When Being Good Is Not Enough: Towards Contextual Education of Business Leadership Ethics

A. Hermannsdottir, O. Stangej, K. KristinssonEducation of Business Ethics

WHEN BEING GOOD IS NOT ENOUGH: TOWARDS CONTEXTUAL EDUCATION OF BUSINESS LEADERSHIP ETHICS

Audur Hermannsdottir* Olga Stangej** Kari Kristinsson***

Received: 30. 6. 2018 Original scientific paper Accepted: 12. 10. 2018 UDC 37:174 DOI https://doi.org/10.30924/mjcmi/2018.23.2.1

Abstract. In light of continuing leadership differences between business and non-business scandals, ethics education has become a recu- students, and the effects of education. The re- rrent topic in public discourse. However, ad- sults of the study indicate that education of the vancement of educational models, formats, and future business leaders calls for a contextualized content rest with a number of questions that re- approach to business ethical dilemmas. The study main unanswered and subject to mixed research yields implications for secondary and tertiary le- results. In this study, we contribute to the discour- vels of education. se on ethics education and its fundamental questions on the role of education in shaping attitudes Keywords: business ethics, education, ethics towards business ethics. Through a survey of 619 education, ethical leadership students in Iceland, we examine the attitudinal

1. INTRODUCTION suggested that the lack of ethics in business education is a significant problem (Ameen Scandals and corruptions in large cor- et al., 1996). This problem calls for a con- porations over the last decades have con- stant focus of colleges and universities as tributed to the increased emphasis on the they educate the executives of the future ethics of today’s business (Kum-Lung & (Henle, 2006; Comegys, 2010). Admittedly, Teck-Chai, 2010; Phau & Kea, 2007; Smyth colleges and universities partly share the re- & Davis, 2004). Managers and employ- sponsibility for the lack of ethical develop- ees are increasingly finding themselves in ment of leaders behind the corporate scan- ethical dilemmas in their jobs as the busi- dals (Cavanagh, 2009). While most students ness environment becomes more complex believe that cheating is ethically wrong, (Rajasekar & Simpson, 2014). Some have almost half of them think that it is socially

* Audur Hermannsdottir, Adjunct Lecturer, University of Iceland, Iceland, e-mail: [email protected], phone: +354 525 5413, Saemundargata v. Gimli, 101 Reykjavik, Iceland ** Olga Stangej, Vilnius University Business School, Lithuania, e-mail: [email protected], phone: +370 680 91219 *** Kari Kristinsson, Associate Professor, University of Iceland, Iceland, e-mail: [email protected], phone: +354 525 4199

1 Journal of Contemporary Management Issues acceptable as demonstrated by Smyth and student learning and develop ethical lead- Davis (2004) and Grimes (2004). Students ers becomes an increasingly important con- who exercise cheating in college are more cern for researchers and policymakers. The likely to engage in other unethical behav- term school, in this case, applies to institu- iour in other contexts, such as the work- tions across secondary and tertiary levels of place (Beck & Ajzen, 1991; Sims, 1993). education. Thus, as framed by Giacalone (2004), the early-stage ethical behavior implies the fu- The purpose of this paper is to further ture costs for the whole society: “Cheating our understanding of the relationship be- is not a problem – until little cheaters grow tween education and attitude towards busi- up to become dishonest executives and lose ness ethics by addressing two key funda- our money” (p. 415). mental questions that remain open in the research on education and ethical leadership: Given that the intrinsic values of a What is the role of education in attitudes personality, linked with ethics, form the towards ethics? Are there potentially inher- personal identity that may be resistant to ent differences in attitudes towards ethics change (Caldwell, 2009), ethical and moral associated with business and non-business development of professional leaders should oriented professional education? indeed be traced in more early personality In this vein, our paper focuses on the in- development stages within the school edu- sights from tertiary, profession-oriented ed- cation. It has been agreed that school leader- ucation that may signal how the secondary- ship shapes learning through both structural level education practices should be shaped. and sociocultural processes (Robinson et al., As such, our paper builds on the empirical 2008; Southworth, 2002). The significance study within the domain of university-level of the role played by principals and teach- education to contribute to the models of ers in these sociocultural processes has been ethical leadership education at high schools. demonstrated previously. While it has also Following this line, we delineate our study been noted that principals play a crucial role from the discourse on whether virtues and in setting and preserving the school culture ethical behavior can be taught (e.g., Hansen, through values (Saphier & King, 1985), an 1993; Ryan & Bisson, 2011). even more immediate influence has been attributed to teachers. Firstly, teacher beliefs In the following section, we review and expectations affect students’ learning the existing literature on the relationship (Jussim, & Harber, 2005). Secondly, teach- between education and attitude towards ers act as moral agents or anchors (Buzzelli business ethics and develop our hypoth- & Johnston, 2002; Simkin & McLeod, eses. Next, we present the methodology 2010), and the moral dimensions are in- and discussion of the findings derived from herently linked with the professional mis- a survey that involved 619 students at the sion and practice of the teacher (Goodlad University of Iceland. Our results suggest et al., 1990; Carr, 2000; Richardson & that the differences in attitudes towards Fenstermacher, 2001; Hansen, 2001; business ethics are not predetermined by Campbell, 2003; Goodman & Lesnick, the professional orientation of the students 2004). Hence, in the light of business school (business and non-business). However, the limitations in effectively conveying business attitudes are affected by the ethics education ethics education (Evans & Weiss, 2008), en- and specific study subjects. Our research hancing the school capacity to transform the contributes to the body of literature that

2 Management, Vol. 23, 2018, No.2, pp. 1-13 A. Hermannsdottir, O. Stangej, K. Kristinsson: EDUCATION OF BUSINESS ETHICS moves on from the question if ethics can be or consequences of an act can be based on taught to the issues of how and why ethics either self-interest (egoism) or concern for education should be integrated in the sec- the social good (utilitarianism) (Miesing ondary and tertiary level school curricula. & Preble, 1985). The five main underlying philosophies emergent in the extant literature are Legalism, Ethical Relativism, 2. KEY PHILOSOPHIES IN Social Darwinism, Machiavellianism, and Moral Objectivism, which are all measured BUSINESS ETHICS by the ATBEQ scale. Ethics represents the framework for an individual’s conduct linked with moral prin- While ethics is often considered inter- ciples (Miesing & Preble, 1985). Business changeably with morals, ethics extends be- ethics involves both morals (right and yond the code that drives decisions, actions, wrong) and ethics (good and bad) (Bageac and behaviour of an individual and involves et al., 2011) and it deals with values that cognitive and reflective processes when the shape decisions (Rajasekar &Simpson, moral principles are applied in a given situ- 2014). An attitude toward business ethics is ation (Wines, 2008). Thus, the education of “the subjective assessment by a given indi- an ethical leader includes a repository of vidual with respect to sets of premises that resources (Kum-Lung & Teck-Chai, 2010) make up various business philosophies” that enable the individual to engage in con- (Preble & Reichel, 1988: 942). The theory sideration of the appropriateness of actions, of reasoned actions by Fishbein and Ajzen decisions, and behaviour. (1975) suggests the existence of a link between attitudes and behaviors. Hence, the attitude towards business ethics of an in- 3. THE SCOPE OF EDUCATION dividual can contribute to the prediction AND ETHICAL BEHAVIOUR of ethical or unethical behavior. Attitudes towards business ethics have served as the A large body of discussion on ethical basis for empirical studies on business eth- and unethical leadership is associated with ics over the years where certain groups of the education of business students, high- individuals are normally found to attach lighted by the fact that many of the leaders to some of the philosophies underlying the involved in some of the most significant concept of business ethics (Kum-Lung & business scandals over the last decades had Teck-Chai, 2010). ATBEQ scale has been received some form of higher education widely adopted as a measure of the attitudes (Kum-Lung & Teck-Chai, 2010; Cavanagh, and philosophies (e.g., Moor & Randloff, 2009). Despite that, future leadership to be 1996; Phatshwane et al., 2014; Phau & Kea, undertaken by college students is associ- 2007; Preble & Reicheld, 1988; Sims, 2006; ated with “virtually all areas of society, Small, 1992). including education, medicine, law, poli- tics, and business” (McCabe et al., 2012: Every person holds a philosophy that 9), business schools and students are nega- implicitly or explicitly determines specific tively distinguished among other fields. decisions (Miesing & Preble, 1985). One According to Miesing and Preble (1985), way to categorize philosophies and business business schools have been criticized for actions is by examining the motives of a de- fostering egocentric rather than society- cision maker. A consideration of the results centred values. When comparing business

3 Journal of Contemporary Management Issues and non-business students, empirical find- 3.1. The span of education and ethical ings from early studies have been incon- behavior clusive (Borkowski & Ugras, 1998; Ford Previous findings suggest that moral & Richardson, 1994). For example, no sig- development continues during the col- nificant differences in ethical perceptions or lege years and that college education can concerns were found between business and be positively associated with moral devel- non-business students (Beltramini et al., opment (King &Mayhew, 2002; Williams 1984; Miesing & Preble, 1985), with some & Dewett, 2005), reflected in decreasing exceptions (e.g., Beltramini et al., 1984). Machiavellianistic and Darwinistic attitudes Nevertheless, mixed results of these stud- among graduate students in contrast to un- ies may have been subjected to inconsist- dergraduate students (Miesing & Preble, ency in the questions employed (Ford & 1985). Similarly, individuals with higher Richardson, 1994). education have been found to pursue more ethical conduct in contrast to individu- Despite that students rely on their als with lower education (Giacalone et al., pre-understandings in ethics (Emerson & 1988; Jones & Gautschi, 1988; Kum-Lung Conroy, 2004, more recent findings suggest & Teck-Chai, 2010; Lane et al., 1988). that business students are more unethical Although this is opposed by findings by in both behavior and attitudes towards eth- Serwinek (1992) and Smyth and Davis ics than non-business students (Smyth & (2004) who found no relationship between Davis, 2004). Similarly, Sparks and Johlke years of education and ethical behaviour or cheating. Kum-Lung & Teck-Chai (2010) (1996) concluded that non-business majors suggest that tendency towards ethical at- have higher ethical standards than busi- titudes among graduates can be a result of ness majors. Additionally, business stu- formal education providing individuals with dents have been found to be more tolerant more resources for judgments about ethical of unethical behaviour and questionable behavior. business practices than non-business students (Crown & Spiller, 1998; Hawkins The findings on the relationship between &Cocanougher, 1972; Ibraham, 2012; Roig the span of education and tendency towards & Ballew, 1994), while cheating behaviour ethical behaviour suggests, that undergradu- is more common for college students who ate and graduate students differ in their attitudes towards business ethics: are anticipating a career in business in contrast to those planning non-business careers Hypothesis 2: Attitudes towards business (McCabe & Treviño, 1993). ethics are different between undergraduate students and graduate students. Reinforced by empirical findings, the general discourse suggests that business 3.2. Exposure to ethics education and students per se diverge in their attitudes to- attitudes towards business ethics wards business ethics from non-business students: In extension to the discussion on the effect that the span of education has on atti- Hypothesis 1: Business students are dif- tudes towards ethical behaviour, exposure ferent to non-business students in their atti- to education in business ethics emerges as tudes towards business ethics. another discussed prerequisite to ethical

4 Management, Vol. 23, 2018, No.2, pp. 1-13 A. Hermannsdottir, O. Stangej, K. Kristinsson: EDUCATION OF BUSINESS ETHICS leadership with diverging opinions. While 4. METHODOLOGY a portion of literature does not indicate sig- The main purpose of this study was to nificant impact of ethics education on stu- investigate the relationship between educa- dents, a substantial number of studies pre- tion and attitude towards business ethics. sents evidence for positive effect of ethics education, with potential divergence in find- We address this topic by looking at how the ings again rooted in different approaches, attitude towards ethics is different for stu- concepts, and methodologies (Lau, 2010). dents pursuing distinct education paths. More recently, authors have suggested that ethics education equips the students with 4.1. Procedure and participants competencies required for identification, Graduate and undergraduate students analysis, evaluation, and judgment of busi- at the University of Iceland were recruited ness decisions and their potential outcomes through in-class contact. The study was car- (Rossouw, 2002; Sims, 2002). Such a set ried out as an online survey in university of competencies, coupled with the stage of auditoriums, where the participants were in- moral development (Rest et al., 2000; Rest, structed to sit one seat apart and not talk to 1979) and moral reasoning abilities of a each other. The participants did not receive person are likely to account for behaviour- any course credit for participation but were al differences in business context (Weber, given time during class to fill out the ques- 1990; Goolsby & Hunt, 1992). As a result, tionnaire. Out of 619 students, 60% were ethics education can positively contribute to moral judgment and the own ethical sense female, and 40%, were male, respectively. (Lau, 2010). However, despite these shifts in a personal ethical sense, the perception 4.2. Measurements by the same students of peers or top manag- The Attitudes Towards Business Ethics ers in a business environment may remain Questionnaire (ATBEQ) scale (Prebel & to be unchanged, posing an additional set Reichel, 1988) was used as the instru- of questions for integration of ethical at- ment for data collection and measurement. titudes into professional, corporate context The ATBEQ scale measures five differ- (Lau, 2010). In this stance, the relationship ent philosophies of ethical attitude. These between the field of studies and the ethical are Social Darwinism, Machiavellianism, development of the students remains sig- Moral Objectivism, Legalism, and Ethical nificant, yet, an under-researched ques- Relativism. Below we discuss each of these tion, which is not new. As early noted by in turn and how they are measured within Miesing and Preble (1985), it is not known the ATBEQ scale. if business schools attract individuals with certain characteristics or train them to be Social Darwinism is a utilitarian phi- pragmatic. In this line, two additional hy- losophy developed by Herbert Spencer potheses are raised: (Bageac et al., 2011), which combines Hypothesis 3: Students who have taken Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and a course in ethics exhibit different attitudes natural selection with Adam Smith’s theory towards business ethics. on the invisible hand (Miesing & Preble, 1985). It argues that individuals should Hypothesis 4: The effect of taking a freely pursue their self-interest in a com- course in ethics is different for business and petitive environment, where the strong and non-business students. the fittest survive while the inefficient are

5 Journal of Contemporary Management Issues eliminated (Bageac et al., 2011). Essential are considered evil individuals (Miesing and to Social Darwinism is the idea that natural Preble, 1985). According to Moral objec- selection is made possible through free mar- tivism, an individual moral obligation is to ket mechanism and morality has no place achieve their own well-being but in order to in the business world (Miesing & Preble, achieve it, they ought to have a moral code 1985). Social Darwinism is measured with (Bageac et al., 2011). Moral Objectivism is items such as “Employee wages should be measured with items, such as “True moral- determined according to the laws of sup- ity is first and foremost self-interested” and ply and demand” and “The main interest of “Every business person acts according to shareholders is a maximum return on their moral principles, whether he/she is aware of investment”. it or not”.

Machiavellianism instead entails judge- Legalism is the attitude that it is suffi- ment of an action based on the efficient cient to follow laws and rules to be a moral achievement of the goal rather than its person (MacCormick, 1989). Individuals conformity to any categorical imperative and companies should therefore not be ob- (Bageac et al., 2011). In this perspective, an ligated to do anything more than follow the organization is viewed as a self-contained rules and laws of their society. This attitude organism with its own laws, which can be is best represented by the phrase “Our com- bent but not broken. In sum, sufficient justi- pany abides by the law”, which is interpret- fication for the means becomes the positive ed as being ethical (Boling, 1978). The rules and winning solution for the organization of society, therefore, govern behaviour, and (Miesing & Preble, 1985). Depending on a ethical conflicts are dealt with by looking at perspective of the judgment, Machiavellians the suitable legal framework for each situ- can be considered either cold-blooded and ation. Legalism is measured with the item opportunistic, or realistic, while they them- “Act according to the law, and you cannot selves often view others as naive about go wrong morally”. the real world (Miesing & Preble, 1985). Machiavellianism is measured with items, Ethical Relativism is a philosophy such as “The only moral of business is mak- where it is emphasized that individuals ing money” and “Moral values are irrel- should conform to the way things are in a evant to the business world”. given time and place. Ethical Relativism argues that there are no ethical absolutes Moral Objectivism focuses on the ability as ethical absolutism implies that individu- to reason within the existing reality. Under als have the right to judge others based on this philosophy the most productive and their own moral values (Lewis & Unerman, the only ethical approach is rational action 1999). This means that individuals should (Bageac et al., 2011). According to Moral not stray from the pack and accept how Objectivism the moral obligation of an in- things are usually done (Stevens, 1979). dividual is to achieve his or her own well- This is also reflected in that societies have being, but in order to achieve it, it is neces- different moral values (Lewis & Unerman, sary to have a moral code valid for everyone 1999), and therefore ethical absolutism (Bageac et al., 2011). Profit is considered to must imply that many societies rely on be the result of reason and an ethical life moral values that are simply wrong. Ethical comes from productive reasoning. Those Relativism is measured with items such as who survive as parasites and rely on others, “The business world today is not different

6 Management, Vol. 23, 2018, No.2, pp. 1-13 A. Hermannsdottir, O. Stangej, K. Kristinsson: EDUCATION OF BUSINESS ETHICS from what it used to be in the past. There is When looking at business students it can nothing new under the sun.” and “The lack be seen that graduate students tend less to- of public confidence in the ethics of busi- wards Machiavellianism (t(228) = 2.049, p < ness people is not justified”. 0.05) and Legalism (t(234) = 3.725, p < 0.05) than undergraduate students. As can be seen in Figure 2 this difference is not large but significant. On the three other dimensions, 5. RESULTS undergraduate and graduate business stu- To better understand the relationship be- dents do not differ significantly. tween education and ethical attitudes and test our hypotheses, we examined whether business students are different from non- business students on the five dimensions of business ethics. When comparing business students to non-business students, we find no significant difference on any of the five dimensions tested. For each dimension,

Machiavellianism (t(557) = -.677, p > 0.05),

Moral Objectivism (t(601) = .637, p > 0.05), Figure 2. Differences between undergraduate Legalism (t(617) = .661, p > 0.05), Ethical and graduate business students Relativism (t(612) = 3.01, p > 0.05) and

Social Darwinism (t(607) = .036, p > 0.05), the statistical tests do not show any differ- When looking at non-business stu- ence in attitude. As can be seen in Figure 1, dents we find a different picture. As with the attitudes of business and non-business business students, non-business gradu- students are very similar and far from being ate students tend to move towards less significantly different on any of the dimen- Machiavellianism (t(369) = 3.585, p < 0.05). sions tested. This result, therefore, does not However, the same does not apply to support Hypothesis 1 that business students Legalism (t(373) = 1.040, p > 0.05). Non- have different ethical attitudes than non- business graduate students also have less business students. strong attitudes in Moral Objectivism (t(366) = 2.433, p < 0.05), Ethical Relativism

(t(372) = 2.709, p < 0.05) and Social

Darwinism(t(366) = 5.490, p < 0.05).

Figure 1. Business vs non-business students and ethical dimensions

Next, the difference between undergrad- Figure 3. Differences between undergraduate uate and graduate students was examined. and graduate non-business students

7 Journal of Contemporary Management Issues

These results support Hypothesis 2 emerges when comparing non-business stu- which stated that undergraduate and grad- dents taking an ethics course to those that uate students differ in their attitude to- do not. With non-business students we see wards business ethics. While graduate that those taking an ethics course become business students tending more towards less Machiavellian (t(374) = -3.244, p < 0.05) Machiavellianism and Legalism than un- and less prone to Social Darwinist attitudes dergraduate business students, non-business (t(370) = -2.693, p < 0.05). Other dimensions graduate students show a different pattern did not see a significant change. of changing attitudes. Overall, the results of the study indicate When looking at Hypothesis 3 we can that business students and non-business stu- see that taking an ethics course has a sig- dents have similar attitudes towards busi- nificant effect on student’s attitude in every ness ethics. However, education span as dimension measured. For each dimension, well as taking an ethics course seems to in-

Machiavellianism (t(604) = -3.541, p < 0.05), fluence these attitudes substantially.

Moral Objectivism (t(598) = -2.180, p < 0.05),

Legalism (t(614) = -1.975, p < 0.05), Ethical Relativism (t = -2.793, p < 0.05) and (609) 6. DISCUSSION Social Darwinism (t(604) = -4.021, p < 0.05), the statistical tests show that graduate stu- The results of testing the four hypoth- dents have less extreme attitude (lower eses raised in our study elicit a number score) than undergraduate students. This of suggestions to ubiquitous arguments can also be seen in Figure 4. within the discourse on development of ethical and unethical business leaders. In disentangling the root causes of unethical business leadership behavior, business students and schools are often considered as the potential source (Giacalone; 2004). However, the results of this study reveal that business and non-business students are likely to hold rather homogenous attitudes towards business ethics, suggesting that business students do not hold ill-bred Figure 4. The effect on moral attitudes by taking attitudes which should be attributed to this an ethics course group in particular. Instead, the change in attitude towards ethics can be observed as the span of education increases, and after For Hypothesis 4 we looked at whether an intervention in ethics education takes taking an ethics course had a different ef- place (i.e., a student takes a course on eth- fect on business and non-business students. ics). Taken together with a finding that the Starting with business students we can see attitudinal shift towards business ethics is that taking an ethics course makes stu- different and stronger among business students less prone to Ethical Relativism (t (231) dents, our results further suggest that eth- = -2.130, p < 0.05) and Social Darwinism ics education for business leadership is (t = -3.219, p < 0.05). However, the at- (232) contextually-sensitive. titude in other dimensions did not see a significant change. A different pattern

8 Management, Vol. 23, 2018, No.2, pp. 1-13 A. Hermannsdottir, O. Stangej, K. Kristinsson: EDUCATION OF BUSINESS ETHICS

In describing the business school envi- business ethical dilemma, a course in busi- ronment, unethical forms of behavior are ness ethics can alter their behaviour. This often associated with dishonesty and cheat- finding has implications for both -univer ing (Trevino & Nelson 2010). In simplest sity level and high school level education. terms of logics, such a discussion puts for- On a college or university level, it suggests ward a conditional statement that involves that students may require a more scruti- general attitudes towards ethics and ethical nized ethics education that guides them behavior in business. This logics is echoed through a variety of specific subtopics and by Maxwell (2003) who contends that there cases in order to develop a repository of is no business ethics and much of problem- resources enabling effective delineation atics arises from individuals trying to apply between ethical and unethical professional different sets of ethics for their professional, decisions. Together with previous insights private, and spiritual lives. While greater by Lawson (2004), Waples et al. (2009), reliance on ethics, in general, can certainly Wittmer (2004), Emerson & Conroy (2004), translate into more ethical behavior, eth- Stephens and Stephens (2008), it once again ics may require to be taught and developed highlights that the key aspect of business from a contextual perspective. Students in ethics education rests with the content and different disciplines receive different educa- formats of business ethics programmes and tion or treatment in ethics, that starts from courses, attitudes towards these courses K-12 classroom (Paul & Elder, 2012), and held by students or attitudes implicitly com- continues with ethics across disciplines and municated by teachers, and social study en- subjects such as business (Taylor-Bianco, vironment (Cronan et al., 2018) rather than 2017; Maclagan, 2012; Wines, 2008), ac- the amount or frequency of ethics courses counting (Loeb, 2015; Sorensen et al., introduced. Furthermore, as Lawson (2004) 2017), engineering (Doorn & Kroesen, identified, students may consider unethical 2013), or medicine (Carrese et al., 2015). behaviour to be need-based – a prerequisite Curricula for non-business students world- to career advancement in business, despite wide often entail courses that shape the their generally understanding of business general attitudes of students towards them- ethics and its importance. Hence, profes- selves and others. Instead, business students sional context-oriented education may be receive ethics education with a focus on the considerable in as early as high school level corporate context that proves to trigger a education when the students engage in the significantly different shift in attitudes to- primary deliberation and selection of their wards business ethics in contrast to cours- careers. In sum, these findings reinforce the es on other topics in ethics. Such a finding urgency for ethics education models and does not negate general ethics education as methods that would accurately reflect the fundamentals of ethical behavior. However, real-life business situations (Ritter, 2006). in line with Lau (2010), it suggests that as individuals enact different roles as students, peers, employees, family members, or lead- 7. CONCLUDING REMARKS ers, their ethical attitudes and schemas are likely to be only partially transferred to a The results of our study contribute to specific context. It also corresponds to the the fundamentals of the discourse on the observation by Wang &Calvano (2013) that education of future leaders. Hence, an edu- while business students are still more likely cation in ethics lends itself to the develop- to act ethically in a non-business than in a ment of an ethically-driven personality. The

9 Journal of Contemporary Management Issues cultivation of ethical business leaders calls and placing emphasis on education of for education in business ethics over a num- business ethics among business students ber of topics and cases. Business ethics is would significantly advance the discourse likely to represent an overlapping, yet, au- from the if’s to the how’s and why’s in the tonomous context for education. Our study education of ethical future business leaders. infuses primary insights from a single uni- Combined with research on determinants of versity in Iceland that exclusively, but not ethical and unethical behavior by students exhaustively, represents the Nordic context. and professionals in varying fields these More contextual studies, covering a vari- studies would foster development of ethical ety of contexts from a cultural standpoint future leaders.

References A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 1117-1127. 1. Ameen, E. C., Guffey, D. M., 8. Carrese, J. A., Malek, J., Watson, &McMillan, J. J. (1996). Gender K., Lehmann, L. S., Green, M. J., Differences in Determining the Ethical McCullough, L. B., & Doukas, Sensitivity of Future Accounting D. J. (2015). The essential role of Professionals. Journal of Business medical ethics education in achiev- Ethics, 15(5), 591-597. ing professionalism: the Romanell 2. Arlow, P. (1991). Personal Report. Academic Medicine, 90(6), Characteristics in College Students’ 744-752. Evaluations of Business Ethics and 9. Comegys, C. (2010). The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility. Religiously affiliated Universities Journal of Business Ethics, 10(1), and Courses in Ethics and Religious 63-69. Studies on Students’ Attitude toward 3. Bageac, D., Furrer, O., & E. Reynaud. Business Ethics. Contemporary Issues (2011). Management Students’ in Education Research, 3(6), 35-44. Attitudes Toward Business Ethics: 10. Cronan, T. P., Mullins, J. K., & A Comparison Between France and Douglas, D. E. (2018). Further under- Romania. Journal of Business Ethics, standing factors that explain freshman 98(3), 391-406. business students’ academic integrity 4. Beck, L., & Ajzen, I. (1991). Predicting intention and behavior: Plagiarism and Dishonest Actions Using the Theory of sharing homework. Journal of Business Planned Behavior. Journal of Research Ethics, 147(1), 197-220. in Personality, 25, 285-301. 11. Crown, D. F., & Spillar, M. S. (1998). 5. Beltramini, R. F., Peterson, R. A., & Learning from the Literature on colle- Kozmetsky, G. (1984). Concerns of giate Cheating: A Review of Empirical College Students Regarding Business Research. Journal of Business Ethics, Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 3, 17, 683-700. 195-200. 12. Conroy, S. J., & Emerson, T. L. 6. Boling, T. E. (1978). The management (2004). Business ethics and religion: ethics “crisis”: An organizational per- Religiosity as a predictor of ethical spective. Academy of Management awareness among students. Journal of Review, 3(2), 360-365. business ethics, 50(4), 383-396. 7. Borkowski, S. C., & Ugras, Y. J. (1998). Business Students and Ethics: 13. Emerson, T. L. N., & Conroy, S. J.

10 Management, Vol. 23, 2018, No.2, pp. 1-13 A. Hermannsdottir, O. Stangej, K. Kristinsson: EDUCATION OF BUSINESS ETHICS

(2004). Have ethical attitudes changed? 22. Jones, T. M., & Gautschi, F. H. (1988). An intertemporal comparison of the Will the Ethics of Business Change? A ethical perceptions of college students Survey of Future Executives. Journal of in 1985 and 2001. Journal of Business Business Ethics, 7(4), 231-248. Ethics, 50, 167 -176. 23. King, P. M., & Mayhew, M. J. (2002). 14. Fishbein, M., & Azjen, I. (1975). Moral Judgement Development in Belief, Attitude, Intention and Higher Education: Insights from the Behviour: An introduction to Defining Issues Test. Journal of Moral Theory and Research. Reading: Education, 31(3), 247-270. Addison-Weslay. 24. Kum-Lung, C., & Teck-Chai, L. 15. Ford, R. C., &Richardson, W. D. (1994). (2010). Attitude Towards Business Ethical Decision Making: A Review Ethics: Examining the Influences of of the Empirical Literature. Journal of Religiosity, Gender and Education Business Ethics, 13(3), 205-221. Levels. International Journal of 16. Giacalone, R. A. (2004). A Marketing Studies, 2(1), 225-232. Transcendent Business Education 25. Lane, M. S., Schaupp, D., & Parsons, for the 21st Century. Academy of B. (1988). Pygmalion Effect: An Issue Management Learning & Education, for Business Education and Ethics. 3(4), 415-420. Journal of Business Ethics, 7, 223-229. 17. Giacalone, R., Payne, S. L., & 26. Lawson, R. A. (2004). Is class- Rosenfeld, P. (1988). Endorsement of room cheating related to business Managers Following Accusations of students’ propensity to cheat in the Breaches in Confidentiality. Journal of real world? Journal of Business Business Ethics, 7(8), 621-629. Ethics, 49(2), 189–199. 18. Grimes, P. W. (2004). Dishonesty in 27. Lewis, L., & Unerman, J. (1999). Academics and Business: A Cross- Ethical relativism: a reason for differ- Cultural Evaluation of Student ences in corporate social reporting? Attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 49, 273-290. 10(4), 521-547. 19. Hansen, D. T. (1993a). The moral im- 28. Loeb, S. E. (2015). Active learning: An portance of the teacher’s style. Journal advantageous yet challenging approach of Curriculum Studies. 25(5), 397–421. to accounting ethics instruction. Journal 20. Hawkins, D. I., & Cocanougher, A. B. of Business Ethics, 127(1), 221-230. (1972). Students Evaluations of the 29. MacCormick, N. (1989). The ethics of Ethics of Marketing Practices: The legalism. Ratio Juris, 2(2), 184-193. Role of Marketing Education. Journal of Marketing, 36(2), 61-64. 30. Maclagan, P. (2012). Conflicting obli- gations, moral dilemmas and the devel- 21. Ibraham, N. A. (2012). Business versus non-business students’ perceptions opment of judgement through business of business codes of ethics. In J. Zhu ethics education. Business Ethics: A and W. I. Mondal (editors) ASBBS 19th European Review, 21, 183–197. Annual Meeting conference proceed- 31. Maxwell, J. C. (2003). There’s no such ings (p. 635-646). Las Vegas: American thing as business ethics: There’s only Society of Business and Behavioral one rule for making decisions. New Sciences. York: Warner Books.

11 Journal of Contemporary Management Issues

32. McCabe, D. L., & Treviño, L. K. Students in Oman and India. Journal of (1993). Academic Dishonesty: Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, Honor Codes and Other Contextual 11(2), 99-114. Influences. The Journal of Higher 41. Ritter, B. A. (2006). Can business eth- Education, 64(5), 522-538. ics be trained? A study of the ethical 33. McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D., & decision-making process in business Treviño, L. K. (2012). Cheating in col- students. Journal of Business Ethics, lege: Why students do it and what edu- 68, 153-164. cators can do about it. Baltimore, MD: 42. Roig, M., & Ballew, C. (1994). Johns Hopkins University Press. Attitude Toward Cheating of Self 34. Miesing, P., & Preble, J. F. (1985). and Others by College Students and A Comparison of Five Business Professors. The Psychological Record, Philosophies. Journal of Business 44(1), 3-12. Ethics, 4(6), 465-476. 43. Serwinek, P. J. (1992). Demographic 35. Moore, R. S., & Radloff, S. E. (1996). & Related differences in Ethical Views Attitudes towards business ethics held among Small Businesses. Journal of by South African students. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(7), 555-566. Business Ethics, 15(8), 863-869. 44. Simkin, M. G., & McLeod, A. (2010). 36. Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2012). Critical Why do college students cheat? Journal thinking: Competency standards es- of Business Ethics, 94(3), 441–453. sential to the cultivation of intel- 45. Sims, R. L. (1993). The Relationship lectual skills, part V. Journal of Between Academic Dishonesty and Developmental Education, 36, 30. Unethical Business Practices. Journal 37. Phatshwane, P. M. D., Mapharing, of Education for Business, 68(4), M., & Basuhi, E. J. (2014). Attitudes 207-211. Towards Business Ethics Held by 46. Sims, R. L. (2006). Comparing Ethical Accountancy and Finance Students Attitudes Across Cultures. Cross in the University of Botswana. Cultural Management, 13(2), 101-113. International Journal of Business and 47. Sims, R. L., & Gegez, A. E. (2004). Management, 9(2), 17-29. Attitudes towards business ethics: A 38. Phau, I., & Kea, G. (2007). Attitudes of five nation comparative study. Journal University Students towards Business of Business Ethics, 50(3), 253-265. Ethics: A cross-National Investigation 48. Small, M. W. (1992). Attitudes to- of Australia, Singapore and Hong wards business ethics held by west- Kong. Journal of Business Ethics, 72, ern Australian students: A compara- 61-75. tive study. Journal of Business Ethics, 39. Preble, J. F., & Reichel, A. (1988). 11(10), 745-752. Attitudes towards business ethics of 49. Smyth, M. L., & Davis, J. R. (2004). future managers in the U.S. and Israel. Perceptions of Dishonesty Among Journal of Business Ethics, 7(12), Two-ear College Students: Academic 941-949. Versus Business Situations. Journal of 40. Rajasekar, J., &Simpson, M. (2014). Business Ethics, 51, 63-73. Attitude Towards Business Ethics: A 50. Sorensen, D. P., Miller, S. E., & Gender-Based Comparison of Business Cabe, K. L. (2017). Developing and

12 Management, Vol. 23, 2018, No.2, pp. 1-13 A. Hermannsdottir, O. Stangej, K. Kristinsson: EDUCATION OF BUSINESS ETHICS

measuring the impact of an accounting business ethics education effective? An ethics course that is based on the moral analysis of gender, personal ethical per- philosophy of Adam Smith. Journal of spectives, and moral judgment. Journal business ethics, 140(1), 175-191. of Business Ethics, 126(4), 591-602. 51. Sparks, J. R., & Johlke, M. (1996). 56. Waples, E. P., Antes, A. L., Murphy, Factors Influencing Students S. T., Connelly, S., & Mumford, M. D. Perceptions of Unethical Behaviour By (2009). A meta-analytic investigation Personal Salespeople: An Experimental of business ethics instruction. Journal Investigation. Journal of Business of Business Ethics, 87, 133–151. Ethics, 15(8), 871-887. 57. Williams, S. D., & Dewett, T. (2005). 52. Stevens, E. (1979). Business ethics. Yes, You Can Teach Business Ethics: A Paulist Press. Review and Research Agenda. Journal 53. Stephens, V.R., & Stephens, A. S. of Leadership & Organizational (2008). An examination of account- Studies, 12(2). 109-120. ing majors‟ ethical decisions before 58. Wines, W. A. (2008). Seven pillars of and after an ethics course require- ment. Journal of College Teaching & business ethics: Toward a comprehen- Learning, 5 (4), 49-55. sive framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 79, 483–499. 54. Taylor-Bianco, A., Tucker, M., Rosado Feger, A., & Barnett, T. (2017). 59. Wittmer, D. P. (2004). Business Teaching” Business” Ethics: Affecting and community: Integrating service Change through Self-Regulation and learning in graduate business educa- Reflection. Journal of Instructional tion. Journal of Business Ethics, 51, Pedagogies, 19. 359-371. 55. Wang, L. C., & Calvano, L. (2015). Is

KADA NIJE DOVOLJNO BITI DOBAR: PREMA KONTEKSTUALNOM OBRAZOVANJU IZ POSLOVNE ETIKE Sažetak 619 islandskih studenata, istražujemo razlike u stavovima između studenata poslovne ekonomije U svjetlu stalnih poslovnih skandala, obrazo- i ostalih studenata, kao i efekte obrazovanja iste. vanje iz poslovne etike postaje trajnom temom u Rezultati rada ukazuju da obrazovanje budućih javnosti. Međutim, napredak obrazovnih modela, poslovnih vođa traži kontekstualizirani pristup formata i sadržaja ostaje povezan s određenim dilemama poslovne etike. U radu se, također, brojem pitanja, koja ostaju neodgovorena ili su utvrđuju implikacije za sekundarno i tercijarno još uvijek predmetom mješovitih istraživačkih re- obrazovanje. zultata. U ovom radu autori doprinose diskursu edukacije iz područja etike te ključnim istraživač- Ključne riječi: poslovna etika, obrazovanje, kim pitanjima, povezanim s utjecajem obrazova- obrazovanje o etici, etičko vođenje nja na stavove o poslovnoj etici. Temeljem ankete