Recent incidences of fraud and the growing globalization of business have focused attention on the effect of culture on ethical decision making within organizations. Because fraud can be extremely costly and is more likely to be committed by employees than persons external to the organization, employees willing to report unethical acts are an important supplemental control tool. The current study provides evidence of the effects of culture (Canadian and Chinese) and the type of reporting (whistle-blowing and peer reporting) on reporting unethical acts within organizations. Chinese and Canadian participants were asked to respond to scenarios describing unethical acts committed within organizations. Results indicate that Chinese are more likely to report the unethical acts of peers than Canadians. Chinese also appear more likely to report the unethical acts of peers than supervisors. The results also suggest that Graham's model of principled organizational dissent may not be applicable to Chinese and perhaps other non-Western cultures.
Empowerment and teamwork are buzzwords of progressive human resource practices. Along with these new job design methods come reduced hierarchical control mechanisms. In light of recent ethical scandals, there is considerable concern regarding the effectiveness of the control systems of these more recent work designs. This study compared the willingness of participants to report unethical behavior when presented with work scenarios in which the perpetrator was in the relative position of team member, peer, or subordinate and in cohesive or non-cohesive conditions of relational closeness. After accounting for the covariates, both main effects and interaction effects were found, indicating that reporting behavior was influenced by relative position and relational closeness.
The current study investigates how a university accounting education affects the rationales used by accounting and first-year business students in making ethical decisions, the level of deliberative reasoning they employ, and their ethical decisions. Senior accounting students (with approximately four accounting courses to complete) were found to exhibit higher deliberative reasoning, make more frequent use of post-conventional modes of deliberative reasoning, and make more ethical decisions than first-year accounting students. These results suggest that a university accounting education has a positive effect on deliberative reasoning, on the use of post-conventional modes of deliberative reasoning, and on ethical decisions. There was no difference between the level of deliberative reasoning and ethical decisions of first-year accounting and first-year business students, but there were differences in their modes of deliberative reasoning. These results suggest that first-year accounting and first-year business students may make ethical decisions differently, implying the need for a different emphasis when teaching ethics to these two groups of students.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.