Buku Bahasa Inggris PDF

MANAGEMENT EDUCATION FOR
INTEGRITY: ETHICALLY EDUCATING

TOMORROW’S BUSINESS LEADERS
MANAGEMENT EDUCATION FOR
INTEGRITY: ETHICALLY
EDUCATING TOMORROW’S
BUSINESS LEADERS
EDITED BY
CHARLES WANKEL
St. John’s University, New York, USA
AGATA STACHOWICZ-STANUSCH
Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland
United Kingdom – North America – Japan

India – Malaysia – China
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley BD16 1WA, UK
First edition 2011
Copyright r 2011 Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Reprints and permission service

Contact: booksandseries@emeraldinsight.com
No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any
form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise
without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting
restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by
The Copyright Clearance Center. No responsibility is accepted for the accuracy of
information contained in the text, illustrations or advertisements. The opinions expressed
in these chapters are not necessarily those of the Editor or the publisher.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1
Emerald Group Publishing

Limited, Howard House,
Environmental Management
System has been certified by
ISOQAR to ISO 14001:2004
standards
Awarded in recognition of
Emerald’s production
department’s adherence to
quality systems and processes
when preparing scholarly
journals for print
Contents
List of Contributors vii

List of Reviewers ix
Acknowledgements xi
PART I: INTRODUCTION
1. Management Education for Integrity; Transcending

Amoral Business Curricula
Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch 3
PART II: BUSINESS ETHICS EDUCATION: ACROSS

THE CURRICULUM AND BEYOND
2. Sensemaking: A Fresh Framework for Ethics

Education in Management
Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes 15
3. Three Pedagogical Tools to Advance Management

Integrity Capacity
Joseph A. Petrick 49
4. Using Literature to Encourage Moral Engagement

in Business Ethics Courses
Louis C. Gasper 73
5. Fostering Integrity in Business Education: An Analysis

of Academic Administrators’ Perceptions at Spanish
Business Schools
Blanca L. Delgado-Márquez, J. Alberto Aragón-Correa and 89
Nuria E. Hurtado-Torres
vi Contents
PART III: VALUES AS PATHWAYS TO ETHICAL ACTION
6. Teaching ‘‘How’’ — Not ‘‘Whether’’ — to Manage with

Integrity: Undergraduate and MBA Applications of the
‘‘Giving Voice to Values’’ Curriculum
Christopher P. Adkins, Mary C. Gentile, Cynthia Ingols and 107
Sˇpela Trefalt
7. Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity

Tony Simons, Kevin Basik and Hannes Leroy 135
8. Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool to

Promote Integrity Awareness: A Chinese Perspective
Heh Jason Huang 155
PART IV: DEVELOPING CURRICULA BASED

ON A LIBERAL APPROACH TO EDUCATION: A WAY
TOWARD RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS
9. Returning to a Holistic Management Education and the

Tradition of Liberal Education
Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin 171
10. Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and

the Liberal Arts
Sarah Stookey 193
11. Meeting the Objectives of Business Ethics Education:

The Marriott School Model and Agenda for Utilizing
the Complete Collegiate Educational Experience
Bradley R. Agle, Jeffery A. Thompson, David W. Hart, 217
Lori L. Wadsworth and Aaron Miller
About the Authors 243
Author Index 251
Subject Index 261

List of Contributors
Christopher P. Adkins Mason School of Business, The College of William &

Mary, Williamsburg, VA, USA
Bradley R. Agle Marriott School of Management, Brigham Young
University, Provo, UT, USA
Alison L. Antes Northern Kentucky University, Highland Heights,
KY, USA
J. Alberto Aragón-Correa University of Granada, Granada, Spain; University
of California, Berkeley, USA
Kevin Basik US Air Force Academy, Center for Character &
Leadership, CO, USA
Blanca L. Delgado-Márquez University of Granada, Granada, Spain
Louis C. Gasper University of Dallas, Irving, TX, USA
Mary C. Gentile Babson College, Babson Park, MA, USA
Lindsey Godwin Champlain College, Burlington, VT, USA
David W. Hart George W. Romney Institute of Public
Management, Brigham Young University, Provo,
UT, USA
Heh Jason Huang National Sun Yat-Sen University, Kaohsiung,
Taiwan
Nuria E. Hurtado-Torres University of Granada, Granada, Spain
Cynthia Ingols Simmons School of Management, Boston, MA,
USA
Hannes Leroy Catholic University Of Leuven, Leuven,
Belgium
viii List of Contributors
Aaron Miller George W. Romney Institute of Public

Management, Brigham Young University,
Provo, UT, USA
Mary Grace Neville Southwestern University, Georgetown, TX, USA
Joseph A. Petrick Wright State University, Raj Soin College Of
Business, Dayton, OH, USA
Tony Simons Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch Silesian University of Technology, Zabrze, Poland
Sarah Stookey Central Connecticut State University, New Britain,
CT, USA
Jeffery A. Thompson George W. Romney Institute of Public
UT, USA
Sˇpela Trefalt Simmons School of Management, Boston MA,
USA
Lori L. Wadsworth George W. Romney Institute of Public
UT, USA
Charles Wankel St. John’s University, New York, USA
Ethan P. Waples University of Central Oklahoma, Edmond, OK,
USA
List of Reviewers
Tom Burgess Leeds University Business School, Leeds, UK

Timothy S. Clark Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, USA
Gregory J. Cooper Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA, USA
Roger A. Dean Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA, USA
Gil Fairholm Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
Matt Fairholm The University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD, USA
Jay Finkelman Marshall Goldsmith School of Management, CA, USA
Peter T. Gianiodis Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA, USA
Michael G. Goldsby Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA, USA
Dennis Heaton Maharishi University of Management, Fairfield, IA, USA
Jo Ann Ho Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
Louise Kelly Alliant International University in San Diego, CA, USA
George W. Kester Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA, USA
Peggy Sue Loroz Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA, USA
Daniel E. Martin California State University, Long Beach, CA, USA
Patric Onsando Moi University, Eldoret, Kenya
Molly Pepper Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA, USA
Mark Pruett University of South Carolina Upstate, Spartanburg, SC,
USA
Hussain Rammal University of South Australia, South Australia, Australia
Carolyn Roper Purdue University North Central, Westville, IN, USA
Ravi Subramaniam University of Madras, India
Acknowledgements
We extend our sincere thanks to all the chapter authors for their hard work on this
book. They met the deadlines, engaged the ideas, responded to feedback, and wrote
magnificent chapters that made this book stellar. We are equally appreciative to all
chapter reviewers for adding constructive and thoughtful suggestions to the text. We
would like to thank Kyle Miller and Neil Washington, Charles Wankel’s research
associates, who have been very skillful and supportive in moving the book through
into publication. To them, and to all others who helped us, many thanks. We
especially want to acknowledge Mary Miskin, the Development Editor at Emerald
Group Publishing Limited for her support and goodwill and everyone else on
Emerald’s editorial and production team. On a personal note, we thank our families
for providing us with their warmth throughout the book development process.
Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch

PART I
INTRODUCTION
Chapter 1
Management Education for Integrity;

Transcending Amoral Business Curricula
Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch
Abstract
Business ethics in higher education is burgeoning as a topic of interest spurred

by emerging accreditation requirements and the increasing interest of
businesses to recruit people with ethical fiber. The effects of avaricious,
ethically bereft leadership have sparked a burgeoning interest in reorienting the
business education system toward producing managers with integrity.
Although it might seem like common sense, educating managers for integrity
as a priority has eluded us in the past.
Management Education For Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s
Business Leaders explores ways through which the moral character of our
business leaders might be improved with a mind to reining in the myopic
perspectives that business schools have foisted on them, and that they have
been lavishly rewarded for using in the past. New directions, such as promoting
spiritual values within business contexts, using moral conundrums from
literature to illustrate ethical issues to students, and developing curricula based
on a liberal approach to education are already emerging as centerpieces of some
business school programs. There is no dearth of ethical challenges for business
educators and emerging managers to take on. By incorporating these important
new changes into business education, management educators can move to
equipping the moral, ecological, and economic heroes of our future.
People who do not believe that management is an activity requiring at its

best extraordinary intellect and intelligence, marked physical powers in
terms of energy, stamina, and strength, and durable moral qualities like
courage, integrity, determination, and ability to choose right over wrong
should read no further, for nothing in the pages to come will make sense
to them. All others are welcome. (Andrews, 1971: xv)
Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders

Copyright r 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited
All rights of reproduction in any form reserved
ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1
4 Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch
Why is it important and advisable to conduct scholarly studies of bolstering

integrity in business through management education? And, why is now the appropriate
time to do so? Recently we have witnessed a surge of interest in discourse on
responsible management education as a sine qua non of responsibility in the business
world (Christensen, Peirce, Hartman, Hoffman, & Carrier, 2007; Crane & Matten,
2004; Lane & Bogue, 2010; Matten & Moon, 2004; Miller, 2009; Moon & Shen, 2010;
Nicholson & DeMoss, 2009; Swanson & Fisher, 2008). This movement in management
education occurred partly in reaction to highly publicized corporate scandals and
instances of management misconduct that have eroded public faith (such as TEPCO,
Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, Adelphia, and Arthur Andersen), and fueled legislative
reactions such as the Sarbanes–Oxley Act in the United States (see Brown & Treviño,
2006; Economist, 2011; Fair Disclosure Wire, 2011; Puffer & McCarthy, 2008;
Waldman & Galvin, 2008). Concomitantly, management scholars and educators
(see Giacalone & Thompson, 2006; Mintzberg, 2004; Pfeffer, 2005; Wankel &
DeFillippi, 2002; Wankel & DeFillippi, 2006) have begun to question the assumptions
underlying traditional management education, which in their view have not only
contributed to a recent moral crisis but also failed to prepare students and executives
for coping with the responsible leadership challenges and ethical dilemmas that face
managers in contemporary corporations (Ghoshal, 2005).
The last decade had abundant corporate, national, and international ethical and
financial scandals and crises. This has resulted in what might be called an epoch of moral
catastrophes. For management education, this sets the stage for more effectively
performing its mission. That is, discover truth, develop knowledge, and educate citizens
who will make this world a better place. It has created a need to bolster the ethical
acumen of managers through business education imperatives. It is incumbent on
business schools not only to imbue students with a deep practical understanding of
globalization, innovation, and the tools of the functional areas, but also to develop their
ability and inclination to think and act wisely and morally. We realize that integrity
without knowledge is ineffectual, while knowledge unbounded by integrity is dangerous.
Also, the need for reflection on integrity in management education results from
important social pressure. After this epoch of catastrophes, society expects on the one
hand that business educators will contribute to addressing business ethics problems by
preparing a cohort of students who will raise the ethical standards of the business
world (Kurpis, Beqiri, & Helgeson, 2008). On the other hand, corporate business
practice has motivated business schools and organizations to take a more critical look
at their role in the ethical development of students and employees. The public generally
perceives corporate business as lacking strong professional ethics. Business leaders
recognize that such a pejorative view of business can be detrimental (Schmidt,
McAdams, & Foster, 2009). Swanson (2004) has shown that public trust in business
has dropped to unfortunate lows, with CEOs and stockbrokers being trusted by only
23% of the public, just a tad above their assessment of used car dealers, at 15%.
Today’s university students will be tomorrow’s business managers. As such, they will
have a profound impact on both everyday practice and the principles governing business
(Sauers, Kennedy, & Loo, 2005). Fully agreeing with the statement that ‘‘ethical
behavior favors a prepared mind,’’ we considered it necessary to invite world-class
Management Education for Integrity 5
scientists with a diversity of backgrounds and perspectives to share their observations

and experience concerning the issue of integrity in management education. In the
chapters that follow, the authors suggest directions that business educators might take to
reorient higher education in business to transcend merely equipping people and
organizations to greedily proceed in building wealth without a moral compass.
This quest for integrity in business and education is focused not on microlevel
wrongdoing, but rather on the larger edifice of global business that has proven a
context within which ethics might be disregarded (Wankel & Malleck, 2011). Certainly,
the economic pratfalls of the last decade suggest that the financial helmsmen should be
more attentive and concerned with the repercussions of their machinations
(e.g., Berger, Cunningham, & Drumwright, 2007; Dobos, Barry, & Pogge, 2011;
Koslowski, 2011; Maak & Pless, 2006; Rodriguez, Siegel, Hillman, & Eden, 2006;
Spitzek, Dierksmeier, & Pirson, 2011; Sun, Stewart, & Pollard, 2010). Stakeholders
expect that corporations and their leaders will take more active roles as agents of
change on the global stage, and assist in the fight against some of the most pressing
problems in the world, such as poverty, environmental degradation, human rights
violations, corruption, and pandemic diseases (Dao, Langella, & Carbo, 2011;
Epstein & Widener, 2011; Hansen, Sextl, & Reichwald, 2010; Huang, 2010; Mainardes,
Alves, & Raposo, 2011; Pless, Maak, & Stahl, in press; Waters, 2011).
Although it is generally acknowledged that integrity ‘‘is at the heart of what
effective business and education is all about,’’ executives seem ill-prepared to cope
effectively with the challenges of leading with integrity in a global stakeholder
environment. Relatively little is known about how management education can
prepare managers and professionals for those challenges (Wankel & Stachowicz-
Stanusch, in press). This was another reason that induced us to take up the challenge
of scholarly discourse on the best practices of teaching integrity to future managers.
We also found inspiration in a new perspective on business management and
management education. The economic crisis along with cultural and technological
trends in the global business environment became a catalyst for the development of a
new person-centered perspective on business education. This perspective is based on
positive psychology, where profit needs to be grounded in human flourishing (Gregg &
Stoner, 2008), spiritual aspects of individuals, and a fascination of scholarly
management with the human brain and intelligence. It is obvious that management
education cannot remain indifferent to this perspective.
With these motivations in mind, we have designed this book to achieve the
following goals:
1. to provide empirically grounded, theoretical insights for rethinking business

curricula requisite for understanding and meaningfully confronting the challenges
of the second decade of the twenty-first century;
2. to explain how curricula should be streamlined and rejuvenated in order to ensure
a high level of integrity in management education;
3. to offer examples of new tools, teaching methods, integrity sensitization and
development exercises, and ethical management education assessment
approaches;
4. to provide teaching tools and curricula for a new way of implementing ethics
education, based on human fulfillment and development of man’s virtuous nature;
5. to present a holistic approach involving developing integrity in future managers
through an integration of extracurricular and curricular elements.
We have organized these goals under three themes, each of which contains multiple
chapter contributions. Part II, ‘‘Business Ethics Education: Across the Curriculum
and Beyond,’’ opens with Ethan Waples and Alison Antes’ chapter, ‘‘Sensemaking: A
Fresh Framework for Ethics Education in Management.’’ They provide a framework
of sensemaking (Mumford et al., 2008) of ethical decision making that might be
adapted to address ethics education in business. This paradigm is accompanied by
documented and replicated success in enhancing ethical decision making across a wide
variety of disciplines, including the sciences and engineering (Barraquier, 2011;
Kligyte et al., 2008; Mumford et al., 2008; Narayanan, Zane, & Kemmerer, 2011).
Moreover, the chapter authors provide theoretical justification for why this particular
framework is relevant to management ethics and outline how it could be applied
to design instruction. Also, they interpret the findings of two recent meta-analyses
vis-à-vis the sensemaking approach and present ‘‘best practice’’ recommendations
designing instructional programs to enhance integrity in management education.
Finally, the authors provide a brief review and discussion of appropriate assessment
methods to serve as a refresher for those interested in the pedagogy of business ethics.
These methods, while geared toward validating individual business ethics instruc-
tional programs, are also discussed with an eye toward meeting and exceeding the
Association to Advance Collegiate Business Schools’ (AACSB) Assurance of
Learning (AOL) standards. The authors close with final thoughts and future
directions for ethics education utilizing a sensemaking approach.
Joseph Petrick in his conceptual and applied pedagogy chapter entitled ‘‘Three
Pedagogical Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity’’ briefly treats the
concept of integrity capacity as a management competency and strategic asset and then
reports on three time-tested pedagogical resources for advancing management integrity
capacity: the Indicator of Readiness for Management Ethics Inquiry (IRMEI), the
Process Integrity Capacity Auction (PICA), and the Intra-Organizational Ethics Bowl
Event (IEBE). Each of these pedagogical tools advances management integrity capacity
in distinctive ways both inside and outside the classroom. If integrity capacity is a critical
intangible asset of individuals and organizations and if managers are held accountable
for responsibly managing that intangible asset in themselves and their organizations, it is
important for responsible management ethics educators to familiarize themselves with
the IRMEI, the PICA, and the IEBE — three proven pedagogical tools delineated in this
chapter that enhance managerial integrity capacity.
In the next chapter, ‘‘Using Literature to Encourage Moral Engagement in
Business Ethics Courses,’’ Louis Gasper argues that the continuing egregious ethical
lapses in the business world despite decades of instruction in ethics by business
schools must be due to a failure of students to internalize what has been taught. He
says that the usual course structures, using only textbooks of theory and cases for
application, do not engage the students’ moral imagination. If moral imagination is
an important component of ethical ‘‘internalization,’’ then it may be worthwhile to

use imaginative materials in business courses. The chapter author describes his own
experience in teaching ethics from imaginative literature and gives an example of his
method by synopsizing one of the stories he uses and explaining how ethical
principles are illustrated by it. Gasper notes that the instructor must have not only
some grounding in moral philosophy but also a fair acquaintance with imaginative
literature, both to have insight into the stories and to discover new sources of
material. Citing the success of his course, he urges that instructors in business ethics
give serious consideration to using this method.
Part II is closed by chapter ‘‘Fostering Integrity in Business Education: An
Analysis of Academic Administrators’ Perceptions at Spanish Business Schools,’’
written by Blanca Delgado-Márquez, J. Alberto Aragón-Correa, and Nuria Esther
Hurtado-Torres. Recent corporate scandals have led to a growing realization that
integrity and business are very closely connected. This realization is leading employers
to demand that business schools, as providers of education and training to managers
and senior executives, train their students in ethics and social responsibility. However,
the central question of how and why universities decide to foster integrity through the
courses offered remains basically unexplored. Given the importance of management
students acquiring abilities related to integrity, which can be used in the subsequent
lives as managers, it is crucial to specify ways to integrate such abilities into
management education. To achieve this aim, the chapter is divided into three main
sections. The first section contains a brief theoretical review about the models
proposed in the literature aimed at fostering the implementation of higher levels of
integrity into management education. In the second section, the authors explore how
these ideas may be conducted at business schools to promote future integrity-based
behaviors in management students, and they review the most recent empirical
literature about integrity in management education. In the third section, they perform
an empirical analysis of the perceptions of Spanish business school administrators.
The third part, ‘‘Values as Pathways to Ethical Action,’’ opens with the chapter
‘‘Teaching ‘How’ — not ‘Whether’ — to Manage with Integrity: Undergraduate and
MBA Applications of the ‘Giving Voice to Values’ Curriculum,’’ written by
Christopher P. Adkins, Mary Gentile, Cynthia Ingols, and Špela Trefalt, which
provides many valuable suggestions for undergraduate and MBA applications of this
curriculum. In this chapter, the authors outline the rationale behind the ‘‘Giving
Voice to Values’’ curriculum and a pedagogical approach in an introductory section,
and then provide case examples of its application for undergraduate business
students at the College of William and Mary and MBA students at Simmons School
of Management. Rather than assuming that students need to somehow be ‘‘fixed’’ or
taught to ‘‘have’’ integrity, the GVV approach focuses on providing them with the
skills and the tools and the actual practice in how to behave with integrity, therefore
making that choice more feasible and more likely. At William and Mary, this has
meant building from students’ past experiences of voicing their values, teaching them
the skills of empathic stakeholder analysis, and crafting ‘‘self-stories of action’’ so
students can personalize their responses to real-world situations that are relevant for
both for current and future experiences. These initiatives utilize the GVV curriculum
and reflect some of the latest research findings about motivation and action. At
Simmons, GVV has proven a powerful tool for addressing the long-standing
challenges of integrating values and ethics across the MBA curriculum in a way that
non-ethics faculty and students find compelling, and for assessing MBA students’
knowledge of how to apply the GVV methodology in difficult situations.
Tony Simons, Kevin Basik, and Hannes Leroy discuss changing ethical
dimensions of behavior through developing awareness, new skills, and habits. In
their chapter, ‘‘Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity,’’ they argue that a
successful change effort must:
(a) Motivate change. Avoidance motives might help in the initial unfreezing process.
However, they also inhibit learning, so approach motives should be emphasized.
(b) Equip. Many promises are broken because the actor was not thoughtful enough in
making the promise or did not track and manage his or her commitments. Fuzzy
communication often results in the perception of broken promises — which is, in
practice, as bad as the real thing. Learners must become aware of internal
mechanisms that might undermine their follow-through and how others see them.
(c) Follow up. To create any lasting change, one must put in place a system that
maintains accountability for the change effort, remind learners what they are trying
to do and why, provide troubleshooting and exercises targeted at the learner’s
specific areas of difficulty, and provide emotional support for the struggle.
(d) Provide a context. Senior management must demonstrate support through action —
namely, by providing adequate resources for the change effort and by endeavoring
to clean up their own house.
If all four of the above-mentioned elements are in place, then efforts to raise
integrity levels are very likely to succeed and to yield positive outcomes both for the
organization and for the individuals in it.
Heh Jason Huang concludes Part III of our book with his original insights on
using scenario-based approach as a teaching tool to promote integrity awareness
from a Chinese perspective. This chapter, ‘‘Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching
Tool to Promote Integrity Awareness: A Chinese Perspective,’’ begins with the
notion that differences in what constitutes integrity may be explained by differences
in national culture. In China, although Confucians think highly about being honest
and being consistent between words and deeds, they maintain that people should not
be confined by those norms if it is a right thing to break them and that great men are
those who stick to principle of righteousness. This line of thought may be understood
by the Confucians’ Doctrine of the Mean. The doctrine conforms with the Taoist
philosophical tradition, which is grounded in a mutuality of differences in nature
(yin and yang). This philosophy holds that a leader must understand the movement
and constant dynamics of these two opposing but complementary forces to maintain
harmony in life. Some Western scholars also share the thought that leader integrity
defies simple categorization and its meaning is highly context-specific. The important
issues of integrity are seen to begin to surface only after being raised to the level of
group discussion. This author shows how groups of MBA and EMBA students in
Taiwan interactively learned the integrity issues associated with their decisions. By
maintaining careful consistency among thought, voice, and action, management
educators can better align teaching with the need to foster the development of
managers with integrity.
The last part of our book, ‘‘Developing Curricula based on a Liberal Approach to
Education: A Way toward Responsible Citizens,’’ opens with Mary Grace Neville
and Lindsey Godwin’s thought-provoking call for ‘‘Returning to a Holistic
Management Education and the Tradition of Liberal Education.’’ From the Latin
integritatem, integrity means ‘‘wholeness’’ and requires a willingness to see the world
as a collective whole rather than as an optimized set of competitive parts.
Unfortunately, the majority of management education today perpetuates a siloed
view of knowledge, which truncates attention on developing the humanistic
dimensions critical for ethical behavior. Thus, this chapter advances the growing
call from scholars who contend that management education needs to incorporate a
whole-systems philosophy if we are to facilitate students’ ability to act with integrity
in an increasingly fragmented world. Specifically, the authors offer a model for
conceptualizing undergraduate management education grounded in the historical
tradition of liberal education. They begin with a definition of ‘‘liberal’’ education,
followed by a brief discussion of the history of undergraduate education, highlighting
the increasing call for a return to a more integrated model. Then, the chapter authors
briefly highlight the cognitive, ethical, and psychological development characteristics
of the traditional undergraduate population that should be considered when
redesigning their curriculum. Next, they summarize the three-year action research
process that informed their emerging model. Finally, they posit a model of liberal
undergraduate business education that considers a variety of elements — both inside
the classroom and beyond — aimed at transforming students into conscientious
global citizens. They conclude with a discussion of the challenges and tensions
inherent as we shift our current approach to management education.
In ‘‘Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts,’’ Sarah
Stookey elaborates on education for a meaningful ethics based on appreciation of
broad social, political, economic, and cultural interdependencies. She argues that
these qualities can be encouraged by the kind of broadly intellectual and
interdisciplinary focus more frequently associated with the liberal arts. The first
part of the chapter summarizes a history of educational practice and social divisions
through which preparation for business is highly stratified. Business elites
traditionally have had the benefits of liberal arts education, often with limited
formal education in business. Conversely, nonelites in the business world tend to lack
the benefits of liberal arts education and have an excess of overly instrumental
business education. Still, they are more likely than their liberal arts counterparts to
have wide-ranging practical business experience. The second half of the chapter
describes seven key elements of a liberal arts approach to management education
that can foster integrity, and it is illustrated with examples of teaching practices.
Stookey concludes that our educational system mirrors a society segregated by
elitism and governed by hierarchies of privilege. For business to serve other than
short-term and minority interests, we need a different educational system.
Bradley Agle, Jeffery Thompson, David Hart, Lori Wadsworth, and Aaron Miller
close our book with ‘‘Meeting the Objectives of Business Ethics Education: The
Marriott School Model and Agenda for Utilizing the Complete Collegiate
Educational Experience.’’ The authors take a holistic approach to the development
of integrity in business schools. They begin by examining the various objectives of
business ethics education through an examination of the ethics development model
used in the Marriott School of Management at Brigham Young University. Then the
chapter authors provide examples of the various types of pedagogical approaches
discussed in the business ethics literature for each of these objectives, along with
examples of successful pedagogical techniques used in Marriott School ethics
courses. They conclude by discussing the Marriott School agenda for fuller
fulfillment of its ethics mission. Such an agenda includes utilizing all the elements
of a student’s collegiate experience to enhance his or her ethical development, per the
ethics development model.
Business ethics in higher education is burgeoning as a topic of interest spurred by
emerging accreditation requirements and the increasing interest of businesses to recruit
people with ethical fiber. The effects of myopic, greedy, ethically bereft leadership have
sparked a burgeoning interest in reorienting the business education system toward
producing managers with integrity. Although it might seem like common sense,
educating managers for integrity as a priority has eluded us in the past.
This book explores ways through which the moral character of our business leaders
might be improved with a mind to reining in the myopic perspectives that business
schools have foisted on them, and that they have been lavishly rewarded for using in
the past. New directions, such as spiritual values, are already emerging as centerpieces
of some business school programs. There is no dearth of ethical challenges for business
educators and emerging managers to take on. We hope that business education will
move to equipping moral, ecological, and economic heroes of our future.
References
Andrews, K. R. (1971). The concept of corporate strategy. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.
Barraquier, A. (2011). Ethical behaviour in practice: Decision outcomes and strategic
implications. British Journal of Management, 22(1), S28–S46.
Berger, I. E., Cunningham, P. H., & Drumwright, M. E. (2007). Mainstreaming corporate
social responsibility. California Management Review, 49, 132–157.
Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions.
Leadership Quarterly, 17, 595–616.
Christensen, L. J., Peirce, E., Hartman, L., Hoffman, W. M., & Carrier, J. (2007). Ethics, CSR,
and sustainability in the Financial Times top 50 global business schools. Journal of Business
Ethics, 73, 347–368.
Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2004). Questioning the domain of business ethics education. Journal
of Business Ethics, 54, 357–369.
Dao, V., Langella, I., & Carbo, J. (2011). From green to sustainability: Information
technology and an integrated sustainability framework. Journal of Strategic Information
Systems, 20(1), 63–79.
Dobos, N., Barry, C., & Pogge, T. W. M. (Eds). (2011). Global financial crisis: The ethical
issues. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Economist. (2011). Piecing together Fukushima: Japan’s nuclear disaster. The Economist, May 5.
Accessed from ABI/Inform database.
Epstein, M. J., & Widener, S. K. (2011). Facilitating sustainable development decisions:
Measuring stakeholder reactions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(2), 107–123.
Fair Disclosure Wire. (2011). The alliance for nuclear accountability holds a news event on a
report on department of energy programs — Final. Fair Disclosure Wire, April 4. Accessed
from ABI/Inform database.
Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices.
Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 75–91.
Giacalone, R. A., & Thompson, K. R. (2006). Business ethics and social responsibility
education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5, 266–277.
Gregg, S., & Stoner, J. R., Jr. (Eds). (2008). Rethinking business management: Examining the
foundations of business education. Princeton: Witherspoon Institute.
Hansen, E. G., Sextl, M., & Reichwald, R. (2010). Managing strategic alliances through a
community-enabled balanced scorecard: The case of Merck Ltd, Thailand. Business
Strategy and the Environment, 19(6), 387–399.
Huang, C. J. (2010). Corporate governance, corporate social responsibility and corporate
performance. Journal of Management & Organization, 16(5), 641–655.
Kligyte, V., Marcy, R. T., Waples, E. P., Sevier, S. T., Godfrey, E. S., Mumford, M. D., &
Hougen, D. F. (2008). Application of a sensemaking approach to responsible conduct of
research training in the physical sciences and engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics,
14, 251–278.
Koslowski, P. (2011). The ethics of banking: Conclusions from the financial crisis. Berlin:
Springer.
Kurpis, L. V., Beqiri, M. S., & Helgeson, J. G. (2008). The effects of commitment to moral self-
improvement and religiosity on ethics of business students. Journal of Business Ethics, 80,
447–463.
Lane, I. F., & Bogue, E. G. (2010). Faculty perspectives regarding the importance and place
of nontechnical competencies in veterinary medical education at five North American
colleges of veterinary medicine. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association,
237(1), 53–64.
Maak, T., & Pless, N. M. (2006). Responsible leadership in a stakeholder society: A relational
perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 99–115.
Mainardes, E. W., Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2011). Stakeholder theory: Issues to resolve.
Management Decision, 49(2), 226–252.
Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2004). Corporate social responsibility education in Europe. Journal of
Business Ethics, 54, 323–337.
Miller, R. A. (2009). The ethics narrative and the role of the business school in moral
development. Journal of Business Ethics, 90, 287–293.
Mintzberg, H. (2004). Managers not MBAs: A hard look at the soft practice of management and
management development. San Francisco: Beret-Koehler Publishers.
Moon, J., & Shen, X. (2010). CSR in China research: Salience, focus and nature. Journal of
Business Ethics, 94(4), 613–629.
Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., Brown, R. P., Murphy, S. T., Hill, J. H., Antes, A. L., y
Devenport, L. D. (2008). A sensemaking approach to ethics training for scientists:
Preliminary evidence of training effectiveness. Ethics and Behavior, 18, 315–339.
Narayanan, V. K., Zane, L. J., & Kemmerer, B. (2011). The cognitive perspective in strategy:
An integrative review. Journal of Management, 37(1), 305–351.
Nicholson, C. Y., & DeMoss, M. (2009). Teaching ethics and social responsibility: An
evaluation of undergraduate business education at the discipline level. Journal of Education
for Business, 84(4), 213–218.
Pfeffer, J. (2005). Why do bad management theories persist? Academy of Management
Learning & Education, 4, 96–100.
Pless, N., Maak, T., & Stahl, G. (2011). Developing responsible global leaders through
international service learning programs: The Ulysses experience. Academy of Management
Learning & Education, 10(2), 237–260. Retrieved from http://journals.aomonline.org/
InPress/main.asp?action=preview&art_id=833&p_id=2&p_short=AMLE
Puffer, S. M., & McCarthy, D. J. (2008). Ethical turnarounds and transformational leadership:
A global imperative for CSR. Thunderbird International Business Review, 50, 303–314.
Rodriguez, P., Siegel, D. S., Hillman, A., & Eden, L. (2006). Three lenses on the multinational
enterprise: Politics, corruption, and corporate social responsibility. Journal of International
Business Studies, 37, 733–746.
Sauers, D. A., Kennedy, J. C., & Loo, J. (2005). Power distance and individualism as cultural
determinants of ethical judgments. Journal of International Business Research, 4(1), 81–96.
Schmidt, C. D., McAdams, C. R., & Foster, V. (2009). Promoting the moral reasoning of
undergraduate business students through a deliberate psychological education-based
classroom intervention. Journal of Moral Education, 38(3), 315–334.
Spitzek, H., Dierksmeier, C., & Pirson, M. (Eds). (2011). Banking with integrity: The winners of
the financial crisis? New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sun, W., Stewart, J., & Pollard, D. (Eds). (2010). Reframing corporate social responsibility:
Lessons from the global financial crisis. Bingley, UK: Emerald.
Swanson, D. L. (2004). The buck stops here: Why universities must reclaim business ethics
education. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2(1), 43–61.
Swanson, D. L., & Fisher, D. G. (Eds). (2008). Advancing business ethics education. Charlotte,
NC: Information Age Publishing.
Waldman, D. A., & Galvin, B. M. (2008). Alternative perspectives of responsible leadership.
Organizational Dynamics, 37, 327–341.
Wankel, C., & DeFillippi, R. (2002). Rethinking management education for the 21st century.
Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Wankel, C., & DeFillippi, R. (2006). New visions of graduate management education.
Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Wankel, C., & Malleck, S. (Eds). (2011). Globalization: Ethical models and applications.
Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
Wankel, C., & Stachowicz-Stanusch, A. (in press). Principles for responsible management
education: A pathway to management education for integrity. Organization and Management.
Waters, R. D. (2011). Redefining stewardship: Examining how Fortune 100 organizations use
stewardship with virtual stakeholders. Public Relations Review, 37(2), 129–136.
PART II
BUSINESS ETHICS EDUCATION: ACROSS
THE CURRICULUM AND BEYOND
Chapter 2
Sensemaking: A Fresh Framework for Ethics

Education in Management
Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes
Abstract
Purpose — The purpose of this chapter is to discuss a new approach to ethics

education in management, the sensemaking approach, and how this approach
matches with several key design, approach, and content features identified in
successful ethics education programs (Antes et al., 2009; Waples et al., 2009). In
addition, we briefly discuss the role and importance of assessment of ethics
programs, particularly with respect to the sensemaking approach.
Methodology — The methodology employed is conceptual review and
discussion.
Findings — We suggest that the sensemaking approach is a valid framework for
enhancing the ethical decision making of management students and that the
approach has features that indicate its potential to be effective in this area. We
also suggest that with this new approach, innovative methods of assessment
may be undertaken to target specific behavioral and cognitive outcomes key to
learning.
Limitations — Our work is limited, in part, because the sensemaking
framework has yet to be translated into a business environment. However,
implications and future directions regarding translation are discussed.
Originality/value — For educators, we offer a new perspective on building
ethics education, one that focuses on altering the process of sensemaking within
an ethical dilemma. We see such courses or modules as being applied both
outside and within the core business curriculum, thus strengthening manage-
ment students’ ethical skills throughout their collegiate experiences.

ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1
16 Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes
Prominent cases of ethical misconduct spanning the gamut of organizations, from

corporate, government, and military to academic, reveal the seriousness of
professional misbehavior and raise concern among scholars and the public alike
about ethical behavior in organizations. No matter the organization or details of the
latest account of misconduct, one factor — leadership — remains constant across
scenarios. Whether organizational leaders perpetrate misbehavior or foster an
environment permitting unethical conduct, scholars are left asking how to remedy
what appears to be a deficit of ethical leadership in organizations. Ethics education has
become the most commonly proposed solution for promoting ethics across professions
and, in particular, for promoting business ethics among students who will join the
leadership ranks in the corporate world. Although scholars generally agree that ethics
education is a fruitful endeavor, the approaches to educating for ethics vary widely.
Indeed, the number of scholars, across a wide variety of disciplines, publishing on
‘‘business ethics’’ alone has exploded in the past decade — virtually tripling from the
1990s to the late 2000s (Tenbrunsel & Smith-Crowe, 2008). Much of this literature has
been on ethical education of students in business and management (Baetz & Sharp,
2004; Giacalone & Thompson, 2006; Glenn, 1992; Koehn, 2005; Mintz, 1996; Painter-
Morland, Fontrodona, Hoffman, & Rowe, 2003; Ritter, 2006; Sims & Felton, 2006;
Weber, 2007). This influx of literature brought forth two qualitative reviews of business
ethics (O’Fallon & Butterfield, 2005; Treviño, Weaver, & Reynolds, 2006) and also a
quantitative review of business ethics education (Waples, Antes, Murphy, Connelly, &
Mumford, 2009). In spite of this abundance of literature, several key, unresolved issues
concerning ethics education for management students remain.
The primary unresolved issue concerns a lack, even among this plethora of
literature, of research and theory clearly addressing the pedagogy behind business
ethics curriculum. Indeed, a meta-analysis conducted by Waples et al. (2009) identified
only 25 examinations of business ethics instructional programs with well-defined,
carefully constructed, and meticulously measured evaluation criteria related to ethics
(e.g., awareness, decision making). This problem is germane not only to business. The
scientific community also struggles to identify sound evaluations of ethics courses and
arrive at an understanding of effective ethics education pedagogy (cf., Antes
et al., 2009). Perhaps the most essential criterion in business ethics — ethical decision
making — has been the focus of many models (Ferrell & Gresham, 1985; Hunt & Vitell,
1986; Jones, 1991; Sonenshein, 2007; Treviño, 1986) and empirical investigations, as
reviewed by Loe, Ferrell, and Mansfield (2000). Despite the recognition of the
importance of ethical decision making in the business ethics literature, relatively few
researchers have examined programs aimed at increasing the ethical decision making
of individuals, within either business schools or organizations.
We suggest, in the wake of the global financial crisis of 2008–2010, the major
automobile recalls of Toyota in 2010, and the massive Gulf Coast oil spill of 2010,
the time has come to take a more direct, pragmatic approach to business ethics
education. To address this, we have three goals for the present chapter. First, we
provide a sensemaking framework (Mumford et al., 2008), which brings with it
documented and replicated success in enhancing ethical decision making, that can be
adopted to approach ethics education in business. Second, we propose instructional
Sensemaking and Management Ethics 17
design techniques for delivering sensemaking instruction based on best practice

recommendations emerging from recent meta-analyses (Antes et al., 2009; Waples
et al., 2009) that examined ethics instruction in the sciences and business,
respectively. Third, and finally, we provide a brief review and discussion of
appropriate assessment methods that might be applied to assess the recommended
instructional approach to serve as a refresher for those interested in the pedagogy of
business ethics. These methods, while geared toward validating individual business
ethics instructional programs, will also be discussed with an eye toward meeting and
exceeding the Association to Advance Collegiate Business Schools’ (AACSB)
Assurance of Learning (AOL) standards.
2.1. Sensemaking as a Framework for Ethics Instruction

Central to a discussion concerning effective approaches to ethics education must be
an examination of the ethical framework applied as the basis for instruction.
Different ethical frameworks make their own assumptions about the nature of ethics
and thus shape ethics instruction in a particular manner. For instance, a framework
based on deontological and teleological moral systems might encourage students to
make two kinds of evaluations of potential alternatives for resolving an ethical
problem — a deontological evaluation of norms and rules of moral behavior and a
teleological evaluation of likely consequences for each alternative (Hunt & Vitell,
2006). Another framework emphasizes developing students’ knowledge of philoso-
phical ethical theories, such as utilitarianism, ethical egoism, the categorical
imperative, and virtue ethics, which are believed to provide a basis for understanding
the ethical components of a particular issue (Sims, 2002). One of the most commonly
applied frameworks is cognitive moral development theory (Kohlberg, 1969, 1976;
Rest, 1979, 1986) that proposes people are capable of less selfish, more principled
moral reasoning as they move to higher stages of moral development. Therefore,
instruction based on a moral development framework aims to advance students to
higher stages of moral development. As evidenced by these example frameworks,
each offers a unique perspective on ethics and results in a unique basis for ethics
instruction.
Recently, a sensemaking framework has been proposed for understanding ethical
behavior in complex professional roles (Mumford et al., 2008), and this framework
appears to be a plausible basis for ethics instruction for management students. The
central tenet of this ethical framework is that ethical behavior arises from decision
making in response to complex workplace problems. Thus, the emphasis of
instruction based on this framework becomes developing an individual’s capacity
to conceptualize and work through ethical problems to arrive at a plausible decision
and action. Given the complex, social nature of management in organizations and
the sensemaking framework’s emphasis on understanding the entirety of a situation,
possible consequences, and consideration of others, this framework provides an ideal
alternative framework for ethics instruction for management students.
2.1.1. Theoretical Model of Sensemaking
Before considering the application of the sensemaking framework to management

ethics instruction, we first discuss the framework’s theoretical basis and evidence for
the validity of the model. The sensemaking model (illustrated in Figure 2.1) accounts
for personal and professional frames of reference that one brings with him/her to the
workplace that play a role in the interpretation and processing of workplace events and
problems. For example, an individual has personal values, goals, and prior personal
experiences that shape his/her interpretations of workplace events (Harris, 1994;
Sheldon & Kasser, 1998). On the side of occupational considerations, professional
experience, including learned norms of one’s given profession or domain of expertise,
guidelines, and principles, operates to shape his/her interpretation of, and reaction to,
workplace events and, in particular, ethical problems (Ericsson & Smith, 1991).
At its core, the model emphasizes that as an individual interacts with his/her
surroundings, he/she applies a mental model — or mental representation (Johnson-
Laird, 1983) — to make sense of, or understand, one’s work and events taking place in
the workplace. Of central importance to ethical decision making, this mental model
permits one to recognize the ethical dimensions of one’s work role and organizational
problems. It is when one recognizes, or frames, a situation as involving ethical aspects
and begins to perceive the potential causes of the situation that the central processes of
ethical decision making — forecasting, emotion management, and self-reflection —
permit one to make sense of, and act on, his/her surroundings. As one critically
evaluates the situation, framing processes continue to operate and shape an
individual’s analysis. For instance, as an employee weighs his/her manager’s request
to record a few sales transactions prior to their actual occurrence to pad monthly
Figure 2.1: Sensemaking model of ethical decision making (Mumford et al., 2008).
Reused with permission.
revenues, the first frame of reference operating may be professional. As such, the
individual considers, from the professional perspective, standards, rules, or guidelines
that may make this practice unethical. Simultaneously, similar thoughts about the
consequences of insubordination — regardless of the morality of behaviors — begin to
add complexity to the analysis of the situation.
After recognition of an ethical problem, an individual begins to forecast potential
outcomes for key stakeholders (Hogarth & Makridakis, 1981). Recognition of the
ethical dimensions of a workplace problem, and forecasting a range of potential
outcomes, evokes emotion, typically negative emotions such as anxiety, anger, or fear
(Gaudine & Thorne, 2001; Haidt, 2001). Thus, the regulation, or management, of an
emotional reaction proves essential to making an ethical choice (Gross, 1999). As an
individual considers potential outcomes of various courses of action, or even inaction,
self-reflection on elements of one’s personal and professional frames of reference, such as
goals and experiences, serves to provide knowledge to inform continued framing of the
situation, forecasting, and emotion regulation (Habermas & Bluck, 2000; Oyserman &
Markus, 1990). These cognitive processes permit the application of an initial mental
model for understanding workplace ethics, and the product of these processes is a refined
mental model indicating ideal decisions and actions for addressing the workplace
problem (Mumford, Friedrich, Caughron, & Byrne, 2007).
Of central importance to the viability of this model for instruction is that the
model implies metacognitive reasoning strategies that facilitate the execution of these
sensemaking processes. These strategies require purposeful, active analysis of
workplace events. These metacognitive reasoning strategies (described in Table 2.1)
include recognizing circumstances, seeking help, questioning one’s judgment,
managing emotions, anticipating consequences, analyzing personal motivations, and
considering others.
Not only do the strategies provide for reflective and active analysis of ethical
decisions, but they also reflect the substantive processes involved in ethical decision
making. As such, they provide the focal point of the sensemaking framework as a
pedagogical tool and act as practical, concrete learning outcomes for assessing the
enhancement of ethical decision making. Importantly, the utilization of the
sensemaking framework as an instructional tool is also supported by a solid
foundation of research. This research (summarized in Table 2.2) provides evidence
for the validity of the framework by demonstrating the effectiveness of instructional
programs based on the framework, the operation of individual-level and situational
variables consistent with hypotheses arising from the model, and the relationship of
the central processes to ethical decision making.
2.1.2. The Sensemaking Framework for Business Ethics Instruction
Turning to the application of the sensemaking framework for ethics education for
management students, it is important to remember the fundamental objective of
ethics instruction according to this framework — to develop a mental model of ethics
Table 2.1: Metacognitive reasoning strategies.
Strategy Description
1 Recognizing Thinking about, and awareness of, origins of the problem(s),

circumstances individuals involved, and relevant principles, goals, and
values
2 Seeking help Consulting a mentor, supervisor, peer, or institutional
resource; learning from others’ behaviors in similar
situations
3 Questioning one’s Considering that one’s interpretation of the problem(s) and
judgment potential decisions may be biased or based on faulty
assumptions and recognizing the problems that people
often have with making ethical decisions
4 Managing emotions Awareness of one’s emotions, their effects on thinking and
decision making, and regulating emotional reactions to the
problem(s)
5 Anticipating Thinking about many possible outcomes, such as
consequences consequences for others and both short- and long-term
outcomes of possible decision alternatives
6 Analyzing personal Considering one’s deeply rooted motivations, values, and
motivations goals and how they might affect one’s decision making
7 Considering others Being mindful of others’ perceptions, perspectives, and
concerns, and the likely impact of one’s actions on others
socially and professionally
Note: Adapted from Mumford et al. (2008).
and ethical decision making in one’s work that allows one to recognize the ethical
dimensions of workplace situations and work through those problems by critical
analysis. This objective requires that ethics instruction for managers includes several
components.
First, it is critical to examine and decompose existing misconceptions about ethics
and ethical behavior that prevent the formation of a mental model for understanding
ethics in organizations and in leadership. Next, students must learn about the
complexities of decision making and become aware of the value of a strategic, critical
thinking approach to addressing the decision-making demands of one’s leadership
role. Finally, students should be presented with decision-making tools (i.e.,
metacognitive reasoning strategies) that facilitate the execution of sensemaking
processes central to ethical decision making.
2.1.2.1. Breaking down misconceptions The first component of applying this

framework, addressing misconceptions, is critical as it serves as a foundation for the
remaining components of instruction. Three common, and related, misconceptions
Table 2.2: Summary of research evidence for the sensemaking model.
Study Research purpose Method Findings Validity implications for
sensemaking framework
Mumford et al. Design complex, Doctoral students in the EDM was related to Provides evidence that
(2006) scenario-based ethical sciences completed hypothesized causes the proposed
decision-making EDM measures, along (e.g., intelligence) and underlying
(EDM) measures, with measures of outcomes (e.g., metacognitive
including measures of hypothesized causes judgments of ethical strategies implied by
underlying and outcomes of EDM misconduct) as the sensemaking
metacognitive expected; scores for framework are related
reasoning strategies, metacognitive to scores on EDM
and provide evidence strategies were
for their validity positively related to
EDM scores (r ranging
from .20 to .52)
Antes et al. (2007) Examine whether Doctoral students in the Personality variables Findings provide
personality sciences completed related to self- evidence that one’s
characteristics (i.e., the measures of perception (i.e., understanding of, and
Big Five, narcissism, personality and EDM narcissism) and framing of, oneself
and cynicism) are perceptions of others and others is related to
related to EDM, (i.e., cynicism) were one’s application of
including negatively related to sensemaking strategies
metacognitive ethical decisions and and EDM
reasoning strategies metacognitive
reasoning strategies
(b coefficients ranging
from –.16 to –.35)
Mumford, Murphy, Examine the relationship Newcomers to graduate Working in an Working in a negative
et al. (2007) of environmental research laboratories environment environment hindered
Sensemaking and Management Ethics
workplace variables, completed measures of characterized by decision making, likely

21
22
Table 2.2: (Continued )

such as interpersonal environmental factors such as due to a disruption of

conflict and lack of dimensions and EDM interpersonal conflict mental model
rewards, to EDM was negatively related formation at a key
to EDM (b coefficients stage in one’s career
ranging from –.22 to
–.35)
Brock et al. (2008) Assess whether Kligyte Compared, 6 months Students of the Sensemaking instruction
et al.’s (2008) after instruction, instructional program appears to change
instruction affects the mental models of had more mental models of
mental models of graduate students who sophisticated mental those instructed
individuals and had completed the models of ethical
determine if effects instructional program problems than their

hold over time to students and faculty untrained counterparts
who had not and faculty
Kligyte et al. (2008) Examine the influence of Members of a physical Moderate to large Replicated findings from
Mumford et al.’s sciences/engineering increases (Cohen’s d Mumford et al. (2008)
(2008) sensemaking research center .53–1.82) in EDM and indicating the
instruction adapted completed a field- four of seven effectiveness of the
for training specific measure of metacognitive sensemaking
participants in a EDM prior to, and reasoning strategies instruction
different field of study following, the (Cohen’s d .33–1.92);
instructional positive subjective
intervention participant reactions
Mumford et al. Examine the influence of Graduate students in the Moderate to large Evidence for the
(2008) sensemaking sciences completed a increases (Cohen’s d effectiveness of the
instruction — a two- field-specific measure .49–1.46) in EDM and sensemaking approach
day, interactive case- of EDM prior to, and metacognitive for enhancing the
following, the reasoning strategy
based seminar — on instructional application (Cohen’s d EDM skills of students
EDM intervention .45–1.36); positive instructed
subjective participant
reactions
Kligyte et al. (2009) Investigate the effect of Participants were asked Individuals experiencing Provides evidence for the
negative emotions to complete EDM anger made less ethical role of emotions and
(anger and fear) and measures after anger choices than those emotion management
the management of or fear was experiencing fear; in EDM
those emotions (i.e., manipulated and cognitive reappraisal
through distraction, participants engaged and relaxation
relaxation, and in one of the three techniques minimized
cognitive reappraisal) emotion management the effect of anger
on EDM techniques
Mumford, Examine whether EDM Doctoral students in the Social and biological Differences in EDM
Connelly, et al. differs by professional sciences were sciences scored higher processes across field
(2009) field and experience in compared for with regard to EDM, and experience level
that field due to differences in EDM, with this difference provides evidence that
differing socialization metacognitive linked to the reasoning field norms do inform
mechanisms reasoning strategies, strategies and social EDM processes
and social-behavioral responses underlying
patterns in responding decision making, even
to ethical problems after controlling for
individual differences
and differential
exposure to unethical
practices
Mumford, Waples Examine the influence of Doctoral science Exposure to unethical Findings consistent with
et al. (2009) the frequency of direct students in early and events in one’s framework ‘s
exposure to unethical later stages of their workplace was proposition that
practices on the EDM graduate programs negatively related to experience provides a
of developing completed measures of EDM (b coefficients mechanism for

professionals, taking the frequency of ranging from –.15 forming a mental
23
24

into account years of exposure to unethical to –.33) with the model for
experience, workplace practices, relationship being understanding
perceptions of perceptions of stronger among less professional conduct
acceptability of acceptability of experienced students;
unethical practices, unethical practices, frequency of exposure
and perceptions of climate, and EDM to unethical events was
ethical climate related to perceiving
those events as
acceptable
Mumford et al. Examine the relationship Doctoral students in the Creative thinking skills Findings provide
(2010) between creative sciences completed were related to EDM evidence that EDM is
thinking skills and measures of creative and metacognitive a complex, cognitive

EDM thinking skills (e.g., strategies (b task requiring general
problem definition and coefficients ranging cognitive ability and
idea generation) along from .14 to .35); involving processes
with measures of intelligence, a control such as recognition of
EDM variable, was also the problem and
related to EDM (b generation of multiple
coefficients ranging alternatives
from .14 to .30)
Stenmark et al. Examine whether Participants were asked Individuals who Provides evidence for the
(2010) forecasting contributes to solve ethical identified key causes importance of
to EDM problems after being and the most critical forecasting in making
prompted to forecast consequences of a ethical decisions
possible outcomes of problem made more
the situation ethical decisions than
those who did not
Antes et al. (2011) Investigate the influence Participants were asked Individuals who reflected Provides evidence for
of self-reflection on to reflect on past on past instances of self-reflection
EDM experiences relevant to situations that they mechanisms and the
a current ethical considered positive role of past
problem they were applied material from experiences in EDM
tasked with addressing that experience to
solving the new
problem, resulting in
more ethical choices
Brown et al. (2011) Investigate whether Experimental study Participants who Provides evidence for the
affirming one’s ethical asked participants to credentialed effects of framing of
values (i.e., ‘‘moral engage in moral themselves were more oneself and the
credentialing’’) credentialing prior to likely to cheat on the situation on EDM
produces the being exposed to a task, but only when
paradoxical effect of situation where they the cheating could be
facilitating unethical could cheat on a task; easily rationalized
behavior while taking the task was
into account how easy manipulated so that it
(or difficult) it was to would be easy or
rationalize the difficult to rationalize
unethical behavior the cheating behavior
25
include assumptions about the straightforward nature of ethics and ethical decision
making in organizations and the protective nature of one’s moral virtue (Bazerman &
Moore, 2009). First, students must recognize the complexity of ethics in
organizations and, moreover, the complexity of making ethical decisions.
Individuals are likely to fall prey to the availability bias (Tversky & Kahneman,
1973) and call to mind relatively extreme cases of unethical conduct in the corporate
world, such as where harmful or faulty products were knowingly sold to consumers
or cases of financial fraud, because of their salience and prevalence in business ethics
texts. This activation of extreme scenarios when conceptualizing business ethics
creates the notion that ethical problems encountered by managers in the corporate
world are fairly obvious. Extrapolating from this deduction, management students
may also assume that ethical decision making, given the black-and-white nature of
the issues, is straightforward.
Of course, ethical behavior and ethical decision making in organizations is much
more complex than this misconception allows one to recognize. Thus, instruction
must discuss the vast range and nature of the ethical problems encountered by
managers and the ‘‘gray areas’’ often inherent in them. In fact, by the very nature of
the work, because managers make decisions that directly influence other individuals,
nearly every decision a manager makes involves an ethical dimension (Messick &
Bazerman, 2001). Indeed, organizational leaders shape the ethical climate within
their organization and serve as role models for ethical behavior (Brown & Treviño,
2006), clearly a dimension of their role that involves ethical considerations on a daily
basis.
Overall, instruction must encourage students to expand their conception of the
nature and type of ethical problems encountered in their role to include ethical
considerations in such tasks as fairness in assigning work tasks, expectations for
employees, and managing interpersonal conflict. When ethical leadership is
construed in this manner, the list of potential ethical considerations is nearly
endless. To name a few, leaders encounter issues of favoritism, sharing information
with employees at the appropriate time, fairness in hiring, firing, allocation of
rewards and promotions, honesty in reports, and fairness in giving credit for work.
Leaders also encounter concerns with regard to conflicts of interest, handling
diversity and managing discrimination, appropriate training and development of
employees, providing employees with voice and participation in decision making,
informing others of rationale behind decisions and policies, anticipating unintended
consequences of decisions or policies, and providing fair and regular feedback. This
list is far from exhaustive and does not even cover relationships that leaders have
outside of the organization, such as relationships with customers, suppliers, and,
more broadly, the public in general.
2.1.2.2. Self-enhancement bias Another key misconception that must be addressed

at the outset of instruction is the faulty assumption, stemming from natural self-
enhancement mechanisms (John & Robins, 1994), that one’s moral values are
sufficient to protect one from, or make one ‘‘immune’’ to, unethical behavior. In this
regard, students must learn that the complexity of ethical decision making in
organizations, given situational factors and the natural faultiness of human judgment
and decision making, allows personal values to be beneficial, but not sufficient, to
protect against unethical choices. This faulty assumption is particularly detrimental
to sensemaking because it implies that one need not think, rather ethical choices will
be obvious. Moreover, this assumption relates to a misconception that when others
engage in unethical behavior, it must be a function of their immoral nature. Rather,
students must learn that it is often poor decision making that contributes to unethical
behavior, even among well-intentioned individuals. This lesson is important for
managers who may be faced in their career with managing the misbehavior of others,
an issue that involves its own ethical considerations.
Once students recognize the complexity of ethical issues and the critical
importance of ethical decision making, they are prepared to learn about this form
of decision making. To begin, a simple primer, or review, of the inherently flawed
nature of human judgment and decision making fosters a sense of buy-in with regard
to the importance of the topic and student readiness to learn (Baldwin, Magjuka, &
Loher, 1991). In this component of the instruction, students can be reminded of their
existing biases that were already covered, including the assumption that they are
immune to unethical behavior and ethical decision making is straightforward. An
instructor might present other examples of the flawed nature of judgment and
decision making by demonstrating other biases, such as hindsight or ease of recall
biases, bounded rationality, escalation of commitment, motivational and emotion
influences, or the powerful influence of framing effects, which lead people to make
choices that are otherwise irrational (Bazerman & Moore, 2009).
2.1.2.3. Rules, guidelines, and field-specific standards As students explore the range
and nature of ethical issues they might encounter in their roles, it is also important to
cover two additional elements of ethical decision making. First, the rules and
principles that might provide insight into the types and nature of ethical problems
should be discussed and briefly explored. Typically rules and principles vary by
industry or organization, with common codes available in fields such as marketing,
accounting, and management.
Second, it is also necessary for students to consider the range and nature of the
consequences of how they handle these issues. The list is rather lengthy, including factors
at the individual, dyadic, or group level — such as trust, effectiveness of teamwork,
workplace stress, interpersonal conflict, perceptions of fairness, and commitment — to
the organization level, such as absenteeism, turnover, profit, and public image (Brown &
Treviño, 2006; Cullen, Parboteeah, & Victor, 2003). Overall, management students must
come to understand that ethics is an integral component of their leadership role.
2.1.2.4. Core of ethical decision making To this point, the intent of these
instructional recommendations is to prepare students to learn about ethical
decision-making tools to facilitate their sensemaking. These preliminary phases are
critical and should not be overlooked. In the final component of an application of
this framework to ethics instruction, students are presented with a guide for
understanding ethical decision making and tools for executing the psychological
processes central to ethical decision making.
First, to provide students with a framework for understanding the elements
operating on and around their ethical decision making, a simplified five-component
model might be presented (see Figure 2.2). This model provides a simpler, condensed
representation of the role that professional guidelines play in providing some
foundation for ethical decision making. Next, the model specifies the operation of
constraints on ethical decision making, including situational constraints, such as time
pressure and group conflict, and personal constraints, such as self-enhancement, fear
of failure, and close-mindedness, that limit student’s decision-making capacity by
detrimentally influencing his/her interpretation of the situation and application of
rules, guidelines, and decision-making strategies. These constraints should be explored
and students made aware of the importance of ongoing scanning for these elements
that might impinge on one’s decision making. In fact, these constraints may serve as a
gauge of the ethical climate within one’s work unit or organization (Martin & Cullen,
2006; Mulki, Jaramillo, & Locander, 2008).
Next, the five-component model presents the importance of decision-making
strategies (i.e., metacognitive reasoning strategies) to serve as tools for how to
systematically approach thinking through an ethical problem to reach a decision. The
remainder of the instruction then focuses on learning and practicing these strategies.
This can be accomplished by defining each of the strategies and providing explanation of
why they prove valuable for ethical decision making. For instance, the strategy
‘‘considering others’’ can be presented as essential to leader ethical decision making.
Leaders must understand that the process of perspective taking is of the utmost
importance, particularly when interacting with peers and subordinates. This type of
discussion would highlight the fact that the consideration of alternative viewpoints
regarding an ethical situation may shed valuable light on the potential decisions and
Figure 2.2: Five-component model of ethical decision making (Mumford,

Connelly, et al., 2007)
actions of the leader. Additionally, concerning the importance of procedural and

interactional justice in the relationships formed by leaders and subordinates, acknowl-
edging and integrating other’s perspectives during the cognitive processes of decision
making are imperative in terms of predicting how others might react to a leader’s
decisions in such situations. Next, presenting students with realistic problems that are
complex and ambiguous will allow them to practice the application of these strategies,
and will provide them with clear feedback about the value of utilizing these strategies to
help them work through a problem. Moreover, students will find that these strategies are
especially valuable because they can be applied across a broad range of situations.
The five-component model indicates that rules and guidelines, constraints, and
decision-making strategies all feed an individual’s interpretation of the situation and
the formulation of decisions, which ultimately yields action. Students may benefit
from drawing a contrast between decisions as an abstract entity existing in one’s
mind and action, the deliberate enactment of a decision. As the emphasis of this
model indicates the importance of analysis of one’s surroundings and of a systematic
approach to decision making, the model implies reflection on, and learning from, the
result of the process. Thus, although the model presents the process in a linear,
stepwise fashion, it is of course not this straightforward.
In summary, the strength of this approach to ethics instruction comes from shaping a
new understanding of what constitutes ethics in the work of a manager. The approach is
reflective and holistic in nature. Students reflect on their conception of ethics and ethical
decision making, the assumptions they make about themselves and their surroundings,
and the complexity of their role and how it is embedded in, and influences, the overall
ethical complexion of followers and an organization. The approach also provides a
means to recognize that ethical problems exist within a context of dynamic
environmental elements. We now turn from these propositions regarding the value of
a sensemaking approach for business ethics education to more concrete, specific
considerations for implementation of such an approach in business schools.
2.1.3. Implementing the Sensemaking Framework to Meet Management

Education Needs
Our discussion above outlined the sensemaking approach, including its theoretical
foundation, evidence for its validity, and potential application to instructing
management students in ethical decision making. At this juncture, before a
discussion of the implementation of this framework, we must address a broader
fundamental question — does this framework offer a viable solution for meeting the
needs of management education?
To consider the answer to this question, we turn to the major curriculum domains
offered by the AACSB in the 2004 report of the Ethics Education Task Force (EETF) to
the AACSB Board of Directors (Phillips, 2004). These four domains, or ‘‘themes
that y inform ethics education’’ (Phillips, 2004: 10), include (1) responsibility of business
in society, (2) ethical decision making, (3) ethical leadership, and (4) corporate governance.
These four themes are deliberately arranged. Students begin with an introduction
to acquire general knowledge of the ethical responsibilities of a business operating in
society. Following this introduction, students should investigate and discover their
own experiences and processes for making ethical decisions and leading others in the
business environment. Finally, the ‘‘capstone’’ of knowledge is to understand, at the
macro level, the functions of various levels of the business system that serve to
regulate and monitor responsible behavior of both the individual and the firm.
In this educational process, students must acquire the knowledge and skill
necessary to reflect on and address questions such as — Is my business meeting its
responsibility to society? Am I making ethical decisions regarding employees,
customers, products, and services? Am I leading my employees in an ethical fashion?
When providing curriculum capable of meeting these needs for ethical education,
multiple criteria may be considered to measure whether ethics education is actually
impactful (e.g., awareness, perceptions, moral reasoning).
In the business ethics literature, there are numerous approaches to instruction
following theories such as Rest (1986), Ferrell and Gresham (1985), Treviño (1986), and
Jones (1991); consult Tenbrunsel and Smith-Crowe (2008) for a comprehensive review.
This existing work can be summarized by stating that a decision-making approach, or
one that focuses on framing issues (Kavathatzopoulos, 1994), viewing issues from
multiple perspectives (Ritter, 2006), and self-reflection (Sims & Brinkmann, 2003), seems
to be the most useful for enhancing the outcomes for business ethics instruction (Waples
et al., 2009). Thus, it is instructional programs based on ethical decision making, and the
manner in which decision making occurs in terms of underlying social-cognitive
processes, that most closely align with the key themes of ethics education. This approach
goes beyond simple awareness or dissemination of knowledge alone; rather it provides
an essential mode of thought for dealing with ethical problems.
Ultimately, to meet the needs of ethics education implied by the ethics education themes
and impact business ethics in a meaningful, lasting way, we must teach management
students to think about how to navigate the complexities of ethics in the business
environment. Students must be able to think about the consequences of their decisions and
behavior for multiple stakeholders — coworkers, shareholders, and community — in
complex, ambiguous situations that are always changing. These objectives are met by the
sensemaking approach to ethics education that provides students with a new mental model
(cf., Brock et al., 2008; Johnson-Laird, 1983) for ethical decision making and strategies to
deal with both internal and external threats to an ethical outcome.
Given our proposal regarding the applicability and likely success of the
sensemaking approach for educating management students, we examine, in the
remainder of this chapter, specific recommendations for implementing this approach
in business schools. We do so by discussing how the structure and tenets of the
sensemaking approach can be utilized to enact several best practice suggestions
provided by meta-analytic reviews of the ethics education literature (Antes et al.,
2009; Waples et al., 2009). We group these suggestions (summarized in Table 2.3)
according to the key components of instructional development (Goldstein & Ford,
2002), including (1) initial design considerations, (2) general instructional approach,
(3) learning content, and (4) instructional mediums (see Table 2.3 for summary).
Table 2.3: Instructional design recommendations for implementing the sensemaking

approach.
Instructional Application to sensemaking References

consideration approach
Design
Organizational Organizational support is Weber (2006)
support and necessary for the success of
standardization training interventions,
particularly with respect to the
transfer of behaviors. Must
align with mission and goals of
institution
Stand-alone with The sensemaking approach Antes et al. (2009)
integration should be the first stand-alone and Waples et al.
component of a broader, (2009)
integrated business ethics
curriculum
Approach
Case learning Cases in the sensemaking Kolodner (1993),
approach provide activities for Mumford et al.
the application of the (2008), and
metacognitive reasoning Riesbeck and
strategies that enhance ethical Schank (1989)
decision making.
Understanding how to make
sense of ethical situations
requires exposure to events —
often best achieved through the
discussions of complex cases
Content
Field-specific Domain-specific knowledge is Baer (2003) and
standards necessary to enhance the utility Ericsson (1999)
and effectiveness of the
sensemaking approach;
building expertise facilitates
future problem-solving
Pitfalls and Learning and applying strategies, Brock et al. (2008)
strategies in through understanding
decision making problems in decision making,
facilitates the advancement
from novice to expert in the
mental model of ethical
decisions

Instructional Application to sensemaking References
consideration approach
Mediums
Integrated CMS Interactive assignments increase McWilliams and
immersion and interaction Nahavandi
(2006)
Social networking Opportunities for real-time Granitz and
application of metacogntive Koernig (2011)
strategies
Virtual SJTs Enhanced fidelity for Christian et al.
sensemaking activities (2010)
2.1.4. Initial Design Considerations
2.1.4.1. Organizational support and standardization The instructional design

literature emphasizes the importance of organizational or social support as an
antecedent for learning and transfer of training to the workplace — and thus the
success of instructional programs (cf., Blume, Ford, Baldwin, & Huang, 2010). The
same truth holds when considering the sensemaking approach to management
education. As scholars have previously suggested, this likely begins with the mission
statement of the institution (Procario-Foley & Bean, 2002). If the faculty of a
university see the development of ethical students as part of their mission, then this
culture is more likely to be ingrained and sustained among both students and faculty.
Moreover, students who experience university support for an ethics curriculum will
likely enter such a course with more positive attitudes and motivation to learn.
Similarly, if the importance of ethics is stressed across a College of Business, then
students will be provided with the opportunity to apply knowledge gained in a core
business ethics course across all of their business courses, thus increasing both
retention and transfer of knowledge (Blume et al., 2010; Oddo, 1997). An example of
such a program can be found by examining Weber (2006).
Organizational support — once achieved through aligning faculty and the
students with the mission — is likely to promote some level of standardization. Of
course, we do not suggest that every professor of business ethics teach a business
ethics course in exactly the same manner. Rather, within institutions, it is important
to come to relative agreement on the content, structure, and evaluation of a business
ethics course. This level of standardization, at the very least, leads to outcomes that
are more easily assessed and interpreted. Overall, standardization should lead to a
level of learning and behavior that can be measured, and instructional programs that
can be efficiently adapted when problems are detected. For management educators,
the implications of this best practice are quite significant. Although we value
academic freedom to teach topics the way we would like, it is perhaps more
important for student learning in the arena of business ethics to join a united front, at
least within our own institutions, as to how to carry out a common course or module
regarding business ethics.
It is here that the importance of the sensemaking approach can be seen. For
example, individuals within an institution may or may not advocate Rest (1979),
Kohlberg (1969), utilitarianism, or the categorical imperative. However, they
should agree that if the institution is to achieve the mission of creating ethical
managers, these students must be able to make appropriate decisions. The
sensemaking approach provides this common ground by emphasizing the
cognitive decision-making process as well as the social and environmental
influences on this process.
2.1.4.2. Stand-alone with integration An often repeated debate and discussion

(Baetz & Sharp, 2004; Lopez, Rechner, & Olson-Buchanan, 2005; Swanson & Fisher,
2011) involves whether business ethics instruction should be integrated into the
curriculum for management students or set aside as its own course. Findings
regarding the differences in effectiveness of stand-alone versus integrated courses are
not drastically different (Waples et al., 2009). Thus, if we hope to strengthen
individuals’ ability to make ethical decisions over time and across a variety of
scenarios, ‘‘both’’ may be the answer to this debate. For individuals concerned with
instructing management students in business ethics, this statement has a clear
implication — while a stand-alone course may suffice, it is necessary to also include
some element of business ethics discussion or instruction within each business course.
With regards to the aforementioned findings, we suggest that the sensemaking
approach to ethics education provides a model for an initial, stand-alone instructional
module or course. The design of the instruction with sensemaking is built around
examining the process of decision making, biases in decision making, and strategies for
alleviating decision-making errors and for enhancing the ethicality of decisions. This
module should pique the interest of business educators for several reasons. First, the
sensemaking instructional approach can be applied as a stand-alone component that
stretches either part of a semester or a full semester. Indeed, it could be that such a
module is offered prior to engaging in core business courses. This stand-alone
component would provide a basis for individuals to begin to create their mental models
for ethical decision making and apply this working model to an ethical dilemma.
Second, if the institution adopted the sensemaking framework, and integrated it across
courses, then the mental model students build in the initial course (regardless of length)
is applied and reinforced throughout ethical discussions and case studies that are
broached in each and every additional business course (e.g., accounting, economics,
finance, management, and marketing). For example, the sensemaking process applied
to ethical dilemmas in marketing is essentially the same when applied to dilemmas in
management courses — what changes are the domain-specific applications of the
sociocognitive principles of sensemaking. Thus, the sensemaking approach facilitates
building ethical expertise by cross-domain application.
2.1.5. Instructional Approach
2.1.5.1. Case learning Case-based reasoning (Kolodner, 1992, 1993) is a method

of instruction that relies on the individual to draw from his/her own knowledge base
in order to apply ‘‘case’’ knowledge to the current situation. Indeed, nearly every
business school utilizes case libraries from famous business schools such as Harvard’s
or Western Ontario’s Ivey School of Business. Kolodner’s theory suggests that
individuals retrieve such cases from memory, match cases to current circumstances or
adapt as needed to a new situation, apply case information, compare previous case
solutions with current alternatives, readapt if solutions alternatives or potential
outcomes are suboptimal, and then re-encode and store the case for future use
(Kolodner, 1993; Kolodner & Simpson, 1989; Riesbeck & Schank, 1989). Thus, the
case method proposes that individuals access their own library of cases that,
subsequently, may come from their own unique experiences or experiences they have
read about and adapted from other case studies.
The sensemaking approach follows these same principles. Thus, in a business
communications class, examples of the 2010 Gulf Coast oil spill and the messages
delivered by BP would serve as an example for students to analyze the situation (e.g.,
What were the competing goals of the situation acting on various key players in the
organization?) and consider the consequences of their actions (e.g., How will this
decision impact shareholders? Customers? The public?). Their active analysis and
engagement in the metacognitive reasoning strategies allows them to begin to
recognize, and thus generate and forecast, potential problems in decision making.
Moreover, the approach utilizes the case method to teach individuals to engage in
information gathering and organization drawn from past experiences (i.e., case
knowledge) to assist in interpreting their current circumstances (e.g., ethical
dilemma). The recommendation here is relatively straightforward — the sensemaking
approach benefits from the utilization of cases to help management students bolster
their own case library, in addition to providing them with a means for practicing
application of metacognitive reasoning strategies.
2.1.6. Learning Content
2.1.6.1. Inclusion of field-specific standards In addition to utilizing a case-learning

approach, other specific content of the instruction must be considered. The inclusion of
field-specific standards in ethics education appears to be one important
recommendation (Antes et al., 2009; Waples et al., 2009). This statement flows
directly from our previous discussions. For example, integrating field-specific
standards into an ethical dilemma assumes that individuals have already built a
mental model for ethical decision making (i.e., via a stand-alone course). Moreover, it
assumes they are working to apply this model to decision making in different business
contexts (i.e., integration). Hence, if we are to enhance ethical decision making, and the
mental model that must be applied when encountering ethical decisions in business, we
must have a foundation that can be added to. This addition comes in the form of
specific rules, guidelines, principles, and standards that a given field may have (e.g.,
accounting). These field-specific standards, when integrated into the already built
mental model, serve to focus and enhance the probability that individuals will use
multiple, and correct, perspectives when making sense of ethical problems. This notion
is rooted in the premise of the role of expertise, particularly domain-specific expertise in
effective problem solving (Ericsson, 1999). In general, field-specific standards provide
individuals with ways to identify causes and consequences in a situation that may
facilitate them forming a response. The fundamental point to convey is that the
sensemaking approach focuses on contextualization, which allows people a range of
flexibility in adapting standards to fit with a particular ethical problem (Baer, 2003;
Mumford et al., 2006).
2.1.6.2. Discussing pitfalls in and strategies for decision making The second
content best practice achieved through using the sensemaking approach in
management ethics education is the inclusion of a comprehensive generation and
discussion of potential problems that may be encountered by an individual when he/
she works through an ethical dilemma. For example, it is important to remind
students that they may have a tendency to rely on a single field principle when
considering potential actions, or avoid seeking outside help when it is necessary. One
of the central activities in the sensemaking approach is to generate such problems by
not only recognizing personal biases in decision making but also engaging in
sensemaking strategies to avoid such biases.
Providing and teaching strategies that students may apply in order to work through
decision-making pitfalls en route to a solution to an ethical dilemma is an essential
component of sensemaking. The metacognitive reasoning strategies associated with
the sensemaking framework are listed in Table 2.1 and described in previous sections.
Indeed, these strategies are a key ingredient to inculcating cognitive restructuring
necessary to reshape an individual’s novice mental model of ethical decision making
toward a more comprehensive expert model (Brock et al., 2008).
2.1.7. Instructional Mediums
One of the most important considerations for management educators is to consider

the next generation of management students. This next generation has often been
described as the ‘‘millennials’’ (Deal, Altman, & Rogelberg, 2010), a group of young
people who have drastically different methods and preferences for learning
(Nicholas, 2008) — not to mention expectations and demands for the organizations
that will employ them (Twenge, 2010). Regardless, this new generation has
demanded a renaissance in teaching, such that the use of PowerPoint, Smart
Boards, video clips, and interactive web assignments is almost demanded over
traditional, bricks and mortar lecture education.
Of course, following the trends noticed in the previous paragraph, the

sensemaking approach is not best served by the typical lecture format. Indeed,
some of the most innovative examples of ethics instruction — business or otherwise —
are those that move away from lecture and provide immersive, relevant, and
emotionally captivating material that draws students in, to not only understanding
the principles but also internalizing and fitting them to their own decision-making
frameworks (cf., McWilliams & Nahavandi, 2006; Mumford et al., 2006; Simola,
2010). We propose that utilizing the sensemaking approach to instructing manage-
ment students in ethical decision making provides a prime opportunity to utilize such
immersive principles.
2.1.7.1. Integrated course management systems Course management systems

(CMS) such as Blackboard are not new to the education market. However,
recently developments such as CONNECT, by McGraw-Hill, have further enhanced
the utility of CMS systems by adding web-based, customizable assignments that are
automatically graded and integrated back into the CMS system. These additional
features offer an abundance of possibilities for the sensemaking approach. For
example, modules can be placed online, so that students may complete a survey
regarding decision-making biases, be linked to a video explaining how such biases
impact decision making, and then be immediately taken to an online chat where peer-
to-peer discussions of the implications of bias on ethical decisions in business may
take place.
Another learning activity linked to sensemaking may require students to watch a
video demonstrating the context, characters, and problems involved in a workplace
dilemma. Different students, or groups of students, might watch videos presenting
different perspectives, for example, upper management, supervisors, low-level
employees, and customers. Following these videos, students might journal
individually, followed by online group chats about the video. Taking the discussion
another step, the different groups might post a summary of the nature of the
discussion to share with the remaining groups. It is this level of interaction and
collaboration that is the core of the sensemaking approach — where facilitating
perspective taking only enhances student’s ability to learn and practice such decision-
making strategies.
2.1.7.2. Social networking sites Social networking tools, such as Facebook,

Twitter, or blogs, provide a value opportunity for students to share their reactions
to real-world events in real time (Granitz & Koernig, 2011). Students might be
required to post examples of positive, ethical leadership that they experience at work,
at school, or around their community. Social networking sites might also provide a
means for ongoing social interaction and discussion about real-world ethical
problems. For example, what better format to teach ‘‘seeking help’’ than for
instructors to dedicate a Twitter or Facebook account or discussion to seeking
the advice of others? Essentially, such outlets provide a forum for the use of the
metacognitive reasoning strategies associated with sensemaking that remove the
barriers of space and time. In fact, these tools may facilitate greater interaction and
depth of conversation about such topics.
2.1.7.3. Use virtual situational judgment tests One final immersive format that may
assist individuals employing the sensemaking approach to develop immersive
activities is the situational judgment test (i.e., low-fidelity simulation; Motowidlo,
Dunnette, & Carter, 1990). Situational judgment tests are paper and pencil measures
to assess constructs often targeted in personnel selection. Such tests provide a means
to assess ethical decision making by providing students with complex, realistic
scenarios (Mumford et al., 2006). As we follow trends in technology and research, it
appears that an increasingly popular method in selection and assessment is the use of
the video-based SJT (Chan & Schmitt, 1997; Weekly & Jones, 1997).
Indeed, Christian, Edwards, and Bradley (2010) proposed that video-based SJTs
would allow for greater predictive validity, in terms of performance, for tasks that
were cognitive and relied on situational cues and contextual interpretations. In fact,
evidence from their meta-analysis of SJTs found that video-based SJTs often led to
higher relationships with job performance than their paper and pencil counterpart
(Christian et al., 2010). Given the predictive validity of video-based SJTs in this
context, and the effectiveness in sociocognitive judgment activities, we suggest it is an
avenue for individuals employing the sensemaking approach to explore. The
sensemaking process will likely be enhanced by using SJTs that are video-based
through increasing the psychological fidelity and enhancing the face validity of either
assessments or activities of ethical decision making in business ethics education.
While they may not replace cases as a primary mode of instruction, SJTs provide a
format for engaging in similar activities in instructional environments that are not
face-to-face. Certainly, such efforts are avenues for future exploration.
2.2. Sensemaking and Assessment

As mentioned previously, the AACSB’s EETF report (Phillips, 2004) outlined adjusted
guidelines to place a greater emphasis on ethics in the curriculum of business schools
that are either accredited by or working for accreditation by AACSB. AACSB
provides the university substantial freedom in determining how and where ethics is
studied and assessed inside the curriculum. However, the importance of assessment
with regards to both the AACSB’s AOL standards and the effectiveness of instruction
cannot be understated. Given the recommendations we have made regarding using the
sensemaking approach in ethics instruction for management students, and the key to
assessment in both creating and maintaining an ethical culture through achieving the
mission of the institution, we will briefly examine some assessment considerations with
particular attention to the sensemaking approach recommended.
While the Phillips (2004) report does not specify particular instruments that must
be used for assessment, we propose the application of a specific assessment
framework in order to facilitate the accumulation of knowledge on the impact of
ethics instruction across a variety of criteria. Indeed, in the field of business ethics
instruction, one of the most troubling issues rests in a lack of appropriate assessment.
For example, Waples et al. (2009) noted that although a large number of articles on
business ethics education were obtained for potential inclusion in their meta-analysis,
the majority were limited to the extent that they appropriately evaluated any
outcome beyond reactions (e.g., whether individuals enjoyed the course or found it
useful; Alliger, Tannenbaum, Bennett, Traver, & Shotland, 1997; Kirkpatrick, 1976).
Similar concerns have been raised by other scholars (Caldwell, 2010; Loeb, 1991;
Mumford et al., 2006; Swanson & Fisher, 2011). To alleviate such problems in the
future, it is imperative that those who teach business ethics begin to evaluate their
courses. Because we suggest a sensemaking approach for such instruction, we
propose an assessment methodology to accompany it.
2.2.1. What are We Assessing?
To evaluate courses appropriately, instructors need to consider the nature of the

criteria. In this chapter, we argued for the use of ethical decision making as the
appropriate outcome to measure for sensemaking-based instruction. We have done
so on the basis of evidence presented and reviewed by a number of scholars.
Although it is beyond the scope of this chapter to thoroughly review the entire
training evaluation taxonomy presented by Alliger et al. (1997), we present brief
descriptions of three components that are key for educators to consider.
2.2.1.1. Reactions Did you enjoy this course? Did you like the instructor? To any
professor in any discipline, these sound like familiar questions. Indeed, many of us
are evaluated based on the responses to such questions. These questions examining
whether individuals like the course they participate in are often used to assess
instruction (Alliger et al., 1997). Specifically, the dimensions of reactions are termed
‘‘affective reactions’’ or ‘‘utility judgments’’ (e.g., how useful participants feel the
course will be to their job). However, if students enjoy a course or perceive it to be
useful, does that mean that they have learned? Unfortunately, the results provided by
Alliger et al. (1997) indicate that the answer is no. Thus, we suggest that when
employing the sensemaking approach to ethics instruction (or any business ethics
program), educators limit their use of the affective reaction measures to formative
evaluations (Goldstein & Ford, 2002) and not consider them sufficient for drawing
conclusions about course effectiveness. Such measures will help to determine how to
alter the course so that students respond more positively. However, these measures
should not be substituted for or assumed to measure learning-oriented outcomes.
2.2.1.2. Learning The learning criterion discussed by Alliger et al. (1997) includes
three distinct dimensions, each with potentially unique implications for use in
sensemaking. First and foremost, it is absolutely necessary to assess the acquisition of
knowledge (specifically, immediate knowledge). For any course in business ethics,
regardless of the focus or framework applied, such information is vital to

determining the effectiveness of the instructional modules or course. Furthermore,
immediate knowledge is the simplest assessment data to gather. Most often, such
data are gathered at the end of a course or module. More difficult to gather data are
on knowledge retention and behavioral or skill demonstrations. Short-interval
retention of learning could be gathered through coordinated efforts of departments
within a business school. Unfortunately, such efforts may be viewed as intrusive, and
therefore may not be well received by faculty. However, for assessing business ethics
curriculum, knowledge retention data may be the most essential.
Applied to the sensemaking framework, appropriate learning measures include
assessments of whether the students are able to adequately recall the model
presented. Additionally, can they recall the definitions of the metacognitive reasoning
strategies, and the purpose each serves in the broader decision-making model? Can
they recognize field-specific rules and principles that guide behavior? Do they recall
the ethics codes presented? Indeed, the list can continue. As these questions
demonstrate, the framework applied for ethics instructions shapes the learning
outcomes to be examined. Of course, the key to effective evaluation of learning is to
develop both valid and reliable assessments based on the given framework.
2.2.1.3. Behavior The most elusive criterion of all is behavior, or transfer of

training. Transfer occurs when actual behaviors, learned in training, are performed
on the job. However, transfer data are difficult to gather because these are data that
must be gathered after some lapse of time, and in an environment that does not
always lend itself to such efforts. When evaluation of distal behavioral outcomes is
not feasible (often due to time and expense constraints), it is appropriate to examine
more proximal transfer of learning, in the form of a work sample measure. Thus, we
suggest that the behavior criterion (or measure of transfer of ethical decision making
to on the job performance) be captured via a simulation exercise.
With respect to the sensemaking approach, we must ask two key questions. Did
students learn to apply the metacognitive reasoning strategies? In doing so, did they
enhance their ethical decision making? It is of note that, from a sensemaking
perspective, individuals solve ethical problems by applying their mental models.
Hence, it is appropriate to utilize assessment methods permitting examination of
performance on problem-solving exercises representing real-world work activities.
Notably, previous ethics training programs following the sensemaking approach
have had success in evaluating the questions posed above (Kligyte et al., 2008;
Mumford et al., 2008). However, the measures employed underwent an extensive
validation process (Helton-Fauth et al., 2003; Mumford et al., 2006) beginning with the
development of a taxonomy of ethical behaviors within the given fields of interest. In
business, taxonomies on which to base such measures are relatively nonexistent (see
Wooten, 2001, for an exception). Thus, to assess whether the sensemaking approach in
business ethics is truly effective, decision scenarios, likely following the low-fidelity
simulation format, should be written. Such scenarios should serve three purposes:
(1) reflect a range of both ethical and unethical potential actions, (2) employ decision
options representing the use of metacognitive reasoning strategies, and (3) be resistant
to faking or socially desirable responding. Indeed, meeting such requirements is a

difficult task, especially when considering the statistical properties of forced choice
measures (Christiansen, Burns, & Montgomery, 2005; LeBreton, Barksdale, Robin, &
James, 2007). However, alternative methods also exist.
If an appropriate measure is not able to be developed, we suggest the use of an
assessment center, where problem solving represents a necessary dimension for effective
performance (Arthur, Day, McNelly, & Edens, 2003). Of course, assessment centers use
multiple activities to measure key aspects of job-relevant behavior or job-relevant
constructs. For example, an in-basket approach could be utilized to determine transfer of
ethical decision making. An in-basket inventory includes a variety of items that a manager
would have to deal with in a truncated time frame. One or more of these issues could have
ethical implications, requiring the individual to engage in ethical sensemaking and
ultimately take an action that would be rated by assessors as ethical or unethical. In
addition, assessors could capture the extent to which participants enacted metacognitive
reasoning strategies (e.g., did they ask other participants for help; did they control their
emotions) — yet another indication that ethical sensemaking is occurring.
Of course, constructing assessment centers requires substantial time and effort.
However, at least one example of an assessment center for undergraduate business
students exists in the literature (Waldman & Korbar, 2004) and one for MBAs (Hoover,
Giambatista, Sorenson, & Bommer, 2010). For three reasons, assessment centers provide
a unique opportunity to evaluate business ethics instruction based on the sensemaking
framework. First, they would provide a behaviorally based, real-world assessment of skill
transfer. Second, they provide an innovative method to assess a wide variety of
constructs — not just ethical decision making — most of which will and should be
extracted from the educational mission of the college. And third, they combat criticisms
that business schools are moving away from providing practical educations and focusing
too much on scientific, research-oriented views of management (Bennis & O’Toole, 2005).
The goal of assessment — to continuously improve on the educational experience by
working to close the loop — can certainly be accomplished by traditional, paper and pencil
measures of learning (i.e., ‘‘tests’’). In this section, we have argued that applying the
sensemaking approach for instruction in management ethics does not prohibit such an
accomplishment. Rather, we have suggested that beyond these measures, those interested
in improving business ethics education should consider innovative, alternative methods of
assessment focused on examining the extent of deep, meaningful learning and
subsequently transfer of learning to observable, measurable behavior. To reiterate,
implementation of such an effort may take the support of the entire college. Interestingly,
such support will, in turn, serve to improve the ethics education received by the students.
2.3. Discussion
2.3.1. Limitations
Prior to discussing several overarching implications from this chapter, it is necessary

to point out two key limitations that one should bear in mind as one considers the
theoretical and practical utility of the sensemaking approach in concert with our
suggestions for instructional design and assessment.
First and foremost, our intent was not to provide a ‘‘review’’ chapter. Rather, we
sought to discuss and provide recommendations pertaining to a specific aspect of
the business ethics domain, ethical decision making. Therefore, it is possible, even
likely, that a review of other aspects of the business ethics domain may provide
equally viable and important conclusions to take into consideration as we seek to
improve management ethics education. Moreover, our discussion was aimed
primarily at management educators. While we would surmise that our conclusions
and recommendations could be extrapolated to organizational ethics training,
we would also caution the reader as organizational training operates in a different
context and creates a variety of attitudes and motivations that may impact
effectiveness.
However, our focus has allowed us to point out several key considerations. First,
our focus on decision making vis-à-vis sensemaking appears to be warranted, as
instructional efforts in this domain have successfully enhanced ethical decision
making, revealing sizable effects that have held over time and across several
disciplines (Kligyte et al., 2008; Mumford et al., 2008). Furthermore, decision
making leads to actions and behaviors. Hence, by educating management students
on the proper methods for sensemaking in an ethical dilemma, we should find
management professionals engaging in substantially greater proportions of ethical
behavior (a proposition that should be examined).
The second limitation to note is that we relied on two recent meta-analyses to
extract best practices, as they related to the sensemaking approach to management
ethics education (Antes et al., 2009; Waples et al., 2009). Regardless, these meta-
analyses were the most recent articles identifying programs with sound, empirical
assessments of enhancements on ethical criteria. In addition, we also presented ample
empirical evidence regarding the validity of the sensemaking framework in other
disciplines, and sound normative arguments for how the sensemaking approach
fulfills the key attributes of ‘‘successful’’ ethics instruction programs.
Despite the presentation of validity evidence accompanying our explanations of
how the sensemaking approach matches the identified best practices, we understand
that the propositions offered must undergo empirical examination. Our hope is that
we have convinced some to engage in such studies while utilizing the sensemaking
approach as their management ethics education framework.
2.3.2. Implications and Future Directions
Despite these limitations, the present chapter offers three notable directions for
educating tomorrow’s business leaders for integrity. These future directions include:
(1) the introduction of a new framework for ethics education for managers, (2) an
evaluation of how this sensemaking framework is guided by best practices emanating
from the business ethics literature, and (3) comprehensive, innovative assessment
practices to provide clear, useful empirical evidence regarding the effectiveness of

ethics instruction in business schools.
The sensemaking framework introduced is, of course, a template. It has proven
successful in other disciplines (Kligyte et al., 2008; Mumford et al., 2008) and has
been implemented at several institutions to varying degrees. However, this
framework has not been fully adapted to business ethics. Perhaps the clearest future
direction is to develop a taxonomy of ethical problems specific to the business
disciplines, similar to efforts undertaken in the sciences (Helton-Fauth et al., 2003).
Our intent is that individual business schools might use this sensemaking template as
a ‘‘launch point’’ for ethics education.
Furthermore, in line with the discussion regarding evaluation presented herein,
another clear future direction is the development of assessment tools for evaluating
instruction designed around the sensemaking and other decision-making frame-
works. More specifically, we must begin to test whether the ‘‘best practices’’ we
suggest be applied with the sensemaking framework hold to be valid in educating
students in business ethics.
Moving forward, clearly, management educators have a major endeavor on their
hands. However, the potential positive outcomes of theoretically sound, well-
designed, standardized, effectively evaluated ethics education that is supported by
colleges and universities must remain our central focus. Perhaps, one of our central
considerations should also pertain to how, as a collective community, we can more
effectively build, implement, and share a program of research to finally, once and for
all, shed light on ethics education pedagogy.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the reviewers of this chapter for their time and insights
regarding improvements for our manuscript. We also thank Christopher Antes for
his graphic design work. Lastly, we would like to acknowledge Dr. Michael
D. Mumford for his important work in the area of ethics and mentorship throughout
our careers. Both authors contributed equally to the present effort.
References
Alliger, G. M., Tannenbaum, S. I., Bennett, W., Jr., Traver, H., & Shotland, A. (1997). A
meta-analysis of relations among training criteria. Personnel Psychology, 50, 341–358.
Antes, A. L., Brown, R. P., Murphy, S. T., Waples, E. P., Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., &
Devenport, L. D. (2007). Personality and ethical decision making in research: The role of
perceptions of self and others. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 2,
15–34.
Antes, A. L., Murphy, S. T., Waples, E. P., Mumford, M. D., Brown, R. P., Connelly, S., &
Devenport, L. D. (2009). A meta-analysis of ethics instruction effectiveness in the sciences.
Ethics & Behavior, 19, 379–402.
Antes, A. L., Thiel, C. E., Martin, L. E., Stenmark, C. K., Connelly, S., Devenport, L. D., &
Mumford, M. D. (2011). Reflection on past experience as a source of knowledge to inform
ethical decision making. (Manuscript submitted for publication).
Arthur, W., Day, E. A., McNelly, T. L., & Edens, P. S. (2003). A meta-analysis of the criterion-
related validity of assessment center dimensions. Personnel Psychology, 56, 125–153.
Baer, J. (2003). Evaluative thinking, creativity, and task specificity: Separating wheat from
chaff is not the same as finding needle in haystacks. In: M. A. Runco (Ed.), Critical creative
processes (pp. 129–152). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
Baetz, M., & Sharp, D. (2004). Integrating ethics content into the core business curriculum: Do
core teaching materials do the job? Journal of Business Ethics, 51, 53–62.
Baldwin, T. T., Magjuka, R. J., & Loher, B. T. (1991). The perils of participation: Effects of
choice of training on trainee motivation and learning. Personnel Psychology, 44, 51–65.
Bazerman, M. H., & Moore, D. A. (2009). Judgment in managerial decision making (7th ed.).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Bennis, W., & O’Toole, J. (2005). How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business
Review, 83, 96–106.
Blume, B. D., Ford, J. K., Baldwin, T. T., & Huang, J. L. (2010). Transfer of training: A meta-
analytic review. Journal of Management, 36, 1065–1105.
Brock, M. E., Vert, A., Kligyte, V., Waples, E. P., Sevier, S. T., & Mumford, M. D. (2008). An
evaluation of sensemaking training using a think-aloud protocol. Science and Engineering
Ethics, 14, 449–472.
Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The
Leadership Quarterly, 17, 595–616.
Brown, R. P., Tamborski, M., Wang, X., Barnes, C. D., Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., &
Devenport, L. D. (2011). Moral credentialing and the rationalization of misconduct. Ethics &
Behavior, 21, 1–12.
Caldwell, C. (2010). A ten-step model for academic integrity: A positive approach for business
schools. Journal of Business Ethics, 92, 1–13.
Chan, D., & Schmitt, N. (1997). Video-based versus paper-and-pencil method of assessment in
situational judgment tests: Subgroup differences in test performance and face validity
perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 143–159.
Christian, M. S., Edwards, B. D., & Bradley, J. C. (2010). Situational judgment tests:
Constructs assessed and a meta-analysis of their criterion-related validities. Personnel
Psychology, 63, 83–117.
Christiansen, N. D., Burns, G. N., & Montgomery, G. E. (2005). Reconsidering forced-choice
item formats for applicant personality assessment. Human Performance, 18, 267–307.
Cullen, J. B., Parboteeah, K. P., & Victor, B. (2003). The effects of ethical climates on
organizational commitment: A two-study analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 46, 127–141.
Deal, J. J., Altman, D. G., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2010). Millennials at work: What we know and
what we need to do (if anything). Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 191–199.
Ericsson, K. A. (1999). Creative expertise as superior reproducible performance: Innovative
and flexible aspects of expert performance. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 329–361.
Ericsson, K. A., & Smith, J. (1991). Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ferrell, O. C., & Gresham, L. G. (1985). A contingency framework for understanding ethical
decision-making in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 49, 8–96.
Gaudine, A., & Thorne, L. (2001). Emotion and ethical decision-making in organizations.
Journal of Business Ethics, 31, 175–187.
Giacalone, R. A., & Thompson, K. R. (2006). Business ethics and social responsibility education:
Shifting the worldview. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5, 266–277.
Glenn, J. R. (1992). Can a business and society course affect the ethical judgment of future
managers? Journal of Business Ethics, 11, 217–223.
Goldstein, I. L., & Ford, J. K. (2002). Training in organizations (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Granitz, N., & Koernig, S. K. (2011). Web 2.0 and marketing education: Explanations and
experiential applications. Journal of Marketing Education, 33, 57–72.
Gross, J. J. (1999). Emotional regulation: Past, present, future. Cognition and Emotion, 13,
551–573.
Habermas, T., & Bluck, S. (2000). Getting a life: The emergence of the life story in adolescence.
Psychological Bulletin, 126, 748–769.
Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to
moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834.
Harris, S. G. (1994). Organizational culture and individual sensemaking: A schema-based
perspective. Organization Science, 5, 309–321.
Helton-Fauth, W., Gaddis, B., Scott, G., Mumford, M. D., Devenport, L., Connelly, S., &
Brown, R. P. (2003). A new approach to assessing ethical conduct in scientific work.
Accountability in Research: Policies & Quality Assurance, 10, 205–228.
Hogarth, R. M., & Makridakis, S. (1981). Forecasting and planning: An evaluation.
Management Science, 27, 115–138.
Hoover, D., Giambatista, R. C., Sorenson, R. L., & Bommer, W. H. (2010). Assessing the
effectiveness of whole person learning pedagogy in skill acquisition. Academy of Manage-
ment Learning & Education, 9, 192–203.
Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. (1986). A general theory of marketing ethics. Journal of
Macromarketing, 6, 5–16.
Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. J. (2006). The general theory of marketing ethics: A revision and three
questions. Journal of Macromarketing, 26, 143–153.
John, O. P., & Robins, R. W. (1994). Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual
differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 66, 206–219.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference
and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-
contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16, 366–395.
Kavathatzopoulos, I. (1994). Training professional managers in decision-making about real
life business ethics problems: The acquisition of the autonomous problem-solving skill.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1976). Evaluation of training. In: R. L. Craig (Ed.), Training and
development handbook: A guide to human resource development (2nd ed., pp. 301–319). New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Kligyte, V., Connelly, S., Thiel, C. E., Devenport, L. D., Brown, R. P., & Mumford, M. D.
(2009, April). Influence of emotions and emotion regulation strategies on ethical decision-
making. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, New Orleans, LA.
Kligyte, V., Marcy, R. T., Waples, E. P., Sevier, S. T., Godfrey, E. S., Mumford, M. D., &
Hougen, D. F. (2008). Application of a sensemaking approach to responsible conduct of
research training in the physical sciences and engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics,
14, 251–278.
Koehn, D. (2005). Transforming our students: Teaching business ethics post-Enron. Business
Ethics Quarterly, 15, 137–151.
Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive development approach to
socialization. In: D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory (pp. 347–480).
Chicago: Rand McNally.
Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-developmental approach.
In: T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral development and behavior: Theory, research, and social issues
(pp. 31–53). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Kolodner, J. L. (1992). An introduction to case-based reasoning. Artificial Intelligence Review,
6, 3–34.
Kolodner, J. L. (1993). Case-based reasoning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufman.
Kolodner, J. L., & Simpson, R. L. (1989). The MEDIATOR: Analysis of an early case-based
problem solver. Cognitive Science, 13, 507–549.
LeBreton, J. M., Barksdale, C. D., Robin, J., & James, L. R. (2007). Measurement issues
associated with conditional reasoning tests: Indirect measurement and test faking. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 92, 1–16.
Loe, T. W., Ferrell, L., & Mansfield, P. (2000). A review of empirical studies assessing ethical
decision making in business. Journal of Business Ethics, 25, 185–204.
Loeb, S. E. (1991). The evaluation of ‘‘outcomes’’ of accounting ethics education. Journal of
Business Ethics, 10, 77–84.
Lopez, Y. P., Rechner, P. L., & Olson-Buchanan, J. B. (2005). Shaping ethical perceptions: An
empirical assessment of the influence of business education, culture, and demographic
factors. Journal of Business Ethics, 60, 341–358.
Martin, K. D., & Cullen, J. B. (2006). Continuities and extensions of ethical climate theory: A
meta-analytic review. Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 175–194.
McWilliams, V., & Nahavandi, A. (2006). Using live cases to teach ethics. Journal of Business
Ethics, 67, 421–433.
Messick, D. M., & Bazerman, M. H. (2001). Ethical leadership and the psychology of decision
making. Volume Research in Ethical Issues in Organizations, 3, 213–238.
Mintz, S. M. (1996). Aristotelian virtue and business ethics education. Journal of Business
Ethics, 15, 827–838.
Motowidlo, S. J., Dunnette, M. D., & Carter, G. W. (1990). An alternative selection
procedure: The low-fidelity simulation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 640–647.
Mulki, J. P., Jaramillo, J. F., & Locander, W. B. (2008). Effect of ethical climate on
turnover intention: Linking attitudinal and stress theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 78,
559–574.
Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., Brown, R. P., Murphy, S. T., Hill, J. H., Antes, A. L., &
Devenport, L. D. (2008). A sensemaking approach to ethics training for scientists:
Preliminary evidence of training effectiveness. Ethics & Behavior, 18, 315–339.
Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., Devenport, L. D., Brown, R. P., Murphy, S. T., Hill, J. H., &
Waples, E. P. (2007). Responsible conduct of research training: Making sense of complex
problems. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma.
Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., Murphy, S. T., Devenport, L. D., Antes, A. L., Brown, R. P., &
Waples, E. P. (2009). Field and experience influences on ethical decision-making in the
sciences. Ethics & Behavior, 19, 263–289.
Mumford, M. D., Devenport, L. D., Brown, R. P., Connelly, M. S., Murphy, S. T., Hill, J. H., &
Antes, A. L. (2006). Validation of ethical decision making measures: Evidence for a new set of
measures. Ethics & Behavior, 16, 319–345.
Mumford, M. D., Friedrich, T. L., Caughron, J. J., & Byrne, C. L. (2007). Leader
cognition in real-world settings: How do leaders think about crises? The Leadership
Quarterly, 18, 515–543.
Mumford, M. D., Murphy, S. T., Connelly, M. S., Hill, J. H., Antes, A. L., Brown, R. T., &
Devenport, L. D. (2007). Environmental influences on ethical decision-making: Climate and
environmental predictors of research integrity. Ethics and Behavior, 17, 337–366.
Mumford, M. D., Waples, E. P., Antes, A. L., Brown, R. P., Connelly, S., Murphy, S. T., &
Devenport, L. D. (2010). Creativity and ethics: The relationship of creative and ethical
problem-solving. Creativity Research Journal, 22, 74–89.
Mumford, M. D., Waples, E. P., Antes, A. L., Murphy, S. T., Hill, J. H., Connelly, S., &
Devenport, L. D. (2009). Exposure to unethical career events: Effects on decision-making,
climate, and socialization. Ethics & Behavior, 19, 351–378.
Nicholas, A. (2008). Preferred learning methods of the millennial generation. The International
Journal of Learning, 15, 27–34.
Oddo, A. R. (1997). A framework for teaching business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 16,
293–297.
O’Fallon, M. J., & Butterfield, K. D. (2005). A review of the empirical ethical decision-making
literature: 1996–2003. Journal of Business Ethics, 59, 375–413.
Oyserman, D., & Markus, H. R. (1990). Possible solves and delinquency. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 112–125.
Painter-Morland, M., Fontrodona, J., Hoffman, W. M., & Rowe, M. (2003). Conversations
across continents: Teaching business ethics online. Journal of Business Ethics, 48, 75–88.
Phillips, S. M. (2004). Ethics education in business schools. Report of the Ethics Education Task
Force to AACSB International Board of Directors, St. Louis, MO.
Procario-Foley, E. G., & Bean, D. F. (2002). Institutions of higher education: Cornerstones in
building ethical organizations. Teaching Business Ethics, 6, 101–116.
Rest, J. R. (1979). Development in judging moral issues. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press.
Rest, J. R. (1986). An overview of the psychology of morality. In: J. R. Rest (Ed.), Moral
development and behavior: Theory, research, and social issues (pp. 133–175). New York:
Praeger.
Riesbeck, C. K., & Schank, R. C. (1989). Inside case-based reasoning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Ritter, B. A. (2006). Can business ethics be trained? A study of the ethical decision-making
process in business students. Journal of Business Ethics, 68, 153–164.
Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. (1998). Pursuing personal goals: Skills enable progress, but not
all goal progress is beneficial. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1319–1331.
Simola, S. K. (2010). Use of a ‘‘coping-modeling, problem-solving’’ program in business ethics
education. Journal of Business Ethics, 96, 383–401.
Sims, R. R. (2002). Business ethics teaching for effective learning. Teaching Business Ethics, 6,
393–410.
Sims, R. R., & Brinkmann, J. (2003). Business ethics curriculum design: Suggestions and
illustrations. Teaching Business Ethics, 7, 69–86.
Sims, R. R., & Felton, E. L. (2006). Designing and delivering business ethics teaching and
learning. Journal of Business Ethics, 63, 297–312.
Sonenshein, S. (2007). The role of construction, intuition, and justification in responding to
ethical issues at work: The sensemaking–intuition model. Academy of Management Review,
32, 1022–1040.
Stenmark, C. K., Antes, A. L., Wang, X., Caughron, J. J., Thiel, C. E., & Mumford, M. D.
(2010). Strategies in forecasting outcomes in ethical decision-making: Identifying and
analyzing the causes of the problem. Ethics & Behavior, 20, 110–127.
Swanson, D. L., & Fisher, D. G. (2011). Towards assessing business ethics education. Charlotte,
Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Smith-Crowe, K. (2008). Ethical decision making: Where we’ve been and
where we’re going. Academy of Management Annals, 2, 545–607.
Treviño, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision-making in organizations: A person–situation
interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, 11, 601–617.
Treviño, L. K., Weaver, G. R., & Reynolds, S. J. (2006). Behavioral ethics in organizations: A
review. Journal of Management, 32, 951–990.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and
probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207–232.
Twenge, J. M. (2010). A review of the empirical evidence on generational differences in work
attitudes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 201–210.
Waldman, D. A., & Korbar, T. (2004). Student assessment center performance in the prediction of
early career success. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3, 151–167.
Waples, E. P., Antes, A. L., Murphy, S. T., Connelly, S., & Mumford, M. D. (2009). A meta-
analytic investigation of business ethics instruction. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 133–151.
Weber, J. A. (2006). Implementing an organizational ethics program in an academic
environment: The challenges and opportunities for the Duquesne University Schools of
Business. Journal of Business Ethics, 65, 23–42.
Weber, J. A. (2007). Business ethics training: Insights from learning theory. Journal of Business
Ethics, 70, 61–85.
Weekly, J. A., & Jones, C. (1997). Video-based situational testing. Personnel Psychology, 50, 25–49.
Wooten, K. C. (2001). Ethical dilemmas in human resource management: An application of a
multidimensional framework, a unifying taxonomy, and applicable codes. Human Resource
Management Review, 11, 159–175.
Chapter 3
Three Pedagogical Tools to Advance

Management Integrity Capacity
Joseph A. Petrick
Abstract
Purpose — To provide conceptual understanding of integrity capacity as a

management competency and strategic asset, as well as three pedagogical tools
to advance its development.
Design/methodology/approach — A review of four dimensions of management
integrity capacity followed by a descriptive treatment of three pedagogical tools
to advance its development: the Indicator of Readiness for Management Ethics
Inquiry (IRMEI), the Process Integrity Capacity Auction (PICA), and the
Intra-Organizational Ethics Bowl Event (IEBE).
Findings — If integrity capacity is a critical intangible asset of individuals and
organizations and if managers are held accountable for responsibly managing
that intangible asset in themselves and their organizations, it is important for
responsible management ethics educators to familiarize themselves with the
IRMEI, the PICA, and the IEBE.
Research limitations/implications — The three pedagogical tools do not
constitute an exhaustive list of resources.
Practical implications — The three instructional tools can be used by
management ethics educators and corporate trainers to improve the moral
competencies of individuals.
Social implications — Advancing management integrity capacity by using the
three pedagogical tools increases the future likelihood of more socially
responsible management decisions.
Originality/value — Both the concept of integrity capacity and the three
pedagogical tools provide original ways to add value to responsible manage-
ment education and performance.

ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1
50 Joseph A. Petrick
The general pattern of irresponsible financial risk management by a range of

stakeholders that originated in the United States and caused the recent great global
recession has provoked a global demand for more responsible business and
government leadership and management ethics education (Kansas, 2009; Korten,
2009; Levin & Coburn, 2011; McLean & Nocera, 2010; Petrick, 2009, 2010).
Specifically, in light of the educational pedigrees of convicted U.S. business criminals
such as Bernard Madoff and others who have defrauded millions of stakeholders, the
record of U.S. undergraduate business student cheating (Smith, Davy, & Eastering,
2004), and the published study documenting that MBA students are the biggest
cheats among U.S. graduate students (McCabe, Butterfield, & Trevino, 2006),
multiple stakeholders are demanding to know what else U.S. business schools are
doing besides credentialing more future white-collar management criminals ( Brown,
2005; Giacalone & Thompson, 2006; Swanson & Frederick, 2005; Trank & Rynes,
2003; Waddock, Bodwell, & Leigh, 2006). Successfully addressing this public
challenge for accountability and providing constructive pedagogical resources to
improve managerial integrity are front burner concerns of responsible management
educators (Petrick, 2011; Sims & Felton, 2006; Swanson & Fisher, 2011; Waddock,
Rasche, Werhane, & Unruh, 2011).
This chapter will first briefly treat the concept of integrity capacity as a
management competency and strategic asset and then report on three time-tested
pedagogical resources for advancing management integrity capacity: the Indicator of
Readiness for Management Ethics Inquiry (IRMEI), the Process Integrity Capacity
Auction (PICA), and the Intra-Organizational Ethics Bowl Event (IEBE).
3.1. The Concept of Integrity Capacity

The concept of integrity capacity builds on ordinary language distinctions of integrity
as entailing wholeness, soundness, and completeness (Carter, 1996; Erikson, 1950;
Paine, 1997) but frames integrity as a capacity at both the individual and collective
levels with both instrumental and intrinsic values. With regard to instrumental value,
this capacity — like manufacturing capacity or financial capacity — can be treated as
an intangible strategic asset that individuals and collectives can responsibly manage to
enhance their domestic and global reputational competitive advantage (Petrick &
Quinn, 2001; Petrick, Scherer, Brodzinski, Quinn, & Ainina, 1999). With regard to
intrinsic value, this capacity grounds, ennobles, and enables human dignity (Chen &
Wang, 2002). A person of integrity has intrinsic value even when there is no external
market for integrity (Taylor, 1985).
Integrity capacity can be defined as the individual and/or collective capability for
repeated process alignment of moral awareness, deliberation, character, and conduct
that demonstrates balanced, moderate, and inclusive judgment regarding moral
results, rules, character, and context, to develop mature moral reasoning and
relationship enhancement, and to design and/or sustain morally supportive intra-
organizational and extra-organizational systems (Petrick & Quinn, 2000, 2001).
Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity 51
Individuals and collectives with high integrity capacity are likely to exhibit a coherent
unity of purpose and action in the face of moral complexity rather than succumb to
organizational inertia or simplistic, irresponsible managerial decision making
(Pritchard, 2006; Trevino & Brown, 2004; Weston, 2008). Integrity capacity is a
crucial foundation for responsible management education and for practicing
managers to sustain trustworthy stakeholder relations in business. The increase in
managers and business stakeholders who individually and collectively demonstrate
integrity capacity domestically and globally is an indicator of moral progress in
management and in business.
As a capacity, it consists of four key dimensions: process, judgment, development,
and system (Petrick, 2008a). These four dimensions both enable and reflect moral
coherence, moral soundness, moral maturity, and the moral environment (Kolb & Sage
Editors, 2012; Petrick, 2008b). Each of these dimensions reinforces and supplements
other general managerial competencies in strategic management, organizational
behavior and leadership, system improvement, and organizational development
(Petrick & Quinn, 1997, 2001). The strategic management of organizational vision
and purpose, the leveraging of intangible assets for competitive advantage, the exercise
of sound operational judgment including supply and distribution chains’ moral
standards, and the sustained commitment to ongoing professional, leadership, and
organizational improvement are all morally supported by the four dimensions (Brown,
2005). Now each of these dimensions will be briefly treated.
First, process integrity capacity is the coherent alignment of individual and
collective moral awareness, deliberation, character, and conduct (Petrick & Quinn,
1997). The need to address lapses in process integrity capacity is evident by the
frequent disconnect between managerial moral rhetoric and actual behavior that
provokes stakeholder criticism of moral hypocrisy, for example, multinational
corporations that tout their public relations images as responsible corporate citizens
while engaging in morally objectionable practices that pollute the natural
environment and exploit indigenous workers. Ordinary language definitions of
personal integrity as embodying cohesive and sincere adherence to moral principles
and commitments refer to process integrity capacity. A person of integrity is
commonly understood to be one who is morally aware, that is, perceives, discerns,
and is sensitive to moral issues; demonstrates both autonomous reflection and
interdependent moral deliberation in the analysis and resolution of moral problems;
is ready to act ethically, that is, exercises intellectual, social, moral, emotional, and
political virtues that build strong character and motivation to act ethically; and
engages in responsible, aligned, and sustainable conduct, that is, takes action that is
consistent with personal moral resolutions on a regular basis, even at great personal
sacrifice, and can publicly prize the moral justifications for doing so. Moral
coherence between belief and expression, awareness and deliberation, and word and
deed, and among moral judgments, commitments, and actions is a hallmark of
managerial and organizational process integrity (Trevino, Hartman, & Brown, 2000;
Trevino & Weaver, 2003).
Second, judgment integrity capacity is the balanced, moderate, and inclusive use
of key ethics theories and dialogic resources in multiple stakeholder relationships to
thoroughly analyze and resolve individual and/or collective moral issues. Ethics
theories can be organized into four categories: teleological ethics theories
(emphasizing moral results/purposes), deontological ethics theories (emphasizing
moral rules), virtue ethics theories (emphasizing moral character), and system
development ethics theories (emphasizing moral contexts) (Kekes, 1993; Petrick,
2008b). It is this pluralistic approach to orchestrating comprehensive analysis and
resolution of ethical issues that avoids moral shallowness and ensures moral
soundness. This categorization has been given the acronym of R2C2 (‘‘R’’ referring to
moral results and rules, while ‘‘C’’ refers to character and context). Personal and
organizational moral soundness is determined by the degree to which reflection,
deliberation, and interaction with multiple stakeholders achieve good results, follow
the right rules, cultivate virtuous character, and sustain morally supportive contexts
throughout life without underemphasizing or overemphasizing any of these factors
as managerial issues are addressed. On the other hand, greedy managers and ruthless
corporations that overemphasize the achievement of good short-term financial
results while violating moral and legal rules, cultivating vicious character traits such
as callous insensitivity to others, and destroying morally supportive contexts
demonstrate a lack of sound moral judgment.
Third, developmental integrity capacity is the cognitive and affective final
improvement stage of individual and collective moral reasoning and caring
relationship formation capabilities from an initial stage of preconventional self-
interested concern (morally immature, selfish connivance) to a stage of conforming
to external conventional standards (partially morally mature, external-governing
compliance), and to a final stage of postconventional commitment to universal
ethical principles and responsive caring relationships (morally mature, self-
governing civic integrity) (Petrick & Quinn, 1997). Postconventional principled
moral reasoning and caring relationship prioritization demonstrate moral maturity.
Morally mature managers and organizations are living examples of developmental
integrity capacity that have internalized their identity-conferring commitment to
universal principles and values such as justice and responsive caring relationships,
are emotionally attuned to all of their stakeholders, and elevate the moral
expectations and performance of stakeholders to the level where just reciprocity
becomes the norm. Hitler, for example, exhibited process integrity through
consistency in word and behavior but never developmental integrity capacity; his
goals precluded commitment to universal justice and doomed him and his followers
to lives of passionately underdeveloped moral immaturity with devastating
consequences. Managers and organizations that sustain the postconventional stage
of moral maturity are either identifying and satisfying the wishes of the majority
(e.g., ‘‘Everyone should participate in public deliberations and vote but the majority
opinion will prevail in final policy determination’’) or eliciting commitment to
universal moral standards (e.g., ‘‘Whatever policies we adopt by consensus must
meet universal standards of justice, care, and global citizenship’’). Individuals,
firms, regimes, and societies committed to developmental integrity standards act
like morally mature citizens on behalf of other internal and external stakeholders —
domestically and globally.
Fourth, system integrity capacity is the demonstrable capability to design and/or

sustain organizational moral infrastructures and extra-organizational relationships
that provide a supportive moral environment for ethical conduct (Petrick, 2008b).
The system contexts within an organization and outside it can either support or
inhibit ethical action, for example, the morally impoverished environment of a
corrupt organization located in a crime-infested city in a bribery-riddled nation on a
heavily polluted planet inhibits viable institutionalization of system integrity capacity
(Brown, 2010). Individuals and collectives that design and/or sustain supportive
moral environments at the intra-organizational and extra-organizational levels
demonstrate system integrity capacity. In effect, it is not enough to be a good person
and a good manager but it is also important to design and shape organizational and
extra-organizational contexts so that the processes for sustaining moral environ-
ments are retained and strengthened over time and are not solely dependent on the
top management team currently in power.
Now that the nature and value of integrity capacity as a management competency
has been delineated, it is time to focus on the role of management education in its
cultivation. Nearly every responsible management educator wants to prevent unethical
conduct, but preventing any and all unethical behavior is an unrealistic goal for either
an ethics training program or a management ethics course (Petrick, 2008a, 2008b;
Whittier, Williams, & Dewett, 2006). Ethical behavior is a function of a variety of
personal and situational factors, including but not limited to moral development,
enforced norms, opportunity for and punishment of violations, rewards for moral
conduct, self-control, and ethics training (Arnold, 2009; True, Ferrell, & Ferrell, 2005).
It is unreasonable to expect that one single link in this chain of inputs can control
behavior by itself (Weston, 2007). The issue becomes how management education for
integrity capacity can be a strong link in the chain, rather than searching in vain for
ways in which management ethics education alone can eradicate unethical behavior
(Rossouw, 2002; Williams & Dewett, 2006). Furthermore, there is empirical research
that substantiates the moral competencies that can be developed by using the integrity
capacity framework (Petrick, 2008a).
One way that management education for integrity capacity can become an even
stronger link is to implement the following three tools for advancing its cultivation:
the IRMEI, the PICA, and the IEBE. To them we now turn.
3.2. Indicator of Readiness for Management Ethics Inquiry

The first tool is the IRMEI. The IRMEI is a quantitative assessment tool that
determines the relative readiness of individuals to engage in management ethics
inquiry. (See Appendix 3.A for a copy of the IRMEI and its interpretive scoring.)
The result of the IRMEI is the categorization of each individual into one of the four
stages of readiness to engage in management ethics inquiry so that stage-appropriate
educational interventions can be delivered to more rapidly advance management
ethics competency, as demonstrated by recent research (Petrick, 2010).
The theoretical basis of the IRMEI is the transformational model of change. The
transtheoretical model of change has been applied in varied transformational contexts
and used to understand student-learning motivation and change (Cole, Harris, &
Field, 2004; Prochaska, DiClemente, & Norcross, 1992). Originally designed for
clinical assessment and treatment, the model can be modified to advance and assess
management ethics education. Once modified, the transtheoretical model of change is a
useful theoretical foundation for both the IRMEI and the rationale for stage-
appropriate sequencing of management ethics instructional interventions (activities)
to advance the attainment of management ethics’ competencies (Tyler & Tyler, 2006).
The model explains why some managers recognize the distinctive challenge of ethical
issues and are willing to actively engage in thorough analysis and resolution, while
others are seemingly unable to grasp or unwilling to act on the ethical dimensions
present in a business event.
Indeed, the IRMEI and the transtheoretical model of change has been particularly
useful because of the distinctive characteristics of business students cross-culturally
(Hill & Stewart, 1999). Numerous studies have profiled business students as being
more motivated by the love of money than other types of students (some being much
more motivated) (Cunningham, Frauman, Ivy, & Perry, 2004; Tang & Chen, 2008;
Tang, Luna-Arocas, & Sutarso, 2005). If this hyperacquisitive predilection for money
is regarded as a form of ‘‘mental addiction’’ prevalent among business students that
may demand fulfillment at any cost, one way to treat that addiction and the ethical
risks it poses would be to offer management ethics education in a way that
incorporates a therapeutic structured process of educational intervention. Indeed,
since the obscene, acquisitive love of money has been such a key motivational factor
for numerous business-degreed white-collar criminals, there is some basis for
adapting a clinical process modality to management ethics education, delivered at
regular intervals during business careers as an antidote to the ongoing temptation of
excessive love of money and to overcome ethics-avoidance disorders (Weston, 2008).
In any event, this novel ‘‘therapeutic process structure’’ is rarely used by management
ethics educators to deliberately overlay and guide historical, topical, theoretical, or
latest-business-scandal approaches to developing management integrity capacity.
As indicated in Table 3.1, the modified four stages of readiness-to-change include
precontemplation, contemplation and preparation, action, and maintenance/ongoing
improvement (DiClemente & Prochaska, 1982). Their parallel modified stages of
intervention treatments include engagement, persuasion, active treatment, and
relapse prevention/sustainable performance (Mueser, Noordsy, Drake, & Fox, 2003).
Only the last change and intervention stages of the transtheoretical model have been
modified to include ‘‘ongoing improvement’’ and ‘‘sustainable performance,’’
respectively. By introducing stage-appropriate management ethics activities, the
model predicts that management ethics instructors who interject ‘‘activating events’’
at each appropriate stage can accelerate a process of managerial learning in relation
to ethical understanding and likely future behavior that will ignite and sustain
personal moral transformation (Cranton, 2002; Tyler & Tyler, 2006).
In the first change stage of precontemplation, managers are engaged by
prearranging themselves into teams on the basis of their IRMEI scores. Those
Table 3.1: Modified transtheoretical model of change and sequenced management

ethics activities.
Stages of change Stages of treatment Selective stage-appropriate
business ethics activities
Precontemplation Engagement Indicator of Readiness for

Management Ethics Inquiry
This is the stage at 1. Activities that attempt to
(IRMEI)
which there is no help students identify Journal of critical incidents in
intention to change concerns and become
academic ethics and other
behavior in the aware of moral relevance
student-anchored experiential
foreseeable future in business and in life
contexts (e.g., cheating)
2. Activities that focus on Classic and contemporary film
recognition or
clips on management ethics
understanding
scandals (e.g., Enron: The
of negative consequences
Smartest Guys in the Room)
of immoral behavior Visits from ex–white-collar
criminals convicted of
management ethics and business
law violations
Contemplation and Persuasion Process Integrity Capacity

preparation Auction (PICA)
Introduction to integrity
During the 1. Activities that increase
capacity model and its practical
contemplative awareness of positive
uses (e.g., Enron Case Analysis)
stage, people personal and business Use of structured ethical
become aware that moral responses
decision-making framework
a problem exists 2. Students are more
(R2C2) in management ethics
and begin thinking receptive to learning
cases based on a pluralistic view
seriously about opportunities, and
of human nature
overcoming it, but more experimental Classic and contemporary film
have not yet made activities can be used to
clips on positive management
a commitment to illustrate and reinforce
ethics practices (e.g., The Ethical
take action. During concepts and attitudes
Marketplace)
the preparation toward moral progress Exercise: management virtues
stage, people create
and improving stakeholder
meaningful
relations (e.g., what emotional/
intentions to take
moral difference would it make
action
to you and other internal and
external stakeholders if you
and/or your coworkers were
more caring?)
Readings: positive
organizational scholarship

Stages of change Stages of treatment Selective stage-appropriate
business ethics activities
Action Active treatment Intra-Organizational Ethics

Bowl Event (IEBE)
This is the stage in 1. Activities that support Business citizenship service-
which people the student’s determination
learning projects
modify their to change behavior and Workplace ethical culture/
behavior, willingness to take specific
climate development projects
experiences, or steps to engage in ethical
(e.g., code of ethics, statement
environment in behavior
of values and ethics processes,
order to overcome
Workplace Ethics Audit)
their problems Workplace community-building
activities (e.g., Management
Integrity Capacity Day)
Maintenance and Relapse prevention and Institute for Business Integrity:

ongoing sustainable performance ongoing outreach as an
improvement institutional resource for
This is the stage in 1. Activities that consolidate sustaining management
which people work and advance moral integrity capacity on-campus
to prevent relapse commitments and off-campus
to prior behaviors 2. Activities that proactively Electronic Ethics Newsletter for
and attitudes, and work to maintain and business students, alums, and
focus on continued further develop ethical practitioners focusing on
developmental decision-making processes management ethics best
progress among multiple practices and new research
stakeholders Business Integrity Breakfasts
that host management ethics
experts to sustain civic
engagement in advancing
workplace ethics
Management Integrity Capacity
Awards to honor local
individual and collective ethical
leadership
teams that are completely or partially composed of managers or management

students with a heightened readiness for management ethics’ inquiry and openness to
change can serve as peer catalysts for morally challenging conventional beliefs and/or
taking action on justified moral beliefs. Too often traditional management ethics
pedagogy assumes that the instructor alone must function as the sole agent of change
and that there is no need for an educational process of structured change that
engages and leverages high ethical readiness learners to collaboratively partner with
the instructor to advance management ethics education. The use of the IRMEI and
the adoption of the transtheoretical model of change for management ethics teaching
challenges both of these assumptions and actively engages peer catalysts in a
structured set of stage-appropriate activities to accelerate and sustain class
momentum toward improved ethics competency and integrity capacity.
In the first change stage of precontemplation, requiring entries into a learner
journal providing detailed accounts of critical incidents that managers and/or
management students have experienced in academic ethics or other experientially
anchored moral contexts is helpful. Showing classic and contemporary film clips
relating to management ethics scandals and/or challenges (e.g., films about the Enron
case) can stimulate moral awareness of the harmful consequences of unethical
practices. Any visits from former white-collar offenders who can realistically shock
managers into recognizing the adverse personal and career impacts of unethical
conduct can also be helpful at this stage.
In the second change stage of contemplation and preparation, persuading engaged
managers or management students to consider positive personal and organizational
moral practices and providing them with effective, conceptual tools to enable
meaningful moral intentions to form around a growing sense of moral self-efficacy is
essential. At this stage vividly reinforcing the need for process integrity capacity is
helpful to sustain student motivation to hone their management ethics skills. Also at
this stage, since the Enron case was introduced in the first stage, it is important to
provide a comprehensive moral analysis and resolution of the Enron case using the
integrity capacity model, stressing the lessons to be learned, and the positive
proactive steps to take in order to prevent a recurrence (Petrick & Scherer, 2003). The
use of classic and contemporary film clips that focus on positive management ethics
practices is appropriate for this stage of moral persuasion. Exercises that require
teams to make presentations that select three business virtues and describe how each
would improve internal and external stakeholder relations can sharpen managerial
expectations of themselves and others to be ready to act ethically and concretely
realize how character should count in the work environment (Solomon, 1999).
Reserve readings from positive organizational scholarship (POS) can provide
examples of constructive ways that individuals, groups, and organizations are
successfully building and strengthening integrity capacity (Cameron, Dutton, &
Quinn, 2003).
In the third change stage of action, activities that support the learner’s
determination to change behavior and willingness to take specific steps to engage
in ethical behavior are appropriate. At this stage providing students with
empowering activities that develop both their competitive and cooperative moral
development skills can be helpful. Ethics Bowls can be particularly engaging as a
subsequent section of this chapter demonstrates. Carefully structured business
citizenship service-learning projects, delivered both on-site and off-site, can develop
habits in future managers that help them make a positive difference in the
communities of which they are a part (Zlotkowski, 1996). Furthermore, including
managers or their representatives as voting stakeholders on committees that engage
in the ongoing assessment and development of the work ethical culture and climate
provides another immediate, incentivized avenue for constructively applying integrity
capacity concepts to improve the manager’s own work environment. Sponsoring a
day each year (e.g., Management Integrity Capacity Day) dedicated to community-
building activities, run primarily by managers or management students, and
including special guest lecturers on management ethics, as well as sporting and
social events that involve practicing managers and non-managers mixing outside the
work arena, is another action that empowers current and future managers to
constructively build a more caring work community for themselves.
In the fourth stage of maintenance and ongoing improvement, moral relapse
(into addictive moral drifting) prevention and sustainable moral performance are enabled
through institutionalized reinforcement and continual creativity relating to new manage-
rial moral challenges. One form of institutionalized moral sustainability is through
ancillary ethics centers or institutes, such as the Institute for Business Integrity (IBI) at
Wright State University (WSU) in Dayton, OH. Through service, teaching, and research
activities, the IBI can fulfill the mission of its business college to develop successful and
ethical business leaders, while initiating integrity capacity projects on-campus and off-
campus. Through this institutionalized form of management ethics education, current and
future managers, as well as alumni, can always replenish and refresh their integrity
capacity resources through reading about the latest management ethics research and
organizational ethics best practices in the Business Integrity E-Newsletter. They can focus
their attention on positive individual and organizational role models during events such as
the Management Integrity Capacity Awards Day, which publicly honors individual and/
or collective integrity capacity award winners that meet exemplary moral standards.
Interested parties can contact the IBI for confidential analysis and resolution of work
ethics issues or can contract with the IBI to conduct objective, professional organizational
ethical climate/culture assessments or ethics audits.
Ultimately, the use of the IRMEI to identify individual readiness for management
ethics inquiry combined with stage-appropriate educational interventions authorized
by the transtheoretical model of change can and has had a profound accelerating
effect on improving targeted moral competencies and managerial integrity capacity
cultivation, as demonstrated in published research findings (Petrick, 2010). By using
the IRMEI, the responsible management ethics educator has the academic freedom/
corporate training prerogative to create an instructional atmosphere of group
dynamics not held hostage to the most morally recalcitrant student(s)/manager(s).
Even if some managers choose not to move beyond the first two stages, they can at
least witness other managers who benefit from doing so and perhaps at a later time
the positive examples of their peers will impact their future choices (Giacalone, 2004).
3.3. Process Integrity Capacity Auction
A second tool is the PICA. The PICA is an instructional instrument consisting of an

auction of life and work values under simulated time, resource, and market
constraints to determine the level of competitive and cooperative skills that can be
brought to bear on the consistent ‘‘lived owning’’ of espoused theoretical values.
(See Appendix 3.B for a copy of the PICA and its purposes and directions.) The
result of the PICA is to provide vivid, real-time feedback to individuals about the
degree of operational value consistency under simulated market conditions.
One effective way to implement the PICA is to have students initially complete a
paper and pencil prioritization of values before the actual auction, with their anticipated
(budgeted) bids. For business students the pre-auction preparation allows them to
directly indicate their value prioritizations and process integrity capacity by the budgeted
number and distribution of their chip investments, that is, they literally can invest their
chips or put their ‘‘money’’ where their ‘‘mouths’’ (voiced values) are. Subsequent to the
auction many students experience a marked discrepancy between their initially stated
values and process integrity standards (the initial chips budgeted for particular values)
and their actual auction results. For them it provides a vividly engaging opportunity to
reflect on the reasons for the divergence between espoused preferences and actual
outcomes of the PICA. Some are motivated to experientially acknowledge that they may
well be in the first stage of the IRMEI and may be open to the second stage.
The course instructor can usually act as the auctioneer but another class member
may also be selected to perform that role. It is important to randomly call out the
values for bid in the class/training room to better simulate the inopportune choices
people often face in life rather than rigidly adhering to the numerical order specified
in the 20 values in Appendix 3.B. This method also reinforces the managerial merit of
sound planning and organizing skills that anticipate contingencies in order to be
better prepared with alternate strategies for optimizing personal value priorities
under time and resource pressures.
As the value auction bidding proceeds, individuals will decide on the blend of
competition and cooperation that they will demonstrate. Some students may be
tempted to participate in more than two pooled bids since everyone in the pooled bid
receives the total value won. It is the responsibility of both the transfer agent bidder
and the auction auditor to accurately record and monitor compliance with the rules.
If a dispute is brought before the auction referee, after the complaining parties have
each paid one chip, and the referee decides in favor of the complaining parties, the
members of the defending parties must each forfeit not only their remaining chips but
also any values successfully obtained thus far in the auction to the complaining
parties. Only the formal complaining individuals are eligible for the benefits of the
forfeitures. If the auction referee decides in favor of the defending parties, then the
‘‘grievance chips’’ of the initially complaining parties (one chip per complainant) are
distributed to the defending parties.
It is important to note what business/management students and/or practicing
managers will do for money. Note the values that obtained the highest bids. The values
receiving the highest bids in the PICA usually give the instructor of the course a truer
reading of the actual values motivating most individuals in the class rather than those
indicated by pencil on paper. Note the extent to which individual competitive or group
cooperative bidding succeeded in securing the targeted values. Bring these insights to
bear after the auction as the instructor debriefs students in the class.
Many students will end the auction with uninvested chips. At the debriefing, the
instructor reminds those students that just as in life, individuals either use their life
investments talents or lose them at death. Wasting talent through passivity or simply
drifting through life, expecting that everyone is entitled to his/her value priority
fulfillment in life without planning and effort, is not only unrealistic but also an
abdication of moral responsibility for stewarding one’s talents before dying. It is a
teachable moment to motivate students to ‘‘get in the game’’ of responsible life and work
investments and to use the course in management ethics to sharpen and prioritize their
values and cooperation skills, that is, to increase their aggregate integrity capacity.
3.4. Intra-Organizational Ethics Bowl Event

A third tool is the IEBE. The IEBE is both an inside-classroom and an outside-
classroom activity that moves individuals and teams up the IRMEI scale by actively
engaging them in ethics case research, analysis, and resolution, as well as developing
oral argumentation skills so that current and future managerial leaders are better
able to give morally sophisticated voice to their values.
The IEBE is modeled on the structure and format of the undergraduate National
Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl (NIEB) Competition, which is described in detail on the
homepage of the Association for Practical and Professional Ethics (APPE). The
educational merits of Ethics Bowls on the undergraduate national and regional levels
included increased understanding of ethics analysis and case resolution, the
development of an extended moral community based on a high standard of moral
discourse, and an enhanced ability to engage in morally responsible democratic
deliberation (Ladenson, 2001).
Operationally, in the NIEB each team from more than 200 universities receives a set
of 15 cases that raise issues in practical and professional ethics six weeks in advance of
the competition and prepare an analysis of each case. At the competition, a moderator
poses questions, based on a case randomly taken from that set, to presenting teams of
three to five students. The questions may concern ethical problems on a wide range of
topics, such as legal, medical, or engineering professional ethics, social and political
ethics, organizational management ethics, academic ethics, and/or personal relation-
ship ethics. A panel of three judges with expertise in the cases selected probes the teams
for further justifications and argumentation after a rebuttal is provided by the
nonpresenting team. Then another case is randomly selected and the previous rebuttal
team now becomes the presenting team and the process repeats itself until 12 cases are
addressed. Rating criteria are intelligibility, focus on ethically relevant considerations,
avoidance of ethical irrelevancies, and deliberative thoughtfulness.
Organizing the IEBE by event management standards is feasible since the cases,
procedures, and judging guidelines provided by the APPE are available for use and could
be modified for different projects in different organizational settings (Raj, Walters, &
Rashid, 2009). If the Ethics Bowl event takes place within the classroom, the R2C2
format for ethics issue analysis and resolution can be directly applied to each case to
enhance judgment integrity capacity and the instructor can serve as both moderator and
judge (supplemented by a class vote to determine the ‘‘winner’’ of the event). If the Ethics
Bowl is held outside of the classroom, it will require many people to volunteer their
support — some to serve as moderators and some to serve as judges. Nevertheless, the
external event provides an excellent opportunity for management educators to connect
with the larger community and invite practicing managers and other professionals to
participate as moderators and judges.
WSU has participated in the undergraduate Regional Intercollegiate Ethics Bowls
and NIEB, earning the national championship in 2002 and runner-up championships
in 2004 and 2008. Each of the award-winning teams has been trained and coached
using the integrity capacity model, along with the IRMEI and the PICA.
One distinctive feature of Ethics Bowls at WSU is that they are initially conducted
on an intramural basis at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Student teams
are formed at both levels and compete; the most successful undergraduate team earns
the honor to represent the university at the regional and national competitions.
Recruitment of new team members is university-wide and involves the faculty
coaches and student members of prior successful WSU Ethics Bowl teams. The event
has been an energizing activity that has stimulated ethics interest across the entire
university at both the undergraduate and graduate levels with competing team
members being awarded a WSU Presidential Medal of Honor for Extracurricular
Leadership — whether or not they win regional or national awards.
Another distinctive feature of Ethics Bowls at WSU is that competing team
members have a postcompetition required venue that involves collaboratively
generating a position paper on all 15 cases. To avoid the downsides of engaging in
ethics discourse only as an adversarial competitive sport, WSU student teams are
required to cooperate with each other and come up with a final position paper that
incorporates the best points from all competing teams. This combination of
competition and cooperation sends an important message that responsibly managing
ethics is an activity that ultimately replaces the conception of the other as opponent
with an invitation to greet the other and work toward a common good.
Ethics Bowls, however, need not be confined exclusively to academic contexts.
Ethics issues arise in all organizations and the format and structure of Ethics Bowls
provide a forum for responsible deliberation about current and emerging organiza-
tional ethics issues. IEBEs can be regarded as one element in the development of any
learning organization in the private, public, or nonprofit sectors that is interested in
employee and public relations enhancements at work as well as continually updating
employee handbooks, human resource policies, and strategic management options.
3.5. Conclusion
The major thrust of this chapter remains promising and useful to management ethics
education. If integrity capacity is a critical intangible asset of individuals and
organizations and if managers are held accountable for responsibly managing that
intangible asset in themselves and their organizations, it is important for responsible

management ethics educators to familiarize themselves with the IRMEI, the PICA,
and the IEBE — three proven pedagogical tools delineated in this chapter that
enhance managerial integrity capacity.
References
Arnold, D. (2009). Essentials of business ethics. New York: Wiley.
Brown, M. (2005). Corporate integrity: Rethinking organizational ethics and leadership. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, M. (2010). Civilizing the economy: A new economics of provision. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Cameron, K., Dutton, J., & Quinn, R. (2003). Positive organizational scholarship. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Carter, S. (1996). Integrity. New York: Harper Perennial.
Chen, L., & Wang, C. (2002). The concept of integrity in China and Western countries: Its
difference and implications. Journal of Philosophy Research, 8, 35–40.
Cole, M., Harris, S., & Field, H. (2004). Stages of learning motivation: Development and
validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(7), 1421–1456.
Cranton, P. (2002). Professional development as transformative learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cunningham, P., Frauman, E., Ivy, M., & Perry, T. (2004). The value of money and leisure
and college student’s choice of major. SCHOLE: A Journal of Leisure Studies and
Recreation Education, 19, 65–72.
DiClemente, C., & Prochaska, J. (1982). Self-change and therapy change of smoking behavior:
A comparison of processes of change in cessation and maintenance. Addictive Behaviors, 7,
133–142.
Erikson, E. (1950). Childhood and society. New York: W.W. Norton.
Giacalone, R. (2004). A transcendant business education for the 21st century. Academy of
Management Journal, 3(4), 415–420.
Giacalone, R., & Thompson, K. (2006). Business ethics and social responsibility education:
Hill, A., & Stewart, I. (1999). Character education in business schools: Pedagogical strategies.
Teaching Business Ethics, 3, 179–193.
Kansas, D. (2009). The Wall Street Journal guide to the end of Wall Street as we know it. New
York: Collins Business.
Kekes, J. (1993). The morality of pluralism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kolb, R., & Sage Editors (2012). Sage brief guide to business ethics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Korten, D. (2009). Agenda for a new economy: From phantom wealth to real wealth. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Ladenson, R. (2001). The educational significance of the Ethics Bowl. Teaching Ethics, 6, 63–78.
Levin, C., & Coburn, T. (2011). Wall Street and the financial crisis: Anatomy of a financial
collapse. Washington, D.C.: Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
McCabe, D., Butterfield, K., & Trevino, L. (2006). Academic dishonesty in graduate business
programs: Prevalence, causes, and proposed action. Academy of Management Learning &
Education, 5(3), 294–306.
McConnaughy, E., Prochaska, J., & Velicer, W. (1983). Stages of change in psychotherapy:
Measurement and sample profiles. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 20, 368–375.
McLean, B., & Nocera, J. (2010). All the devils are here: The hidden history of the financial
crisis. New York: Penguin.
Mueser, K., Noordsy, D., Drake, R., & Fox, L. (2003). Integrated treatment for dual disorders:
A guide to effective practice. New York: Guilford Press.
Paine, L. (1997). Leadership, ethics, and organizational integrity. Chicago: Irwin.
Petrick, J. (2008a). Using the business integrity capacity model to advance business
ethics education. In: D. Swanson & D. Fisher (Eds), Advancing business ethics
education (pp. 103–124). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Petrick, J. (2008b). Integrity. In: R. Kolb (Ed.), Encyclopedia of business ethics and society
(pp. 1141–1144). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Petrick, J. (2009). Toward responsible global financial risk management: The reckoning and
reform recommendations. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business, 10, 1–33.
Petrick, J. (2010). Sustainable stakeholder capitalism and redesigning management education:
Lessons generated from the great global recession. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 40,
101–124.
Petrick, J. (2011). The measured impact of the transtheoretical model of educational change on
advancing business ethics education. In: D. Swanson & D. Fisher (Eds), Advancing business
ethics education (pp. 335–360). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Petrick, J., & Quinn, J. (1997). Management ethics: Integrity at work. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Petrick, J., & Quinn, J. (2000). The integrity capacity construct and moral progress in business.
Petrick, J., & Quinn, J. (2001). The challenge of leadership accountability for integrity capacity
as a strategic asset. Journal of Business Ethics, 34, 331–343.
Petrick, J., Scherer, K., Brodzinski, J., Quinn, J., & Ainina, F. (1999). Global leadership skills
and reputational capital: Intangible resources for sustainable competitive advantage in the
21st century. Academy of Management Executive, 13(1), 58–69.
Petrick, J., & Scherer, R. (2003). The Enron scandal and the neglect of management integrity
capacity. Mid-American Journal of Business, 18(1), 37–50.
Pritchard, M. (2006). Professional integrity: Thinking ethically. Lawrence, KS: University Press
of Kansas.
Prochaska, J., DiClemente, C., & Norcross, J. (1992). In search of how people change.
American Psychologist, 47(9), 1102–1114.
Raj, R., Walters, P., & Rashid, T. (2009). Events management: An integrated and practical
approach. Los Angeles: Sage.
Rossouw, G. (2002). Three approaches to teaching business ethics. Teaching Business Ethics, 6,
411–433.
Sims, R., & Felton, E. (2006). Designing and delivering business ethics teaching and learning.
Journal of Business Ethics, 63(3), 297–312.
Smith, K., Davy, J., & Eastering, D. (2004). An examination of cheating and its antecedents
among marketing and management majors. Journal of Business Ethics, 50, 63–80.
Solomon, R. (1999). A better way to think about business: How personal integrity leads to
corporate success. New York: Oxford University Press.
Swanson, D., & Fisher, D. (Eds). (2011). Toward assessing business ethics education. Charlotte,
Swanson, D., & Frederick, W. (2005). Denial and leadership in business ethics education. In:
O. Ferrell & R. Peterson (Eds), Business ethics: The new challenge for business schools and
corporate leaders (pp. 222–240). New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Tang, T., & Chen, Y. (2008). Intelligence vs. wisdom: The love of money, Machiavellianism,
and unethical behavior across college major and gender. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 1–26.
Tang, T., Luna-Arocas, R., & Sutarso, T. (2005). From income to pay satisfaction: The love of
money and pay equity comparison as mediators and culture (the U.S. and Spain) and gender
as moderators. Management Research: The Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of
Management, 3(1), 7–26.
Taylor, G. (1985). Integrity: Pride, shame and guilt. Oxford, UK: The Alexander Press.
Trank, C., & Rynes, S. (2003). Who moved our cheese? Reclaiming professionalism in business
education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2(2), 189–205.
Trevino, L., & Brown, M. (2004). Managing to be ethical: Debunking five business ethics
myths. Academy of Management Executive, 18(2), 69–81.
Trevino, L., Hartman, L., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How
executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review, 42(4),
128–142.
Trevino, L., & Weaver, G. (2003). Managing ethics in business organizations. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
True, S. L., Ferrell, L., & Ferrell, O. C. (2005). Fulfilling our obligation: Perspectives on
teaching business ethics. Kennesaw, GA: Kennesaw University Press.
Tyler, C., & Tyler, J. (2006). Applying the transtheoretical model of change to the sequencing
of ethics instruction in business education. Journal of Management Education, 30(1), 45–64.
Waddock, S., Bodwell, C., & Leigh, J. (2006). Total responsibility management. Sheffield, UK:
Greenleaf Publishers.
Waddock, S., Rasche, A., Werhane, P., & Unruh, G. (2011). The principles for responsible
management education: Implications for implementation and assessment. In: D. Swanson &
D. Fisher (Eds), Toward assessing business ethics education (pp. 13–28). Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishing.
Weston, A. (2007). Creative problem solving in ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Weston, A. (2008). A 21st century ethical toolbox. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Whittier, N., Williams, S., & Dewett, T. (2006). Evaluating ethical decision making models: A
review and application. Society and Business Review, 4, 94–112.
Williams, S., & Dewett, T. (2006). Yes, you can teach business ethics: A review and research
agenda. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 12, 109–120.
Zlotkowski, E. (1996). Opportunity for all: Linking service-learning and business education.
Appendix 3.A. Indicator of Readiness for Management Ethics Inquiry

(IRMEI) r
Purpose: This pre-course survey is designed to assess preliminary readiness to address

current management ethics beliefs. Each statement describes how a student might feel
when starting a course.
Directions: Please indicate the extent to which you tend to agree with each statement. In
each case, make your choice in terms of how you feel right now, not what you have felt in
the past or would like to feel. There are five possible responses to each of the items in the
questionnaire: strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, and strongly agree. Circle the
number that best describes how much you agree or disagree with each statement.
Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly

disagree agree
1. It might be worthwhile to 1 2 3 4 5
examine my management
ethics beliefs
2. I think I might be ready for 1 2 3 4 5
some moral self-
improvement
3. I am doing something 1 2 3 4 5
about my management
ethics beliefs that had been
bothering me
4. As far as I’m concerned, I 1 2 3 4 5
don’t have any
management ethics beliefs
that need changing
5. I’m not aware of any issues 1 2 3 4 5
with my management ethics
beliefs. I don’t see the
relevance of this to my
management education
6. It concerns me that I might 1 2 3 4 5
slip back into negative
management ethics beliefs I
have already changed, so I
am here to sustain positive
7. I am finally taking some 1 2 3 4 5
action based on my
8. I’ve been thinking that I 1 2 3 4 5
might want to change some

disagree agree
of my management ethics
beliefs
9. I have been successful in 1 2 3 4 5
building sound
management ethics beliefs,
but I’m not sure I can keep
up the effort on my own
10. At times changing my 1 2 3 4 5
is difficult, but I’m trying
11. Being here is pretty much 1 2 3 4 5
of a waste of time for me
because management
ethics has nothing to do
with me or my future
career
12. I’m hoping this class will 1 2 3 4 5
help me to better
understand my
13. I guess I have faulty 1 2 3 4 5
but they’re nothing that I
really need to change
14. I am working hard to 1 2 3 4 5
change my management
ethics beliefs
15. I have unexamined 1 2 3 4 5
and I really think I should
change them
16. I’m not sustaining the 1 2 3 4 5
positive management
ethics beliefs for which I
have already changed as
well as I had hoped, and
I’m here to stop this
17. Even though I am not 1 2 3 4 5
always successful in
changing my management
ethics beliefs, I am at least
critically examining them
18. I thought once I had 1 2 3 4 5
changed my management
ethics beliefs they would

disagree agree
remain stable, but

sometimes I still find
myself reverting to my old
views
19. I wish I had more ideas on 1 2 3 4 5
how to view management
ethics
20. I have started working on 1 2 3 4 5
my personal ethics beliefs
but I would like help
21. Maybe this class will be 1 2 3 4 5
able to open my mind
about the value of
22. I may need a boost right 1 2 3 4 5
now to help me maintain
the management ethics’
belief changes I’ve already
made
23. I may have faulty 1 2 3 4 5
but I don’t really think I
do
24. I hope that this class will 1 2 3 4 5
have some good
management ethics advice
for me
25. Anyone can talk about 1 2 3 4 5
changing management
ethics beliefs; I’m actually
doing something about
them
26. All this talk about 1 2 3 4 5
management ethics is
boring and irrelevant.
Why can’t people just
believe whatever they
want?
27. I’m here to prevent myself 1 2 3 4 5
from going back to my old
management ethics’ views
28. It is frustrating, but I feel I 1 2 3 4 5
might be having a
recurrence of unethical
management beliefs I

disagree agree
thought I had already

resolved
29. I have some concerns 1 2 3 4 5
about management ethics,
but so does everyone.
Why spend time thinking
about the topic?
30. I am actively examining 1 2 3 4 5
my management ethics
beliefs
31. I would rather cope with 1 2 3 4 5
my faulty management
ethics beliefs than try to
change them
32. After all I had done to try 1 2 3 4 5
and change my former
every now and again they
come back to haunt me
Scoring key:
Precontemplation items 4, 5, 11, 13, 23, 26, 29, 31
Contemplation items 1, 2, 8, 12, 15, 19, 21, 24
Action items 3, 7, 10, 14, 17, 20, 25, 30
Maintenance items 6, 9, 16, 18, 22, 27, 28, 32
Description: The scale is designed to be a continuous measure. Thus, subjects can score high on more than
one of the four stages. To score, add up the total number for each item corresponding to each of the four
subscales. Higher scores indicate a greater likelihood to be currently in that stage of change regarding
management ethics beliefs.
Source: McConnaughy et al. (1983). Copyright r Institute for Business Integrity. Reproduced with
permission.
Appendix 3.B. Process Integrity Capacity Auction (PICA) r

Purposes: Since management ethics values are significant in individual, organiza-
tional, and systemic adjustments to and transformations of reality, it is important to
understand basic lived (as opposed to only theoretical) alignment of value priorities.
The purposes of PICA are the following:
(1) to determine those work and life values that are of greatest importance to you;
(2) to explore the degree of trust you have in the group;
(3) to examine how well you compete and cooperate; and
(4) to invite reflective consideration of your accountability for personal and
professional life value alignments and priorities.
Directions:
(1) Ten chips representing 10 life investment talents are to be used for bidding (one
chip ¼ one talent). Only those chips initially provided will be accepted as legal
tender for any value purchased.
(2) You may elect to pool your resources (your chips) with other people in order to
purchase a particularly high-priced value. This means that two or more people may
combine their funds and have one person bid for a desired value. You are allowed
to participate and win in such a pool two times only. If and when you decide to enter
a pooled bid, deposit your talent and sign a roster list with the amount you
deposited. Participation in more than two pooled bids results in the depositor’s
elimination from the auction, so keep track of any pooled bidding commitments.
(3) The selected transfer agent bidder (person who collects, coordinates, and actually
bids for others) may extract as many ‘‘talent transaction fees’’ (chips for
representing others) as the market will bear. The transfer agent bidder may not
mix funds between pools and personal resources. If fund mixing occurs, the
transfer agent bidder will be eliminated from the auction, so transfer agent
bidders have the added responsibility to keep careful track of who pays what
amount for which value.
(4) The appointed or selected auction auditor is responsible for recording and
monitoring the activities of the transfer agent bidder, the auctioneer, and the
individual and collective bids made. If there are any unwarranted process
irregularities, as determined by the auditor, the individuals and groups involved
are to be eliminated from the auction.
(5) The auctioneer’s task is to collect the highest number of chips possible in the
course of the auction. After the auction has begun, no further questions will be
answered by the auctioneer. The only other questions that can be asked or any
conflicts resolved are to be directed to the selected or appointed auction referee.
In any dispute involving the auction auditor determinations, the auction
referee is the final authority. Individuals who bring complaints to the auction
referee must each pay one chip before the auction referee decision is rendered;
otherwise the auction referee will accept the status quo by default. The decision of
the auction referee after analyzing the facts of the case is final.
(6) As in life, you either use your life investment talents or lose them. Also as in life,
the sequence of value investment opportunities will not follow a predictable,
logical sequence, so value priority clarity is important to capitalize on your
window of opportunity.
(7) After the auction, the results of all bidding are to be publicly posted. Individuals
are to focus and write on process values lessons learned: (1) Did you gain what
you wanted by your own bidding? By pooled bidding? Why? Why not? (2) What
did you learn about your lived value priorities? (3) What would you do
differently? Why?
List of values Amount Amount Top Gained by Gained

budgeted bid bid and for with
yourself others
1. All the food and drink you
want without gaining weight
2. The opportunity to exercise
economic leadership at the
state, national, and
international levels
3. The opportunity to exercise
political leadership at the
state, national, and
international levels
4. The admiration of good
friends due to your
honorable reputation
5. Travel and tickets to any 10
cultural/athletic events every
year for your lifetime
6. Starting your own business
and earning $1,000,000 as its
CEO in five years
7. A happy, healthy family
8. Recognition as the most
physically attractive person
in the world
9. A long life free of illness all
the time
10. Become a multimillionaire
by winning the lottery
11. Earnest perseverance,
resilience, and courage in
overcoming obstacles
List of values Amount Amount Top Gained by Gained

budgeted bid bid and for with
yourself others
12. Become a billionaire
through illegal and unethical
means
13. A lovely home in a beautiful
setting
14. A high-paying entry-level
position in your field on
graduation
15. The elimination of poverty
from the world
16. International fame and
renown for your
achievements
17. A wise understanding of life
18. As much sexual pleasure as
you want with anyone
anytime
19. The highest success in your
chosen profession/career
20. Being deeply in love with
someone
Copyright r Institute for Business Integrity. Reproduced with permission.
Chapter 4
Using Literature to Encourage Moral

Engagement in Business Ethics Courses
Louis C. Gasper
Abstract
Purpose — Propose a method of engaging the moral imagination in business

ethics classes.
Approach — Critically examines pedagogical materials in business ethics to
identify deficiencies that hinder engagement of the student’s moral imagination.
An alternative or supplement is proposed that uses stories taken from
imaginative literature and analyzes them in a virtue ethic framework. The
intended result is to decrease the distance between the experience in the
classroom and performance in meeting ethical challenges at work.
Practical implications — A great deal has been omitted in current teaching
methods in business ethics, evidenced by the practical results of continuing
spectacular ethical lapses in business. A substantial reorientation needs to be
undertaken in how business ethics is taught.
Social implications — Affecting the moral imagination of business students,
schools can help raise the ethical consciousness and behavior of business people
of the future. In turn, this can only help raise the general tone of ethical
behavior in society at large.
Originality/value of chapter — Very little has been done in this area. Except for
a few schools where this proposed approach is already used, there is almost
virgin ground for the method, even as to knowledge of what is required.
Enron, WorldCom, Adelphia, HealthSouth, Tyco, Imclone, Ahold, Arthur Andersen,

Martha Stewart, Bernard Madoff, y, the list of companies and persons touched by
serious lapses in ethics in recent years goes on and on and makes for dreary reading.

ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1
74 Louis C. Gasper
Corporate ethics scandals have been so many and so serious that they are beginning to
fall off the front page. An example is Quadrangle Group. Headlines were garnered by
Enron and Bernard Madoff and Arthur Andersen, but Steve Rattner and Quadrangle
and their part in the New York State public pension kickback scandal are scarcely
noticed on the national scene.
Yet these signal lapses come after decades during which business schools quite
generally increased the resources dedicated to teaching business ethics. The trend
started in the1970s and built momentum through the latter part of the 20th century.
In 2002, the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business recommended
that schools incorporate ethics courses in their curricula. And still the ethical failures
multiply. Professor McCabe (McCabe, Trevino, & Butterfield, 2001; McCabe,
Trevino, & Butterfield, 2006) has reported that extensive survey data demonstrate
that MBA students cheat more than students in other graduate programs. Despite
the multiplication of ethics courses, business students are, if anything, cheating more
than ever. Worse yet, it seems that business students do not arrive at business school
with a stronger propensity to cheat than that exhibited by their peers. Observers can
be forgiven for concluding that with respect to inculcating ethics and resilient values,
business schools have proven worse than useless.
The present chapter suggests that an additional pedagogical method can be useful
in reducing the distance between the classroom and the business place when it comes
to actually making sound decisions in which ethical challenges are encountered. That
method is one that has not received extensive attention in the literature on business
ethics, most likely because it is so little used. The method can be characterized by a
single word: ‘‘story.’’
This method was pioneered by Robert Coles, a psychiatrist who successfully
introduced it into several Harvard professional curricula courses focused on
connecting the student to his professional life through the use of stories. Coles
discovered that the student enters in imagination into the life of a literary character
and in that way not only observes but also experiences vicariously the development
of that character (1989). Examining that character development, the student gains
understanding of his/her own character. By working on the moral imagination, the
literary method promises more success in actually altering moral character than can
be obtained by the dispassionate analysis of principles and cases.
4.1. Sources of Failure in Business Ethics

Another important obstacle to business ethics education is that the majority of
business schools, so they claim, include ethics in their business curricula by requiring
that the ethics of the subject of a course be covered inside that course. Yet few
business teachers have had any formal training, even a workshop, in ethics or how to
teach ethics. Requiring them to teach something about the ethics of a subject must
assume that a person of goodwill who has not been accused of any serious ethical
lapse will be well equipped to instruct in ethics. Granted, the teacher may model good
Encouraging Moral Engagement 75
ethical behavior, but that is not at all the same thing as teaching it, any more than
playing baseball is the same thing as coaching it. One must suspect that the teachers,
knowing themselves embarrassed to make more than a token effort at teaching the
ethics of their subject, end up doing very little, and none at all in a systematic way.
We should perhaps be thankful for that, as a wrong-headed teacher can do a great
deal of damage even with all goodwill.
If business students do not get their ethics, good or bad, from the ethics
courses they take or from the ethics lectures and cases presented to them in other
courses, then what is it in business schools that corrupts them? We can take it as
given that their professors are trying to turn out good business people, not liars and
cheats. The business faculty on the whole appear to live decent lives in which they
model good character quite as well as the faculty in other disciplines. So it is not
likely that either the faculty are contradicting the message in the ethics courses or
the students are emulating bad behavior among the faculty. The most cogent likely
explanation is that they are emulating what they think is the behavior that is
successful in business. From a philosophical viewpoint, business is shot through
with positivism. What works, what is most efficient, is accorded the highest value
and is what we routinely teach our students.
From the very beginning of a student’s business education, ethics may be difficult
to inculcate because students often select a business major with the underlying idea
that they need to learn how to win against other competitors. That is, they often have
the idea, rarely conscious, that there is just so much wealth available for them to
gain, and the gain comes by keeping that wealth away from others. Implicitly, they
think they are in what economists call a zero-sum game in which one participant’s
gain is another’s deprivation. Focused on winning, they have no scruples about
depriving others because that is the nature of the ‘‘game.’’ Granted that the business
person must work in collaboration with, not in competition with, customers and
suppliers and employees, even that collaboration is seen as a matter of winning the
greater advantage in any exchange, at the expense of the other party.
Business students are deliberately encouraged to compete. Indeed, we would think
it strange if it were otherwise. But in this competition, the profit or value goal is
singular and the means to it are judged entirely on the basis of efficiency. When ethics
is formally introduced into this milieu, it is almost inevitably treated as another
constraint in a problem of constrained maximization of shareholder value. It is not
treated itself as a good.
One of the principal things taught to business students, day in and day out, is the
necessity to reduce costs. But this must be done by optimization, which broadly
means not reducing one cost at a time but coordinating cost control across the board.
In other words, one takes care that what is done to reduce cost in one direction does
not cause a problem that raises costs even more in another way. Being ethical is
treated as a cost, so the student seeks to reduce that cost. When he/she cannot see
that cheating causes a reduction in discounted present value, all his/her training is
toward lowering or breaking altogether the ethics constraint. This idea is only
reinforced when academic cheating is insufficiently penalized. As the ‘‘business
model’’ has penetrated the administration of our schools, learning is becoming
76 Louis C. Gasper
viewed as a ‘‘product’’ and the student as a ‘‘customer,’’ and such things as market
share and enhanced revenues are the new objectives. The full flowering of this is seen
at Texas A&M University, where faculty have been subjected to an explicit efficiency
(cost/benefit) calculation (Mangan, 2010). It is beyond the scope of this chapter to
probe the reasons for this trend and its advantages and costs. Here we need only note
that it is a basic axiom of business that the customer has to be satisfied, that we do
not alienate a paying customer if revenues are important to us. Dismissing a student
for cheating is then a drag on the bottom line and is impliedly discouraged. The
student cannot fail to notice a forgiving and even relaxed attitude toward cheating,
and easily comes to the conclusion that sales outrank ethics. Highly competent and
intensive ethics training can be powerless against this influence.
Our problem, then, is not that ethics is not taught at all, or that faculty model bad
behavior, but that the unspoken yet pervasive message is that behaving ethically is a
cost that may often be reduced in order to enhance the bottom line. This line of
approach can be seen in the claims that good ethics is good business, in the sense that
long-term success is elusive without sound ethics. But to the students, that rings
hollow. Students are not fools; they know that ethical behavior often enough is not
profitable business whether in the short term or for the long run. When they see the
truth, that ethics can be costly without any commensurate value added to the
company, their business training tells them to abandon ethics so far as that helps and
does not hurt the bottom line. In few words, this comes down to ‘‘Don’t get caught.’’
This is actually reinforced by the unfortunate emphasis on ‘‘social’’ ethics, on
environmental responsibility and ‘‘sustainability.’’ Inevitably, what comes across to
the student in these dimensions is ‘‘Do just as much as will satisfy people who are in a
position to pressure your company. You have to balance the costs of social
responsibility against the costs that can be visited on your company if you do not
appear to be socially responsible to an acceptable threshold.’’ This is social
responsibility only in the shallowest sense.
If this analysis is correct, then something very different needs to be introduced in
the way of ethics education and training in business schools. What is wanting is a
way to bring the student to believe that there is a good that ethical behavior brings
and that the ethical good matters to the interior person more than can any external
consideration.
4.2. Seeking ‘‘Internalization’’

It may be thought at this point that this chapter is about to traverse again the well-
trod path of those who think that students should be brought to ‘‘internalize’’ ethical
values, so that they behave as socially aware adults and not as selfish children. But
not so. That approach is wrong from the start because it still deals in ethical values
that are taken to be things external to the person and that therefore must be alien to
the natural person even when ‘‘internalized.’’ A parallel is the idea that ‘‘clothes
make the man.’’ Even if that were true, and to the extent that it is true, it is also true
that the person is not changed as his/her clothes change. The clothes do not become
part of who the person is, but can be put off quite as easily as they are put on,
perhaps more so. Ethical values that are internalized but not integrated are still not
part of who the person is, of what it is that makes the self.
A course in business ethics is almost always anchored in adopted materials that
include a textbook and cases. These are often ‘‘filled out’’ with articles from both the
professional literature and the current news press. Part of the problem with how
business ethics is taught is precisely in the exclusive reliance on textbooks and cases.
4.2.1. Business Ethics Textbooks
From his own experience in attempting to do without a textbook, the present author
has concluded that in teaching business ethics a textbook of some kind is needed. It is
possible that a set of readings may serve in place of a textbook, but something is
needed by which to present to the student a framework on which he/she may begin to
put structure on what otherwise is likely to be inchoate thinking about ethical
matters. Unfortunately, in too many instances the reluctance to ‘‘push’’ a particular
ethical theory leads to a failure to make clear that the way in which a person thinks
about ethics is vitally important. Consequently, textbooks in business ethics very
commonly present several different ‘‘theories’’ of ethics. There are usually
presentations of ethics based in utilitarianism, rights theory, deontological ‘‘code’’
behavior, distributive justice, and social contract. Understandably, these presenta-
tions are more in the nature of summary descriptions than they are rigorous analyses.
On the whole, however, they are adequately serviceable as introductions to those
who are very unlikely to have any background in philosophy. Each presentation is
ordinarily accompanied by an example of the application of the principles of the
particular moral philosophy to a case. The author often shows how the different
principles will yield different results in application. The author may opine that one
theory seems to do a better job of coming up with a satisfactory conclusion than
do the others, but what is almost universally missing is a definite statement that one
of the theories is true. The textbooks, that is, are eclectic and thereby encourage
the student to consider that ethical thinking can be eclectic, too. The result is that,
one way or another, the student can end up preferring that ethical theory that gets
the results he/she desires. When this results, all that is being done is to enhance the
student’s skill at rationalizing, improving the capacity to convince others that what
he/she did is right.
One could scarcely expect anything else. As the various methods of ethical
analysis are presented only in an introductory way, there is not such a deep
investigation as to enable the student to have a defensible grasp of any of the
theories, or therefore to have a sound basis on which to adhere to one theory instead
of another. The teacher in the classroom, of course, can change this. He/she can
present the subject in such a way as to recommend strongly one system instead of
another. Still, by adopting a textbook that presents alternative theories as more or
78 Louis C. Gasper
less equal in standing, the teacher is handicapped in trying to inculcate one of those
theories. The student will remember that there are other ways of ethical thinking and
can easily consider, once out of the teacher’s influence, that eclecticism is acceptable
as a working method of ethical analysis.
4.2.2. Cases in Business Ethics
Instructors in business ethics very commonly, perhaps universally, at least supplement

their teaching of ethical principles with cases by which the principles can be illustrated
and applied. Some, indeed, teach exclusively from cases and it can be argued that this is
better than relying on a textbook. It is hard to imagine, and perhaps it would be
foolhardy, to do without cases. But even the best cases have a marked deficiency that
would be difficult for them to overcome. Although a case usually will not explicitly
introduce the student to different ethical theories, it is very likely to be written with a
particular viewpoint. The use of several cases from different authors may increase the
likelihood that the student will pick up on the fact that there is a viewpoint embedded in
a case, and begin to think seriously about whether one viewpoint is more valid than
another. This is all to the good. However, cases have the limitation of being mostly
presentations of facts and data. The selection of these facts is what conveys a particular
viewpoint. Assuming there is real depth in the problem that the case is intended to
illuminate, presenting all the pertinent facts is perhaps not even possible within the
confines of a reasonably sized case. More, however, the facts tend to be given with little
analysis of character. Indeed, few cases even have characters as a concern. If the case
includes questions, these, too, are ways in which the viewpoint of the author is
conveyed. The skillful teacher will mount his/her own questions in order to examine
that viewpoint or to assert another.
What is necessarily true of all cases, however, is that they are presented as cases, as
disconnected events. The student is asked to look at a case as if he/she were a physician
considering a medical case. One of the important skills required of a medical
practitioner is the capacity to consider the patient so to speak as a medical specimen.
Emotional involvement is recognized as being often deadly — sometimes literally so —
to medical judgment. But just as a physician in a weekly staff meeting will examine with
utter dispassion a case presented by staff, so the business ethics student will stand apart
from any kind of inner involvement in an ethics case. We understand and accept and
even demand this of our medical practitioners. But the difficulty in ethics is that we are
called on not to make decisions for others, as if they were patients depending on our
judgment for their care, but must make decisions for ourselves. Dispassion is certainly
desirable as we think out our own behavioral choices, but it is obviously much more
difficult to achieve than it is with respect to a case.
The difficulty with case studies is that they train the student in analysis and decision
making as a completely detached person, but that is not the mode in which ethical
decisions are made in the real world. Cases give valuable practice in applying abstract
principles to particular problems, but they do so outside the kind of context in which
ethical difficulties are set in the real world. Lacking that, the ‘‘internalization’’ of
ethical values and ways of thinking is at best difficult to achieve. The inner person of the
student is simply insufficiently engaged by cases for them to have a strong influence. A
person has to have a very strong imagination to transcend the detachment that is
natural to using cases, but without that imagination the inner person of the student can
scarcely be expected to become engaged either in the realities lying behind the case or in
the values the teacher or case author intend to inculcate.
4.3. The Imaginative Alternative
Because both textbooks and cases are insufficient to engage the inner person of the
student, because they do not excite the student’s imagination to a high enough level,
a pedagogical method that directly engages the imagination can be very useful.
Abstractly, if one wants to engage the imagination, then it seems obvious that
imaginative materials should be used. Yet very few business schools make use of
imaginative literature as a resource for business ethics. This is no doubt due to the
fact that we would not think of using imaginative literature to teach the principles of
finance or logistics, for example. It is not the way we do things in business school,
and for most subjects we have good reason to use more didactic methods.
We certainly would like our students to be imaginative in finding solutions to financial
and logistical problems, but the kind of imagination that is used in such problems is one
that is grounded in concrete being. There is a great deal to dislike about the
Enlightenment’s forced distinction between what is and what ought to be, but it has
about it an element of truth. When we engineer a new financial instrument, we do so to
reach a concrete goal that is justified solely by its efficiency toward a value maximization
goal. It is supposed, of course, that the instrument is legal and that its use accords with
law. If we were to ask a question such as ‘‘Ought this instrument to exist,’’ the answer
would be seen by most business people as depending entirely on whether the instrument
is more efficient than other instruments available to do the same job. The only ‘‘ethical’’
concern would be whether it conforms to law and market rules. Assuming it does, then
whether it ‘‘ought’’ to exist is reduced to whether it ‘‘is’’ efficient. The moral imagination
is not engaged, and business schools do not seek to have it engaged.
Carrying that same approach into business ethics, business schools generally
reduce what might be ethical questions of what ‘‘ought’’ to be to empirical questions
of what ‘‘is’’ in concrete fact. This will not answer if we take seriously the proposition
that what ought to be has a moral dimension, not only an empirical one. The
imagination that must be engaged is the moral imagination.
4.4. Different Kinds of Imagination
To situate this clearly, it is useful to distinguish the moral from other kinds of
imagination. Philosophers and psychologists have worked on categorizing different
80 Louis C. Gasper
sorts of imagination. An early example of one such examination of types of

imagination is the one made by Bartlett (1928). Perhaps the division most commonly
encountered in the literatures of psychology, philosophy, and art is that between
what are usually called the passive and creative imaginations. This was set down by
Ribot (1903) long ago. But it has been argued by Kind (2005) that this distinction
makes imagination depend too much on imagery. Similarly, Carrier (1973) proposed
that the usual division had to be supplemented by a third kind of intellectual
imagination that is more logically conceptual than imagistic. It is much like the
scientific imagination that Peirce (1931) mentioned.
The taxonomic discussion in the professional literature is not ended. No single
scheme has been proposed to answer to every need for such a taxonomy. There can
be no objection, then, to advancing a new scheme for the purposes of the present
chapter.
4.4.1. Fantasy and Imagery
One sort of imagination may be called the fantastic imagination, the imagination that
results in fantasy. This kind of imagination has only a tenuous connection to reality
and easily goes beyond ‘‘what might be.’’ The content of dreams may well be the
result of such imagination. The fantasies of science fictionists are conscious products
of it. We do not try to develop such an imagination in business students, for it is not
often of use, and perhaps more often than not is counterproductive, leading to
nothing more than daydreaming.
Another sort of imagination that is not far removed from the fantastic
imagination, and may simply be a subdivision of it, is what can be called the
imagistic imagination. This is the source of the right-brain seated kind of activity that
is essential to visual artists. Whereas the fantastic imagination can deal in concepts
alone, images and appearances are crucial for the imagistic imagination. We who
teach business students might be pleased that one of them has a well-developed visual
imagination, but we do not find it of great use in the study and practice of most types
of business endeavor.
4.4.2. The Conceptual Imagination, Passive and Constructive
The kind of imagination that we do seek to develop is what we may call the
conceptual imagination. Unlike fantasy, it is closely bound to reality, and unlike the
artistic imagination it deals much less in images than it does in concepts. We can
introduce the standard division between the passive and the constructive or creative
into the idea of the conceptual imagination. The passive imagination is one that
searches out links between concepts and is an essential part of the capacity to learn,
because we learn not only by concepts but also by connections. Only by the
connections in conceptual imagination can we have a true grasp of reality. At the
lowest level, the passive conceptual imagination is exercised in mnemonic

memorization of facts. At a much higher level, the imagining of real links between
things becomes insight. Certainly we encourage this sort of imagination, perhaps
more by requiring it than by teaching it.
The conceptual imagination can be not passive but constructive. The constructive
imagination conjures up new, realistically possible links among things. This is the
sort of imagination we are requiring when we demand of our students that they come
up with an ‘‘imaginative solution’’ to a problem. It is the imagination of inventors as
well as successful business persons. Bill Gates, for example, imagined a link between
an individual person and a computer, a link that was dedicated and exclusive. The
desktop computer resulted and by answering the need for such a link, Bill Gates was
very successful. This is, clearly, a kind of imagination we want not only to encourage
but also to actively develop, and much of our curriculum is designed to do just that.
In partnership with passive imagination, the constructive imagination opens up new
territory and finds solutions to problems that have no exact parallel in experience.
4.4.3. Moral Imagination
But there is a yet another kind of imagination. If we try to use the constructive
imagination in approaching ethical concerns, we are trying to find new connections,
and must treat the ethical problem as just that: a problem for which there must be a
solution. What is missing, even if we find a ‘‘solution,’’ is engagement. The student
tries to find a solution to the exam problem because finding it will bring some
external good the student seeks, such as a better grade in the course. But it scarcely, if
at all, touches his/her inner person, who he/she is in character. Ethical problems,
however, are not problems in the exam problem sense. They are things that touch
who a person is and who he/she will become, if they are truly ethical in nature. For
this, something more is needed than a constructive imagination.
This kind of imagination is the moral imagination. It is characterized above all by
empathy, for which reason it might be called alternatively the empathetic
imagination. It is by such imagination that we enter into the inmost concerns of
others. That is the basis of a ‘‘social conscience’’ and is called on when we are asked
to work on problems of ‘‘social justice.’’ But perhaps more importantly, the moral
imagination engages with the person’s own objective self, with who he/she is and the
self he/she may become. Without this, we cannot take hold of our own behavior and
cannot develop ourselves.
An important link between the conceptual and moral imaginations that
distinguishes them from the fantastic and imagistic imaginations is that both of
them are informed by a goal. The fantastic imagination and the imagistic may work
fine if they just work. But the constructive imagination works well only if it advances
us toward something that we desire. Likewise, the moral imagination requires some
goal, some overall guidance that makes an ethical choice right or wrong. The person
who thinks deeply of his/her life will see that to have meaning his/her life must have
82 Louis C. Gasper
an end that fulfills purpose. The good life well led is the one that is shaped in every
act to advance toward that end. Of course, life is not filled with contemplation of
one’s final end. Quotidian concerns are with such things as getting to the office on
time, finishing the report, making the sale, and so on and on, day after day. But if
these concerns, these more immediate goals make sense, it is because they are
instrumental toward attaining that final end.
If we now review what we have established so far, we see that the moral
imagination has to do with character and with development toward an end. This is
very nearly a definition of ‘‘story.’’ The successful life, the good life well led, is one
that involves character and its development, and something like a plot that moves
from beginning through the middle to a purposeful end, all united and illuminated
(in the best of lives) by that final purpose. To develop our students ethically, we have
to engage this moral imagination, and there is no more natural way to do so than
with the aid of story.
4.5. Using Imaginative Literature

At the University of Dallas, instead of using a standard textbook in the Business
Ethics course, readings are assigned in imaginative literature. Lectures and selected
articles provide the skeleton framework that helps organize ethical thinking but
which does not form a kind of calculus for ethical solutions. The stories are then
discussed in a seminar-like setting in which the lessons to be learned are drawn out by
an empathetic engagement with the characters of the story.
4.5.1. An Example of a Useful Story
An example of a useful story is Power in Trust, a short story by Auchincloss (1963;

see Appendix for full citation). It is a story of the managing partner of a Manhattan
law firm who has a noble view of the proper function of a law firm, a vision toward
which he tries to lead the firm. But one partner is entirely of another view, believing
that the firm exists simply to make as much money as possible, whether the cases they
take are just causes or not, and not scrupling about tactics. Further, he is the leader
of an incipient rebellion against the leadership of the managing partner. A small
incident convinces the managing partner that he must find some way to be rid of his
maverick partner, or give up his vision for the firm. Something novel is called for, as
a member of a partnership cannot simply be fired, and can be forced out only by
agreement of at least a simple majority of the partners. The maverick partner takes a
case that has no merit and that attacks, on the grounds of mental incapacity in the
testator, the will of an industrialist who was a friend of the managing partner. The
widow inherits half the estate, the other half going to a charitable foundation
founded by the decedent. The plaintiff of record is a disreputable and troublesome
sister of the decedent. The managing partner is clear that the decedent deliberately
cut her out of his will for good reason. The maverick does not disagree and he makes
a bet with the managing partner that he will gain a settlement of at least half a million
dollars, or resign from the firm. The foundation, seeing that settling the suit for a
goodly amount of money will be cheaper than defending it, offers a settlement. The
widow is distressed because, although the foundation will bear the cost, she considers
that the suit is an attack on her late husband’s character. She appeals to her friend,
the managing partner, who coaches her to send a letter to the foundation threatening
to cut them out of her will if they settle the suit. With the settlement offer off the
table, the suit goes to trial and is dismissed. An appeal is unanimously rejected by
both the appellate and the supreme courts. The maverick partner resigns, leaving the
managing partner free to lead his firm to his noble vision.
4.5.2. An Ethical Analysis of the Story
The common response of students to this story is that the managing partner was grossly
unethical in violating the canon of the law that prohibits counsel from aiding an adversarial
party. Although the maverick is the lead counsel, the canon binds the entire firm.
But then some may say, and the instructor can encourage this, that, after all, legal
justice has been served. The complete failure of the suit in the courts shows that the
managing partner has caused justice to be worked, and the purpose of the canons of
the law is exactly that, to see to it that justice is not frustrated. The technical
philosophy applicable to this situation is taken from Aquinas’ Treatise on Law. In
brief, the law is framed for the common good, but is in its nature general; it cannot fit
with perfect correctness every situation that may arise. Accordingly, the function of
the judge is to modify or set aside the law in those instances where it will not reach
the result intended by the legislator, without vacating the law.
Efficiency is the goal of the foundation, but not of the widow, who seeks strict
justice. In this instance, the managing partner sets aside a rule (not a statute) that
would, were it applied strictly in this case, keep justice from being done. But justice
for the widow is not the intention of the managing partner, who is fixed on getting rid
of his partner. The discussion inevitably gets into the question of whether it is good
for the maverick partner to leave the firm, and whether it is good in the managing
partner to seek that result. If it is good, on the grounds that a moral cancer has to be
excised, then the fact that the managing partner was not aiming for the justice sought
by the widow does not affect the moral quality of his act. Some students will remain
unconvinced, but few, if any, are sympathetic to the maverick, and others enter into
empathy with both the widow and the managing partner. They can feel the widow’s
distress, and imagine themselves in the managing partner’s position. At the same
time, the instructor must bring forward the critical point that, granted that the
legislator would want this particular rule set aside in this particular case, that can be
done only by a judge properly authorized to do so by the legislator, a judge who is
learned in the intentions of the legislator. The question then is: by what authority
does the managing partner imagine himself entitled to be the judge who does that?
84 Louis C. Gasper
The point of the story and its consideration is not so much to decide whether one or
the other character was right or wrong, but to enter into the thinking of the characters,
into their passions and attachments and so engage the student’s moral imagination. In
this way, the student can apprehend the difficulty encountered by a person who ought to
question the soundness of his/her objective when it is driven by a motivation that may
well be simple spite. The emotional attachment shown by the managing partner, the
emotional appeal by the widow, and the crassness of his partner’s behavior, all conspire
to cloud the ethical way forward. Part of the point is to demonstrate to the student, and
get the student to feel, that there is tragedy in life, that though our ethical principles are
pretty much black and white the situations in which we find ourselves often enough make
application of those principles a study in half-lights and grays. The partner who takes the
case is explicitly engaging in a variety of extortion that happens to have no express law
against it. On the other hand, preventing that extortion requires violation of a solemn
obligation by the managing partner. No entirely happy ending is possible. The partner
who lost the case is crushed, the managing partner’s rule is consolidated, but the student
must ponder whether the result is a better character in either of those persons. The firm is
presumably now committed to the managing partner’s nobility of vision, but the student
must be brought to consider whether it is likely that the firm will behave better once its
managing partner, albeit to attain a good, has set aside a rule over which even he
admitted he had no authority. If general respect for the canons of legal practice have
been diminished by the managing partner’s act, the student must question whether the
greater good has been served, despite the prevention of this extortion and perhaps others
that would otherwise have been undertaken in the absence of the managing partner’s
making an example of the partner who tried it this time.
By enmeshing the ethical facts and issues in a context-rich narrative, the story
induces the student to ‘‘suspension of disbelief’’ and consequently an engagement of
the moral imagination, whether by attraction or revulsion to the characters and their
doings. The principles and values involved are imprinted more easily and deeply by
the story than they could be by textbooks and cases that ‘‘objectify’’ the characters
and issues and thus detach them from the student. Again, the point is not to find a
happy solution — none is available — but to bring the student to feel the difficulties
that must be overcome in ethically challenging situations, and to appreciate what is
involved in dealing with passions before he/she must himself work through a serious
ethical challenge in his/her business life, a situation he/she will not be able to detach
from as if it were a case or a textbook example.
4.6. What the Teacher must bring to the Course

This method of teaching business ethics is not without its rigors for the instructor.
The teacher has to have a good breadth of acquaintance with imaginative literature
and a certain minimum of skill and practice in reading stories for this purpose. This is
not gained quickly. Students can be guided to stimulate and exercise their
imaginations only by a teacher who brings to the course a certain amount of artistic
(literary) imagination in addition to a well-formed moral imagination.
Along with imagination, the teacher also has to help the students structure their
ethical thinking in some systematic way. Otherwise, the discussion tends to descend
rapidly to what each student ‘‘feels’’ is right. In other words, emotions and passions
can rule. Because there is an emphasis on character, the ethical ‘‘theory’’ that is best
suited to this literary approach is Aristotelian virtue.
The various theories of ethics can be divided, somewhat arbitrarily, into three
kinds. Many theories are deontological, relying on the duty to conform to right rules,
an approach developed to a high level by Kant (1964). The alternative to
deontological ethics is a teleological ethics, such as utilitarianism, that justifies acts
by the consequences they bring. Virtue ethics, fathered by Aristotle’s Nicomachean
Ethics, is a further alternative that proposes that neither rules nor consequences are
adequate in themselves to determine the goodness of an act.
Academic business ethics programs tended to follow the theory of ethics that was
dominant in the philosophy departments in the 1970s, which was Kantian. Since then,
however, virtue ethics has enjoyed a resurgence and while not dominant is very much
alive in philosophy departments. It has the advantage of focusing first on character, on
the strengths of character that enable one to attain ‘‘the good life.’’ Instruction requires
that the teacher set forth the true nature of virtue as a settled disposition to choose
rightly (calling it ‘‘a good habit’’ is misleading at best) and the foundations for the four
‘‘cardinal’’ virtues. A brief synopsis here of virtue theory may be useful.
Virtue theory proceeds on a certain anthropological understanding, that insofar as
we are concerned with influences on behavior the human being is distinguished as
being a rational and social animal. In its functioning in relation to the world, the
human being experiences pain and pleasure as an animal, needs to function in
relation to others on a continuing basis, and has the capacity for thinking and
judgment. A person’s character consists of the strengths and weaknesses that he/she
brings to dealing with these influences, which often present themselves as emotions.
To prevent being ruled by emotion, the person needs strength to deal with pain, to
act rightly when fearful. He/she must also rule his/her pleasures so that they take
their proper place in his/her life. He/she must also have the strength to control his/
her natural egoism and selfishness so as to live well in society with others, and he/she
must have the strength to have sound judgment and bring it to bear on the
practicalities of life. The English names usually given to these strengths are,
respectively, fortitude, temperance, justice, and prudence.
Applying the virtues requires a (theoretical) framework that allows analysis of the
ethical act. The one that seems best suited to a virtue orientation is that which
distinguishes three principal factors. The first is the end, the consequence that the person
intends to bring about by his/her choice. The second is the immediate concrete action
that is contemplated in the choice, and the third is the totality of all the circumstances
that may impinge on the quality of the act. This is not a deontological framework, as it
takes account of rules as a circumstance, not as the principal determinants of what is to
be done. Similarly, consequences are circumstantial, not simply dispositive of the ethical
problem. Virtue ethics is able to rise above what otherwise is a quandary between
deontological and teleological ethical theories that shuttles fruitlessly between rules and
consequences as finally determinative of what is right or wrong.
86 Louis C. Gasper
4.7. A Course using Imaginative Literature

The Business Ethics course in the Graduate School of Management at the University
of Dallas requires that the student read two literary works for every class meeting
(the meetings are 3.5 h long). Examples of some of the stories are given in the
Appendix. The student is expected to have read the selection with care before the
class begins, and a brief quiz on the content of each reading imposes a penalty for
anyone who does not meet that expectation. As a rule, each reading is discussed
separately. Each student is required to respond to the reading, identifying the
principal ethical issue(s) involved, analyzing the decisions of the characters, and
explaining why the decisions were right or wrong, and what might have been done
differently and why. This provokes a general discussion in which different ideas are
hashed out. Students are encouraged to bring to the discussion parallels in actual
situations they know of, or have experienced, that support the points they make. The
part of the instructor is to provide his/her own parallels, to guide this discussion as
needed to expose the principles that are latent in the story, and encourage an
empathy with the characters that will build the habit of empathy with others in real
life. The instructor also lectures, albeit not at great length or in great detail, on
philosophical structures or principles that can illuminate the ethical issues and enable
the student to analyze them with greater facility. Sometimes background has to be
supplied, such as requirements found in professional codes of conduct that may bear
on the story.
Every class session includes discussion of a case that the student has not been
given in advance and therefore cannot prepare. The cases present the kinds of
everyday decisions that the ordinary manager must make, not policy decisions but
the resolution of ethical dilemmas. This is useful in demonstrating principles
recognized in the stories and applying them to new and unfamiliar and indeed sudden
situations, just as a manager so often must.
A term paper is also required, focusing on a contemporary ethical challenge faced
by an executive or a company. The bare essence of the case is proposed and the
student is required to research the events, persons, and circumstances thoroughly and
carry out the kind of analysis, but with more extended attention, that is given to the
cases proposed in the class sessions. No examinations are given, as the quiz scores
and a tally of the number and quality of interventions in the discussions are adequate
grading points.
4.8. Conclusion
Instructors in business ethics ought to give serious consideration to this teaching
method. Besides stimulating the development of the moral imagination, an
additional benefit to using stories is that the student has a refreshing change of
pace from the methods used in other courses. Further, if they have not done so before —
and in a distressing proportion of cases, they have not — the students are introduced
to imaginative literature, an aspect of our culture that is critical for becoming a

genuinely educated person.
Teaching from imaginative literature does not necessarily require more effort than
do other methods, but it does require a reorientation not only from the didactic
methods suited to other subjects but also from the most common mode of thinking in
business. There is real work to be done if one has not read widely. Not every story is
suitable for teaching business ethics, so finding fresh material requires reading a good
deal more than what will be assigned. Yet the benefit of making a much greater
impact on the subsequent behavior of our students is great. Moreover, the instructor
is never injured or left without personal reward by entering more extensively and
deeply into the moral imaginations of competent writers, and into what finally is the
moral imagination of our culture and our civilization.
Acknowledgments
The author wishes to thank the anonymous referees of this chapter for their many
valuable suggestions. He is greatly indebted to them.
References
Auchincloss, L. (1963). Power in trust. In: Powers of attorney. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Bartlett, F. C. (1928). Types of imagination. Journal of Philosophical Studies, 3, 78–85.
Blish, J. (2000). A case of conscience. New York, NY: Del Rey.
Block, L. (1999). Keller’s choice. In: Hit man. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Bolt, R. (1990). A man for all seasons. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Carrier, D. (1973). Three kinds of imagination. The Journal of Philosophy, 70, 819–831.
Christie, A. (1984). The Augean stables. In: The labors of Hercules. New York, NY: Bantam
Books.
Coles, R. (1989). The call of stories. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Conrad, J. (1969). The secret sharer. In: Heart of darkness and the secret sharer. New York,
NY: Bantam Books.
Crane, S. (1977). The blue hotel. In: The portable Stephen Crane. New York, NY: Penguin
Books.
Eliot, T. S. (1952). Murder in the cathedral. In: T. S. Eliot: The complete poems and plays
1909–1950. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Faulkner, W. (1999). Lo! In: The collected stories of William Faulkner. New York, NY: Vintage
Books.
Ibsen, H. (1977). An enemy of the people. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
Ishiguro, K. (1993). Salisbury. In: The remains of the day. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Joyce, J. (2011). A mother. In: Dubliners. Hollywood, FL: Simon & Brown.
Kant, I. (1964). Groundwork of the metaphysic of morals (H. J. Paton, Trans.). New York, NY:
Harper Books.
Kesey, K. (1999). One flew over the cuckoo’s nest (Part one). New York, NY: Penguin Books.
88 Louis C. Gasper
Kind, A. (2005). Imagery and imagination. In: Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. Available at
http://www.iep.utm.edu/imagery/.
Mangan, K. (2010, September 15). Texas A&M’s bottom-line ratings of professors find that
most are cost-effective. In: The chronicle of higher education. Available at http://
chronicle.com/article/Texas-A-Ms-Bottom-Line/124451/.
McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions:
A decade of research. Ethics & Behavior, 11, 219–232.
McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2006). Academic dishonesty in graduate
business programs: Prevalence, causes, and proposed action. Academy of Management
Learning & Education, 55, 295–305.
Miller, H. (1996). Death of a salesman. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
O’Connor, F. (1971). The displaced person. In: Flannery O’Connor: The complete stories.
New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Peirce, C. (1931). The scientific imagination. In: C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), The collected
papers of Charles Sanders Peirce Vol I: Principles of philosophy. Retrieved from http://
www.textlog.de/4231.html.
Ribot, T. (1903). The heredity of imagination. In: T. Ribot (Ed.), Heredity: A psychological
study of its phenomena, laws, causes, and consequences (pp. 54–55). New York, NY:
Appleton & Co.
Shaw, G. B. (1956). Saint Joan. In: Bernard Shaw’s Saint Joan, Major Barbara, Androcles and
the lion. New York, NY: Modern Library.
Sophocles. Antigone (E. H. Plumptre, Trans., revised Louis C. Gasper) (private publication).
Tan, A. (1991). The red candle. In: The Joy Luck Club. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Wilson, S. (1955). The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Appendix. Some Works used by the Author in His Business

Ethics Course
See Blish (2000), Bolt (1990), Joyce (2011), Ibsen (1977), Sophocles (private
publication), Auchincloss (1963), Miller (1996), Block (1999), Faulkner (1999), Eliot
(1952), Shaw (1956), Ishiguro (1993), Kesey (1999, chapter 5), Wilson (1955, chapters
11–14 and 26), Christie (1984), Crane (1977), O’Connor (1971), Tan (1991), and
Conrad (1969).
Chapter 5
Fostering Integrity in Business Education:

An Analysis of Academic Administrators’
Perceptions at Spanish Business Schools
Blanca L. Delgado-Márquez, J. Alberto Aragón-Correa and
Nuria E. Hurtado-Torres
Abstract
Purpose — The central question of how and why universities decide to foster
integrity through the courses offered remains basically unexplored. Given the
importance of management students acquiring abilities related to integrity,
which can be used in the subsequent lives as managers, it is crucial to specify
ways to integrate such abilities into management education.
Methodology — We performed an exploratory empirical analysis about the
situation of Spanish business schools, with a special focus on university
administrators’ perceptions about several university groups (i.e., students,
faculty, and governmental team at the university).
Findings — We conclude that the weight of business ethics, compared to the
remaining disciplines taught at business schools, is the lowest, while the faculty
employed in this field is also marginal. Results reveal that groups perceived as
having the highest levels of integrity by both heads of department and deans do
not necessarily coincide with the university groups that are perceived as having
the greatest influence to incorporate changes in management education at
business schools.
Implications — Our results may also be useful for regulators and university
managers to understand how certain policies and measures may influence the
achievement of higher levels of integrity in management education at university
institutions.

ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1
90 Blanca L. Delgado-Márquez et al.
Originality of the chapter — The originality of this chapter relies on addressing

the central question of how and why universities decide to foster integrity
through the courses offered, which has not been previously studied.
Additionally, the analysis of academic administrators’ perceptions provides
an original viewpoint to the issue.
5.1. Introduction
Recent corporate scandals have led to a growing realization that integrity and business
are very closely connected. Integrity is of particular importance for businesses facing
employee fraud and other forms of unethical activity as well as for societies in general.
For instance, the annual cost of business crime in the United States is about a trillion
dollars (ACFE, 2008). This realization is leading employers to demand that business
schools, as providers of education and training to managers and senior executives,
train their students in ethics and social responsibility (Wankel, 2010).
Nonetheless, recent management literature has suggested that, as MBA programs
proliferate, the emphasis on integrating ethics education into graduate business
curricula is decreasing (Wankel, 2010). Our second section shows that this tendency
is also observed at any level of business programs, that is, bachelor, MBA,
specialized master, and doctoral. The term ethics refers to rules and principles that
define right and wrong conduct, and managers make their decisions based on ethical
principles (Robbins & Coulter, 2002). Thus, business education for integrity is aimed
at training students to identify what behaviors and decisions to take in their
subsequent lives as managers.
Several universities concerned with ethical and moral issues have developed
heterogeneous initiatives with respect to the inclusion of integrity into business
curricula. Some of these cases have been reported in the literature (e.g., Aquino,
Freeman, Reed, Lim, & Felps, 2009; Vega, 2007; Zgheib, 2005). Furthermore, beyond
the experiences carried out by university institutions, the accrediting body for business
schools, the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), has
updated its ethics standards for business schools (Kennedy & Horn, 2007). The Ethics
Education Task Force (EETF) has created an accreditation requirement for the
presence of ethics education within the MBA curriculum (Phillips, 2004), and business
scholars have advocated the importance of giving increased emphasis to moral
standards for their students as ‘‘a way out of the morass’’ (Locke, 2006, p. 324).
However, the central question of how and why universities decide to foster
integrity through the courses offered remains basically unexplored. Given the
importance of management students acquiring abilities related to integrity, which can
be used in the subsequent lives as managers, it is crucial to specify ways to integrate
such abilities into management education.
To achieve this aim, this chapter is divided into three different sections following
this section. The second section contains a brief theoretical review about the models
proposed in the literature aimed at fostering the implementation of higher levels of
Fostering Integrity in Business Education 91
integrity into management education. In the third section, we explore how these ideas
may be conducted at business schools to promote future integrity-based behaviors in
management students, and we review the most recent empirical literature about
integrity in management education. In the fourth section, we perform an empirical
analysis about the situation at Spanish business schools. Finally, the fifth section
provides the main conclusions drawn from the chapter.
5.2. Fostering Integrity at Business Schools: Theoretical Review

Literature analyzing the implementation of integrity in management education
includes studies on students’ engagement in some form of cheating or questionable
behavior at business schools (McCabe, Butterfield, & Treviño, 2006), ethics
standards for business schools (Kennedy & Horn, 2007), the adoption of honor
codes (McCabe, Butterfield, & Treviño, 2003), and the role of students’ perceptions
in academic misconduct (Kennedy, Bisping, Patron, & Roskelley, 2008).
There is a huge array of possibilities for incorporating integrity contents and
practices into management curricula. These possibilities are diverse and cover the
existence of one or more specific topics within a course, specialized courses, or even
specialized programs for integrity-based management. Nonetheless, while prior
works have stressed that integrity must be inherent to academic culture at business
schools (Caldwell, 2010), the perception that business schools’ curricula still do not
adequately cover ethics is widespread even among leaders of business schools
(Nicholson & DeMoss, 2009).
Recent studies have addressed how integrity and moral conduct may be
implemented in business schools (Caldwell, 2010) for future managers (i.e., current
business students) to acquire the abilities to run their businesses in accordance with
integrity principle. A study by Pfeffer (1998) claims that an incremental approach is
often less effective than a systemic and holistic effort. Pfeffer supports the idea of
integration rather than separate and isolated initiatives. This finding seems to
contradict the evidence existing at many universities, where the emphasis has been put
on the development of separate courses focusing on guidelines for ethical behavior.
5.2.1. Caldwell’s Model for Academic Integrity
Moreover, several studies have presented different initiatives to incorporate integrity

into management education (e.g., Cornelius, Wallace, & Tassabehji, 2007; McCabe
et al., 2006). Caldwell (2010) proposes a 10-step model for academic integrity, whose
underlying idea is the involvement of all the participants (i.e., students, faculty, and
administrators) in order to create an integrated and aligned culture based on integrity
(Dufresne, 2004). The first step consists of the ‘‘articulation of a clear purpose and
mission,’’ that is, establishing clear objectives and commitment for an academic
integrity program, as foundations of a successful ethics initiative (Procario-Foley &

Bean, 2002).
The second step involves the ‘‘orientation and training of faculty.’’ Caldwell
proposes that, since faculty are trained on and familiar with the academic research
literature, faculty training may be mostly carried out through copies of articles,
PowerPoint summaries, and well-crafted written materials. Later, the information
contained in such documents may be discussed in a formal meeting. The five
fundamental values of academic integrity, that is, honesty, trust, fairness, respect,
and responsibility, must be incorporated into the creation of a successful program to
promote a culture that discourages academic dishonesty (Caldwell, 2010, p. 5).
‘‘Explanation and clarification of current policies’’ constitutes the third step.
Students are often confused about what constitutes unethical behavior. Thus, faculty
and administrators play a key role in clarifying an ethics program to students, as well
as in explaining how students’ behavior will be monitored. Kennedy et al. (2008) also
confirm the importance of being clear with students about what constitutes
inappropriate conduct, and establishing control systems in the classroom that
demonstrate that inappropriate conduct would be discovered and penalized.
The fourth step, ‘‘implementation of a realistic process for addressing violations,’’
implies that both an academic honesty policy and an enforcement process are crucial
for discouraging academic dishonesty as well as to punish it when it occurs.
The fifth step is called ‘‘attainment of student ownership.’’ Since many
undergraduate and graduate business programs involve international students
having different attitudes than home students about cheating (Flynn, 2003), it is
important that university institutions clearly specify what they expect from academic
integrity, and how these international students should adjust to this ethical code.
‘‘Empowerment of students in education and enforcement’’ reflects the sixth step
of the model proposed by Caldwell (2010). At this stage, several aspects are useful for
educating students and reinforcing academic integrity policies, such as the existence
of honor codes, students’ identification with a university’s institutions, and belonging
to a moral community.
The seventh step is the ‘‘maintenance of dialogue with stakeholders.’’ It is
necessary to achieve a shared commitment from faculty, administrator, business
community, and students in order to keep an effective integrity program (Havnes,
2004; Leonard & LaBrasseur, 2008).
The eighth step comprises the ‘‘refinement of the ethics curriculum.’’ Despite a
great debate against, a growing body of evidence supports the idea that moral
awareness can be learned and ethical decision making can be improved by training in
business ethics (Ritter, 2006). Caldwell (2010) stresses the idea that business curricula
need to be constantly updated, and grounded in the application of moral principles in
order to have an impact on students’ behavior (Treviño & McCabe, 1994).
The ninth step relies on ‘‘monitored enforcement and documentation of results.’’
Several scholars have pointed out this step as crucial for an effective implementation
and follow-through (Kotter, 1996; Pfeffer, 1998). Many students blame faculty for
failing to monitor obvious cheating and for failing to penalize students who cheat
(Levy & Rakovski, 2006).
Finally, the last step consists of an ‘‘evaluation of outcomes and communication

of results’’. Both elements constitute important aspects to develop a sustainable
culture. Once these results are communicated to faculty, students, and adminis-
trators, these groups can carry out additional efforts to refine the integrity program
implemented at the institution.
Despite its great degree of complexity, it is important to note that this model does
not necessarily have to be fully implemented, but is rather intended to serve for each
university institution to select the elements of the model that better apply to its
circumstances.
After having reviewed the most recent theoretical proposals, in the next section we
explore some initiatives implemented to foster integrity in business education.
5.3. Implementing Integrity-Based Experiences at Business Schools:

Empirical Review
Business schools are increasingly leading the incorporation of integrity-related topics

into management education, addressing both theoretical and pedagogical perspec-
tives. A traditional business program, that is, bachelor, master, specialized master, or
doctoral, is usually focused on training students about how to maximize profits in
their future businesses. Thus, these courses pay extensive attention to areas such as
finance, accounting, and economic theory. As a consequence, aspects of ethics and
integrity topics are left behind in some sense, and just occupy a marginal part of the
training.
5.3.1. Business Ethics at Business Schools: Number of Programs and Full-Time Faculty
Several schools have already implemented business programs on business ethics all
over the world, though the presence of this field is still far from reaching the levels of
other disciplines more traditional within management. To illustrate our arguments,
Table 5.1 gathers the percentage of schools offering at least one degree program in
each field/discipline all over the world for the year 2008/2009, with data extracted
from AACSB International. While many international business, corporate govern-
ance, and accounting and accountability courses include ethics as part of their
course, we can perceive the limited number of ethics programs. Among the four
categories of business programs, that is, bachelor, MBA, specialized master, and
doctoral, we observe that the field of business ethics is given less importance than
other aspects of the business curriculum. Moreover, these results can be analyzed by
types of business program. First, in the category of bachelor program, business
schools provide no bachelor degree on business ethics for the year 2008/2009.
Second, just 1% out of the 604 business schools reporting MBA programs is devoted
to business ethics, while other fields such as general business or management receive
attention from 69.5% and 34.9% of the business schools, respectively. Third, in the
Table 5.1: Percentage of business schools offering at least one degree program in
each field/discipline (2008/2009).
Field/discipline Specialized
Bachelor’s MBA Master’s Doctoral
Accounting 78.3 14.9 65.0 33.9

Behavioral science/organizational 0.8 2.0 2.7 14.8
behavior
Business communication 1.3 0.5 1.7 0.0
Business education 4.1 0.3 1.5 0.0
Business ethics 0 1.0 0.2 0.4
Business law/legal environment 4.1 2.3 1.7 0.0
Computer information systems (CIS)/ 53.1 18.2 27.9 27.1
management information systems (MIS)
E-business (includes e-commerce) 3.8 3.6 2.4 0.4
Economics/managerial economics 43.9 4.5 18.0 21.2
Entrepreneurship/small business 21.1 10.4 3.9 2.1
administration
Finance (includes banking) 69.8 24.5 35.4 39.8
General business 50.4 69.5 10.9 22.9
Health services/hospital administration 2.0 11.3 5.3 0.0
Hotel/restaurant/tourism 6.8 1.5 3.2 0.8
Human resource management (includes 24.0 8.3 14.8 5.5
personnel and industry/labor relations)
Insurance 7.0 1.0 1.5 2.1
International business 39.5 20.2 13.3 5.9
Management 68.2 34.9 21.4 36.0
Marketing 70.3 19.9 18.4 33.9
Operations research 0.8 1.0 1.5 4.2
Production/operations management 14.9 6.5 4.6 15.3
Public administration 1.2 1.5 3.4 1.3
Quantitative methods 1.2 1.0 32 4.2
Real estate 10.0 4.1 5.6 2.5
Statistics 1.7 0.2 2.7 3.0
Strategic management 1.2 6.0 2.2 12.7
Supply chain management/ 10.9 6.0 7.8 4.7
transportation/logistics
Taxation 0.7 2.3 15.5 0.0
Other 27.0 17.9 25.7 19.5
Number of schools reporting 603 604 412 236
Source: Self-elaboration from AACSB International.
category of specialized masters, business ethics has the lowest representation (0.2%).
Finally, only 0.4% of the business schools offer a doctoral program in business
ethics. By adding all these results, we can conclude that, at an aggregate level,
business ethics constitutes the least represented field in business school programs
during the academic course 2008/2009.
Beyond analyzing the prevalence of programs focused on business ethics at
business schools, it is also important to observe the full-time faculty employed in the
field of business ethics at business schools during the year 2009/2010. Table 5.2
reports this information, elaborated with data from the Salary Survey carried out at
AACSB International. The second and third columns gather the data for the United
States, while the fourth and fifth columns represent the information for the rest of the
world. Several conclusions can be drawn. First, while in Table 5.1 we saw that
business ethics programs are the least represented, Table 5.2 shows that for the
United States, the number of full-time faculty in this field (112) is greater than in
other fields such as business education (77), e-business (30), health services/hospital
administration (89), and public administration (93). Second, the same relationship is
drawn for the rest of the world but with greater intensity, since the number of
full-time equivalents in business ethics (29) surpasses the number of full-time faculty
in several other areas such as business communication (28), business education (2),
e-business (17), health services/hospital administration (4), hotel/restaurant/tourism
(21), insurance (10), public administration (19), real estate (17), and taxation (24).
Third, if we look at the percentages comparison, then twice the number of full-time
faculty is devoted to business ethics in the rest of the world as compared to the
United States.
5.3.2. Teaching of Business Ethics: Alternatives Proposed in the Literature
The teaching of business ethics has been addressed by a variety of studies (Bean &
Bernardi, 2007; Beauvais, Desplaces, Melchar, & Bosco, 2007; Gonin, 2007; Poff,
2007), with scholars (Boyle, 2007) and practitioners (Krehmeyer, 2007) debating the
most effective approach to influencing behaviors about moral conduct.
Vega (2007) states that one solution has been to put an ethical component in each
business course as suggested by the AACSB. However, these courses are taught by
faculty who may themselves be untutored in ethical frameworks and philosophical
foundations (p. 650), which seems a potentially weak method of getting the message
across to undergraduate business students (Hartman & Hartman, 2004). Henceforth,
she proposes the appropriateness of metaprojects as useful means to train business
students in the field of ethics.
Recent analyses have also addressed the extent of use of ethics in managerial
ethical decision making through a classroom laboratory experiment developed at the
American University of Beirut (Zgheib, 2005). Zgheib distinguishes among the three
principles of ethics, that is, utility, morality, and justice. The author concludes that
morality is the overriding ethical principle used in managerial decision making,
Table 5.2: Full-time business faculty by field/discipline (2009/2010).
Field/discipline United States Rest of the world

Number Percentage Number Percentage
Accounting 4626 16.7 401 11.7

Behavioral science/organizational 810 2.9 136 4.0
behavior
Business communication 379 1.4 28 0.8
Business education 77 0.3 2 0.1
Business ethics 112 0.4 29 0.8
Business law/legal environment 333 3.0 72 2.1
Computer information systems (CIS)/ 2552 9.2 185 5.4
management information systems
(MIS)
E-business (including e-commerce) 30 0.1 17 0.5
Economics/managerial economics 2668 9.6 386 11.3
Entrepreneurship/small business 434 1.6 52 1.5
administration
Finance (includes banking) 3669 13.3 383 11.1
General business 148 0.5 75 2.2
Health services/hospital administration 89 0.3 4 0.1
Hotel/restaurant/tourism 170 0.6 21 0.6
Human resource management 541 2.0 151 4.4
(includes personnel and industry/
labor relations)
Insurance 131 0.5 10 0.3
International business 347 1.3 60 1.7
Management 2713 9.8 316 9.2
Marketing 3597 13.0 429 12.5
Operations research 169 0.7 67 2.0
Production/operations management 1.061 3.8 115 3.3
Public administration 93 0.3 19 0.6
Quantitative methods 382 1.4 61 1.8
Real estate 178 0.6 17 0.5
Statistics 317 1.1 63 1.8
Strategic management 887 3.2 184 5.4
Supply chain management/ 309 1.1 44 1.3
transportation/logistics
Taxation 182 0.7 24 0.7
Other 172 0.6 79 2.3
Source: Self-elaboration from AACSB International — Salary Survey.
business students still believe in the justice system despite the weakness of the
country’s law, and utility is the least used principle in decision making.
Aquino et al. (2009) introduce a social-cognitive model of moral behavior for
examining the joint influence of situational factors and the centrality of moral
identity on moral intentions and behaviors. The study shows that the presence of a
financial incentive for performing well during a negotiation increased the accessibility of
achievement-oriented facets of identity and decreased the accessibility of moral identity,
especially for those for whom moral identity had relatively higher centrality.
Consequently, intentions to lie increased (p. 132).
Finally, in more general terms, Wankel (2010) proposes seven practical rules to
help faculty readjust students’ mindsets and behavioral habits: (1) ‘‘know yourself,’’
(2) ‘‘start small,’’ (3) ‘‘have an escape plan,’’ (4) ‘‘send strong signals,’’ (5) ‘‘recognize
the other person’s dilemma,’’ (6) ‘‘look at roles as well as people,’’ and finally
(7) ‘‘remain vigilant and always question.’’ These rules are focused on helping
students evaluate whether the counterpart is worthy of trust and displaying
trustworthy behaviors, as foundations of future successful businesses.
While this section shows an investigation about how and why universities decide to
promote integrity through the courses, the following section provides an empirical
analysis, based on two samples of Spanish academic administrators (i.e., deans and
heads of department), about how universities decide.
5.4. Integrity at Spanish Business Schools: Academic Administrators’

Perceptions
The European Higher Education Area (EHEA) is aimed at achieving a homogeneous

system of university institutions. Thus, the so-called Bologna process constitutes an
opportunity for higher education institutions to redefine and update university
curricula, including aspects of business ethics as key knowledge within student
education. The EHEA will involve substantial changes in the syllabuses, the
emergence, deletions, and/or fusion of careers, as well as conceptual and
methodological reformulations. In this context, business schools are called to create
a comprehensive cultural change to implement successfully an effective ethics
program.
Prior studies have also stressed that integrity must be inherent to academic culture
at business schools (Caldwell, 2010), and to achieve that aim in business curricula,
university departments and deans play a key role. The EETF stresses the importance
of ethical culture, conduct, and climate of business schools to students’ tacit
awareness and understanding of the importance and consequences of ethical
behavior (Cornelius et al., 2007). Creating an organizational culture that is perceived
as ethical and congruent requires communicating values in a clear manner and
modeling behavior by organizational leaders (Schein, 2003). More specifically, we
agree with Schein (2003), who claimed that organizations are most effective in
achieving results when their cultures reflect alignment between the actions, espoused
beliefs, and core assumptions of leaders. For this reason, in this section we investigate
management educators’ perceptions about several university groups.
Some prior studies have dealt with the influence of perceptions on the integration
of an ethics program (e.g., McCabe et al., 2006; McCabe & Treviño, 1993; McCabe,
Treviño, & Butterfield, 2002; Zimny, Robertson, & Bartoszek, 2008). For instance,
early research by McCabe and Treviño (1993) found that several factors associated
with student perception were important in affecting the likelihood of students
engaging in academic dishonesty, including student perceptions about (1) peer
behavior, (2) faculty understanding and acceptance of policies about academic
integrity, (3) the overall effectiveness of these policies, and (4) the severity of the
penalties imposed on those who cheated.
Why the focus on educators’ perceptions about integrity? While the theoretical
background addresses how and why universities decide to foster integrity through the
courses, the empirical section focuses on how universities decide about:
Which groups are interested in fostering integrity, and

Which groups have influence on fostering integrity.
We will illustrate our arguments by showing data from our own surveys of heads
of department and deans of university schools, both with management teaching
assignments. It is important to note that department managers in Spain are largely
responsible for the specific syllabus and orientation of the courses, whereas other
administrators (e.g., deans) play a broader role, coordinating departments and
school management, and serve as symbolic representatives. Our analysis provides
interesting insights about two main aspects. First, we address department heads’ and
deans’ perceptions about the levels of integrity in each university group (i.e., faculty,
students, and governmental team at the university). Second, we additionally
investigate the influence of ability.
5.4.1. Heads of Department’s Perceptions
The sample was obtained by means of a written questionnaire sent on three occasions
by both regular mail and by email to the heads of the departments with the option to
reply online or on paper. The total population that received the questionnaire
comprised 224 heads of department from Spanish universities (a response rate of
42.41% of department heads surveyed). This rate of response can be considered as
highly satisfactory in comparison with the usual response rates in these studies.
Furthermore, no significant differences were found in the size of the universities that
responded to the questionnaire. Additionally, no significant differences were found in
the replies to the questionnaire in the first round in relation to the third round, or
between online or postal replies. Specifically, we consider the following university
groups for the sample of department heads: faculty, students, and the governmental
team at the university.
5.4.1.1. Heads of department’s perceptions about integrity levels of university

groups Figure 5.1 represents the heads of department’s average perceptions about
integrity levels of university groups. Integrity involves an agent’s perception that
another agent adheres to a set of principles that the former finds acceptable (Mayer,
Davis, & Schoorman, 1995). To measure integrity, participants surveyed were asked
to assess (by means of a Likert scale from 0 to 6) the interest of each of the following
groups in the introduction or strengthening of new topics, contents, and practices in
the courses. We can observe that the governmental team at the university is perceived
as having the highest level of integrity. In contrast, heads of department perceive
students as the university group with the lowest level of integrity. Additionally,
several tests were conducted to prove the statistical significance of these differences.
5.4.1.2. Heads of department’s perceptions about ability levels of university

groups Figure 5.2 gathers the heads of department’s average perceptions about
ability levels of university groups. Ability is that group of skills, competencies, and
characteristics that enables a party to have influence within some specific domain
(Mayer et al., 1995). Hence, in order to measure ability, participants were asked to assess
(by means of a Likert scale from 0 to 6) the importance of each of the three groups in the
decision-making processes of their department. It is interesting to note that, contrary to
what was previously mentioned in Figure 5.1, students are perceived as having the
lowest level of ability to effectively collaborate in the integration of new contents.
Furthermore, faculty is highly ranked by heads of department, which means that this
university group is perceived as owing the highest influential power to incorporate new
content in business curricula. Moreover, these differences are statistically significant, as
reported by several tests conducted though not included in the chapter.
Heads of departments perceptions (Likert scale from 0 to 6)
0
Faculty Students Governmental team at the University
University groups
Figure 5.1: Heads of department’s average perceptions about integrity levels of

university groups
Heads of department’s perceptions (Likert scale from 0 to 6)

6
0
University groups
Figure 5.2: Heads of department’s average perceptions about ability levels of

university groups
5.4.2. Deans’ Perceptions
We sent a written questionnaire to 164 deans of business schools and engineering

education schools in 69 Spanish universities in order to learn their perceptions about
several university groups. The sample was obtained by means of a written
questionnaire sent on three occasions by both regular mail and email to the heads
of the department, with the option to reply online or on paper. The final sample
comprised 74 deans of 46 different universities, all of them with management
teaching assignments. In relation to deans, the same university groups are explored:
faculty, students, and governmental team at the university.
5.4.2.1. Deans’ perceptions about integrity levels of university groups To

complement the perceptions of department heads, we now turn to explore deans’
perceptions about integrity levels of university group. Figure 5.3 contains such
information. In a scale ranging from 0 to 6, two groups — faculty and governmental
team at the university — are rated with a score of 4. In other words, deans perceive
such university groups as willing to cooperate effectively in the integration of new
practices at business schools. Several tests were conducted to prove the statistical
significance of these differences.
5.4.2.2. Deans’ perceptions about ability levels of university groups Finally,

Figure 5.4 represents deans’ average perceptions in relation to ability levels of
university groups. In this case, the governmental team at the university is perceived
by deans as being the most influential, in terms of ability, to effectively implement the
integration of new practices at business schools, while students receive the lowest
score. Finally, some tests show the statistical significance of these differences.
6
Deans average perceptions (Likert scale from 0 to 6)
0
University groups
Figure 5.3: Deans’ average perceptions about integrity levels of university groups
6
Deans average perceptions (Likert scale from 0 to 6)
0
University groups
Figure 5.4: Deans’ average perceptions about ability levels of university groups
5.5. Conclusions
Management education for integrity constitutes a crucial tool for alleviating the
severe economic consequences of business fraud and corruption for society. Through
mass media, the public has consistently learned about the far-reaching effects of
corporate scandal in organizations such as Enron, Adelphia Communications,
WorldCom, and Tyco International (cf., Merritt, 2004). In this context, business
schools have been signaled as sharing the blame for certain corporate scandals
(Ghoshal, 2003).
Furthermore, the benefits of enhanced intellectual capital can be viewed on both a
micro and a macro level with competitive advantage, as advocated by the resource-
based view of the firm, and improved economic growth (Ginzberg & Vojta, 1981)
being prominent examples.
In this chapter we investigate university administrators’ perceptions. After a
theoretical review about the integration of ethics management at business schools, we
explore the current situation of this field all over the world. We conclude that the
weight of business ethics, compared to the remaining disciplines taught at business
schools, is the lowest, while the faculty employed in this field is also marginal.
Finally, we performed an exploratory empirical analysis about the situation of
Spanish business schools, with a special focus on university administrators’
perceptions about several university groups (i.e., students, faculty, and governmental
team at the university). Results reveal that groups perceived as having the highest
levels of integrity by both heads of department and deans do not necessarily coincide
with the university groups that are perceived as having the greatest influence to
incorporate changes in management education at business schools. Moreover,
several tests conducted additionally, though not included in the chapter, prove the
significance of the differences observed.
Finally, our results may also be useful for regulators and university managers to
understand how certain policies and measures may influence the achievement of
higher levels of integrity in management education at university institutions.
Acknowledgments
This research has been partially funded by grants from the Spanish Ministry of
Education and Science through the projects ECO2010-20483 and the Andalusia
Regional Government (Excellence Research Project P08-SEJ-0457 and Excellence
Research Project SEJ-6765).
References
Aquino, K., Freeman, D., Reed, A., Lim, V. K. G., & Felps, W. (2009). Testing a social-
cognitive model of moral behavior: The interactive influence of situations and moral identity
centrality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(1), 123–141.
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE). (2008). Report to the nations on
occupational fraud and abuse. Available at http://www.acfe.com/rttn/2010-rttn.asp.
Bean, D. F., & Bernardi, R. A. (2007). Ethics education in our colleges and universities: A
positive role for accounting practitioners. Journal of Academic Ethics, 5(1), 59–76.
Beauvais, L. L., Desplaces, D. E., Melchar, D. E., & Bosco, S. M. (2007). Business faculty
perceptions and actions regarding ethics education. Journal of Academic Ethics, 5(1), 121–136.
Boyle, M. E. (2007). Learning to neighbor? Service-learning in context. Journal of Academic

Ethics, 5(1), 85–104.
Caldwell, C. (2010). A ten-step model for academic integrity: A positive approach for business
schools. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 1–13.
Cornelius, N., Wallace, J., & Tassabehji, R. (2007). An analysis of corporate social responsibility,
corporate identity and ethics teaching in business schools. Journal of Business Ethics, 76, 117–135.
Dufresne, R. L. (2004). An action learning perspective on effective implementation of
academic honor codes. Group & Organization Management, 29(2), 201–218.
Flynn, R. S. (2003). Confronting academic dishonesty in the accounting classroom: A cultural
experience? Accounting Education, 12(4), 437–439.
Ghoshal, S. (2003, July 18). Business schools share the blame for Enron. Financial Times.
Ginzberg, E., & Vojta, G. (1981). The service sector of the U.S. economy. Scientific American,
244, 48–55.
Gonin, M. (2007). Business research, self-fulfilling prophecy, and the inherent responsibility of
scholars. Journal of Academic Ethics, 5(1), 33–58.
Hartman, L. P., & Hartman, E. M. (2004). How to teach ethics: Assumptions and arguments.
Journal of Business Ethics, 1(2), 165–212.
Havnes, A. (2004). Examination and learning: An activity-theoretical analysis of the
relationship between assessment and education practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 29(2), 159–176.
Kennedy, M. J., & Horn, L. C. (2007). Thoughts on ethics education in the business school
environment: An interview with Dr. Jerry Trapnell, AACSB. Journal of Academic Ethics,
5(1), 77–84.
Kennedy, P., Bisping, T. O., Patron, H., & Roskelley, K. (2008). Modelling academic
dishonesty: The role of student perceptions and misconduct type. Journal of Economic
Education, 39(1), 4–21.
Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Krehmeyer, D. (2007, October 26). Teaching business ethics: A critical need. Business Week
Online, p. 4.
Leonard, V., & LaBrasseur, R. (2008). Individual assignments and academic dishonesty —
Exploring the learning conundrum. Australian Educational Researcher, 35(1), 37–56.
Levy, E. S., & Rakovski, C. C. (2006). A zero tolerance professor and student registration
choices. Research in Higher Education, 47(6), 735–754.
Locke, E. A. (2006). Business ethics: A way out of the morass. Academy of Management
Learning & Education, 5(3), 324–332.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of
organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.
McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D., & Treviño, L. K. (2003). Faculty and academic integrity:
The influence of current honor codes and past honor code experiences. Research in Higher
Education, 44(3), 367–385.
McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Academic dishonesty in graduate
business programs: Prevalence, causes, and proposed action. Academy of Management
McCabe, D. L., & Treviño, L. K. (1993). Academic dishonesty: Honor codes and other
contextual influences. The Journal of Higher Education, 64(5), 522–538.
McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2002). Honor codes and other contextual
influences on academic integrity: A replication and extension to modified honor code
settings. Research in Higher Education, 43(3), 357–378.
Merritt, J. (2004, October 18). Welcome to ethics 101. Businessweek. Available at http://
www.businessweek.com/bschools/04/partner/b3904435.htm.
Nicholson, C. Y., & DeMoss, M. (2009). Teaching ethics and social responsibility: An
evaluation of undergraduate business education at the discipline level. Journal of Education
for Business, 84(4), 213–218.
Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation: Building profits by putting people first. Boston: Harvard
Business School Press.
Phillips, S. M. (Chair). (2004). Ethics education in business schools. Report of the Ethics
Education Task Force to AACSB International Board of Directors, St. Louis, MO.
Poff, D. C. (2007). Duties owed in serving students: The importance of teaching moral
reasoning and theories of ethical leadership in educating business students. Journal of
Academic Ethics, 5(1), 25–32.
Procario-Foley, E. G., & Bean, D. F. (2002). Institutions of higher education: Cornerstones in
building ethical organizations. Teaching Business Ethics, 6, 101–116.
Ritter, B. (2006). Can business ethics be trained? A study of the ethical decision-making
process in business students. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(2), 153–164.
Robbins, S. P., & Coulter, M. (Eds). (2002). Management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Schein, E. H. (2003). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Treviño, L. K., & McCabe, D. (1994). Meta-learning about business ethics: Building
honorable business school communities. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(6), 405–416.
Vega, G. (2007). Teaching business ethics through service learning metaprojects. Journal of
Management Education, 31(5), 647–678.
Wankel, C. (2010). Orienting business students to navigate the shoals of corruption in practice.
In: A. Stachowicz-Stanusch (Ed.), Organizational immunity to corruption: Building theoretical
and research foundations (pp. 53–68). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Zgheib, P. W. (2005). Managerial ethics: An empirical study of business students in the
American University of Beirut. Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 69–78.
Zimny, S. T., Robertson, D. U., & Bartoszek, T. (2008). Academic and personal dishonesty in
college students. North American Journal of Psychology, 10(2), 291–312.
PART III
VALUES AS PATHWAYS TO
ETHICAL ACTION
Chapter 6
Teaching ‘‘How’’ — Not ‘‘Whether’’ — to

Manage with Integrity: Undergraduate and
MBA Applications of the ‘‘Giving Voice to
Values’’ Curriculum
Christopher P. Adkins, Mary C. Gentile, Cynthia Ingols and Sˇpela Trefalt
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of the chapter is to introduce educators to the Giving
Voice to Values (GVV) approach to values-driven leadership development and
to illustrate its flexibility and usefulness in several business education contexts.
Methodology/approach – The chapter’s introduction provides a rationale for
and general description of the GVV curriculum. GVV’s contributions to
traditional Business Ethics education are differentiated and explained. The
current use and availability of the curriculum are briefly outlined.
Two case examples of GVV’s use follow, one designed for undergraduate
business students and another for MBA students. Through these cases, readers
see the curriculum’s key aspects: the foundational frameworks; the use of self-
assessment; and the scripting exercises. They see how the curriculum can be
adapted for a single course as well as used as a framework for integration
across the core curriculum. Finally they see how the GVV design can be
adapted for assessment of learning initiatives.
Social implications – The GVV curriculum holds the promise of helping
business students to not only know what is right but also learn and importantly
practice how to get it done in their business careers.
Originality/value of paper – The chapter’s contribution is to provide concrete
examples of two school’s multi-year experiences using the GVV curriculum, at
both undergraduate and graduate levels, and an assessment of its impacts, both

ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1
108 Christopher P. Adkins et al.
from faculty perspectives and in terms of student assessment. The GVV

curriculum is expanding rapidly around the world and there is a need for such
concrete and informative accounts of how it has been implemented and to what
effect.
Can management educators teach future business practitioners and leaders to have
integrity? That question remains with the psychologists and the philosophers — and
ultimately the historians. However, the premise of the Giving Voice to Values (GVV)
pedagogy and curriculum (GVV) is that educators can, in fact, teach students how to
act with integrity and thereby empower receptive and open students to do so more
confidently, more effectively, and more often. Thus, GVV is not about ‘‘fixing’’
students who do not want to behave in accordance with their values. Rather it is
about providing the skills, the tools, the examples, and the actual opportunity to
practice voicing and enacting values for those who would like to do so. And as
discussed below, GVV is about creating a normative context where these students do
not feel alone with this positive impulse.
GVV also starts from the premise that the often-encountered faculty reluctance to
‘‘teach business ethics’’ does not reflect a lack of commitment to train responsible
business managers and leaders. Rather this reluctance often stems from an
understandable discomfort with asserting a definitive knowledge of right and wrong
on the part of individual educators and the awareness that regardless of what is
taught in the classroom, students are likely to encounter ethical transgressions and
pressures in their professional careers. Faculty themselves want to behave with
integrity in their teaching and to reflect reality in their classrooms.
So with these two premises — an intent to teach ethical action as opposed to the
intent to preach to or ‘‘fix’’ students and a respect for the faculty’s commitment to
honesty in the classroom — GVV is organized around a different set of assumptions
and questions than the typical business ethics curriculum.
Rather than asking ‘‘What is the ‘right’ thing to do in a particular situation?’’ — a
question that too often leads students to practice crafting rationalizations for
questionable actions or to generate self-defeating portraits of a business context
inhospitable to ethical action — GVV poses the questions: ‘‘What if you knew what
you believed was ‘right’? How would you get it done? What would you say, to whom,
in what sequence? What information and analysis would you need to build your most
effective case? What allies could you find or develop to rely upon?’’
Rather than focusing on those thorny and complex ethical dilemmas — the ones
where reasonable and intelligent individuals of good will may legitimately disagree —
GVV focuses on the conflicts where the ethics and even the legality of the situation
are much clearer, the kind of situation where many, if not most, would agree on the
‘‘right’’ course of action. GVV does this not to avoid the complexity but rather
because the exclusive focus on those so-called right versus right or wrong versus
wrong sorts of dilemmas too often leads to a sense that any choice is just as good or
bad as any other. And even more importantly, a look at the kinds of negative press
Giving Voice to Values 109
and scandal that has plagued the business arena and that has led to a measurable
decline in public trust of corporations and the markets reveals that the most
troubling behaviors tend to be those more clear-cut examples: that is, the cases of
clear dishonesty with investors and consumers and regulators, the cases of fraud,
illegality, and outright abuse. On the contrary, the more ambiguous questions about
whether a new technology is better or worse for the environment or whether out-
sourced employment is necessarily exploitative toward foreign workers or unfair to
domestic ones, while difficult and important, raise questions that intelligent people of
good will may legitimately disagree upon, and therefore less likely to fuel the
fundamental cynicism we have seen in recent years.
By shifting the question asked and the kind of situation addressed, as explained
above, GVV creates space in the classroom to focus on crafting action plans and
practicing — literally ‘‘pre-scripting’’ — how students can respond when they
encounter all too frequent workplace value conflicts and the pressures to act in ways
they know are unethical. The faculty member is free to step over the philosophical
debates about utilitarianism versus deontology and instead to focus on the realm of
rehearsal for action and peer coaching. This is not to say that the philosophical debates
are not important — they unquestionably are — but they are precisely the debates that
faculty trained in accounting or marketing or finance or operations are usually less
comfortable moderating, generating the often bemoaned barriers to integrating ethical
issues into the core business curriculum. They are the conversations that appropriately
belong in the business ethics classroom. The GVV approach allows faculty to moderate
a discussion of how students might generate persuasive arguments to address values
conflicts, using the language of their relevant function (e.g., accounting, finance, and
marketing), as opposed to requiring business function faculty to field a debate about
‘‘what is right’’ that draws on Aristotle or John Rawls or Kant.
These basic premises about where to focus, what is possible in the business
classroom, and what will make the greatest impact on students led to the
development of the GVV approach to values-driven leadership development. The
curriculum itself builds on interviews and conversations with managers at all levels,
from recent graduates to senior executives, about times when they did find ways to
effectively voice their values. GVV then draws on management and social psychology
research on decision-making biases, heuristics and framing tendencies, to generate a
set of tools and approaches to help students craft effective and persuasive arguments
to counter the common ‘‘reasons and rationalizations’’ for unethical choices. It is
designed for integration across the core curriculum, although it is useful in the
business ethics course context as well and it builds upon the foundations set there.
The GVV curriculum is distinguished by several features:
A focus on how a manager raises values-based issues in an effective manner —

what he/she needs to do to be heard and how to correct an existing course of action
when necessary.
An emphasis on positive examples of times when people have found ways to voice
and thereby implement their values in the workplace.
The importance of self-assessment and a focus on individual strengths when looking

for a way to align one’s individual sense of purpose and that of the organization.
Opportunities to construct and practice responses to frequently heard reasons and
rationales for not acting on one’s values.
Practice in providing peer feedback and coaching.
GVV shifts the classroom focus from ethical debate to pre-scripting and practicing
responses to predictable values conflicts future managers are likely to encounter, and
it helps build an enabling normative context by means of the opportunity for peer-
coaching to refine and enhance student scripts and implementation plans. Education
for integrity is no longer about ‘‘thou shalt not’’ but rather about ‘‘can do,’’
appealing to the pragmatic, creative, and action-oriented business student. And
through their rehearsal for values-based action, students build the muscle memory to
make voicing and enacting their values, clearly, skillfully, and effectively, more of a
default position.
With venture support from The Aspen Institute as incubator and, along with Yale
School of Management, founding partner for GVV, and now housed at and funded
by Babson College, GVV currently includes hundreds of pages of cases, exercises,
readings, and teaching plans all available for free to educators (www.Giving
VoiceToValues.org). The innovative approach has been piloted on six continents at
well over 125 business schools and other organizations. Although developed for use
in MBA programs, increasingly it is being used in undergraduate and executive
programs and is being reviewed and adapted for use in schools of engineering and
health-related fields and liberal arts, as well as businesses themselves and NGOs.
Custom collections of GVV curricula are being developed to feature region-specific
(e.g., India and China) and topic- or function-specific (e.g., sustainability, social
entrepreneurship, and marketing) materials.
In the following pages, two examples of GVV implementation are discussed in
detail, illustrating how this pedagogy can be used at both the undergraduate and the
graduate levels and sharing some of the different applications and emphases that
individual faculty and schools have taken.
At The College of William & Mary, GVV is a unique tool for working with
undergraduate business students, helping them to craft an individual commitment
and competence for values-driven behavior at the very start of their careers. Here,
GVV is used in the foundational and introductory business course for all majors,
setting the stage, establishing a tone and affirming a commitment to values-driven
management at the outset of their studies. The William & Mary example illustrates
that the GVV approach works not only with individuals who already have had some
significant organizational experience but also with students who are new to
management. Given their youth and relative lack of experience, there is a particular
emphasis upon two of the core principles of GVV — ‘‘self-knowledge and alignment’’
and individual ‘‘choice’’ — in the approach taken with these undergraduates. To this
end, the adaptation of two unique GVV exercises — ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ and
‘‘Framing a Life Story’’ — is described below. The relevance of this approach to
recent research is also noted.
At Simmons School of Management, GVV became a mechanism for implement-

ing the school’s MBA mission to ‘‘educate women for power and principled
leadership.’’ They have used GVV as a tool for delivering on the ‘‘holy grail’’ of
values-driven leadership development: that is, integration across the curriculum.
They accomplish this by introducing the ‘‘Ways of Thinking about Our Values in the
Workplace’’1 (Gentile, 2010a) and the process of ‘‘pre-scripting’’ for values conflicts
at various pivotal moments across the core curriculum. The faculty at Simmons also
found GVV to be a mechanism for addressing yet another thorny challenge of
business ethics education, that of assessment, and this process is described below as
well.
The two cases also demonstrate that the GVV curriculum is designed flexibly so
that it may be adopted and used by an individual faculty member in a single class
session or module within his or her course, required or elective (as in the College of
William & Mary example); it may serve as the focus of a dedicated required or
elective course;2 or it may be integrated across the entire curriculum (as in the
Simmons example). Also as illustrated, faculty may use the existing GVV cases and
exercises that are all available for free to educators, or they may adapt the approach
for use with their own existing cases and course materials (as in the case of the
Simmons Accounting course example).
Finally, the following illustrations demonstrate that the GVV curriculum appeals
to the creativity and action-orientation of business students and provides an
opportunity to build a (formal and/or informal) peer network for finding and
practicing ways to be their best selves in their professional careers. Although a
relatively new initiative, several faculty are designing both qualitative and
quantitative studies to better understand its impacts, and the rapid spread of the
curriculum globally is encouraging. Anecdotal reports are positive, both from faculty
who enjoy using the approach and students who report behavior changes, as
discussed below.
6.1. GVV with Undergraduates at the Mason School of Business,

College of William & Mary
6.1.1. Introduction: Using GVV with Undergraduates
Critics of business ethics education often note that by the time students enter in MBA
programs, they are in the mid-20s or older and thus their moral character is already
1. Download this foundational GVV reading as well as ‘‘Starting Assumptions for Giving Voice to Values’’
by Mary C. Gentile under the ‘‘Curriculum’’ tab at www.GivingVoiceToValues.org.
2. For example, GVV is used as the organizing principle and approach in a required graduate course at the
University of Western Australia-Perth, and it is the primary focus of an undergraduate elective offered at
the School of Business at Notre Dame University in the United States.
formed (Ford Foundation Report, 2002). Accordingly, they doubt the impact of
ethics courses in changing students’ behavior. By contrast, the search for and shaping
of values is often associated with the undergraduate experience. Within the college
environment, students explore new ideas and social settings and encounter views that
challenge and even threaten their own values. While many are insulated from the
pressures of ‘‘real life,’’ undergraduates do experience the power of social pressures
and group norms and struggle to find their own voice with their peers and discover
their own path for the future. In short, college life is rich with opportunities to voice
one’s values — or to remain quiet in the face of ethical transgressions.
Despite this rich context for developing values-based leaders, ethics initiatives
often bypass college life and thrust students into case scenarios that are far removed
from their everyday experience. For example, many business ethics texts focus
exclusively on cases and readings in professional settings. Exposing students to the
challenges they will face in the business environment is necessary, yet faculty face a
challenge: Most undergraduates have had little, if any, professional experience.
Engaging in business cases from the outset can be difficult, for the episodes discussed
may not resonate with those who are reading them.
GVV offers faculty a means for bridging this experience gap. GVV can be applied
to the scenarios in their present context, offering relevance for the here-and-now of
college life. At the same time, GVV utilizes cases and exercises that reveal the
complexities and reality involved in business settings and creates opportunities to
practice voicing their values in these professional contexts.
Moreover, GVV can leverage undergraduates’ lack of experience. Influenced by
their past work experience, MBAs may arrive with a jaded past view of voicing values
in business; undergraduates may be more open-minded and optimistic about
practicing one’s values in the workplace. Using positive examples and practical
frameworks, faculty can use GVV to foster the norm that professionals can and do
voice their values in their workplace. And lest such optimism lead to naive idealism,
GVV provides a pragmatic action-based approach where students develop
personalized responses to realistic and complex business challenges.
6.1.2. GVV with New Business Students at William & Mary
Every autumn, the College of William & Mary welcomes 180 new business majors
(third-year of study) into the Mason School of Business. Curious, hard-working, and
multi-dimensional in both talents and interests, they offer great promise as the next
generation of business leaders. They enter their first semester of business study
nervous, excited, and impressionable; they are looking for examples to follow and
strategies for success. They are eager to learn and eager to lead from their values and
passions — whether this means leading a student organization, balancing the
challenges of being a student-athlete, starting their own business or non-profit, or
getting that first internship. Developing these future leaders requires an experiential
approach to education, where students can actively practice skills and strategies. In
response, William & Mary begins the business school experience with the Integrated
Foundation Semester, weaving the themes of teamwork, communication, global
issues, and ethical decision-making across introductory courses in finance, marketing
and information systems.
Within the introductory business ethics course in the foundation semester, GVV is
used to norm and practice the skills of values-based leadership by way of self-
discovery and scripting. Students begin by first exploring their own past experiences
in voicing their values. The reflection ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’3 (Gentile, 2010b)
illustrates ‘‘the power of choice’’ (Gentile, 2010c, p. 47) in their past decisions,
helping them discover the factors that support and inhibit their own ability to voice
their values. As the course proceeds to case analyses, faculty use the ‘‘reasons and
rationalizations’’ framework (Gentile, 2010c, p. 170) to teach students how
stakeholder analysis leads to pragmatic strategizing and scripting as they identify
levers for speaking up. Near the end of the course, students are challenged to
personalize the GVV approach through ‘‘self-knowledge and alignment’’ (Gentile,
2010c, p. 108). Here students develop ‘‘self-stories’’ that describe the strategies and
scripts that best exemplify their personal strengths. This progression of exercises and
cases fosters the self-discovery that is relevant for undergraduates while simulta-
neously cultivating the practices of reflection, analysis, and action-planning necessary
for values-based leadership.
6.1.3. A Tale of Two Stories: Beginning with Personal Past Experience
We understand new or complex things in relation to things we already

know. (Haidt, 2006)
If undergraduates lack experience in business contexts, where can faculty begin in

teaching business ethics? Business ethics texts tend to begin with the ‘‘ethics’’ angle,
with an emphasis on foundations in ethical theory to help students understand the
philosophical frameworks that they can apply to the ethical scenarios. Many texts
complement such readings with the ‘‘business’’ angle, exposing students to business
contexts through cases that pose ethical challenges for the business professional.
This balance of theory and context is valuable and well-intentioned, yet lacks an
experiential relevance for undergraduates. These new ways of thinking and acting in
business settings may be so foreign to the students’ own experience that they may
struggle to achieve depth of analysis, or internalize the lessons for action in their
future careers.
The exercise, ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ (Gentile, 2010b), offers an alternative
starting point that simply and powerfully introduces the GVV approach. The
3. ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories,’’ as well as other curricular materials, can be found under the ‘‘Curriculum’’ tab
at www.GivingVoiceToValues.org.
exercise builds from the second assumption of GVV: ‘‘I have voiced my values,
at some points in my past’’ (Gentile, 2010c, p. 224). Instead of looking ahead
to business scenarios they’ve never seen, this reflection begins by looking backward
to events they have experienced in their own lives.4 The exercise is composed of two
parts:
Part 1: Recall a time in your work experience when your values conflicted with what
you were expected to do in a particular, non-trivial management decision, and you
spoke up and acted to resolve the conflict.
Part 2: Recall a time in your work experience when your values conflicted with what
you were expected to do in a particular, non-trivial management decision, and you
did not speak up or act to resolve the conflict. (Gentile, 2010c, pp. 228–229)
The exercise is one of reflection and discovery. Parts 1 and 2 engage students in
personal reflection on their own past as they identify significant moral moments of
success and failure. As students compare and contrast their own episodes and hear
the stories of their peers, each student can discover their own strategies for voicing
their values and gain insights into the strategies others have used. They learn that
acting on their values is possible and normal — both in their own lives and in
the lives of their fellow students. Discussion questions help focus the reflection on the
internal processes and external conditions that enable or inhibit their ability to voice
to their values.
At William & Mary, ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ is used to introduce the GVV
approach to new business majors within their introductory business ethics course.
Students are encouraged to describe episodes from their work experience (such as a
past job or internship), or should they lack such experience, they can use a
leadership, team, or group situation during their time in college. Students complete
the exercise within the first two weeks of the semester as a written, take-home
assignment, which they later submit to the faculty, assured of their confidentiality. By
using this exercise early in the course, and by giving students time outside of class to
reflect and share their stories confidentially, faculty lay a foundation for depth of
reflection and greater personal engagement in the course. The recalling and reflecting
on their own stories makes the learning more real, more experiential, and ultimately
more relevant. The exercise of writing and retelling the episodes promotes moral
awareness in a meaningful way for the awareness is applied to their personal lives,
not a theoretical situation. At the same time, the exercise promotes both self and
organizational awareness; as they continue to examine their own scenarios, students
look inward for insight about what empowers and weakens their own voices, and
4. This exercise activates an important feature of memory that can be overlooked in ethics education: our
episodic memory. ‘‘Episodic memory is concerned with remembering past experiences as such. This is the
crux of episodic memory: it has to do with conscious recollection of previous experiences of
events, happenings, and situations. The emphasis is on ‘experience,’ rather than ‘event’ or ‘happening.’’’
(Tulving & Markowitsch, 1998).
they look outward for the circumstances and conditions that facilitate or obstruct
their ability to speak up.
When students recall episodes from past workplaces, their stories typically involve
restaurants and retail settings or summer camps and community pools (the backdrop
for waiters, salespeople, camp counselors and lifeguards), while others share from
their first professional internship.5 Many students find it difficult to recall a value
conflict from a former workplace, yet they easily identify episodes from college life.
Here the scenes depict a range of social settings: the varsity sports team, fraternity or
sorority life, student clubs. Several share situations of academic integrity. While the
specific contexts vary, most of situations could be categorized as ‘‘truth versus
loyalty’’ or ‘‘individual versus community’’ (Kidder, 2005). The conflicts involve
voicing their values with both their peers (i.e., observing friends and co-workers
stealing from the college or business organization) and with authority figures (i.e.,
managers and coaches asking them to participate in practices of questionable
integrity).
In a class session following the assignment, student teams begin by sharing their
stories of effectively voicing values with their team. Beginning with positive examples
makes it easier for students to share and reinforces the idea that voicing values is
normal and possible. Rather than share stories of failing to voice values (which can
make many students uncomfortable and can be a kind of imprinting on the negative),
the instructor facilitates a conversation focusing on common ‘‘enablers and
disablers’’ — individual, situational, or organizational characteristics that make it
easier or more difficult to voice and enact one’s values — having students first
provide examples in their own teams; then a team representative reports to the class.
The team representative shares both the common enablers and disablers, while the
instructor records these on the whiteboard. The team representative also shares the
most original or surprising enabler that the team found valuable.6
This discussion takes the private reflection of ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ and makes
public the best practices and common pitfalls of voicing values as a college student.
5. GVV has several cases that focus on early work experiences, from internships (‘‘Market Research
Deception,’’ ‘‘Online Identities,’’ and ‘‘Student Privileges with Strings Attached’’), college jobs (‘‘Part-time
Job with Full-time Challenge’’), and first jobs after college (‘‘Is This My Place Speaking Up?’’). These cases
can be downloaded from www.GivingVoiceToValues.org.
6. While Gentile uses the language of enablers and disablers in reflecting on past experiences, one can also
connect this exercise to the research of Robin Hogarth (2001) on learning structures in the educating our
intuitive responses. He describes environments that offer relevant, accurate, and timely feedback and hold
individuals accountable for their actions as kind learning structures, while those that reinforce wrong
behaviors through inaccurate and untimely feedback and weak consequences are wicked learning
structures. If moral intuitions are built on one’s past experiences and how the feedback one received, then
one’s past learning structures, whether at home, school, or work, have a significant impact on one’s moral
intuition: ‘‘The quality of your intuitions depends on the kinds of learning that prevailed when these were
acquired’’ (p. 89). The ‘‘Tale of Two Stories’’ exercise can help students uncover the learning structures
that were present in situations where they voiced their values effectively, and where they found voicing
their values difficult.
Enablers and strategies of success that students identify include: consulting with a
trusted friend or mentor for feedback; finding support amongst co-workers or peers
who will speak up with you; using humor to broach difficult subjects; imagining
themselves in another’s shoes, or imagining that a loved one in the role of the
individual at risk; deeply considering the consequences of getting caught; framing
the situation as an opportunity or a chance to lead by example and inspire others.
Disablers or rationalizations typically include: fear of losing the esteem of others
(peers or authority figures); over-optimism; assuming that those in authority must be
right; rationalizing that the behavior in question is ‘‘no big deal’’ and is ‘‘normal’’ in
this context; comparing oneself to others; fear of losing one’s status or position or
financial benefit; being invisible (no one else knows of the information or can see how
you will respond); seeing how big or deep the problem is, and how speaking up won’t
make a difference.
Generating this list of insights engages students in self and social awareness.
Moreover, faculty can see how the types of college conflicts and the common
enablers and disablers are remarkably similar to the conflicts and conditions
characteristic of values conflicts in the workplace. ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ primes
the students to make these connections from their own experience to the challenges in
business, and faculty have a wealth of stories and insights to bridge the experience
gap facing undergraduates.
As Gentile notes: ‘‘Recognizing the fact we are capable of speaking and acting on
our values, as well as the fact that we have not always done so, is both empowering
and enlighteningyIt opens a path to self-knowledge, as well as situational analysis,
that we may otherwise short-circuit’’ (Gentile, 2010b, p. 49). Having opened these
paths by reflecting on their own stories, students can bring these personal insights to
bear on business cases.
6.1.4. Reasons and Rationalizations: GVV Stakeholder Analysis and Action Planning
Recently graduated from college, Ben landed a job as a junior

accountant for a non-profit that distributes donated medical supplies
to developing countries. He discovers that his organization lacks a
formal process for valuing the donated supplies, and in some cases the
values may be inflated by the donors. Ben wants to raise this concern to
his boss, but he does not want to risk his own position or jeopardize
relationships with the donors and thus lose donations. ‘‘What should
Ben say, to whom, when, and how?’’ (Gentile, 2010e)
This scenario is one of the first GVV cases used with the new business students. As
a recent college graduate eager to launch his professional career, they find it easy to
relate to Ben. He also offers a positive example: here is a young professional who not
only wants to act on his values, but also seeks the well-being of the organization, and
wants to help those in need of medical supplies. At the same time, his particular
situation can seem far removed from their past experience: perhaps they have not
been young accountants, they are not aware of the auditing processes that could or
should be in place, they may not be aware of the laws or consequences involved in
corroborating with potentially deceptive practices.
This mix of familiarity with novelty facilitates the connections of students’ pasts to
their professional future. As they explore the case in class discussion, students begin
to see parallels to their own stories. They have been in situations where problems
have been overlooked or dismissed in the face of stressful demands or the need to
please others. They have had opportunities to look the other way when they have
encountered broken systems and processes. They have faced the rationalization that
it can seem easier and safer to keep quiet rather than face the risks and hardship that
will likely emerge when speaking up about an organizational problem.
Identifying parallels is a good starting point, but to be effective, faculty must
foster a richer understanding of the scenarios they may encounter, and practice
developing and voicing responses before they find themselves in these situation.
Depth and breadth of analysis is needed, and in beginning GVV case discussions,
students encounter the ‘‘Reasons and Rationalizations’’ (Gentile, 2010f) framework:
What are the main arguments you are trying to counter? That is, what are the
reasons and rationalizations you need to address?
What is at stake for the key parties, including those who disagree with you?
What levers can you use to influence those who disagree with you?
What is your most powerful and persuasive response to the reasons and
rationalizations you need to address? To whom should the argument be made?
When and in what context?
This GVV framework is one of perspective-taking and stakeholder analysis.

Students begin by placing themselves in the role of the protagonist, and they clarify
the internal and external forces that are weighing on the individual. Many of the
reasons and rationalizations emerge from self-interest, from social pressure, from
concern for friends and family, from fear of authority — forces that college students
have already experienced, though perhaps not within business settings.
To be effective in communicating their values, they need to move beyond their
own perspective and expand their understanding to the other parties involved and
consider what is important from these various perspectives. The second question in
the framework offers an opportunity to teach undergraduates the skill of stakeholder
analysis. At William & Mary, students create diagrams of the stakeholders involved
and elaborate on the relationships between stakeholders. In these diagrams students
not only label the stakeholders, but they define the motivations and concerns of each
party. The exercise is one of ‘‘zooming in’’ to empathize with each stakeholder
and ‘‘zooming out’’ to understand the larger picture of the business scenario and how
the parties are related. ‘‘Zooming out’’ helps identify both the obstacles and
opportunities that may not be obvious at first glance, and where the levers might be
for influence or for win-win solutions. It also helps students recognize the complexity
of the scenario and that one’s response is often a series of responses to a variety of
parties.
Students quickly identify the obvious stakeholders and their concerns for Ben’s
situation: Ben, his boss, his co-workers, the donors, the recipients in developing
countries, the IRS. In diagramming the stakeholders and articulating their
concerns, they begin to recognize how interconnected the parties are and how
speaking up threatens the value chain for those in need and the viability of the
non-profit. At the same time, failing to speak up puts the company and donors at
risk.
In the face of such complexity, a young professional can easily cower. Some
students argue that it is safer and easier to say nothing or that while speaking up
would be ideal, the harm here is small in comparison to the good being accomplished
through the donations. Yet in the GVV framework, one begins with the assumption
that one wants to speak up and can find ways to do so.
Crafting the response requires connecting their stakeholder analyses with the
personal understanding of their own past effectiveness. Students return to their list of
enablers from ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ (2010b) in search of past strategies that might
work in the present scenario. Some focus on the fact that even though Ben is new and
inexperienced, he sees a significant problem. They wonder: If Ben can see this, have
others noticed it as well? Is everyone looking the other way? Has someone spoken up
before? If so, what was the outcome? In short, students realize they need to
investigate further, but how to do so carefully? Some suggest Ben innocently raise the
issue as the ‘‘new guy’’ trying to understand how things work. This strategy of
‘‘innocent inquiry’’ is one that often emerges from their own stories. Another
common strategy that emerges from their past is seeking out a trusted and
experienced advisor who can provide you with insight. Others are worried about
raising this issue alone and want to build support from other co-workers who will
join Ben in raising this issue with his boss. Others worry about Ben’s inexperience so
they suggest finding a credible partner who can verify the concern and help develop a
solution, such as the senior accountant. In thinking about solving the problem of
valuing supplies, some student teams quickly recognize that the key step in changing
the reporting process is how they communicate any change with the donors. They
need a policy that is fair and accurate, yet does not suggest that the donors have been
guilty of over-valuing supplies, lest they offend them.
This GVV case includes two parts, where part B provides students with the details
on how Ben voiced his values in the context. The students appreciate learning the
outcome, and seeing if any of their proposed strategies were consistent with Ben’s
response. They discover that Ben did end up finding support from the senior
accountant, approaching his boss, and ultimately collaborating on a new system
where there was an average value per box of donated supplies. Undergraduates
develop confidence in this early case, learning that some of their own strategies can
be applied in business scenarios. In short, they have seen how lessons from their own
past can be applied in new and unfamiliar scenarios. With this positive experience of
generating strategies and scripts, undergraduates can begin approaching more
complex cases in later class sessions.
6.1.5. Finding Your Own Voice: The Self-Story Approach
Susan’s boss wants her to ‘‘revise the numbers’’ to hide the poor
portfolio performance of one of her clients. With the client meeting
only a few hours away, she needs to decide quickly how she can do
right by her client and her company. What should Susan say, to whom,
when, and how? (Gentile, 2010i)
As students and faculty continue case discussions, the class can collaborate in
developing a response, identifying various approaches and strengthening the strategy
as new perspectives highlight opportunities for action as well as hidden obstacles.
The richness of such exploration also includes a potential weakness: in such group
discussions, the individual student may not discover their own set of strategies that
best builds on their particular strengths. Preparation for future action requires that
each student personalize the scripts and strategies for their own identity.
The emphasis in GVV on ‘‘self-alignment, self-image, and alignment’’ (Gentile,
2010c) resonates with undergraduates as they seek to develop their own unique voice
in launching their careers. GVV offers several curricular exercises for discovering
one’s voice, including self-assessment (‘‘Personal-Professional profile,’’ Gentile,
2010g) and crafting a personal narrative (‘‘Framing a Life Story,’’ Gentile, 2010h).
GVV also provides guidelines for peer coaching that can be used in student teams to
help students discover their own voice.
Building on these peer coaching guidelines, Professor Christopher P. Adkins at the
College of William & Mary has developed a ‘‘self-story’’ exercise that immerses
students within a GVV case; yet in crafting the response, they generate a script that is
a reflection of their personality, their particular strengths and their enablers. The
team structure of the foundation semester is used to help individual team members
craft their own self-stories.
To demonstrate this approach, two student teams are assigned to prepare a ‘‘self-
story’’ presentation on the case of the day. For example, in the case of Susan above,
the teams are asked to present several self-stories of action, one from each team
member, to the class. Each story should offer a script that communicates that
student’s ‘‘most powerful and persuasive response to the reasons and rationaliza-
tions’’ if they were in Susan’s situation and clearly illustrate how their script is rooted
in their own strength and personality. By the end of the team presentations, the class
will have heard a range of self-stories and action plans, seeing that there are various
approaches that might work in speaking up in this case.
In developing their ‘‘self-story,’’ students make use of the peer coaching questions7
in the GVV curriculum. Here students can begin to label an approach that best
describes how they voice their values. They might describe their strategy as a
‘‘learning stance,’’ where one asks open-ended questions to better understand the
7. See Gentile, 2010, ‘‘Guidelines for Peer Coaching’’ at www.GivingVoiceToValues.org.

situation or individuals in the case. Others may describe themselves as problem-

solvers, seeking ways to find a novel win-win answer to the difficult situation. Others
may describe their approach as adversarial, directly confronting the issue at hand
and boldly stating their position. Such labels, along with a series of questions, help
students reflect and articulate a strategy that resonates with their personal strengths
and past experiences.
At William & Mary, the ‘‘self-story’’ exercise is used in the concluding weeks of
the course as way to help synthesize and internalize the lessons that have emerged
throughout their introductory business ethics course. Students return to ‘‘A Tale of
Two Stories’’ (Gentile, 2010b) and their list of enablers that they have developed
throughout the course. The series of case discussions have further clarified the
patterns and conditions for effective action, both within themselves and within
organizational contexts. Their self-story solidifies this learning by defining a personal
strategic approach that can be applied in the final cases of the course.
6.1.6. The Impact of GVV on New Business Students
The integration of GVV within this first business course with new business students
was a gradual one. First, faculty began using a few cases, and applying the ‘‘reasons
and rationalizations’’ framework to these cases to help shift the analysis from making
a decision to putting a decision into action. This case-based approach to GVV did
help students focus on action-planning, but the tone and engagement of discussions
remained largely the same as when using other case-based approaches to teaching
ethics in previous semesters. The turning point in change of tone and depth of
personal engagement came with the incorporation of ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ early
in the semester. Even though new to the business school, most students presented
their stories with a remarkable depth of openness and maturity of reflection.
Moreover, the lists of enablers and disablers displayed greater depth and breadth in
later case discussions. It appears that the personal nature of ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’
facilitates an engagement that is missing in a more analytical, less personal approach,
at least with this population of undergraduates.
The ‘‘self-story’’ approach to cases is a relatively new exercise in the program, but has
received extremely positive feedback from the students. Many indicate that the peer
coaching guidelines, with the reflection questions and position labels, helped them
articulate their particular strategy or stance in voicing their values. Most powerful,
however, were the peer presentations of the self-story exercise; hearing their fellow
classmates share their unique voices and scripts to the same cases illustrated the diversity
of strategies and richness of personalities in the class. Such sharing not only sparked new
ideas but reinforced the norm of voicing values and playing to one’s strengths.
GVV at William & Mary illustrates how the curriculum can be used effectively
with new business students, even with their relative lack of experience and business
expertise. As undergraduates participate in internships and advanced courses, GVV
can be used in these new contexts to deepen their learning from these experiences.
6.2. GVV in the Simmons SOM MBA Program

Leadership is, in part, about clarifying and affirming personal and community values
(Heifetz, 1994; Kouzes & Posner, 2007). In fact, Kouzes and Posner view this task as
the ‘‘First Law of Leadership’’ (p. 47). To pursue the school’s mission, the SOM
faculty teaches concepts of principled leadership and then assesses students’ mastery
of these concepts in biannual assessment of learning (AoL) workshops. In the
December 2007 workshop, faculty noted that students did not perform well across
several categories related to ethics and its mission. This realization moved the dean
and faculty to act quickly: By January 2008 several faculty were working with the
GVV methodology to integrate modules into their courses. In the language of the
assessment process, the SOM moved rapidly to ‘‘close the loop’’ once a gap in
students’ knowledge had been identified.
Founded in 1974 by Margaret Henning and Anne Jardim, two scholars who were
the first women to receive their doctorates from the Harvard Business School in the
1960s, the SOM is a mission-driven institution that has designed its MBA program
for women students. While the faculty teaches rigorously the same functional MBA
courses as other business schools, the curriculum and much of faculty’s research
focus on topics of particular interest to women leaders. One such topic is ethics and
corporate social responsibility. Our students, like women students in The Aspen
Institute’s 2008 survey of MBA students’ attitudes about business and society, are
keenly interested in values conflicts that arise in a broad spectrum of business issues.8
Because of our students’ deep interest in ethical issues, the December 2007
assessment data was surprising.
By August 2008, the SOM faculty began to teach the GVV framework in its
Foundations course. One year later the students’ selected commencement student
speaker talked about how compelling the GVV curriculum was. How had the SOM
faculty integrated the GVV curriculum so quickly and thoroughly into its MBA
Program?
6.2.1. Application of the GVV Framework into the Core Curriculum
In early 2008, several faculty expressed interest in working with the GVV curriculum.
The dean and faculty decided to integrate GVV modules across the core courses,
rather than create a standalone course. The integration is summarized in Table 6.1
and Figure 6.1. Faculty believed that repetition of practice (a core tenet of GVV)
would best be done spread throughout the MBA Program from the first to last
courses, adding depth and breadth to practical ways of thinking about ethical issues.
8. See gender differences noted in the 2008 report of ‘‘Where will they lead?’’ Center for Business
Education, The Aspen Institute.
Table 6.1: Application of GVV in the Simmons School of Management MBA core
curriculum.
Course Materials Duration of GVV

module
Foundations Case: Martha McCaskey (HBSP 90 minutes

9-403-114)
Ways of Thinking about Our
Values in the Workplace (Mary
Gentile, GVV materials)
Leading Individuals Case: Mobley, M. E. & Humphreys, 90 minutes (in a

and Groups (core J. (2006). How low will you go? 180 minutes
micro-OB course) Harvard Business Review, 84(4), session on ethics)
33–44
Gentile, M. (2010). Keeping your
colleagues honest. Harvard Business
Review, 88(3), 114–117
Career Strategies Case: Helen Drinan, Case Research 180 minutes

Journal, Vol. 32, No. 2, Spring 2011
Review ‘‘Ways of Thinking about
Our Values in the Workplace’’ and
‘‘Keeping Your Colleagues Honest’’
Managerial Garrison, Noreen and Brewer (2009): About 30 minutes

Accounting Managerial Accounting, 13th ed., in each of three
McGraw-Hill Irwin pertinent classes
Review of ‘‘Ways of Thinking about
Our Values in the Workplace’’ (Mary
LGA Case: Malden Mills (HBSP 180 minutes

9-404-072)
Review of ‘‘Ways of Thinking about
Our Values in the Workplace’’ (Mary
In general, our MBA students are working professionals who have returned to school
to advance or change their careers. Because they have substantial work experience
(seven years on the average), they come into the MBA Program knowing that
conflicts in values are common in the workplace, and yet many say that they do not
Progra m Fall 1 Spring 1 Summer 1 Fall 2 Spring 2 Summer 2 Fall 3 Spring 3

Accelerated Foundations,
Full Time Leading Managerial
Individuals and Accounting LGA
Groups,
Career Strategies
2.5-Year Part Foundations,
Time (fall Leading Career Managerial
start) Individuals and Strategies Accounting LGA
Groups
2-Year Part Foundations,
Time (spring Leading Career Managerial LGA
start) Individuals and Strategies Accounting
Groups
Figure 6.1: Timing of GVV in the Simmons School of Management MBA core
curriculum (a selection of available programs)
know how to deal with the conflict.9 The practical approach of GVV appeals to
working professionals who quickly see the applicability of its methodology.
While GVV has been integrated into the SOM’s core MBA curriculum since 2008,
there has also been an evolution in the use of materials and the ways in which the
materials are taught to reflect changes in faculty personnel and in individual faculty’s
identification of students’ responses to particular materials.
6.2.2. Foundations
Foundations is a one-week orientation program required of all students who enter

the MBA program. One of the cases discussed in Foundations, Martha McCaskey
(Van Dissel, Margolis, & Kanji, 2004), is used to introduce the GVV framework. The
case had been used before the adoption of the GVV curriculum and — like several
other non-GVV-specific cases — works very well with the new framework. In
preparation, students study the case and read ‘‘Ways of Thinking about Our Values
in the Workplace,’’ (Gentile, 2010a) to glean initial information on the GVV
approach. The case presents Martha McCaskey, a project leader at a consulting firm.
McCaskey is asked to complete a project that could secure her promotion and a
significant raise. McCaskey, however, cannot see a way to complete the project
without compromising her values. Faced with a tight deadline, she is asked to present
an action plan to complete the project by paying someone off to get information of
questionable quality. Her boss had already promised this information to the client,
overstating its value. McCaskey, pressured by her supervisors and colleagues, has
already engaged in some dubious activities. She had, for example, misrepresented
herself to the informant in her prior conversation. To speak up now seems risky if not
impossible.
Part of the discussion focuses on ‘‘normalizing’’ the values conflicts (Gentile,
2010c). The students explore the reasons why McCaskey should not be surprised by
the difficult circumstances that she is facing and examine the factors in the industry
9. This is consistent with the 2008 report of the Center for Business Education, The Aspen Institute.
as well as those specific to McCaskey’s firm that show why such situations should be
expected and may even be unavoidable. While the branch in which McCaskey works
is portrayed as particularly lax about ethical standards, the discussion points to the
fact that similar situations may arise across industries and organizations.
In the exploration of how the values conflict developed over time, the instructor
asks students to generate options for McCaskey at the final juncture in the case.
Recognizing that going along with the request or passing the buck to a colleague —
the options that McCaskey contemplates at the end of the case — is not consistent
with her values, the students generate other options, consistent with GVV approach.
McCaskey could (1) speak to her supervisors about her concerns or (2) contact the
firm’s headquarters and inform them about the questionable practices in her branch.
They suggest she should approach the conversation with the goal of aligning her job
with her values but that, if that turns out to be impossible, she should quit. Students’
initial suggestions about how to approach these conversations sound aggressive,
judgmental, and accusatory. They are eager to say their piece, but they are not yet
ready to do so effectively.
Using the language of GVV, the students then explore the risks that McCaskey
faces if she pushes back on her boss, or if she goes along with his plan. They identify
her disablers, the reasons she might have for not speaking up, such as her sense that
this kind of approach may be common. McCaskey also has a number of enablers for
action, such as her excellent track record at the firm.
In groups of three, students work for 10 minutes to generate action plans for
McCaskey. Each group picks one of the options and generates ideas about what
McCaskey should say, what responses she can expect from her counterparts, and how
she can address those responses. After 10 minutes, the instructor calls on a few groups
to act as McCaskey while the instructor takes on the role of Martha’s counterpart to
allow students to practice voicing their values. The discussion and group work help the
students hone their approaches into persuasive, rational, business-oriented arguments.
This first exposure to GVV leaves students feeling empowered to act in accordance
with their values. Even those who at the beginning believed McCaskey slid down the
slippery slope and has no way back, later come up with responses to their counterparts’
who ask why ‘‘all of a sudden’’ McCaskey has a problem with the approach.
Moreover, those students who, from the start, feel strongly that McCaskey should
speak up, generate specific ideas about how to do so while minimizing the chances of
losing her job.
6.2.3. Leading Individuals and Groups
Students get their next opportunity to practice giving voice to their values in the
introductory organization behavior course. Its intention is to improve students’
ability to effectively lead and manage individuals and groups. One of the course’s 14
three-hour sessions is exclusively dedicated to ethics, with many of the other sessions
touching on the importance of principled leadership, as well.
Before the ethic session, the students read four documents (Gentile, 2010d;
McCoy, 1997; Paine, 2007; Mobley & Humphreys, 2006), to revisit the complexity of
ethical dilemmas. The class session is structured in two parts around the case, ‘‘How
low will you go?’’ The case’s main protagonist, Bob Carlton, is the owner and CEO
of OptiMotors Industries, a midsize engine-parts manufacturer. His sales manager,
McDowell, whom he hired at the urging of angel investors, is taking his prospective
clients to a local strip club. This does not sit well with Carlton but he lets it go when
McDowell suggests that this is simply how business gets done. The situation escalates
when one of the female salespersons quits because of disagreements with McDowell
and another considers pressing charges for discrimination. Carlton needs to decide
how to proceed. Even though he is the CEO, ostensibly with the authority to dismiss
McDowell if he does not comply with Carlton’s standards, he must manage the
expectations of the angel investors and the degree to which his business depends on
successful sales.
In the first part of the discussion, we treat ethics in the traditional way, analyzing
the case using Paine’s framework. While students enter the discussion with various
personal views about the ethicality of strip club visits and using those visits to gain
sales, the framework allows the students to see the downside of this approach for
various stakeholders and for the long-term interests of OptiMotors. Once they arrive
at the decision that Carlton needs to stop the practice, the students are ready to
formulate action plans, using the GVV frameworks. They usually come up with two
possibilities: (1) fire McDowell or (2) keep McDowell but persuade him to change his
approach. For each, they need a script for Carlton to voice his values.
The students recognize McDowell’s arguments that taking clients to gentlemen’s
clubs is ‘‘standard practice’’ and is ‘‘no big deal.’’ They identify the stakes of each of
the stakeholders: Carlton, McDowell, the angel investors, the saleswomen, and the
salesmen who have also engaged in this practice with successful outcomes. They are
explicitly urged to assume that each of the stakeholders is a pragmatist: someone who
wants to do the right thing but is not willing to place oneself at a systematic
disadvantage by doing it. In the discussion, students identify the levers that Carlton
has such as the legal risks for OptiMotors’ if they continue with the practice; finding
allies in the angel investors if Carlton presents risks to them; and the false dichotomy
that McDowell implicitly presented to Carlton (‘‘Do you want squeaky clean
practices or do you want sales?’’). Students also often suggest identifying positive
examples of successful sales that have been made without the dubious practice. They
are aware that Carlton cannot afford to lose sales with the increased capacity into
which he and others had just invested.
Once the whole class identifies the levers, they work in pairs to develop action
plans for Carlton. In the plenary discussion that follows, students state what course
of action they plan (most of them first try to persuade McDowell to change his
approach and only dismiss him if he is unwilling to comply), and then role play the
conversations. The instructor plays the role of McDowell, taking a very inflexible
stance. The whole class helps the student in the role of Carlton to improve his
approach and strengthen his arguments, and the role play is repeated several times to
help Carlton become increasingly more successful at his task.
The students conclude the session with effective alternatives to what seems initially
like a lose-lose situation. At the beginning, many students believe that McDowell
needs to be dismissed to end the practice but assess that option as risky for
OptiMotors’ sales; they come to understand that they may persuade McDowell to
comply with higher ethical standards if Carlton outlines the risks and uses available
levers.
6.2.4. Career Strategies
Decades ago, the SOM faculty decided to make the Career Strategies course part of
the required core curriculum. This is in contrast to most business schools where
similar courses are electives. The faculty made this decision because of ever-present
facts: women make approximately 75 cents on the dollar that men make (Lang,
2010); the reality of the glass-ceiling (Lang, 2010); the continued experience of second
generation gender issues, practices that seem neutral but disproportionately
negatively affect women (Trefalt, Merrill-Sands, Kolb, Wilson, & Carter, 2010);
and the knowledge that women’s careers are more difficult to manage than
men’s (Blake-Beard, O’Neill, Ingols, & Shapiro, 2010; Shapiro, Ingols, O’Neill, &
Blake-Beard, 2009).
All students at the SOM, then, spend somewhere between 30 and 40 hours during
their MBA studies analyzing themselves and their careers.10 As part of this required
self-analysis, students engage in several approaches to values’ clarifications. There is,
for example, an online career diagnostic instrument titled ‘‘CareerLeader’’s (see
www.careerleader.com). This instrument consists of three parts, but the one that is
relevant for this discussion is the diagnosis of what motivates people (i.e., work
reward values). It is a tedious section that takes students about one hour to complete,
as the 13 values are paired against one another and students are forced to select one
value over another. In the final report, students learn their numeric score and
whether or not this score is in a range of high, medium, or low. As a follow-on to this
comparative, quantitative approach to values’ clarification, students use a workbook
to add a qualitative dimension to their analysis. They are asked to answer a series of
self-reflective questions from ‘‘Ways of Thinking’’ (Gentile, 2010a), including
questions about purpose, risk, personal communication style, loyalty, and self-
image. These two approaches ask students to understand their strengths and styles
when faced with a conflict in values and challenge them to develop a personal and
professional profile that will help each person when next she encounters a workplace
values’ conflict. This process is the prelude to the three-hour module on GVV.
Specifically, students prepare for the three-hour class by reviewing Gentile’s Ways of
Thinking and reading the Helen Drinan case (Shapiro, Ingols, & Gentile, 2011).
Students are given a grid with classic GVV questions (e.g., who are the stakeholders
10. Several years ago one cohort of students nicknamed the course ‘‘the me, me, me course.’’
that the protagonist will face and what does each have at risk?) that is turned in at the
beginning of class. The faculty adopted this approach to challenge students to
analyze the situation that Drinan faces before they practice delivering a script.
Once the students have thoroughly analyzed the situation,11 then they are asked to
practice articulating their values to a selected stakeholder. The faculty asks students
to work individually, answering standard GVV questions, such as to whom the
protagonist should speak and what she should say. Once students have individually
written down notes for a script to a particular stakeholder, they get into triads and
take turns playing one of two roles, speaker and listeners. They give one another
feedback and learn from one another how and why to approach various
stakeholders. Once students have spent a specified time in these small groups, a
faculty member debriefs the conversations, asking what students learned and what
questions remain for them. Finally, the faculty asks students to suggest colleagues
whose scripts were particularly compelling; these students stand and deliver their
scripts. Invariably, students select to speak their values to different stakeholders,
adding to the richness of the discussion about values and articulating one’s concerns.
6.2.5. Managerial Accounting
This course introduces students to cost management and management controls, and
to the generation, use and interpretation of management and cost information under
various organizational systems. In contrast to primarily externally oriented financial
accounting, managerial accounting is internally oriented and context driven.
Throughout the course, the students consider what is right and wrong when it
comes to internal reporting and systems. At three points in the semester, students use
the GVV approach to practice their responses to organizational pressures for
inappropriate behavior in increasingly more complex and far-reaching circum-
stances. The first opportunity is the discussion of ‘‘fudging the budget;’’ the second is
the question of delaying the reporting of some relevant information to the
subsequent quarter; and the third is the issue of setting artificially low standards
of performance. While many GVV cases on these topics are available,12 the
instructor continues to use the cases needed to cover the accounting material and
complements each with a short vignette in which the protagonist is asked to act
against her values. These vignettes serve as the basis for GVV discussion. The
students explore the consequences of unethical decisions and recognize the ripple
effect of seemingly small transgressions by looking at how inaccurate reporting
affects not only intra-organizational dynamics but also a number of external
stakeholders.
11. The Instructor’s Manual for the Drinan case has an extensive debriefing of class discussions.
12. From ‘‘Curriculum’’ tab on http://www.GivingVoiceToValues.com
Once students articulate a reporting standard that applies in the situation, they
work in dyads to develop responses to the situations described in vignettes, in which
their supervisor asks them to ‘‘fudge the numbers.’’ Despite practicing GVV in other
courses, students are often reticent to be definitive about their beliefs and positions in
this course. Furthermore, despite having the ‘‘correct numerical solution,’’ they are
uncomfortable using that as the basis upon which to build their dialogue or discuss
the necessary actions to take and voice their values. They begin with the ‘‘innocent
novice’’ approach, in which they ask qualitative types of questions rather than
pointing out the numerical impact of mistakes. But, some of the more astute students
will pounce on this and suggest that highlighting the consequences may be more
effective. The class moves forward to a more comprehensive approach, by addressing
the power of a solid numerical basis upon which to build their position. Once they
recognize it, students eagerly use it going forward. They challenge the often-used ‘‘no
big deal’’ rationalization by exposing the far-reaching consequences of a particular
practice — not only on internal stakeholders, but also on external stakeholders. In
the end, the class crafts several approaches using the numerical impact of the error or
lapse in judgment as the foundation upon which to build their arguments and voice
the values they embrace.
The issues that the students tackle get increasingly complex as the semester
progresses, because the concerns impact an ever broader set of stakeholders. Yet,
through practice and feedback, the students improve their ability to effectively voice
their values and respond to pressures and potential supervisors’ arguments under
various circumstances.
6.2.6. Leadership, Governance, and Accountability
Leadership, governance, and accountability (LGA) is the capstone course and is

focused on making business decisions that are consistent with a manager’s fiduciary,
legal, and ethical responsibilities. The course existed with the same purpose prior to
our adoption of the GVV framework. One class included a case on Malden Mills
(Nohria, Piper, & Gurtler, 2006), a family-owned textile mill facing bankruptcy in
2001. CEO Feuerstein rebuilt the plant after a 1995 devastating fire. During that
time, he paid his idle workers while he rebuilt his plant to provide employment for all
his workers, even though only some parts of the mill were profitable. Some of his
managers, including Fitzpatrick, the chief of one of the profitable lines, were
skeptical about his plan and suggested changes in production and automation.
Feuerstein opposed such ideas, expressed distrust of machines and suggested that he
had the responsibility to keep his loyal workers employed. He fired Fitzpatrick and
executed his own plan. By the end of 2001, however, the accumulated losses forced
him to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
Before the adoption of the GVV curriculum, students — put in a position of an
employee of a potential investor into Malden Mills in 2001 — were asked to write a
memo to their senior executive team, arguing against making an investment of any
kind, balancing financial and non-financial reasons. With the adoption of the GVV,
the assignment changed. The students are put in the shoes of Fitzpatrick in the days
following the fire in 1995 and are asked to persuade Feuerstein that her
recommendations are not only economically viable but also socially responsible.
The students are prompted to think about the reasons and rationalizations that
Fitzpatrick will need to address, consider the stakes of each party, and find
arguments and levers Fitzpatrick can use to influence Feuerstein. The students also
consider Feuerstein’s likely responses and how to address them. The memos, due at
the beginning of the class, ensure that the students think about their arguments on
their own before engaging in a group discussion. By stepping into Fitzpatrick’s shoes,
students get an opportunity to practice everything that they learned about GVV
throughout the curriculum.
The case discussion goes well beyond GVV. It considers fiduciary responsibility
and creditors, the social role of bankruptcy, the soundness of Feuerstein’s decision to
rebuild the mill and the alternatives to that course of action, and the assessment
of Feuerstein’s rationale and factors that influenced his decision. With the benefit of
hindsight, the students tend to agree that his decision was short-sighted and
suboptimal. At this point, the professor engages the students in a role play based on
the GVV framework. Two volunteers at a time — one as Fitzpatrick and another as
Feuerstein — engage in a discussion in which Fitzpatrick voices her values to
convince Feuerstein to change and modernize Malden Mills. Since students wrote
down their arguments in their memos, they know how to begin, but their
‘‘Feuerstein’’ may respond differently than they anticipated, requiring them to think
on their feet. The main insight that usually emerges from the discussion is the false
dichotomy that Feuerstein perceives between the concern for employees and financial
concerns. Students come up with specific ways for Fitzpatrick to appeal to Feuerstein
to make a financially sound decision in a way that resonates with his concern for
employees. Instead of paying idle employees, he may want to use money to retrain
them and help them find jobs elsewhere, while making sure that the mill has a
sustainable business model that will secure the jobs to a subset of his former
employees for the long run.
6.2.7. The Impact of GVV on SOM Faculty and Students
In December 2009, the SOM faculty again held its biannual AoL Workshop and
again read the Malden Mills’ papers from the LGA course. This time, the faculty was
pleased with its assessed outcomes. While in 2007, only 45% of students linked ethics
and values to their recommendations, in 2009, 84% of students who had the full
GVV curriculum did so. Also important is the change in consideration of various
stakeholders. In 2007, 76% of students considered a broad range of stakeholders’
interests and in 2009, a full 89% did so. With the adoption of GVV, the assessment of
learning expanded to include how well students anticipate and address Feuerstein’s
reasons, how effectively they counter them, and how persuasively they write. Large
proportions of students met these quality standards in 2009 (79%, 74%, and 79%,
respectively). Perhaps most telling is the observation of the faculty member who
taught LGA before and after the integration of GVV, that all students’ papers are
more persuasive using the GVV curriculum. It is easy to postulate that the greater
clarity in faculty’s teaching makes students’ learning easier and more effective.
Like many schools, the SOM needs to work constantly to integrate its silo,
discipline-based MBA curriculum. Through the years faculty have tried various
techniques: exchanged lists and talked about cases taught in their respective courses;
made all MBA core courses’ syllabi accessible on eLearning; and gathered
in discipline-based and cross-discipline sub-groups to map out threads of the
curriculum around important topics, particularly related to the school’s mission. The
GVV curriculum, notably, with its breath of disciplinary materials and sound,
specified methodology now integrates the teaching about values across the MBA
curriculum, an important factor in a school with mission-driven faculty.
It is the powerful and straight-forward approach to teach about values that allows
the GVV curriculum to serve as an integrative mechanism. Each faculty member
knows, for example, that other faculty will ask consistent values-related questions in
each respective discipline. Discussions of dilemmas inherent in each discipline
reinforce the usefulness of the GVV approach, and reassure faculty that students will
exit its MBA Program able to be leaders who have a voice and who know how to
voice their values in difficult situations.
GVV’s pragmatic approach to conversations about conflicting values also allows
faculty who are not trained as ethicists to hold savvy discussions about sensitive
topics. Most of SOM’s faculty has had minimal formal training in ethics. One
colleague, for example, took one college course in political philosophy and a short,
ethics-related module in his MBA program; this preparation is typical for faculty
who now feel empowered to hold important conversation with students.
In addition to faculty’s positive responses to the GVV curriculum, students have
also engaged enthusiastically with the curriculum. First, there is the enthusiastic
involvement of students in classroom discussions and activities. Across the courses,
there are inevitably more willing students than there is time for them to deliver their
scripts and get feedback from their peers. This willingness to practice publicly and then
to receive feedback from a large number of people speaks to students’ consideration of
the importance of the process and the topic. In addition, some students have been
public about their gratitude to engage with the GVV curriculum. In August 2009, after
only one year of the SOM’s adoption of the GVV curriculum, the students’ selected
commencement speaker talked eloquently about her reaction to the impact of the GVV
curriculum on her perception of leadership and ethical dilemmas.
6.3. Conclusion
The premise of the GVV curriculum and pedagogy is that faculty can share lessons
and create opportunities for students to practice — to literally pre-script and
rehearse — effective ways to voice and enact their best values and their best selves in
the workplace. And they can do this in a rigorous, pragmatic, and skill-based
fashion, without requiring faculty to assume a preaching stance that is likely to
trigger resistance in students and discomfort, at best, in faculty.
The idea here is not that there is an assurance that voicing and enacting one’s
values will always work but that it is more likely to be effective if students have
gathered data, examined best practices, and rehearsed their approach, with the input
of other students and faculty as peer coaches. After all, studying marketing, for
example, does not ensure that every new product launch will be a smashing success,
but it hopefully raises the odds.
And even though there are no guarantees in life, the GVV approach does
create for students the experience of having a cohort who are all engaged in the same
endeavor — figuring out the most effective way to voice their values. Students leave
this classroom with the sense that they are not necessarily alone in caring about
values, and with the pragmatic perspective that although success is never a sure thing,
it is unquestionably important to try to find ways to engage in values-driven
leadership.
The examples shared above from both undergraduate and MBA contexts
illustrate the many ways that this flexible pedagogy can be adapted for use with
different populations, and they demonstrate that GVV is accessible and useful for the
individual faculty member who wants to insert one session in his or her class, as well
as for the institution that determines to integrate this action-oriented approach
across the entire curriculum, or to create a dedicate core or elective course. Faculty
can use the already developed GVV materials or they can simply modify the teaching
plans for their favorite traditional cases. And some faculty work with their students
to generate additional, custom GVV materials based on their own experiences.
Finally there are scholars designing empirical studies to assess the impact of this
approach in teaching and in practice.
The faculty and students at William & Mary University and Simmons College are
part of an ever-expanding community of scholars and practitioners who are thinking,
experimenting, and working to find ways to integrate integrity into the practice of
management. This is a community that spans numerous boundaries: the silos of
disciplines; the separation of colleges and university; and national boundaries as
faculty from the USA, China, India, and elsewhere, work with and expand the
boundaries of the GVV curriculum.
The GVV approach inspires faculty and students to be creative in how they think
about their curriculum, while at the same time the community allows and encourages
them to learn from one another. For example, in reading the William and Mary’s
section in this chapter, the faculty at Simmons College will now use ‘‘The Tale of
Two Stories’’ (Gentile, 2010b) in their undergraduate curriculum in spring 2011. It is
this wholesale permission to both use what is available and to create new curriculum
that inspires faculty and reassures them simultaneously.
Perhaps most importantly, students remember the GVV curriculum. The
Simmons College student 2009 commencement speaker writes, two years later, that
when she is in meetings and there is conflict about the company’s direction and
values, she no longer shrinks from debate. In fact, she now feels empowered to enter
the fray and she writes:
This can be very intimidating, because my colleagues are all very

bright, and experts in their functional areas. Many of them have longer
tenure, more institutional knowledge and higher corporate roles and
titles than I do. The ‘Giving Voice to Values Curriculum’ often comes
to my mind and gives me the confidence to stay strong and true to my
feelings. I find that in almost every case, others agree with me, and
become vocal after I’ve opened the door. Frequently, my colleagues
complement me after the fact for being firm and tell me that they felt
the same way, but didn’t want to rock the boat.
What better testimony to the power of teaching ‘‘how’’ — rather than ‘‘whether’’ —
to voice and enact ones’ values?
Finally one of the most engaging aspects of the GVV approach is its marriage of
creativity, innovative thinking, and an action orientation with values-driven
leadership. In this way, future managers and leaders emerge with the ability to not
only know what is right, but the skills, the confidence and the practice that enables
them to make it happen.
References
Blake-Beard, S., O’Neill, R., Ingols, C., & Shapiro, M. (2010). Social sustainability, flexible
work arrangements, and diverse women. Gender in Management: An International Journal,
25(5), 408–425.
Center for Business Education (2008). Where will they lead? Aspen, CO: Aspen Institute.
Ford Foundation. (2002). Briefly noted: Business ethics after Enron. Retrieved from http://
fordfound.org/publications/ff_report/
Gentile, M. C. (2010a). Ways of thinking about our values in the workplace. Retrieved from
http://www.GivingVoicetoValues.org
Gentile, M. C. (2010b). A tale of two stories. Retrieved from http://www.GivingVoicetoValues.
org
Gentile, M. C. (2010c). Giving voice to values: How to speak your mind when you know what’s
right. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Gentile, M. C. (2010d). Keeping your colleagues honest. Harvard Business Review, 88(2),
114–117.
Gentile, M. C. (2010e). Is this my place?ySpeaking ‘‘UP’’ (A). Retrieved from http://
www.GivingVoicetoValues.org
Gentile, M. C. (2010f). Reasons and rationalizations. Retrieved from http://www.Giving
VoicetoValues.org
Gentile, M. C. (2010g). Personal-professional profile. Retrieved from http://www.Giving
VoicetoValues.org
Gentile, M. C. (2010h). Framing a life story. Retrieved from http://www.GivingVoiceto
Values.org
Gentile, M. C. (2010i). The client who fell through the cracks. Retrieved from http://www.
GivingVoicetoValues.org
Haidt, J. (2006). The happiness hypothesis. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Hogarth, R. M. (2001). Educating intuition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Kidder, R. M. (2005). Moral courage. New York, NY: William Morrow.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2007). The leadership challenge. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Lang, I. H. (2010, April 14). Have women shattered the glass ceiling? USA Today. Retrieved
from http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-04-15-column15_ST1_N.htm
McCoy, B. H. (1997). The parable of the Sadhu. Harvard Business Review, 75(3), 54–64.
Mobley, M. E., & Humphreys, J. (2006). How low will you go? Harvard Business Review,
84(4), 33–44.
Nohria, N., Piper, T., & Gurtler, B. (2006). Malden Mills (A), Harvard Business School Case
9-404-072. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.
Paine, L. S. (2007). Ethics: A basic framework, Harvard Business School Note 9-307-059.
Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.
Shapiro, M., Ingols, C., & Gentile, M. (2011). Helen Drinan (Cases A & B). Case Research
Journal, 31(2) (Forthcoming).
Shapiro, M., Ingols, C., O’Neill, R., & Blake-Beard, S. (2009). Making sense of women as
career self-agents: Implications for human resource development. Human Resource
Development Quarterly, 20(4), 477–501.
Trefalt, S., Merrill-Sands, D., Kolb, D., Wilson, F., & Carter, S. (2010). Closing the women’s
leadership gap: Who can help? Center for Gender in Organizations, Simmons School of
Management. CGO Insights, (32).
Tulving, E., & Markowitsch, H. J. (1998). Episodic and declarative memory: Role of the
hippocampus. Hippocampus, 8(3), 198–204.
Van Dissel, B., Margolis, J., & Kanji, A. (2004). Martha McCaskey, Harvard Business School Case
9-403-114. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.
Chapter 7
Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity

Tony Simons, Kevin Basik and Hannes Leroy
Abstract
Purpose — The purpose of this chapter is to describe the function and practical
mechanisms that promote behavioral integrity (BI) in individuals and
organizations. Specifically, four prescriptive areas of focus are offered to foster
positive and sustained change in BI: How to motivate, equip, follow-up, and
provide a context for lasting integrity change.
Design/methodology/approach — A framework is presented to describe the
essential mechanisms for emphasizing and enhancing BI. Recommended
techniques are offered for those developing their own or others’ integrity.
Practical implications — This chapter identifies specific actionable
approaches to enhance one of the most fundamental and critical elements in
any trust-based relationship: integrity. This chapter provides the ‘‘how to’’ with
regard to strengthening and consistently acting in accordance with one’s
commitments, values, and promises.
Originality/value — Research has consistently demonstrated the measurable
impact of BI perceptions on key outcomes. This chapter clarifies the processes,
systems, techniques, and other factors that elevate integrity.
At the start of our class, we typically ask students to write down and
rank-order the five most important dimensions they consider when
evaluating effective leadership. Leader integrity almost always comes
out as the single most valued dimension to be an effective leader.
However, when we then ask students how many leaders they currently
know who have integrity, the number zero is by far the most common
answer.
— Interview with Len Crowley, Executive director,
PLI Global, an international ethics training company

ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1
136 Tony Simons et al.
Most people agree, regardless of context, that integrity is critical for effective
leadership. As an example, the 2010 Service Academy Consortium on Character
Assessment (representing the US Air Force, Naval, Military, Merchant Marine, and
Coast Guard Academies) identified integrity as the most important character
dimension for development in future military officers. Similarly, when workers in
different industries and settings are asked what they look for in a leader, the notion
of integrity repeatedly comes to the top (e.g., Kouzes & Posner, 2003).
Yet despite its importance — experiences like Crowley’s are common — people
are painfully aware of the absence of integrity among the leaders in their lives, and
this absence has a cost. This phenomenon begs the question, ‘‘If we (including those
who eventually find themselves in leadership positions) know how important
integrity is, why is impeccable leader integrity so rarely demonstrated?’’ We suggest it
is because practicing and conveying integrity are challenging behaviors for
individuals to maintain. Nevertheless, we share a deep-rooted belief that the
behaviors that enhance leader integrity are learnable and teachable. This chapter
presents a framework for operationalizing integrity and offers recommendations for
enhancing and sustaining it over time.
Not surprisingly, scholars disagree in their definitions of integrity, which has only
served to slow the discourse on how best to develop it (Palanski & Yammarino,
2007). The dictionary defines integrity as consistent adherence to an accepted set of
moral values. However, a second, related definition can also be useful: integrity is a
state of seamlessness or wholeness. The hull of a boat has integrity when it has no
gaps or leaks, ensuring its functionality. In this chapter, we extend this second
definition and align it with the construct of behavioral integrity (BI). BI can be
defined as the perceived pattern of alignment between leaders’ words and action. It is
further operationalized as how consistently the target actors (i.e., leaders) keep their
promises and enact their espoused values. More simply stated, leader BI is about the
extent to which leaders are perceived to ‘‘walk their talk,’’ ‘‘practice what they
preach,’’ and ‘‘live by their word’’ (Simons, 2002, 2008).
Empirical research has demonstrated a strong impact of BI on both organiza-
tional and individual behavior and performance outcomes (Simons, Tomlinson, &
Leroy, 2011). This construct differs from most conceptions of integrity in that it
explicitly excludes moral content from consideration — it simply focuses on the
alignment between words and actions. While we believe that the content of values
that a person lives by is extremely important, this chapter focuses on the question of
how to help people more consistently align their words and their actions — an aspect
of integrity that we assert is critical for good leadership. The facts that BI does not
reference any particular moral code and has empirically demonstrated strong
performance implications combine to make it an especially potent framework for
teaching ethics. In applying this framework, we consider the scarcity of leaders with
an impeccable word to be due to shortfalls of skill and focus rather than of
‘‘character.’’ This understanding renders integrity very trainable, given appropriate
contextual supports. The BI framework offers an approach to learning ethics that is
positive and practical in orientation and that speaks even to students who may see
little or no inherent value in pursuing ethical behavior. This approach does not
Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity 137
invoke shame in the way other approaches might because it focuses on effectiveness
rather than rectitude, and on learnable behaviors rather than character. As a result, it
makes current personal shortfalls more readily discussable without defensiveness.
BI is a perceived pattern of alignment — and, as such, it may usefully be broken
down into components. There is the actual level of values alignment and promissory
follow-through that a leader tends to demonstrate over time. This pattern of
behavior forms the basis for others’ perceptions, and is a critical area for
intervention. Then there is a second component, which is occasionally more critical:
the actor must communicate well enough that observers notice and experience the
actor as demonstrating high values alignment and promissory follow-through.
Commitments must be explicitly discussed, and their completion acknowledged.
Similarly, decisions must be explained in terms of their values alignment, and so
forth. Integrity is a subjectively perceived phenomenon, but the perception is based
upon an objective reality. Both objective and subjective components represent areas
for potential habit and skill acquisition with the goal of raising integrity levels. Our
aim is to support people in better living by their word, and in communicating
effectively so that others perceive this alignment as well.
Raising integrity levels, as we understand the challenge, is ultimately about
changing behavior. We seek to enhance the extent to which students or clients (e.g.,
teachers, managers, and leaders) deliver on promises and demonstrate espoused
values, and also to more skillfully manage others’ perceptions of these traits. The
events to which the integrity question applies are ubiquitous — as people interact to
get things done, they are constantly making commitments. Thus, the requisite
behavioral changes are profound and far-reaching. Based on personal experiences of
teaching BI for managers and graduate and undergraduate students, which we
further confirmed through discussions with several executive trainers and coaches, we
assert that four things are needed to create lasting integrity change:
First and most importantly, the learner must be positively motivated to pay
attention and to struggle through the awkwardness that usually accompanies the
learning of new approaches to frequent interactions and processes. Since the context
of this approach focuses on one’s integrity, the learner must be willing to be self-
critical, have a mindset oriented toward growth and development, and seek to
understand the perceptions of others.
Second, the learner must become equipped with specific skills and habits to support
change. Learners must embrace new habitual procedures for making and asking for
commitments, for follow-through and transparency. They must also develop their
awareness of ambivalences, values, and habits that undermine their ability to
consistently deliver on promises. This skill and awareness development is the meat of
the lesson plan, but it must be well motivated because change is not easy.
Third, there must be a system for follow-up and ongoing encouragement because
change takes time and sustained attention. Absent follow-up, the best-delivered
package of motivation and equipment will fail to become integrated into the learner’s
daily (and hourly) routine. Consequently, there needs to be a system for getting
learners back on track when the learning and practice become inconvenient or
uncomfortable — as they inevitably will.
Fourth, the change effort must be supported and reinforced by a larger

organizational context. Too often, features in the immediate and broader organiza-
tional environment undermine what would otherwise be a successful program of
change or development. Indeed, even the most well-intentioned individuals will be
challenged to maintain their word-deed alignment in a system that includes
hypocritical leaders or supervisors, middle managers who are ambivalent about the
policies they espouse and enforce, and/or policies that provide perverse incentives
and so reward behaviors that run counter to espoused values and goals. Such
contextual factors will bring into question leadership commitment to the principles of
integrity, and will generate cynicism and a pull toward low integrity. Support from
the larger organizational context is further important as it combines and strengthens
each of the three preceding steps.
7.1. Motivate
We established earlier that BI is anything but an easy task. It involves confronting

personal demons, noticing and changing well-established but dysfunctional habits,
learning new skills and attitudes, and — most difficult of all — maintaining behavioral
change over time. Therefore, overcoming these challenges and enhancing integrity calls
for considerable motivational and emotional resources. In this section, we distinguish
between intrinsic and extrinsic motives for integrity and positive and negative
emotions supporting these motives. When we integrate these two dimensions —
intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation, and positive and negative emotions — the
following matrix emerges (Figure 7.1, see also Elliot & McGregor, 2001).
All four of these cells can be useful in creating behavioral change. Extrinsic
motivation may be particularly useful in the early stages of behavioral change
programs, in that they are easy to target and provide immediate gratification for the
learner. In contrast, intrinsic motives are more sustainable. The two forms of
motivation can peacefully coexist. Similarly, both approach and avoidance (i.e.,
‘‘pull’’ and ‘‘push’’, respectively) motives have their place and time. The often-used
Positive emotions Negative emotions

Intrinsic approach motivation Intrinsic avoidance motivation
Intrinsic motivation (Self-driven pursuit of the (Self-driven avoidance of the costs

benefits of high BI) of low BI)
Extrinsic approach motivation Extrinsic avoidance motivation
Extrinsic motivation (Externally-driven pursuit of (Externally-driven avoidance of

the benefits of high BI) the costs of low BI)
Figure 7.1: Types of motivation for integrity change.

change management analogy of the ‘‘burning platform’’ (Embley, 2005, p. 1) argues

that some people engage in change because they are drawn to the new future (i.e.,
leaping toward something), while others only change because staying the same
becomes uncomfortably ‘‘hot’’ (i.e., leaping away from something).
The distinction between ‘‘pull’’ and ‘‘push’’ or approach and avoidance motives is
important because ethics are so often framed as a way to avoid legal and reputational
problems — which creates an avoidance motive. Boyatzis (2008) discussed approach
and avoidance motives in terms of ‘‘positive and negative emotional attractors,’’
which are associated with parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous system arousal,
respectively. Positive emotional attractors involve contemplation of aspirations and
desired outcomes, while negative emotional attractors involve shame and fear of
undesired outcomes. Positive emotional attractors — approach motives — are
associated with parasympathetic nervous system arousal and with successful
development of new neural pathways, or learning. Negative emotional attractors,
on the other hand — avoidance motives — stimulate sympathetic fight-or-flight
arousal and so actively inhibit higher cognitive functioning, the growth of new neural
pathways, and learning. Boyatzis’ research suggests that most ethical or integrity
training is framed in a way that inhibits thought, learning, and integration of the
lessons into new behavioral patterns. Integrity must be discussed as a positive
aspiration — and ultimately as a performance enhancer — to create an approach
motivation, a positive emotional attractor, and ultimately, effective cognitive and
behavioral learning.
7.1.1. Extrinsic Motivation
Motivating people to focus on and enhance their BI can be accomplished with both
approach and avoidance approaches. Fear of negative consequences can be powerful
to initiate movement, but may only nudge them to the nearest safe spot. We believe
that such a negative focus inhibits the reflection and thought needed to change
behavior for the long term, and so encourage educators to focus on building positive,
approach-based, motivation for integrity change. By contrast, many companies and
schools seem to implement integrity enhancement practices based on extrinsic
avoidance motivation. They seek to avoid legal and reputational damage that often
results from patterns of unethical behavior, as opposed to being ‘‘pulled’’ toward
something engaging and elevating associated with integrity-based performance.
While negative emotional attractors play a role in the ‘‘unfreezing’’ process of
change, effective integrity enhancement entails shifting participants toward positive
motivation. Fortunately, the BI framework facilitates such a shift. As noted earlier,
BI uses morally neutral language that reduces negative feelings such as defensiveness
and shame, and allows productive discussion and reflection to develop skills and
habits rather than striving to build ‘‘moral fiber.’’
The BI framework has generated a body of empirical studies that demonstrate
concrete, measurable personal and organizational performance benefits to be
attained through integrity enhancement. For example, Simons (2008) demonstrated

that hotel managers who were seen as walking their talk reaped an ‘‘integrity
dividend’’ of significantly superior customer satisfaction and business unit profit-
ability. Research further clarifies how individuals — in particular leaders — reap
these positive rewards (Simons et al., 2011). When leaders maintain BI, they
communicate more clearly and they build stronger relationships (Simons, 2008). As a
result, followers perform better in their job and are more likely to engage in extra-
role behaviors, such as helping others or promoting a positive image of the
organization (Palanski & Yammarino, 2011). In addition, research has shown that BI
improves the relationship with other organizational stakeholders: other departments
or peers, customers, suppliers, and unions — all of which enhance performance
(Simons et al., 2011).
7.1.2. Intrinsic Motivation
In addition to these extrinsic motivations, it is important to highlight that there are

also intrinsic motivations for wanting to develop BI. Festinger (1962) noted that
there is an inherent striving for consistency as individuals experience unpleasant
dissonance when they experience a misalignment between their attitudes and actions.
To the extent that people voice (or subvocalize) their attitudes, this dissonance will
drive them to increase BI. Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000) further
posits that individuals have an inherent striving for integrity as the integration of the
psychological elements of the self in a unified whole and the integration of the
individuals into the larger social environment. In the next section, we elaborate how
leader integrity may result from a more integrated identity.
Milton, Simons, and Leroy (2011) built on the self-discrepancy and regulatory
focus literature (Higgins, 1987, 1997) to argue that BI may arise from a lack of
congruence between the actual self (who you are), the ought self (who you believe
you ought to be), and the ideal self (who you want to be). Discrepancies between
actual and ideal selves lead to disappointment and dissatisfaction arising from
dreams left unfulfilled and an approach motivation concerned with (i.e., being ‘‘pulled
toward’’) advancement, growth, and accomplishment. In contrast, discrepancies
between actual and ought selves lead to fear, guilt, self-contempt and uneasiness, and
an avoidance motivation concerned with (i.e., ‘‘pushed away from’’) protection,
safety, and responsibility. Self-discrepancies can thus make individuals intrinsically
motivated to develop BI by highlighting the gap between who they are and who they
aspire to be or who they should be.
Several training tools may be used to highlight the gap between these different
selves and so increase intrinsic motivation. Combining self-assessment and peer
assessment may be particularly interesting because it not only provides individuals
with motivation to change but also provides some insight into perceived
misalignment. Both empirical and practical knowledge confirm that others often
do not perceive us in the same way we perceive ourselves. Because BI is difficult to
maintain, individuals often find large discrepancies between how they perceive their
own BI and how peers, subordinates, and supervisors perceive their BI. Highlighting
the gap can be very disconcerting but also highly motivating for change. As a simple
example, one of the authors recently interviewed his wife regarding his patterns of
promise keeping, and learned of a few minor home repair projects that he had agreed
to and then put off. While that breach might seem trivial, it nonetheless represented
an impediment to trust in an undeniably important relationship. The interview
successfully motivated change.
Individuals also learn simply by observing others (Bandura, 1977). In observing
role models who score high on BI, they see what kinds of behaviors, emotions, or
thoughts are desired, and thus construct a best practice or a new ‘‘ideal self.’’ Of
course, individuals can be inspired by famous examples of leaders who have
demonstrated high integrity (e.g., Gandhi and Mandela), but ideally their role model
should be someone closer to home, someone they can personally relate to, talk to,
and model in the same context. This recommendation highlights an important yet
unsettling challenge for anyone in the role of developing/training others in BI — they
must maintain an impeccable word because trainees implicitly see the trainer as
someone who should be a positive example and role model of word-deed alignment.
Highlighting the gap between different selves may also occur because of a
significant event or moment in one’s life or one’s career (Roberts, Dutton, Spreitzer,
Heapy, & Quinn, 2005). These ‘‘trigger moments’’ can happen spontaneously (e.g.,
departure of a spouse or career change) or can be induced in training (Avolio &
Luthans, 2006). In addition, designed interventions or exercises can induce jolts as
well, such as imagining what individuals say about you at your own funeral,
participating in a fire walk to overcome personal fears, having a difficult
conversation with a loved one, or countless other activities. Roberts et al. (2005)
further argue that for jolting experiences to translate into positive change rather than
negative change, one needs the emotional resources to cope with the jolting
experience. Those resources may come in the form of positive affect, positive/
supportive interpersonal relationships, and personal agency, or psychological capital
in the form of hope, optimism, self-efficacy, and resilience (Avolio & Luthans, 2006).
When jolts are induced through training, the educator needs to ensure that sufficient
resources exist prior to the exercise by creating an environment where it is
psychologically safe to engage in learning (Edmondson, 1999).
One context for intentionally creating such ‘‘trigger moments’’ for new self-
awareness and integrity development is in challenge experiences. These crucible
events (often considered significant formative moments for the participants) enable
learners to crystallize and develop a vivid body sense of an ‘‘ideal self’’ as they
accomplish emotionally charged experiences, such as walking across a bed of hot
coals or traversing a gorge on a high-speed zipline. A good trainer can associate the
exhilaration and adrenaline that are inherently attached to these activities with the
concept of integrity, thus creating a positive challenge: ‘‘Are you man enough/
woman enough for integrity?’’ Indeed, after successfully accomplishing something so
far beyond the boundaries of the previously-defined ‘‘possible self,’’ a new
appreciation can emerge about one’s ability to control their actions and, in turn,
their word-deed alignment. Such an approach is a far cry from a traditional ethics
discussion or lecture forum. However, it may well provide a more effective
motivational context for generating lasting behavioral change.
7.1.3. Conclusion
In concluding this section, we propose that both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation are
important in developing BI. Whereas extrinsic motivation is perhaps more important
to get individuals over the initial threshold to consider the importance of BI, intrinsic
motivation is important to have individuals identify with more personal benefits to
striving for alignment, and thus helps create sustained change. The tension between
approach and avoidance motivation for integrity change is more problematic. While
many programs are driven at the organization level by negative avoidance motives
such as the fear or cost of scandal and illegality, positive approach motives are far more
supportive of higher cognitive functioning and learning. The BI framework, and the
research it has spawned, facilitates redirecting avoidance motives into approach
motives by enumerating practical bottom-line performance enhancement benefits and
non-shaming language. In the next section, we further discuss how developing self-
awareness is an important aspect of equipping individuals to build and maintain BI.
7.2. Equip
Motivation is imperative, but is not by itself enough to change a person’s integrity
level in a lasting way. Raising integrity levels requires (1) changing dysfunctional
habits, (2) cultivating self-awareness, and (3) developing a set of communication
skills necessary to become better at aligning words with actions (and being seen as
doing so). Learners must address, for example, habits of overcommitment and/or
disorganization and communication patterns that allow listeners to hear nonexistent
commitments. They must become aware, in an ongoing way, of their own values,
ambivalences, and automatic social behaviors that affect their ability to maintain an
impeccable word. These learning challenges are substantial, but they are necessary
for maintaining BI.
7.2.1. LearningHabits
Many integrity breaches are a result of people overpromising. The ‘‘offender’’ might
have the best of intentions and no manipulative agenda, but might simply overinflate
their self-concept in the mold of Garrison Keillor’s Lake Wobegon, where ‘‘all the
children are above average.’’ Many managers do not like to admit the limits of their
power within the organization — that someone other than them has final approval
authority. Some describe themselves in terms of the values to which they aspire — rather
than those they actually enact and overpromise that way. For example, a speaker might
overpromise out of fear of failure or of disappointing or of looking bad. Managers who
describe extreme commitments to customer service or to employee development are
often in fact operating from a more complex calculus that factors in costs and profits.
Notice that none of these integrity breaches is a result of malice or of poor character.
Indeed, there are many noncharacter-based reasons why people act with low BI. The
challenge these people face is how to present a more accurate picture without alienating
their constituencies. Honest dealings often require greater skill than would a more
deceitful approach.
The work of David Dunning and colleagues further highlights why assessing one’s
own BI might be particularly challenging for individuals (Kruger & Dunning, 1999).
This research has shown that individuals are typically bad at assessing their own
competence. In general, individuals assume that they are ‘‘above average’’ and that
this effect gets worse as individuals are, in fact, less competent. More importantly,
this research has also shown that individuals are bad at making predictions about
their own behavior (Epley & Dunning, 2000). Epley and Dunning (2006), for
example, found that people were systematically worse in evaluating their follow-up
on ethical behavior than when they were judging that of others. In other words,
individuals systematically thought that they were ‘‘holier than thou.’’ Their results
indicate that being bad at making behavioral predictions is not the result of
deliberate manipulation but of basic psychological mechanisms such as the inability
to use population base rates and the general tendency to assess oneself positively.
One key to raising the reliability with which one keeps one’s word is simply to give
one’s word more focus and intentionality. People often agree to things casually,
without thinking through the commitment they are making. Some people tend to want
to say ‘‘yes’’ to others’ demands or requests. They might want to please others, to sell,
be liked, or to avoid conflict. Simply stated, in order to protect their integrity, these
people need to learn to say ‘‘no’’ or to lean into their discomfort — admittedly, not an
easy task. Granted, one cannot sidestep this problem simply by refusing ever to give
one’s word — promises are the lifeblood of any business dealing or ongoing trust-based
relationship. But one can learn to be more deliberate in the giving of one’s promise.
Robert Gass teaches people to carefully and soberly consider, before giving a promise,
(1) whether one truly wants to make this commitment given the other promises and
commitments already on the plate and (2) whether one can, in fact, truly guarantee its
delivery. If the answer to either of these questions is ‘‘no,’’ then one needs to negotiate a
different deal with the person asking the promise. Catching yourself before you make a
poor promise is a habit that requires training and reinforcement.
Another necessary, functional element of teaching people to manage their
integrity perceptions is learning and using a system for recording, keeping track of,
and following up on commitments. It could be a simple paper and pencil to-do list or
a smartphone program, or a multi-platform system like one of the authors is
currently developing. The essence of making such a system work is using it: marking
down every commitment, checking in with the list, noticing when commitments need
to be renegotiated, and marking them off when complete. Simply the process of
compiling all of one’s promises onto a single list is often a journey of discovery.
When you have worked the list to the point where every commitment on it is on track
for delivery, there is an extraordinary sensation of mastery that follows. This
recommendation might seem pedestrian, but such a list represents a direct picture of
the extent to which the learner is living by his or her word.
Even if you make your promises carefully, and follow through like gravity, others
might still perceive word-deed misalignment, and so ascribe to you low BI. It is not
enough simply to live by one’s word; one must also communicate well enough that
people recognize that you are living by your word. We can all recognize that many
perceived broken promises are simply the result of misunderstandings. So often,
people hear what they want to hear, filter the message through their biases,
attributions, and assumptions, and perceive promises or statements of espoused
values that were never intended. For example, if a supervisor tells an employee that
she will ‘‘try to get them a raise,’’ the employee may very likely filter out the word
‘‘try,’’ and will see anything less than success as a broken promise. Instead, more
deliberate, intentional language on the part of the supervisor can illuminate the
commitment being offered, and can prevent accidental perceptions of word-deed
misalignment.
Often people are unclear in their requests. For example, does the statement, ‘‘I
want this project in my hands by Friday’’ mean first thing or end-of-business? Is it a
request for a first draft or a polished document? Was the request made in a way that
allows the respondent to refuse? An agreement absent permission to decline or
renegotiate means very little. When the person asked cannot say ‘‘no,’’ then his ‘‘yes’’
is suspect. Clear communication patterns around asking and giving commitments are
a powerful tool for raising integrity. The key to establishing these patterns is, again,
training, practice, and reinforcement.
7.2.2. Develop Self-Awareness
In addition to developing new behavioral routines, learners need to develop

awareness of their internal mechanisms — particularly those elements that might
challenge their integrity. People can enhance their integrity levels by better
understanding and tracking their personal values, desires, and wants, while also
increasing awareness of how they are perceived by others. Simons (2002) argued that
a key precondition for perceived alignment between values espousal and enactment is
that managers are actually aware of what drives or motivates them — what they
value. If leaders do not fully understand their own personal values before they
espouse them to followers, they may find that they are unable to, or uninterested in,
living up to their espousal. Even when leaders do not intend to deceive their
followers, they may unwillingly do so when they deceive themselves. As
Shakespeare’s Polonius said in Hamlet: ‘‘To thine own self be true and it shall
follow, as the night the day, that thou cannot be false to any other man.’’ In other
words, to remain true to others, one most first remain true and authentic to oneself
(see also Leroy, Palanski, & Simons, 2009).
As such, a useful step in developing BI is clarifying personal priorities, values, and

philosophies. As indicated earlier, this awareness can be achieved through surveys or
checklists where managers gain more self-knowledge.
Simons (2002) argued that there are perceptual filters between what leaders do and
how they are perceived. Followers may assume that the leader endorses certain values
without overtly espousing them, which sets the stage for BI evaluations for which the
leader never intended to be accountable. For example, simply by being in the leadership
role or through membership in an organization (e.g., military officer, church pastor, and
school board member), a leader will be considered to have endorsed certain relevant
values and promises. Therefore, when the military/church/school board member acts in
a way that seems inconsistent with the assumed values, a BI judgment is made, perhaps
without the member’s awareness. If any of these members were to be obviously
intoxicated, use foul language in public or even cut someone off in traffic, the resultant
evaluation may be that the action is inconsistent with the values expected of someone in
that position, despite no formal espousal being made. As such, self-reflection should
examine both the overt and the potentially nonverbalized values and promises that may
be evaluated by observers. Similarly, leaders need sufficient empathy and emotional
intelligence to know how their actions have an impact on others. In other words, to
maintain BI individuals need to develop accurate public self-awareness.
There are different ways to develop both private and public self-awareness. We first
highlight the role of mindfulness (Brown, Ryan, & Creswell, 2007; Dane, 2011) as a
vehicle for cultivating one’s awareness and developing one’s ability to direct our
attention internally (i.e., one’s thoughts, feelings, intentions, and values) as well as
externally (i.e., situational demands, other’s emotions, and desires). This heightened
awareness helps us to reduce discrepancies between who we are and what we do.
Research has shown that mindfulness supports value clarification and behavioral self-
regulation (Carmody, Baer, Lykins, & Olendzki, 2009; Shapiro, Carlson, Astin, &
Freedman, 2006). In other words, in being more mindful, we make more conscious
decisions that reflect our own personal values and behaviors. Research has shown that
mindfulness helps us to become more authentic, more true to ourselves, and experience
more self-concordance. For example, Brown and Ryan (2003) found that mindfulness
increases the congruency between implicit and explicit affect. Similarly, Koole,
Govorun, Cheng, and Gallucci (2009) found that even a small mindfulness induction
may increase the congruence between explicit affect and implicit and explicit self-esteem.
Mindfulness helps us become aware of when we are rationalizing our actions and are
failing to live up to certain commitments. In being more mindful, we are also more attuned
to how others will perceive our words (empathy) in that we more easily take the perspective
of the other party (Galinsky, Maddux, Gilin, & White, 2008). Perspective talking is a well-
established leadership exercise that helps individuals become aware not only of someone
else’s view on things but also of how this contrasts with your own view (Bass, 2008).
Finally, mindfulness may also be particularly valuable in highlighting one’s own habits
that make individuals engage in certain BI-destructive behaviors. In essence, mindfulness
makes one aware of what one does when one does it (Brown et al., 2007). If someone has
the tendency to come up with excuses, and these excuses damage their BI, mindfulness
training can help people become more aware of their own habits and change them.
In addition to private self-awareness, it is important to remain open to feedback

from others. Indeed, it is the outside party (e.g., peer, subordinate, friend, boss, or
spouse) who has command over the BI ascription in the first place (Simons, 2002). As
a result, it is critically important that we develop self-awareness through social
interaction. So often, the external perspective identifies ‘‘blind spots’’ and perceptions
of which the leader is unaware. One example of this comes from one of the authors,
who served as an instructor of a leadership course at the Air Force Academy. In this
course, the instructor introduced the concept of BI, and offered himself up as the
semester-long test case in trying to maintain a high level of BI. On the very first day,
he clearly espoused personal accountability, suggesting that each student had
command over his/her grade through his/her effort. In the same lesson, the instructor
delivered a brief quiz, using a technique to use mild social pressure to drive student
reading: all quizzes would be collected and a randomly selected quiz would be the
grade for the whole class. The following lesson, a student privately and respectfully
indicated that he perceived the way the quiz was conducted was inconsistent with the
stated value for accountability and ownership of one’s grade. The instructor
admitted that this perception was something he had never considered, but
acknowledged that it was absolutely an example of an ‘‘out of integrity’’ moment.
Had the student not felt safe enough to offer the feedback, or the instructor not been
receptive to it, the student’s perception of hypocrisy would likely have festered and
ultimately created a motivation and trust problem among his classmates.
This example demonstrates that other individuals can thus be an important
resource to make sure that we stay on the track we set out for ourselves. Leaders who
want to maintain BI are wise to actively search feedback from other individuals on
their current functioning and remain open and nondefensive to this feedback when it
is given. This will not only help leaders to remain on track and aware of their own
values but also help foster perceptions of BI in the eye of that particular beholder. By
remaining open to critique when someone perceives that a promise has been
breached, this person may come to better understand that the value breach was not
intentional and thus not downgrade the overall integrity of the person. Such an
environment of clear evaluation and open feedback seldom emerges spontaneously in
organizations. It requires a climate of trust and psychological safety, which can be
fostered through a clear BI ‘‘language’’ and a clear demonstration of receptivity to
feedback. In this regard, Leroy, Halbesleben, Savage, and Simons (2010)
demonstrated that leader BI is an antecedent to a team environment where it is
psychologically safe to speak up and admit mistakes.
7.2.3. Communication Skills
In addition to developing habits of careful commitment and self-awareness, high-

integrity leaders must communicate adeptly. Political skill represents ‘‘the ability to
effectively understand others at work, and to use such knowledge to influence others
to act in ways that enhance one’s personal and/or organizational objectives’’
(Ferris et al., 2005b, p. 127). This competency has been described as fundamental to
influence in the management of work and interpersonal relationships (Ferris,
Munyon, Basik, & Buckley, 2008), and provides leaders with a skill set for
identifying, minimizing, or managing word-deed misalignment events. Exploratory
research has also provided evidence that managers’ political skill is an antecedent to
subordinates’ ratings of the managers’ BI (Basik, 2010).
Political skill has four distinct dimensions (Ferris et al., 2007): social astuteness,
interpersonal influence, networking ability, and apparent sincerity. Competence in
these areas allows politically skilled managers to approach ambiguous situations with
a heightened ability to ‘‘tune into cues regarding constituents’ expectations, and thus
readily detect discrepancies in expectations and evaluations’’ (Tsui & Ashford, 1994,
p. 106). This skill allows such managers to anticipate, identify, and manage potential
BI problems that less politically skilled individuals may miss.
Leaders with high political skill may also be better able to facilitate the kind of
communication that reduces the probability of word-deed misalignment events from
occurring (or being perceived as having occurred). Cha and Edmondson (2006, p. 59)
found that ‘‘leaders with strong values may be earnest in their intention to behave
authentically, but their followers may not perceive them this way.’’ In their study,
employees often did not openly raise concerns about inconsistent behavior with the
managers, and poorly performing managers either were not sensitive to environ-
mental cues or were uncomfortable in actively seeking feedback in a sincere manner
from trusted sources. Similarly, Ceasar, Ferris, and Perrewé (2005) argued that
authentic leadership and leader political skills work together to foster follower
perceptions of trust and credibility and reputation.
Perhaps one of the most interesting application-based aspects of political skill is
that, although it is reasonably consistent across situations and is largely influenced by
stable characteristics and personality dimensions, it is conceptualized as a trainable
skill (see Ferris et al., 2007 for antecedent list). Scholars suggest that political skill
can be developed through self-assessment, experiential (e.g., personal or vicarious
learning and dramaturgical) exercises, mentoring, and evaluation and feedback
(Blass & Ferris, 2007; Ferris et al., 2005a). Mentoring or coaching relationships that
focus on clear communication, networking skills, appreciation for social and
emotional cues, and emotional regulation can also advance one’s comfort with these
critical dimensions.
7.2.4. Conclusion
In summary, we argue that certain techniques and skills can equip individuals to
develop and practice BI. These include establishing a clear, intentional framework
for making and asking commitments, keeping track and following through,
promoting communication through trusting, morality-neutral language, and
promoting the development of political skill. In addition, we suggest it is important
to maintain both private and public self-awareness by being staying present-minded
and engaging in authentic leadership behaviors. These recommendations can

promote an engaging climate that sets in motion a new type of relational exchange.
However, to create sustained integrity change, one must commit to a more sustained
program. In the next section, we will discuss ways to follow-up on the BI
development to ensure more lasting change.
7.3. Follow-Up
All the motivation in the world, and all the very best of tools, will, for most people,
fail to create lasting change if they are not coupled with follow-up. Changing
behavioral routines — especially subtle ones about how you deal with people — is a
difficult process. It invariably includes fumbles, missteps, and backslides. People need
support in order to continue to drive the change process forward. They need to be
reminded of the priority placed on integrity, they need to be held accountable for
completing exercises and learning new habits of commitment and follow-through,
and they need encouragement. Life is complicated, and other priorities will certainly
challenge the efforts of a new integrity enthusiast. Support is what allows integrity to
compete in the face of those competing priorities.
While follow-up is important for any behavioral change to be successful, we would
argue that it is especially important for the success of BI. While confronting your
reasons for engaging in BI development and learning new skills and habits can be
difficult, maintaining one’s integrity may be the most important challenge of all.
Similar to trust, once broken, BI is not easy to repair. Maintaining integrity is thus an
ongoing challenge for individuals. Circumstances can often change quickly such that
keeping promises may be costly, impractical, or even impossible. Managers are, almost
by definition, very busy, they are frequently focused on performance, and they are
often in the business of ‘‘putting out fires’’ or handling crises. For this reason, it is
important to have support structures in place to help managers maintain focus on BI.
Support can take many forms, and, ideally, multiple forms of support can
backstop each other to prevent participants from losing change momentum and/or
slipping back into dysfunctional habits. The support can come in the form of routine
conversations with a coach, or a circle of like-minded peers, or simply a colleague
who serves as an accountability partner. Specialized integrity enhancement software
can reinforce change efforts by facilitating accountability, though it may be
inherently limited at addressing social needs.
The functions of follow-up are (1) to refocus attention on the challenge of growing
personal and organizational integrity, (2) to recommit to meeting that challenge —
especially in the face of slippage, (3) to point out blind spots and patterns that
diminish integrity, (4) to provide additional skills as needed, and (5) to provide a
social incentive and encouragement in taking on this most difficult and profound of
challenges.
Any effective effort to create lasting personal or organizational change in integrity
must include a mechanism for follow-up. The simplest mechanism is simply to assign
participants partners with whom they must discuss their daily integrity challenges in
on a weekly or biweekly basis. Assignments and discussion questions could be
provided for each conversation. While it is simplest to implement, this mechanism
will allow some participants to slip through the cracks or to collude in devaluing or
dismissing the material. Creating circles of five or six with the same structure is a
more reliable method of follow-up support, as such groups will create social pressure
against cynical dismissal. Larger follow-up circles might have an assigned coach or a
designated facilitator. Such circles might also have a volunteer who will represent the
group members’ challenges to a skilled facilitator at an additional troubleshooting
conference call. The most expensive and versatile method of follow-up —
appropriate where resources are available and other factors might make one of the
other methods impractical — is personalized coaching. The key to any follow-up is
simply to find a way to keep integrity top-of-mind as a focal point.
A second form of follow-up support — which may be considered as a potential
supplement — is accountability software. While there are many time management
and to-do list manager programs, we envision software that is tailored to increasing
integrity levels within this framework. As such, it would remind participants about
deliberate processes for making and breaking commitments, keep track of and
remind participants about commitments while informing accountability partners
about the status of these commitments, query satisfaction levels with commitment
fulfillments, track numbers of commitments made and fulfilled, and perhaps offer
coaching videos targeted to displayed patterns. Such work, undertaken by one of the
authors, is in its infancy, but it represents a promising direction.
A third form of follow-up is to ensure that the exercises during any BI-
developmental effort are transferable enough to practice. As we noted earlier, the
developmental context needs to be positive and safe to learn new behaviors and
skills. However, this context should not create a utopian environment that stands in
sharp contrast with the day-to-day reality of maintaining BI. We see two methods to
enhance the transfer of BI-developmental practices: First, in the training the exercises
need to be as realistic and as practically applicable as possible. Second, after the
training the trainee needs to be supported by the larger organizational context to
implement their newfound skills. We focus on this in more detail in the next section.
In conclusion to this section, we want to reemphasize the importance of follow-up
for the inherent challenges related to BI. Because perfect BI is so difficult to attain,
anyone is going to face disappointment along the way. Meeting these disappoint-
ments head-on and acknowledging that these disappointments do not speak to your
character but to your skill is important to remain motivated.
7.4. Manage the Larger Organizational Context

Because much of this chapter describes BI development in an organizational context,
whether a school, military unit, or a business, we would be remiss not to recognize
the broader organizational features that can contribute to BI enhancement success
and failure. Anyone’s ability to effectively learn to demonstrate high BI will be

influenced by factors such as the history of integrity in the organization, the reward
structures in place, the hierarchical alignment of values in the organization, the
consistency of upper management guidance, and even the modeled behavior of upper
management themselves.
Organizational culture and norms can create both formal and informal pressures
that can undermine BI at the individual level. Simple behaviors such as poor
punctuality, missed meetings, and tolerance for promise breaking can set the stage
for desensitization to BI breaches. Anyone who has waited hours past a scheduled
cable or telephone company appointment can attest to the impact of a culture of
tolerance for such actions, regardless of all the customer service values they espouse.
In that culture, it is no surprise that the service technicians (when they finally show
up) are not particularly concerned with broken appointments. Conversely, cultures
such as Southwest Airlines that both formally and informally support and expect
actions in alignment with their values seem to naturally produce individual actions
that exemplify BI.
In the same way, an organization’s reward system can easily encourage or even
discourage BI enhancement. Bonuses, incentives, and performance appraisals should
clearly align with the values espoused by the organization, lest they run the risk of
‘‘rewarding A while hoping for B’’ (Kerr, 1975). For example, Simons (2008) spotlighted
a Boeing executive who directly linked the company’s value of employee morale with the
performance appraisal system. In one instance, an abusive manager who ignored
the corporate focus on morale was penalized a third of his bonus for not aligning with the
company value. Similarly, when Brigham Young University removed a star athlete from
the basketball team for premarital sex (a violation of the school’s honor code), it sent a
clear and consistent message about the integrity of the school with regard to its espoused
values. Conversely, a major hotel once implemented an unconditional money-back
guarantee for its customers as a way to enhance service quality — but they then
incentivized hotel managers to minimize the number of refunds given (causing them to
renege on the guarantee). It took a major change effort to remedy the reputation damage
wrought by this perverse incentive. So often, organizations proclaim values that they
undermine with their own incentive programs. In these cases, the ends are rewarded,
while the means — often proclaimed loudly in the company values — are noticeably
disregarded. In such an environment, individuals trying to elevate their own BI are
operating in a system that encourages and models just the opposite.
Simons (2008) also described those recurring situations where managers must
espouse, and perhaps even champion, initiatives and values with which they disagree.
This ‘‘middle manager’s dilemma’’ can result in frustration, callousness, and even
decrease in effort. The requirement to compromise one’s own consistency may also
result in ambivalence about their charge, ultimately setting the stage for BI
violations. This very real and frequent dilemma of having to ‘‘salute smartly and
carry on’’ is made only more problematic if the guidance from on high does not,
itself, stay consistent. The shifting winds of change and management fads too often
create a situation where it is impossible for a manager to demonstrate consistency,
keep promises, and walk the values they (or the broader organization) talk.
In conclusion to this section, we restate that positive and well-designed efforts to

enhance individual and corporate integrity can be easily undermined by an
organizational context that incentivizes low-integrity behavior, or by senior
executives who fail to live up to the higher standard espoused. Because training
and education in integrity tends by design to sensitize participants or students to
integrity breach, it is extremely important that those in leadership positions
themselves enact the high standards they hope to inculcate. Failure to do so risks
generating extreme levels of cynicism.
7.5. Summary
Raising integrity levels — your own or someone else’s — is a personal development
challenge that entails learning new skills and habits, developing new awareness, and
confronting personal demons and automatic behaviors. It is not an easy challenge,
nor is the change process an easy fix. It requires sustained effort and attention.
Because of that requirement, a successful change effort must:
Motivate change. The motivation can be intrinsic or extrinsic, and may focus on
approach or avoidance. Intrinsic motivations may be more durable, but extrinsic
motivations are easier to manage. Avoidance motives, such as the fear of scandal,
might help in the initial unfreezing process. However, they also inhibit higher
cognitive functioning and learning, so approach motives should be emphasized.
Fortunately, the BI framework facilitates approach motivation.
Equip. Integrity is a personal discipline that calls for the development of skills and
habits. Tactful honesty often requires greater skill than deceit. Likewise, many
promises are broken because the actor was not thoughtful enough in making the
promise or did not apply techniques of tracking and managing their commitments.
Fuzzy communication often results in the perception of broken promises — which is,
in practice, as bad as the real thing. Further, learners must develop awareness and
sensitivities, both of any internal mechanisms that might serve to undermine their
follow-through, and of how they are perceived by others.
Follow-up. Changing behavior patterns that are as pervasive and as deeply rooted
as those around commitments is difficult and will almost certainly entail backslides
and failures along the way. To create any lasting change, one must put in place a
system that maintains accountability for the change effort, reminds learners what
they are trying to do and why, provides troubleshooting and exercises targeted at the
learner’s specific areas of difficulty, and provides emotional support for the struggle.
The follow-up can come in the form of personal coaching, or peer accountability
partners, or a facilitated or nonfacilitated accountability circles. One way or another,
make sure learners have a serious, honest, and supportive conversation about the
change effort at least every two weeks for three or four months after initial exposure.
Provide a context. Do not allow the larger organizational context to undermine
your efforts. Don’t demoralize learners with policies that create perverse incentives
or leadership that demonstrates and fails to acknowledge blatant hypocrisy and
promise breaking. While organizational perfection may be an unattainable ideal, to

create change it is important that senior executives demonstrate support for the very
real challenge of raising integrity levels. The best way to demonstrate support is
through action — namely by providing adequate resources for the change effort and
by endeavoring to clean up their own house.
If all four of these elements are in place, then your efforts to raise integrity levels
are very likely to succeed and to yield positive outcomes both for the organization
and the individuals in it.
Acknowledgments
We would like to acknowledge the people with whom we had interesting conversations
and interviews for this chapter. More specifically, we would like to acknowledge
Laurent Ledoux, Head of Public Banking, at BNP Paribas Fortis in Belgium, and
Mr. Len Crowley, Executive director, PLI Global in Colorado Springs, CO.
References
Avolio, B. J., & Luthans, F. (2006). The high impact leader: Moments matter in accelerating
authentic leadership development. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Basik, K. (2010). Expanding the boundaries of behavioral integrity in organizations. Dissertation
thesis, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.
Bass, B. M. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial
applications. New York, NY: Free Press.
Blass, F. R., & Ferris, G. R. (2007). Leader reputation: The role of mentoring, political skill,
contextual learning, and adaptation. Human Resource Management, 46, 5–19.
Boyatzis, R. E. (2008). Leadership development from a complexity perspective. Consulting
Psychology Journal Practice and Research, 60, 298–313.
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in
psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 822–848.
Brown, K. W., Ryan, R. M., & Creswell, J. D. (2007). Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations
and evidence for its salutary effects. Psychological Inquiry, 18, 211–237.
Carmody, J., Baer, R. A., Lykins, E. L. B., & Olendzki, N. (2009). An empirical study of the
mechanisms of mindfulness in a mindfulness-based stress reduction program. Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 65, 613–626.
Ceasar, D., Ferris, G. R., & Perrewé, P. L. (2005). Leader political skill and authentic
leadership. In: W. Gardner, B. Avolio & F. Walumbwa (Eds), Authentic leadership theory
and practice: Origin, effects and development (Vol. 3, pp. 139–154). Oxford: Elsevier.
Cha, S. E., & Edmondson, A. C. (2006). When values backfire: Leadership, attribution, and
disenchantment in a values-driven organization. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 57–78.
Crowley, L. (2010). Executive director, PLI Global Personal Interview.
Dane, E. (2011). Paying attention to mindfulness and its effects on task performance in the
workplace. Journal of Management, 37(4), 997–1018.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2000). The what and why of human goal pursuit: Human needs and the
self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 350–383.
Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501–519.
Embley, K. (2005). The burning platform: Identification of the ‘‘burning issue’’ will encourage
change in stakeholder behavior. Policy Perspectives. Center for Public Policy & Administration.
Retrieved from http://www.cppa.utah.edu/outreach/articles/PP_Burning_Platform.pdf.
Epley, N., & Dunning, D. (2000). Feeling ‘‘holier than thou’’: Are self-serving assessments
produced by errors in self- or social prediction? Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 79(6), 861–875.
Epley, N., & Dunning, D. (2006). The mixed blessings of self-knowledge in behavioral
prediction: Enhanced discrimination but exacerbated bias. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 32(5), 641–655.
Ferris, G. R., Munyon, T. P., Basik, K. J., & Buckley, M. R. (2008). The performance
evaluation context: Social, emotional, cognitive, political, and relationship components.
Human Resource Management Review, 18, 146–163.
Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Kolodinsky, R. W., Hochwarter, W. A., Kacmar, C. J.,
Douglas, C., & Frink, D. D. (2005). Development and validation of the political skill
inventory. Journal of Management, 31, 126–152.
Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Perrewé, P. L., Brouer, R. L., Douglas, C., & Lux, S. (2007).
Political skill in organizations. Journal of Management, 33, 290–320.
Festinger, L. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Galinsky, A. D., Maddux, W. W., Gilin, D., & White, J. B. (2008). Why it pays to get
inside the head of your opponent in strategic interactions. Psychological Science, 19(4),
378–384.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review,
94(3), 319–340.
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280–1300.
Kerr, S. (1975). On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B. Academy of Management
Journal, 18, 769–783.
Koole, S. L., Govorun, O., Cheng, C. M., & Gallucci, M. (2009). Pulling yourself together:
Meditation promotes congruence between implicit and explicit self-esteem. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1220–1226.
Kouzes, J., & Posner, B. (2003). The leadership challenge. The most trusted source on becoming
a leader. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing
one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134.
Leroy, H., Halbesleben, J., Savage, G., & Simons, T. (2010). Behavioral integrity, priority of
safety, psychological safety, and safety outcomes: A team-level study. Paper presented at the
Academy of Management Conference, Montreal, CA.
Leroy, H., Palanski, M., & Simons, T. (2009). How being true to the self helps leaders walk the
talk: Authentic leadership and leader behavioral integrity driving follower affective
organizational commitment and work role performance. Paper presented at the Academy
of Management Conference, Chicago, IL.
Milton, L., Simons, T., & Leroy, H. (2011). Three implications of identity theory for
behavioral integrity research, August. Paper to be presented at Academy of Management
Meeting, San Antonio, TX.
Palanski, M. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (2007). Integrity and leadership: Clearing the conceptual
confusion. European Management Journal, 25, 171–184.
Palanski, M. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (2011). Impact of leader behavioral integrity on follower
job performance: A three-study examination. Leadership Quarterly, 22, 405–420.
Roberts, L. M., Dutton, J. E., Spreitzer, G. M., Heapy, E. D., & Quinn, R. E. (2005).
Composing the reflected best-self portrait: Building pathways for becoming extraordinary in
work. Academy of Management Review, 30, 712–736.
Shapiro, S. L., Carlson, L. E., Astin, J. A., & Freedman, B. (2006). Mechanisms of
mindfulness. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62, 1–14.
Simons, T. (2002). Behavioral integrity: The perceived alignment between managers’ words
and deeds as a research focus. Organization Science, 13, 18–35.
Simons, T. (2008). The integrity dividend: Leading by the power of your word. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Simons, T., Tomlinson, E., & Leroy, H. (2011). Research on behavioral integrity: A promising
construct for positive organizational scholarship. In: K. S. Cameron & G. M. Spreitzer
(Eds), Handbook of positive organizational scholarship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tsui, A. S., & Ashford, S. J. (1994). Adaptive self-regulation: A process view of managerial
effectiveness. Journal of Management, 20, 93–121.
Chapter 8
Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool

to Promote Integrity Awareness: A Chinese
Perspective
Heh Jason Huang
Abstract
Purpose –– Combining principles and pragmatism is one of the most difficult
challenges any leader would face. We want leaders to be morally sensitive
pragmatists. This chapter shows how groups of MBA and EMBA students in
Taiwan interactively learned the integrity issues of their decisions.
Approach –– By using proper scenarios and performing careful analysis of
consistency among thought, voice, and action (a TVA model), management
educators can better align teaching with the need to foster integrity awareness
of the students.
Findings –– In the expatriation scenario with four alternative actions, only 30%
of the students in both MBA and EMBA classes opted for the action with
behavioral integrity implication.
Practical implications –– The behavioral definition of integrity is too narrow
that people would find widespread phenomena of lacking integrity in our
business managers. To Confucius and his disciples, there are other more
important elements than behavioral integrity within a larger overarching
framework of values.
Social implications –– The answer to what is a good moral code for a leader
would be the most problematic when referring to integrity because integrity in
organizational life is a multifaceted concept that operates at many levels and
can be viewed from many perspectives.
Originality of paper –– This chapter proposes a TVA model as a teaching tool
to promote integrity awareness. The model not only facilitates discussion but
also makes a contribution to clarify the concept of integrity by dealing with the
different aspects of the concept.

ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1
156 Heh Jason Huang
Traditionally, the concept of integrity is closely bounded to morality and is treated as

personal virtue. Empirical studies found that integrity is an influential antecedent of
leader trustworthiness (Deery, Iverson, & Walsh, 2006; Hinkin & Schriesheim, 2009).
Leaders shape and reinforce an ethical or unethical organizational climate by what
they pay attention to, how they react to crises, and how they behave (Sims &
Brinkmann, 2002). Being honest and trustworthy with integrity, leaders can provide
the ethical tone for the organizations (Trevino, Brown, & Hartman, 2003).
Nevertheless, while integrity is seen as very important, there is little agreement on
how it actually works. Existing research has shown a more popular definition of
integrity in terms of consistency of a person’s words and deeds, that is, behavioral
integrity (Palanski & Yammarino, 2007; Simons, 2002). However, a strict rigidness
of integrity application is not only impractical but also undesirable (Barry &
Stephens, 1998; Becker, 1998). Integrity is under challenge when ethical or moral
dilemmas arise. Leaders hold their integrity to gain trustworthiness; yet at the same
time they may have to compromise their integrity in terms of voice or behavior for
survival. Therefore, it will be necessary for leaders to manage a delicate balance
between flexibility and total rigidness of integrity.
Integrity is a multifacet concept that can be looked at from various angles and
perspectives. The above-mentioned behavioral definition of integrity, with an
emphasis on trustworthiness, is too narrow. With such a narrow definition, people
would find widespread phenomena of the lack of integrity in our business managers,
especially those in some cultures with high pragmatism. Particularly, Chinese are
pragmatic. They see functionality and results as the primary motivators. Besides
trustworthiness, to Confucius and his disciples, there are other more important
elements within a larger overarching framework of values. Therefore, while
emphasizing being trustworthy by keeping one’s words, Confucius described the
people with a rigidity of behavioral integrity as being of a petty-minded manner
(岏㉔≰,嫛㉔㨫,䫫䫫䏅⺞ⅉ❘) (The Analects of Confucius, Chapter 13).
As pointed out by Srivastva and Cooperrider (1988), leader integrity defies simple
categorization and its meaning is highly context-specific; its important issues begin to
surface only after being raised to the level of group discussion. Following this line of
thought, I propose a scenario-based approach to show how the desirable virtue of
integrity can be educated, developed, and further exercised by leaders.
8.1. Consistency of Thought, Voice, and Action

Etymologically, integrity comes from the Latin: integritas, meaning ‘‘wholeness,
soundness, completeness’’ as does the word integer meaning ‘‘whole.’’ In this context,
integrity is the inner sense of ‘‘wholeness’’ deriving from qualities such as honesty.
Integrity can be regarded as the opposite of hypocrisy in that former regards internal
consistency as a virtue. As such, integrity is a concept of consistency in thoughts,
attitude, words, and behavior across time (Trevino, Hartman, & Brown, 2000;
Worden, 2003).
Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool for Integrity Awareness 157
Nevertheless, behavioral integrity has been seen by many scholars as a

parsimonious definition (Palanski & Yammarino, 2007; Simons, 2002). Behavioral
integrity represents the consistency of words and action, which meets in part the
popular definition of integrity as trustworthiness and promise keeping. Behavioral
integrity is arguably amoral — an individual may declare an intention to act
unethically and, in following through, claim to act with integrity.
In existing literature, moral integrity is a concept of integrity with an emphasis on
morality (Olson, 2002). Moral integrity is a very complex construct to define and may
represent coherence between the philosophical components of moral discernment,
consistent behavior, and public justification. An appropriate Chinese translation for
‘‘moral integrity’’ would be zheng qi (㷲㺲), which is also not easy to explain in
Chinese. However, it is readily recognized as a virtue that lays the foundation for all
other virtues and is thus fundamental to all others. Carter (1996) referred to moral
integrity when he defined integrity in three steps: ‘‘discerning what is right and what is
wrong; acting on what you have discerned, even at personal cost; and saying openly
that you are acting on your understanding of right from wrong.’’
Therefore, concept of integrity is more about the wholesomeness of the character
and the steadfastness in the adherence to one’s personal ethics. A person of integrity
will bear the consequences, as Carter (1996) pointed out that ‘‘we admire most those
who stand up for their beliefs when they have something to lose.’’ Integrity can be
explained as the belief in their own moral ethics and the conviction to stick by them
even during times of adversity and misfortune. And integrity can still be seen as a
consistency between words and actions, but the words here should include the
thoughts, that is, ‘‘words inside our heads’’ (Harris, 2008) and the voices, that is,
‘‘words being said.’’
8.2. Inconsistency of Thought, Voice, and Action

As integrity has come to take on the positive aspect of being a ‘‘whole’’ person, it
seems desirable for people to have the consistency among thought, voice, and action.
Nevertheless, we have also noticed, more often than not, all kinds of inconsistencies
among them in the real world. Below are various perspectives of explanations on
those inconsistencies.
A contractarian perspective on inconsistency would point to the basic idea that
ethical obligations originate in mutual agreements or contracts between people.
Integrative social contracts theory (ISCT) developed by Donaldson and Dunfee
(1994, 1999) can be used as a framework that anchors integrity in ethical theory
(Gosling & Huang, 2009). Instead of starting from an individual’s judgment
processes, ISCT started by considering the interactions and interventions of the
individual’s surroundings. The immediate surroundings of an individual are
described as ‘‘microsocial’’ and the broader, outer parts as ‘‘macrosocial.’’ Therefore,
within different levels of social surroundings, different codes of actions were
developed. The central argument of the ISCT is that there is no absolute set of
158 Heh Jason Huang
guidelines that suits every situation in all circumstances. Conflicts and dilemmas exist
in complex groups and social interactions. Individuals will try to satisfy as much as
the micro-local rules allow, but anything in the local area that violates the macro is
unacceptable.
A theory-of-action perspective on inconsistency points to the action strategies
adopted by managers. The action strategies are mainly produced by the theories-in-
use, as termed by Argyris (1993). The governing values of theories-in-use are being in
unilateral control, being rational, and suppressing negative feelings. According to
Argyris, there are two types of master programs of theories of action: those that are
espoused and those that are used. The power motive of the leaders would keep them
from acting with integrity.
The ‘‘folly of ignoring’’ would be another perspective on inconsistency. It is about
the human nature that leads people to ignore the inconsistency of their thoughts,
voices, and actions. They may make decisions unconsciously when reacting out of the
‘‘human nature’’ and do the usual, commonly accepted thing. Kerr (1975) raised our
attention to the follies of rewarding A, while hoping for B. Some of the reasons he
gave for the follies of a reward system may also contribute to the foolish mismatches
among people’s thought, voice, and action.
However, more pertinent and general factors for the explanation to the
inconsistencies among integrity components may be from the national culture
perspective. National culture is the dominant culture within the boundaries of the
nation-state. As cultural norms, values, and beliefs are passed on through
generations, historical factors play a central role in culture formation. Especially,
Chinese culture has its deep roots in history, which span almost five millennia. The
Chinese see themselves as guardians of a unique heritage. History serves as a
reference point for many customs, traditions, and practices, including their views on
the various aspects of integrity. The following section is a detailed discussion of the
Chinese culture in terms of integrity-related values.
8.3. Chinese Integrity-Related Core Values

When referring to moral integrity, we need to mention Wen Tianxiang (1236–1283), a
prime minister in the last years of the Southern Song Dynasty of China. He has
become a popular symbol of patriotism in China for his resistance to Kublai Khan’s
invasion of the Song, and for his refusal to yield despite being captured and tortured.
Wen suffered for four years in a military prison before his execution in 1283. During
that time he wrote the famous classics ‘‘Song of Moral Integrity’’ (㷲㺲㷛) that
most of Chinese are familiar with.
The story of Wen Tianxiang is a good case to show the characteristics of moral
integrity in Chinese societies. Whereas the West focuses on the individual, China
places more emphasis on a collective perspective (Hofstede, 1980). A key part of
collectivism is taking pride in and being loyal to the country. Therefore, Chinese
usually refer ‘‘moral integrity’’ (or ‘‘righteousness’’) to sacrificing oneself or doing

something good to benefit the country and society.
Filial piety has the second place, next to country, in integrity. Filial piety in Chinese
culture is an individual’s natural feeling toward his parents. It is composed of caring
love, sincere concern, and natural respect. In Chinese culture, the ultimate moral
authority is still the human world. The practice of moral life is not following the
spiritual authority or God, but to follow humanistic sensitivity and reflection. Filial
piety just refers to the most immediate and necessary human relation. Confucius
clearly claimed that filial piety is the foundation of morality (The Analects of
Confucius, Chapter 1). That is why he defies the type of integrity in terms of honesty in
a case of testifying against one’s own father for stealing a goat. He maintains that real
integrity exists when a father conceals the misconduct of his son, and a son conceals the
misconduct of his father (䓅䍉⷟楀,⷟䍉䓅楀,䦃⦷␅₼䩲) (Chapter 13).
Therefore, it is not surprising to notice that, in a Chinese culture, integrity with a
subject-matter other than patriotism and filial piety is somewhat downplayed. When
Tzu-Gung asked Confucius, ‘‘What qualities entitle a person to be considered
scholarly?’’ Confucius gave his answers in the following order: ‘‘being loyal to the
commission of the lord,’’ ‘‘being praised for filial piety,’’ and ‘‘being trustworthy in
walking the talk.’’ Confucius not only put behavioral integrity in the third place but
also warned Tzu-Gung not to do it with a petty-minded manner. Mencius, the most
famous Confucian after Confucius, gave an even more outspoken comment on
behavioral consistency (Li Lau, Chapter 11). He emphasized that great men are those
who stick to principle of righteousness, neither must they to be sincere about what
had been said, nor must bring about accomplishment for what had been undertaken
(⮶ⅉ劔,岏ₜ㉔≰,嫛ₜ㉔㨫,㍮券㓏⦷).
It seems clear that although Confucians think highly about being honest and being
consistent between words and deeds, they maintain that people should not be
confined by those norms if it is a right thing to break them. This line of thought may
be understood by the Confucians’ Doctrine of the Mean (Analects, Chapter 6). The
Doctrine conformed to the tradition of the philosophical Taoists who believed in the
mutuality of nature (Yin and Yang). This philosophy maintains that a leader must
understand the movement and constant dynamics of these two opposing but
complementary forces to maintain harmony in life.
8.4. Scenario Analysis for Promoting Integrity Awareness

When fostering the development of managers with integrity in a Confucian culture
like that of China, management educators must take into account important
contextual factors. It is important for students in management education to not only
understand that integrity may be susceptible to influences of situation and
disposition, but they also need to understand what these potential influences are.
To bring together contextual factors and individual interactions within their
surrounding environments, scenarios can be used for analysis. Scenarios represent stimuli
160 Heh Jason Huang
in different contexts, and scenario analysis is a process of analyzing possible future events
by considering alternative possible outcomes. Each scenario carries different emphases on
contextual domains. While a slightly different emphasis on each scenario is placed,
scenarios could play as modifiers and filters. They could screen, change, and provide
necessary surroundings, situations, and environments in which managers and our survey
subjects could be circumscribed and imbedded (Huang & Hung, 2009).
In facilitating scenario discussions, I propose a model of thought, voice, and
action (hereafter called TVA analytical model for integrity or TVA model): the
thought (ideas and opinions about a given subject; the words inside one’s head),
the voice (an expression of one’s will and desire; the words being expressed), and the
action (the choice being made). Within the model, the consistencies among thought,
voice, and action can be calculated. The data thereby generated can be used for
group discussion. Accordingly, students will be able to understand the causes and the
justifications that may initiate a divergence from the ideal states of integrity.
8.5. TVA Analytical Model for Integrity: An Illustration

The instructor may run a series of scenario analysis classes to respond to one important
integrity issue. The students use the information from the scenario to independently
complete the worksheet (see Appendix 8.A). Please refer to the example as follow:
You are the vice president for Sales and Marketing of a leading motorcycle
company and have appointed Mr. Chang to develop the Indonesian market.
Mr. Chang accepted this position on the premise that the assignment will be for a
limited period of three years and he can return to the company headquarters after
the period. Three years had passed and Mr. Chang had done his best to bring that
Indonesian subsidiary to a break-even situation. He now expresses his desire to fly
back home to have more time with his aging parents. However, finding a successor
would not be easy and is becoming a matter of great concern. What would you do
given the following options?
A. Acknowledge Mr. Chang for his outstanding performance and persuade him to
extend his stay. And tell him that he can come home after the subsidiary
reports stable revenue.
B. Just allow Mr. Chang to return home as agreed.
C. Promote Mr. Chang and offer him a better package to entice him to stay longer
and work harder in his post.
D. Talk to Mr. Chang’s parents and ask them to convince their son to stay with
his current post.
Forty-four MBA students and 59 EMBA students were exposed to the above
scenario. Based on his or her own choice of action, each student was asked to
evaluate the consistency between thought and voice, and the consistency between
voice and action chosen. In addition, he or she was required to evaluate the
legitimacy of the voice (then) and the action (now), respectively. The three indicators
of legitimacy are: (1) In line with the existing practice? (2) Be willing to discuss the
decision publicly? (3) Having support from the closest friends and family members?
A decision is probably acceptable on ethical grounds if the decision maker can
answer positively to each of those questions (Jones, 2010;Trevino, 1986).
Anonymously, all the above were done on a worksheet (see Appendix 8.A) and the
students’ subjective evaluations were made on 10-point Likert scales. All the
worksheets were collected and divided according to the alternative actions. For this
scenario, there are four groups and for each group, mean values of the subjective
voice-action consistency (i.e., behavioral integrity or BI) and the subjective thought-
voice consistency (i.e., voice integrity or VI) were calculated. Also, the mean values of
the legitimacy indicators for voice and action can be obtained. Appendices 8.B and
8.C are the results for the MBA class and the EMBA class, respectively.
With the results provided, the students were then randomly and equally divided into
four groups for discussions. Each group discussed one of the four alternatives, which was
also assigned randomly. A focal question for discussion is to identify the initial thought of
the vice president when he made his earlier statement. For the alternatives rated with lower
levels of integrity (BI or VI), it is important to investigate the contextual factors behind.
After discussion, each group was required to make a report to the class and take questions.
8.6. Discussion
In the above scenario, the vice president was faced with a conflict between idealism
and pragmatism. Each student was required to assume the role of the vice president
and choose among the four alternative courses of action. A worksheet (see Appendix
8.A) was then used to guide each student in evaluating his or her own choice. After
completing the worksheets and aggregating the evaluations, three kinds of data can
be generated: the preference for actions, the level of integrity, and the level of
legitimacy (see Appendices 8.B and 8.C).
As for the action preference, the action with behavioral integrity (the action B)
was chosen by about 30% of the students in both MBA and EMBA classes. The
three other alternatives valued pragmatism above idealism in different degrees. The
above scenario aroused student interest immediately at the onset of the study because
most of the students had concrete experience or reflective observation for
expatriation issues. It is important to note that the scenario should include all the
major alternatives or options in which the contextual factors faced by the students
had been taken into account. For example, action D in the above scenario seems very
unlikely in a Western culture, but it is definitely an option in Chinese societies which
place far greater emphasis on filial piety.
Being provided with the data from students’ worksheets, each of the four groups
discussed one specific action randomly assigned by the instructor. Based on that
action taken, the students take turn to discuss on what was really in the mind
162 Heh Jason Huang
(i.e., the thought) of those decision makers in the first place. In a more objective
manner, each group should come up with the evaluations on the levels of integrity
(including VI and BI) and the levels of legitimacy (voice and action, respectively) for
the action assigned. On one hand, by comparing the group evaluation with the
students’ subjective evaluation on integrity, the students would be able to be aware of
the possible integrity issues. On the other hand, by comparing the group evaluation
with the students’ subjective evaluation on legitimacy, the students may detect what
the decision makers truly believe and may want to investigate where those beliefs
come from and if they are morally grounded; hence, the instructor can introduce
later a meaningful discussion on moral integrity.
This chapter does not go into the detailed findings of the above scenario since it
was only used for illustration purpose. More importantly, this exercise did yield
insightful comments from the students. It was really a learning process because some
students expressed their willingness to change their decisions if they had to make the
choice again. Although TVA model is mainly a teaching tool to promote students’
integrity awareness, researchers may find it useful for comparative studies (e.g.,
comparisons between the MBA and the EMBA or participants with different
demographics or cultural backgrounds).
8.7. Conclusion
Due to the elusiveness of the concept of integrity, Carter (1996) put it this way:
‘‘Integrity is like the weather: everybody talks about it but nobody knows what to do
about it’’ (p. 181). Moreover, the concepts of integrity, morality, ethics, and legality
are often entwined to create confusion (Erhard, Jensen, & Zaffron, 2010). As a result,
the development of integrity awareness is a neglected area of management education.
The TVA model of integrity proposed in this chapter intends to make a contribution
to clarify the concept of integrity by dealing with the different aspects of the concept.
By doing so, managers would be able to recognize it, accept it, and manage it.
Any moral decision a leader makes should be able to withstand adversity and
challenges. A leader needs to be consistent in the face of adversity, whereas a leader
also needs to be adaptive to be contingent to the environment. If the concept of
integrity is only understood as the consistency between thought and voice (i.e., voice
integrity or VI) or between voice and action (i.e., behavioral integrity or BI), then we,
as the management educators, should feel frustrated by the fact that many students
evaluated the actions of their own choice with very low in BI with a clear conscience
and peace of mind. Moreover, many of the students admitted that they did not
express their thoughts fully and, therefore, were low in voice integrity.
Fortunately, ethical consideration does not demand perfect honesty and
consistency. From a Chinese perspective at least, it is sometimes even a ‘‘right’’ thing
for us if we are not subject to the rigid requirements of integrity. If carried to its logical
conclusion, this argument points to the most important thing that we know whether it
is a ‘‘right’’ thing to do. For this purpose, TVA model of integrity can help facilitate
useful discussion. And through the scenario analysis, hopefully we can still find some
principles that we should never compromise, no matter how pragmatic we are.
Acknowledgment
I wish to thank Gerhard Reber, Peithe Salva, Jay Vora, and the anonymous reviewers for
their valuable comments and suggestions on an earlier draft of the chapter. Financial
support from the National Science Council, Taiwan for my research projects on integrity
is gratefully acknowledged (grant numbers: NSC-93-2416-H-110-032, 94-2416-H-110-
019, & 95-2416-H-110-019).
References
Argyris, C. (1993). Knowledge for action: A guide to overcoming barriers to organizational
change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Barry, B., & Stephens, C. U. (1998). Objections to an objectivist approach to integrity.
Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 162–169.
Becker, T. E. (1998). Integrity in organizations: Beyond honesty and conscientiousness.
Academy of Management Review, 23, 154–161.
Carter, S. L. (1996). Integrity. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Confucius. (1989). The analects of Confucius (A. Waley, Trans.). New York, NY: Vintage
Books.
Deery, S., Iverson, R., & Walsh, J. (2006). Towards a better understanding of psychological
breach: A study of customer service employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 166–175.
Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. W. (1994). Towards a unified conception of business ethics:
Integrative social contracts theory. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 252–284.
Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. (1999). Ties that bind: A social approach to business ethic. Boston,
MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Erhard, W. H., Jensen, M. C., & Zaffron, S. (2010). Integrity: A positive model that
incorporates the normative phenomena of morality, ethics, and legality. Working Paper NOM
No. 10-061. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Gosling, M., & Huang, H. J. (2009). The fit between integrity and integrative social contracts
theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(3), 407–417.
Harris, R. (2008). The happiness trap: How to stop struggling and start living. Boston, MA:
Trumpeter Books.
Hinkin, T. R., & Schriesheim, C. A. (2009). Use shaping and chaining to boost employees’
work. Harvard Business Review, March, p. 26.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture consequences: International differences in work-related values.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Huang, H. J., & Hung, Y. (2009, August). Gender differences in behavioral integrity from a
social-contracts perspective. Paper presented at Academy of Management Annual Meeting,
Chicago, IL.
Jones, G. R. (2010). Organizational theory, design, and change (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Pearson.
164 Heh Jason Huang
Kerr, S. (1975). On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B. Academy of Management
Journal, 18, 769–783.
Olson L. M. (2002). The relationship between moral integrity, psychological well-being, and
anxiety. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Palanski, M. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (2007). Integrity and leadership: Clearing the conceptual
confusion. European Management Journal, 25(3), 171–184.
Simons, T. (2002). Behavioral integrity: The perceived alignment between managers’ words
and deeds as a research focus. Organization Science, 13(1), 18–35.
Sims, R. R., & Brinkmann, J. (2002). Leaders as moral role models: The case of John
Gutfreund at Salomon Brothers. Journal of Business Ethics, 35, 327–339.
Srivastva, S., & Cooperrider, D. L. (1988). Executive integrity: The search for high human
values in organizational life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Trevino, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision making in organizations: A person-situation
interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, 11, 601–617.
Trevino, L. K., Brown, M., & Hartman, L. P. (2003). A qualitative investigation of perceived
executive ethical leadership: Perceptions from inside and outside the executive suite. Human
Relations, 56, 5–37.
Trevino, L. K., Hartman, L. P., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager.
California Management Review, 42(4), 128–142.
Worden, S. (2003). The role of integrity as a mediator in strategic leadership: A recipe for
reputational capital. Journal of Business Ethics, 46, 31–44.
Appendix 8.A. Worksheet for ‘‘Indonesia Expatriation’’: A Scenario

Mr. Chang accepted the position on the premise that the assignment will be for a
limited period of three years and he can return to the company headquarters after the
period. Three years had passed and Mr. Chang had done his best to bring that
Indonesian subsidiary to a break-even situation. He now expresses his desire to fly
back home to have more time with his aging parents. However, finding a successor
would not be easy and is becoming a matter of great concern. What would you do
given the following options?
WHAT WAS SAID THEN The consistency THE ACTION NOW

between said and done
Promise Mr.Chang
Repatriation at 3-year term Low High (Please pick one)
0.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10
Considering what you have said: A. Persuade Mr. Chang to extend his
In line with the existing practice? stay until it reports stable revenue.
Low 0_1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10 High B. Allow Mr. Chang to return home
Willing to discuss what you said publicly? as agreed.
Low 0_1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10 High C. Offer a higher ranking and a better

Being supported by your closest friends? package to entice Chang to
Low 0_1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10 High stay longer at his current post.

D. Convince Chang’ parents of
asking their son to stay with his
current post.
The consistency between

what you said and what in
your mind. Considering the action you took:
Low High
In line with the existing practice?
0.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10
Low 0_1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10 High
Willing to discuss your action publicly?
Low 0_1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10 High
Being supported by your closest friends?
Low 0_1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10 High
WHAT REALLY IN YOUR MIND WERE:
166 Heh Jason Huang
Appendix 8.B. MBA Class Feedback Information as the Basis for

Group Discussions
Actions Action A Action B Action C Action D

n: 26 (59%) n: 14 (31%) n: 2 (5%) n: 2 (5%)
Intention of Persuade Allow Offer a Convince

the actions Mr. Chang to Mr. Chang higher rank Chang’
extend his stay to return and a better parents of
until it reports home as package to asking their
stable revenue agreed entice Chang son to stay
to stay longer with his
current post
Voice: Promise Subjective BI (Behavioral Integrity, i.e., Voice–Action
Mr. Chang consistency)
repatriation
(5.3) (7.8) (1.5) (8.0)
at 3-year term
Thought: What Subjective VI (Voice Integrity, i.e., Thought–Voice
are the true consistency)
thoughts in (6.0) (7.1) (5.0) (5.0)
the first place
In line with V1 7.5 8.0 10.0 6.0
the existing
A1 6.6 8.7 7.5 6.0
practice?
Be willing to V2 6.9 7.9 4.5 5.5
discuss A2 6.2 8.6 8.5 3.0
the decision
publicly?
Supported V3 7.2 7.8 6.5 6.5
by closest
A3 6.0 8.5 6.0 5.5
friends and
family?
Voice legitimacy 7.2 7.9 7.0 6.0
¼ (V1 + V2
+ V3)/3
Action legitimacy 6.3 8.6 7.3 4.8
¼ (A1 + A2
+ A3)/3
Appendix 8.C. EMBA Class Feedback Information as the Basis for

Group Discussions
Actions Action A Action B Action C Action D

n: 21 (36%) n: 18 (30%) n: 16 (27%) n: 4 (7%)
Intention of Persuade Allow Offer a Convince
the actions Mr. Chang to Mr. Chang higher rank Chang’
extend his stay to return and a better parents of
until it reports home as package to asking their
stable revenue agreed entice Chang son to stay
to stay longer with his
current post
Voice: Promise Subjective BI (Behavioral Integrity, i.e., Voice–Action
Mr. Chang consistency)
repatriation (7.2) (9.3) (5.6) (6.5)
at 3-year term
Thought: The true Subjective VI (Voice Integrity, i.e., Thought–Voice
thoughts in the consistency)
first place (8.4) (8.3) (6.4) (8.7)
In line with the V1 8.5 8.7 6.9 8.5
existing
A1 7.8 8.7 6.4 8.0
practice?
Be willing to V2 8.9 8.3 6.5 9.3
discuss the A2 8.4 9.1 6.6 7.0
decision
publicly?
Supported by V3 8.7 7.8 7.1 7.8
closest friends A3 7.6 8.1 7.3 7.0
and family?
Voice legitimacy 8.7 8.3 6.8 8.5
¼ (V1 + V2
+ V3)/3
Action legitimacy 7.9 8.6 6.8 7.3
¼ (A1 + A2
+ A3)/3
PART IV
DEVELOPING CURRICULA BASED ON A
LIBERAL APPROACH TO EDUCATION: A
WAY TOWARD RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS
Chapter 9
Returning to a Holistic Management Education

and the Tradition of Liberal Education
Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin
Abstract
Purpose – This chapter advances the growing call from scholars who contend
that business education needs to incorporate a whole-systems philosophy
guided by the traditional liberal education model. We focus on traditional
undergraduate students in our discussion because their stages in cognitive,
ethical, and psychological development suggest they have different develop-
mental needs compared to conventional MBA students.
Methodology/approach – Insights from both a literature review and qualitative
data gathered from a three-year action research process that engaged four
business education stakeholder groups (teacher-scholars, administrators,
students, and business practitioners) in virtual and face-to-face dialogues
inform our emergent model for a liberal undergraduate business education.
Findings – We detail the competencies involved in, pedagogical approaches
needed for, and philosophical tensions that emerge when working toward the
creation of a liberal education model for undergraduate business education.
Research limitations/implications – The action-research project informing the
current chapter was conducted with a limited sample size only in the United
States. Future research could seek to expand on our findings with a larger,
more internationally diverse sample.
Social implications – A liberal-based education helps students connect the siloed
realms of information they are exposed to in school and helps them begin to
view themselves as citizens of a larger society, encouraging them act with
integrity toward others in business and beyond.
Originality/value of paper – The chapter offers a model to begin re-conceptua-
lizing undergraduate management education grounded in the historical
tradition of liberal education.

ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1
172 Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin
When you have broken the reality into concepts

you never can reconstruct it in its wholeness.
–William James
Old habits are hard to break. This statement rings true not only for individuals
but also for industries. A glance through the history of modern business reveals the
deep-seated pattern of breaking down whole systems into measurable, isolated,
component parts to help increase efficiency and effectiveness. With industrialization,
Frederick Taylor’s extreme focus on optimizing task-oriented work and establishing
time-motion rewards accelerated the perception of organizations as being comprised
of various parts; like a machine, work began to be reduced to smaller and smaller
elements to be efficient. This mechanistic metaphor has become so pervasive in
business we no longer even recognize it as an optional way to approach creating
effectiveness, but rather we treat it as a given (Bolman & Deal, 2008; Morgan, 1996).
Yet, as the recent ethical and financial crises around the world remind us,
organizations are not machines; they are intricate and integrated elements in the
fabric of our society. From single companies like Enron to entire industries like
mortgage lending, we have learned that a myopic focus on one area of business —
such as short-term financial profits — can lead to blindness regarding business’ long-
term, holistic societal impact. Similarly, when individuals only focus on meeting their
individual performance metrics without consideration for how they fit into a broader
business and social reality, we increasingly see the unethical and unsustainable
behaviors that have addled corporate culture. We are coming to realize that the
success of business has become fundamentally interconnected with the successes of
our society, and vice versa. Therefore, management education has an intensified
responsibility for cultivating holistic thinkers who can agilely navigate the complexity
of our business world and balance both business and society’s needs, a process we
will argue best happens through the tradition called ‘‘liberal education.’’1
In this chapter, we advocate for the long-standing tradition of liberal education,
which historically integrates lessons and thinking across many disciplines that are
segmented in today’s curricula. After first detailing the rationale for changing toward a
more integrated model of business education, we define what a liberal education
entails. We trace the history of undergraduate education, highlighting the increasing
call for a return to more integrated education. Specifically, we offer a model for
conceptualizing undergraduate management education grounded in the historical
tradition of liberal education. While we believe that such a model is also applicable at
the MBA level, we focus specifically in this chapter on the traditional undergraduate
student population (i.e., students under 23 years old) who comprise 69.7% of all
undergraduate students nationwide (NCES, 2006). We purposely concentrate on this
group because their stages in cognitive, ethical, and psychological development suggest
they have different developmental needs compared to conventional MBA students. We
1. Our use of the term ‘‘liberal’’ in this context does not relate to any political ideology.
Return to Liberal Education 173
ground our proposed educational model in data gathered during a three-year, multi-
stakeholder action research agenda seeking to identify best practices, imagine new
possibilities, and experiment with training new leaders for the future. We conclude with
a discussion of the challenges and tensions inherent in any paradigmatic shift,
especially one as long standing as business and management education.
9.1. The Call to Transform Management Education

Today’s complex global world has fundamentally challenged the traditional, siloed
business thinking that has predominated business practices during the twentieth
century. The current call to create institutions that foster continuous innovation
requires vibrant and imaginative thinking (Segal, 2010). The increasingly cross-cultural
and multi-generational work force requires insightful and inclusive leadership
strategies, adaptive thinking, and critical reflection skills (Thomas, Thomas, Ely, &
Meyerson, 2002; Zemke, Raines & Filipczak 2000). The rapid evolution of social
technology tools is revolutionizing the possibilities for corporate interaction more than
ever before (Solis, 2011). Furthermore, decreasing natural resources, radical
transparency in the marketplace, and increasing expectations for sound social and
environmental performance from stakeholders are but a few of the many obstacles to
integrative, systems-thinking facing current business leaders (Laszlo & Zhexembayeva,
2011). Systemic thinking approaches are necessary today if value chains are to be
maintained in a sustainable manner for both business and wider society (Atwater,
Kannan, & Stephens, 2008; Thurston, 2000). However, a recent Association to
Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) study indicated that while 76% of
business school deans believe an integrated curriculum is necessary (Athavale,
Davis, & Myring, 2008), fewer than 5% have a comprehensive program
(DeMoranville, Aurand, & Gordan, 2000).
Just as managing and leading in this environment requires new approaches, so too
do our approaches for educating and developing the young minds who will be the
future leaders in this world. After all, at its very core, the primary role of
management education is to prepare students to become effective leaders of
tomorrow, providing them with the tools, skills, and mindsets to face the daunting
challenges, ethical dilemmas, and enormous opportunities they will inevitably
experience during their careers. The call for management education, therefore, is to
develop the effective curricular models and pedagogical strategies that will cultivate
future managers who can lead with integrity and manage the ‘‘whole’’ in a
competitive landscape that does not always cultivate such behaviors.
From the Latin integritatem, integrity means ‘‘wholeness’’ and requires a
willingness to see and experience the world as a collective whole rather than as an
optimized set of competitive parts. Unfortunately, the majority of management
education today reflects — and perpetuates — a siloed view of knowledge, with a
bias toward functional and technical skill sets (Khurana, 2007). Such an approach
has inadvertently truncated management education’s attention on developing the
human and caring dimensions critical for ethical behavior (i.e., Bennis & O’Toole,
2005; Donaldson, 2002; Ghoshal, 2005; Mintzberg 2004; Navarro, 2008). Yet, if we
want students to act with integrity, we must model it at every level of the educational
system. To this end, this chapter advances the growing call from scholars who
contend that management education needs to incorporate a whole-systems
philosophy if we are to facilitate students’ ability to act with integrity in an
increasingly fragmented world (i.e., Atwater et al., 2008; Giacalone, 2004; Khurana,
2007; Mintzberg, 2004).
9.2. Liberal Education: Rediscovering and Returning to Our Roots

We define a ‘‘liberal’’ approach to education as one that provides students with
integrated coursework that spans across the major disciplines of the university (i.e.,
‘‘hard’’ sciences, social sciences, humanities, and fine arts) in a coherent program that
actively helps students blend and apply the knowledge across their courses as well as
focuses on the holistic development of the student as a person (i.e., ethically,
intellectually, spiritually, socially and professionally). Key to this definition is its
emphasis on coherence across disciplines and among students’ ways of being in the
world. Coherence applies not only to general education requirements but also to
business courses. Our definition is built on Schneider (2000) who explained that liberal
learning includes, ‘‘forms of education that develop analytical and ethical judgment,
expand cultural and imaginative horizons, prepare students for socially useful work,
and foster both social responsibility and civic engagement in a wider world’’ (p. 2).
Schneider further posits five broad areas of liberal learning:
1. essential skills, such as writing or quantitative reasoning or a second

language; 2. cultural, societal, and scientific knowledge important in
making sense of the world we inherit; 3. developed inquiry capacities and
knowledge sufficient to probe unscripted problems and complex issues;
4. integrative learning, or the ability to bring disparate kinds of
knowledge and understanding to bear on complex problems; and, 5.
grounded values, including the willingness to see the world through
others’ eyes and a commitment to the value of learning itself. (ibid, p. 2)
On the basis of this definition, one can see that a liberal education seeks to
integrate paradigms, cultivate individual and systemic capacity, and foster critical
thinking (Senchack, 2007). This type of education aims at giving students a broad
grounding in various disciplines that better prepares them for the myriad of
organizational roles they will face in their professional, civic, and social lives
(AAC&U, 2007). In practice however, today’s colleges — even with their increased
focus on cross-disciplinary general education requirements — often fall into the old
rut of knowledge segmentation, where each course is treated as a unique entity,
rather than as a complement to other courses in the curriculum.
We know that education can be so much more than graduation requirement

checklists. At its roots, a liberal education is the coherent integration of multiple
areas of knowledge and practice. This does not negate students’ desire for
professional readiness, but the educational experience is intended to be co-created
between the student’s initiative, faculty efforts, and an institution’s intention behind
curricular and extra-curricular designs. Thus, beyond simply seeing education as a
sequence of courses in a degree plan or a job training exercise, liberal education is a
process by which individuals come to understand themselves holistically (i.e., minds,
bodies, and beings) with multiple forms of knowledge, skills, and abilities (e.g.,
disciplinary literacy, leadership capacity, critical thinking, and ethical reasoning
abilities); and students begin to understand themselves and organizations as
integrated and contributing members of larger systems and societies (Neville,
Godwin, Senchack, & Parks, 2007). From the liberal education perspective, students
begin to make meaning from theory, critical thinking, and their lived experiences.
Therefore, a liberal education model transcends particular courses and aims to
transform students into responsible global citizens.
A liberal approach to education is not novel. At one time, this education standard
epitomized societies like ancient Greece. When President Lincoln signed the Morrill
Act in 1862 establishing the U.S. system of public colleges, the Act explicitly asserted
that the purpose of these land-grant colleges was to ‘‘promote the liberal and
practical education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and professions in
life’’ (AAC&U, 2011). Similarly, the primary objective of the early baccalaureate
degree was building foundational literacy in arts, natural science, and humanities and
striving towards skills in moral reasoning and critical thinking abilities (Senchack,
2007), so that students could ‘‘broaden (themselves) and prepare for life in general’’
(Kimball, 1996, p. 18). American colleges today, however, have philosophically and
programmatically drifted farther and farther away from integrated education models
toward a post–World War II consumer oriented, job-training model (Obermueler,
1993). This shift reflects the broader shift in our society’s focus toward specialization,
rapid success, and efficient processes (Khurana, 2007). Silos of knowledge began to
emerge with the professionalization of business and management, compartmentaliz-
ing subject matter into categories (Raelin, 2008). While silos offer depth of
specialized learning (Campbell, Heriot, & Finney, 2006), we have shifted our
educational attention away from the foundational cognitive and moral, psychosocial,
and skills development processes that our younger students specifically need. Perhaps
it is time for the pendulum to swing back.
Calls for a shift back to a more integrated educational model are echoing
throughout the Academy and beyond (Athavale et al., 2008; Bendheim, Waddock &
Graves, 1998; Nesteruk, 2005). The Board of Directors for the Association of
American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) issued a statement in 2002 saying,
‘‘Education serves democracy best when it prepares us for just the kinds of questions
we face now: questions about a wider world, about our own values, and about
difficult choices we must make both as human beings and citizensy. The approach
to higher learning that best serves individuals, our globally engaged democracy and
an innovating economy is liberal education’’ (AAC&U, 2011). Building on this
assertion, the AAC&U has outlined how the contemporary approach to liberal
education has shifted from a twentieth-century perception of being seen as non-
vocational and only an option for a privileged few, to becoming an essential
approach for all undergraduate education in the twenty-first century.
Academics such as Giacalone have similarly argued that to succeed in today’s
increasingly complex market and society, every student ‘‘needs a balanced
education that offers simple, basic humanistic knowledge to offset tactical
reductionism’’ (2004, p. 418). Similarly, Jones (2005) states that, ‘‘higher education,
business, and public policy makers will need to turn their attention to efforts of
aligning higher education curricula and outcomes with the escalating demands of
the surrounding environment y the value and benefits of a liberal education will be
more respected and in greater demand as the world becomes increasingly complex’’
(p. 32). Even the AACSB has supported the movement of programs toward a more
integrated approach. They now encourage undergraduate business programs to
include broad skills in their curriculum such as communication abilities, ethical
understanding and reasoning abilities, analytic skills, use of information
technology, understanding of the dynamics of the global economy, multicultural
and diversity understanding, and reflective thinking skills (AACSB, 2009, p. 71).
Clearly, some management educators recognize the value of holistic designs, even if
as an industry we do not integrate well.
AACSB’s evolving standards represent steps being taken within the field toward
creating a more integrated, holistic undergraduate education experience for our
students, but we still have a long way to go. For example, 90% of programs rely on a
single capstone course to provide integrated business functions (DeMoranville et al.,
2000). Furthermore, while some business faculty argue that integrating is the job of
the broader university curriculum or general education requirements, these
presumptions again illustrate fragmented thinking. Similarly, Chew and McInnis-
Bowers (2004) discuss an overarching problem with our attempts to integrate
curricula, the reality that most attempts merely structure ‘‘bridges’’ between courses
rather than genuinely ‘‘blending’’ approaches and perspectives. They claim that such
an approach only serves to reinforce the idea that general education courses such as
English, history or psychology (which help develop students’ cognitive, psychosocial,
and skill levels) are separate, unrelated realms of knowledge that are merely ‘‘fillers’’
that lack relevance to students’ true work within the business major (ibid.).
At a tactical level, some undergraduate business programs designate which
courses fulfill both the general education requirements and their business major
requirements to encourage ‘‘double counting’’ courses rather than to encourage
diversification of interests. While students no doubt seek out courses that will fulfill
multiple requirements simultaneously, it seems that we as faculty also compound the
problem with a ‘‘jump-through-the-hoops’’ mentality of advising. As Wick and
Phillips discuss, advisors often focus solely on major requirements at the margin-
alization of the general education core, resulting in students who ‘‘view general
education as the ‘stuff to get out of the way’ via the path of least resistance’’ (2008,
p. 24). These realities reduce the very intention behind diverse curriculum exposure in
general education requirements.
Considering these various dynamics, it is arguably time to return to a holistic

approach to management education. This is especially important at an under-
graduate level, a population to which we now turn.
9.3. Traditional Undergraduates as a Unique Population
The average undergraduate business student is younger, less professionally experienced

and in a different developmental stage than the traditional MBA student (Ruegger &
King, 1992). This holds significant implications for developing integrity in various ways.
First, age has implications on one’s generational perspective and life experiences, work
experience holds implications for one’s ability to effectively grasp business theory, and a
person’s developmental stage has implications for their cognitive, moral, and psychosocial
abilities (Godwin & Neville, 2007). We briefly address each of these dimensions in turn and
how each correlates with implications of a liberal educational model.
9.3.1. Age
While the average age of entering MBA class at the top business schools is 28 years
old, with most first-year MBA students having worked an average of four to five
years before attending business school (Schweitzer, 2005), the majority of under-
graduate business students are in their late teens and early 20s and have little to no
professional work experience. Given this age gap, the generational divide among
student populations is one dimension that separates our younger students from older
ones. Many have written about how the ubiquitous access to the internet and social
technology has impacted younger students’ learning styles (Proserpio & Gioia, 2007).
Others have pointed to an increased level of narcissism and over-developed sense of
entitlement and self-esteem that this younger ‘‘generation me’’ has compared to older
students (Bergman, Westerman, & Daly, 2010; Robak, Chiffriller, & Zappone, 2007;
Twenge, 2006). Each of these factors impacts how current, traditional under-
graduates approach the learning environment differently than their older, graduate
counterparts, and has implications for us as educators who are trying to foster
graduates who value integrity.
9.3.2. Work Experience and Skill Development
The average 28-year-old MBA student presumably has more work experience than
the average undergraduate business major. Looking at the average work experience
at each of the top five American MBA programs, as ranked by Business Week, those
students average from 41 to 120 months work experience before entering their
programs. This suggests a higher probability that MBA students have developed a
broader set of skills and abilities than their undergraduate counterparts.
The implication for educators is that the graduate and undergraduate students differ
significantly in the professional experience on which they can draw as they study
concepts. A recent survey of chief information officers reinforces this idea by
suggesting that college graduates (presumably mostly business majors) are not
prepared for the real world of business, with young hires reportedly lacking skills in:
project management (74%), business operations (71%), and interpersonal relation-
ships (71%) (CIOinsight, 2004). Such findings imply that classroom objectives for
typical undergraduates who lack significant professional experience need to focus on
strengthening particular skills and abilities toward appropriate professional levels,
compared to MBA classes, which instead need to build on those students’ four to five
years of professional experience.
Furthermore, looking at undergraduate students as a whole, employers report
overall inadequate levels of undergraduate preparation on foundational abilities such
as critical thinking and analytical reasoning, writing, information literacy, creativity
and innovation, complex problem solving, and intercultural competencies (AAC&U,
2007). Similarly, Bok (2006) argues that college students are underperforming in
crucial areas such as critical thinking, writing, and quantitative reasoning. He also
finds that only 10% of today’s college graduates are globally prepared. Even though
findings such as these refer to undergraduates in general, we can infer these lack-of-skill
issues exist for business graduates, given they comprise a majority of undergraduate
majors who are entering the workforce today.
9.3.3. Developmental Stages
The majority of traditional undergraduates fall into an age group loosely classified as
youth, which is a transition time between adolescence (14–19 years old) and adulthood
(generally occurring by mid 20s) (Brooks, 2008). MBA students, on the contrary,
traditionally fall into the adulthood category. The youth brain is continuing to
develop physically, as are their social abilities and self-perception, and a stream of
educational research has suggested that adolescent and youth learners are indeed
different from adult learners (i.e., Kasworm, 1980; Lankard, 1997).
For example, Lampe (1997) traces literature over 20 years illustrating that decision-
making capabilities in traditional undergraduate college students are subordinate to
the ethical reasoning abilities in older, more mature, adult populations. Furthermore,
psychosocial development theories suggest that important emotional intelligence and
personal identity development occur during the traditional undergraduate years
(Chickering, 1969; Chickering & Reisser, 1993; King & Kitchener, 1994; Perry, 1970),
which further suggests that 18–23 year olds are likely to be at a more basic level of
moral complexity than the moral reasoning capacity of their adult MBA counterparts.
Considering these various dynamics simultaneously, we argue that undergraduate
management students in particular are ripe for a liberal educational approach that will
holistically nurture and develop their various skills and development levels, balancing
their need for acquisition of content knowledge and personal development, while
simultaneously fostering holistic understanding of the business world which they will
lead. Tomorrow depends on how we educate today. The question becomes, what does
that liberal educational model look like in business and how is it delivered effectively?
9.4. Re-Thinking How to Teach for Integrity

We convened a three-year action research project that engaged multiple stakeholder
groups in virtual and face-to-face dialogues to begin answering this very question
(detailed in Neville et al., 2007). Using a strength-based, whole-systems approach
(detailed in Godwin & Neville, 2008), we sought input from four management
education stakeholder groups — teacher-scholars, administrators, business students,
and business practitioners. After an initial discovery phase with 48 people to begin
lifting up the specific capabilities and attributes that undergraduate business majors
should have upon graduation, a two-day face-to-face summit was held with
representatives from 20 different institutions across four stakeholder groups (i.e.,
students, faculty, administrators, alumni, and business leaders) to further articulate
what a liberal educational model for business students needs to look like to prepare
undergraduates specifically for today’s rapidly changing business world.
Guided by the overarching question: ‘‘what should a liberal undergraduate business
education look like?’’ participants developed a collective vision regarding ‘‘what’’ and
‘‘how’’ we should be teaching undergraduate business majors. Interestingly, there was
much agreement on the fundamental elements that should comprise a liberal
undergraduate business education. Despite this philosophical accord, in reality it was
quickly determined that no single university’s program was already successfully
implementing a true liberal education, although different elements were being
instituted at different schools. Common obstacles to full programmatic implementa-
tion include cultural entrenchment in academic silos, institutional prioritization of
research over teaching innovation, and faculty burn-out. We explore these obstacles
further later in this chapter. First though, we detail here the competencies, pedagogical
approaches, and philosophical tensions that emerged from these discussions. On the
basis of these insights, we then model one way to conceptualize these dynamics at play
in a whole-system view of creating liberal education.
9.4.1. Liberal Management Education Core Competencies
Our action research process revealed a wide array of competencies believed to be

important specifically for undergraduate students to have upon completion of a business
degree, and thus the outcome goals for a liberal education. Table 9.1 details these
competencies broadly grouped into three categories: (a) Measurable Knowledge & Skills,
competencies that can be specifically and objectively measured; (b) Personal Traits or
Qualities, competencies that students develop within themselves which are more
subjective and less-measurable in nature; and (c) Future Actions, Decisions & Behaviors,
Table 9.1: Competencies important for undergraduate students.
Type of competency Specific competencies
(a) Measurable knowledge Basic literacy in:

& skills Mathematics
English writing skills
Reading and analyzing text and data
Communication skills (writing, oral, and critical
listening)
Information literacy (including technology
skills)
Foreign language competency
Basic understanding of major disciplines (i.e.,
Humanities & Arts, Natural Sciences, and Social
Sciences)
Basic understanding of traditional business areas:
Accounting
Business law
Economics (micro and macro)
Finance
Marketing
Management
Global and cultural awareness of current issues
and their historical context
(b) Personal traits or Adaptability, such as:

qualities Appreciation of non-linearity in the world
Comfort with ambiguity
Appreciation and respect for the natural
environment
Critical thinking and analytic reasoning ability
Creativity
Critical and active listening ability (beyond basic
communication)
Ethical behavior and moral imagination, such as:
Awareness of right and wrong (or ability to
ponder this)
Willingness to act on ‘‘right’’
Diverse opinions and ideas, such as:
Ability to embrace multiple perspectives
Awareness ‘‘beyond the self’’ including other
people and the environment
Sensitivity to dimensions of diversity (i.e.,
gender, religious, cultural, physical, social, and
economic)

Type of competency Specific competencies
Interpersonal competency such as:
Self awareness
Ability to work collaboratively with others
Conflict resolution skills
(c) Future actions, Demonstrated leadership within organizations and

decisions, and behaviors society
Engaged citizenship
Ongoing critical inquiry and life-long, self-directed
learning
Effective decision making including abilities to
Analyze situations
Seek out and use useful information
Balance multiple perspectives
Recognize impact of decisions on others/
environment
Articulate and defend decisions
actions students demonstrate throughout their lives and careers (Neville et al., 2007,
p. 41). As an industry, our focus tends to remain on the objective domain, ‘‘measurable
knowledge and skills.’’ Yet, all three competency areas need to flourish for the full benefit
of a liberal undergraduate management education. Thus it is important to recognize
when we design curricula that aim at fostering measurable skills, business competencies,
and basic literacy in English, math, and communications, we need to balance this with
curricula that cultivate an understanding of the role of business in society in relationship
with history, philosophy, literature, culture, and the natural environment.
9.4.2. Important Pedagogies
In addition to articulating ‘‘what’’ abilities undergraduate business students should

have, there were also many ideas shared regarding ‘‘how’’ educational programs
should go about developing the competencies detailed above. Pedagogically,
participants advocated for integration between practical experiences, reflection
opportunities, conceptualization activities, and application opportunities — the four
domains needed for effective learning according to Kolb’s (1986) seminal work on
learning theory. Summarized in Table 9.2, data suggested that to maximize the
educational environment, multiple pedagogical strategies need to be concurrently
employed. For example, the traditional ‘‘lecture course’’ loses educational value until
Table 9.2: Curricular and pedagogical approaches.
Type of pedagogical Specific activities

activity
(a) Practical Professional internships

experiences Volunteer and civic projects
Interacting with professionals (i.e., interviewing,
shadowing)
Intercultural experiences (e.g., study abroad,
multicultural teams)
Foreign language usage
Group and team project work with focus-related skills
practice
Faculty role-modeling in the classroom:
Promoting critical stances
Teaching from multiple perspectives
Reflecting
Asking
(b) Reflection Faculty mentoring

opportunities Self-analysis processes and tools (e.g., Myers Briggs
assessment, learning styles indicators)
Activities that engage mind, heart, and soul
Activities that have no one right answer
(c) Conceptualization Case studies

activities Current affairs readings and real-life examples
Creative and artistic projects and exposure
Interdisciplinary collaboration by faculty (‘‘beyond
bridges’’):
Embedded and integrated ideas across courses
Challenging the artificial divide between business,
liberal arts, and other disciplines
Making connections between classes
Lectures
Literature and arts in the classroom
Research projects
Socratic method
Writing papers
(d) Application Role playing

opportunities Individual-focused pedagogies including individual
projects
Business decision-making opportunities
Public speaking through presentations and debate
companioned with forms of application and experiential learning. Similarly, a civic

engagement course needs solid theoretical grounding in order for students to
adequately conceptualize the activities’ meaning. Although the teacher-scholars
engaged in the inquiry process reported being facile at drawing on a wide variety of
pedagogical approaches, they also reported little university-wide emphasis on building
all faculty’s skills at or rewarding faculty for drawing on a wide variety of pedagogical
approaches. In fact, participant experiences mirrored the Van Fleet and Peterson
(2005) argument that good teaching is a second-class achievement in our research-
driven field. Findings suggest that until we consistently and actively convert knowledge
into actualized learning (Blood, 2006), our educational system remains inadequate.
Taking the insights from this process, we turn our attention now to modeling these
different considerations and activities into a framework from which educators can
construct whole-system dialogues about what and how to shape an effective liberal
curriculum that aligns with their particular institution and students’ needs.
9.5. A Model for Integrated, Liberal Management Education Experiences

Given the diverse skills and capacities needed in our graduates, coupled with the
developmental differences detailed above, we recognize the challenge educators face
to design any curricula, let alone curricula with the lofty goal of fostering integrity.
Furthermore, we recognize that no normative solutions exist about what educational
design is ‘‘best.’’ What we can do, however, is to begin mapping the domains that
need attention within the overall educational system if we are to create integrated,
liberal education experiences for our students. Thus, our model is not designed to be
a ‘‘one-size-fits-all’’ approach, but a guide for management educators to help outline
the systemic picture of multiple interdependent variables and stakeholders they need
to address as educators strive to create the ideal liberal educational model in their
own university system (Figure 9.1).
First, we discuss the major elements in the model in order to clarify the intention
of and relationship between each element. Then, we discuss the larger implications of
the whole-system picture, major emergent dilemmas that all educational designers
should be considering.
9.5.1. Curricular and Classroom Concerns
The inner-most circle of the model represents what is going on in our individual
classrooms as elaborated in the core competencies and pedagogies sections earlier. The
overarching question for educators to consider within this realm is: What balance of
functional skills development and personal development best serves our students? As we
quickly learned from our discussions and insights from the literature, there is no
uniform agreement regarding what the ‘‘right’’ balance is for focusing on one
competency versus another. The essential need when developing a curriculum,
Figure 9.1: Model for lntegrated liberal education
however, is to create a workable equilibrium between concrete skills which are

measurable and easier to explain in the short-term and more amorphous personality
development that has implications for long-term behaviors. For example, students and
parents might presume that an undergraduate major must provide a set of technical,
practical skills easily recognizable by recruiters as job-ready training. However, as we
have discussed, traditional undergraduate students are at a stage of development
where, if rich attention can be allocated towards blending disciplinary approaches to
problem solving, then the student’s increased cogitative complexity will better serve the
student for a lifetime of learning than had the student been skilled in silos of existing
thought. And even among blended approaches, a decision will be needed about the
emphasis to place on disparate skills such as numeric literacy and emotional
intelligence. These are basic examples of curricular and classroom trade-offs.
Arguably, an educational experience should do both, teach the basic literacy
competencies and develop a responsible and imaginative mind. However, as we
explore below, dilemmas quickly surface when the reality of prioritizing sets in.
9.5.2. Systemic Influences
John Dewey, a great educational reformer, once wrote, ‘‘we never educate directly,
but indirectly by means of the environment’’ (1944, p. 19). Thus, while course-level
suggestions are a beginning point for enhancing education, deep change rests with
coordinated attention and activity at multiple levels within the university

environment. A systems perspective is needed to truly meet the developmental needs
of all business students. Thus, our model suggests that in addition to looking at what
is happening in the classroom, we must also look to cultivate actions at other levels
within the university system — represented by the outer dotted circle in the model.
The overarching question for educators to consider within this realm is: What are the
forces and who are the stakeholder groups most influencing our curriculum decisions
and design?
As each university explores this area for itself, they need to pay heed to the
overarching culture of their specific university. Is it one that fosters and rewards
teaching excellence? What are the faculty philosophies of education and how are they
impacting curriculum design? Each institution will presumably have its own unique
set of both strengths upon which to build and challenges they face. Looking beyond
the campus is important as well, to consider both the existing and potential
relationships that the school has with the business community. Whether through
networking, recruiting, or co-curricular engagement or disengagement, members of
the business community influence the educational experience. All these pieces become
building blocks for creating a truly integrated liberal education for students.
9.5.3. Beyond the Classroom
As Paulo Freire, an educational reformer, writes, ‘‘No pedagogy which is truly

liberating can remain distant from the oppressed [i.e. the student] by treating them as
unfortunates and by presenting for their emulation models from among the
oppressors. The oppressed must be their own example in the struggle for their
redemption’’ (1970, p. 54). This provocative statement, while revolutionary in tone,
has implications for a holistic model of liberal education. As educational designers,
we must not only attend to helping build students’ capacity for critical inquiry, but
we must also consider ways to encourage students to actively engage in shaping their
own questions, their own decisions, and their own destinies. Thus, in our model,
students are not without responsibility for their own development as well. The
overarching question for educators to consider within this realm is: Who are our
unique students and how can we support their role in creating an effective educational
experience for themselves?
Thus, the overlapping oval in the model represents the role students must play in
internalizing their own liberal education experience. Although a characteristic of
youth-learners is that they do not always take active responsibility for their learning
process, students must be held somewhat accountable for navigating their
educational experience in a way that meets their developmental needs. Such
responsibilities will help them succeed not only in our classrooms but also in the ever-
changing world they will face after graduation. For example, a student choosing to
simply follow instruction might develop basic literacy in the models and tactics
business textbooks explain. However, a student who chooses to select among broad
disciplines of courses and actively seek conversations with faculty to compare and
contrast the different underlying assumptions will intrinsically be maximizing her
own educational opportunity. The curriculum can insist a student take general
education requirements, but the students’ experience moving through those courses
varies widely. Through formal and informal advising, career services, and engaged
student services staff, universities can build the infrastructure to help foster
integrated learning experiences, yet students must choose to engage in these
activities. Students who do are likely to experience their education as far more
‘‘whole’’ than those who do not.
An integrated, liberal, management education as modeled here involves a
convergence of experiences and influences far more expansive than curriculum
alone. It rests on the pivotal choices curricular designers must make to balance an
institution’s philosophy of education, strategic objectives, and organizational
strengths. And these choices often involve changing the traditional way that our
educational systems have been run. Just as Kurt Lewin (1951) suggested that any
organization must consider external forces that are working to support or impede a
desired change, so too must we consider the influences in our system working to
perpetuate or change the status quo.
9.5.4. Transforming the Parts into a New Whole: Tensions and Dilemmas
We outline here three major tensions that emerged throughout our inquiry. These are
critical areas where stakeholder communities must collaboratively discuss, reflect,
and ultimately agree if a particular institution’s educational reform can be successful.
Reconciling — or at least attending to these issues — is crucial to the success of an
integrated liberal education because the whole must function in concert rather than
disparate parts working in discord.
First, balancing the degree of attention that any one competency area receives in
the classroom begs the larger question, ‘‘what are we trying to accomplish?’’ For
example, institutional decision makers recognize that parents and recruiters want
education models that are ‘‘useful’’ and that prepare students for a particular job.
However, the aspirational nature of the model itself calls on educators to shift the
responsibility for ‘‘job-skilling’’ onto the student, who should be encouraged to seek
out internships and work experiences to bolster their practical experience and begin
building professional networks. As students increasingly take ownership of
developing themselves outside the classroom, then educators can draw on these
experiences in classroom activities, helping students integrate their conceptual and
practical learning. A second example of balancing educational objectives appears
when discussing the degree to which an education should instill intellectual
knowledge and the degree to which the experience should develop the individual
personhood. And with intellectual knowledge, how much should be disciplinary
specific and how much should be grounded in broader areas of study? Again, the
balance between how much of which is the ‘‘right’’ amount remains controversial
even when all components are deemed important. Therefore, the tension is strong
between, on the one hand, peoples’ expectations of immediate usefulness of an
education, and on the other hand, the long-term potential developmental inherent in
having contextual awareness.
Second, assessment drives many curricular decisions. Standardized testing creates
an ability to compare some quantified value across institutions. However, our current
forms of standardized testing only assess certain competencies deemed significant.
Furthermore, economies of scale associated with large lecture halls rather than
individualized and small group learning tend to push curricular assessment further
toward standardization. Another assessment issue is that our education system
divides evaluation of student performance into 12- and 16-week units of time. For
many of the identified competencies, however, students have not yet behaviorally
absorbed the experiences within the length of a semester. Therefore, because of our
industry and modern social push for measuring immediate outcomes, a majority of
our educational emphasis gets placed on the one measurable dimension, traditional
skills and knowledge acquisitions. The contradiction between educating for a world
of innovation and complexity, yet educating within academic systems that emphasize
short-term assessment of traditional skills and knowledge mirrors a problem in our
business world: the short-term focus on financial returns with a simultaneous long-
term hope for innovative possibility. Over-emphasizing either jeopardizes the goal.
Third, a major tension that arose in our inquiry was the question of whose value
system should be instilled into tomorrow’s leaders? The dominant Western capitalist
paradigm is in flux. Even since the turn of this century, a rise in social
entrepreneurialism has begun to re-shape the business landscape. With emerging
shifts in economic power from the United States to China and India, educators have
reason to suspect that tomorrow’s leaders will be faced with a far more complex set
of philosophical differences than were yesterday’s leaders. Our time horizon matters
too — ancient wisdom traditions have been all but extinguished from the business
arena with the rise of industrialization. This poses a dilemma for people seeking to
integrate spirituality into business culture, Eastern philosophy into innovation
processes, and sustainability into current economic priorities. Questioning the role of
business in society quickly leads to questioning the role of the government in
managing the landscape and questioning the degree of accountability that individuals
have for organizations’ behaviors. Sorting out whose value system should be taught
raises complex dilemmas for educators.
These tensions and dilemmas are not insurmountable; they actually fuel the
potential for innovation at any particular institution. In fact, knowing the questions
to ask is part of what we want our students to learn also.
9.6. Conclusions and Recommendations
Many questions obviously remain about how to best construct liberal education
environments. While each individual institution must answer the questions we have
raised for themselves to create a curriculum that works for their unique students,
there are various interventions that can be done to help facilitate transformation. For
example, working within our spheres of influence as faculty at an institutional level,
we can seek to involve our university presidents, provosts, and academic deans
toward creating a whole-system, liberal educational model. We can also work to
build bridges with social science, humanities, and natural science colleagues by
hosting faculty discussion sessions, participating in cross-disciplinary development or
writing groups, and informally discussing the potential social value of business; all
such activities encourage bridge-building with non-business faculty. Such cross-
disciplinary connections will help lead to an innovative environment that not only
strengthens our curricula (Smith, Hornsby, & Kite, 2000) but also advances students’
ethical development (Sims & Brinkman, 2003).
Within our own classrooms, we can shift the paradigm of how students perceive
their experiences by incorporating context from other disciplines into our own course
materials, draw on examples in class that maximize the ways in which students begin
to make meaning from their own extracurricular activities, and integrate new
pedagogical approaches at every turn. Even though most business faculty are not
formally trained in natural sciences or the arts, we are each adequately aware of the
world’s complexity and bring related ideas into our discussions.
We can also begin recognizing the unique developmental needs of our under-
graduate management students, honoring that they need more than just a mini-MBA.
Given the impressionable developmental stage at which our undergraduate students
enter our classrooms, we must realize that they look to us with more deference as
authority figures than do older, adult learners. Therefore, it is even more important
that we strive to model not only skills, but also appropriate behaviors. If we intend to
establish confidence and self-identity, a sense of personal integrity, and mature
relationships, we must model civility in our own behavior in all of our interactions,
with both our students and our other institutional colleagues. Faculty can also role
model ethical behaviors through a variety of classroom interactions — from managing
discussions to grading papers with transparency and fairness. Role modeling does not
end at the faculty level. We must also encourage our institutions to ‘‘walk the talk’’
when it comes to integrity. Authors like Boyle (2004) have suggested that business
schools especially need to be models of social responsibility and sustainability if we
expect to create students who value such actions.
One by one, if collectively engaged, we can begin to shift the equilibrium point of
how undergraduate management education occurs toward a liberal, integrated
model. As we seek to make these shifts, we should keep in mind the AAC&U’s
articulation of the purpose of undergraduate education,
In the final analysis, the challenge of college, for students and faculty
members alike, is empowering individuals to know that the world is far
more complex than it first appears, and that they must make
interpretive arguments and decisions — judgments that entail real
consequences for which they must take responsibility and from which
they may not flee by disclaiming expertise. (1991, p. 16–17)
Our hope is that collectively, we as educators will live up to this lofty call to action and
expand our capacity for enhancing the experience of and developmental opportunities
for traditional undergraduate students so they can become effective, integrious leaders of
tomorrow’s organizations. This chapter argues for doing so by returning to a holistic
management education through the tradition of liberal education.
Acknowledgments
We wish to extend our gratitude to the James S. Kemper Foundation and
Southwestern University for collaboratively sponsoring the 2006 summit, Re-
envisioning Business Programs in Liberal Arts Worlds, from which the action-
research portions of this work emerged. We have continued to benefit from the
practices, imaginations, and intellectual generosity of every summit participant, a
multitude of colleagues nationwide, and countless reviewers, without whom this
work would not have been possible. Most importantly, we have been sustained and
inspired by those closest to us who share our passion for making the world a better
place through transformative education and lifelong learning.
References
Association of American Colleges. (1991). The challenge of connecting learning. Project on
liberal learning, study-in-depth, and the arts and sciences major. Washington, DC.
Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). (2007). College learning for the
new global century, Association of American Colleges and Universities. Retrieved from http://
www.aacu.org/leap/documents/GlobalCentury_final.pdf. Accessed on January 16, 2011.
Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). (2011). What is liberal
education? Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/leap/what_is_liberal_education.cfm.
Accessed on January 16, 2011.
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB). (2009). Eligibility procedures
and accreditation standards for business accreditation. Retrieved from http://www.aacsb.edu/
accreditation/standards.asp. Accessed on November 2, 2009.
Athavale, M., Davis, R., & Myring, M. (2008). The integrated business curriculum: An
examination of perceptions and practices. Journal of Education for Business, 83(5), 295–301.
Atwater, B. J., Kannan, V. R., & Stephens, A. A. (2008). Cultivating systemic thinking in
the next generation of business leaders. Academy of Management Learning & Education,
7(1), 9–25.
Bendheim, L., Waddock, S., & Graves, S. B. (1998). Educating holistic professionals in a world
of wicked problems. Business and Society, 37(3), 306–338.
Bennis, W., & O’Toole, J. (2005). How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business
Review, 85(5), 96–104.
Bergman, J., Westerman, J., & Daly, J. (2010). Narcissism in management education. Academy
of Management Learning and Education, 9(1), 119–131.
Blood, M. R. (2006). Only you can create actionable knowledge. Academy of Management
Bok, D. (2006). Our underachieving colleges: A candid look at how much students learn and why
they should be learning more. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice & leadership.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publications.
Boyle, M. E. (2004). Walking our talk: Business schools, legitimacy, and citizenship. Business
and Society, 43(1), 37–68.
Brooks, R. (2008). Youth and lifelong learning. In: P. Jarvis (Ed.), International handbook of
lifelong learning (pp. 33–44). London: Routledge.
Campbell, N., Heriot, K., & Finney, R. (2006). In defense of silos: An argument against the
integrative undergraduate business curriculum. Journal of Management Education, 30(2),
316–332.
Chew, E. B., & McInnis-Bowers, C. (2004). Blending liberal art and business education.
Liberal Education, 90(1)n.p..
Chickering, A. W. (1969). Education and identity. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
CIOinsight. (2004, November 11). Whose job is it to teach business skills? CIOinsight, n.p.
DeMoranville, C., Aurand, T. W., & Gordan, G. L. (2000). The delivery of an undergraduate
crossfunctional, business principles program: One university’s continuing journey. Market-
ing Education Review, 10(3), 29–41.
Dewey, J. (1944). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education.
New York, NY: Free Press.
Donaldson, L. (2002). Damned by our own theories: contradictions between theories and
management education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 1(1), 96–106.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.
Godwin, L., & Neville, M. G. (2007, October). Designing a degree that works: Rethinking
undergraduate management education. Paper presented at the meeting of the Institute of
Behavioral and Applied Management, Reno, NV.
Godwin, L., & Neville, M. G. (2008). Learning from a whole-system, strength-based approach:
A case of collaborative curriculum development. Journal of Quality & Participation, 31(1),
11–14.
Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices.
Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4(1), 75–91.
Giacalone, R. (2004). A transcendent business education for the 21st century. Academy of
Management Learning and Education, 3(4), 415–420.
Jones, R. T. (2005). Liberal education for the twenty-first century: Business expectations.
Liberal Education (Spring), 32–37. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/liberaleducation/
le-sp05/LEAP_SP05.pdf.
Kasworm, C. E. (1980). The older student as an undergraduate. Adult Education, 31(1), 30–47.
Khurana, R. (2007). From higher aims to hired hands: The social transformation of American
business schools and the unfulfilled promise of management as a profession. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Kimball, B. A. (1996). A historical perspective. In: N. H. Farnham & A. Yarmolinsky (Eds),
Rethinking liberal education (pp. 11–35). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and
promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kolb, D. (1986). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lampe, M. (1997). Increasing effectiveness in teaching ethics to undergraduate business
students. Teaching Business Ethics, 1(1), 3–19.
Lankard, B. B. (1997). New learning strategies for generation X. ERIC Clearinghouse on adult,
career, and vocational education, Columbus, OH (ERIC Digest No. 184).
Laszlo, C., & Zhexembayeva, N. (2011). Embedded sustainability. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. New York, NY: Harper and Row.
Mintzberg, H. (2004). Managers not MBAs. San Francisco, CA: Barrett-Koehler.
Morgan, G. (1996). Images of organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2006). Profile of undergraduates in US
postsecondary education institutions: 2003-04. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/
pubsinfo.asp?pubid¼2006184. Accessed on November 21, 2009.
Navarro, P. (2008). The MBA core curricula of top-ranked U.S. business schools: A study in
failure? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7(1), 109–123.
Nesteruk, J. (2005). A liberal model for professional education. Liberal Arts Online, 5(8)n.p.
Neville, M. G., Godwin, L., Senchack, A. J., & Parks, D. (2007). Re-envisioning business
programs in liberal arts worlds: 2006 summit proceedings and outcomes. Southwestern
University. Retrieved from http://www.southwestern.edu/laab/laab-resource_bank.html.
Accessed on June 20, 2007.
Obermueler, S. R. (1993). A Delphi study to build a model integrative curriculum for an
undergraduate business program in a liberal arts setting (doctoral dissertation, Walden
University, 1993). Dissertation Abstracts International, 55(09A), 2689.
Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A
scheme. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Proserpio, L., & Gioia, D. (2007). Teaching the virtual generation. Academy of Management
Learning and Education, 6(1), 69–80.
Raelin, J. (2008). Toward an epistemology of practice. Academy of Management Learning and
Education, 6(4), 495–515.
Robak, R., Chiffriller, S., & Zappone, M. (2007). College students’ motivations for money and
subjective well-being. Psychological Reports, 100(1), 147–156.
Ruegger, D., & King, E. W. (1992). A study of the effect of age and gender upon student
business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(3), 179–186.
Schneider, C. G. (2000). Greater expectations. Liberal Education, 86(2), 1–3.
Schweitzer, K. (2005). MBA programs vs. executive MBA programs: What’s the difference?
Guide to Business Majors. Retrieved from http://businessmajors.about.com/od/program-
comparison/a/mba_vs_emba.htm. Accessed on December 3, 2009.
Segal, D. (2010). In pursuit of the perfect brainstorm. New York Times Magazine. Retrieved
from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/magazine/19Industry-t.html?_r2&pagewanted¼1.
Accessed on December 16, 2010.
Senchack, A. J. (2007). On liberal arts education in the business curriculum: A discussion
paper for the 2006 summit on the liberal arts in business. In: M. G. Neville, L. Godwin,
A. J. Senchack & D. Parks (Eds), Re-envisioning business programs in liberal arts worlds:
2006 summit proceedings and outcomes (pp. 22–37). Georgetown, TX: Southwestern
University. Retrieved from http://www.southwestern.edu/laab/laab-resource_bank.html.
Accessed on June 20, 2007.
Sims, R., & Brinkman, J. (2003). Business ethics curriculum design: Suggestions and
illustrations. Teaching Business Ethics, 7(1), 69–86.
Smith, B., Hornsby, J., & Kite, M. (2000). Broadening the business curriculum via a cross-
disciplinary approach. Education, 120(4), 713–721.
Solis, B. (2011). Rethinking the future of business part 1: The state of corporate social media.
Fast Company. Retrieved from http://www.fastcompany.com/1720285/rethinking-the-
future-of-business-part-1-the-state-of-corporate-social-media. Accessed on January 24, 2011.
Thomas, R. R., Thomas, D. A., Ely, R. J., & Meyerson, D. (2002). Harvard Business Review on
managing diversity. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Thurston, E. (2000). Enabling systems thinking in the ‘‘Mesonic millennium’’: The need for
systemic methodologies for conceptual learning in undergraduate management education.
Journal of Management Education, 24(1), 1–31.
Twenge, J. M. (2006). Generation me: Why today’s young Americans are more confident,
assertive, entitled — and more miserable than ever before. New York, NY: Free Press.
Van Fleet, D. D., & Peterson, T. O. (2005). Increasing the value of teaching in the academic
marketplace: The creation of a peer-review infrastructure for teaching. Academy of
Management Learning & Education, 4(4), 506–514.
Wick, M., & Philips, A. (2008). A liberal education scorecard. Liberal Education, 94(1), 22–29.
Zemke, R., Raines, C., & Filipczak, P. (2000). Generations at work: Managing the clash of
veterans, boomers, xers, and nexters in your workplace. New York, NY: AMACOM.
Chapter 10
Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and

the Liberal Arts
Sarah Stookey
Abstract
Purpose – Analyze limitations to and possibilities for business education that

promotes a meaningful ethics. Evaluate relationships between culture, elitism,
democracy, business, and undergraduate education in the United States.
Describe how liberal arts perspective to undergraduate business education can
promote greater integrity, illustrated with examples of teaching practices and
university-wide collaboration. Consider institutional, intellectual, and social
barriers to this effort.
Methodology/approach – Historical analysis of trends in relationship between
business, elitism, the liberal arts, and business education in the United States.
Reflection and systematization of author’s experience.
Findings – Because the U.S. educational system mirrors a society segregated by
elitism and governed by hierarchies of privilege it obstructs development of
integrity in business. Adoption of approaches from liberal arts can be helpful.
Practical implications – Outlines specific, strategies for introducing elements of
liberal arts education into the undergraduate business classroom, based on
teaching experience.
Social implications – In light of misbehavior and irresponsibility antecedent to
financial collapse it is important to ask if there is an elite business class that is
‘‘in the know’’ and another layer of business workers ‘‘kept in the dark’’ and if
this is the case, how this division came about. If business is to serve other than
short-term and minority elite interests we need an educational system in which
all students have opportunities to understand how business works/can work
and also be exposed to ideas and traditions of liberal arts.

ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1
194 Sarah Stookey
Originality/value of paper – Raises original questions and analysis about how

social and economic segregation perpetuated by the U.S. system of higher
education affects integrity in business and democracy in society. Proposes
innovative strategies to reduce such segregation.
10.1. Introduction
The Great Recession raises significant questions about the enterprise of teaching ethics
to the nation’s business students. For one, to what extent does the integrity of individual
practitioners make any difference in thwarting the sorts of broad-scale fraud and
irresponsibility that can wreck the economy? If we can answer this question positively the
further question of particular concern to management educators is whether — and
how — the courses we teach can foster students’ integrity. In this chapter I seek to
elaborate on education for a meaningful ethics. My point of departure is that a
meaningful ethics requires an awareness, understanding and appreciation of broad
social, political, economic, and cultural interdependencies. Integrity requires a sense of
integration and accountability (‘‘I am part of the larger world; my wellbeing depends on
others’’). The challenge for management educators concerned with ethics is to encourage
these qualities in contexts where their utility may not be readily apparent — and where
immediate (and, particularly, profit-denominated) utility is highly prized. Because these
are sensibilities and perspectives that a liberal arts education characteristically fosters, I
raise the question, how can management education for integrity be strengthened by
incorporating the central features of traditional liberal arts education?
Addressing this question raises important related issues. For example, to what degree
have business programs segregated students from the larger intellectual life of the
University? How have distinctions made between the liberal arts and management
education influenced higher education’s historic mission (particularly in the United
States) of increasing the scope and quality of democracy? Examining the 2008 financial
collapse in light of the differences between liberal arts and management education
highlights issues of social distinction, power and moral responsibility. Historians of the
Third Reich have long asked how the larger part of a seemingly ordinary, but educated
population could blithely follow the commands of a patently immoral and corrupt
regime. Or was there a sharp division between leaders ‘‘in the know’’ who were willing to
engage collectively in the worst sorts of behavior witnessed in modern times and
followers ‘‘in the dark,’’ the ‘‘good soldiers’’ who simply carried out what they of as
legitimate orders? The literature remains divided (Goldhagen, 1996, Kershaw, 2000). We
can raise a similar set of questions in connection with the misbehavior and
irresponsibility antecedent to the financial collapse. For instance, is there an elite
business class that is ‘‘in the know’’ and another layer of business workers ‘‘kept in the
dark’’? That is, did many of our business leaders anticipate the consequences of their
questionable dealings (just as many experienced hedge fund managers and bankers
‘‘knew’’ that Bernard Madoff was a fraud all along), whereas the managers on the front
lines who made the system run had little idea where their operations would lead? And if
Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts 195
this is the case, how did that division come about? One place we can look is the division
between elite and para-professional or undergraduate business education.
The chapter is structured as follows. An overview underscores the complexity of
relationships between culture, elitism, democracy, business, and undergraduate
education in the United States. This provides necessary context for understanding
how a liberal arts perspective to business education can help to promote greater
integrity as well as the institutional, intellectual, and social barriers this effort faces.
The second half of the chapter describes key elements of a liberal arts approach to
management education that can foster integrity, illustrated with examples of teaching
practices and university-wide collaboration.
10.2. Liberal Arts, Management Education, and the Organization

of Business — A Short History
In the United States traditional liberal arts education and management education
have very distinct yet tightly interlocking relationships to the organization of
business. The complexity of this relationship was illustrated at a recent meeting of the
American Association of Colleges and Schools of Businesses (AACSB). Reflecting
hierarchies within the discipline, a panel of deans from elite graduate business
schools (associated with renowned liberal arts colleges) had been invited to present
their expertise to an audience of deans and others from non-elite undergraduate and
graduate schools of business. The elite business schools occupy the highest echelons
of management prestige, supplying the graduates, research, and policy with the most
influence on the practice of business. And yet none of the deans from the elite schools
held advanced degrees in business while the deans in the audience would not have
hired faculty with nonbusiness degrees. In fact, to do so would threaten AACSB
accreditation (which many of the most prestigious business schools do not bother
with). How did we get to this situation and what do these contradictions suggest
about efforts to incorporate the liberal arts into management education?
Although the liberal arts have never played a strong role in management
education, they have been and continue to be the basis of the education of managers,
at least at the highest levels. In the United States, through the first half of the 20th
century, business discourse and norms were largely the product of elite colleges and
universities, which served as ‘‘a paragon, a distinct social and professional model of
higher education’’ (Kushner, 1999, p. 413). These schools, the majority of which were
private, were guided by a vision of the liberal arts derived from classical European
traditions, that ‘‘sought to advance humanity as well as secure freedom’’ (McKeon,
1968, p. 111). Public colleges and universities also promoted classical liberal arts
education but this was balanced by the mandates for more explicitly practical
education of the land grant (Key, 1996) and normal schools (Wright, 1930). The
college education of the elites was not only, therefore a liberal arts education, but it
196 Sarah Stookey
was also, to a strong degree, defined in contrast to the more vocational orientation of
public higher education (Burke, 1983).
Specialized academic preparation for ‘‘the professions’’ was largely limited to
graduate schools of engineering, law, and medicine. Through the first half of the 20th
century business schools were incidental (Zimmerman, as cited in Pfeffer & Fong,
2002). Absent a need for specific technical expertise (not established until the later
stages of the discipline), there was no need for the white, male elite to specialize in
business. The prerogative not only to conduct business but also to lead major business
organizations was not based on professional credentials — or even on demonstrated
managerial ability — but on ethnic, cultural, and economic identities. Business was
conducted in the white, male, upper-class voice of elite liberal arts colleges and
universities — not because business was taught there but because those were the guys
who ran things (Hall, 1982; Hambrick & Mason, 1984). Cultural elites had a ‘‘lock’’ on
economics and business and it was not necessary to be specifically credentialed to be a
leader in business. In fact, specialized credentials and even excessive familiarity with
technical detail could be considered a liability if it seemed to overwhelm more
‘‘cultured’’ interests and expertise (Rossett). Among the elites in the United States
business has been most acceptable when it is conducted inconspicuously and with
certain diffidence. This contradiction, of the most powerful business participants’
resistance to overt association with business, is reflected in the absence of business
education at elite liberal arts colleges and universities. A classical liberal arts education,
as generally understood in elite social and academic circles, typically does not include
courses in applied fields such as accounting or finance — even if graduates may go
directly into careers on Wall Street (Roth, 2008). The few elite liberal arts schools that
acknowledge the importance of understanding how business operates tend to do under
cover of nonbusiness-y sounding titles, such as ‘‘Complex Organizations’’ (in the case
of Mount Holyoke College). Not only have they not been taught about business but,
strikingly, many students at these liberal arts schools have never even had paid jobs.
Sustained by business they do not know it.
Young people from the elites who enter business have tended to rely on
opportunities afforded by family ownership, intermarriage, and social networks and
not business expertise (much less academic business credentials). This may seem like
an historical artifact. It is true that over time the student body of the elite liberal arts
colleges and universities has become more diverse, less uniformly elite. However, up
until relatively recently graduation from an elite liberal arts school was not only
largely sufficient to gain entry into the higher levels of business, it has been almost
necessary (Rossett, undated). A French literature major from an Ivy League school
was much more likely to be recruited for a management trainee position at a major
investment bank, for example, than a finance major from a major public university.
The linkage between elite liberal arts education and business leadership has been so
tight that even for those not born to the elites immersion in the highest levels of the
liberal arts has often been credential enough to gain entry. Business education is
‘‘treated as belonging to some other educational paradigm’’ (Kushner, 1999, p. 415)
and only pursued, if necessary, at the graduate level, after a solid liberal arts base has
been laid (McKeon, 1968).
The U.S. students who do study business as undergraduates therefore do so at

non-elite schools where training in more directly practical skills is not only not
depreciated but expressly valued. The history of land grant or teacher training public
universities and the non-elite economic and social position of these students clearly
validate such technical training as the express purpose of a college degree (Key, 1996;
Wright, 1930). These students are much more likely than their peers at elite
institutions to have come from working class families (Green, 1992; Leppel, 2001).
They are much more likely to have, themselves, significant work histories and first-
hand exposure to the mechanics and purposes of business. They are familiar — in
ways students at elite schools tend not to be — with the economic pressures to earn
income, with the obstacles to fulfilling work, with the limitations capitalism imposes
on the majority of working people. It is at these schools that the names of recent
graduates who have passed the CPA exam are proudly exhibited.
Another important element in the contradictory relationship between the liberal arts
and business education has been the parallel trends of ‘‘academicization’’ and
‘‘scientificization’’ of management (Gordon & Howell, 1959; Pierson, 1959). The
codification of the discipline and creation of increasingly esoteric areas of study have
contributed to an apparent ‘‘intellectualization’’ of business education and expertise. At
the same time, the inclusion in the business academy of such seemingly attractive (and less
overtly ‘‘business-like’’) areas as organizational development and environmental
sustainability have seemed to broaden the scope of the discipline, affecting the perception
of business education. As business has, in some ways, come to be seen as ‘‘less-business-y,’’
overt attention to it seems less offensive to elite sensibilities (the Aspen Institute exemplifies
this kind of mainstreaming of business in academic circles). In the past decade increasing
numbers of graduates of elite liberal arts colleges and universities chose a business career
(Rimer, 2008). The barriers between the liberal arts and business education have been
further weakened by two related phenomena, increased vocationalism in higher education
(Pace & Connolly, 2000) and the ‘‘businessization’’ of some of the liberal arts canon. Not
only most notably economics, but also other social sciences, have become focused on ever-
narrower technical and behavioral concerns, often directly subordinate to financial
efficiency criteria (Birnik & Billsberry, 2008; Huehn, 2008). In some ways this tendency
allows for certain common grounds between business and ‘‘the disciplines.’’ On the
contrary, in many colleges and universities, it contributes to a sense of encroachment and
increased resentment toward business education. There is both melding and heightened
entrenchment between the two educational projects.
The curricular orientation and institutional culture of undergraduate business
programs reflects the more conventional — and less liberal arts-inflected —
understanding of what constitutes business education: more instrumental, more
technique-oriented. And this is probably a reasonable bias if the goal is
employability. Given the elitism that privileges liberal arts graduates from elite
schools, non-elite business undergraduates face almost insurmountable hurdles in
being considered for the kind of entry level jobs which will lead to the higher
managerial echelons. But accommodation to this reality is self-perpetuating: because
it does not incorporate liberal arts concerns, undergraduate business education does
not tend to facilitate the qualities expected of elite business leaders.
198 Sarah Stookey
The history of the relationship between the liberal arts and business education
suggests several important challenges to integrating the liberal arts in business education
at the undergraduate (therefore non-elite) schools. First, there are long-standing cultural
and institutional barriers that divide the two forms of education. Second, despite these
apparent differences and in significant ways, both approaches serve to prepare people to
participate in business, albeit in very different and hierarchical roles. Therefore, and
third, the differences between liberal arts and business education have as much to do with
social privilege (both inherited and conveyed in schools) as curricular content and
method. A fourth and final challenge, beyond the scope of this chapter but very
important, is to consider how integrity in business would be strengthened by addressing
the elitism which (a) keeps many non-elite students out of liberal arts schools, thereby
excluding important knowledge of business and its effects from the management power
structure and (b) incorporating more direct exposure to the operations of business in elite
liberal arts curricula. The remainder of the chapter focuses on ways a liberal arts
approach can be implemented in a management classroom. The conclusion outlines
possibilities for collaborating in the business school and across campus to support
effective education for integrity, identify common interests and benefit from a more
comprehensive perspective.
10.3. How Can the Liberal Arts Strengthen the Integrity

of Undergraduate Management Students?
Why is elite liberal arts education so valued by people of influence in business? Social
class and affinities of privilege are certainly powerful. To a degree elite liberal arts
schools serve as a cultural and social screening mechanisms, validating graduates as
comfortable with (if not born into) hierarchies of power. That stamp of approval
cannot be imported to undergraduate business programs at non-elite schools. But an
elite liberal arts education also can develop skills and knowledge which bring
demonstrable benefit to business organizations. Half a century ago Nelson (1958)
wrote, ‘‘A number of leading corporation executives have come to the conclusion that
a broad liberal education — as distinct from vocational training — is a most desirable
part of preparation for business leadership and that such an education becomes more
urgently necessary as business becomes more complex’’ (p. 281). Such opinions were
reflected in the creation of programs such as the Institute of Humanistic Studies for
Executives at the University of Pennsylvania (Nelson, 1958). In analyzing corporate
tendencies to hire liberal arts graduates, Salem and Grabarek (1986), highlighted the
value placed on the ability to ‘‘see things not ordinarily connected, and then connect
them’’ (p. 274). And in a 2007 opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal, two former
assistant U.S. Secretaries of Education and members of the Koret Task Force on K-12
Education at the Hoover Institution wrote, that ‘‘The liberal arts make us ‘competitive’
in the ways that matter most’’ (Finn & Ravitch, 2007).
I would suggest seven characteristics of a liberal arts education are most critically
lacking from much undergraduate management education. These are (1) emphasis on
the ‘‘big picture’’ and how it relates to the immediate and personal, (2) recognition of
underlying assumptions and how they shape perception, (3) noninstrumental
attention to social phenomena, (4) knowledge of major historical turning points
and periods, (5) respect for the expressive potential of a broad range of disciplinary
realms, including the arts, (6) global and local geo-political awareness, and (7) the
self-confidence to address a wide range of issues and value personal experience and
opinions. The elements are not distinct; in teaching practice they often overlap. As a
whole they compose the traditional elements of a liberal arts education. Combined
with the core of a more traditional management curriculum and the students’
experience of business, they promote greater integrity in business conduct.
These elements constitute not simply content (to be added to a management
curriculum) but a personal stance. It is this stance, as much as (if not more than)
familiarity with the liberal arts canon that has distinguished the graduates of elite
liberal arts colleges — and what has seemed to recommend them for leadership in
business. The stance consists not only of depth and breadth of intellectual knowledge
but also of self-confidence and a felt right and responsibility to participate in the
most influential arenas — of business but also politics, culture, and science.
In the elite liberal arts graduate who enters the business world, often without
exposure to or personal experience of the human effects of business, this stance can
result in dangerous hubris and inattention to the social consequences of business’
actions. For the undergraduate in a (non-elite) business program, this stance is a
necessary corrective. As non-elites management students have been largely excluded
from or oppressed by spheres of influence they are, often quite reasonably, alienated
from the world beyond the familiar. Keeping abreast of developments of public life
writ large, for example, is not only unfamiliar, but seems pointless. Although
alienation from structures of power may be completely appropriate, disassociation
and lack of involvement in making change is not. To become morally engaged in the
larger structures of business these students need to exposure to many areas of
intellectual content they are not familiar with. But they need, just as much, the
capacity to value and articulate their own non-elite experience of and perspective on
management, to be convinced they of their own potential for influence. They need to
develop the instinct to question, cultivate strong voices not easily marginalized or
dictated to, and build confidence in their abilities to offer alternatives. Combined
with these students’ personal experience of the more destructive aspects of business,
liberal arts knowledge and this kind of stance can make it more possible for them to
promote the broader social interests too often marginalized.
10.3.1. Ways to Bring the Liberal Arts into the Undergraduate Management Classroom
This section describes in more depth the seven elements of liberal arts education
which can enhance undergraduate business education, illustrated with examples from
my own efforts to incorporate them in a variety of courses, from ‘‘Principles of
Management’’ to advanced classes in ethics and globalization.
200 Sarah Stookey
10.3.2. The Big Picture
Perhaps the most limiting quality of most undergraduate business education, in terms
of promoting integrity, is its narrow focus and minimization of interdependence. If
the scope of business perspective and priorities is limited it is more likely that the
interests of a few, more powerful, stakeholders (i.e., majority owners) will be
advanced at the expense of more numerous, less influential ones (i.e., employees,
customers, and neighbors). Ideally, immersion in the liberal arts entails widening the
range of factors and interests considered important, based on the presumption that
social activity is the consequence of interactions (of people, ideas, and relationships)
not formally, immediately, or overtly related. Results are attributed less to concerted,
specific actions than to a confluence of factors (Senge, 1990). Effective action or
analysis is therefore understood to require detecting significant relationships between
elements more than focus on individual elements. It involves connecting dots and
crossing apparent barriers.
Sensitivity to interdependencies requires looking beyond familiar, immediate, and
established interactions. Liberal arts students are encouraged to ask questions about
the ‘‘meaning of life,’’ to find themselves or their places in the world — existential
questions that literature and philosophy raise. In the business realm this perspective
is most closely reflected in strategy which, not surprisingly, is often a very challenging
course for business undergraduates. A capstone strategy class that requires them to
synthesize the distinct elements of accounting, finance, management, marketing, etc.
is difficult in part because of the emphasis on integration over specialization and
prescribed procedures.
In helping business undergraduates to see a Bigger Picture we face serious
limitations. Liberal arts students may take semester-long courses that focus on the
Roaring Twenties or Modern Islam. In the business classroom such connections have
to be made apparent in more focused and simplistic ways. One simple method involves a
diagram that places the individual (as both person and business participant) at the
center off our concentric circles: local, state, national, and global (see Figure 10.1,
Locating Ourselves). The concentric identities could be identified in other nongeo-
graphic and/or political ways as well, for example, ‘work’, ‘ethnicity’, ‘religion’, etc.
The diagram provides a useful image and framework, throughout a business
course, for calling attention to and analyzing the relevance of event, places, and
dynamics that might not seem relevant to either students’ lives or business. Marked
on the periphery, the pro-democracy movement in Tunisia, the cost of housing in
Hartford, or financial regulations in Washington become the subject of the questions,
‘‘How does this affect you?’’, How does this affect business in Connecticut?’’ and,
‘‘How do these affect each other? When the connections are indirect the discussion
opens up new lines of thought. Eventually (on a blackboard and in students’ minds, I
hope) the circles are embedded in an ever-changing thatch of crisscrossing lines or a
freeform squiggle. The diagram becomes quite messy and unintelligible but the point
is quite visible: the people, places, and issues that seem unrelated to our concerns can
be central and we cannot advance our own interests without taking these others into
account (Figure 10.2).
Figure 10.1: Locating Ourselves
Figure 10.2: Complex Interdependencies
10.3.3. Assumptions
Given such complex interdependencies, acting with integrity becomes a matter of

locating ourselves, making choices, and navigating to the best of our abilities. But
here we confront questions about what is right and, even more fundamentally, what
is possible. Evaluating and surpassing convention requires recognition of the
conditions of knowledge and ‘‘breaking the tyranny of fixed accepted facts reified as
202 Sarah Stookey
independent entities’’ (McKeon, 1968, p. 120).The Great Books-type programs

and/or more extensive distribution requirements of a liberal arts education highlight
the role of assumptions in shaping perception and the multiplicity of interpretative
lens for considering social phenomena. In her analysis of methods for cultivating
critical thinking used in elite liberal arts colleges, Tsui (2008) highlights the focus on
‘‘thinking outside the box’’ and asking ‘‘How do we know what we know?’’ Liberal
arts students take logic, statistics, epistemology and methodology, etc. They also
learn to read and think critically in classes ranging from poetry to philosophy to
histories of science — the standard comparative analyses that develop competence in
recognizing and articulating similarities and differences (Black, 1979).
Business education, in contrast, tends to present norms and practices as received
wisdom and to foster acceptance of established values and cultural perspectives of
the business community (Alvesson & Deetz, 2000). The apparent authority of the
precepts taught is reinforced by the massive textbooks it is often packaged in
(textbooks being rarely used in non-science courses in the liberal arts). Students
therefore tend to lack a sense of how influential and also mutable assumptions are. In
order to strengthen their ability to act with integrity students need to be able to
identify, analyze, and evaluate unstated assumptions in norms and behaviors.
To introduce the role of assumptions I often use a short quiz. Questions may
include the geographical (‘‘Is China bigger than Greenland?’’ and ‘‘Is Connecticut
above Uruguay?’’), health (‘‘Are saturated fats bad for you?’’) and business-related
(‘‘When CEOs own shares of their company the company is more profitable — true
or false?’’ and ‘‘When the economy is growing unemployment goes down — true or
false?’’). Introducing different global map projections (Mercator, Peters, ‘‘upside-
down’’) and newspaper or journal articles reporting on such phenomena as low-carb
diets and ‘‘jobless recoveries’’ stimulates discussion about why our knowledge of
such apparently demonstrable information can be so varied. The effect of where,
when, and how life histories, our economic position and cultural traditions, the
impact of technology, national identity and global politics — we discuss how these
affect our perception of what is true and how things work. And we discuss how
useful our assumptions can be. Mercator’s projection is an enormous distortion of
the world’s land masses but it served a vital function by facilitating 16th century
navigation. Our assumptions, we recognize, help us move forward and collaborate
with others because they limit our field of vision (Figure 10.3).
And so assumptions also obstruct a wider view. Students read Plato’s Allegory of
the Cave and we spend a class discussing how assumptions may be so powerful that
they obscure the true nature of our experience. So, while an economic moment may
not feel like a recovery if you are un- or underemployed (as many students or
members of their families are), other assumptions (i.e., that global competition
dictates layoffs or that the unemployed are not sufficiently valuable) may make
unemployment seem both inevitable and a necessary precursor of better times.
It is very important, in these discussions, not to dictate interpretations by
privileging certain assumptions. To develop the ability and inclination to articulate
and examine assumptions students need to come to their own conclusions and listen
to others discuss their assumptions without judgment. One way of walking this line is
Figure 10.3: The Role of Assumptions
to refer to Truths and truths, distinguished by degree of disputability (while

acknowledging that each person’s constellation will be different). Short readings
representing different philosophical traditions (e.g., Locke, Rousseau, Sartre, the
Hopi, and the Buddha) illustrate this point. Additional readings offer other concepts:
paradigms (Kuhn, 1996) and organizing patterns (Hall, 1959) to underscore how
assumptions change over time and culture.
Greater sensitivity to assumptions — one’s own and others’ — promotes integrity
by inhibiting the human inclination to assert inevitability in choices that advance
particular interests at others’ expense. If businesses ‘‘have to’’ maximize profit they
‘‘can’t’’ not outsource to low-wage countries. The point is not to paralyze decision-
making or reduce all differences to opinion but to legitimize options that may seem
unsanctioned and/or impossible.
10.3.4. Business as Social Phenomena
A liberal arts approach emphasizes how institutions, norms, and practices evolve to
advance particular interests in specific contexts and the value-laden choices and actions
of individuals and groups. Liberal arts students learn about symbolism from a variety
of sources — literature and media studies, anthropology, and sociology (Baudrillard,
1995). As a result they become adept at valuable skills such as interpreting class and
ethnic cures, characterizing audiences and communicating with them accordingly, etc.
In contrast, business education tends to present students with the institutions,
norms, and practices of business as exogenous, an objective set of principles and
techniques extensively detailed in textbooks. The impression conveyed is that
business is largely value-neutral: businesses ‘‘have to’’ maximize profits, managers
‘‘have to’’ promote efficiency, employees ‘‘have to’’ be productive. Management is
treated as an instrumental practice.
204 Sarah Stookey
Perhaps the most radical shift a liberal arts approach brings to business education
is to consider business not as a set of techniques and imperatives but as a subject of
study, similar to economics or literature. The emphasis is not ‘‘how to use the
techniques’’ but rather, ‘‘what is it?’’, resulting in more open inquiry and analysis of
basic building blocks of business that tend to be taken for granted or ignored,
including ‘‘work,’’ ‘‘pay,’’ and ‘‘profit.’’ These can be examined ‘‘from the ground
up;’’ trying to understand and evaluate the different ways in each can be constituted
differently and not automatically adopting as mandatory the most familiar versions.
For example, techniques of employee control (a prominent topic in introductory
textbooks) can be considered in terms of values: ‘‘why do managers get to tell people
what to do?’’ and ‘‘Why do employees need to be controlled?’’ The idea that
managerial prerogative could be considered contingent makes a lot of sense to young
people who have worked in service or retail organizations where they often perceive
their (frequently underpaid and overworked) managers as relatively unintelligent and
lacking in personal authority. The goal of discussing the basis of managerial
authority is not simply to subvert. It is intended to encourage students to articulate
and defend or critique the values embedded in managerial practice.
The concept of profit is also offers important lines of questioning. Class discussion
of the basic accounting equation, ‘‘Revenue minus Costs equals Profit ’’ provides
many opportunities for posing questions about values. Why does capital get a profit?
What apparently positive values (such as efficiency) are attributed to profit
maximization? What assumptions are made about the distributive effects of markets?
What are the effects of using market standards as benchmarks for rates of profit?
What are the implications of treating labor as a cost? The mere voicing of such
questions is an important statement about the need for active ethical engagement.
Understanding business as socially constructed requires acknowledging there is
any number of ways to conduct it. In order to illustrate the wide range of possibilities
I introduce students to alternative forms of organizing business activity, including
cooperatives, fair trade, socialism, a variety of regulatory systems, etc. Each example
offers opportunities to analyze and evaluate effectiveness and underlying values and
the variety reinforces the role of individual and social choice in establishing norms.
10.3.5. World History
A good liberal arts education is extensively historical, familiarizing students not only
with major and global historical turning points and periods but also with arcs of change
in politics, culture, and technology and with the inevitability and possibilities of change.
History teaches liberal arts students to raise questions about cause and effect writ large
and to grapple with its complexities. For any significant historical event there are
multiple causal explanations; moreover, the periodization of history leads to competing
interpretations of which events are significant at all (Gaddis, 2002; Veyne, 1984).
In considering the importance, for managers, of studying history, Nelson (1958)
maintained that a ‘‘perspective of time and history (is) one of the best safeguards
against rash and ill considered public action, (but) hardly can be acquired except by
reading and reflection’’ (p. 281). Undergraduate business students know many things
that the average student at an elite liberal arts college does not. But there are
worrisome gaps in their knowledge of world history (Behrman & Levin, 1984). Here
is a list of some of the more notable historical markers my students cannot provide
the most basic description of:
The financial failure of 2008

The New Deal
Middle East politics
The Cold War
The Great Society
Feudalism
General familiarity with these parts of world history is not simply a matter of an
intellectual inventory or cultural pedigree. It is certainly possible to act with integrity
in business without any of this knowledge. But today’s business environment, with its
crisscrossing of global economies, culture, and politics, increasingly demands
awareness of historical context and, just as importantly, appreciation of the
powerful role of seemingly minor events and movements. Putting business activities
in historical context also directly highlights the role of value judgments: the rights
and responsibilities of the U.S. employees and employers can be more clearly
evaluated as moral claims in the context of the development of American industry.
The possibilities of trade relations with China can only be fully considered in light of
the history of Chinese Communism and the Cold War.
In part, management students’ lack of historical knowledge has nothing to do with
their undergraduate education. It is a function of the pervasive social hierarchies
described earlier. Students from non-elite families and school districts are less likely
to have received this kind of education in their high schools than the more privileged
students who attend liberal arts schools. But this difference is compounded by the
instrumental focus of business programs. On the one hand, historical knowledge is
not seen as serving an immediate business function. On the other hand, the
abundance of techniques deemed necessary to learn fills up a curriculum, leaving
little room for nonbusiness courses, including history.
Weaving history into business courses is relatively straightforward. Treating
topics, such as work, from the ground up calls for readings that speak to the qualities
of work which have endured — and changed — across time. So, for example, De
Tocqueville’s (1988) Democracy in America provides a basis for considering the
truism that ‘‘all work is honorable.’’ Readings that describe the heyday (and relative
demise) of the American labor movement shape discussion of how the conditions of
paid work have changed and what issues persist. Excerpts of accounts of the
Progressive Movement (e.g., Goodwyn, 1978; Zinn, 1995) can be used as the basis of
classroom skits and discussion of corporate influence in government today.
Historical complexities can also be suggested, in condensed form, with video clips
and films. News footage of The Great Leap Forward or of the sole demonstrator
206 Sarah Stookey
confronting tanks in Tiananmen Square powerfully conveys a spirit which can be

contextualized through lecture and readings.
Clearly, in a management classroom it is only possible to provide a bare outline of
historical events, especially if a wide range seems relevant. But given students’ lack of
familiarity, even limited exposure can be significant. If the historical component does
not provide detail it does make the statement that ‘‘these past events (Tiananmen
Square, the Six Day War, the New Deal, etc.) matter and there’s more to today’s
concern (trade relations with China or the future of Social Security) than you might
think.’’ The overall effect may simply be to complicate the process of forming
opinions. That, combined with some greater measure of humility about apparent
national or economic imperatives can promote integrity.
10.3.6. The Arts and Sciences
Cultural awareness is the understanding of the products and process of artistic,

scientific, political, and intellectual endeavors. Individuals’ cultural awareness shapes
interpretation of social phenomena. When cultural awareness, broadly defined, is
confined to the currently and immediately prevalent, conceptual algorithms are
limited. According to the 19th century poet, Matthew Arnold, an education that
focuses on culture expands and enriches the capacity to make sense of the world by
making ‘‘the best that has been thought and known in the world current everywhere’’
(cited in Carr, 2009).
A substantive liberal arts education, with its emphasis on the arts and sciences
familiarizes students with a broad range of cultural endeavors (Carr, 2009). In
contrast, an undergraduate management program offers students little required
exposure to the arts and sciences. As a result, most management undergraduates
have not:
debated existentialism, gender relations, or immigration patterns;

discussed the implications of developments in physics;
watched a Charlie Chaplin movie;
studied the U.S. plantation system;
dissected a Supreme Court case;
read Mark Twain;
studied an artist or novelist; and
taken an anthropology course.
The lack of exposure to a broad range of intellectual endeavor reinforces greater

anti-intellectualism among business students than among students in other academic
disciplines (Elias, 2008). Of course, there is no direct connection between emphasis
on the arts and sciences and a tendency to act with integrity. In fact, given the
predominance of Ivy League B.A.s among the most powerful scoundrels of recent
scandals, that credential could be considered damning, integrity-wise. But, as with
history, education that emphasizes the value of the arts and sciences can encourage
consideration of more subtle and wide-ranging implications of action and social

choices (Small, 2006). A seminar on the caste system of India is valuable not only for
the greater understanding of that particular phenomenon but also for what it teaches
about the structure of social systems, their consequences and the levers of change. It
also introduces students to the practice of scholarship and the ways that it can create
new knowledge.
The Freshman Seminars now so prevalent at elite liberal arts colleges and
universities are rooted in this principle that students’ appreciation of a discipline is
enhanced by seeing in-depth focus and advanced scholarship in action early in their
college education. In contrast, the few arts and sciences courses a management major
takes are likely to be broad survey courses in which it is harder to convey the
intriguing aspects of a subject, the lessons for advancing human interests and the
possibilities for new interpretation. Finally, courses in the arts and literature expose
students to direct expressions of others’ experience, introducing new places and ways
of living and feeling. Novels, autobiographies, poetry, music, and dance express
human needs and aspirations in unique ways, building understanding and empathy
(Carr, 2009).
The relevance of more broadly humanistic education as part of preparation for
management has been long and widely acknowledged if not extensively implemented.
In their acclaimed book, In Search of Excellence, Peters and Waterman ‘‘cited former
investment banker Michael Thomas, who said that today’s MBAs ‘lack liberal arts
literacy y need a broader vision, a sense of history and perspectives from literature
and art’’’ (Mulligan, 1987).
Elements of this aspect of a liberal arts education can be incorporated into a
management course through the standard tools: readings, lectures, classroom
activities, and assignments. Again, it is largely a matter of widening the frame
around a particular topic of more immediate management or business concern. I
have already referred to the ways authors not usually associated with management
(i.e., Kuhn, Rousseau, De Tocqueville) can open up discussion for probing questions
about what is right and possible. The possibilities are endless and even brief exposure
can be effective. The excerpt from Tom Sawyer in which Tom discovers how to make
a profit while others whitewash the fence is very effective in a discussion of what
constitutes work. The first 10 min of Chaplin’s Modern Times illustrate the
timelessness of a very familiar experience of managerial control. The wide-ranging
implications of scientific and technological developments can be easily addressed
using serious newspaper reports. A few paragraphs from the Koran and Buddhist
texts provoke new considerations in a discussion of wealth and profit. There can be
no pretense that these short interactions provide substantial understanding of the
works or topics. But they serve a vital role of affirming the importance of considering
the usually-not-considered and encouraging students to consider their personal
experience in the light of both familiar and unfamiliar narratives.
A final note concerns music and songwriting, a form of cultural expression
management students are very familiar with. As part of asserting the importance of
culture and the arts for understanding society, it can be very useful to incorporate
music in the classroom by playing songs whose lyrics speak to the topic of the
208 Sarah Stookey
moment. An instructor’s choices can be useful because they usually involve music
unfamiliar to the students. But to affirm art’s power of expression it is also important
to have students make their own choices to share with the class. It is striking how
many popular songs speak very directly to the ways business affects lives and society.
10.3.7. The Local/Global
The concentric circles around the YOU in the diagram described earlier the extension
of geographic interdependency from the most local to the global. Sensitivity to these
interlocking relationships is crucial to acting with integrity and to success in
management (Kelley & Worthley, 1981). To some degree, having a global mindset
and being a more cosmopolitan ‘‘citizen of the world’’ is a distinguishing
characteristic of privileged liberal arts students. High-power businesses consider
such a ‘‘global mindset’’ a crucial quality (Levy, Beechler, Taylor, & Boyacigiller,
2007). Greater ability to process events unfolding in the streets of Egypt or changes
in the European Union is an increasingly important asset. But the ability to discern
and analyze what is happening on more local levels is also crucial (Levy et al., 2007).
If people are to act with attention to the effects on others, both are necessary.
In terms of familiarity with places and people outside the United States the difference
between management students’ understanding and that of liberal arts students at elite
colleges and universities is not as clear-cut as in other areas. Liberal arts students tend to
have the class-based advantage of families that travel more extensively and are generally
more knowledgeable and engaged with the rest of the world. They are also more likely to
consume news media that is more internationally focused. On the contrary, management
undergraduates’ typically less elite families are more likely to have emigrated recently to
the United States, have more intimate connections outside the United States and be more
familiar with non-mainstream culture.
Understanding of and connections with the local community are an area in which
non-elite management students’ may have advantages over their elite liberal arts
counterparts. The flip side of less engagement with international events may be more
engagement with what is near. The concerns of a town, region, or even state may
seem parochial and less worthy of attention in elite circles.
In a management classroom the challenge is, on the one hand, to help students
become accustomed to paying attention to and analyzing the relevance of global
events. One relatively easy and effective way of doing this is to make discussion of
global, national, and local current events a frequent and important part of classroom
activities. It is not sufficient to rely on televised news reports; the less-digested form
of newspaper reporting is necessary. Many teachers ask students to keep up with
current events and some assign reading a daily news source. Although The Wall
Street Journal is frequently used for this purpose, I prefer The New York Times. The
Times more broadly considers what is newsworthy (providing many opportunities to
discuss Big Picture concerns) and covers international events more fully.
Furthermore, as I tell my Connecticut students, it is paper of choice among the
powerful business people who take the train from Fairfield County to Grand Central
on weekday mornings. It is therefore more likely to be the paper elite students at
liberal arts colleges found on their kitchen counters growing up. Facility with the
range of topics and level of analysis that distinguishes The New York Times from
U.S.A. Today, for example, is an important part of the stance that gives liberal arts
students their greater self-confidence and assumption of authority which manage-
ment students tend to lack. Another very effective news source is The Economist
magazine (I tell students this is what people are reading in the front of the plane
going to London or Beijing). Finally, the Internet and predominance of English
makes non-U.S. news sources readily accessible. Assigning students to read the
online versions of The Lusaka Times or the English paper, The Guardian over the
course of several weeks gives them insight into unfamiliar national and global
perspectives.
Because students often lack the background knowledge to make sense of what is
reported, it is not enough to assign reading. It is important to also take time to
discuss selected reports in depth on a regular basis. These discussions can become
quite rich as students’ questions prompt discussion of contextual factors, historical
precedence, and alternative interpretations. They can also be opportunities for
students whose families originated in other parts of the world to contribute their
special insights. As the events are discussed the circular YOU diagram can be used to
chart the effects at different levels and the connections between events and places.
Over the course of a semester, such discussions can substantially increase students’
abilities to think about global complexities.
Although international news can be very compelling, also discussing local news
counteracts a tendency to devalue the more familiar. Students can be encouraged to
consider their home communities, and especially the business and economic
dimensions, in new, more complex terms, adding analysis to description. Attention
to the local also is not parochial; in any given region differences of class, ethnicity,
urbanization, etc. mean much is unknown to students, even about the community
next door. In addition to discussing local news, student research about ‘‘food
deserts’’ state-wide or the characteristics of local housing markets can illuminate the
needs and resources of unfamiliar neighbors.
Direct interaction with people in the local community is the most powerful (and
challenging to incorporate into coursework) way for students to gain new
appreciation of differences locally and — by extension — situations facing people
throughout the country. At elite liberal arts colleges where students tend to live and
work (if they do) on campus, outreach programs are more common. Management
majors at non-elite schools are more likely to live off-campus and to have jobs off-
campus. The opportunities for volunteer work with community organizations are
therefore more limited. The challenge then is to incorporate this kind of interaction
into the course requirements and assigned course time. I have had very good results
with having management students’ work with middle school students in a series of
meetings to develop curricula and even business planning competitions. The younger
students, I tell my students, are likely to be their future employees, employers, or
neighbors — it is important that they get to know each other.
210 Sarah Stookey
Greater understanding of the significance of conditions around the world and

locally helps students to embrace and manage complex business and civic situations.
Developing understanding of commonalities and differences across geographic,
economic, and cultural distances helps them be more thoughtful about the impact of
their choices and actions.
10.3.8. Claiming Powerful Voices
Integrity requires consideration of others. But making that consideration real also
requires the sense that self-efficacy is possible. The ‘‘YOU’’ diagram asserts the
importance of individual experience, values, choices, and actions and the importance
of being engaged and thoughtful. One of the most significant aspects of an elite liberal
arts education often missing from undergraduate management education is cultivation
of individual voice. History, the arts and sciences, and current events all highlight the
potential of individual and small group actions. Social hierarchies, reflected in the
educational system, undermine many non-elite students’ self-confidence at the same
time that they elevate the confidence of elite liberal arts students.
This difference is particularly striking, in light of differences in life experience of
the two groups. For example, in a seminar of juniors and seniors at an elite liberal
arts college, only a couple of students had ever held a paying job. Very few of them
had any idea how business worked (i.e., the difference between a private and a public
company), even though many of their parents played influential roles in business. On
the contrary, virtually all of my management students have been doing serious paid
work since they were young teenagers. When I have told them about peers who did
not have jobs as teenagers they have been dumbfounded — ‘‘How did they buy
anything?’’ they asked. Not only have my management students put in countless
hours as waitresses, landscapers, clerks, secretaries, and tellers. They have also
managed work crews, helped run family businesses and started their own, paid
medical bills, received unemployment, been on food stamps, earned their tuition and
saved up for a down payment on a house.
These management students are capable and responsible. And, in terms of personal
experience they are eminently more qualified in business than their liberal arts
counterparts. Certainly they have a more vivid sense of the short end of the stick. Yet
they have received the message that their experience and voices are not valuable. If
integrity derives from the sense of being an important part of a large and complex
whole and having responsibility to a wide range of others, then they have been limited.
The management classroom can be a place for encouraging students to value their
own experience at the same time that they are urged to consider the unfamiliar
(Roca, 2007). An elementary practice is to insist that they write analytical essays in
the first-person, particularly for claiming and taking responsibilities not only for
opinions but also for reliance on particular assumptions. Invariably, at the beginning
of a semester, when students hand in their first essays, their aversion to using ‘‘I’’ to
claim opinions becomes evident. When I call their attention to this they remind me
that they have always been taught not to use the first-person. Recently, when I asked
one class why they thought their teachers had taught that a young woman said,
‘‘They don’t want to hear what we think.’’ That impression, confirmed by others, is
important to discuss. Other techniques include having them write letters to the
editors of local or national newspapers or to elected representatives.
In addition to claiming their voice in writing, I expect students to articulate opinions
and develop arguments, in generalized discussions, small group work and debates. One
of the goals of discussion about everything from philosophy to current events is to reduce
the barriers to engaging. It is critical to avoid making students feel their opinions are
wrong or that they are ill-informed. As professor and participant in the discussions I try
to make clear that while my own knowledge about most topics is limited I believe in my
right and responsibility to try to figure things out. Of course, it is also important that I
frame opinions as possibilities: ‘‘if you believe this, then y,’’ and not make my own
preferences explicit. I tell students outright that I do not care whether or not they agree
with what they think are my opinions or with the views of any author, only that they
work on figuring out and sharing their own views. The critical message is that their voices
are worth attending to, sometimes even more so than the experts’.
10.4. Conclusions
The failures of business to advance broad social interests are not, largely, due to
decision makers’ lack of personal integrity. Managers work in a political economy
which equates short-term results, financial profit and personal gain with success and
treats workers, consumers, and the natural environment as instruments. But
organizations and societies are maintained by people acting individually and in
groups. Education contributes to shaping individuals’ sense of business and social
imperatives and the possibility of acting differently.
The educational system in the United States mirrors a society segregated by
elitism and governed by hierarchies of privilege. These values cannot ever promote
integrity. If business is to serve other than short-term and minority elite interests we
need a different educational system. All students, regardless of their social and
economic status, need opportunities to understand how business works/can work
from many different perspectives. And all students, regardless of their social and
economic status, need to be exposed to the powerful ideas and traditions of the
liberal arts. Management undergraduates bring to the classroom rich understanding
of how business works. Yet management education too often consists of imposing an
overlay of instrumental and often socially dysfunctional values and prescriptions.
Therefore affirming the importance of individual voice and the capability of each
person to formulate critique and alternatives may be the most important
contribution of a liberal arts approach to management education. This self-confident
and socially aware stance is a prerequisite for integrity.
Incorporating the elements of a liberal arts education outlined here in an
undergraduate management classroom is a challenge. The norms of doctoral
212 Sarah Stookey
preparation and the AACSB are substantial obstacles to teaching which challenges
the status quo, introduces new frameworks and resists focusing future employees and
managers — our current students — into instruments for achieving financial goals
(Giacalone & Thompson, 2006; Swanson, 2004).Yet management education is also
uniquely positioned for making change. Beyond the obvious (our business is
business) management undergraduates bring to the classroom personal experiences
and an understanding of the power of business usually lacking in elite liberal arts
classrooms. This experience, so significantly ignored by managerial instrumentalism,
should be a central concern in evaluating business norms and practices.
Supplemented by elements of a liberal arts approach management undergraduates
can be extremely effective agents of change.
Expanding this approach to promoting integrity institutionally involves moving
beyond the management classroom to seek opportunities for deepening and
systematizing a liberal arts orientation across business school departments. The
same elements of Big Picture thinking, assumptions, social construction, world
history, arts and sciences global/local, and individual voice can be enlisted to
encourage cross-disciplinary courses, especially on topics of global and local social
and economic interest, for example, housing, water, food, healthcare, etc. These
kinds of topics offer rich opportunities to consider opportunities for profit-making
but also many forms of interdependencies. Similarly, cross-disciplinary research can
open up new avenues of thinking and investigation for faculty.
On a university level collaboration with faculty in other schools can be a
particularly fruitful way to integrate business and traditional areas of liberal arts
study (Kanter, 1994). On my campus the Honors College offers opportunities to for
cross-disciplinary teaching but traditionally business faculty have not pursued these.
Co-teaching a recent course, ‘‘Business and Government,’’ with a colleague in the
political science department helped me to see my own subject matter and ways of
teaching in new and useful lights. The students, all liberal arts majors, had very little
understanding of even the most basic aspects of business and enjoyed becoming
familiar with institutions and systems they had largely ignored. Unfortunately (and I
think it is a reflection of the dynamics described earlier), few business students enroll
in the Honors College. Besides addressing that lack, we need to figure out ways that
all students can take such co-taught, interdisciplinary courses. At the very least we
can invite our colleagues from across the campus to guest lecture. Finally, we can
promote cross-campus projects that give students opportunities to work with the
community (locally and globally) to address problems and create ways of acting with
greater integrity. The AASCU Democracy Project and Civic Agency initiative are
national efforts that help to strategize about how to do this.
There are many ways management educators can incorporate a liberal arts
approach into our teaching and profession in order to encourage integrity in
business. But given the social and economic segregation that permeates our
educational system, it is also crucial that elite liberal arts schools incorporate more
education about business into their curricula. This is not a matter of inviting exalted
business leader alumnae to speak on campus. It is not accomplished by most
economics courses. It requires more consideration of the normative assumptions of
business, of the mechanisms of its operation, the magnitude and pervasiveness of its
often-contradictory effects on people. As suggested by the recommendations made
here for the management classroom, it requires enlarging and deepening the scope of
students’ perspective and their sensitivity to the experience of people who are
unfamiliar yet surely linked.
Educators at colleges and universities of all sorts need to be enlisted to prepare
students to create business organizations and systems that act with integrity. We need
to prepare young people across the range of schools and social background to
analyze critically and envision ways of doing business that advance satisfying
livelihoods, gratifying and sustainable consumption and vibrant and diverse
communities. Weaving together the liberal arts and business offers one way
education can address the injustices that segregate and keep us from acting with care.
References
Alvesson, M., & Deetz, S. (2000). Doing critical management research. London: Sage
Publications.
Baudrillard, J. (1995). Simulacra and simulation. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Behrman, J. I., & Levin, R. I. (1984). Are business schools doing their job? Harvard Business
Review, 62(2), 140–147.
Birnik, A., & Billsberry, J. (2008). Reorienting the business school agenda: The case for
relevance, rigor, and righteousness. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(4), 985–999.
Black, M. (1979). More about metaphor. In: A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 19–41).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Burke, C. B. (1983). American collegiate populations: A test of the traditional view. New York:
New York University Press.
Carr, D. (2009). Revisiting the liberal and vocational dimensions of university education.
British Journal of Educational Studies, 57(1), 1–17.
De Tocqueville, A. (1988). Democracy in America (Original work published 1835). New York:
Perennial Library.
Elias, R. Z. (2008). Anti-intellectual attitudes and academic self-efficacy among business
students. Journal of Education for Business, 84(2), 110–117.
Finn, C. E. Jr., & Ravitch, D. (2007, August 8). Not by geeks alone. Wall Street Journal
(Eastern Edition), p. A.13. Retrieved July 6, 2011, from ABI/INFORM Global.
(Document ID: 1316534321).
Gaddis, J. L. (2002, November–December). A grand strategy of transformation. Foreign
Policy No. 133 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC (pp. 50–57). Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3183557
Giacalone, R. A., & Thompson, K. R. (2006). Business ethics and social responsibility education:
Goldhagen, D. (1996). Hitler’s willing executioners. New York: Vintage.
Goodwyn, L. (1978). The populist moment: A short history of the agrarian revolt in America.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Gordon, R. A., & Howell, J. E. (1959). Higher education for business. New York: Columbia
University Press.
214 Sarah Stookey
Green, K. C. (1992). After the boom: Management majors in the 1990s. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Hall, E. (1959). The silent language. Greenwich, CT: Fawcett Publication.
Hall, P. D. (1982). The organization of American culture: Private institutions, elites and the
origins of American nationality. New York: New York University Press.
Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of
its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9, 193–206.
Huehn, M. P. (2008). Unenlightened economism: The antecedents of bad corporate
governance and ethical decline. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(4), 823–835.
Kanter, R. M. (1994). Collaborative advantage: The art of alliances. Harvard Business Review,
4, 96–108.
Kelley, L., & Worthley, R. (1981). The role of culture in comparative management: Across-
cultural perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 24(1), 164–173.
Kershaw, I. (2000). The Nazi dictatorship: Problems and perspectives of interpretation. London:
Arnold.
Key, S. (1996). Economics or education: The establishment of American land-grant
universities. Journal of Higher Education, 67(2), 196–220.
Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kushner, R. J. (1999). Curriculum as strategy: The scope and organization of business
education in liberal arts colleges. Journal of Higher Education, 70(4), 413–440.
Leppel, K. (2001). Race, Hispanic ethnicity, and the future of the college business major in the
United States. Journal of Education for Business, 76(4), 209–216.
Levy, O., Beechler, S., Taylor, S., & Boyacigiller, N. A. (2007). What we talk about when we
talk about ‘‘global mindset’’: Managerial cognition in multinational corporations. Journal
of International Business Studies, 38(2), 231–258.
McKeon, R. (1968). Character and the arts and disciplines. Ethics, 78(2), 109–123.
Mulligan, T. M. (1987). The two cultures in business education. Academy of Management
Review, 12(4), 593–599.
Nelson, C. A. (1958). Liberal education for public service? Public Administration Review, 18(4),
278–284.
Pace, C. R., & Connolly, M. (2000). Where are the liberal arts? Research in Higher Education,
41(1), 53–65.
Pfeffer, J., & Fong, C. T. (2002). The end of business schools? Less success than meets the eye.
Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1(1), 78–95.
Pierson, F. C. (1959). The education of American businessmen. New York: McGraw Hill.
Rimer, S. (2008). Big paycheck or service? Students are put to the test. New York Times,
June 23.
Roca, E. (2007). Introducing practical wisdom in business schools. Journal of Business Ethics,
82, 607–620.
Rossett, R. N. (undated). Business education in the United States. Selected Paper
#59.University of Chicago, Booth School of Business. Retrieved from http://www.
chicagobooth.edu/faculty/selectedpapers/sp59.pdf.
Roth, M. (2008, December 1). What’s a liberal arts education good for? (Web log essay). Retrieved
from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-roth/whats-a-liberal-arts-educ_b_147584.html.
Salem, R., & Grabarek, S. (1986). Sociology B.A.s in a corporate setting: How can they get
there and of what value are they? Teaching Sociology. 14(4), 273–275.
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of a learning organization. New York:
Doubleday.
Small, M. W. (2006). A case for including business ethics and humanities in management
programs. Journal of Business Ethics, 64(2), 195–211.
Swanson, D. L. (2004). The buck stops here: Why universities must reclaim business ethics
education. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2(1), 43–61.
Tsui, A. (2008). Cultivating critical thinking: Insights from an elite liberal arts college. Journal
of General Education, 56(3–4), 200–227.
Veyne, P. (1984). Writing history: Essay on epistemology. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan
University Press.
Wright, F. W. (1930). The evolution of the normal schools. Elementary School Journal, 30(5),
363–371.
Zinn, H. (1995). A people’s history of the United States. New York: Harper Perennial.
Chapter 11
Meeting the Objectives of Business Ethics

Education: The Marriott School Model
and Agenda for Utilizing the Complete
Collegiate Educational Experience
Bradley R. Agle, Jeffery A. Thompson, David W. Hart,
Lori L. Wadsworth and Aaron Miller
Abstract
Purpose –– Business ethics education is critical in the development of leaders in
management who possess integrity. In this chapter, we introduce the Marriott
School Model to business ethics education. In so doing, we assert that any
successful pedagogical approach to developing ethical leaders must progress
through at least four primary levels of business ethics education. Those four
primary levels that should be covered in the classroom are: (1) personal ethical
understanding, (2) application of ethical principles to business situations,
(3) moral courage and organizational savvy, and (4) ethical leadership.
Methodology –– This chapter is a conceptual piece based on the authors’
collective experiences, as well as a literature review of pedagogical applications.
Findings –– The future of business ethics education holds great promise. We
assert that with the use of stand-alone dedicated business ethics courses, ethics
applications utilized throughout the entire management curricula, as well as
various field experiences that address lessons in business ethics, can be even
better at producing greater levels of integrity in business settings.
Originality –– This chapter is the first extensive discussion of the Marriott
School Model of business ethics education.

ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1
218 Bradley R. Agle et al.
11.1. Introduction
There is an extensive literature on the teaching of business ethics and integrity during
the past 30 years. This literature deals with various questions such as: what are the
objectives of such teaching, what pedagogies can be used, how effective are such
pedagogies, how can ethics be integrated into other nonethics courses, how effective
is such integration, how can an organization model effect ethical behavior, what
things shouldn’t be taught in our business schools in order to promote ethics, etc.
In this chapter, we take a holistic or broad-based approach to the development of
strong moral principles and integrity in business schools. We begin by examining the
various objectives of business ethics education. We do this through an examination
of the ethics development model used in the Marriott School of Management at
Brigham Young University. We then provide examples of the various types of
pedagogical approaches discussed in the business ethics literature for each of these
objectives, along with examples of successful pedagogical techniques used in
Marriott School ethics courses. We conclude by discussing the Marriott School
agenda for fuller fulfillment of its ethics mission. Such an agenda includes utilizing all
the elements of a student’s collegiate experience to enhance their ethical development,
per the ethics development model.
Albrecht, Hill, and Albrecht (2006) originally created the ethics development
model for the Marriott School of Management. The model shown in Figure 11.1 and
shaped like a pyramid is a slightly modified version of this model, with
organizational savvy added to the level of moral courage. This model is a
developmental model in which each higher level builds upon the previous level.
The foundation of the model is an individual’s ethical understanding. Students do
not come to business schools as empty slates. They have already developed certain
ethical understandings through their lives. We attempt to help them develop a
Ethical Leadership
Ethical Courage &

Organizational Savvy
Application of Ethics to Business Situations
Personal Ethical Understanding
Figure 11.1: Marriott school ethics development model. Source: Adapted from
Albrecht et al. (2006).
Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model 219
stronger understanding of their own ethical values and to strengthen their

commitment to, and understanding of, ethical principles.
The second level of the model involves the student learning to apply the ethical
principles from level one in actual business situations. Such practice in application
can be very helpful to students as they begin to deal with real ethical dilemmas early
in their career. The third level of the model involves moral courage and
organizational savvy. This level emphasizes the need not only for an understanding
of what should be done in ethical dilemmas but also the need for the personal
fortitude and skills necessary to do the right thing in difficult circumstances. Finally,
the top level of the model focuses on ethical leadership, the ability to influence others
for good.
11.2. Level One: Personal Ethical Understanding

Teaching business ethics relies on an understanding of basic ethical values. Almost all
students bring these values with them into a business ethics course. The first level of
the Marriott School Model reinforces these values and helps students better
understand them. We do this by pursuing four objectives (Table 11.1):
Identifying and enhancing personal values and virtues

Increasing ethical sensitivity
Knowing the benefits of ethical behavior
Developing awareness of influences on ethical behavior.
11.2.1. Identifying and Enhancing Personal Values and Virtues
Various pedagogical approaches discussed in the literature describe ways to reinforce

students’ understanding of basic ethical values. Relying on ethical problems depicted
in fiction is an effective way to press students to better understand their own ethics.
By having students project their decisions in difficult ethical problems, they often
realize the strengths and weaknesses of their own ethical understanding.
Common fictional approaches include the use of movies, modern morality plays
(Alsop, 2006), literature, and role-playing. Some movies and plays have been
specifically mentioned, including Death of a Salesman (Garaventa, 1998), The Insider
(Van Es, 2003), and Ibsen’s An Enemy to the People (Brinkmann, 2009). In the
Marriott School, we often use the film Miss Evers’ Boys, which is a fictional depiction
of the Tuskegee Study of syphilitic black men, focusing on the role played by the
head nurse in the study. Class discussion about the film focuses on what ethical
values the nurse should have applied to her decisions and how those compare to the
values the students hold. Most importantly, whenever movies, plays, literature, or
role-playing are used to teach ethics, instructors should push students to articulate
how their ethics would lead them to act in such a situation.
Table 11.1: Level 1 — Individual ethical understanding.
Objectives of level 1 Pedagogy Author(s)
Identifying and Case studies Many references

enhancing personal Movies Giacalone and Jurkiewicz
values and virtues (2001), Van Es (2003)
Plays Alsop (2006), Garaventa
(1998), Brinkmann (2009)
Role-playing Adams et al. (1998), Sanyal
(2000), LeClair, Ferrell,
Montuori, and Willems
(1999)
Literature Adams et al. (1998)
Personal codes of Jones and Ottaway (2001)
ethics
Increasing ethical Case studies Many references
sensitivity Student written cases Dunfee and Robertson (1988)
Knowing the benefits Prison field trips Castleberry (2007)
of ethical behavior Enron case Wipperfurth (2002)
Developing awareness Milgram experiment Sheppard and Young (2007)
of influences on
ethical behavior
Although almost every student has a commitment to ethics in general, students

frequently fail to understand their own individual ethics and values in detail. For this
reason, self-assessment activities can also be effective teaching tools. The research
demonstrates a wide variety of effective self-assessment activities to help students
better understand their ethics.
In Marriott School ethics courses, the personal code of ethics assignment, also
recommended by Jones and Ottaway (2001), asks students to articulate their personal
ethics in a way that guides their decision-making. Students complete three drafts of
the personal code of ethics throughout the semester, and the instructors give detailed
feedback helping the students improve each draft.
The assignment usually helps students better understand their own ethics. For
example, students often sense the need to fulfill the obligations they owe to their
employers, families, and communities, without understanding exactly what those
obligations are and how they relate to each other. We find that students sometimes
express these obligations without thoughtful wording, writing statements like, ‘‘I’ll
always put my family first.’’ Although admirable in principle, it is a broad, inaccurate
statement about the obligation a student might owe to his family. We give feedback
helping the students recognize the need to better articulate — and thus better
understand — the obligations they hold. By the final draft, students instead express
their obligations with greater clarity and purpose, such as, ‘‘I commit to providing
for my family’s physical, emotional, and spiritual welfare.’’ Each semester produces
similar examples of improved understanding involving values like honesty, justice,
and care for others. These improvements give students clarity in the kinds of
decisions they aspire to make.
11.2.2. Increasing Ethical Sensitivity
Understanding ethical virtues like honesty or care does not mean students will
automatically recognize ethical problems when they arise. As such, students may fail
to recognize situations that present ethical danger. Therefore, presenting students
with situations that are not obviously ethically dangerous helps them to learn to
develop better ethical sensitivity.
Case studies, a staple of business education, work well for developing ethical
sensitivity. In our experience, a case involving potential conflicts of interests often
surprises students because the conflict arises from something common in business
like an offer to buy someone an expensive lunch. Students simply see this as ‘‘how
business gets done’’ rather than as a potential conflict of interest.
Outside of the traditional, in-class model of case teaching, cases can be used in
other creative ways. Students can write their own cases, researching a situation faced
by someone they know personally (Dunfee & Robertson, 1988). This is an approach
we use in the Marriott School. We find that students write teaching notes that push
the students to be more attentive to their own ethical values. Also, students who write
cases may find that if they present them to their classmates, their conclusions could
be challenged by the other students, further refining their ethical sensitivity.
By default, business ethics faculty turn to cases describing business circumstances,
but this is not necessary for reinforcing personal ethical values. Any situation
evoking an ethical dilemma, like a conflict with a neighbor or an encounter with a
charity fundraiser, can help students better understand their own ethics. In fact,
sometimes these situations are more probing because they help students realize that
ethics reaches into every aspect of life.
11.2.3. Knowing the Benefits of Ethical Behavior
Ethical choices often have immediate or remote benefits that students may not
appreciate. These benefits might be economic, social, or psychological. Under-
standing the benefits of ethical behavior helps students to increasingly see an ethical
choice as a good choice.
Castleberry (2007) writes about the effectiveness of taking students to meet with
white-collar criminals through prison field trips. The Enron case is common in ethics
courses (Wipperfurth, 2002). Part of its effectiveness lies in the consequences that
came from the choices made by Enron executives, a potent warning to students.
Besides avoiding negative outcomes for unethical choices, it is important to

reinforce the good outcomes that would realize from ethical choices. In this area, the
research in effective pedagogy is not as well developed. More could be done in this
area to help students appreciate the positive outcomes of ethical choices.
In the Marriott School, we use the Prisoner’s Dilemma in class, altering it in a way
that illustrates benefits to ethical behavior. The activity involves a ten-round iterated
version of the game played in pairs and using a typical scoring mechanism (e.g., three
points to each for cooperation, five points to an aggressor and zero points to a
cooperator, and one point to each if both are aggressors). After the students choose
their opponents, the instructor divides the class into three groups: A’s and B’s, C’s
and D’s, and E’s and F’s. Each letter group receives secret instructions for playing
the game. D’s, E’s, and F’s are simply told to try and get the highest score they can.
A’s, B’s, and C’s are told to get the highest score possible, but at the end of the game
their opponents will rate how satisfied they are with their outcome on a scale of one
to ten, ten being the highest. A’s, B’s, and C’s are then told that the number chosen
by their opponents will be added to their own final score. This addition incentivizes
students to care about their opponents’ satisfaction, approximating ethics within the
confines of the Prisoner’s Dilemma game. Table 11.2 illustrates the arrangement of
players and instructions.
Students are also told that they can only negotiate with their opponent during the
rounds when we allow it, usually before rounds two, four, seven, and ten. After the
ten rounds are played, all of the students rate their satisfaction with their own
outcome. Each letter group then gathers together and calculates an average of their
raw score, without any bonus points added for opponent’s satisfaction, and the
average satisfaction score for the group. Although outliers can skew the results in
small classes, the AB pairings typically perform the best in raw score and in
satisfaction score because their ‘‘ethical’’ incentive encourages cooperation and thus
increased potential value. Also, the ‘‘ethical’’ C’s usually do as well as D’s, E’s, and
F’s, even though they are incentivized to care about D’s satisfaction when D has no
reason to care about C’s satisfaction. This activity drives home the lesson that ethical
values in competitive situations can lead to increasing value through cooperation. We
end the discussion with real-world examples of how bad ethics can lead to high
transaction costs for negotiating parties.
11.2.4. Developing Awareness of Influences on Ethical Behavior
However, even with a clear understanding of ethical values and a commitment to

follow them, outside influences often lead to unethical decisions. Cognitive, social, and
psychological factors often divert well-intended decision-makers. Learning about
these influences helps students better compensate for them in their ethical choices.
Although a great deal of research relates to outside influences on ethical behavior,
very little research relates to effectively teaching business ethics students about these
influences. The Milgram obedience study is a very common teaching tool about
Table 11.2: Prisoner’s dilemma game.
Pairing Player Instructions Typical outcome
Pairing 1 Player A Try to obtain the highest score High raw score
possible. At the end of the High satisfaction score
game, your opponent will be
asked to rate his or her
satisfaction with the outcome
on a scale of 1 to 10
(10 ¼ highest). Their
satisfaction will be added to
your score.
Player B Try to obtain the highest score High raw score
your score.
Pairing 2 Player C Try to obtain the highest score Moderate raw score
your score.
Player D Try to obtain the highest score Moderate raw score
possible. Moderate satisfaction score
Pairing 3 Player E Try to obtain the highest score Moderate to low raw score
possible. Moderate to low
satisfaction score
Player F Try to obtain the highest score Moderate to low raw score
possible. Moderate to low
satisfaction score
outside influences that works well (Sheppard & Young, 2007). Beyond this, the
literature says little on teaching students to understand these influences.
We use an engaging in-class activity that asks the students prior to class to
complete a survey evoking common cognitive errors, like the availability heuristic,
the framing effect, loss aversion, and overconfidence. We divide the students into two
different groups to better illustrate the effects. For example, one group took a survey
that asked students to weigh a layoff plan that will lose 400 of 600 jobs while the
other group took a survey that describes the same plan as saving 200 of 600 jobs.
True to the framing effect and loss aversion, students who faced losing jobs usually
avoided the layoff plan while students saving jobs typically preferred it. After
learning the survey results in class, which almost always illustrate the cognitive
biases, the discussion centers on how these biases might affect ethical decision-
making. We then give the students multiple examples of these effects on ethics.
11.3. Level Two: Application of Ethical Principles to Business Situations

The second level of the model involves the application of ethical concepts to the
professional context. Students may have a firm foundation in the first level of the model
(i.e., the development of strong moral principles and integrity) and yet still fail to recognize
context-specific ethical dilemmas or to apply their personal principles into the managerial
context. Consequently, it is vital that ethics education provide opportunities for students
to grapple with dilemmas common in the business environment, and to master theories
and frameworks that allow them to reason about ethics in a professional context.
We have identified three general objectives pertinent to developing students’
capacity at this level. Table 11.3 provides a listing of techniques identified by
pedagogical research that support these objectives. We describe each of these three
objectives, and provide a brief discussion of the elements of an ethics curriculum that
would support each of them.
11.3.1. Understand Ethical Issues in the Business Environment
In order to prepare students to act ethically in the business environment, an effective

business ethics curriculum must introduce them to the types of dilemmas that
commonly confront managers. This is particularly important for undergraduates
who may have little to no managerial experience, but even students with significant
work experience may have overlooked ethical dimensions of the decisions they made
at work. Courses that focus purely on character development or theoretical
perspectives may leave students ill-equipped to identify ethical aspects of the critical
decisions they make. A compelling example of someone with high integrity who
nonetheless failed to perceive the ethical dimension of a critical business decision is
the experience of Dennis Gioia in the Pinto Fires case (see Gioia, 1992, as well as the
video case produced by Pennsylvania State University), which we find to be an
extremely effective learning tool in our courses.
Pedagogical research provides considerable guidance about techniques for
fostering understanding of ethical issues in the business context. Naturally, the
most common approach to immersing students into practical issues is through the
Table 11.3: Level 2 — Application of ethics to business situations.
Objectives of Pedagogy Author(s)

Level 2
Understand Case studies Many references

ethical issues Business simulations Beggs et al. (2006), Gowen,
in the business Hanna, Jacobs, Keys, and
environment Weiss (1996);
Kavathatzopoulos, 2003
Early-career dilemma Bishop (1992), Carroll and
examples Buchholtz (2011),
Christensen et al. (2007)
Student-written cases Desjardins and Diedrich
(2003), Dunfee and
Robertson (1988)
Role-playing Many references
Guest lectures Beggs et al. (2006), Castleberry
(2007), Henle (2006)
Using current news stories Many references
Using fiction and media Adams et al. (1998), Alsop
(2006), Brinkmann (2009),
Cohen and Gotlieb (1989),
Raisner (1997)
Excursions Christensen et al. (2007), Jones
and Ottaway (2001)
Study companies’ ethics Couger (1989)
programs
Learn ethical Read ethics literature and use Many references
theories and cases
apply them in
the business
context
Develop a Adopting an honor code at the Trevino and McCabe (1994)
commitment business school level
to ethical Student orientation ethics Christensen et al. (2007),
professional emphasis Hawley (1991)
behavior Student-generated codes of Buff and Yonkers (2005),
conduct Jones and Ottaway (2001),
Kidwell (2001)
case study method. Our literature review revealed many articles that examine the use
of (and advocate for) case studies in business ethics education. As per Table 11.3,
some specific unique strategies for incorporating case studies include the use of
computer-based cases (Beggs, Dean, Gillespie, & Weiner, 2006), ‘‘living cases’’ in
partnership with practitioners (Christensen, Peirce, Hartman, Hoffman, & Carrier,

2007), and real-world scenarios that students are likely to encounter in their careers
(Bishop, 1992; Carroll & Buchholtz, 2011). Some scholars advocate using student-
written cases as a course assignment (Desjardins & Diedrich, 2003; Dunfee &
Robertson, 1988). Role-plays are another common technique for introducing
students to ethical issues in business.
Scholars have also explored the benefits of inviting guest speakers to class,
whether they be managers (Beggs et al., 2006), religious leaders (Henle, 2006), or
white-collar criminals who can provide cautionary tales (Castleberry, 2007). Other
techniques suggested in the literature include immersion in media related to business
ethics, both fictional and factual (Adams, Harris, & Carley, 1998; Alsop, 2006;
Cohen & Gotlieb, 1989) or conducting excursions to immerse students in the business
environment (Christensen et al., 2007).
A novel technique that we have found useful for increasing awareness of ethical issues
in the business context is the ‘‘Impromptu Dilemma,’’ an experience that draws students
into extemporaneous decision-making. To conduct this exercise, we have a teaching
assistant email a micro-case to all students in the class. An example is as follows:
Your supervisor has alerted you that your department will be closed in
two months and your employees will be laid off. You, however, will
receive a promotion. You promise your supervisor that you will keep
this information strictly confidential until the HR department is
prepared to conduct the layoffs legally. One of your employees, an
excellent performer and a personal friend, has just approached you and
asked, ‘‘What can you tell me about these rumors about layoffs? I’m
getting ready to close on a new house in two days. I really need to
know if I’m still going to have a job.’’ You have no time to think. Write
your response to this employee now.
Students are required to send an immediate brief response (no more than a
sentence or two) back to the TA, who records participation, removes identifying
information from each response, and then compiles the responses for the professor.
We then use these anonymous responses to foster a discussion in class about
appropriate actions and ethical issues. We have found this exercise to be an extremely
effective way to point out errors in ethical reasoning without putting particular
students on the spot. Feedback from students indicate that these exercises create
heightened awareness of ethical issues and cause students to think more critically —
and often change their minds — about what constitutes ethical behavior at work.
11.3.2. Learn Ethical Theories and Apply them in the Business Context
Although we are skeptical about ethics curricula that deliver only theoretical
perspectives, we strongly advocate the incorporation of ethical theory into the
curriculum. Many teachers shy away from discussing moral theory in the classroom,
either because they do not feel they have adequate philosophical training, or because
they believe that students will not be receptive to it. Some faculty themselves do not
see the value of moral philosophy in business ethics. In our collective experience,
however, we have discovered that students are highly receptive to moral theory when
we frame it as a set of tools that allow them to think more carefully about business
issues, and to argue their positions more persuasively. This ‘‘strategic’’ use of moral
theory resonates within the culture of business education, and yet produces the
happy side effect of better thinking among students.
In our review of the pedagogical literature on business ethics training, we have
been surprised at the lack of research dedicated to understanding how to deliver
training on moral theory in business ethics courses. This represents a serious gap in
the literature, and suggests an important opportunity for scholarly contributions.
In our experience, one tool that has proven very useful and effective in helping our
students apply ethical theory in the business context is an ‘‘Ethics Toolkit’’
(see Table 11.4). The toolkit provides a very general description of five major theories
that we employ in the classroom. For each theory, we provide criteria that constitute
ethical behavior, questions for personal reflection, limitations, and ‘‘discussion starters’’
(ways to invoke the theoretical perspective using regular business language). The last
column, in particular, proves to be popular with students, and we often have them
practice ethical dialogue using the types of statements and questions provided by the
toolkit. We welcome other faculty to employ and adapt the toolkit in their own teaching.
11.3.3. Develop a Commitment to Ethical Professional Behavior
The capability to identify ethical issues in the business context and reason about
them using ethical frameworks does little practical good for students if they do not
also have a strong resolve to act ethically within the professional context. For that
reason, a third key objective at the second level of our model is the development of a
commitment to ethical professional behavior. A good business ethics course will
include elements that foster a sense of personal obligation to the highest standards of
professional integrity.
Pedagogical research on fostering a commitment to ethical professional behavior
is quite scarce. In terms of in-class activities that directly address fostering a
commitment to ethical behavior in the business context, several scholars (Buff &
Yonkers, 2005; Jones & Ottaway, 2001; Kidwell, 2001) explore the use of student-
generated codes of conduct as a teaching tool, and Couger (1989) examined the
effects of having Information Systems (IS) students study company’s ethics programs
as an indoctrination into standards of the IS profession. Scholars have also attended
to activities and influences that happen outside the confines of the traditional
classroom in fostering commitment to professional behavior. For instance,
Christensen et al. (2007) and Hawley (1991) have explored the role of an ethics
emphasis during student orientations, and Trevino and McCabe (1994) examined the
impact of operating a business school under an honor code.
Table 11.4: Marriott school ethics toolkit.
228
Theoretical roots An action is ethical Questions I should ask Limitations Discussion starters
wheny myself (in ‘‘business-speak’’)
Deontology I would be willing for it What are the core Difficult to manage ‘‘Would we be content if
to become universal principles at stake? competing principles others (competitors,
law Difficult to bound the employees, partners)
conditions did what we plan to
do?’’
Bradley R. Agle et al.
It treats other people as Am I protecting others’ Difficult to balance ‘‘Will our decision make
ends in themselves, and rights? Does my conflicting rights some people feel that
not just as a means decision preserve Lack of agreement about they are just being
others’ dignity and rights used?’’
agency?
It is reversible (as per the Would I be willing to be Multiple parties to ‘‘Are we treating our
Golden Rule) the other party to the satisfy stakeholders as we
transaction? would like to be
treated?’’
Difficult to anticipate
how others really feel
Benefits and costs are Will this decision be fair Difficult to measure costs ‘‘Will any of our
equitably distributed to all involved? and benefits stakeholders feel this
Lack of agreement on decision is unfair to
fair shares them?’’
Utilitarianism It provides the greatest Who will be affected by Difficult to measure costs ‘‘Let’s talk about who
benefit to the most my decision? Who will and benefits our decision will
people benefit, and who will impact the most. Who
be harmed? are the key
stakeholders here?’’
Majority may disregard ‘‘What decision would
rights of the minority add the most value to
us and our
stakeholders?’’
Virtue ethics It helps me become a Who am I? What kind of Relies on individual ‘‘Let’s consider what
better person person would this feelings kind of organizational
action make me? All have implicit self- identity we want to
serving biases convey to the public.’’
I would be willing to How would I feel if my Public isn’t always right ‘‘How will this decision
have it broadcast to the reasoning and decision Historical/cultural biases affect our image or
public appeared on the news? reputation if it
becomes public?’’
Social contracts I am fulfilling my Am I fulfilling my Difficult to balance ‘‘What do we owe our
obligation to societal duties? What conflicting duties stakeholders?’’
contribute to a are my obligations or Lack of agreement on ‘‘How might this
harmonious society. promises (explicit or duties decision affect our
implicit) to others? environment (the
market, the national
economy, our industry)
at large?’’
Ethics of care It benefits those with Am I taking care of the Danger of favoritism and ‘‘How does this decision
whom I have a special people who are most nepotism affect the people or
trust and obligation. important to me? Difficult to balance groups who trust us the
competing relationship most (e.g., employees,
demands customers, etc.)?’’
Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model
229
Some universities have experimented with developing a professional pledge or

oath that students voluntarily take to signal their commitment to ethical business
behavior. A noteworthy example is the Harvard MBA Oath (see VanderMey, 2009,
http://mbaoath.org). Another technique that fosters commitment to professional
integrity is the personal code of ethics, discussed in the previous section. In our
courses, we often require students to include a statement of their professional
commitments in their personal code of ethics, and encourage them to use the
document as a touch point as they go forward in their careers.
11.4. Level Three: Moral Courage and Organizational Savvy
The third component of the Marriott School Ethics Framework is moral courage and
organizational savvy. Once students have a better grasp of their basic values and
have an increased understanding of their application to the managerial context, they
are in a much better position to act on those values. It is at this point that we turn our
efforts to providing our students with skillsets that focus on actually acting on our
values, reasoning, and decisions. In short, it is here that we progress from thought
(Components 1 and 2) to action (Component 3). Based on our survey of ethics
research and pedagogy, we believe that this is perhaps one of the more unique
elements of ethics delivery in the School of Management at Brigham Young
University. We strongly emphasize application of theory and providing pragmatic
skillsets in this section of our ethics courses.
Our conception of moral courage and organizational savvy consists of the
following three objectives: (1) to develop the courage to act in accordance with one’s
values, (2) to effectively communicate one’s moral reasoning, and (3) to learn to
effectively navigate the political environment of organizations with good judgment.
While these objectives seem intuitive to us, we were startled to see almost no research
has been conducted on the pedagogical foundations of how one should take action in
regards to ethical decision-making. While we would argue that this is one of the most
important elements of any course on professional ethics, there is alarmingly little in
the way of pedagogical support (as evidenced in the lightly populated Table 11.5).
Nonetheless, we follow with an application of how those might be applied in an
ethics course based on our collective experience while incorporating the paucity of
pedagogical research and support for this particular component of the Marriott
School Ethics Framework.
11.4.1. Develop Moral Courage to Act in Accordance with One’s Values
As we have argued throughout the chapter, we believe strongly that ethics courses
need to be as much skills-based as theoretically grounded. Our objective to develop
moral courage begins with a theoretical discussion loosely based on the work of
Rushworth Kidder (2005) whose broad framework of moral courage provides a nice
Table 11.5: Level 3 — Moral courage and organizational savvy.
Objectives of level 3 Pedagogy Author(s)
Develop moral courage Giving voice to values Gentile (2010)

Research and report moral
values in business
Effectively communicate Writing up case studies

moral reasoning Giving voice to values Gentile (2010)
Navigate the political Giving voice to values Gentile (2010)

environment using good
judgment
foundation for classroom discussion and subsequent applications. One of the more
critical points in this section, however, is the discussion of how to develop moral
courage. Students are given a very practical five-step list of tools for developing
moral courage.
The first application comes through the use of relevant social psychology research.
Our reasoning here is that for most students, moral courage is most often challenged
as a result of environmental variables and social inhibitions. Thus, we use several
classic examples of psychological research as a medium for students to discuss how
they would respond and, more specifically, how they would prevent themselves from
falling into the moral traps of environmental pressures.
For example, at least one day in most of our courses is dedicated to obedience and
dissent. The case method is very effective here. We show video clips of the now-
infamous Milgram experiments (1974), as well as of Latane and Darling’s (1968)
research on a well-known experiment where a room in which a group of people
waiting for interviews begins to fill with smoke and no one responds. The discussion
centers on how students would respond in this situation and what they would do to
ensure right action in those situations. We also use a video version of the Pinto case
(Gioia, 1992) and have a series of probing discussion questions that focus on the
moral courage and how they would respond in similar situations.
11.4.2. Effectively Communicate Moral Reasoning
One of the overarching objectives for any ethics course should be to teach students
the language of ethics in a way that is practical and applicable. As much as it would
warm our hearts to have our students quoting Aristotle or Kant in making a case to
coworkers or bosses, we would be doing them a disservice by not making practical
connections to the realities of the workplace. Our objective here, then, is to help train
students how to effectively and persuasively communicate their values to others in
the workplace. While this is something that is emphasized throughout the course, two
specific course activities are very effective.
The first activity is a college admissions case where students are put into groups
and given a list of ten applicants to the university. The group must make admissions
decisions for each on the list. Every applicant has a unique set of value-driven
circumstances that make his or her case challenging. For example, one applicant is a
blue-chip quarterback with terrible grades while another applicant is the son or
daughter of a large donor with lower than average grades. The major point of the
exercise is for students to make a compelling case for their value judgments in a
nonthreatening situation. More often than not, it provides for very spirited small
group discussion that subsequently leads to a larger discussion of what sorts of
reasoning and persuasion is most effective.
The second activity is a long-answer final exam question. A scenario is provided in
which the student is asked to take the perspective of the manager of team that needs to
perform at a high level, under pressure, and in a situation where being unethical or ‘‘cutting
corners’’ would create efficiencies. A team member comes to the manager’s office and asks,
‘‘Why should I be ethical — especially if it drags out the project?’’ The student is then asked
to articulate a well-reasoned and persuasive response. Interestingly, the feedback from
students regarding this particular final exam question is overwhelmingly positive.
11.4.3. Navigate the Political Environment of Organizations with Good Judgment
This is perhaps the most tricky but critical part of all our objectives because of the
inherent difficulty of teaching the nuances of organizational savvy. It is clear that one
must have a realistic understanding of the political landscape of his or her organization
to make effective ethical decisions. The bulk of ethics-related decisions made in
organizations do not require that one ‘‘charge the hill’’ and resort to ultimata and
righteous indignation (Badaracco, 1997). Doing so often alienates coworkers and often
puts one’s job in jeopardy. This is why we emphasize the need for and provide tools to
develop organizational savvy. It is more than just understanding office politics — it is
also about knowing when and where to take a stand, and to consider the ongoing
context or organizational life and interpersonal relationships. In short, this reflects a
realistic and unvarnished view of the practical realities of ethics as managers and
leaders. Thus, for our purposes organizational savvy means the ability to operate
effectively but ethically in ongoing managerial settings. This objective focuses on being
ethical while navigating the sometimes treacherous waters of life in organizations.
Our broad approach to achieving this objective relies heavily on the work of Mary
Gentile. Her book, Giving Voice to Values (2010), and the plethora of supporting
materials available on the internet provide an excellent, skills-based method for
achieving this objective. The premise of the book is grounded in the operating
assumption that our fundamental values will be challenged at work and we therefore
must be clear on what those values are, and then have a practiced skillset for giving
voice to those values. The ability to give voice to values and take an effective ethical
stand is as important as anything else taught in an ethics course. Her approach,
however, is right in line with our objective:
It is important to recognize that there are many different ways to express

our values y ; that some may work better in some circumstances than
others; that we may be more skillful or simply more likely to use one
approach than another y ; that some organizational contexts and
conditions (and some sorts of leaders) will have a strong impact on our
own and others’ likelihood of expressing values; and that there are things
we can do to make it more likely that we will voice our values and that we
will do so effectively y . (2010, pp. xli–xlii)
Gentile has articulated a very handy process for developing competencies in this
regard that includes reflection, practice, and coaching materials. All this helps to
prepare and equip our students to understand the context in which ethics decisions
are made and prepare them to act in keeping with their fundamental values.
11.5. Level Four: Ethical Leadership

The fourth level of the model is entitled ‘‘ethical leadership.’’ Following the three
previous levels, the focus in this level is to provide opportunities for students to
model ethical behavior and encourage those around them to behave ethically. In this
level, we discuss (1) the ethical use of power and techniques for handling ethical
dilemmas in a politically effective way, (2) managing ethical organizations, and
(3) understanding and applying models of organizational responsibility. These three
objectives of level four will be described in detail below. For each objective, we
provide a brief discussion of the relevant literature and a description of the
educational experiences we incorporate into our class.
Table 11.6 presents a listing of techniques reported in the literature. These
techniques have been used in academic settings to reinforce the classroom teaching of
each of the three objectives of ethical leadership.
11.5.1. Exercise Power and Influence for Good
Much has been written on power in both academic and popular press. Power is a central
component of leadership and can be used in a positive way to gain useful and important
Table 11.6: Level 4 — Ethical leadership.
Objectives of Pedagogy Author(s)

level 4
Exercise power Using heroes to teach ethics Apostolou and Apostolou

and influence (1997)
for good White-collar criminals as Castleberry (2007)
guest speakers
White-collar criminals as Loeb and Ostas (1997)
guest speakers
Panel discussions Alsop (2006)
Interview or survey Acevedo (2001)
professionals
Involve business and Henle (2006)
religious leaders in
discussions about ethics
Managing an Local managers who share Beggs et al. (2006)
ethical their experiences
organization Student-generated codes of Buff and Yonkers (2005 )
conduct for classroom
Write proposal for Kidwell (2001)
university student honor
code
Study ethics programs in Couger (1989)
companies
Develop personal ethical Jones and Ottaway (2001)
code
Corporate site visits Jones and Ottaway (2001)
Develop ethics training Weber et al. (2008)
module
Understand and Teach ethics integrated with Christensen et al. (2007)
apply models leadership and CSR
of Experiential learning — Christensen et al. (2007)
organizational pairing students with
responsibility executives
Stakeholder model analysis Dean and Beggs (2006)
Community service King and Mayhew (2002)
resources for their organization or department (Braynion, 2004), or can be used to

dominate others and for the self-serving purposes of the leader (Maner & Mead, 2010).
Pedagogical research suggests several techniques that are helpful additions to the
classroom experience. One common form is through case studies. These case studies can
be implemented in the classroom through the use of panel discussions (Alsop, 2006), by
inviting white-collar criminals (Castleberry, 2007; Loeb & Ostas, 1997) or local business
or religious leaders (Henle, 2006) as guest speakers in the classroom, and by involving
students in interviewing or surveying professionals about their experience with ethical
leadership (Acevedo, 2001). Each of these techniques allows students to discover how the
use of power is related to ethical leadership.
We believe that students need to be introduced to positive examples of power.
Donald Phillips describes Abraham Lincoln’s leadership style in the following way,
‘‘Such a leader rejects the use of naked power and instead attempts to motivate and
mobilize followers by persuading them to take ownership of their roles in a more
grand mission that is shared by all members of the organization’’ (1992, p. 172).
Another example of ethical leadership is Gandhi. Students can be asked to watch
portions of the movie ‘‘Gandhi’’ or to read excerpts from books about his life.
These examples of positive use of power can be extremely helpful to the students,
but we have found that they also need to look for positive examples in their
own lives.
Students are asked to write a paper describing their own ethical hero, the person
they most want to emulate with their own ethical behavior. In the paper, they also
describe how their hero makes ethical decisions and how that person has shaped or
influenced their own standard of ethics. During the semester, they are asked to reflect
on their ethical hero and use that guide as they make ethical decisions.
Students also must understand the problems with abuse of power. Weidner and
Purohit (2009) describe power as addictive and potentially hazardous. One common
method to illustrate the potential problems with power is through the use of the
movie Quiet Rage. This movie follows the Zimbardo Prison Experiment conducted at
Stanford in 1971. The students see young men very quickly taking on the randomly
assigned roles of prisoner or guard, and in the process, abuse of power is illustrated.
In addition, the students see the positive ‘‘power of one,’’ when the graduate student
is able to make a difference by expressing her horror at the experiment.
11.5.2. Managing an Ethical Organization
The major conclusion of a very well-known Business Roundtable report (Keough,

1988) states that ‘‘To achieve results, the Chief Executive Officer and those around
the CEO need to be openly and strongly committed to ethical conduct, and give
constant leadership in tending to and renewing the values of the organization.’’ An
important aspect of this commitment to ethics and leadership is to create an ethical
culture within the organization. In order to do so, organizations must consider
specific aspects of compliance and culture, such as an organizational code of ethics,
mission or vision statement, the appointment of an ethics officer, and ethics training.
Organizations must then ensure that the policies and practices are in place. These
cover a broad range of topics including financial incentives, hiring and promotion,
privacy, the environment, employee safety, work–family issues, etc. In our courses,
we help students see the ethical issues within these topics.
Trevino, Weaver, Gibson, and Toffler (1999) found seven outcomes of effective
ethical management: (1) reduced unethical/illegal behavior, (2) increased awareness
of legal and ethical issues, (3) employees seek out ethics/compliance advice, (4) bad
news is delivered to management, (5) violations are reported in the organization,
(6) improved decision-making due to the ethics/compliance program, and (7)
employee commitment to the program. We use these seven outcomes as the
foundation of our discussion on managing an ethical organization. These outcomes
provide a foundation for our discussion on managing an ethical organization. Each of
the above outcomes is a specific item that students can look for, or encourage, in an
organization.
A review of the literature on ethics education suggests that many schools are doing
this well. Beggs et al. (2006) suggest having local managers come into the classroom
and share their own experience with these issues. Similarly, Jones and Ottaway (2001)
recommend that students participate in corporate site visits, with particular focus on
their ethics programs. Other programs have asked students to come up with a code of
conduct for the classroom (Buff & Yonkers, 2005) or for the university (Kidwell,
2001), or to develop an ethics training module for an organization (Weber, Gerde, &
Wasieleski, 2008). One particularly interesting application is for students to read the
play An Enemy of the People (Ibsen, 1999) about the experience of a whistle-blower.
After reading the play, the students are divided into groups and asked to argue their
position (Koehn, 2005).
11.5.3. Understand and Apply Models of Organizational Responsibility
The major aspects of organizational responsibility are captured in the literature on

corporate social responsibility (CSR). CSR is often represented by a pyramid with
four levels: economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic (Carroll, 1991). In order for
an organization to be successful, they must fulfill the economic responsibility, namely
to be profitable and make wise strategic decisions. Second, an organization must
comply with the legal and regulatory requirements. The third aspect of the CSR
pyramid is to behave ethically. This entails meeting legitimate stakeholder needs,
avoiding questionable practices, and asserting ethical leadership. The fourth and last
portion of the pyramid is to be a good corporate citizen and promote human welfare
and goodwill.
Many academic institutions are including activities that help promote discussion
and application of models of organizational responsibility in their curriculum. These
can be incorporated into the curriculum through community service (King &
Mayhew, 2002), or an experiential learning process matching students with
executives (Christensen et al., 2007), or students can be assigned to complete a
stakeholder analysis of an organization (Dean & Beggs, 2006).
In the Marriott School, we use cases to discuss how organizations respond to CSR
issues, for example, Merck Company and the River Blindness case, Timberland and
their involvement with volunteerism, Home Depot and their hiring practices,
Johnson and Johnson and their response to the Tylenol poisoning. Examples such as
these provide students with appropriate organizational role models and illustrate that
many organizations are striving to respond to various stakeholders and fulfill their
social responsibilities. Another helpful tool is to invite guest speakers from various
organizations to present information about their organization’s stance on CSR. This
provides an opportunity for students to hear about what organizations are doing,
and also to ask questions about CSR in the ‘‘real world.’’
One tool we use to help students understand how to manage an ethical organization
and how to apply models of organizational responsibility is to assign a CSR/ethics
report. The report requires the student to research and conduct an analysis of the CSR
efforts and the ethics programs of an organization using the organization’s website and
publications, along with external media sources. The students assess the areas of
involvement and specific programs in CSR and the formal ethics programs of the
organization. The students are also asked to look for external media reports on the
organization’s ethical or unethical behavior. This assignment provides an opportunity
to carefully review and analyze the ethics and CSR efforts of an organization of interest
to the student, and to see the potential impact of the organization’s decisions. A
variation on this assignment is to put the students into groups with each student
completing an analysis of one organization, followed by a section comparing and
contrasting the CSR/ethics programs of all the organizations.
11.6. Agenda for Utilizing the Complete Collegiate Educational Experience
One of the most oft-repeated questions regarding business ethics education is

whether it should be provided through stand-alone courses in business ethics as
primarily discussed in this chapter or through integration in other disciplinary
courses. Most business ethicists would reply that the answer is ‘‘both.’’ There are
certain objectives to business ethics that can best be met in a dedicated course while
other objectives can best be met through disciplinary courses. Because the
development of strong moral principles and integrity is a difficult challenge, we
believe that such an undertaking requires a holistic approach to the subject. Just as
businesses have found that a rigorous ethics culture requires various elements
including leadership example, organizational infrastructure, training, communica-
tion, selection, etc., so too does the development of individual integrity require a
number of elements — in addition to the stand-alone course and ethics integration.
For that reason, our Marriott School agenda includes thinking about each element of
students’ collegiate experience and how it relates to their ethical development.
What elements of a student’s collegiate experience can we think about influencing?
The most obvious are their courses — stand-alone ethics, philosophy, or theology
courses, elective ethics courses, and required and elective disciplinary courses.
Another important part of their experience is their extracurricular activities, such as
participation in clubs, athletic teams, student government, study-abroad, volunteer-
ing, etc. Students also become a part of their university and can be influenced by
experiencing how their organization functions from an ethics perspective, including

things such as honor codes, organizational codes of ethics, organizational ombuds-
men and ethics officers, ethics hotlines, etc. Finally, most students will hold a job at
some point in their collegiate experience.
Given that we have various business ethics objectives, and elements to a student’s
collegiate experience, it seems to make sense to examine how we might best match the
objectives with the student objectives. As an example of such matching, we postulate that
ethical decision-making skills can best be developed in stand-alone ethics courses taught
by appropriately trained faculty members. We might also argue that such a stand-alone
course provides a very effective arena for the examination of personal values.
Because ethical sensitivity will naturally be heightened in a stand-alone ethics
course, and thus a stand-alone ethics course can be useful in meeting the objective of
increasing a students’ moral awareness, we believe that ethical awareness can best be
developed in discipline-specific courses and through the integration of assignments
from the students’ work experience. Looking for ethics issues in coursework not
formally associated with ethics forces a student to develop a higher moral sensitivity.
In addition, students’ understanding of various laws, regulations, and ethics issues
attendant to various professions can best be learned in discipline-specific courses.
While professors trained in ethics are likely to provide better education in ethical
decision-making, they are not at all capable of having the intimate knowledge of the
ethics issues associated with various professions like their business discipline-trained
colleagues. Thus, teamwork among colleagues in the business school is essential.
While various aspects of ethical leadership can be discussed and concepts learned in an
ethics or leadership course, moral leadership and character can best be developed in
extracurricular activities such as volunteering, study-abroad, or serving in leadership
positions in organizations, etc. For example, we’ve seen students learn the concepts of
developing and enhancing an ethics infrastructure for an organization in class. We’ve also
assigned students to develop and enhance such structures in organizations in which they
are a part (clubs, student government, volunteer organizations, etc.). The increased
knowledge gained from actually attempting to do these things as opposed to simply
learning the concepts has been geometric. Also, objectives such as development of
empathy are very difficult to accomplish in a classroom. However, various professors have
reported phenomenal results from having students engage in service-work, volunteer trips
to underprivileged areas, etc. There are also various dangers to such endeavors such as
making students feel that they have been forced to engage in ‘‘volunteer’’ work that have to
be watched out for. Nevertheless, there are things that can only be accomplished outside of
a classroom setting. Noted ethicist Derek Bok suggested the following:
Moral responsibility cannot develop through rules and penalties alone.

It must grow out of a genuine concern for others and a desire to respect
their legitimate interests. The best way of acquiring such concern is to
experience situations in which one can appreciate the effects of one’s
actions on others and understand how one’s own interests are affected in
return. (Bok, 1988, p. 9)
As a final example of matching, we submit that the university as an organization

can provide powerful modeling for students. The university is the primary
organization the students will be a part of during several of their most important
developmental years. Therefore, aspects of the organization such as ethics and honor
codes, ethics training, ethics officers and ombudsman, etc. can have a strong
modeling effect on students. When they enter organizations or become leaders in
those organizations, they should be able to draw not only on the knowledge they
gained in their classes, but also based on their experience being a part of the
university organization for four or more years. These are just a few examples of how
we might be able to think about using the student’s entire collegiate experience to
meet our ethics objectives. Derek Bok suggests the following:
Like it or not, [universities] will affect the moral development of their

students by the ways in which they administer their rules of conduct,
by the standard they achieve in dealing with ethical issues confronting
the institution, by the manner in which they counsel their students and
coach their athletic teams. The only question is whether they choose to
proceed deliberately and with forethought. (1988, p. 6)
As evidenced by the multitude of citations contained in this chapter, we acknowledge

and express appreciation to so many of our colleagues who have proceeded deliberately
and with great forethought in the advancement of business ethics education. Meanwhile,
we believe that as a professional group we yet have much work to do in helping our
students become the kind of ethical leaders for which our world can only hope.
Acknowledgment
We express our appreciation to Bethany Hansen, Marc-Charles Ingerson, Jennifer
Kellis, Aaron Lee, and Melissa Porter for their assistance in the preparation of this
chapter.
References
Acevedo, A. (2001). Of fallacies and curricula: A case of business ethics. Teaching Business
Ethics, 5(2), 157–170.
Adams, J. S., Harris, C., & Carley, S. S. (1998). Challenges in teaching business ethics: Using
role set analysis of early career dilemmas. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(12), 1325–1335.
Albrecht, W. S., Hill, N. C., & Albrecht, C. C. (2006). The ethics development model applied
to declining ethics in accounting. Australian Accounting Review, 16(38), 30–40.
Alsop, R. J. (2006). Business ethics education in business schools: A commentary. Journal of
Management Education, 30(1), 11–14.
Apostolou, B., & Apostolou, N. (1997). Heroes as a context for teaching ethics. Journal of
Education for Business, 73(2), 121–125.
Badaracco, J. (1997). Defining moments: When managers must choose between right and wrong.
Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Beggs, J. M., Dean, K. L., Gillespie, J., & Weiner, J. (2006). The unique challenges of ethics
instruction. Journal of Management Education, 30(1), 5–10.
Bishop, T. R. (1992). Integrating business ethics into an undergraduate curriculum. Journal of
Business Ethics, 11(4), 291–299.
Bok, D. (1988). Can Higher Education Foster Higher Morals? Business & Society Review,
66(3), 4–12.
Braynion, P. (2004). Power and leadership. Journal of Health Organization and Management,
18(6), 447–463.
Brinkmann, J. (2009). Using Ibsen in business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 11–24.
Buff, C. L., & Yonkers, V. (2005). Using student generated codes of conduct in the classroom
to reinforce business ethics education. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(2), 101–110.
Carroll, A., & Buchholtz, A. (2011). Educating students in corporate governance and ethics.
In: D. L. Swanson & D. G. Fisher (Eds), Advancing business ethics education (pp. 285–304).
Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral
management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.
Castleberry, S. B. (2007). Prison field trips: Can white-collar criminals positively affect the
ethical and legal behavior of marketing and MBA students? Journal of Marketing Education,
29(1), 5–17.
Christensen, L. J., Peirce, E., Hartman, L. P., Hoffman, W. M., & Carrier, J. (2007).
Ethics, CSR, and sustainability education in the Financial Times top 50 global bus-
iness schools: Baseline data and future research directions. Journal of Business Ethics, 73(4),
347–368.
Cohen, R., & Gotlieb, C. C. (1989). Educating tomorrow’s professionals. Journal of Business
Ethics, 8(2-3), 193–199.
Couger, J. D. (1989). Preparing IS students to deal with ethical issues. MIS Quarterly, 13(2),
211–218.
Dean, K. L., & Beggs, J. M. (2006). University professors and teaching ethics:
Conceptualizations and expectations. Journal of Management Education, 30(1), 15–44.
Desjardins, J. R., & Diedrich, E. (2003). Learning what it really costs: Teaching business ethics
with life-cycle case studies. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(1), 33–42.
Dunfee, T. W., & Robertson, D. C. (1988). Integrating ethics into the business school
curriculum. Journal of Business Ethics, 7(11), 847–859.
Garaventa, E. (1998). Drama: A tool for teaching business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly,
8(3), 535–545.
Gentile, M. (2010). Giving voice to values: How to speak your mind when you know what’s right.
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Giacalone, R. A., & Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2001). Lights, camera, action: Teaching ethical decision
making through the cinematic experience. Teaching Business Ethics, 5(1), 79–87.
Gioia, D. A. (1992). Pinto fires and personal ethics: A script analysis of missed opportunities.
Journal of Business Ethics, 11(5–6), 379–389.
Gowen, C. R., III., Hanna, N., Jacobs, L. W., Keys, D. E., & Weiss, D. E. (1996). Integrating
business ethics into a graduate program. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(6), 671–679.
Hawley, D. D. (1991). Business ethics and social responsibility in finance instruction: An
abdication of responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(9), 711–721.
Henle, C. A. (2006). Bad apples or bad barrels? A former CEO discusses the interplay of
person and situation with implications for business education. Academy of Management
Learning and Education, 5(3), 346–355.
Ibsen, H. (1999). An enemy of the people. New York, NY: Dover Publications.
Jones, G. E., & Ottaway, R. N. (2001). The effectiveness of corporate ethics on-site visits for
teaching business ethics. Teaching Business Ethics, 5(2), 141–156.
Kavathatzopoulos, I. (2003). The use of information and communication technology in the
training for ethical competence in business. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(1), 43–51.
Keough, J. (1988). Corporate ethics: A prime business asset. New York, NY: Business
Roundtable.
Kidder, R. (2005). Moral courage. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Kidwell, L. A. (2001). Student honor codes as a tool for teaching professional ethics. Journal of
Business Ethics, 29(1–2), 45–49.
King, P. M., & Mayhew, M. J. (2002). Moral judgment development in higher education:
Insights from the defining issues test. Journal of Moral Education, 31(3), 247–270.
Koehn, D. (2005). Transforming our students: Teaching business ethics post-Enron. Business
Ethics Quarterly, 15(1), 137–151.
Latane, B., & Darley, J. M. (1968). Group inhibition of bystander intervention. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 215–221.
LeClair, D. T., Ferrell, L., Montuori, L., & Willems, C. (1999). The use of a behavioral
simulation to teach business ethics. Teaching Business Ethics, 3(3), 283–296.
Loeb, S. E., & Ostas, D. T. (1997). A business ethics experiential learning module: The
Maryland business school experience. Teaching Business Ethics, 1(1), 21–32.
Maner, J. K., & Mead, N. L. (2010). The essential tension between leadership and power:
When leaders sacrifice group goals for the sake of self-interest. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 99(3), 482–497.
Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Phillips, D. T. (1992). Lincoln on leadership: Executive strategies for tough times. New York,
NY: Warner Books.
Raisner, J. A. (1997). Using the ‘‘ethical environment’’ paradigm to teach business ethics: The
case of the maquiladoras. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(12–13), 1331–1346.
Sanyal, R. N. (2000). An experiential approach to teaching ethics in international business.
Teaching Business Ethics, 4(2), 137–149.
Sheppard, J. P., & Young, M. (2007). The routes of moral development and the impact of
exposure to the Milgram obedience study. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(4), 315–333.
Trevino, L. K., & McCabe, D. (1994). Meta-learning about business ethics: Building
honorable business school communities. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(6), 405–416.
Trevino, L. K., Weaver, G. R., Gibson, D. G., & Toffler, B. L. (1999). Managing ethics
and legal compliance: What works and what hurts. California Management Review,
41(2), 131–151.
VanderMey, A. (2009). Harvard’s MBA oath goes viral. Business Week, Retrieved from http://
www.businessweek.com, July 8, 2011.
Van Es, R. (2003). Inside and outside the insider: A film workshop in practical ethics. Journal
of Business Ethics, 48(1), 89–97.
Weber, J., Gerde, V. W., & Wasieleski, D. M. (2008). A blueprint for designing an ethics
program in an academic setting. In: D. L. Swanson & D. G. Fisher (Eds), Advancing
business ethics education (pp. 85–101). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Weidner, C., & Purohit, Y. (2009). When power has leaders: Some indicators of power-
addiction among organizational leaders. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communication
and Conflict, 13(1), 83–99.
Wipperfurth, H. (2002). Enron scandal touches off boom in ethics education. Crain’s New
York Business, 15 April, pp. 47–50.
About the Authors
Christopher P. Adkins (PhD, The College of William & Mary) is Executive Director
of the Undergraduate Business Program at the College of William & Mary,
Mason School of Business. In his research, Chris studies the psychology of business
decision-making for social and environmental impacts. In particular he leverages
findings from cognitive neuroscience and social psychology for new research
directions and practical insights for business leadership and educational programs.
Current projects include: an empathy-based model of ethical decision-making, the
heuristics of sustainability decision-making, and the psychology of triple-bottom line
value creation in business. In his teaching, Chris has pioneered the application of
the MBA-level Giving Voice to Values approach with undergraduates. With
sustainability consulting firm Saatchi S, Chris led the first personal sustainability
program at a university. In 2010, he co-founded the Corporate & College
Collaborative for Sustainability, a new partnership of business leaders, faculty and
students for innovation in undergraduate sustainability education.
Bradley R. Agle (PhD, University of Washington) is the George Romney Endowed
professor, professor of Ethics and Leadership in the Marriott School of Manage-
ment, and a fellow in the Wheatley Institution at Brigham Young University.
Previously, he spent 17 years as a professor in the Katz Graduate School of Business
at the University of Pittsburgh, where he also served for eight years as the inaugural
director of the Berg Center for Ethics and Leadership. He is an active researcher with
articles in the top journals in management and ethics. He is also a recipient of
multiple teaching awards, including Distinguished Professor of the Year honors. His
teaching brought the University of Pittsburgh the distinction of being the #2 ranked
eMBA program in the world in business ethics by Business Week. He also created the
Certificate Program in Leadership and Ethics, the world’s first integrated under-
graduate specialty in ethical leadership in business. He currently chairs the
Conference on Ethics Teaching in Universities, sponsored by the Wheatley
Institution and the Society for Business Ethics.
Alison L. Antes is an assistant professor of Organizational Leadership. She earned her
PhD in Industrial and Organizational Psychology from the University of Oklahoma.
She conducted ethical decision making and ethics instruction research at the
University of Oklahoma’s Center for Applied Social Research and coordinated the
University’s first campus-wide, cross-disciplinary ethics instructional program. She
also earned her master degree in I/O Psychology, with an emphasis in measurement
and statistics, at the University of Oklahoma. Dr. Antes has published her research
on cognitive and social processes facilitating creative problem-solving, ethical
decision making, and leadership in ethics, leadership, and creativity journals, such as
Ethics and Behavior, Journal of Business Ethics, Leadership Quarterly, and Creativity
244 About the Authors
Research Journal. Dr. Antes’ current research focuses on how leaders solve complex
problems and make ethical decisions, along with techniques for leader development.
Dr. Antes also has interests in instructional design, organizational creativity, and
innovation management. Dr. Antes is a member of the Society for Industrial and
Organizational Psychology and the Academy of Management.
J. Alberto Aragón-Correa is a full professor of Strategic Management at the
University of Granada (Spain) and visiting professor at U.C. Berkeley (USA). He
earned his PhD in Business Administration and Economics from the University of
Seville. He has published in top tier journals such as Academy of Management
Journal, Academy of Management Review, British Journal of Management, Long
Range Planning, Journal of Business Research, Ecological Economics, and Sustainable
Development, among others. He has been deputy dean in the School of Economics
and Business for seven years and chair of Department of Management at University
of Granada. He has led different research projects supported by the European
Commission analyzing how to integrate new practices in business curricula at
university management institutions.
Kevin Basik, Lieutenant Colonel Kevin Basik (PhD), is the chief of the Scholarship
Division at the US Air Force Academy’s Center for Character & Leadership Development.
In addition, he is the instructor of the Foundations of Leadership Development course,
and has been an instructor and course director in numerous leadership, organizational
behavior, and industrial/organizational psychology courses at the Air Force Academy and
the Citadel. In his current role, Lt. Col. Basik is responsible for developing and integrating
the conceptual framework for developing leaders of character. In addition, he serves as the
senior editor of the Journal of Character & Leadership Integration, and is involved in
executing the Academy’s comprehensive assessment plan for character and leadership
development. His areas of interest include behavioral integrity, accountability, leadership
development, political skill, and social influence. Lt. Col. Basik received his PhD in
Management from Florida State University’s College of Business.
Blanca L. Delgado-Márquez, PhD in Economics, University of Granada, also holds a
master degree in Economics and Business, University of Granada. She is currently
assistant professor at the Department of International and Spanish Economics in the
Faculty of Economics and Business at the University of Granada (Spain). Her
research interests cover the analysis of trustworthiness’ dimensions (i.e., integrity,
ability, and benevolence) into management education specifically, and the influence
of trust and trustworthiness’ dimensions in economics and management in general,
among others. Indeed, her thesis was focused on trust and trustworthiness at
interpersonal level, with applications to several fields, such as university management
education.
Louis C. Gasper, has been a member since 1992 of the resident faculty of the
Graduate School of Management in the University of Dallas. He is presently
associate professor of Management and Director of the Center for Business Ethics.
After taking his PhD from Duke University in 1969, Professor Gasper taught
economics at the University of Arizona. In 1975, he became an economist with the
Banking Committee in the United States House of Representatives and Counsel to

the Domestic Monetary Policy Subcommittee. Following on the presidential
elections of 1980, he was a member of President-Elect Reagan’s transition team
for the Treasury Department and soon after was appointed senior economist to the
Finance Committee of the United States Senate. Professor Gasper served in both
Reagan Administrations as executive assistant to the President of the Government
National Mortgage Association (GNMA) and then as its Acting President. He
received the highest commendation of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, the Secretary’s Award for Excellence. Professor Gasper is a Knight
Grand Cross of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre, membership in which is awarded by
the Pope in recognition of ‘‘remarkable service’’ to the Roman Catholic Church.
Mary C. Gentile, PhD, is the director of an innovative curriculum, Giving Voice to
Values (www.GivingVoiceToValues.org), launched by Aspen Institute as incubator
and, along with Yale SOM, founding partner; it is now supported by BabsonCollege.
This pioneering approach to values-driven leadership has been featured in the
Financial Times, Harvard Business Review, McKinsey Quarterly online, Stanford
Social Innovation Review, strategy+businesss, etc. and is being piloted in well over
125 business schools and organizations globally. Her book, Giving Voice to Values:
How to Speak Your Mind When You Know What’s Right was published by Yale
University Press (www.MaryGentile.com, 2010). Gentile, faculty at Babson College
and educational consultant, was previously at Harvard Business School. She is
author of numerous books and articles, with her BA from College of William and
Mary and PhD from State University of New York, Buffalo.
Lindsey Godwin is an assistant professor of management in the Division of Business
at Champlain College. She holds a MS in Conflict Analysis and Resolution from
George Mason University and a PhD in Organizational Behavior from Case Western
Reserve University. She also holds a double BA in psychology and sociology from
Ohio Wesleyan University. Godwin’s research interests include morality and social
responsibility in business, moral imagination and innovation in organizational life,
and positive organizational development and whole-system’s change. Her work has
been published in a variety of outlets including the Journal of Leadership and
Organizational Studies, Training & Management Development Methods, Journal of
Online Education, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Information & Organization,
Advances in Interdisciplinary Studies of Work Teams, and presented at both national
and international conferences such as the Annual Academy of Management
Meetings, the Babson–Kauffman Entrepreneurship Research Conference, the
Institute for Behavioral and Applied Management Conference, the Annual Society
for Business Ethics Meetings, and the EABIS Experiential Learning Congress.
David W. Hart (PhD, State University of New York at Albany) is currently an
associate professor and director of the Romney Institute of Public Management at
the Marriott School of Management at Brigham Young University. His current
research focuses on both theoretical and applied ethics, business-government
interaction, and the external environment of organizations.
Heh Jason Huang received his PhD from Washington State University in 1994. He is
now a full-time professor at National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
He was a visiting professor at Zhejiang University, Hangzhou in 2007 and at Tongji
University, Shanghai in 2010. He had eight-year working experience at a prominent
bank, the International Commercial Bank of China in Taiwan. Heh Jason Huang’s
research interests includes human resource management, cross-cultural analysis of
HRM practices, trust, and integrity issues in workplace. His work has been published
in Human Resource Management Journal, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources,
Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, Sun Yat-sen Management Review,
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Personnel Review, Journal of Business Ethics, etc.
Professor Huang has a lot of international experience. He had served as the dean of
international affairs at NSYSU and served for the Founding Committee of APAIE.
From 1998 to 2002, he had participated in the APEC Training and Certification
Program, representing Chinese Taipei. For professional affiliations, Professor Huang
has memberships of the following organizations: Academy of Management, Asian
Academy of Management, Management Science Association Taiwan, Human
Resource Development Association Taiwan, and Statistician Association Taiwan.
Nuria E. Hurtado-Torres — PhD in Business Administration and Economics,
University of Granada — is an associate professor at the University of Granada
(Spain). She has published in top journals such as Journal of Environmental
Management, Information Technology and Management and Journal of Organiza-
tional Change Management, among others. She has been coordinator for the Degree
in Business Administration in the School of Economics and Business and secretary of
the Department of Management at the University of Granada. She has participated
in different research projects supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education
analyzing how to integrate new practices and policies at business schools.
Cynthia Ingols is an associate professor, School of Management (SOM), Simmons
College, Boston, MA. At the SOM, she directs the internship program for
undergraduate and MBA students. In addition, Ingols teaches courses in
Organizational Change and Career Strategies to MBA students. Ingols is the faculty
director of Strategic Leadership for Women, an executive education program with a
global reach that strengths the leadership skills, self-confidence, and motivations of
its women participants. Early in her career, she received her doctorate from the
Harvard University Graduate School of Education in Organization Behavior and
taught Management Communication at the Harvard Business School. Ingols focuses
her consulting work in three areas: conducting diagnostic work to promote change in
organizations; developing interactive executive education programs, particularly
using cases and simulations; and, coaching executives to enhance their leadership
capacity and careers. Ingols’ research and publications follow similar lines. Her
research on executive education programs has been published in leading journals,
such as Harvard Business Review, Organizational Dynamics, and Training. Her
research work on creating innovative organizational structures and change was
published in the Design Management Journal. She has published numerous articles
about careers in journals such as the Journal of Career Development and Human
Resource Development Quarterly. She co-authored three books: Organizational

Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit (2011); Take Charge of Your Career (2005); & A
Smart, Easy Guide to Interviewing (2003).
Hannes Leroy obtained his master degree in Industrial- and Organizational
Psychology at Ghent University and is a doctoral student in a PhD program in
Applied Economics at the Center for Organization Studies Katholieke Universiteit
Leuven. His research interests include leadership and employee development,
employee well-being and work motivation. His past research focuses on the
keywords of authenticity, behavioral integrity, and mindfulness.
Aaron Miller is an Assistant Teaching Professor in BYU’s Romney Institute of
Public Administration where he teaches business ethics and nonprofit structure and
finance. He is also the faculty director for the Romney Institute’s Grantwell program
and BYU’s Social Venture Competition. A member of the Utah Bar, Aaron is also
an attorney practicing small business and nonprofit law.
Mary Grace Neville is an associate professor of business and holder of the John
Shearn Chair in Business at Southwestern University. She earned her PhD in
Organizational Behavior from Case Western Reserve University, and her MBA in
strategic management at the Wharton School of Business. She also holds a bachelors
degree from Northwestern University, and has done advanced studies in gestalt therapy
theory at the Gestalt Institute of Cleveland. Neville studies, teaches, and consults on
business behaviors and relationships that create world benefit. She follows a teacher–
scholar–professional model of social change, each stream of work co-creating the
others. She is oriented toward pedagogy with roots in experiential learning and
dialogue, and toward practice understood from systems theories. Neville’s work has
been published in a variety of outlets including Journal of Management Education,
Business and Society Review, Journal for Quality & Participation, and an edited volume
of social healing interventions titled Mending the World. Both in writing and at
national and international conferences, Neville advocates for positive change at the
intersection of business and society.
Joseph A. Petrick is a professor of Management and International Business and
executive director of the Institute for Business Integrity at Wright State University in
Dayton, Ohio. He earned his PhD from Pennsylvania State University as a
Woodrow Wilson Fellow and his MBA from the University of Cincinnati, with
postdoctoral work at the University of Bonn in Germany and the University of
Tokyo in Japan. He is SPHR-certified and has served on the National Board of
Directors of the Human Resource Certification Institute (HRCI), and is currently the
President of the International Business Honor Society. He has published widely in
the fields of management ethics, sustainable stakeholder capitalism, corporate
leadership, and management education including the book, Management Ethics:
Integrity at Work, and over 90 refereed journal articles in the Journal of Business
Ethics, Business and Society Review, Journal of Corporate Citizenship, Academy of
Management Executive, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Professional Ethics,
Journal of Management Development, Business and Professional Ethics Journal, and
other journals. He has worked as a manager and organizational ethics consultant in

the private, public, and nonprofit sectors and taught business ethics at the
undergraduate, graduate, and executive education levels domestically and globally.
He also is the CEO of two consulting firms, Integrity Capacity Associates and
Performance Leadership Associates.
Tony Simons, as an associate professor at Cornell University’s School of Hotel
Administration, teaches, studies, and speaks on integrity, trust, accountability, and
measurement in leadership, teamwork, sales, and negotiations. Earned trust makes a
huge difference for change implementation, creative problem-solving, employee
retention, customer service, sales, and ultimately, for company profitability. Simons
teaches people how to earn more of these benefits. Professor Simons wrote The
Integrity Dividend: Leading by the Power of Your Word (Jossey Bass, 2008), and has
published over 28 journal articles for both managerial and scholarly audiences. His
work has appeared in the Harvard Business Review, Organization Science, the Journal
of Applied Psychology, and the Academy of Management Journal. He has spoken and
trained executives in negotiation skills and in leadership at Northwestern
University’s Kellogg School, Cornell University and in seminars around the United
States and Europe. Simons earned his PhD from Northwestern University in 1993.
He is also a certified firewalk instructor, and he leads monthly firewalk empowerment
workshops near his home in Ithaca, New York. His business website is http://
IntegrityDividend.com.
Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch, PhD, DSc, is an associate professor of management at
The Silesian University of Technology. She is the Head of Management & Marketing
Department. Agata has authored and edited seven books including co-authoring of
Management through Collaboration: Teaming in a Networked World edited by
Charles Wankel; Organizational Immunity to Corruption: Building Theoretical and
Research Foundations (IAP, 2010), The Core Values of Universities in the Context of
Different National Cultures (SUT Press, 2009), The Power of Values (Helion, 2007),
Management by Values: Modern Company Development Perspective (SUT Press,
2004), and Marketing Culture (PWN, 2001). She is also an author of over 70 research
papers in national/international journals and conference proceedings. She was a
reviewer of Academy of Management (AOM), European Academy of Management
(EURAM), and Journal of Brand Management (Palgrave MacMillan). Agata is a
member of Polish Academy of Sciences, and the Committee on Organizational and
Management Sciences Department Katowice and PRME Working Group on Anti-
Corruption. She is also a co-founder of Organizational and Management Journal
edited by the Silesian University of Technology and editorial board’s member of
Global Management Journal.
Sarah Stookey is an associate professor of Management and Organization at Central
Connecticut State University. Her interest in studying business and management
arose from almost a decade of promoting community-based economic development
in Nicaragua. She also spent several years helping to create grassroots-managed
lending programs in the Philippines and Zambia. She is motivated by a desire to
create organizations that respond to the needs of society broadly defined. In her
research and teaching she is interested in articulating and evaluating the economic
and philosophical assumptions underlying management theory and practice. She has
developed a new framework that challenges the assumption of money as fixed and
proposes understanding money as a social — and organizational — construction. In
her classes on social issues and globalization Sarah uses a multidisciplinary
perspective to help students see familiar norms and apparent imperatives of business
activity in new lights and to encourage them to take seriously their own experience
and values. As a faculty member she founded ‘‘Community Central,’’ a student-run
community center in downtown New Britain, CT. She holds a BA from Harvard, an
MA in Economics from the University of California, Riverside and MBA and PhD
from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Jeffery A. Thompson (PhD, University of Minnesota) is an associate professor in
the Romney Institute of Public Management at Brigham Young University.
Professor Thompson’s research focuses on meaningful work and organizational
ethics. His research has appeared in Administrative Science Quarterly, Academy of
Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Business Ethics Quarterly.
He teaches Organizational Behavior and Business Ethics at the Marriott School of
Management.
Špela Trefalt is an assistant professor in Organizational Behavior at the Simmons
School of Management in Boston. She is a faculty affiliate of the Center for Gender
in Organizations at Simmons and of The Berger Institute for Work, Family, and
Children at Claremont McKenna College in California. Trefalt studies issues that
professionals — men and women — face when managing competing demands of
work and life outside of work. Her research is aimed at understanding the
individuals’ experiences in managing work and nonwork demands. She earned her
DBA in Management from the Harvard Business School, her MBA from University
of Kansas, and her BA in Law from University of Ljubljana in Slovenia. Before her
academic career, Trefalt spent six years as a human resources manager and
consultant, and eight years working in the media in Slovenia.
Lori L. Wadsworth (PhD, University of Utah) is an associate professor in the
Romney Institute of Public Management at Brigham Young University. Professor
Wadsworth’s research focuses on work-family interaction, particularly how
organizations can assist employees in balancing their work and family life. Within
this general theme, her research includes flexible benefits, alternative work schedules,
social support, mentoring, and ethical behavior in the workplace. Her research has
been published in Public Administration Review, Review of Public Personnel
Administration, Connecticut Law Review, and Journal of Family and Economic
Issues. She teaches Human Resource Management and Ethics in Management.
Charles Wankel is an associate professor of Management at St. John’s University,
New York, earned his doctorate from New York University. Charles is on the
Rotterdam School of Management Dissertation Committee and is Honorary Vice
Rector of the Poznan University of Business. He has authored and edited about 30
books including the best-selling Management, 3rd ed. (Prentice-Hall, 1986), eight
volumes in the IAP series Research in Management Education and Development, the
Handbook of 21st Century Management (SAGE, 2008), and the Encyclopedia of
Business in Today’s World (SAGE, 2009), which received the American Library
Association’s Outstanding Business Reference Source Award. He is the leading
founder and director of scholarly virtual communities for management professors,
currently directing eight with thousands of participants in more than 70 nations. He
has been a visiting professor in Lithuania at the Kaunas University of Technology
(Fulbright Fellowship) and the University of Vilnius (United Nations Development
Program and Soros Open Society Foundation funding).
Ethan P. Waples is an assistant professor of Management at the University of
Central Oklahoma. He received both his MS and PhD in Industrial and
Organizational Psychology from the University of Oklahoma. His primary areas
of interest include sensemaking and leadership, leadership and emotions, and
business ethics. His research can be found in outlets such as Ethics and Behavior,
Journal of Business Ethics, Science and Engineering Ethics, and Creativity Research
Journal. In addition, he has presented numerous papers at regional, national, and
international conferences, including the Society for Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, The Academy of Management, and the Southwest Academy of
Management. Dr. Waples teaches Human Resource Management, Organizational
Behavior, and Leadership for both undergraduates and the MBA program at UCO.
Author Index
Acevedo, A., 234–235 Bartlett, F. C., 80

Adams, J. S., 220, 225–226 Bartoszek, T., 98
Adkins, C., 107 Basik, K., 135, 147
Agle, B. R., 217 Bass, B. M., 145
Ainina, F., 50 Baudrillard, J., 203
Albrecht, C. C., 218 Bazerman, M. H., 26–27
Albrecht, W. S., 218 Bean, D. F., 32, 92, 95
Alliger, G. M., 38 Beauvais, L. L., 95
Alsop, R. J., 219–220, 225–226, 234 Becker, T. E., 156
Altman, D. G., 35 Beechler, S., 208
Alves, H., 5 Beggs, J. M., 225–226, 234, 236
Alvesson, M., 202 Behrman, J. I., 205
Andrews, K. R., 3 Bendheim, L., 175
Antes, A. L., 6, 15–18, 20–24, 25, 30–31, Bennett, W., 38
33–39, 41–42 Bennis, W., 40, 174
Apostolou, B., 234 Beqiri, M. S., 4
Apostolou, N., 234 Berger, I. E., 5
Aquino, K., 90, 97 Bergman, J., 177
Aragón-Correa, J. A., 89 Bernardi, R. A., 95
Argyris, C., 158 Billsberry, J., 197
Arnold, D., 53 Birnik, A., 197
Arthur, W., 40 Bishop, T. R., 225–226
Ashford, S. J., 147 Bisping, T.O., 91–92
Astin, J. A., 145 Black, M., 202
Athavale, M., 173, 175 Blake-Beard, S., 126
Atwater, B. J., 173–174 Blass, F. R., 147
Auchincloss, L., 82, 88 Blish, J., 88
Aurand, T. W., 173, 176 Block, L., 88
Avolio, B. J., 141 Blood, M. R., 183
Bluck, S., 19
Badaracco, J., 232 Blume, B. D., 32
Baer, J., 31, 35 Bodwell, C., 50
Baer, R. A., 145 Bogue, E. G., 4
Baetz, M., 16, 33 Bok, D., 178
Baldwin, T. T., 27, 32 Bolman, L. G., 172
Bandura, A., 141 Bolt, R., 88
Barksdale, C. D., 40 Bommer, W. H., 40
Barnes, C. D., 25 Bosco, S. M., 95
Barraquier, A., 6 Boyacigiller, N. A., 208
Barry, B., 156 Boyatzis, R. E., 139
252 Author Index
Boyle, M. E., 95, 188 Christian, M. S., 32, 37

Bradley, J.C., 32, 37 Christiansen, N. D., 40
Braynion, P., 234 Christie, A., 88
Brinkmann, J., 30, 156, 188, 219–220, 225 Coburn, T., 50
Brock, M. E., 22, 30–31, 35 Cohen, R., 225–226
Brodzinski, J., 50 Cole, M., 54
Brooks, R., 178 Coles, R., 74
Brouer, R. L., 147 Confucius,, 156, 159, 197
Brown, K. W., 145 Connelly, M. S., 21, 35–39
Brown, M. E., 4, 26–27, 50–51, 53, 156 Connelly, S., 6, 16–18, 20–25, 30–31,
Brown, R.P., 6, 16–18, 20–25, 30–31, 33–34, 38–39, 41–42
34–39, 41–42 Conrad, J., 88
Buchholtz, A., 225–226 Cooperrider, D. L., 156
Buff, C. L., 225, 227, 234, 236 Cornelius, N., 91, 97
Burke, C. B., 196 Couger, J. D., 225, 227, 234
Burns, G. N., 40 Crane, A., 4
Butterfield, K. D., 16, 50, 74, 91, 98 Crane, S., 88
Byrne, C. L., 19, 21
Cranton, P., 54
Creswell, J. D., 145
Caldwell, C., 38, 91–92, 97
Cullen, J. B., 27–28
Cameron, K., 57
Cunningham, P., 54
Campbell, N., 175
Cunningham, P.H., 5
Carbo, J., 5
Carley, S. S., 220, 225–226
Daly, J., 177
Carlson, L. E., 145
Dane, E., 145
Carmody, J., 145
Dao, V., 5
Carr, D., 206–207
Darley, J. M., 231
Carrier, D., 80
Davis, J. H., 99
Carrier, J., 4, 225–227, 234, 236
Carroll, A. B., 225–226, 236 Davis, R., 173, 175
Carter, G. W., 37 Davy, J., 50
Carter, S. L., 50, 126, 157, 162 Day, E. A., 40
Castleberry, S. B., 220–221, 225–226, De Tocqueville, A., 205
234–235 Deal, J. J., 35
Caughron, J. J., 19, 21, 24 Deal, T. E., 172
Ceasar, D., 147 Dean, K. L., 225–226, 234, 236
Cha, S. E., 147 Deci, E., 140
Chan, D., 37 Deery, S., 156
Chen, L., 50 Deetz, S., 202
Chen, Y., 54 DeFillippi, R., 4
Cheng, C. M., 145 Delgado-Márquez, B. L., 89
Chew, E. B., 176 DeMoranville, C., 173, 176
Chickering, A. W., 178 DeMoss, M., 4, 91
Chiffriller, S., 177 Desjardins, J. R., 225–226
Christensen, L. J., 4, 225–227, 234, 236 Desplaces, D. E., 95
Author Index 253
Devenport, L. D., 6, 16–18, 20–25, 30–31, Fong, C. T., 196

34–39, 41–42 Fontrodona, W. M., 16
Dewett, T., 53 Ford, J. K., 30, 32, 38
Dewey, J., 184 Foster, V., 4
DiClemente, C., 54 Fox, L., 54
Diedrich, E., 225–226 Frauman, E., 54
Donaldson, L., 174 Frederick, W., 50
Donaldson, T., 157 Freedman, B., 145
Douglas, C., 147 Freeman, D., 90, 97
Drake, R., 54 Freire, P., 185
Drumwright, M. E., 5 Friedrich, T. L., 19, 21
Dufresne, R. L., 91 Frink, D. D., 147
Dunfee, T. W., 157, 220–221, 225–226
Dunnette, M. D., 37 Gaddis, B., 39, 42
Dunning, D., 143 Galein, B. M., 4
Dutton, J. E., 57, 141 Galinsky, A. D., 145
Gallucci, M., 145
Eastering, D., 50 Garaventa, E., 219–220
Eden, L., 5 Gasper, L. C., 89
Edens, P.S., 40 Gaudine, A., 19
Edmondson, A. C., 141, 147 Gentile, M. C., 107, 111, 113–114, 116–120,
Edwards, B. D., 32, 37 123, 125–126, 131, 231, 233
Elias, R. Z., 206 Gerde, V. W., 234, 236
Eliot, T. S., 88 Ghoshal, S., 4, 102, 174
Elliot, A. J., 138 Giacalone, R. A., 4, 16, 50, 58, 174, 176,
Ely, R. J., 173 212, 220
Embley, K., 139 Giambatista, R. C., 40
Epley, N., 143 Gibson, D. G., 236
Epstein, M. J., 5 Gilin, D., 145
Erhard, W. H., 162 Gillespie, J., 225–226, 234, 236
Ericsson, K. A., 18, 31, 35 Ginzberg, E., 102
Erikson, E., 50 Gioia, D. A., 177, 224, 231
Glenn, J. R., 16
Felps, W., 90, 97 Godfrey, E. S., 6, 22, 39, 41–42
Felton, E. L., 16, 50 Godwin, L., 171, 175, 177, 179, 181
Ferrell, L., 16, 53, 220 Goldhagen, D., 194
Ferrell, O. C., 16, 30, 53 Goldstein, I. L., 30, 38
Ferris, G. R., 147 Gonin, M., 95
Festinger, L., 140 Goodwyn, L., 205
Field, H., 54 Gordan, G. L., 173, 176
Filipczak, P., 171, 173 Gordon, R. A., 197
Finn, C. E. Jr., 198 Gosling, M., 157
Finney, R., 175 Gotlieb, C. C., 225–226
Fisher, D. G., 33, 38 Govorun, O., 145
Flynn, R. S., 92 Gowen, C. R., 225
254 Author Index
Granitz, N., 32, 36 Howell, J. E., 197

Graves, S. B., 175 Huang, C. J., 5
Green, K. C., 197 Huang, H. J., 155, 157, 160
Gresham, L. G., 16, 30 Huang, J. L., 32
Gross, J. J., 19 Huehn, M. P., 197
Guertler, B., 128 Humphreys, J., 125
Hung, Y., 160
Habermas, T., 19 Hunt, S.D., 16–17
Haidt, J., 19, 113
Halbesleben, J., 146 Ibsen, H., 88, 236
Hall, E., 203 Ingols, C., 107, 126
Hall, P. D., 196 Ishiguro, K., 88
Hambrick, D. C., 196 Iverson, R., 156
Hanna, N., 225 Ivy, M., 54
Hansen, E. G., 5
Harris, C., 220, 225–226 Jacobs, L. W., 225
Harris, R., 157 James, L. R., 40
Harris, S., 54 Jaramillo, J. F., 28
Harris, S. G., 18 Jensen, M. C., 162
Hart, D. W., 217 John, O. P., 26
Hartman, E. M., 95 Johnson-Laird, P. N., 18, 30
Hartman, L. P., 4, 51, 95, 156, 225–227, Jones, C., 37
234, 236 Jones, G. E., 220, 225, 227, 234, 236
Havnes, A., 92 Jones, G. R., 161
Hawley, D. D., 225, 227 Jones, R. T., 176
Heapy, E. D., 141 Jones, T. M., 16, 30
Heifetz, R. A., 121 Joyce, J., 88
Helgeson, J. G., 4 Jurkiewicz, C. L., 220
Helton-Fauth, W., 39, 42
Henle, C. A., 225–226, 234–235 Kacmar, C. J., 147
Heriot, K., 175 Kahneman, D., 26
Higgins, E. T., 140 Kannan, V. R., 173–174
Hill, A., 54 Kansas, D., 50
Hill, J. H., 6, 16–18, 20–23, 31, 35–39, 41–42 Kant, I., 85
Hill, N. C., 218 Kanter, R. M., 212
Hillman, A., 5 Kasser, T., 18
Hinkin, T. R., 156 Kasworm, C. E., 178
Hochwarter, W. A., 147 Kavathatzopoulos, I., 30, 225
Hoffman, W. M., 4, 225–227, 234, 236 Kekes, J., 52
Hofstede, G., 158 Kelley, L., 208
Hogarth, R. M., 19, 115 Kemmerer, B., 6
Hoover, D., 40 Kennedy, J. C., 4
Horn, L. C., 90–91 Kennedy, M. J., 90–91
Hornsby, J., 188 Kennedy, P., 91–92
Hougen, D. F., 6, 22, 39, 41–42 Keough, J., 235
Author Index 255
Kerr, S., 150, 158 Leigh, J., 50

Kershaw, I., 194 Leonard, V., 92
Kesey, K., 88 Leppel, K., 197
Key, S., 195, 197 Leroy, H., 135–136, 140, 144, 146
Keys, D. E., 225 Levin, C., 50
Khurana, R., 173–175 Levin, R.I., 205
Kidder, R. M., 115, 230 Levy, E. S., 92
Kidwell, L. A., 225, 227, 234, 236 Levy, O., 208
Kimball, B. A., 175 Lewin, K., 186
Kind, A., 80 Lim, V. K. G., 90, 97
King, E. W., 177 Locander, W. B., 28
King, P. M., 178, 234, 236 Locke, E. A., 90
Kirkpatrick, D. L., 38 Loe, T. W., 16
Kitchener, K. S., 178 Loeb, S. E., 38, 234–235
Kite, M., 188 Loher, B. T., 27
Kligyte, V., 6, 22–23, 30–31, 35, 39, 41–42 Loo, J., 4
Koehn, D., 16, 236 Lopez, Y. P., 33
Koernig, S. K., 32, 36 Luna-Arocas, R., 54
Kohlberg, L., 17, 33 Luthans, F., 141
Kolb, D., 126, 181 Lux, S., 147
Kolb, R., 51 Lykins, E. L. B., 145
Kolodinsky, R. W., 147
Kolodner, J. L., 31, 34 Maak, T., 5
Koole, S. L., 145 Maddux, W. W., 145
Korbar, T., 40 Magjuka, R. J., 27
Korten, D., 50 Mainardes, E. W., 5
Koslowski, P., 5 Makridakis, S., 19
Kouzes, J. M., 121, 136 Maner, J. K., 234
Krehmeyer, D., 95 Mangan, K., 76
Kruger, J., 143 Mansfield, P., 16
Kuhn, T. S., 203 Marcy, R. T., 6, 22, 39, 41–42
Kurpis, L. V., 4 Margolis, J., 123
Kushner, R. J., 195–196 Markowitsch, H. J., 114
Markus, H. R., 19
LaBrasseur, R., 92 Martin, K. D., 28
Ladenson, R., 60 Martin, L. E., 25
Lampe, M., 178 Mason, P. A., 196
Lane, I. F., 4 Matten, D., 4
Lang, I. H., 126 Mayer, R. C., 99
Langella, I., 5 Mayhew, M. J., 234, 236
Lankard, B. B., 178 McAdams, C. R., 4
Laszlo, C., 173 McCabe, D. L., 50, 74, 91, 92, 98, 225, 227
Latane, B., 231 McCarthy, D. J., 4
LeBreton, J. M., 40 McConnaughy, E., 68
LeClair, D. T., 220 McCoy, B. H., 125
256 Author Index
McGregor, H. A., 138 Noordsy, D., 54

McInnis-Bowers, C., 176 Norcross, J., 54
McKeon, R., 195–196, 202
McLean, B., 50 Obermueler, S. R., 175
McNelly, T. L., 40 O’Connor, F., 88
McWilliams, V., 32, 36 Oddo, A. R., 32
Mead, N. L., 234 O’Fallon, M. J., 16
Melchar, D. E., 95 Olendzki, N., 145
Merrill-Sands, D., 126 Olson L. M., 157
Merritt, J., 101 Olson-Buchanan, J.B., 33
Messick, D. M., 26 O’Neill, R., 126
Meyerson, D., 173 Ostas, D. T., 234–235
Milgram, S., 231 O’Toole, J., 40, 174
Miller, A., 217 Ottaway, R. N., 220, 225, 227, 234, 236
Miller, H., 88 Oyserman, D., 19
Miller, R. A., 4
Milton, L., 140 Pace, C. R., 197
Mintz, S. M., 16 Paine, L. S., 50, 125
Mintzberg, H., 4, 174 Painter-Morland, M. J., 16
Mobley, M. E., 125 Palanski, M. E., 136, 140, 144, 156–157
Montgomery, G. E., 40 Parboteeah, K. P., 27
Montuori, L., 220 Parks, D., 175, 179, 181
Moon, J., 4 Patron, H., 91–92
Moore, D. A., 26–27 Peirce, C., 80
Morgan, G., 172 Peirce, E., 4, 225–227, 234, 236
Motowidlo, S. J., 37 Perrewé, P. L., 147
Mueser, K., 54 Perry, T., 54
Mulki, J. P., 28 Perry, W. G., 178
Mulligan, T. M., 207 Peterson, T. O., 183
Mumford, M. D., 6, 16–25, 30–31, Petrick, J. A., 49, 50–53, 57–58
33–39, 41–42 Pfeffer, J., 4, 91–92, 196
Murphy, S. T., 6, 16–18, 20–24, 30–31, Philips, A., 176
33–39, 41–42 Phillips, D. T., 235
Myring, M., 173, 175 Phillips, S. M., 29, 37, 90
Pierson, F. C., 197
Nahavandi, A., 32, 36 Piper, T., 128
Narayanan, V. K., 6 Pless, N. M., 5
Navarro, P., 174 Poff, D. C., 95
Nelson, C. A., 198, 204 Posner, B. Z., 121, 136
Nesteruk, J., 175 Pritchard, M., 51
Neville, M. G., 171, 175, 177, 179, 181 Procario-Foley, E. G., 32, 92
Nicholas, A., 35 Prochaska, J., 54, 68
Nicholson, C. Y., 4, 91 Proserpio, L., 177
Nocera, J., 50 Puffer, S. M., 4
Nohria, N., 128 Purohit, Y., 235
Author Index 257
Quinn, J., 50–52 Scherer, K., 50

Quinn, R. E., 57, 141 Scherer, R., 57
Schmidt, C. D., 4
Raelin, J., 175 Schmitt, N., 37
Raines, C., 173 Schneider, C. G., 174
Raisner, J. A., 225 Schoorman, F. D., 99
Raj, R., 60 Schriesheim, C. A., 156
Rakovski, C. C., 92 Schweitzer, K., 177
Raposo, M., 5 Scott, G., 39, 42
Rasche, A., 50 Segal, D., 173
Rashid, T., 60 Senchack, A. J., 174–175, 179, 181
Ravitch, D., 198 Senge, P., 200
Rechner, P. L., 33 Sevier, S. T., 6, 22, 30–31, 35, 39, 41–42
Reed, A., 90, 97 Sextl, M., 5
Reichwald, R., 5 Shapiro, M., 126
Reisser, L., 178 Shapiro, S. L., 145
Rest, J. R., 17, 30, 33 Sharp, D., 16, 33
Reynolds, S. J., 16 Shaw, 88
Ribot, T., 80 Sheldon, K. M., 18
Riesbeck, C. K., 31, 34 Shen, X., 4
Rimer, S., 197 Sheppard, J. P., 220, 223
Ritter, B. A., 16, 30, 92 Shotland, A., 38
Robak, R., 177 Siegel, D. S., 5
Roberts, L. M., 141 Simola, S. K., 36
Robertson, D. C., 220–221, 225–226 Simons, T., 135–136, 140, 144–146, 150,
Robertson, D. U., 98 156–157
Robin, J., 40 Simpson, R. L., 34
Robins, R. W., 26 Sims, R. R., 16–17, 30, 50, 156, 188
Roca, E., 210 Small, M. W., 207
Rodriguez, P., 5 Smith, B., 188
Rogelberg, S. G., 35 Smith, J., 18
Roskelley, K., 91–92 Smith, K., 50
Rossett, R. N., 196 Smith-Crowe, K., 16, 30
Rossouw, G., 53 Solis, B., 173
Roth, M., 196 Solomon, R., 57
Rowe, M., 16 Sonenshein, S., 16
Ruegger, D., 177 Sophocles., 88
Ryan, R. M., 140, 145 Sorenson, R. L., 40
Rynes, S., 50 Spreitzer, G. M., 141
Srivastva, S., 156
Sanyal, R. N., 220 Stachowicz-Stanusch, A., 3, 5
Sauers, D. A., 4 Stahl, G., 5
Savage, G., 146 Stenmark, C. K., 24–25
Schank, R. C., 31, 34 Stephens, A. A., 173–174
Schein, E. H., 97 Stephens, C. U., 156
258 Author Index
Stewart, I., 54 Van Fleet, D. D., 183

Stookey, S., 193 VanderMey, A., 230
Sutarso, T., 54 Vega, G., 90, 95
Swanson, D. L., 4, 33, 38, 50, 212 Velicer, W., 68
Vert, A., 22, 30–31, 35
Tamborski, M., 25 Veyne, P., 204
Tan, A., 88 Victor, B., 27
Tang, T., 54 Vitell, S. J., 16–17
Tannenbaum, S. I., 38 Vojta, G., 102
Tassabehji, R., 91, 97
Taylor, G., 50 Waddock, S., 50, 175
Taylor, S., 208 Wadsworth, L. L., 217
Tenbrunsel, A. E., 16, 30 Waldman, D. A., 4, 40
Thiel, C. E., 23, 25 Wallace, J., 91, 97
Thiel, C. E., 24 Walsh, J., 156
Thomas, D. A., 173 Walters, P., 60
Thomas, R. R., 173 Wang, C., 50
Thompson, J. A., 217 Wang, X., 24–25
Thompson, K. R., 4, 16, 50, 212 Wankel, C., 3–5, 90, 97
Thorne, L., 19 Waples, E. P., 6, 15–18, 20–24, 30–31, 33–35,
Thurston, E., 173 38–39, 41–42
Toffler, B. L., 236 Wasieleski, D. M., 234, 236
Tomlinson, E., 136 Waters, R. D., 5
Trank, C., 50 Weaver, G. R., 16, 51, 236
Traver, H., 38 Weber, J. A., 16, 31–32,
Treadway, D. C., 147 234, 236
Trefalt, S., 107, 126 Weekly, J. A., 37
Trevino, L., 50–51 Weidner, C., 235
Treviño, L. K., 4, 16, 26–27, 30, 74, 91–92, Weiner, J., 225–226, 234, 236
98, 156, 161, 225, 227, 236 Weiss, D. E., 225
True, S.L., 53 Werhane, P., 50
Tsui, A., 202 Westerman, J., 177
Tsui, A. S., 147 Weston, A., 51, 53–54
Tulving, E., 114 White, J. B., 145
Tversky, A., 26 Whittier, N., 53
Twenge, J. M., 35, 177 Wick, M., 176
Tyler, C., 54 Widener, S. K., 5
Tyler, J., 54 Willems, C., 220
Williams, S., 53
Unruh, G., 50 Wilson, F., 126
Wilson, S., 88
Van Dissel, B., 123 Wipperfurth, H., 220–221
Van Es, R., 219–220 Wooten, K. C., 39
Author Index 259
Worden, S., 156 Zaffron, S., 162

Worthley, R., 208 Zane, L. J., 6
Wright, F. W., 195, 197 Zappone, M., 177
Zemke, R., 173
Zgheib, P. W., 90, 95
Yammarino, F. J., 136, 140,
Zhexembayeva, N., 173
156–157 Zimny, S. T., 98
Yonkers, V., 225, 227, 234, 236 Zinn, H., 205
Young, M., 220, 223 Zlotkowski, E., 57
Subject Index
AACSB, 6, 17, 29, 37, 90, 93, 95, 173, 176, 196, 206, 220, 221, 224, 225, 226, 231,
195, 212 232, 234, 236
Academic administrators’ perceptions, 7, Case study, 33, 34, 78, 220, 221, 225, 234–235
89–102 College of William and Mary, 7
Accounting, 27, 93, 94, 96, 109, 127–128, 196, Collegiate experience, the complete, 10, 15,
200, 204 218, 237–239
Assessment, 4, 6, 15, 17, 37, 40, 41, 53, 54, 58, Communication skills, 142, 146–147
107–108, 121, 129, 140, 147, 187 Confucianism, 8, 155, 156, 159
Assessment of Learning (AoL), 121, 129 Creativity, 58, 111, 132, 178
Assumptions, 4, 17, 26, 29, 57, 98, 108, 144, Curriculum, 6, 7–8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 29, 30, 31,
186, 201–203, 211–212 32, 33, 37, 39, 81, 90, 92, 93, 107–108,
109, 111, 113, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123,
Behavioral integrity, 135, 136, 155, 156, 157, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 173,
159, 161, 162 174, 176, 183, 185, 186, 188, 199, 205,
Big picture, 199, 200, 208, 212 224, 226, 236
Business, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 19, 26,
29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, Decision, 6, 9, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 27,
41, 42, 50, 51, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39,
73–87, 89–102, 107–132, 140, 143, 144, 40, 41, 42, 51, 55, 56, 69, 74, 78, 86, 90,
148, 149, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 92, 95, 97, 99, 109, 113, 114, 120, 125,
177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 185, 187, 188, 126, 127, 128, 129, 137, 145, 155, 158,
193–213, 217–239 161, 162, 166, 167, 178, 181, 182, 184,
Business education, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 75, 185, 186, 203, 211, 219, 220, 221, 222,
89–102, 107, 171, 172, 179, 193, 195, 224, 226, 228, 229, 230, 236, 237, 238
196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 202, 203, 204, Democracy, 175, 193, 194, 195, 200, 205, 212
221, 227 Disciplinary divides, 130, 175, 184, 199, 212,
Business ethics, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 16–17, 19, 26, 237
29, 30, 32, 33, 37–38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 47,
73–87, 89, 92, 93–97, 102, 107, 108, 109, Elites, 9, 195, 196, 199
111, 112, 113, 114, 120, 217–239 Elitism, 9, 193–213
Business schools, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 16, 29, 30, 34, Empowerment, 92
37, 40, 42, 50, 74, 75, 76, 79, 89–102, Ethical behavior, benefits of, 221–222
110, 121, 126, 177, 188, 195, 196, 218 Ethical behavior, influences on, 222–224
Ethical issues, understanding of in business
Case, 6, 7, 16, 26, 31, 34, 37, 57, 60, 61, 65, environments, 3, 27, 52, 54, 86, 109, 121,
69, 74–75, 77, 78–79, 82, 83, 84, 86, 90, 224, 226, 236
100, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, Ethical leadership, 16, 26, 29, 36, 217, 219,
115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 122, 123, 233–237
124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, Ethical organizations, creating and
132, 146, 150, 158, 159, 182, 193, 195, managing, 235–236
262 Subject Index
Ethical professional behavior, developing Leadership, 3, 4, 10, 16, 20, 26, 27, 29, 36, 50,
commitment to, 227–230 51, 61, 82, 107, 109, 111, 113, 114, 117,
Ethical sensitivity, 221, 238 121, 128–129, 136, 138, 145, 146, 147,
Ethical theories, application of in business 173, 196, 198, 199, 217, 233, 235, 237,
contexts, 226–227 238
Ethical understanding, personal, 219–224 Learning, 15, 28, 32, 34–35, 38–39, 142–144
Ethics, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 15–42, 49–50, 51, Liberal arts, 9, 110, 193–213
52, 53–58, 60–61, 65–68, 69, 73–87, 89, Liberal education, 9, 171–189
90, 91, 92, 93–97, 102, 107, 108, 109, Local, 208–210
111–114, 120, 121, 125, 129, 130, 139,
142, 157, 162, 193, 194, 199, 217–239 Management Integrity Capacity, 6, 49–61
Ethics development, 218 Marketing, 33, 109, 110, 131, 160, 200
Ethics education, 6, 10, 15–42, 50, 53, 54, 57, Marriott School Model, 217–239
58, 74, 76, 90, 107, 111, 217–239
Moral courage, development of, 230–231
Exercise, 5, 8, 39, 51, 57, 81, 84, 107, 110,
Moral imagination, 6–7, 73, 81–82, 86, 87
111, 113–114, 115, 117, 119–120, 141,
Moral reasoning, effective communication
145, 147, 148, 149, 151, 156, 175, 226,
of, 232
232, 233–235
Exploratory analysis, 89, 102
Operations, 19, 28, 60, 109, 178
Gender, 126 Organizational responsibility, models of,
Giving Voice to Values (GVV), 7, 107–132 236–237
Global, 208–210 Organizational savvy, 218, 230–233
Good judgment, 232–233
Pedagogy, 6, 16, 108, 110, 130, 131, 230, 231,
History, 195–198, 204–206 234
Holistic management education, 171–189 Positive change, 141
Humanities, 174, 175, 180, 188 Power, 99, 111, 112, 128, 132, 158, 187, 194,
198, 199, 208, 212
Indicator of Readiness for Management Power and influence, exercised for good,
Ethics Inquiry (IRMEI), 6, 49, 50, 233–235
53–58, 59, 60, 61, 65–68 Practice, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 17, 19, 29, 32, 35, 36,
Instructional design, 31, 32, 42 41–42, 80, 84, 90, 99, 100, 110, 112, 113,
Instrumentality, 9, 50, 82, 197, 205, 211, 212 115, 117, 121, 124, 126, 127, 128, 129,
Integrated business curriculum, 31 131, 136, 137, 139, 141, 144, 147, 195,
Integrity, 3–10, 41, 49–62, 69, 89–103, 199, 202, 203–204, 207, 210, 212, 219,
107–132, 135–151, 155–163, 179–183, 227, 233, 235, 236–237
193–211, 194, 198–211 Pragmatist, 125, 155
Interdependence, 200 Pre-scripting (and scripts), 109, 110, 111
Intra-Organizational Ethics Bowl Event Private colleges, 195
(IEBE), 6, 49, 50, 56, 60–61 Privilege, 9, 115, 176, 193, 197, 198, 205, 208,
211
Leader development, 135–151 Process Integrity Capacity Auction (PICA),
Leader integrity, 135–151 6, 49, 50, 55, 58–60, 69–71
Subject Index 263
Reasons and rationalizations, 109, 113, Tale of Two Stories, 110, 113–116, 118, 120,
116–118, 119, 120, 129 131
Research, 8, 9, 16, 19, 21–23, 37, 40, 42, 49, Teaching materials, 77, 122, 233
53, 58, 60, 86, 92, 98, 102, 109, 115, 121, Tools, 4, 5, 7, 20, 27, 37, 42, 49–61, 140, 207
135, 136, 139, 140, 142, 143, 145, 147, TVA model, 155, 160, 162
156, 162, 171, 173, 178, 179, 183, 195,
209, 212, 220, 221, 222, 230, 237 Undergraduate business education, 171, 179,
193, 195, 197, 199–200
Scenario analysis, 159–160
Self-awareness, 144–146 Values, 3, 7–8, 10, 15, 18, 20, 26–27, 29,
Self-confidence, 199, 209, 210 32–33, 36, 49, 59, 60, 69, 70, 73, 75, 76,
Sensemaking, 6, 15–42 77, 79, 107–132, 135, 142, 144, 150,
Simmons (School of Management), 7, 111, 158–159, 171, 198, 199, 202, 203, 205,
121–130 209, 210, 219–221, 222, 227, 230,
Skills, 7, 8, 15, 57, 59, 60, 78, 99, 108, 113, 232–233, 238
132, 137, 139, 142, 147, 151, 171, 173, Values, personal, 18, 27, 59, 144, 145,
175, 176, 183, 184, 187, 188, 197, 203, 219–221, 238
219, 230, 233, 238 Values conflicts, 109, 110, 111, 114, 116, 123,
Social segregation, 194, 212 124, 126
Students MBA, 7, 8–9, 50, 74, 107, 121–122, Voice, 9, 26, 59, 60, 109, 112, 113, 114, 115,
155, 160, 171, 177, 178 118, 119, 124, 125, 128, 129, 130–132,
Students Undergraduate, 137, 171, 172, 178, 140, 155, 156–158, 166, 210–211
179, 180, 184, 188–189 Voicing values, 112, 115, 120

Buku Bahasa Inggris PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Buku Bahasa Inggris PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MANAGEMENT EDUCATION FOR

INTEGRITY: ETHICALLY EDUCATING

United Kingdom – North America – Japan

First edition 2011

Copyright r 2011 Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Reprints and permission service

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Emerald Group Publishing

List of Contributors vii

1. Management Education for Integrity; Transcending

PART II: BUSINESS ETHICS EDUCATION: ACROSS

2. Sensemaking: A Fresh Framework for Ethics

3. Three Pedagogical Tools to Advance Management

4. Using Literature to Encourage Moral Engagement

5. Fostering Integrity in Business Education: An Analysis

PART III: VALUES AS PATHWAYS TO ETHICAL ACTION

6. Teaching ‘‘How’’ — Not ‘‘Whether’’ — to Manage with

7. Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity

8. Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool to

PART IV: DEVELOPING CURRICULA BASED

9. Returning to a Holistic Management Education and the

10. Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and

11. Meeting the Objectives of Business Ethics Education:

About the Authors 243

Author Index 251

Subject Index 261

Christopher P. Adkins Mason School of Business, The College of William &

Aaron Miller George W. Romney Institute of Public

Tom Burgess Leeds University Business School, Leeds, UK

Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch

Management Education for Integrity;

Business ethics in higher education is burgeoning as a topic of interest spurred

People who do not believe that management is an activity requiring at its

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders

Why is it important and advisable to conduct scholarly studies of bolstering

scientists with a diversity of backgrounds and perspectives to share their observations

1. to provide empirically grounded, theoretical insights for rethinking business

an important component of ethical ‘‘internalization,’’ then it may be worthwhile to

Sensemaking: A Fresh Framework for Ethics

Purpose — The purpose of this chapter is to discuss a new approach to ethics

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders

Prominent cases of ethical misconduct spanning the gamut of organizations, from

design techniques for delivering sensemaking instruction based on best practice

2.1. Sensemaking as a Framework for Ethics Instruction

2.1.1. Theoretical Model of Sensemaking

Before considering the application of the sensemaking framework to management

2.1.2. The Sensemaking Framework for Business Ethics Instruction

Table 2.1: Metacognitive reasoning strategies.

1 Recognizing Thinking about, and awareness of, origins of the problem(s),

2.1.2.1. Breaking down misconceptions The ﬁrst component of applying this

workplace variables, completed measures of characterized by decision making, likely

Table 2.2: (Continued )

such as interpersonal environmental factors such as due to a disruption of

determine if effects instructional program problems than their

of developing completed measures of EDM (b coefﬁcients mechanism for

Table 2.2: (Continued )

thinking skills and measures of creative and metacognitive a complex, cognitive

2.1.2.2. Self-enhancement bias Another key misconception that must be addressed

Figure 2.2: Five-component model of ethical decision making (Mumford,

actions of the leader. Additionally, concerning the importance of procedural and

2.1.3. Implementing the Sensemaking Framework to Meet Management

Table 2.3: Instructional design recommendations for implementing the sensemaking

Instructional Application to sensemaking References