Journal of Asia Business Studies

Business students’ attitudes toward business ethics: an empirical investigation in Vietnam

Loan N.T Pham Lam Dang Nguyen Monica J Favia
Article information:
To cite this document:
Loan N.T Pham Lam Dang Nguyen Monica J Favia , (2015),"Business students’ attitudes toward business ethics: an
empirical investigation in Vietnam", Journal of Asia Business Studies, Vol. 9 Iss 3 pp. 289 - 305
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JABS-01-2015-0012
Downloaded on: 12 February 2016, At: 22:59 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 70 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 106 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

Nazli Anum Mohd Ghazali, (2015),"The influence of a business ethics course on ethical judgments of Malaysian
accountants", Journal of Asia Business Studies, Vol. 9 Iss 2 pp. 147-161 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JABS-06-2014-0042
Lam D. Nguyen, Bahaudin G Mujtaba, Frank J. Cavico, (2015),"Business ethics development of working adults: a study in
Vietnam", Journal of Asia Business Studies, Vol. 9 Iss 1 pp. 33-53 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JABS-05-2013-0027
Laszlo Zsolnai, (2011),"Environmental ethics for business sustainability", International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 38
Iss 11 pp. 892-899 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03068291111171397

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:393177 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Business students’ attitudes toward
business ethics: an empirical
investigation in Vietnam
Loan N.T. Pham, Lam Dang Nguyen and Monica J. Favia
Loan N.T. Pham is based
at Banking University of
Ho Chi Minh, Ho Chi
Minh City, Vietnam.
Lam Dang Nguyen is
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)
based at Bloomsburg
University of
Pennsylvania,
Bloomsburg,
Pennsylvania, USA.
Monica J. Favia is
Assistant Professor at
Bloomsburg University of
Pennsylvania,
Bloomsburg,
Pennsylvania, USA.
Received 28 January 2015
Revised 28 January 2015
Accepted 28 February 2015
DOI 10.1108/JABS-01-2015-0012
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to examine the attitudes toward business ethics of Vietnamese
business students based on gender and the experience of having taken a business ethics course.
Design/methodology/approach – A quantitative self-administered survey was conducted with a
convenience sample of Vietnamese business students at a banking university in Ho Chi Minh City,
Vietnam. This study used the 30-item Attitudes Toward Business Ethics Questionnaire (ATBEQ)
constructed by Neumann and Reichel (1987) based on the work of Stevens (1979). The Vietnamese
version questionnaire was distributed, and 282 surveys were used for analysis. An item-by-item analysis
was conducted based on gender and the experience of having taken a business ethics course.
Findings – Significant differences were found on seven items based on gender and four items based
on the experience of having taken a business ethics course. However, respondents appeared to have
similar attitudes on the majority of the items.
Research limitations/implications – Perhaps the greatest limitation of this study is the relatively
uneven distribution of the respondents in the sample. The sample is skewed slightly toward women who
are a bit older, fourth year or post-graduate and those who have not taken a business ethics course. In
addition convenience sampling technique reduced its generalizability. This study is important because
it supports the idea of ethics education to improve ethical decision-making of future business leaders
and that education has an effect in Vietnam.
Practical implications – As business students are the main subjects of this research, it can be useful
for those involved in development of management and business education in Vietnam to have an
overview on how gender impacts business students’ ethics perception. For the executives of
multinational corporations, this study provides important information and adds support to a decision to
do business in Vietnam.
Social implications – Although there may be a perception of a less than ethical climate in Vietnam
based on its Corruption Perception Index scores, it appears that Vietnamese business students in
general express an ethical viewpoint. This study emphasizes the importance of ethics education that is
culture-specific to build a strong ethical business environment that can help Vietnam prevent bribery
and corruption and achieve sustainable growth and prosperity.
Originality/value – This study contributes to the attitudes toward business ethics research and sheds
light on the impact of gender and education (business ethics course) on Vietnamese business students’
ethical attitudes. There has been little research on business ethics in Vietnam. Academicians,
managers, practitioners, policymakers, government leaders and the like can benefit from the findings of
this paper.
Keywords Gender, Vietnam, Attitudes to business ethics, Business ethics course
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The reality is that public concern for unethical issues has increased with many scandals
and fraudulent corporate cases worldwide, from the infamous Ford Pinto case in the 1970s,
to Enron, WorldCom, Bernie Madoff and more. Many authors and researchers have studied
ethics and the unethical behaviors of managers and senior officers of major firms (Clark,
2008; Crary, 2008; McGill, 2008; Desplaces et al., 2007; Gao, 2004; Klein et al., 2007;
Lawson, 2004; Cherry et al., 2003; Nonis and Swift, 2001; Ridley and Husband, 1998 and
VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015, pp. 289-305, © Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1558-7894 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES PAGE 289
 others, as cited in Mujtaba et al., 2009). Unethical issues are of particular concern in
developing countries with high Corruption Index Perception like Vietnam with a ranking of
119 out of 175 countries (Transparency International, 2014). Given the current high-profile
corporate scandals, it seems that less emphasis has been put on the overall ethical
considerations in Vietnam.
This study specifically investigates business students’ ethical perception in Vietnam for
several reasons. First, a study by Nonis and Swift (2001) showed that students who
participated in unethical behavior in college were more likely to participate in unethical
behavior at work. Sadly, Segal et al. (2013) found that between 2001 and 2010, there was
increasing tolerance among US business students for unethical and even illegal behavior,
a finding they contributed to the recession. Second, although we know quite a bit about
American business students and their attitudes and ethical/unethical behavior, we know
relatively little about business students in the international community. In 1997, Grünbaum
(1997) called for additional cross-cultural research on the attitudes of students toward
business ethics. A growing number of studies have been conducted. Grünbaum (1997)
investigated Finnish business students, Preble and Reichel (1988) researched business
students in Israel, Karassavidou and Glaveli (2006) investigated Greek students, Eweje and
Brunton (2010) investigated New Zealand students, and Phau and Kea (2007) investigated
Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong. Other countries have been studied, but gaps still
exist. However, the ethical attitudes of business students in Vietnam have not yet been
studied. Finally, Vietnam has become an emerging economy in Southeast Asia that attracts
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

a large volume of international trade and business with a more welcoming investment
environment including investment incentives, stable political environment and a relatively
low-cost labor force over the past decade (Nguyen et al., 2015b). Thus, it is necessary for
global managers and entrepreneurs to learn more about its culture, business practices and
ethical maturity of the workforce.
This paper specifically compares the attitudes toward business ethics of male and female
business students in Vietnam as well as between those who took ethics course and those
who did not.

Literature review
Ethics and corruption in Vietnam
As reported in Nguyen et al. (2015a, 2015b), the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, or Vietnam
in short, is a South East Asian country with a population of more than 93 million people, of
which almost 70 per cent are in the age group of 15-64 years. With its huge economic
reform from a centrally planned economy to an open market economy, Vietnam has
emerged to become a strategic business partner with many other countries in the world.
For example, Vietnam’s trade volume with the USA increased from US$4.6 million in 1992
to over US$33 billion in 2014 (US Census Bureau, 2015). With an attractive investment
environment supported by investment incentives, stable political environment and a
relatively low-cost labor force, Vietnam will be the destination for substantial financial
investment by multinational corporations. Foreign direct investment reached US$19.2
billion within the first ten months of 2013 (IFLR, 2014). However, enthusiastic global human
resource managers and entrepreneurs are often challenged with the decision of
committing resources in Vietnam when they see the Transparency International ranking of
Vietnam and its Corruption Perception Index (CPI) scores. Figure 1 shows Vietnam’s CPI
scores from 2000 to 2014. Even though there is an increase in its CPI scores over the years
(from 25 to 31 out of the possible 100), the score in general is still very low, which indicates
that Vietnam has significant corruption issues, and if it does not deal with these issues
whole-heartedly, the country’s economic advantage and sustainability will surely be
impacted negatively.
To illustrate how Vietnam’s CPI scores compared to other countries, Table I shows the 2014
CPI scores of selected countries. As seen in Table I, Vietnam had a CPI score of 31 and

PAGE 290 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015

 Figure 1 Vietnam’s CPI scores from 2000 to 2014

Vietnam's Corruption Perception Index

CPI Scores 2000-2014
40 29 31 31 31
25 26 24 24 26 26 26 26 27 27 27
30
20
10
0

Note: Data from 2000 to 2011 were calculated on a

10-point scale and from 2012 to 2014 on a 100-point
scale (e.g. in 2010, the index was 2.7 before
transformation)
Source: Transparency International (2014)

Table I Corruption perception index of selected countries

Country rank Country/Territory CPI 2014 score
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

1 Denmark 92
2 New Zealand 91
7 Singapore 84
10 Canada 81
14 United Kingdom 78
17 The USA 74
26 France 69
43 Korea (South) 55
50 Malaysia 52
67 South Africa 44
69 Brazil 43
85 Philippines 38
85 Thailand 38
100 China 36
103 Mexico 35
107 Indonesia 34
119 Vietnam 31
126 Pakistan 29
136 Russia 27
145 Laos 25
156 Cambodia 21
156 Myanmar 21
170 Iraq 16
172 Afghanistan 12
174 Korea (North) 8
174 Somalia 8
Source: Transparency International (2014)

ranked 119 out of 175 countries. In contrast, Denmark had the highest ranking with a CPI
score of 92. The USA ranked 17 with a CPI score of 74 (Transparency International, 2014).
In Vietnam, the majority of the corruption cases are found in the transfer of public rights to
private ownership (Maitland, 2001). A survey conducted by the Centre for Community
Support Development Studies revealed that land management and construction projects
are most vulnerable to corruption (CECODES, 2008). Corruption takes place at any level of
the state authority hierarchy, as well as in governmental ministries, departments, agencies
and in public sector organizations. Former President Tran Duc Luong once said:
“Corruption is taking place every day and every hour, at all places, all the time” (as cited
in Maitland, 2001). A study on corruption in Vietnam in 2005 found that one in every three

VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES PAGE 291

 public officials and civil servants admitted that they were willing to accept brides, and
one-half reported that intermediate- and higher-level officials were involved in corruption
(Gibson, 2011).
Until recently, business ethics has not been discussed openly and frequently in Vietnam.
Thus, concepts of business ethics are relatively new to many Vietnamese people, even
though many were taught about moral principles since childhood. To many Vietnamese
people, being ethical means simply complying with laws and regulations. Issues such as
consumer ethics, corporate social responsibility, environment protection and sustainability
are not discussed adequately or taken seriously.

Attitudes toward business ethics

Business attitudes, philosophies and ethics have a close relationship with each other.
Stevens (1979) believed that business philosophies, for example, Machiavellianism,
Objectivism, Social Darwinism and Ethical Relativism, are “the sets of premises that
underlie a person’s own business ethics”, whereas business ethics is concerned with the
issues of moral (right and wrong) and ethics (good and bad) (Miesing and Preble, 1985;
Crane and Matten, 2007; Carroll and Buchholtz, 2008; Ferrell et al., 2015). An attitude
toward business ethics is referred to as “the subjective assessment by a given individual
with respect to sets of premises that make up various business philosophies” (Preble and
Reichel, 1988, p. 942). Given the importance of these attitudes toward business ethics,
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

there have been studied extensively in the business ethics literature. Fatoki and Marembo
(2012) found a difference in attitudes toward business ethics in relation to the level of study
of South African students. Kum-Lung and Tek-Chai (2010) found a positive correlation
between intrapersonal religiosity and attitudes toward business ethics of business students
and working adults in Malaysia.

Gender and ethics

Many studies support the notion that women in general are more ethical than men
(Beltramini et al., 1984; Ferrell et al., 2015; Miesing and Preble, 1985; Ruegger and King,
1992). However, research results on this issue have been inconclusive. McCabe et al.
(2006) and Peterson et al. (2010) agreed that women have higher ethical standards than
men. Beltramini et al. (1984) and Gill (2009) stated that female students are more ethically
inclined than male students. Onyebuchi (2011) echoed this conclusion with similar findings
of his study on college students. In a study on marketing professionals, Akaah (1989) found
that females showed higher research ethics judgments than males. Weeks et al. (1999) in
a survey of 1875 US business people found that women had a more rigorous ethical
position as opposed to men. Consistently, a study of US students by Kreie and Cronan
(1998) found that male students were less likely to consider a behavior to be unethical than
female students. Nguyen et al. (2014a, 2014b) studied Vietnamese students and
concluded that female students have a higher level of ethical maturity and less tolerance for
unethical behaviors in business. In a recent study, Nguyen et al. (2015a, 2015b) found that
female Russian working adults have higher ethical maturity than their male counterparts.
In contrast, many studies found no difference in ethical beliefs between women and men.
In a study on male and female chairs of the 530 largest accountancy programs in North
America, Schmidt and Madison (1998) found that there was no difference in their perceived
importance of ethics for either the accounting or business curricula. Radtke (2000) studied
accountants from both public accounting firms and private industry and concluded that
there were no differences in the ethical decisions between male and female accountants.
He went further and stated that when facing ethically sensitive situations, both men and
women responded quite similarly. McCuddy and Peery (1996) conducted a study on
undergraduate students in management and organizational behavior courses and found no
significant correlations between gender and ethical beliefs. Jones and Kavanagh (1996)
studied upper-level undergraduate students in management and found no support for the

PAGE 292 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015

 difference in ethical behavior of male and female students. Kum-Lung and Teck-Chai
(2010) studied business students and working adults in Malaysia and found no significant
difference in the attitudes toward business ethics between male and female respondents.
Nguyen et al. (2014a, 2014b) studied business students at a state college in the USA and
found no significant difference in the personal business ethics perception between male
and female respondents. Nguyen et al. (2014a, 2014b) found no significant difference in
the personal business ethics perception between male and female Thai working adults.
In addition, two meta-analyses resulted in conflicting conclusions. Franke et al.’s (1997)
meta-analysis of 66 research studies showed that even though there were differences
between genders, these differences were significantly smaller in samples with greater work
experience. In other words, the gender difference observed in student samples vanished
on average after approximately 21 years in the workforce. Jaffee and Hyde’s (2000)
meta-analysis of 113 studies of moral reasoning failed to find significant gender differences
on moral orientations, even though a small difference favoring females on care reasoning
and a small difference favoring male on justice reasoning were found. Based on the results
of extensive studies, Rest (1986) concluded that differences on moral reasoning between
male and female are insignificant. Jamali et al. (2005) believed that these insignificant
differences might be because of traditions, cultural practices and early socialization.
Overall, many researchers believed that in different situations and contexts, women and
men could perceive moral issues from different points of view. With that in mind, the
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

following hypothesis was proposed:

H1. The attitudes toward business ethics of male students are generally similar to
those of female students.

Business ethics course and ethics

Similar to the gender case, research on the impact of business ethics course on ethics have
produced mixed results, even though many believe that business ethics course has a
positive impact on an individual’s ethical maturity. Business ethics education is considered
to be of great importance to the accrediting organization, The Association to Advance
Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) is a strong supporter of this belief evidenced by
its promulgating a guideline requiring that ethics be included in the business curriculum.
The AACSB first required an explicit course in business ethics, but in subsequent revisions,
in 1991 and 2003, it has moved away from an explicit ethics course to an integrative
approach, allowing for an infusion of ethical content throughout the business curriculum
(Brinkman et al., 2011). In a study on student perceptions of business ethics in Finland and
in the USA, Amberla et al. (2010) concluded that senior students are more skeptical when
viewing current ethical environment than new students. They stated that those who have
been exposed to ethical issues in a course are more knowledgeable on current ethical
environment and have a more positive attitude toward ethics. Lindeman and Verkasalo
(2005) found that business students view more positively about business ethics than
non-business students do. Nguyen et al. (2014a, 2014b) found that Thai working adults who
took an ethics course have a significant higher level of ethical maturity than those who did
not.
However, several studies have found no positive effects of business ethics course on
students’ attitudes toward ethics (Wynd and Mager, 1989) or on perceptions of ethical
behavior (Davis and Welton, 1991). Kraft and Singhapakdi (1991) concluded that business
law seminars and ethics courses have little significance in an individuals’ overall ethics
training. In their study across six countries including China, Egypt, Finland, Korea, Russia
and the USA, Ahmed et al. (2003) found no significant differences in ethical attitude of
students in different year of study. Nguyen et al. (2014a, 2014b) studied Vietnamese
students and concluded that there was no significant difference in the level of ethical
maturity between those who took ethics course and those who did not.

VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES PAGE 293

 Some even believe that it is the business education that contributes to unethical behavior.
Miller (1999) argued that students do not come into business schools predisposed to
cheat; rather, they learn about the principle of rational self-interest and believe that it is the
correct way to behave. Indeed, according to Ferraro et al. (2005), a growing body of
evidence suggests that self-interested behavior is learned behavior, and people learn it by
studying economics and business (Ferraro et al., 2005). Ludlum and Moskaloinov (2005)
found that for Russian students, the longer they are in school, the more ethical risks they are
willing to commit to. With that in mind, the following hypothesis was proposed:

H2. The attitudes toward business ethics of students who took business ethics course
are generally similar to those of students who did not.

Research methodology
Measurement scale
This study used the 30-item Attitudes Toward Business Ethics Questionnaire (ATBEQ)
which was constructed by Neumann and Reichel (1987) based on the work of Stevens
(1979). Stevens (1979) provided statements that clarify an individual’s values that are
related to many business philosophies including Machiavellianism, Objectivism, Social
Darwinism and Ethical Relativism (Appendix). Each respondent was requested to indicate
his/her stance on each of the 30 statements based on a five-point Likert scale ranging from
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The ATBEQ instrument has been cross-
validated and tested in different contexts (i.e. Preble and Reichel, 1988; Kum-Lung and
Tek-Chai, 2010).

Subjects
A convenience sampling technique was used in this study. Target audiences were
business students at a banking university in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. The original English
questionnaire was translated into Vietnamese and back translated for cross-culture validity
check purposes. Informed consent, explanation of study, procedure of maintaining
confidentiality and detailed instructions on how to complete the questionnaire successfully
were included to the questionnaire. The authors assumed that if the respondents read and
proceeded to take the surveys (either hard copy or online), they consented to the survey.
Hard copies were handed out and collected by one of the authors. The data obtained from
these copies were entered manually. For online questionnaires that were completed
through the Web link, the data were automatically saved and converted into a database that
contains the data received from hard copies. There were 282 completed questionnaires
that were used for analysis. Table II shows the descriptive statistics of the sample.
As seen in Table II, the sample was slightly skewed toward women respondents. The
majority of respondents were under 30 years of age with approximately 60 per cent aged
25 years or under, the typical traditional student. The sample was also slightly skewed
toward the older student with 36.2 per cent fourth-year undergraduates and 42.2 per cent
post-graduates. The relatively uneven distribution of respondents in the sample represents
a limitation of the study.

Analysis and results

Reliability
According to Table III, Cronbach’s alpha and Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted were all
greater than 0.7, which indicates a satisfactory reliability (Nunnally, 1978).

ATBEQ and gender

Table IV shows the statistical results of the item-by-item t-tests at 0.05 level based on
gender. Only 7 of the 30 items (i.e. 1, 2, 6, 8, 9, 14 and 27) show a significant difference in

PAGE 294 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015

 Table II Descriptive statistics (N ! 282)
Item Frequency (%) Valid % Cumulative %

Gender
Male 116 41.1 41.1 41.1
Female 166 58.9 58.9 100.0
Total 282 100.0 100.0
Age (years)
17-25 169 59.9 59.9 59.9
26-30 63 22.3 22.3 82.3
31-35 24 8.5 8.5 90.8
36-40 15 5.3 5.3 96.1
40 and above 11 3.9 3.9 100.0
Total 282 100.0 100.0
Education
First year 11 3.9 3.9 3.9
Second year 15 5.3 5.3 9.2
Third year 6 2.1 2.1 11.3
Fourth year 102 36.2 36.2 47.5
Fifth year 11 3.9 3.9 51.4
Post-graduate 119 42.2 42.2 93.6
Other 18 6.4 6.4 100.0
Total 282 100.0 100.0
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

Table III Reliability statistics

Cronbach’s alpha Cronbach’s alpha based on standardized items No. of items
0.751 0.750 30
Scale mean if Scale variance if Corrected item-total Squared multiple Cronbach’s alpha if
Item item deleted item deleted correlation correlation item deleted

ATBEQ_1 83.02 114.943 0.301 0.462 0.742

ATBEQ_2 83.21 117.803 0.245 0.341 0.745
ATBEQ_3 82.44 117.179 0.226 0.213 0.746
ATBEQ_4 82.54 116.840 0.233 0.169 0.746
ATBEQ_5 81.84 119.406 0.123 0.270 0.751
ATBEQ_6 82.23 112.344 0.404 0.349 0.736
ATBEQ_7 83.13 113.391 0.345 0.538 0.739
ATBEQ_8 82.29 118.826 0.128 0.199 0.752
ATBEQ_9 82.80 113.363 0.389 0.300 0.737
ATBEQ_10 83.19 114.703 0.306 0.377 0.742
ATBEQ_11 82.74 114.041 0.353 0.263 0.739
ATBEQ_12 82.00 116.445 0.231 0.230 0.746
ATBEQ_13 82.60 114.704 0.301 0.319 0.742
ATBEQ_14 83.13 114.909 0.303 0.277 0.742
ATBEQ_15 83.23 116.856 0.244 0.338 0.745
ATBEQ_16 82.33 116.406 0.201 0.278 0.748
ATBEQ_17 82.10 114.550 0.290 0.233 0.743
ATBEQ_18 81.63 118.240 0.157 0.210 0.750
ATBEQ_19 82.17 113.660 0.333 0.222 0.740
ATBEQ_20 81.96 114.625 0.307 0.191 0.742
ATBEQ_21 82.67 114.563 0.290 0.260 0.743
ATBEQ_22 83.11 117.619 0.201 0.253 0.748
ATBEQ_23 82.56 112.091 0.378 0.327 0.737
ATBEQ_24 81.41 118.556 0.174 0.496 0.749
ATBEQ_25 82.37 115.473 0.278 0.301 0.743
ATBEQ_26 81.91 115.601 0.291 0.347 0.743
ATBEQ_27 83.14 117.515 0.240 0.303 0.746
ATBEQ_28 82.38 119.951 0.082 0.121 0.754
ATBEQ_29 82.05 114.620 0.342 0.272 0.740
ATBEQ_30 81.55 118.341 0.131 0.232 0.752

VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES PAGE 295

 Table IV t-Test results – ATBEQ and gender
Item Gender N Mean SD Standard error mean t df Significance (two-tailed)

ATBEQ_1 Male 116 2.44 1.189 0.110 2.059 280 0.040*

Female 166 2.17 0.966 0.075
ATBEQ_2 Male 116 2.24 0.787 0.073 2.508 280 0.013*
Female 166 1.99 0.867 0.067
ATBEQ_3 Male 116 2.84 0.809 0.075 "0.289 280 0.773
Female 166 2.88 1.100 0.085
ATBEQ_4 Male 116 2.64 1.083 0.101 "1.678 280 0.095
Female 166 2.84 0.960 0.074
ATBEQ_5 Male 116 3.59 1.014 0.094 1.859 280 0.064
Female 166 3.37 0.943 0.073
ATBEQ_6 Male 116 3.23 1.033 0.096 2.118 280 0.035*
Female 166 2.95 1.138 0.088
ATBEQ_7 Male 116 2.31 1.183 0.110 1.786 280 0.075
Female 166 2.07 1.091 0.085
ATBEQ_8 Male 116 3.19 1.046 0.097 2.348 280 0.020*
Female 166 2.89 1.087 0.084
ATBEQ_9 Male 116 2.66 1.149 0.107 2.239 280 0.026*
Female 166 2.39 0.932 0.072
ATBEQ_10 Male 116 2.19 1.149 0.107 1.030 280 0.304
Female 166 2.05 1.040 0.081
ATBEQ_11 Male 116 2.54 1.058 0.098 "0.183 280 0.855
Female 166 2.57 1.035 0.080
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

ATBEQ_12 Male 116 3.42 1.089 0.101 1.530 280 0.127

Female 166 3.22 1.070 0.083
ATBEQ_13 Male 116 2.73 1.137 0.106 0.346 280 0.730
Female 166 2.69 1.072 0.083
ATBEQ_14 Male 116 2.34 1.164 0.108 2.149 280 0.032*
Female 166 2.06 0.983 0.076
ATBEQ_15 Male 116 2.03 1.004 0.093 "0.471 280 0.638
Female 166 2.09 0.965 0.075
ATBEQ_16 Male 116 2.84 1.162 0.108 "1.540 280 0.125
Female 166 3.07 1.207 0.094
ATBEQ_17 Male 116 3.26 1.202 0.112 0.647 280 0.518
Female 166 3.17 1.110 0.086
ATBEQ_18 Male 116 3.64 1.145 0.106 "0.379 280 0.705
Female 166 3.69 1.002 0.078
ATBEQ_19 Male 116 3.08 1.166 0.108 "0.619 280 0.536
Female 166 3.16 1.114 0.086
ATBEQ_20 Male 116 3.39 1.178 0.109 0.564 280 0.573
Female 166 3.31 1.032 0.080
ATBEQ_21 Male 116 2.74 1.238 0.115 1.350 280 0.178
Female 166 2.55 1.076 0.084
ATBEQ_22 Male 116 2.16 0.919 0.085 "0.558 280 0.578
Female 166 2.22 1.058 0.082
ATBEQ_23 Male 116 2.74 1.151 0.107 "0.039 280 0.969
Female 166 2.75 1.214 0.094
ATBEQ_24 Male 116 3.95 0.912 0.085 0.870 280 0.385
Female 166 3.85 0.957 0.074
ATBEQ_25 Male 116 2.98 1.079 0.100 0.705 280 0.481
Female 166 2.89 1.062 0.082
ATBEQ_26 Male 116 3.39 1.002 0.093 0.019 280 0.985
Female 166 3.39 1.031 0.080
ATBEQ_27 Male 116 2.30 0.925 0.086 2.182 280 0.030*
Female 166 2.07 0.868 0.067
ATBEQ_28 Male 116 2.90 1.091 0.101 "0.381 280 0.704
Female 166 2.95 1.052 0.082
ATBEQ_29 Male 116 3.16 1.012 0.094 "1.179 280 0.240
Female 166 3.31 1.001 0.078
ATBEQ_30 Male 116 3.62 1.242 0.115 "1.545 280 0.123
Female 166 3.84 1.097 0.085
Note: *Significant at 0.05

PAGE 296 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015

 the attitude of male and female respondents. Thus, H1 is supported. Attitudes toward
business ethics of male students are generally similar to those of female students.
For the seven items that were significant, male business students scored significantly
higher than female business students. In particular:
! ATBEQ_1: “The only moral of business is making money” (Machiavellianism): the mean
scores of male students (M ! 2.44) and the mean scores of female students (M ! 2.17)
are significantly different (t ! 2.059, p ! 0.04 # 0.05). Both mean scores indicate a
disagreement of the statement, although female students seemed more against the
statement than male students.
! ATBEQ_2: “A person who is doing well in business does not have to worry about moral
problems” (Machiavellianism): the mean scores of male students (M ! 2.24) and the
mean scores of female students (M ! 1.99) are significantly different (t ! 2.508, p !
0.013 # 0.05). Both mean scores indicate a disagreement of the statement, although
female students seemed more against the statement than male students.
! ATBEQ_6: “Business decisions involve a realistic economic attitude and not a moral
philosophy” (Machiavellianism): the mean scores of male students (M ! 3.23) and the
mean scores of female students (M ! 2.95) are significantly different (t ! 2.118,
p ! 0.035 # 0.05). Both mean scores indicate that both male and female students were
not sure about the statement, although male students seemed to lean a little bit toward
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

the agreement side.

! ATBEQ_8: “The lack of public confidence in the ethics of business people is not
justified” (Ethical Relativism): the mean scores of male students (M ! 3.19) and the
mean scores of female students (M ! 2.89) are significantly different (t ! 2.348, p !
0.020 # 0.05). Both mean scores indicate that both male and female students were not
sure about the statement, although male students seemed to lean a little bit more toward
the agreement side.
! ATBEQ_9: “‘Business ethics’ is a concept for public relations only” (Machiavellianism):
the mean scores of male students (M ! 2.66) and the mean scores of female students
(M ! 2.39) are significantly different (t ! 2.239, p ! 0.026 # 0.05). Both mean scores
indicate a disagreement of the statement, although male students seemed a little bit
more indecisive than female students.
! ATBEQ_14: “While shopping at the supermarket, it is appropriate to switch price tags or
packages” (Social Darwinism): the mean scores of male students (M ! 2.34) and the
mean scores of female students (M ! 2.06) are significantly different (t ! 2.149, p !
0.032 # 0.05). Both mean scores indicate a disagreement of the statement, although
female students seemed more against the statement than male students.
! ATBEQ_27: “True morality is first and foremost self-interested” (Moral Objectivism): the
mean scores of male students (M ! 2.30) and the mean scores of female students
(M ! 2.07) are significantly different (t ! 2.182, p ! 0.030 # 0.05). Both mean scores
indicate a disagreement of the statement, although female students seemed more
against the statement than male students.

ATBEQ and business ethics course

Table V shows the statistical results of the item-by-item t-tests at 0.05 level based on
business ethics course taken. Only 4 of the 30 items (i.e. 1, 7, 17 and 29) show a significant
difference in the attitude between those students who took a business ethics course and
those who did not. Thus, H2 is supported. Attitudes toward business ethics of students who
took business ethics course is generally similar to those of students who did not.
For the four items that were significant, business students who took a business ethics
course scored significantly higher than those who did not. In particular:

VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES PAGE 297

 Table V t-Test results – ATBEQ and business ethics course
Item Ethics business course N Mean SD Standard error mean t df Significance (two-tailed)

ATBEQ_1 Yes 119 2.48 1.199 0.110 2.649 280 0.009*

No 163 2.14 0.942 0.074
ATBEQ_2 Yes 119 2.03 0.747 0.068 "0.997 280 0.319
No 163 2.13 0.906 0.071
ATBEQ_3 Yes 119 2.85 1.039 0.095 "0.239 280 0.811
No 163 2.88 0.954 0.075
ATBEQ_4 Yes 119 2.68 1.127 0.103 "1.106 280 0.270
No 163 2.82 0.925 0.072
ATBEQ_5 Yes 119 3.38 1.105 0.101 "1.166 280 0.245
No 163 3.52 0.870 0.068
ATBEQ_6 Yes 119 2.97 1.161 0.106 "1.206 280 0.229
No 163 3.13 1.057 0.083
ATBEQ_7 Yes 119 2.41 1.337 0.123 3.151 280 0.002*
No 163 1.99 0.923 0.072
ATBEQ_8 Yes 119 3.12 1.166 0.107 1.426 280 0.155
No 163 2.93 1.007 0.079
ATBEQ_9 Yes 119 2.55 1.118 0.102 0.641 280 0.522
No 163 2.47 0.970 0.076
ATBEQ_10 Yes 119 2.21 1.149 0.105 1.325 280 0.186
No 163 2.04 1.036 0.081
ATBEQ_11 Yes 119 2.64 1.110 0.102 1.128 280 0.260
No 163 2.50 0.990 0.078
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

ATBEQ_12 Yes 119 3.30 1.147 0.105 "0.032 280 0.974

No 163 3.31 1.032 0.081
ATBEQ_13 Yes 119 2.58 1.153 0.106 "1.650 280 0.100
No 163 2.80 1.049 0.082
ATBEQ_14 Yes 119 2.23 1.131 0.104 0.713 280 0.476
No 163 2.13 1.021 0.080
ATBEQ_15 Yes 119 2.19 1.044 0.096 1.852 280 0.065
No 163 1.98 0.923 0.072
ATBEQ_16 Yes 119 2.87 1.241 0.114 "1.322 280 0.187
No 163 3.06 1.151 0.090
ATBEQ_17 Yes 119 3.41 1.189 0.109 2.603 280 0.010*
No 163 3.06 1.096 0.086
ATBEQ_18 Yes 119 3.54 1.103 0.101 "1.748 280 0.082
No 163 3.76 1.023 0.080
ATBEQ_19 Yes 119 3.23 1.160 0.106 1.257 280 0.210
No 163 3.06 1.113 0.087
ATBEQ_20 Yes 119 3.40 1.003 0.092 0.779 280 0.437
No 163 3.30 1.155 0.090
ATBEQ_21 Yes 119 2.65 1.147 0.105 0.198 280 0.843
No 163 2.62 1.150 0.090
ATBEQ_22 Yes 119 2.32 1.033 0.095 1.786 280 0.075
No 163 2.10 0.973 0.076
ATBEQ_23 Yes 119 2.70 1.168 0.107 "0.570 280 0.569
No 163 2.78 1.202 0.094
ATBEQ_24 Yes 119 3.81 1.002 0.092 "1.275 280 0.203
No 163 3.95 0.888 0.070
ATBEQ_25 Yes 119 2.92 1.132 0.104 "0.176 280 0.861
No 163 2.94 1.023 0.080
ATBEQ_26 Yes 119 3.36 1.125 0.103 "0.355 280 0.723
No 163 3.40 0.934 0.073
ATBEQ_27 Yes 119 2.25 0.993 0.091 1.425 280 0.155
No 163 2.10 0.818 0.064
ATBEQ_28 Yes 119 2.88 1.067 0.098 "0.580 280 0.562
No 163 2.96 1.068 0.084
ATBEQ_29 Yes 119 3.48 1.056 0.097 3.349 280 0.001*
No 163 3.08 0.936 0.073
ATBEQ_30 Yes 119 3.62 1.295 0.119 "1.565 280 0.119
No 163 3.84 1.048 0.082
Note: *Significant at 0.05

PAGE 298 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015

 ! ATBEQ_1: “The only moral of business is making money” (Machiavellianism): the mean
scores of students who took a business ethics course (M ! 2.48) and the mean scores
of students who did not take such a course (M ! 2.14) are significantly different
(t ! 2.649, p ! 0.009 # 0.05). Both mean scores indicate a disagreement of the
statement, although students who did not take a business ethics course seemed more
against the statement than students who took a business ethics course.
! ATBEQ_7: “Moral values are irrelevant to the business world” (Machiavellianism): the
mean scores of students who took a business ethics course (M ! 2.41) and the mean
scores of students who did not take such a course (M ! 1.99) are significantly different
(t ! 3.151, p ! 0.002 # 0.05). Both mean scores indicate a disagreement of the
statement, although students who did not take a business ethics course seemed more
against the statement than students who took a business ethics course.
! ATBEQ_17: “Employee wages should be determined according to the laws of supply
and demand” (Social Darwinism): the mean scores of students who took a business
ethics course (M ! 3.41) and the mean scores of students who did not take such a
course (M ! 3.06) are significantly different (t ! 2.603, p ! 0.010 # 0.05). Both mean
scores indicate that both groups of students were not sure about the statement,
although students who took a business ethics course tended to lean a little bit more
toward the agreement side.
! ATBEQ_29: “You can judge a person according to his work and his dedication” (Moral
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

Objectivism): the mean scores of students who took a business ethics course (M !
3.48) and the mean scores of students who did not take such a course (M ! 3.08) are
significantly different (t ! 3.349, p ! 0.001 # 0.05). Both mean scores indicate that
both groups of students were not sure about the statement, although students who took
a business ethics course tended to lean a little bit more toward the agreement side.

Discussion, implication and limitation

Although we found some significant differences in the attitudes toward business ethics
between genders (seven items) and between those who took a business ethics course and
those who did not (four items), we found no significant differences on the majority of the
items. Perhaps the greatest limitation of this study is the relatively uneven distribution of the
respondents in the sample. The sample is skewed slightly toward women who are a bit
older, fourth year or post-graduate and those who have not taken a business ethics course.
In addition, the convenience sampling technique reduced its generalizability. However,
even with this distribution, the results were similar to what Jaffee and Hyde’s (2000)
meta-analysis concluded, finding no significant difference between the genders. More
recently, these findings are also consistent with Kum-Lung and Tek-Chai (2010) and
Nguyen et al. (2014a, 2014b), who also found no significant differences between genders.
While there was a significant difference on 7 of the 30 items, this could be attributed to
traditions, cultural practices and early socialization, as Jamali et al. (2005) postulated.
With respect to the effects of an ethics course, the results are similar to Amberla et al.
(2010) who concluded that senior students are more skeptical when viewing current ethical
environment than new students. Given that the present sample is skewed older with most
respondents being fourth year or post-graduate, it is noteworthy that its results are similar.
The results are also consistent with Nguyen et al. (2014a, 2014b), who found that Thai
working adults who took an ethics course have a significant higher level of ethical maturity
than those who did not. Again, the fact that the present sample is skewed slightly older and
that it has similar results is notable. This is important because it supports the idea of ethics
education to improve ethical decision-making of future business leaders and that education
has an effect in Vietnam. It is also worth mentioning that even though respondents who had
taken a business ethics course scored significantly different than those who had not, on the
ethics items, overall respondents in their responses displayed a generally ethical viewpoint.

VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES PAGE 299

 This is important because, although there may be a perception of a less than ethical climate
in Vietnam based on its CPI scores, it appears that Vietnamese business students in
general express an ethical viewpoint. For the executives of multinational corporations, this
is important information, adding support to a decision to do business in Vietnam.
Future research should do a direct comparison between the ethical attitudes of Vietnamese
business students and the business students of several Western countries like the USA
using the same instrument to determine whether there are any significant differences. Such
research would have the potential to increase the support for doing business in Vietnam,
which will no doubt be an important economic entity in the future.

Research contribution
At the theoretical level, this research contributes to the previous studies in the literature of
business ethics study. It sheds light on the attitude toward business ethics of Vietnamese
business students, particularly in Ho Chi Minh City, a new research site. Moreover, it
provides empirical examination of a US-based research model on a sample outside of the
USA, which extends the theoretical application to a broader scope, i.e. cross-cultural
application, as called for by Grünbaum (1997).
In addition, it seems that environmental and situational factors impact ethical judgment
(Karassavidou and Glaveli, 2006). Smith et al. (1999, p. 324) contend that there does
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

“appear to be many universal theories of ethics that accurately reflect the behavior patterns
of most cultures”. Some general moral and ethical standards may be appropriate for
virtually all systems, to know the proper rules of ethical conduct, it is necessary to have
some familiarity with the system and its members (Getsteland, 1999). According to Getz
(1990), to know what may be expected in a particular ethical system, it is necessary to know
what the local customs tend to encourage. Customs vary from culture to culture and in our
global economy. Therefore, it is necessary to develop an understanding of the business
ethical attitudes of other countries and cultures.
Specifically, at the practical level, as business students are the main subjects of this
research, it can be useful for those involved in development of management and business
education in Vietnam to have an overview on how gender impacts business students’ ethics
perception. Moreover, it emphasizes the importance of ethics education that is culture
specific to build a strong ethical business environment that can help Vietnam prevent
bribery and corruption and achieve sustainable growth and prosperity.

References
Ahmed, M.M., Chung, K.Y. and Eichenseher, J.W. (2003), “Business students’ perception of ethics and
moral judgment: a cross-cultural study”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 43 Nos 1/2, pp. 89-102.

Akaah, I.P. (1989), “Differences in research ethics judgments between male and female marketing
professionals”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 375-381.

Amberla, T., Wang, L., Juslin, H., Panwar, R., Hansen, E. and Anderson, R. (2010), “Students’
perception of forest industries business ethics: a comparative analysis of Finland and the USA”,
Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 44-54.

Bageac, D., Furrer, O. and Reynaud, E. (2011), “Management students’ attitudes toward business
ethics: a comparison between France and Romania”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 98 No. 3,
pp. 391-406.

Beltramini, R.F., Peterson, R.A. and Kozmetsky, G. (1984), “Concerns of college students regarding
business ethics”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 195-200.

Brinkman, J., Sims, R. and Nelson, L. (2011), “Business ethics across the curriculum”, Journal of
Business Ethics Education, Vol. 8, pp. 83-104.

Carroll, A.B. and Buchholtz, A.K. (2008), Business and Society: Ethics and Stakeholder Management,
7th edn., South-Western Cengage Learning, London.

PAGE 300 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015

 Centre for Community Support Development Studies (CECODES) (2008), “Anti-corruption in Vietnam:
the situation after two years of implementation of the law”, available at: www.finland.org.vn/public/
download.aspx?ID_38961&GUID_%7B96721A6B-F87E-4B53-9342-5FDACC26B097%7D

Cherry, J., Lee, M. and Chien, C.S. (2003), “A cross-cultural application of a theoretical model of
business ethics: bridging the gap between theory and data”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 44 No. 4,
pp. 359-376.

Clark, K. (2008), “Taking a bite out of cheating, with the help of technology”, US News and World
Report, Vol. 145 No. 8, pp. 74-76.

Crane, A. and Matten, D. (2007), Business Ethics, 2nd ed., Oxford University Press.

Crary, D. (2008), “Students lie, cheat, steal, but say they’re good”, available at: www.foxnews.com

Davis, J. and Welton, R. (1991), “Professional ethics: business students’ perceptions”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 451-463.

Desplaces, D.E., Melchar, D.E., Beauvais, L.L. and Bosco, S.M. (2007), “The impact of business
education on moral judgment competency: an empirical study”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 74
No. 1, pp. 73-87.

Eweje, G. and Brunton, M. (2010), “Ethical perceptions of business students in a New Zealand
university: do gender, age and work experience matter?”, Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 19
No. 1, pp. 95-111.

Fatoki, O. and Marembo, M. (2012), “An investigation into the attitudes toward business ethics by
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

university students in South Africa”, African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 6 No. 18,
pp. 5865-5871.

Ferraro, F., Pfeffer, J. and Sutton, R.I. (2005), “Economics language and assumptions: how theories
can become self-fulfilling”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 30, pp. 8-24.

Ferrell, O., Fraedrich, J. and Ferrell, L. (2015), Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases,
10th edn., Cengage Learning, Stamford, CT.

Franke, G., Crown, D. and Spake, D. (1997), “Gender differences in ethical perceptions of business
practices: a social role theory perspective”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 82 No. 6, pp. 920-934.

Gao, L. (2004), “Deficiency of honesty from cheat of college students in a test”, Journal of Bingtuan
Education Institute, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 52-54.

Getsteland, R. (1999), Cross Cultural Business Behavior, Handelshojskdens Forlag, Copenhagen.

Getz, K.A. (1990), “International codes of conduct: an analysis of ethical reasoning”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 9 No. 7, pp. 567-577.

Gibson, D. (2011), “Vietnam: an update”, available at: www.gibsondunn.com/publications/pages/

vietnam–anupdate.aspx

Gill, S. (2009), “Is gender inclusivity an answer to ethical issues in business? An Indian stance”,
Gender in Management: An International Journal, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 37-63.

Grünbaum, L. (1997), “Attitudes of future managers towards business ethics: a comparison of Finnish
and American business students”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 451-463.

International Financial Law Review (IFLR) (2014), “2014 FDI report: Vietnam”, available at: www.iflr.
com/Article/3306955/2014-FDI-Report-Vietnam.html

Jaffee, S. and Hyde, J.S. (2000), “Gender differences in moral orientation: a meta-analysis”,
Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 126 No. 5, pp. 703-726.

Jamali, D.J., Sidani, Y. and Safieddine, A. (2005), “Constraints facing working women in Lebanon: an
insider view”, Women in Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 8, pp. 581-594.

Jones, G. and Kavanagh, M. (1996), “An experimental examination of the effects of individual and
situational factors on unethical behavioral intentions in the workplace”, Journal of Business Ethics,
Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 511-523.

Karassavidou, E. and Glaveli, N. (2006), “Towards the ethical or the unethical side? An Explorative
research of Greek business students’ attitudes”, International Journal of Educational Management,
Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 348-364.

VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES PAGE 301

 Klein, H.A., Levenburg, N.M., McKendall, M. and Mothersell, W. (2007), “Cheating during the college
years: how do business school students compare”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 72 No. 2,
pp. 197-206.

Kraft, K. and Singhapakdi, A. (1991), “The role of ethics and social responsibility in achieving
organizational effectiveness: students versus managers”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 10 No. 9,
pp. 679-686.

Kreie, J. and Cronan, T.P. (1998), “How men and women view ethics”, Communications of the ACM,
Vol. 41 No. 9, pp. 70-76.

Kum-Lung, C. and Tek-Chai, L. (2010), “Attitudes towards business ethics: examining the influence of
religion”, International Journal of Marketing Studies, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 225-232.

Lawson, R.A. (2004), “Is classroom cheating related to business students’ propensity to cheat in the
“real world”?”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 189-199.

Lindeman, M. and Verkasalo, M. (2005), “Measuring values with the short Schwartz’s value survey”,
Journal of Personality Assessment, Vol. 85 No. 2, pp. 170-178.

Ludlum, M.P. and Moskaloinov, S. (2005), “Russian student views on business ethics: post-Enron”,
College Student Journal, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 156-165.

McCabe, A.C., Ingram, R. and Dato-On, M.C. (2006), “The business of ethics and gender”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 64 No. 2, pp. 101-116.

McCuddy, M. and Peery, B. (1996), “Selected individual differences and collegians’ ethical beliefs”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 261-272.
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

McGill, S. (2008), “Integrating academic integrity education with the business law course: why and
how?”, Journal of Legal Studies Education, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 241-282.

Maitland, E. (2001), “Corruption and the outsider: multinational enterprises in the transitional economy
of Vietnam”, Singapore Economic Review, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 263-282.

Miesing, P. and Preble, J.F. (1985), “A comparison of five business philosophies”, Journal of Business
Ethics, Vol. 4 No. 6, pp. 186-187.

Miller, D.T. (1999), “The norm of self-interest”, American Psychologist, Vol. 54 No. 12,
pp. 1053-1060.

Mujtaba, B., Cavico, F., McCartney, T. and DiPaolo, P. (2009), “Ethics and retail management
professionals: an examination of age, education, and experience variables”, American Journal of
Business Education, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 13-26.

Neumann, Y. and Reichel, A. (1987), “The development of attitudes toward business ethics
questionnaire (ATBEQ): concepts, dimensions, and relations to work values”, Working Paper,
Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer
Sheva.

Nguyen, L.D., Ermasova, N. and Sergey, E. (2015a), “Business ethics perceptions of Russian working
adults: do age, gender, education, work experience, management experience, and government work
experience make a difference?”, 2015 International Business Conference of the Society for
Advancement of Management (SAM), Las Vegas, NV, 26-29 March.

Nguyen, L.D., Lee, K-H., Mujtaba, B.G. and Silanont, S. (2014a), “Business ethics perceptions of
working adults: a study based on gender, age, management experience, and ethics training in
Thailand”, International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management, Vol. 5 No. 2,
pp. 23-39.

Nguyen, L.D., Mujtaba, B.G. and Cavico, F.J. (2015b), “Business ethics development of working
adults: a study in Vietnam”, Journal of Asia Business Studies, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 33-53.

Nguyen, L.D., Tran, Q.H.M., Mujtaba, B.G. and Tran, C.N. (2014b), “Students and business ethics: an
examination of business students at a college in Florida”, Review of Business Research, Vol. 14 No. 1,
pp. 111-122.

Nonis, S. and Swift, C.O. (2001), “An examination of the relationship between academic dishonesty
and workplace dishonesty: a multicampus investigation”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 77 No. 2,
pp. 69-76.

Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

PAGE 302 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015

 Onyebuchi, V.N. (2011), “Perceptions of male and female accounting majors and non-accounting
majors on ethics in accounting”, International Journal of Business & Social Science, Vol. 2 No. 17,
pp. 74-78.

Peterson, R.A., Albaum, G., Merunka, D., Munuera, T.L. and Smith, S.M. (2010), “Effects of nationality,
gender and religiosity on business related ethical”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 96 No. 4,
pp. 573-587.

Phau, I. and Kea, G. (2007), “Attitudes of university students toward business ethics: a cross-national
investigation of Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 72 No. 1,
pp. 61-75.

Preble, R. and Reichel, A. (1988), “Attitudes towards business ethics of future managers in the US and
Israel”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 7 No. 12, pp. 941-949.

Radtke, R.R. (2000), “The effects of gender and setting on accountants’ ethically sensitive decisions”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 299-312.

Rest, J. (1986), Moral Development: Advances in Research and Theory, Praeger, New York, NY.

Ridley, D.R. and Husband, J.E. (1998), “Online education: a study of academic rigor and integrity”,
Journal of Instructional Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 184-188.

Ruegger, D. and King, E.W. (1992), “A study of the effect of age and gender upon student business
ethics”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 179-186.

Schmidt, J.J. and Madison, R.L. (1998), “Do male and female accountancy chairs perceive ethics and
communication the same?”, Management Accounting Quarterly, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 29-33.
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

Segal, L., Haberfeld, M. and Gideon, L. (2013), “The effects of the recession on attitudes toward
business ethics: an inter-temporal study of business students in 2001, 2009, and 2010”, Business &
Society Review, Vol. 118 No. 1, pp. 71-104.

Smith, D., Skalnik, J. and Skalnik, P. (1999), “Ethical behavior of marketing managers and MBA
students: a comparative study”, Teaching Business Ethics, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 321-335.

Stevens, E. (1979), Business Ethics, Paulist Press, New York, NY.

Transparency International (2014), “Corruption perceptions index 2014”, available at: http://cpi.
transparency.org/cpi2014/results/

US Census Bureau (2015), “Trade in goods with Vietnam”, available at: www.census.gov/foreign-trade/
balance/c5520.html

Weeks, W.A., Moore, C., McKinney, J. and Longenecker, J. (1999), “The effects of gender and career
stage on ethical judgment”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 301-313.

Wynd, W. and Mager, J. (1989), “The business and society course: does it change student attitudes?”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 487-491.

Further reading
Albaum, G. and Peterson, R.A. (2006), “Ethical attitudes of future business leaders: do they vary by
gender and religiosity?”, Business & Society, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 300-321.
Conroy, S. and Emerson, T. (2004), “Business ethics and religion: religiosity as a predictor of ethical
awareness among students”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 383-396.

Nguyen, L.D., Mujtaba, B.G., Tran, C.N. and Tran, Q.H.M. (2013), “Sustainable growth and ethics: a
study of business ethics in Vietnam between business students and working adults”, South East Asian
Journal of Management, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 41-56.

Appendix. Attitudes Toward Business Ethics Questionnaire (ATBEQ)

ATBEQ items and the correspondent business philosophies

ATBEQ items:
1. The only moral of business is making money (Machiavellianism).
2. A person who is doing well in business does not have to worry about moral problems
(Machiavellianism).

VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES PAGE 303

 3. Every businessperson acts according to moral principles, whether he/she is aware of
it or not (Moral Objectivism).
4. Act according to the law, and you cannot go wrong morally (Legalism).
5. Ethics in business is basically an adjustment between expectations and the way
people behave (Ethical Relativism).
6. Business decisions involve a realistic economic attitude and not a moral philosophy
(Machiavellianism).
7. Moral values are irrelevant to the business world (Machiavellianism).
8. The lack of public confidence in the ethics of business people is not justified (Ethical
Relativism).
9. “Business ethics” is a concept for public relations only (Machiavellianism).
10. The business world today is not different from what it used to be in the past. There is
nothing new under the sun (Ethical Relativism).
11. Competitiveness and profitability are independent values (exist on their own) (Social
Darwinism).
12. Conditions of a free economy will serve best the needs of society. Limiting competition
can only hurt society and actually violates basic natural laws (Social Darwinism).
13. As a consumer when making an auto insurance claim, I try to get as much as possible
regardless of the extent of the damage (Social Darwinism).
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

14. While shopping at the supermarket, it is appropriate to switch price tags or packages
(Social Darwinism).
15. As an employee, I take office supplies home; it does not hurt anyone (Social
Darwinism).
16. I view sick days as vacation days that I deserve (Social Darwinism).
17. Employee wages should be determined according to the laws of supply and demand
(Social Darwinism).
18. The main interest of shareholders is maximum return on their investment (Social
Darwinism).
19. George X says of himself, “I work long, hard hours and do a good job, but it seems
to me that other people are progressing faster. But I know my efforts will pay off in the
end.” Yes, George works hard, but he’s not realistic (Machiavellianism).
20. For every decision in business the only question I ask is, “Will it be profitable?” If yes –
I will act accordingly; if not, it is irrelevant and a waste of time (Machiavellianism).
21. In my grocery store every week I raise the price of a certain product and mark it “on
sale.” There is nothing wrong with doing this (Machiavellianism).
22. A businessperson cannot afford to get hung up on ideals (Machiavellianism).
23. If you want a specific goal, you have got to take the necessary means to achieve it
(Machiavellianism).
24. The business world has its own rules (Machiavellianism).
25. A good businessperson is a successful businessperson (Machiavellianism).
26. I would rather have truth and personal responsibility than unconditional love and
belongingness (Moral Objectivism).
27. True morality is first and foremost self-interested (Moral Objectivism).
28. Self-sacrifice is immoral (Moral Objectivism).
29. You can judge a person according to his work and his dedication (Moral Objectivism).
30. You should not consume more than you produce (Moral Objectivism) (Bageac et al.,
2011).

About the authors

Loan N.T. Pham is Lecturer of Marketing in the Business Administration Department at
Banking University of Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam. Her research has been presented in

PAGE 304 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015

 multiple international and national conferences. Her areas of research are leadership,
ethics, entrepreneurship in cross-cultural setting and international marketing.

Dr Lam Dang Nguyen is Associate Professor of Management at the AACSB-accredited

College of Business at Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania. He holds both a doctorate
and an MBA degree from Webster University. He is currently the Associate Editor of the
World Journal of Management and the Book Review Editor for the International Journal of
Business and Emerging Markets. He has served as a Visiting Professor at Webster
University, Thailand, and at the University of Economics, Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam. Dr
Nguyen possesses a solid practitioner experience including various managerial and
leadership positions he held in Vietnam and in the USA. He has published more 40 articles
in peer-reviewed journals and proceedings. His areas of interest are job satisfaction,
leadership, strategic management, ethics, entrepreneurship, and cross-cultural
differences. Lam Dang Nguyen is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
lnguyen@bloomu.edu
Dr Monica J. Favia is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the AACSB-accredited College of
Business at Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania. She holds both a PhD and an MS from
The Pennsylvania State University. She also holds an MBA from Shippensburg University
and Graduate Certificates from both Lehigh University and George Washington University.
Her teaching and research interests are in sales, leadership and ethics. She has recently
designed and implemented a concentration in professional selling.
Downloaded by RMIT University At 22:59 12 February 2016 (PT)

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

VOL. 9 NO. 3 2015 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES PAGE 305