We develop a model of ethical decision making that integrates the decision-making process and the content variables considered by individuals facing ethical dilemmas. The process described in the model is drawn from Janis and Mann’s [1977, Decision Making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict Choice and Commitment (The Free Press, New York)] work describing the decision process in an environment of conflict, choice and commitment. The model is enhanced by the inclusion of content variables derived from the ethics literature. The resulting integrated model aids in understanding the complexity of the decision process used by individuals facing ethical dilemmas and suggests variable interactions that could be field-tested. A better understanding of the process will help managers develop policies that enhance the likelihood of ethical behavior in their organizations. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007decision making, ethical framework, ethics, process, stress,

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present a unique version of the balanced scorecard developed and applied by the faculty of a university division.Design/methodology/approachThe paper uses a case study approach and uses the experiences of the faculty of a business school to describe the process and benefits of developing a custom balanced scorecard.FindingsThe unique version of the scorecard revitalized the faculty and resulted in a process model of organizational change based on the balanced scorecard that can be used in many academic divisions.Practical implicationsThis unique version of the scorecard helped to establish a program of continuous improvement and facilitated the formulation of strategic initiatives. The documentation provided in the scorecard supports requests for increased budgets and grant applications.Originality/valueUniversity and faculty administrators can use the model developed in this paper as a basis of a change program that can help design improvement programs, facilitate strategy development, and support funding requests.

Digital technology has proven a beguiling, some even venture addictive, presence in the lives of our 21st century (millennial) students. And while screen technology may offer select cognitive benefits, there is mounting evidence in the cognitive neuroscience literature that digital technology is restructuring the way our students read and think, and not necessarily for the better. Rather, emerging research regarding intensive use of digital devices suggests something more closely resembling a Faustian quandary: Certain cognitive skills are gained while other “deep thinking” capabilities atrophy as a result of alterations in the neural circuitry of millennial brains. This has potentially profound implications for management teaching and practice. In response, some advocate that we “meet students where we find them.” We too acknowledge the need to address student needs, but with the proviso that the academy’s trademark commitment to penetrating, analytical thinking not be compromised given the unprecedented array of existential challenges awaiting this generation of students. These and rising faculty suspicions of a new “digital divide” cropping up in the management classroom represents a timely opportunity for management educators to reflect not only on how today’s students read and learn, but equally, on what and how we teach.

No abstract

No abstract