Management Educators’ Expectations for Professional Ethics Development

Abstract

Professional associations, like the Academy of Management, exist to foster and promote scholarship, exchange among faculty, and an environment conducive to member professional ethics development. However, this last purpose of such organizations has received the least amount of attention. Moreover, previous research has demonstrated that there are differences in perceived needs for professional ethics development between tenured and untenured faculty. In the current research 260 Academy of Management members were surveyed. The research identified differences between tenured and untenured management faculty with respect to expectations for the Academy of Management to provide ethics education and research with respect to the professional code of conduct. Implications of the findings are discussed from a developmental perspective. Directions for future research are provided.

The Role of Ethical Values in an Expanded Psychological Contract

“…To be sure, there is evidence of training in business ethics (Gandz and Hayes, 1988;Maclagan, 2002;Payne, 1988;Petrick and Scherer, 2005;Rossouw and van Vuuren, 2003;Warren and Tweedale, 2002); however, training based on the organization's view of 'ethics' may be insufficient. The critical factor, therefore, is not so much ethics as narrowly determined by the organization in terms of its own business interests, but that organizations need to be aware of ethical tensions placed on individuals, whether stemming from their professional obligations, or their personal ethical standards.…”

A Survey of Management Educators’ Perceptions of Unethical Faculty Behavior

“…The task force proposed a code of ethical conduct, the Academy of Management Code of Ethical Conduct (AMCEC) that was eventually approved in 1990 by the organization's governing board and voting membership of the Academy (Petrick and Scherer 2005). A copy of the initial version of the AMCEC can be found in a 1991 issue of Academy of Management Journal (Anonymous 1991).…”

“…Due to disagreements among Academy board members concerning early recommendations related to certain educational and implementation/enforcement practices, the focus during the first 15 years after the code's passing was only on the educational and research dimensions of the AMCEC (Petrick and Scherer 2005).…”

“…While unethical conduct in academe has not garnered similar headlines as their corporate counterparts, occurrences of unethical behaviors by educators have resulted in many complaints from students, parents, legislators, university employees, and other stakeholder groups, including fellow educators themselves (e.g., Bruhn et al 2002;Coombs 1998;Field 1993;Sheldon and Hoffman 2005). Some observers link the reoccurring malfeasance of business executives to failure of ethical training in business schools (e.g., Leicht and Fennell 2001;Peterson and Ferrell 2005;Petrick and Scherer 2005;Trank and Rynes 2003). Others have even suggested that business faculty should be viewed as silent partners of corporate misconduct (e.g., Anand et al 2004;Gioia 2002;Swanson and Frederick 2003).…”

Developing a measure to capture marketing faculty's perceptions of unethical behavior

“…Thus, these variables are likely to have similar effects on the marketing educators' perceptions of acceptability of questionable behavior. Based on past research, several factors related to the educational and institutional environment were found to account for differences in ethical judgment between tenured and nontenured marketing educators (Petrick and Scherer, 2005). When compared to tenured faculty, non-tenured faculty experience less job security, potential for denial of tenure, and perceptions of mistreatment by their administrators and tenured colleagues.…”