PhD Program in Business Administration and Management
Advanced Topics in Organization & Management Theory: Ethics in
Organizations
a.y. 2015‐2016
Instructor: Art Brief Office: TBD Phone: TBD Office Hours: Flexible, by appointment or just pop in.
Course Description and Objectives
The purpose of this course is to provide you with an introduction to the research on ethics in organizations, with a focus on behavioral ethics. By the end of this course you should be familiar with a breadth of material, and have a developing expertise in a topic of your choosing (i.e., a topic you have led the class in discussing).
Course Requirements and Grading
There are three course requirements: (1) contributing to class discussions, (2) leading the class discussion on designated days, and (3) submitting “take home” messages. Class Participation (40%) This course is designed as a seminar, which means that the course will only be as good as the questions, comments, and insights that the students bring to the table. It is essential that you prepare for class by reading all assignments. You should come to class knowing the “take‐home” message of each reading, what we know about a given topic, and any disagreements, debates, and limitations in the literature. Though one student will be designated to lead the discussion on each topic (see the next section), everyone is expected to contribute in every class session.
Leading Class Discussions (30%) You will be assigned to lead the class discussion for a topic during the semester. You should think of yourself as our class expert on your given topic. Come to class prepared (a) to give a brief overview of your topic, highlighting its main issues and any disagreements in the literature, (b) to address the state of theory and empirical evidence, and (c) to suggest future directions for research. You should direct the class discussion towards these three items. In addition to facilitating the discussion, you should prepare a 4 to 5 page (plus title page and references) typed summary (in essay form) of the above items, and distribute a copy of your summary to each class member at the beginning of the discussion. The discussion leader does not need to prepare a “take home” message for the material he/she leads for the day.
“Take Home” Messages (30%) “Take home” messages for this class are what you learned from an assigned reading. “Take home” messages are due the day a reading is presented and should be a relatively short, type‐written paragraph (about two or three sentences longs). No late “take home” messages will be accepted. Grades Grades will be pass/fail. Student Honesty Integrity is expected and demanded. Readings
1. Normative versus Descriptive Ethics Beauchamp, T. L., & Bowie, N. E. (1988). Ethical theory and business (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ. (Read pages 21‐49) Paulus, I. (1981). Laborem Exercens. Libreria Editrice Vaticana. Donaldson, T. (1994). When integration fails: The logic of prescription and description in business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4, 157‐169. Greene, J. D. (2003). From neural "is" to moral "ought": What are the moral implications of neuroscientific moral psychology? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 847‐850.
Feinberg, M., Willer, R., Antonenko, O., & John, O. P. (2012). Liberating reason from the
passions overriding intuitionist moral judgments through emotion
reappraisal. Psychological Science, 23(7), 788‐795. Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293, 2105‐2108. 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. (Read pages 548‐552, 584‐586) 2. Moral Foundations de Waal, F. B. M. (2008). Putting the altruism back into altruism: The evolution of empathy. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 279‐300.
Graham, J., Nosek, B. A., Haidt, J., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 366‐385. Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. (2009). Liberals and conservatives use different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029‐1046.
Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P., & Ditto, P. H. (2012). Moral
foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. Advances in Experimental
Social Psychology, 47, 55‐130. Haidt, J. (2007). The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science, 316, 998‐1002. Rai, T. S., & Fiske, A. P. (2011). Moral psychology is relationship regulations: Moral motives for unity, hierarchy, equality, and proportionality. Psychological Review, 118, 57‐75.
3. Moral Decision Making Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue‐ contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16, 366‐395. Gunia, B. C., Wang, L., Huang, L., Wang, J., & Murnighan, J. K. (2012). Contemplation and conversation: Subtle influences on moral decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 51(1), 13‐33.
Zhong, C. B. (2011). The ethical dangers of deliberative decision making. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 56(1), 1‐25.
Ham, J., & van den Bos, K. (2010). On unconscious morality: The effects of unconscious
thinking on moral decision making. Social Cognition, 28(1), 74‐83.
Bazerman, M. H., & Gino, F. (2012). Behavioral ethics: Toward a deeper understanding of
moral judgment and dishonesty. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 8, 85‐104.
Haidt, J. (2003). The moral emotions. Handbook of affective sciences, 11, 852‐870.
Pizarro, D. A., & Bloom, P. (2003). The intelligence of the moral intuitions: A comment on
Haidt (2001). Psychological Review, 110(1), 193‐196.
Bennis, W. M., Medin, D. L., & Bartels, D. M. (2010). The costs and benefits of calculation
and moral rules. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(2), 187‐202.
Bazerman, M. H., & Greene, J. D. (2010). In favor of clear thinking: Incorporating moral rules
into a wise cost‐benefit analysis—Commentary on Bennis, Medin, & Bartels
(2010). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(2), 209‐212.
4. Lack of Moral Agency
Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Asian journal of social
Psychology, 2(1), 21‐41. Ayal, S., & Gino, F. (2011). Honest rationales for dishonest behavior (pp. 149‐166). In M. Mikulincer, & P. R. Shavers (Eds.), The social psychology of morality: Exploring the causes of good and evil. American Psychological Association: Washington, DC. Moore, C., Detert, J. R., Treviño, L. K., Baker, V. L., & Mayer, D. (2012). Why employees do bad things: Moral disengagement and unethical organizational behavior. Personnel Psychology, 65, 1‐48. Shu, L. L., Gino, F., & Bazerman, M. H. (2011). Dishonest deed, clear conscience: When cheating leads to moral disengagement and motivated forgetting. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 330‐349. Blanken, I., Ven, N. van de, & Zeelenberg, M. (2015). A meta‐analytic review of moral licensing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(4), 540‐558.
Kouchaki, M. (2011). Vicarious moral licensing: the influence of others' past moral actions
on moral behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology,101(4), 702. 5. Conflicts of Interest Moore, D. A., Tetlock, P. E., Tanlu, L., & Bazerman, M. H. (2006). Conflicts of interest and the case of auditor independence: Moral seduction and strategic issue cycling. Academy of Management Review, 31, 10‐29. Nelson, M. W. (2006). Ameliorating conflicts of interest in auditing: Effects of recent reforms on auditors and their clients. Academy of Management Review, 31, 30‐42. Bazerman, M. H., Moore, D. A., Tetlock, P. E., & Tanlu, L. (2006). Reports of solving conflicts of interest in auditing are highly exaggerated. Academy of Management Review, 31, 43‐ 49.
Loewenstein, G., Cain, D. M., & Sah, S. (2011). The limits of transparency: Pitfalls and
potential of disclosing conflicts of interest. The American Economic Review, 101(3), 423‐
428. Harris, J., & Bromiley, P. (2007). Incentives to cheat: The influence of executive compensation and firm performance on financial misrepresentation. Organization Science, 18, 350‐367.
6. Individual Differences
Shao, R., Aquino, K., & Freeman, D. (2008). Beyond moral reasoning: A review of moral
identity research and its implications for business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 513‐
540.
Cohen, T. R., Panter, A. T., Turan, N., Morse, L., & Kim, Y. (2014). Moral character in the
workplace. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(5), 943‐963.
Cohen, T. R., & Morse, L. (2014). Moral character: What it is and what it does. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 34, 43‐61.
Piff, P. K., Stancato, D. M., Côté, S., Mendoza‐Denton, R., & Keltner, D. (2012). Higher social
class predicts increased unethical behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 109(11), 4086‐4091. 7. Corruption of Individuals Kish‐Gephart, J. J., Harrison, D. A., Treviño, L. K. (2010). Bad apples, bad cases, and bad barrels: Meta‐analytic evidence about sources of unethical decisions at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 1‐31. Ordonez, L., Schweitzer, M., Galinsky, S., & Bazerman, M. (2009). Goals gone wild: The systematic side effects of overprescribing goal‐setting. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(1), 6‐16. Umphress, E. E., Bingham, J. B., & Mitchell, M. S. (2010) Unethical behavior in the name of the company: The moderating effect of organizational identification and positive reciprocity beliefs on unethical pro‐organizational behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 769‐780. 8. Corruption of Organizations
Gioia, D. A. (1992). Pinto fires and personal ethics: A script analysis of missed
opportunities. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(5‐6), 379‐389. Brief, A. P., Buttram, R. T., & Dukerich, J. M. (2001). Collective corruption in the corporate world: Toward a process model (pp. 471‐499). In M. E. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Advances in Theory and research. Hilldale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. Ashforth, B. E., & Anand, V. (2003). The normalization of corruption in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 1‐52. Greve, H. R., Palmer, D., & Pozner, J‐E. (2010). Organizations gone wild: The causes, processes, and consequences of organizational misconduct. Academy of Management Annals, 4, 53‐107.
9. Where do we go from here?
Treviño, L. K., den Nieuwenboer, N. A., & Kish‐Gephart, J. J. (2014). (Un) ethical behavior in
organizations. Annual review of psychology, 65, 635‐660.
Brief, A.P. (2011). The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: What Behavioral Business Ethics
Researchers Ought to be Studying. In D. De Cremer and A. Tenbrunsel (Eds.) “Behavioral business ethics: Ideas on an emerging field.” New York: Taylor and Frances.
McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D., & Trevino, L. K. (2006). Academic dishonesty in graduate
business programs: Prevalence, causes, and proposed action. Academy of Management
Learning & Education, 5(3), 294‐305.
Wang, L., Malhotra, D., & Murnighan, J. K. (2011). Economics education and greed. Academy
of Management Learning & Education, 10(4), 643‐660.
Wang, L., & Murnighan, J. K. (2011). On greed. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1),
279‐316.
Kouchaki, M., Smith‐Crowe, K., Brief, A. P., & Sousa, C. (2013). Seeing green: Mere exposure
to money triggers a business decision frame and unethical outcomes. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 121(1), 53‐61.
Brief, A. P., & Smith‐Crowe, K. (forthcoming). Why organizations matter. In A. G. Miller (Ed.), The social psychology of good and evil (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Shu, L. L., Mazar, N., Gino, F., Ariely, D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2012). Signing at the beginning makes ethics salient and decreases dishonest self‐reports in comparison to signing at the end. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(38), 15197‐15200. Bradley, J.C., Brief, A.P., & Smith‐Crowe (2008). The good corporation. In D.B. Smith (Ed.), The People Make the Place: Exploring Dynamic Linkages Between Individuals and Organizations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kreps, T. A., & Monin, B. (2011). “Doing well by doing good”? Ambivalent moral framing in
organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31, 99‐123.
