Perception of What the Ethical Climate is and What it Should be: The Role of Gender, Academic Status, and Ethical Education

Discussion
Academic status was found to have a significant
effect upon how students view business ethics.
Actual work experience, both real and presented
in coursework, of older seniors may account for
differences when compared to the freshmen. The
present study found that freshmen (but not
seniors) perceived a positive and significant
relationship between social responsibility of a
firm and its profit performance. Perhaps the
seniors possess a more realistic evaluation of the
prominence of factors inherent in business
activities and this has been reflected in their
responses to the questionnaire.
It is also possible that senior students have
become more cynical than the freshmen.
Cynicism has been found to have an impact on
a wide range of attitudes and behavior towards
oneself as well as others. Guastello et al. (1992)
in their study of cynicism, personality and work
values found that cynical students felt that
workers are exploited by management and are
alienated from productive activity. This perspec-
tive is consistent with Arlow’s (1991) findings
that older students appear to be more negative
toward corporate social responsibility efforts by
business than younger students.
This study confirms that females tend to have
a different ethical orientation than their male
counterparts. This is consistent with the findings
of numerous prior studies’ conclusions discussed
earlier in the literature review section. Although
there was not much difference between males
and females on their perception of the current
ethical climate (HOWITIS), there was a wide gap
between the sexes on what the ethical climate
should be (SHOULDBE). Female students
clearly appeared to favor an ethical climate that
would be fair and in which ethical attitudes and
behavior would be rewarded.
Earlier studies with similar results have tried
to explain gender differences in ethical percep-
tions and attitudes in a variety of ways. Betz et
al. (1989) used two broad explanations to suggest
how gender differences in values and work
interests could come about. According to the
authors, the “structural” approach predicts that
women will become more like men under similar
occupational conditions, while the “gender
socialization” approach asserts that the sexes
bring different values and traits to their work
roles. For example, men may tend to seek signs
of competitive success (money and advancement)
while women may emphasize relationships and
intrinsic satisfaction derived from the work
itself.” Presumably, a concern for money and
advancement spurs a willingness to be less ethical
and a concern for relationships and people
promotes ethical behavior” (Betz et al., p. 322).
Ruegger and King (1992), supporting a
modified version of the “gender socialization
view,” have suggested that gender differences in
ethical perceptions may be traced back to the
family environment. In the traditional family,
aggressive male behavior is more acceptable than
aggressive female behaviors. Females are social-
ized to be nurturing and supportive of other
people. This logic implies that society expects
different ethical orientations to be dominant
in males and females. These expectations are
internalized at an early age and manifest in terms
of attitudes and behavior both outside and inside
214
H. K. Luthar et al.

---

the workplace. While this explanation of the
differences between men and women in ethical
proclivities is highly plausible, it also suggests
such differences may be quite fundamental. It is
possible that such differences may lead to
increasing conflict between male and female
managers when facing ethical dilemmas in the
future. This conflict may become more intense
and apparent as the number of female managers
continue to increase in the workforce. The
possibility that male and female managers may
need to be trained and sensitized to differing
ethical orientation due to gender must be
explored by organizations. Not doing so risks a
dysfunctional working environment in which
male and female managers would suspect each
other’s motives as well as loyalty to the organi-
zation. It is up to each organization to provide
guidance to its managers with regard to the
ethical parameters for their decisions because
such decisions can often have both positive and
negative outcomes for their customer, employees,
shareholders and society at large.
Although several studies that have examined
the influence of business ethics instruction on
students’ ethical attitudes show mixed results, the
findings in this study provided strong support for
exposure to ethical education. Both male and
female students through freshmen and senior
classes receiving ethics instruction believed that
a relationship exists between ethical behavior and
positive business outcomes. It is interesting that
the effect of ethics instruction on freshmen
would show a significant difference so early in
their overall education. With seniors, both males
and females, the difference between those who
had been exposed to ethical education and those
who had not, was even more dramatic. This
makes sense as the seniors would have had nearly
four years to take courses in which ethical
education was integrated. Those seniors who did
not have the opportunity to take such courses,
however, clearly fell behind in ethical sensitivity
to business issues. These results are consistent
with Steven et al. (1993) finding that the educa-
tional process in business schools may increase
ethical sensitivity. It seems that the earlier ethical
education starts, the more impact it may have.