International Fellows Program 2011
Bruce W.N. Lo
Regional and Societal Influence in Ethical IT Decision Making: A
Comparison of US and Australia
1. Introduction & Theoretical Background
For many years information systems professionals assumed that their decision universe does not
go beyond the technical horizon. But more recently there is recognition that many day-to-day
technical decisions in information systems practice may have ethical implications or even
significant ethical consequences. This lead to an increased attention to the ethical decision
making process by information systems practitioners. Examples of recent studies on this topic
include: Paradice & Dejoie (1991), Lo & Doak (1996), Leonard, Cronan, & Kreie (2004), Hilton,
Martinez Santa Cruz, Oh, & Husain (2006), Haines & Leonard (2007), Patel & Schaefer (2009),
Brown, Sautter, Littvay, Sautter & Bearnes (2010).
Factors that influence ethical IT (or general) decision making are many and may be classified
into three categories: (a) individual value factors, (b) group/institutional value factors, and (c)
societal value factors. This is illustrated below:
Figure 1: Three-fold Classification of Value Factors
Individual
value factors
Group
value
factors
Societal
value
factors
Individual factors are related to the belief system of the individual decision maker and may
include personal values, perceived importance, and/or subjective norms. Group/institutional
factors are related to the value system of the peer group to which the decision maker belongs,
and may include shared visions, organizational goals, group values, situational factors, and/or
institutional constraints. And finally, societal factors are related to the common standard of the
3
International Fellows Program 2011
Bruce W.N. Lo
subculture in which individual decision maker finds himself/herself, and may include regional
norms, tribal traditions, cultural practices, and societal expectation.
These factors interact in a complex and dynamic way. While individual values are shaped by the
group and society to which the individual belongs, at the same time, individuals may also
influence group or societal norms and expectations. As a consequence, ethical reasoning in
decision making can be very complex and may be approached from many different angles.
It is generally recognized that moral or ethical values are somewhat shared (or at least sharable)
across individuals, otherwise it would not make sense to talk about rights and wrongs, or even
what “ought to be”. But as pointed out by MacDonald (2002) while individuals or groups may
agree on which value factors are important, they may still disagree over the relative importance
of the various value factors. It is in this context that the present study attempts to examine what
differences, if any, exist between two societies in the ways that the respective information
systems practitioners made their decisions in a set of IT-related ethical scenarios.
There are many ways to analyze ethical decision making. One analysis that incorporates many of
the widely known classical concepts was given by Velasquez, Andre, Shanks, and Meyer (2007)
and published by the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University. They
identify 5 approaches that may be used to arrive at an ethical decision depending on how broad is
the expanse of consideration:

The Virtue approach

The Utilitarian approach

The Common Good approach

The Rights approach, and

The Fairness/Justice approach
Another way is to analyze ethical decision making along the psycho-cognitive developmental
model proposed by Kohlberg (1976). This was summarized by Gaspard (2004) into 5 stages:

Preconventional (young children) level

Conventional (kids) level

Principled (lawyer) level

Righteous (a judge) level, and
4
International Fellows Program 2011

Bruce W.N. Lo
Selflessness (love) level
These different ways of analysis reflect the different relative importance attributed to the
different value factors by the decision makers in arriving at the final conclusion. It is in this
context that we wish to investigate the differences of how ethical IT decisions are made by
information systems & business students in US and Australia. It is postulated that students in the
two societies, one capitalistic-oriented the other social welfare-oriented, are likely to show
significant differences in their decision making process.
We recognize that while the ultimate research goal is to assess the decision making behavior of
information systems professionals in real life, due to time and resource constraints this study will
use IS and business students as subjects. Since the research focus here is on the difference
between subjects from the 2 countries rather than the correctness of the decision outcomes, the
use of student subjects may be an acceptable first step (Haines & Leonard 2007; Paradice &
Dejoie 1991). In future we plan to extend the study to include IS practitioners as subjects to
investigate whether students and practitioners make ethical IT decisions differently.
By gaining a deeper understanding of the ethical IT decisions making process in these two
countries, the researchers hope to formulate guidelines that may be helpful to information
systems educators and practitioners to clarify their ethical reasoning and situation analyses in
both pedagogic and real-life applications.
2. Project Objectives
This research project has a two-fold objective:
Research Objective:
To investigate how regional norms and societal expectation may influence the ethical decision
making process of information systems students in the United States and in Australia.
International Experience Objective:
To enable the student researchers to experience firsthand the culture and customs of a foreign
country (in this case Australia). One of the key dimensions which distinguishes Australia from
the US is that, US is essentially a capitalist-oriented society with strong profit motive for
businesses, while Australia is essentially a social welfare-oriented society with a strong emphasis
on individual’s rights to leisure and life enjoyment. It was thought that this difference may have
bearing on how ethical IT decisions are made.
5
International Fellows Program 2011
Bruce W.N. Lo
Additional Cultural Exposure:
While the main research objective is the comparison of the IS people in US and in Australia, it is
our plan to provide additional opportunities for the students to experience the Australian
Indigenous culture, to see how Australian Aboriginals may analyze ethical decisions differently
from the modern mainstream Australians. Due to time constraints and limited number subjects, it
is not possible to include the indigenous culture aspect into the main survey research. We
propose to simply interview Aboriginal elders to get a feel of their perspectives. See Method
section for more details.
3. Significance of the Project
In the context of ethical IT decisions making, findings from this research study may lead to:

A better understanding of how culture may influence individual decision making, thus
providing further insight to the Douglasian Culture Theory (Patel & Schaefer 2009).

A clearer knowledge of the interplay among various individual, group, and societal
factors in real-life ethical situation analyses, providing deeper appreciation of the Theory
of Reasoned Action (Fisbein & Ajzen 1975) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen
1985).

Formulation of guidelines for pedagogic use to assist IS students to develop a more
mature approach to ethical IT decision making.

Development of a check list for information systems professionals to guide their ethical
decision making (situation) analysis.
4. Research Method and Project Plan
In this section we shall describe the research method that we intend to use and the project plan
that outlines the schedule of activities and travel itinerary.
Research Method
This research examines and compares the ways how IS students in the United States and in
Australia make value decisions in two common IT scenarios (see Appendix for details of the
scenarios) that call for ethical judgment. In addition, while not able to do a full research
investigation, we plan to conduct interviews with selected Australia indigenous people to gain
some perspective of how Australian Aboriginals may view similar decision making process.
Table 1 summarizes the main characteristics of our research method.
6
International Fellows Program 2011
Bruce W.N. Lo
Table 1: Selected Characteristics of The Research Method
Subjects
Information Systems (IS) students or Business students who had done IS
courses. See the *paragraph for a brief justification re using students as
surrogates for IS professionals in the field.
Institutions from
UWEC is the only US institution at this stage.
which subjects are 3 Australian universities: Bond University (Gold Coast, QLD), Southern
to be drawn
Cross University (Lismore, NSW), Wollongong University (Wollongong,
NSW)
Australian
Research
Collaborators
Prof. Gavin Finnie, Bond University
Dr. Xiangzhu Gao, Southern Cross University
Assoc. Prof Peter Hyland & Dr. Joshua Fan, Wollongong University
Decision Context
under which
subjects are asked
to express their
views
Subjects were asked to describe “what” decision they will make and
explain “how” they arrive at their decisions in the following two IT
scenarios
1. Whistle blowing decision in a program coding scenario
2. Client selection decision in a IT project procurement scenario
See the Appendix for more details about these two scenarios.
Investigation
Methods
Analysis of discussion forum postings for the US subjects ( See project
plan section for more details)
Administer survey questionnaire and conduct selective interviews for the
Australian subjects.
Survey Instrument The questionnaire contains items that measure not just what is the decision
outcome of the subjects but also “how” the subjects arrive at that decision
and what value factors have they taken into consideration.
Methods of
Analysis
Firstly the raw data will be classified and tabulated to detect trends and
group characteristics. Most of the analyses involve classifying the decision
process into the different categories of approached mentioned earlier, and
the different relative importance the decision makers attributed to the value
factors.
Secondly, since most of the measurements are essentially nominal in
nature, non-parametric techniques will be used to test for differences
between the two cultural groups.
7
International Fellows Program 2011
Bruce W.N. Lo
Project Plan
Table 2 gives the major research activities associated with this project and when they will take
place. These activities are divided into four phases: (1) Preparatory phase, (2) Pre-travel phase,
(3) In-travel phase, and (4) Post-travel phase. Also contains in the table is a brief travel itinerary
as it also describe when and where will these research activities take place. Please note, in phase
3, we have highlighted those parts of the travel that involve visits with Australian indigenous
people to gain a perspective of their ethical decision making process. For full details of the travel
itinerary in Australia during phase (3), see the Appendix.
Table 2: Project Plan and Key Dates
1.
Preparatory
phase
2007 to 2010
At UWEC
Data collection phase for US subjects:
During the past 4 years, UWEC students as part of the course
work in “Systems Analysis and Design” were asked to participate
in an online D2L Discussion Forum on two ethical IT decision
making scenarios. The two are (1) Whistle blowing decision
scenario, and (2) Client selection decision scenario. Students were
asked not just to tell “what” are their decisions but also to explain
“why” or “how” they arrive at these decisions.
Records of these discussion postings form an excellent source of
data for the present research project, as we are able to analyze in
details how ethical IT decisions are made by the UWEC students.
2. Pre-travel
phase
Fall semester
2010
At UWEC
Survey instrument construction phase:
During this phase three important tasks will be done:
1) Analyze the data for US subjects,
2) Construct the survey questionnaire, and
3) Prepare interview check list for the Australian subjects.
Due to limited time in Australia, it is not practical to use the
“discussion forum” approach for data collection. We plan to
administer a brief survey questionnaire and conduct selective
interviews of the Australian subjects. Questions may be raised re
the different data collection method for the 2 subject groups. We
plan to administer the same survey to the US subjects in Phase 4
to act as a control mechanism for comparison purpose.
The 2010 fall semester also acts as an orientation and training
period for the two student researchers, to introduce them to the
theoretical background and techniques of this research project.
3. In-travel
phase
Winterim
2011
Data collection phase for Australian subjects:
This is the phase that the student researchers & faculty will travel
8
International Fellows Program 2011
In Australia
at
Bruce W.N. Lo
to Australia to collect data there. The detailed itinerary may be
found in Appendix 5. But here is a summary:


Sydney
Wollongong

Lismore
Gold Coast
Sydney


Jan 1: Depart Eau Claire to travel to Sydney
Jan 3-7: Meet with Wollongong research collaborators and
collect data there. Visit Aboriginal artist Walangari
Karntawarra to discussion dream time stories and
indigenous culture.
Jan 10-14: Travel to Lismore. Meet with Southern Cross
research collaborators and collect data there. Conduct
interviews with staff from Gnibi College of Indigenous
Australian People.
Jan 17-21: Meet with Bond research collaborators and
collect data there. Visit the Minjungbal Aboriginal
Museum in Gold Coast.
Jan 22: Depart Sydney to return to Eau Claire
The exact travel plan, particularly those parts depending on the
availability of the indigenous people, is subject to change.
4. Posttravel phase
Spring
semester
2011
At UWEC
Data analysis and write-up phase:
During this phase there are basically three tasks that need to be
performed:
1) Consolidate all data collected into a single usable format
2) Perform data analysis and statistical computation
3) Prepare report and poster paper
5. Mentor/student involvement and Preparation for Host Country
As mentioned in the previous section, the applicant has been collecting data in the “ethical IT
decision making” area since 2007. Therefore considerable efforts have already been devoted to
this research. The International Fellows program provide an opportunity to move this research in
a new and more challenging direction that allows us to compare decision making in different
countries. With the exception of phase 1, which had already been done, the student researchers
will be closely involved in all the remaining three phases (2 to 4) of this research project. Here is
a brief explanation on each:
2) Pre-travel phase: This is the most important phase for the two students, as they will be
introduced and trained into the ethical decision making research area by the faculty
mentor. Under the guidance of the faculty, student researchers will analyze the US data
that were collected in previous years. Using the findings as a guide, the research team
9
International Fellows Program 2011
Bruce W.N. Lo
will construct a questionnaire for the Australian subjects. Develop a check list for
interviewing the Australian subjects.
3) In-travel phase: Students will be involved in discussions with Australian research
collaborators, administering questionnaire, and conducting interviews with Australia
subjects. They also will participate in visit to and interviews with the Australian
indigenous people at several Australian locations.
4) Post-travel phase: Again under the guidance of the faculty, students will consolidate all
data, analyze the data, and finally prepare the research report and poster papers.
Preparation for Host Country
The applicant has secured agreements from four (4) colleagues in three (3) universities in
Australia to participate in this joint research. See Appendix 1 for the list of names and their
affiliations. These four Australian collaborators have agreed that they will not only participate in
the research but will also assist our students in finding suitable accommodation during the time
of visit, and arrange for Internet and communications access. Thus considerable background
arrangements have already been accomplished.
6. Plan for dissemination of the results
In UWEC: Findings may be shared in a College of Business faculty forum and/or a University
wide research forum. We definitely plan to present at least one poster presentation in the UWEC
Student-Faculty Research Day.
National/Regional: We plan to submit a paper to the forthcoming National Conference for
Undergraduate Research and/or the UW System Symposium..
Information Systems Conferences: We plan to prepare a paper for submission to one or more
of the following academic conferences: MBAA (Society for the Advancement of Information
Systems), MWAIS (Midwest Association of Information Systems), IACIS (International
Association of Computer Information Systems), or eCASE (International Conference on eCommerce, e-Administration, e-Society and e-Education).
Journal outlets: It is planned that more complete results will be submitted to a refereed journal,
e.g. IJBI (International Journal of Business and Information), JCIS (Journal of Computer
Information Systems), JBE (Journal of Business ethics), or Information & Management.
10
International Fellows Program 2011
Bruce W.N. Lo
7. History of prior funding from ORSP
The applicant did receive an ORSP grant in Summer Research Experience for Undergraduates in
2010, with the student James Kasson. That project is progressing well. Prior to that, the applicant
also received student-faculty collaborative research grants in the summer of 2008 and 2009. All
of these were successful and led to either poster presentation or refereed conference paper.
8. References
Ajzen, I. (1985) From Intention to Action: A Theory of Planned Behavior, in Kuhl, J. and
Beckman, J. (editors), Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior, Berlin & New York:
Springer-Verlag.
Brown, T.A., Sautter, J.A.Littvay, L. Sautter, A.C. Bearnes, B. (2010) Ethics and Personality,
Empathy and Narcissism as Moderators of Ethical Decision making in Business Students,
Journal of Education for Business 85 (4) 203-208.
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975) Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: an Introduction to
Theory and Research, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Gaspard, M. (2004) Morality in Decision making: Levels of Moral Development, from
mdpme.com, Managing Decision- Priority- Mental Error. Retrieved 6/24/2010 from
http://www.mdpme.com/moral.htm.
Haines, R., and Leonard, L.N.K. (2007) Situational Influences on Ethical Decision-Making in an
IT Context, Information and Management 44 (3) 313-320.
Hilton, T.S., Martinez Santa Cruz, A., Oh S.H D., and Husain, M. A. (2006) Information
Systems Ethics in Developed & Developing economies: Comparing Bolivia, Oman, south Korea,
and the United States, Issues in Information Systems, VII (2) 333- 338.
Kohlberg, L. (1976) Moral Stages and Moralization: The cognitive-Developmental Approach, in
Lickona, T. (editor) Moral Development and Behavior: Theory Research and Social Issues, Holt,
Rheinhart and Winston: New York, NY.
Leonard, L.N. K., Cronan, T.P., and Kreie, J. (2004) What Influences IT Ethical Behavior
Intentions – Planned Behavior, Reasoned Action, Perceived Importance, or Individual
characteristics? Information and Management, 42 (1) 143-158.
Lo, B.W.N. and Doak, P. (1996) Ethical Attitudes of Australian Information Technology
Professionals, Proceedings of the 7th Australian Conference on Information Systems, University
of Tasmania, pp. 151-160.
MacDonald, C. (2002) Moral Decision Making- An Analysis, from Ethics Web, Saint Mary’s
University, Halifax, Canada. Retrieved 2/22/2008 from http://www.ethicsweb.ca/guide/moraldecision.html.
Paradice, D.B. and Dejoie, R.M. (1991) The Ethical Decision-Making Processes of Information
Systems Workers, Journal of Business Ethics, 10 (1) 1-21.
11
International Fellows Program 2011
Bruce W.N. Lo
Patel, T. and Schaefer, A. (2009) Making Sense of the Diversity of Ethical Decision making in
Business: An Illustration of the Indian Context, Journal of Business Ethics, 90 (2) 171-186.
Velasquez, M., Andre, C., Shanks, T., and Meyer, M. (2007) Thinking Ethically: A Framework
for Moral Decision Making, from Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Santa Clara University.
Retrieve 2/22/2008 from http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v7n1/thinking.html.
12