Organizational Ethical Climate within the
University of Nueva Caceres
College of Computer Studies
Marvin M. Monteagudo
Technological Institute of the Philippines
Quezon City, Philippines
marvinmm.dit@gmail.com
May 29, 2019
Abstract
the much-awaited spotlight on organizational ethics,
when multinational companies, such as Volkswagen are
accused of falsifying tests. Events such as these called
into question the ethical standards of companies and
how their respective management hold this against
their people. Haines4 believes that the most companies
are under scrutiny because of reported widespread
breaches in intellectual property, privacy and security.
He further postulated that 80% of these breaches are
committed by employees of a company. Larson5 further
supported this by stating that poor ethics had been
recognized as a leading killer of organizations.
Some even argue on what ethics really mean and
disagree on what it means when equated to business.
Sturges14 writes that any one time a human being
intercedes into the life of another, gives rise to an ethical
dilemma. Barnett1 also says that values, being the
foundation of a person’s ethical belief, enables a person
to hold his ground against such dilemmas. A very
optimistic point of view on ethics can be read from
the study of Singh,13 where he identified the different
values of an ethical leader. He identified the top 4 values
as honesty, self-discipline, hard work, and concern for
people, as well as family, socialization and teachers as
the top 3 sources of the said values.
However, not all views about ethics can be considered
as optimistic. Shakib12 asserts that righteousness does
not equate to being ethical. He further states that
ethics only becomes meaningful in the social and public
domain, but very seldom on a personal domain, which
is why any individual is capable of self-deceit.
At the academic level, some researches even called out
other empirical studies regarding ethics and how they
actually contributed to the formation of ethical climates
within organizations.8
Educational Institutions are not exempted from this
kind of scrutiny. Much expectations are raised within
schools, since idealism commonly implied. In schools
teaching ICT, students are more prone to committing
ethical breaches because of the tempting nature of the
Ethics are said to be the principles that a member of an
organization, big or small, uphold. Each member has a
different set of ethical beliefs shaped by the different
experiences at different stages of his/her life. The
combination of the different beliefs within a community
is known as the Organizational Ethical Climate.
For small organization, such as the College of
Computer studies at the University of Nueva Caceres
(Naga City, Philippines), there exists an organizational
ethical climate that most, if not all of the members
may not be aware of. This study intended to uncover
the elements and dimensions that makeup this
organizational climate by asking relevant questions,
based on the well-accepted measure of ethical climate
by Victor and Cullens.
The study revealed that despite different points of
view about their respective values, the organization, as a
whole, is generally driven by benevolence and principle,
more than egoism. It also shows that members of the
organization are willing to compromise and put others
first in favor of the department’s success.
1
Introduction
An organization, regardless of its size, will have always
establish within it, a culture that governs its day-to-day
existence. Within that culture lies the principles upheld
by members of the organization. These principles are
the ethics that governs each member’s morality. The
totality of the atmosphere where these ethics coexist
or clash within the organization is what we call as the
Organizational Ethical Climate.
Ethics used to be an underrated field of study,
mostly because whatever breakthroughs and new
concepts this field have are published in academic
journals, which makes it generally out of reach for the
common individual.8 Recent events, however, brought
1
2.1
internet. IT educators, generally considered as IT
professionals themselves,10 carry the burden of teaching
students to look at their situations from an ethical
perspective, as such knowledge will carry over their
actual professional lives.5
The College of Computer Studies is a relatively
young academic department in the University of Nueva
Caceres, the oldest university in Bicol Region. UNC
CCS is currently composed of 12 faculty members,
where 10 are IT subject instructors. The UNC CCS
had been in existence since 2001.
This study aims to answer the question of what
organizational ethical climate does the UNC CCS have,
in the eyes of its faculty members.
2
Teaching is considered as a noble profession, and as
such, is idealism personified. As such most teachers are
more benevolent, caring more about the beneficiaries,
rather than himself. Anchored in this common belief,
the researcher assumes that most responses will be
skewed towards benevolence, with some extending
further to principle.
Some responses on locus of
analysis may center on the individual, but it is more
likely that most will be centered on Local, while
another few, may end up centering on the community.
On the other hand, office staff are generally concerned
with doing their specific duties, along with following
rules and regulations. For faculty respondents who are
also employed as an office staff, the likely response might
skew towards benevolence and principle, and might
center on their respective immediate communities,
because of their service orientation.
Those with
managerial experience might even prefer centering on
the community as a whole because of their background
and tendency to look at the bigger picture.
Theoretical Background
This study sits on the theory of Victor and Cullen’s3
measure of ethical climate.
According to them,
the ethical climates can be described using a
two-dimensional matrix.
The first dimension represents the ethical criterion,
which maps the three major classes of ethical theory:
Egoism (E), which pertains to one’s desire to maximize
self-interest; benevolence (B), which pertains to
one’s desire to maximize common interest between
another person or group of persons; and principle
(P), which is pertains to a person’s compulsion to
follow a set of personal values. The second dimension
refers to the locus of analysis, which points to the
referent for one’s action. The three loci are self or
individual (I), which refer to the person in focus; local,
which is the individual’s immediate community(L),
and cosmopolitan or the environment outside of the
person’s locality (C). The three by three matrix formed
by the loci of analysis against the three major classes
of ethical theory form nine theoretical dimensions (TD)
of ethical climate. The said matrix is clearly illustrated
at Table 1.8
3
Locus of Analysis
I
L
C
E
Self-Interest
(EI)
Company
Profit (EL)
Efficiency
(EC)
B
Friendship
(BI)
Team
Interest (BL)
Social
Responsibility
(BC)
P
Personal
Morality (PI)
Rules,
Standard
Operating
Procedures
(PL)
Laws,
Professional
Codes (PC)
Research Method
The faculty members of the UNC College of Computer
Studies, both part-time and full-time, were asked
to be the respondents of this study. A total of 9
faculty members were asked to answer a series of
questions about how they view the department and
their co-faculty members.
Questions range from
their personal observations on what they view as the
professional desire and wants of a faculty member as
well as their treatment of their peers. The questionnaire
was patterned after the well-established Ethical Climate
Questionnaire by Victor and Cullen. Questions were
focused more on the UNC CCS as a college department,
with the faculty members referred to as the ”people
involved”.
All questions were answerable by True, Somewhat
True, Somewhat False and False. The decision to add
two more responses was done to address the apparent
”uncertainty” that one person may feel in answering just
the absolute truth or falsity of the statement. Having
two more responses, where each tend to lean to one side
allows for a more accurate and realistic response. Each
response corresponds to a score, with ”True” having a
value of 4, ”Somewhat True” with 3 to 3.99, ”Somewhat
False” with 2 to 2.99 and ”False”, with a value of 1 to
1.99.
Questions were then clustered according to their
theoretical dimension, with respect to the ethical
climate matrix seen in Table 1. The average of the
responses of each individual respondent were tallied,
based on the classification. Finally, all the responses
are averaged for each theoretical dimension to identify
the overall response.
Table 1: Victor’s and Cullen’s Ethical Climate Matrix
Ethical
Criteria
Hypothesis
The application of the said table in this study is
further explained at the Research Method section of this
paper.
2
Table 2 shows the list of the questions used in the
survey.
Table 3 shows the theoretical dimensions and the
number of questions for each.
Table 2: Ethical Climate Questions Table
Table 3: Questions per Theoretical Dimension
TD
EI
EC
EI
EL
PC
PL
EL
PI
EI
PL
PC
PC
PC
BI
PL
EC
PC
EC
BL
FI
EL
PC
EC
BC
Ethical Climate Question
In the UNC CCS, people are mostly out for
themselves.
The major responsibility for a CCS Faculty Member
is to consider efficiency first.
The CCS Faculty are expected to follow their own
personal and moral beliefs.
The CCS Faculty are expected to do anything to
push forward / further the department’s interest.
There is no room for one’s own personal morals or
ethics at the UNC CCS
It is very important to strictly follow the
department’s rule and procedures.
Work is considered sub-standard only if it adversely
affects the UNC CCS as a department.
Each CCS Faculty decides for himself what is right
and wrong.
At the UNC CCS, each faculty protect his/her own
interest above other considerations.
The most important concern is the good of all the
people within the CCS.
The first consideration is whether any decision
violates the UNC CCS policy and guidelines.
CCS Faculty members are expected to comply with
the law and professional standards over and above
other considerations.
All CCS Faculty members are expected to stick by
company rules and procedures.
In the CCS, our major concern is always what is best
for the other person.
CCS Faculty members are concerned with the
department’s interest.
Successful CCS Faculty members go by the book.
In the CCS, The most efficient way is always the
right way.
In the CCS, faculty members are expected to strictly
follow legal or professional standards.
Our major consideration is what is best for every
CCS Faculty member.
In the CCS, every faculty member is guided by
his/her own personal ethics.
A successful CCS Faculty Member strictly obey the
department policy.
In the CCS, the law or ethical code of the teaching
profession is the major consideration.
In the CCS, everyone is expected to work efficiently,
above everything else.
In the CCS, everyone is expected to do what is right
for our customers (students) and the public.
Theoretical Dimension
4
Company Profit (EL)
3
Efficiency (EC)
4
Friendship (BI)
1
Team Interest (BL)
1
Social Responsibility (BC)
1
Personal Morality (PI)
1
Rules, SOP’s (PL)
3
Laws, Professional Codes (PC)
6
TOTAL No. of Questions
24
Table 4 shows the average responses of each
respondents among the questions from the different
theoretical dimensions. The formula used was
ARtd = (
n
X
R)/n
n=1
where: ARtd is the average response per theoretical
dimension, R is the response and n is the number of
response per theoretical dimension.
Table 4: Average Response by Theoretical Dimension
per respondent
R#
EI
EL
EC
BI
BL
BC
PI
PL
PC
R1
3
4
3
3
4
4
4
4
3
R2
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
3
R3
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
4
3
R4
3
3
3
3
4
4
3
3
3
R5
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
3
3
R6
3
3
3
2
3
4
3
3
3
R7
2
3
2
3
2
3
4
3
2
R8
3
2
3
2
4
4
3
3
2
R9
2
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
3
The results indicate that the respondents are not
too different in their opinions about what ethical
climate dimensions are observable within the UNC
CCS. Two respondents (9 and 2) agree on their
observation that Friendship(BI), Team Interest(BL),
Social Responsibility(BC), Personal Morality (PI) and
Rules and SOP’s (PL) are the most observable ethical
climate dimensions within the UNC CCS. This means
that the respondents value benevolence above egoism,
while also focusing on self, and immediate community
most of the time.
The questionnaire was patterned after the
well-established Ethical Climate Questionnaire by
Victor and Cullen. Questions were focused more on the
UNC CCS as a college department, with the faculty
members referred to as the ”people involved”.
4
Count
Self-Interest (EI)
Results and Discussions
There were 24 questions, categorized into the different
theoretical dimensions that were used in this study.
3
On the other hand, Self-Interest (EI) got the most
number of ”Somewhat false” vote, which indicates that
while most respondents believe that self-interest is the
least of the faculty respondents’ priority, there are still
doubts as to whether all everyone practices their belief
of not putting self-interest ahead.
The average response rating for all respondents gives
the sense of what the whole department generally feels
about which ethical climate dimension is mostly felt and
observed at the UNC CCS. Table 5 shows the said data.
It is highly recommended that this study be done
again, this time with more diverse questions that will
challenge the beliefs of the respondents.
Also, this study can be expanded to include other
departments as well, including non-teaching staff, to
ensure a diverse group of respondents. Questions can
be modified to avoid being instruction-related.
Finally, the result of a university-wide study may
be used to identify what types of support activities
may help enforce and enhance the values within the
employees that the university hopes to cultivate, paving
the way for the creation of suitable Code of Ethics for
the university that may serve its rightful purpose in the
years to come.
Table 5: Average Response by Theoretical Dimension
Theoretical Dimensions
Ave.
Interpretation
Self-Interest (EI)
3.15
Somewhat True
Company Profit (EL)
3.07
Somewhat True
Efficiency (EC)
3.28
Somewhat True
Friendship (BI)
2.80
Somewhat False
Team Interest (BL)
3.30
Somewhat True
Social Responsibility (BC)
3.50
Somewhat True
Personal Morality (PI)
3.30
Somewhat True
Rules, SOP’s (PL)
3.57
Somewhat True
Laws, Professional Codes (PC)
3.35
Somewhat True
References
The results indicate that among the 9 ethical climate
dimensions, the three most observable are Rules and
SOP’s (PL), Social Responsibility (BC), and Laws
and Professional Codes. This indicate that within
the organization, Professionalism, Responsibility and
Procedures are generally the drivers of ethical choices.
Conversely, the data also indicate that Friendship
(BI), Company Profit (EL) and Self-Interest are the
three ethical climate dimensions that are least likely
to be considered when making ethical decisions and
formulating values within the organization.
5
R. Barnett. ”Ethics in the Workplace: It Begins with
Character”. Women In Business. 2003. 55(2) pp. 34
2
S.S. Bhadauria, V. Sharma. ”Empirical Analysis of
Ethical Issues in the Era of Future of Information
Technology”. 2nd International Conference on
Software Technology and Engineering. 2010. pp.
V2-31-V2-35
3
J. Cullen, B. Victor and J. Bronson. ”The Ethical
Climate Questionnaire:
An Assessment of its
Development Validity”. Pyschological Reports. 1993
4
R. Haines and L. Leonard. ”Influences of Different
Ethical Issues on Ethical Decision-Making in an
IT Context.” Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences. 2004
5
D. Larson and K. Miller. ”Ethics in the IT Classroom:
Why and how?”. Journal of Information Ethics. 2009.
18(2) pp. 38-49
6
M. Masrom and Z. Ismail, ”Computer security
and computer ethics awareness: A component of
management information system.” Information
Technology, 2008. ITSim 2008. International
Symposium on.. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 2008. pp.
1-7.
7
J.L. May, A. Mead, and J.K. Ellington. ”Measuring
Team Ethical Climate: Development of the TECS”.
IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science,
Technology and Engineering. 2014. pp. 1-4
8
D. Mayer, M. Kuenzi and R. Greenbaum. ”Making
Ethical Climate a Mainstream Management Topic:
A review, critique, and prescription for the
Empirical Research on Ethical Climate” Pyschological
Perspectives on Ethical Behavior and Decision
Making. 2009. pp. 181 - 213.
Conclusion
Although considered as a small academic department,
the result of this study indicate that despite generally
divergent points of view about what values should
drive the department, the harmony (and occasional
cacophony) between the UNC CCS Faculty is generally
driven by benevolence and principle, more than egoism.
It also shows that while they values themselves, they
are willing to compromise and put others first in order
for the organization to function as it needs to be.
6
1
Recommendations
As honest as the responses were, the intimacy between
the members of such a small group might have
contributed to the similarity of answers. The researcher
does not discount the possibility that answers may
have been similar because of the seemingly-similar
inclinations and personal beliefs of the respondents.
4
9
N. Moratalla. ”Graft and Corruption: The Philippine
Experience” 113th International Training Course,
Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of
Crime and the Treatment of Offenders. 2009. pp. 501
- 523.
10
D. Payne and B. Landry. ”Similarites in Business
and IT Professional Ethics: The Need for and
Development of A Comprehensive Code of Ethics”.
Springer Journal of Business Ethics. 2005. 35(1) pp.
73-85
11
A. Shacklock, M. Manning and L. Hort. ”Dimensions
and Types of Ethical Climate within Public Sector
Human Resource Management.”. Journal of New
Business Ideas and Trends. 2011. 9(1) pp. 51-66
12
J. Shakib and D. Layton. ”Interaction between Ethics
and Technology”. IEEE International Symposium on
Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering. 2014
13
A. Singh and N. Rathore, ”’The organization is what
the leader is’: An ethical leadership framework for
universities and research organizations.” Ethics in
Science, Technology and Engineering, 2014 IEEE
International Symposium on. Chicago, IL. 2014. pp.
1-6.
14
D.L. Sturges. ”Overcoming the Ethical Dillema:
Communication Decisions in the Ethic Ecosystem”.
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication.
1992. 35(1)
15
Z. Rezzae, R. Elmore, and J. Szendi. ”Ethical
Behavior in Higher Educational Institutions: The role
of the Code of Conduct”. Journal of Business Ethics.
2001. 30 pp. 171-183
16
S Couch and S. Dodd. ”Doing the Right Thing:
Ethical Issues in Higher Education”. Journal of
Family and Consumer Sciences. 2005. 97(3) pp. 20-26
5