Running head: WEEK FOUR CASE STUDY
Week Four Case Study
Jennifer A. Bylan
Global Ethics in the Marketplace
Southwestern College Professional Studies
Dr. Roger Fuller
January 29, 2012
1
WEEK FOUR CASE STUDY
2
Week Four Case Study
Crittenden, Hanna, & Peterson (2009) measured the degree to which cultural corruption
affects the moral compass of business students. The underlying hypothesis of the study
contended that students raised in measurably greater corrupt countries would be more likely to
approve of unethical behaviors than those of their less corrupt counterparts (Crittenden, et al.,
2009). Business students from a wide range of Eastern and Western countries were asked
questions designed to measure their ethical sensitivity in four areas: necessity, belief, tolerance
for personal gain, and tolerance for corporate gain (Crittenden, et al., 2009). Measurements of
the students’ native country Corrupt Perception Index (CPI) were used as the baseline for the
degree of cultural corruption within that country (Crittenden, et al., 2009). Combing all results
allowed for the distinction of the students into four identifiable ethical perception clusters: less
principled, ambivalent, subjective, and more principled (Crittenden, et al., 2009).
Ethical Sensitivity
Crittenden, et al. (2009) asked business students from 36 countries, 6,226 students in all,
questions intended to gauge their ethical sensitivity. Necessity for unethical acts was one
measure identified as a dimension of ethical sensitivity. Crittenden, et al. (2009) defined
necessity as “The need…to compromise one’s ethics is likely a function of the pressure to meet
certain objectives” (p. 2). Second, students were asked as to the degree they believe (belief)
legality equals ethical. The foundation for this element contended fear of punishment, rather
than the belief behind the ethical principle, would be the driver behind the moral compass
(Crittenden, et al., 2009). Finally, students were asked questions to gauge tolerance toward
unethical acts committed for corporate or personal gain. The purpose was to identify if there is a
WEEK FOUR CASE STUDY
3
greater tolerance toward corrupt acts committed for corporate gain versus unethical acts
committed for personal gain (Crittenden, et al., 2009).
Results
The first conclusion derived from the study arose from the comparison of Eastern versus
Western cultures. It was deduced Eastern cultures tend to agree with the necessity of unethical
behavior, believe legal equals ethical, and have a high tolerance for both corporate and personal
gains obtained through unethical activities (Crittenden, et al., 2009). Western cultures, on the
other hand, were found to have a difficult time believing there is need for unethical acts
(Crittenden, et al., 2009).
Secondly, Crittenden, et al. (2009) segmented the students into definable clusters based
upon their responses. The first cluster, the less principled, were the most likely to agree with the
need for unethical actions and are more likely to compromise their ethics (Crittenden, et al.,
2009). The ambivalent cluster would not compromise their ethics, but would be more tolerant of
those committing such acts (Crittenden, et al., 2009). The subjective cluster recognized a need
for ethical compromise, but did not think it is the right thing to do. This cluster would be the
harshest in judgment against those committing unethical acts (Crittenden, et al., 2009). Finally,
the more principled were the most ethically sensitive, especially in regard to necessity and
tolerance (Crittenden, et al., 2009). The study concluded that there is a relationship between the
less principled and the culture in which they were raised.
Conclusion
Crittenden, et al. (2009) drew a correlation between cultural corruption practices and the
ethical attitudes of business students.
If corruption breads corruption, students in the lower
ethical cultures will continue utilizing unethical practices (Crittenden, et al., 2009).
One by-
WEEK FOUR CASE STUDY
product of such actions includes wasted entrepreneurial talent of students. “Corruption leads to
squandered and misdirected entrepreneurial talent because individuals are drawn to socially
unproductive avenues for advancements afforded by corrupt environments” (Doh, et al, 2003, p.
118).
4
WEEK FOUR CASE STUDY
5
References
Crittenden, V. L., Hanna, R. C., & Peterson, R. A. (2009). Business students’ attitudes toward
unethical behavior: A multi-country comparison. Marketing Letters, 20(1), 1-14.
Doh, J. P., Rodriguez, P., Uhlenbruck, K., Collins, J., & Eden, L. (2003). Coping with corruption
in foreign markets. Academy Of Management Executive, 17(3), 114-127.
doi:10.5465/AME.2003.10954775