The moral minority: impact of gender, education, work experience and age on moral development in business students.

Steele, Nathan L. ; Branson, Leonard ; Martin, Rachel C. 等

INTRODUCTION

Even preceding the current economic tumult caused in part by unethical decision making by large corporations, the state of corporate ethics was much in question. The highly publicized collapse of such companies as Enron and WorldCom, due to the unethical actions of a few executives, has generated ripples throughout the economy and the public's perception of business ethics in practice and in the educational arena. Boddy (2010) claims that corporate psychopaths are more commonly found at higher levels of organizations. Upper level executives and managers at the heart of many of these debacles have possessed elite credentials from top rated business schools. Jeffrey Skilling, the infamous former CEO of Enron, received his MBA from Harvard Business School (Schwartz, 2002). Andrew Fastow, the former CFO of Enron, graduated from the highly regarded Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern (Barboza & Schwartz, 2002). Clifford Baxter, who left Enron immediately prior to its collapse, received his MBA from NYU (Jennings, 2004). Scott Sullivan, named CFO of the Year by CFO Magazine in 1998 for his work at WorldCom, received his MBA from Oswego State (Yang & Grow, 2002). In response to such incidences, there has been greater public outcry for and scrutiny of the inclusion of ethical education in business curricula (Desplaces, Melcher, Beauvais, & Bosco, 2007; Lopez, Rechner, & Olson-Buchanan, 2005; Pettijohn, Pettijohn, & Taylor, 2008). In fact, the largest accrediting body for business schools, the Association for the Advancement of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), has taken great care to specify that not only should the schools they accredit maintain ethical codes for their students, administrators, and faculty (AACSB, 2010), but that ethical understanding and reasoning are part of the fundamental knowledge base expected for students of business and management. The apparent position of the public and educators in general is that not enough has been done to educate business practitioners in both how and why to make ethical decisions. This position assumes that business education, among other things, can enhance the ethics of these individuals. As indicated in Frank Ofobike and Gradisher (2010), the task of teaching ethics in a way that will result in ethical conduct is a challenge for educators.

Ethics itself is the branch of philosophy that encompasses "the study of moral judgments--value judgments about what is virtuous or base, just or unjust, morally right or wrong, morally good or bad or evil, morally proper or improper" (Moore & Bruder, 2002, p. 210). Business ethics in particular has also been specified in terms of its relation to the judgment of right and wrong. It has been defined within the literature as "a specialized study of right and wrong. It concentrates on how moral standards apply particularly to business policies, institutions, and behavior" (Velasquez, 2006, p. 16) and alternately as involving "any formal (i.e., identifiable) activity taking place among individuals, organizations, or other entities operating within or related to a business context that involves the explicit interaction and/or application of ethical (i.e., moral) standards" (Schwartz & Weber, 2006, p. 386). From these definitions, we may postulate that what is assumed to be affected by ethics education in particular is the moral reasoning ability of students.

This study investigates individual differences within and, to a degree, the success of business education in cultivating the moral development of business students. By examining the differential levels of moral reasoning possessed by undergraduate and graduate students within business and accounting fields of study, we will be able to better understand the differences that lead to greater and lesser levels of moral reasoning capacity and development, as well as to identify indirectly whether or not progressively more educated business students (MBAs) are more fully developed than their less educated business student counterparts (undergraduates).

LITERATURE REVIEW

Moral Reasoning

From the original work of Piaget (1932), moral reasoning has been considered a developmental issue, one that is not inborn in its full capacity, but rather cultivated through education and exposure to others. These early developmental theories of moral reasoning were further fleshed out in the work of Kohlberg (1971), who proposed that humans go through six basic stages of moral reasoning development, contained in three levels--pre-conventional, conventional, and post-conventional--linearly and progressively (i.e., never regressing after having attained higher levels of moral reasoning).

In Kohlberg's theory, the first level of moral reasoning development--preconventional--is primarily contained in the early childhood experiences of an individual and generally concluded with elementary school (Dawson, 2003). Development during this level is generally of the ilk of operant conditioning, through punishment and reward of immoral and moral acts respectively and thusly solicited through these positive and negative conditioned responses. The second level of moral reasoning development--conventional--can carry on throughout the course of adult life. In the first of the two stages of this level, the third overall, the individual begins to recognize what is moral by the abstract standards adhered to by others around them, but only adheres themselves out of pressure to conform (Dawson, 2003). It is in the transition to the second of the two conventional stages--the fourth stage overall--that the individual gains a sense of the larger societal implications and their actions begin to be guided by this larger moral compass of what is truly "ethical" in the preservation of that larger societal structure (Dawson, 2003). The remaining level of development--the post-conventional--is achieved by very few, and pertains to the development of universal conceptions of what is moral by principals of fairness rather than the immediate impacts on society and others (Dawson, 2003).

Measurement of Moral Reasoning

Much work has been conducted to divine the differences between individuals exhibiting high and low levels of moral reasoning. To wit, several measures have been constructed over the years. Piaget's original cognitive development interview method was modified by Kohlberg to the Moral Judgment Interview (MJI), wherein the interviewee is presented with several moral dilemmas they respond to. The MJI was so intricate and exhaustive in both its conduct and scoring that few if any practitioners utilize it today (Gibbs, Basinger, & Grime, 2003). In order to facilitate the assessment of larger samples of moral reasoning development, Rest (1990) developed the Defining Issues Test (DIT) and its successor the Defining Issues Test 2 (DIT2). These tests were seen as great improvements in the objective assessment of moral reasoning, using moral dilemmas followed by statements that were rank ordered in importance and relevance to the dilemma by responders. One of the latest psychometric tools developed for assessing moral reasoning, and the one used in the present research, is the Moral Judgment Test (MJT) developed by Lind. Lind (2010a; 2010b) developed this measure in order to assess both the competency aspect of morality (the underlying cognitive structure) as well as the attitudinal component (the emotional aspect of how one responds to moral dilemmas).

Individual Differences and Moral Reasoning

Findings have been mixed in assessing the relationship of individual differences with the development of moral reasoning. Some studies have found differences between the genders, such that females present higher levels of moral reasoning (Rest et al., 1999). Still others have suggested that these differences are hardly noteworthy as they account for far less of the effect on moral reasoning than education. For example, one investigation found that education had 250 times greater effect on moral reasoning development than gender possessed (Rest et al., 1999).

Education does seem to be a prominent factor in the development of moral reasoning. Rest and Thoma conducted a longitudinal study, demonstrating a positive linear relationship between education and moral development (Bouhmama, 2001). Participants tracked for six years post secondary education developed significant differences between those who pursued college and those who did not. The moral reasoning of those who attended college continued to increase while those who did not attend college remained virtually the same (King & Mayhew, 2002). Within the broader topic of education, several studies have been conducted to investigate the role of academic major on moral reasoning development. Of these, some have found that academic major does predict differences in the moral reasoning level of students (Bay & Greenberg, 2001; Rest, 1990). Others have found less clear relationships or a lack thereof with academic major Rest, 1990).

Although there has been little empirical study of the relationship between work experience and moral reasoning development, some findings indicate a positive relationship between the two. For example, Dawson (1997) found ethical reasoning differences between men and women in sales such that: 1) females showed higher levels of moral reasoning development than their male counterparts at all age and experience levels, 2) moral reasoning increased for both sexes as age and work experience increased, and 3) differences between males and females declined as age and experience increased. Other studies also indicate positive relationships between moral reasoning and work experience as well as the declination in gender differences as work experience increases (Franke, Crown, & Spake, 1997; Windsor & Cappel, 1999). Person's (2009) research concluded that female gender, accounting major, full-time work experience and workplace ethics training have a positive influence on students ethicality.

While the concept of moral reasoning development is constructed in such a way as to implicitly suggest that it increases with age, the findings have not been unanimous in this regard. In fact one of the more common findings is a declination of moral reasoning with age (e.g., Rest, Davison, & Robbins, 1978). Still others have shown positive relationships between moral reasoning development and age (e.g., Gibbs & Widaman, 1982; Nisan & Kohlberg, 1982; Rest, 1983; Trevino, 1992). At present, it simply is not known if age is a reliable predictor of moral reasoning development.

In summary, the findings on moral reasoning development indicate that gender may have a role that is moderated by work experience, that education seems to positively influence it, and that age is mixed as a predictor, but likely positive in its relationship up to a certain point of development after which declination begins.

HYPOTHESES OF THIS STUDY

In order to investigate the moral reasoning development of participants, the MJT was employed as a measure of moral competence in particular. The test itself consists of two dilemmas with participants rating their initial feelings about each dilemma followed by six positive arguments and six negative arguments relevant to each dilemma which participants are then asked to rank using a scale of "I strongly reject" (-4) to "I strongly accept" (+4). For example, the "Worker's Dilemma" is as follows:

   Due to some seemingly unfounded dismissals, some factory workers
   suspect the managers of eavesdropping on their employees through an
   intercom and using this information against them. The managers
   officially and emphatically deny this accusation. The union
   declares that it will only take steps against the company when
   proof has been found that confirms these suspicions. Two workers
   then break into the administrative offices and take tape
   transcripts that prove the allegation of eavesdropping.

Having read this dilemma, participants are then asked, "Do you accept or reject the following arguments in favor of the two workers' behavior? Suppose someone argued they were right ..." after which a series of arguments follow--such as "because they didn't cause much damage to the company," "because due to the company's disregard for the law, the means used by the two workers were permissible to restore law and order," "because most of the workers would approve of their deed and many of them would be happy about it," etc.--and participants are required to respond whether they accept or reject each of these arguments on the -4 to +4 scale.

Scoring the MJT produces two scores: the C-score, which represents the participant's moral judgment competence, and a score that reflects which of the six stages of moral reasoning in Kohlberg's moral development theory best represents the participant's current state of development (Lind, 2010a; 2010b).

The authors of this study used a broad cross sectional sample that included undergraduates as well as graduate students with varying levels of professional experience and academic majors to test our hypotheses. Because the majority of research on gender has found no significant effect of gender on moral reasoning development (Rest et al., 1999), we anticipate no differences between men and women in moral competence scores:

[H.sub.0]1: There will be no difference in the competency scores of female and male participants.

Because education has been found in the main to have a positive impact on moral reasoning development between populations that did and did not attend college, we assume the moral reasoning development of graduate students should be significantly higher than the development of undergraduate students:

[H.sub.a]2: Graduate student participants will have significantly higher moral competence scores than do undergraduate participants.

Although the results of studies on academic major have been mixed, it has been found that students who pursue accounting as a major score significantly higher in moral reasoning as measure by the DIT than do students whose majors are business administration or liberal arts (Bay & Greenberg, 2001). As a result, we hypothesize that accounting majors will have higher levels of moral development than other majors:

[H.sub.a]3: Participants majoring in accounting will have significantly higher moral competence scores than participants who are majoring in other disciplines.

The finding that accounting majors had higher levels of moral reasoning than did other majors has been in part attributed to the more rigorous ethical training accounting majors receive as part of their normal curriculum (Branson, Edbrooke-Richardson, & Moe, 2007). As an extension of our hypothesis on the effect of majoring in accounting versus other fields, we also postulate that participants working in the field of accounting will have higher levels of moral development than those working in other fields, due to the persistent exposure to ethical requirements and considerations.

[H.sub.a]4: Participants working in the field of accounting will have significantly higher moral competence scores than those working in other fields.

Lastly, results are mixed regarding the influence of age on moral reasoning development. It appears that the declination of moral reasoning occurs later in life. Consequently, we assume there will be no effect of age on moral reasoning development within our sample whose age-while not homogenous--is not representative of the broader spectrum of ages considered in Kohlberg's stages and other work on the topic.

[H.sub.0]5: Age will not be a significant predictor of the moral competence scores of participants.

METHODOLOGY

Sample and Data Collection

One hundred twenty four participants (62 female, 62 male) at a small Midwestern university were administered both the MJT as well as a demographic questionnaire. Participants were voluntary, and selected from senior level accounting and business administration courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels, in which the measures were administered. Participants were instructed on and asked to complete the MJT, and then answer demographic questions on a separate measure giving their age in number of years, indicating their level of education as undergraduate junior, undergraduate senior, or graduate student, identifying their academic major as accounting, business or other with space available to write in a response, and identifying their work experience and present field of work. The demographics of participants can be seen in more detail in Table 1, below.

RESULTS

The mean C-scores, with higher scores representing higher levels of moral competence, for participants are presented by category in Table 2 below, alongside the p scores for t-tests conducted between category means.

As can be seen in Table 2, the only categories where significant differences were found (beside a marginal result of p > .05 for Business versus "Other") were between Accounting majors and those students identified as "Other" majors. It should be noted that the nine participants in the "Other" category were double majors in accounting and business administration, and that this cell n was substantially smaller than the cell n for accounting majors (64) was substantially higher, potentially creating an illusory effect based on violation of the underlying assumptions of equivalent variance. Simple linear regression analysis found no significant ability of age to predict moral competence, and in fact, the relationship appeared to be marginally negative in posthoc correlational analysis (r = -0.12, ns).

LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY

While this study presents a strong insight into the moral reasoning development (or lack thereof) in students of a school of business and the influence of individual differences thereupon, and bolsters previous findings from the literature, it is mainly limited in two ways: the sample size, and the homogeneity of participants. Participants were not representative of a broad crosssection in age, work experience, level of education, college major, and geographic background due in part to their self-selection into this study as students within the same disciplines and region. The sample for this study was taken from one college within a single university in the Midwest. The conclusions do not generalize readily to the population of business decision makers, nor to the students of other schools of business. In addition, the cell sizes of categories under investigation were limited in some instances by subject-variables present in our sample (e.g., double-majors, work experience years, etc.), and so inferences drawn from the analysis must be made with an eye to this reduced statistical power, and quasi-experimental use of naturally occurring subject-variables as independent variables of study. Lastly, there is a limitation present in this study that is common to many studies of moral reasoning development: Age is problematic as a variable. Age is at some level inextricable from other variables that are typically of interest. It is unlikely that one can gain more education or work experience without having also gained more years of age. This confounding makes the influence of age on moral reasoning difficult--if not impossible--to statistically segregate.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

It is important that future research be undertaken to explain inconsistencies between prior findings. For example, this study found no significant differences between the genders in moral reasoning development. Prior studies have suggested a potential gender difference, or possible interaction between gender and education whereby the difference in the scores of the genders converge as level of education increases (Branson, Edbrooke-Richardson, & Moe, 2007). Future research may clarify these relationships. College major and type of work performed may or may not systematically impact moral reasoning development. The dynamics of college major and type of work need to be more fully researched by utilizing larger cross-sectional samples from larger pools of universities and programs, themselves from a greater diversity of regions.

CONCLUSION

The results of this investigation of moral reasoning development support our null hypotheses regarding the influence of age and gender on moral development with no significant differences found between the genders and no significant prediction of moral competence by age. This result is inconsistent with the Branson Edbrooke-Richardson and Moe (2007) study that concluded that gender does have an effect on moral reasoning, but its impact diminished with increasing levels of education.

Our hypothesis that level of education would significantly influence moral reasoning development was not only not supported, but the results--though nonsignificant--in fact point to a possible decline in moral competence from undergraduate students to graduate students. This is moderately disturbing, and conflicts with earlier findings that found that graduate students compared favorably in DIT scores with junior high and high school students (Rest, 1990). It is also inconsistent with the Branson, Edbrooke-Richardson and Moe (2007) study that found that level of education had more impact on moral reasoning development than gender, age, work experience, or academic major. Because major was not a component of prior analyses, this could be construed as a paucity of moral reasoning development in graduate accounting and business majors when compared with majors from other fields of graduate study--though further research will be needed to investigate this possibility. This would not be entirely out of line with prior findings that although accounting undergraduates outpace their liberal arts and business administration brethren in moral reasoning development, they also lagged significantly behind psychology major undergraduates (Bay & Greenburg, 2001).

The finding that accounting majors were significantly lower in moral competence than double majors in accounting and business administration is a suspect one due to the previously discussed qualities of categorical cell size. It is presumable that this difference is less likely due to some greater development on the part of double majors than it is to the substantially greater variability of the substantially larger accounting subsample versus the small subsample of double majors.

It is both heartening and disheartening to find that professionals working in the accounting fields did not differ significantly from those in other business fields and those in unrelated fields. While one might be tempted to weave a tale of no greater moral scrutiny on the part of accountants than the common man, it should be remembered that absence of evidence of difference is never a safe basis for such postulation.

The findings of the present study taken in total are congruent to the larger body of results suggesting little if any change occurs as a function of aging or pursuing study beyond the undergraduate level, regardless of business subdiscipline. This "non-result" should represent a red flag to educators and the public alike that not enough is being done to cultivate the moral reasoning development of students of business and accounting, especially between the undergraduate and graduate levels. If the moral reasoning development of students is left up to their own experiences and interpersonal encounters in the world, according to Kohlberg's (1971) theories, they will rarely develop beyond what their social and legal environment absolutely requires of them. In a financial and business world with few true preventive constraints on ethical decision making and reporting behaviors, this may be a harbinger of more Enron's and WorldCom's to come unless positive steps to enhance moral reasoning education are taken.

REFERENCES

AACSB (2010). Eligibility Procedures and Accreditation Standards for Business Accreditation. Retrieved March 13, 2010 from http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/AACSBSTANDARDS-2010-TRACKING.pdf

Barboza, D., & J. Schwartz (2002). "The Finance Wizard Behind Enron's Deals". The New York Times, February 6, A1, C9.

Bay, D. D., & Greenberg, R. R. (2001). The relationship of the DIT and behavior: A replication. Issues in Accounting Education, 16(3): 367-380.

Bouhmama, D. (2001). Relation of formal education to moral judgment development. The Journal of Psychology, 122(2): 155-158.

Boddy, C.R., Leaders without ethics in global business: Corporate psychopaths. Journal of Public Affairs, 10 (3): 121-138.

Branson, L, Edbrooke-Richardson, S., & Moe, B., (2007). Impact of gender, age, work experience, and education on moral development: Implications for business education. The Journal of Business and Behavior Sciences, 15(2): 24-41.

Dawson, L. M. (1997). Ethical differences between men and women in the sales profession. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 1143-1152.

Dawson, T. L. (2003). A stage is a stage is a stage: A direct comparison of two scoring systems. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 164(3): 335-364.

Desplaces, D. E., Melcher, D. E., Beauvais, L. L., & Bosco, S. M. (2007). The impact of business education on moral judgment competence: An empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(1): 73-87.

Franke, G. R., Crown, D. F., & Spake, D. F. (1997). Gender differences in ethical perceptions of business practices: A social role theory perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 52(6): 920-934.

Frank, G., Ofobike, E., & Gradisher, S. (2010). Teaching business ethics: A quandary for accounting educators. Journal of Education for Business, 85, 132-138.

Gibbs, J. C., Karen B., & Grime, R. (2003). Moral judgment maturity: From clinical to standard measures." Positive Psychological Assessment: A Handbook of Models and Measures, Eds. S. Lopez and C.R. Snyder. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Gibbs, J. C., & Widaman, K. F. (1982). "Social Intelligence: Measuring the Development of Socio-moral Reflection. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Jennings, M. M. (2004). Incorporating ethics and professionalism into accounting education and research: A discussion of the voids and advocacy for training in seminal works in business ethics. Issues in Accounting Education, 19(1): 7-26.

King, P. M., & Mayhew, M. J. (2002). Moral judgment development in higher education: Insights from the Defining Issues Test. Education, 31(3): 247-270.

Kohlberg, L. (1971). From Is to Ought: How to Commit the Naturalistic Fallacy and Get Away with It in the Study of Moral Development. New York: Academic Press.

Lind, G. (2010a). "What is the psychological and methodological background of the MJT?" The Moral Judgment Test Website. Retrieved March 13, 2010 from http://www.uni-konstanz.de/ag-moral/mut/mjt-engl.htm#theory

Lind, G. (2010b). The meaning and measurement of moral judgment competence revisited - A dual-aspect model. In: D. Fasko & W. Willis, eds., Contemporary Philosophical and Psychological Perspectives on Moral Development and Education. Cresskill. NJ: Hampton Press, pp. 185 - 220.

Lopez, Y., Rechner, P. L., & Olson-Buchanan, J. B. (2005). Empirical assessment of the influence of business education, culture, and demographic factors. Journal of Business Ethics, 60(4): 341-358.

Moore, B. N., & Bruder, K. (2002). Philosophy: The Power of Ideas 5e. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Nisan, M., & Kohlberg, L. (1982). Universality and variation in moral judgment: A longitudinal and cross-sectional study in Turkey. Child Development, 53(4): 865-876.

Pettijohn, C., Pettijohn, L., & Taylor, A. (2008). Salesperson perceptions of ethical behaviors: Their influence on job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(4): 547-557.

Piaget, J. (1932). The Moral Judgment of the Child. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co.

Persons, O. (2009) Using a corporate code of ethics to assess students' ethicality: Implications for business education. Journal of Education for Business. 84 (6): 357-366.

Rest, J. R. (1983). Morality. Eds. J. Flavell & E. Markman. Handbook of Child Psychology Volume III: Cognitive Development 4th Ed. NewYork: Wiley.

Rest, J. R. (1990). DIT Manual, 3rd Ed. Minnesota: Center for the Study of Ethical Development.

Rest, J. R., Davison, M. L., & Robbins, S. (1978). Age trends in judging moral issues: A review of cross-sectional, longitudinal, and sequential studies of the Defining Issues Test. Child Development, 49(2): 263-279.

Rest, J. R., Thoma, S. J., Narvaez, D., & Bebeau, M. J. (1999). Postconventional Moral Thinking: Neo-Kohlbergian Approach. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Schwartz, J. (2002). Darth Vader, Machiavelli, Skilling set intense pace. The New York Times, February 7, 2002, C1, C7.

Schwartz, M. S., & Weber, J. (2006). A business ethics national index (BENI): Measuring business ethics activity around the world. Business & Society, 45(3): 382-405.

Trevino, L. K. (1992). Moral reasoning and business ethics: Implications for research, education, and management. Journal of Business Ethics, 11, 445-459.

Velasquez, M. G. (2006). Business Ethics: Concepts and Cases 6e. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Windsor, J. C., & Cappel, J. J. (1999). A comparative study of moral reasoning. College Student Journal, 33, 281-287.

Yang, C., & Grow, B. (2002). "What Did Ebbers Know?" BusinessWeek, Retrieved March 13, 2010 from http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan2005/ nf20050114_5183_db016.htm

About the Authors:

Nathan Steele is Assistant Professor of Management at University of Illinois Springfield. His research interests are in the area of the impacts of social psychology on business practices.

Leonard Branson is Professor and Chair of Accountancy at the University of Illinois Springfield. His research interests are in areas related to behavioral accounting and curriculum development.

Rachel Martin is a master's graduate of University of Illinois at Springfield who is currently working and living in Israel. Her research interests focus on the importance of moral reasoning on business practices.

Nathan L. Steele

Leonard Branson

Rachel C. Martin

University of Illinois Springfield

Table 1
Participants Demographics

Variable          Category        n    Proportion
Age

                  20-26 years     67   54%
                  27-33 years     37   30%
                  34-40 years     8    6%
                  41-47 years     6    5%
                  48-54 years     5    4%
                  > 54 years      1    1%

Gender

                  Female          62   50%
                  Male            62   50%

Academic Major

                  Accounting      65   52%
                  Business        49   40%
                  Other           10   8%

Education Level

                  Undergraduate   47   38%
                  Graduate        77   62%

Job Type

                  Accounting      44   36%
                  Business        48   40%
                  Other           29   24%

Table 2
Moral Competence by Category

                           M               p

Gender

Female / Male              9.77 / 12.61    0.10

Academic Major

Accounting / Business      10.01 / 11.42   0.43
Accounting / Other         10.01 / 18.06   0.02
Business / Other           11.42 / 18.06   0.05

Education Level

Undergraduate / Graduate   12.48 / 10.36   0.23

Job Type

Accounting / Business      11.43 / 11.48   1.00
Accounting / Other         11.43 / 10.30   0.60
Business / Other           11.48 / 10.30   0.59