Advertisement

Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 79, Issue 1–2, pp 29–42 | Cite as

Moral Choice and the Concept of Motivational Typologies: An Extended Stakeholder Perspective in a Western Context

  • Gordon F. Woodbine
Article
  • 116 Downloads

Abstract

Accountants and auditors are often faced with ethical dilemmas, which they have to process using resources available to them. Although they may be sensitive to the ethicality of the issues and have the cognitive ability to work through a judgment process, the final action they take may be dependent on a number of motivational factors, endogenous to the issue. Agency issues are a continuing area of concern providing accountants with an ability to shirk their responsibilities and hide confidential information, which may affect their career prospects if disclosed. This ongoing study explores these notions within a stakeholder context and uses a post test only field experiment to gain evidence to support the existence of an agency problem and that membership to one of a number of motivational typologies directly affects the way accountants respond to ethical issues. This association causes them to adopt informational heuristics that may result in less than optimal decisions. This study identified two specific endogenous constructs, namely social consensus and venal intent that discriminate between motivational types and which possibly provide psychological underpinnings explaining membership orientation.

Keywords

agency problem stakeholder theory motivational typologies accountants and auditors 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arrow K. J. 1985 Informational Structure of the Firm. American Economic Review 75(2):303–307Google Scholar
  2. Blasi A. 1980 Bridging Moral Cognition and Moral Action: A Review of the Literature. Psychological Bulletin 88:1–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowie N. E., Freeman R. E. (eds) 1992 Ethics and Agency Theory: An Introduction. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Caldwell C., Karri R. 2005 Organizational Governance and Ethical Systems: A Covenantal Approach to Building Trust. Journal of Business Ethics 58:248–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chi, S. K.: 1989, ‹Ethics and Agency Theory’, Unpublished doctoral research paper, Department of Accounting, Washington University, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  6. De Cremer D., Van Vugt M. 1999 Social Identification Effects in Social Dilemmas: A Transformation of Motives. European Journal of Social Psychology 29:871–893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dellaportas, S., K. Gibson, R. Alagiah, M. Hutchinson, P. Leung and D. Van Homrigh: 2005, Ethics, Governance and Accountability: A Professional Perspective (John Wiley & Sons, Australia Ltd.)Google Scholar
  8. Eisenhardt K. M. 1989 Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review. Academy of Management Review 14(1):57–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Forsyth D. R., Berger R. 1979 The Effects of Ethical Ideology on Moral Behaviour. Virginia Commonwealth University, RichmondGoogle Scholar
  10. Fritzsche, D. J.: 1997, Business Ethics: A Global and Managerial Perspective (McGraw Hill Companies Inc.)Google Scholar
  11. Hair J. F., Anderson R. E., Tatham R. L., Black W. C. 1995 Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings. 4th edn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice HallGoogle Scholar
  12. Harrell, A. and P. Harrison: 1994, ‹An Incentive to Shirk, Privately Held Information, and Managers' Project Evaluation Decisions’, Accounting Organizations and Society, 19(7): 569–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hegarty W. H., Sims H. P. Jr. 1978 Some Determinants of Unethical Decision Behaviour: An Experiment. Human Relations 43(7):451–457Google Scholar
  14. Hunt S. D., Vitell S. 1986 A General Theory of Marketing Ethics. Journal of Macromarketing 6(1):5–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jones T. M. 1991 Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model. Academy of Management Review 16:366–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kohlberg L. 1969 Stages and Sequences: The Cognitive Development Approach to Socialization. In: D. A. Goslin (eds) Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research. Chicago, Rand McNallyGoogle Scholar
  17. Kohlberg L. 1980 The Meaning and Measurement of Moral Development. Worcester, Mass., Clark University PressGoogle Scholar
  18. Kurtines W. M., Gewirtz J. L.(eds) 1984 Morality, Moral Behavior, and Moral Development. New York, Wiley Interscience PublicationGoogle Scholar
  19. Rest J. R. 1983 The Major Components of Morality. In: W. M. Kurtines J. L. Gewirtz (eds) Morality, Moral Behavior and Moral Development. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Rest J. R. 1986 Moral Development: Advances in Research and Theory. Praeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Rest J. R. 1994 Background: Theory and Research. In: Rest J. R., D. Narvaez (eds) Moral Development in the Professions. New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, PublishersGoogle Scholar
  22. Rokeach M. 1973 The Nature of Human Values. New York, Free PressGoogle Scholar
  23. Ross S. A. 1973 The Economic Theory of Agency: The Principal’s Problem. American Economic Review 63:134–139Google Scholar
  24. Rutledge, R. W. and K. E. Karim: 1999, ‹The Influence of Self-interest and Ethical Consideration on Managers' Evaluation Judgments’, Accounting Organizations and Society (24), 173–184Google Scholar
  25. Shankman N. A. 1999 Reframing the Debate between Agency and Stakeholder Theories of the Firm. Journal of Business Ethics 19:319–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sharma A. 1997 Professional as Agent: Knowledge Asymmetry in Agency Exchange. The Academy of Management Review 22(3):758–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Simon H. A. 1992 Economics, Bounded Rationality and the Cognitive Revolution. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, Hants, U.KGoogle Scholar
  28. Singer M., Mitchell S., Turner J. 1998 Consideration of Moral Intensity in Ethicality Judgements: Its Relationship with Whistle-Blowing and Need-for-Cognition. Journal of Business Ethics 17(5):527–541Google Scholar
  29. Trevino L. 1986 Ethical Decision Making in Organizations: A Person-Situation Interactionist Model. Academy of Management Review 11(3):601–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Woodbine G. F. 2004a Moral Choice within the Financial Sector of the Shenzhen Economic Zone, People’s Republic of China. Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies (EJBO) 9(1):2004Google Scholar
  31. Woodbine, G. F.: 2004b, ‹Moral Choice and the Declining Influence of Traditional Value Orientations within the Financial Sector of a Rapidly Developing Region of the People’s Republic Of China’, Journal of Business Ethics 55(1), 43–60Google Scholar
  32. Woodbine G. F., Taylor D. 2006 Moral Choice in an Agency Framework: The Search for a Set of Motivational Typologies. Journal of Business Ethics 63(3):261–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of AccountingCurtin University of Technology PerthPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations