Analysis of a Journal on Ethical decision making

1. Presented by
Syed Rashedul Hossen, ID: 6320131003
September 29, 2021
A Model of Ethical Decision Making: The Integration of
Process and Content
by
Roselie McDevitt, Catherine Giapponi and Cheryl Tromley

2. Abstract
• The authors developed a model of ethical decision making that integrates the
decision-making process and the content variables considered by individuals facing
ethical dilemmas.
• The process described in the model is drawn from Janis and Mann’s, Decision
Making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict Choice and Commitment work
describing the decision process in an environment of conflict, choice and
commitment.
• The model is enhanced by the inclusion of content variables derived from the ethics
literature.
• The resulting integrated model aids in understanding the complexity of the decision
process used by individuals facing ethical dilemmas and suggests variable
interactions that could be field-tested.
• A better understanding of the process will help managers develop policies that
enhance the likelihood of ethical behavior in their organizations.

3. Introduction Cont’d
• While it is important to understand what influences the decisions of
individuals, it is equallyimportant to understand how they derive solutions to
their dilemmas.
• A great deal of research focuses onthe content variables and moderators that
impact ethical decision making, but there is less that explores that process
itself.
• There are models that discuss general decision influences or variables thatare
important in making ethical choices (Ferrell andGresham, 1985; Ferrell et al.,
1989; Trevino, 1986),but none provide a complete understanding of how the
variables might be used in a step by step process.
• There are models that identify steps leading to moralbehavior, from the
recognition of the moral issue toengaging in moral behavior (Jones, 1991;
Rest, but they do not wrestle with the process of resolving ethical conflict.

4. Introduction Cont’d
• This paper looks outsidethe ethics literature and suggests that a general
decision-making model can be used to help explain ethical/unethical decision
processes.
• Janis and Mann (1977) developed a comprehensive ‘‘Conflict Theory Model
of Decision Making’’ that is applicable to all types of consequential decisions.
They identified the antecedent conditions of conflict situations, the mediating
processes used to make decisions, and the consequences that result.
• This conflict model has much to offer the researcher who is seeking to
understand decision making and conflict resolution.
• Although Janis and Mann address general conflictissues, not specifically
ethical conflicts, their model can be adapted to and integrated with the
variables identified in the ethics literature to develop an integrated model of
ethical decision making.

5. Introduction Cont’d
• This paper extends the ethics literature by creating an integrated model that
describes the decision-making process used and the decision variables
considered by managers.
• The result is a model that describes the process and the content of the
information search that a manager might complete when faced with an ethical
dilemma.
• This understanding is the first step in forming a basis upon which
organizations can develop policies and procedures to enhance the likelihood of
ethical behaviorby their managers.

6. • Researchers have described numerous content variables in
an attempt to understand ethical decisions.
• For this study, we selected those variables for whichthere
is the most consistent and widespread support.
• They have divided the selected variables into two major
categories, individual and situational.
• As shown in Figure 1, the situational variables are further
subdivided into the job context, organizational context, and
external environment.
• Each of these is described in detail below.
The content variables

7. Individual variables
• There are many individual variables that can influence the
ethical decision-making process.
• Among those identified by researchers are age, religious
beliefs, and gender (Hegarty and Simms, 1978).
• The level of an individual’s moral maturity has also been
identified as an important variable in the ethical decision
process (Kohlberg, 1969; Rest, 1986).
• Some variables are related to the confidence and personal
beliefs of the individual decision maker.
• When individual action is required, strong decision makers
will be confident in following their judgment.

9. Situational Variables
• In addition to individual characteristics that
influence the decision-making process, the
situation the individual is facing is also important
to the decision.
• For instance, individuals operate within a job
context, an organizational context, and an
environmentexternal to the organization.

10. Job Context
• Job context is important because such things as
peer pressure and management expectations can
influence an individual’s judgment (Jones, 1985;
Sheidahl,1986; Stead et al., 1990).
• In addition, operating practibilities, such as the
competition for scarce re- sources among
employees, must also be consideredas a potential
influence (Trevino, 1986).

11. Organizational Context
• The organizational context in which an individual operates has many facets.
For instance the organizational culture is a system of shared norms, values, and
expectations that exist throughout the organization (Deal and Kennedy, 1999;
Schein, 2004).
• So, organizational culture includes both formal codes ofethics and non-
codified expectations of behaviors thatmay influence ethical choices (McCabe
et al., 1996).
• Other variables include obedience to authority and the responsibility for
consequences. For instance, executive leadership is important in settingthe
tone at the top, and is integral to organizationalculture (Trevino et al., 2003;
• In addition, the rewardsystems and sanctions are created in the organizationto
motivate employee behavior.
• Unfortunately theseincentives can sometimes motivate unethical actions by
managers who are under pressure to meet deadlines or financial goals (Carson,
2003; Hunt and Vasquez-Parraga, 1993; Trevino et al., 2003).

12. External Environment
• Some situational variables exist outside the organization. For instance, societal
norms create a group ofexternal environmental factors.
• Cross-cultural studies have revealed how differences in societal normscan lead
to different ethical practices and decisions (Donaldson and Dumfee, 1999;
Sims and Gegez, 2004).
• Further, the legal system and political institutions in the environment influence
individualsfacing difficult decisions.
• Another important set of external forces facing corporate managers are
industry norms and competitive economic factors.
• Such factors can create environmental uncertainty that may lead to unethical
business decisions (Morris et al., 1995).

13. External Environment
• Finally, other environmental variables includeprofessional
codes of conduct and personal andfamily obligations.
• In some professions, codes of conduct are created to give
guidance to decision makers facing ethical problems.
• They are meant to act as a deterrent to unethical decisions
(Bommeret al., 1987; Patterson, 2001).
• Personal and family obligations also exist outside the
organization and are idiosyncratic to each individual. Their
impact on anindividual’s behavior within an organizational
settingcan be a powerful motivator (McDevitt and Van
Hise, 2002).

14. The decision making process
• As noted previously, the Janis and Mann (1977) model, while not an ethical
decision-making model, is broad enough to provide a sound basis for
understanding the process of resolving ethical conflicts.
• The decisions required of business managers and leaders facing ethical
dilemmas fit into Janis and Mann’s characterization of consequential decisions
(1977).
• Janis and Mann present a clear definition of consequential decisions as
decisions that include those that evoke some degree of concern or anxiety in a
decision maker about the possibility that he may not gain the objectives he is
seeking or that he may become saddled with costs that are higher than he can
afford, either for himself personally or for a group or organization with which he
is affiliated ....
• It also included are uncertain risks as well as known costs with regard to
money, time, effort, emotional involvement, reputation, morale, or any other
resource at the disposal of the decision maker or his organization. These risks or
potential losses are perceived as threats to important utilitarian, social, or ethical
goals within the decision makers’ value system.’

15. The decision making process
• In order to apply this model specifically to ethical decision
making, it is necessary to understand Janis and Mann’s
(1977) ‘‘ideal’’ procedural criteria.
• The authors use anecdotal information to describe criteria
that give decision makers a better chance of attaining their
objectives.
• Decision makers who follow all of these procedural criteria
are judged to have made a vigilant information search and
will reach the best decision under the circumstances.
• Janis and Mann(1977) do not present the decision result as
good or bad. Rather the omission of one of the criteria
leaves the decision process open to defect.

17. The proposed integrated Model
• The proposed model integrates an adaptation of theJanis and Mann (1977)
model with ethical decision-making variables presented in Figure 1.
• This integrated model describes the process of ethical decision making and
defines the content variables influencingdecision makers during the process.
• A flowchart of the model showing its progressive steps and variables is shown
in Figure 2.
• The process consists of three main categories, antecedent conditions,
mediating processes, and decision outcomes.
• While the steps are similar tothose in the Janis and Mann (1977) model,
additional information is included in this integrated process model.
• Specifically, the content variables are integrated under antecedent conditions
and specifythe categories of information that influence the decision. This
model moves beyond the individual variables addressed in the Janis and Mann
model to include organizational and external environmental variables.

18. Phase 1 processes of antecedent
conditions
• Antecedent conditions begin with the ethical
dilemma that initiates the process.
• It should be notedthat the model assumes that the
decision maker recognizes which action is ethical
or unethical.
• As the decision maker progresses through the
model, consideration of additional variables
becomes more and more important for a good
decision outcome.

19. Mediating processes and
decision outcomes
• The mediating processes of Phase I begin with an
assessment of the risk of choosing either the ethicalor
unethical action.
• Decision behavior may begin with the question,
• ‘‘How serious are the risks if I insist on ethical action?’’
• or ‘‘How serious are the risks if I accept unethical
action?’’
• Using the first question of ethical action as a starting point,
consider the classic dilemma of division managers when
their divisions’ operating results are less than the budget
projections.

20. Phase 2 processes
• Phase II decisions are more difficult to face and complex
to think about.
• Sufficient time is requiredto consider all relevant
variables and affected parties.
• Janis and Mann’s (1977) notion of creative thinking enters
the picture here.
• There is the possibility thatthe problem has not been
fully defined.
• It may be a ‘‘below budget performance’’ problem,
because other considerations may have expanded it.

21. Operationalizing the model
• As a preliminary step, the model is applied to an
ethical dilemma involving accounting issues that reflect
current financial reporting problems.
• Although this is not an empirical test of the model, this
examination will accomplish two things.
• First, applying the model to a realistic case should point
out its strengths and weaknesses.
• Second, it should increase our understanding of how
ethical conflicts interact with other variables during the
decision- making process.

22. Discussion
• 1. “How far this model help to avoid ethical dilemma now
a days in any public corporation?
• 2. How this model can help ethical conflicts in the private
sector?