INSTITUTIONALIZING ETHICS INTO BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS: A MODEL AND RESEARCH AGENDA*

James Weber

Abstract: Grounded upon the late 1970s phrase "institutionalizing ethics into business," I present a multi-component model and research agenda to enhance our understanding of organizations' efforts to integrate ethics into the daily decision-making process of employees. Three research foci are emphasized: (1) the need to establish consistent categorical frameworks to describe business organizations' efforts in the field, (2) the study of the interrelationships between the various components presented in the model, and (3) the exploration of the linkage between organizational efforts to institutionalize ethics and ethical employee behavior. Research and organizational implications evolving from these research foci are discussed.

FFORTS to incorporate ethics into business to enhance ethical employee decision making and behavior are not recent phenomena. Grounded in ancient and medieval philosophy (Vogel, 1991), researchers and practitioners have attempted to apply ethics to modern business since early in this century (Clark, 1916). However, the challenge has more recently evolved into a distinctive stream of research: the institutionalization of ethics into business (Purcell, 1977; Weber, 1981). The phrase "institutionalization of ethics into business' was originally developed in a corporate case study by Theodore V. Purcell and James Weber (1979), and through articles written by both researchers (Purcell, 1977; Weber, 1981). According to Weber, institutionalizing ethics means: "... integrating ethics into all daily decision making and work practices for all employees" (1981:47). During the next decade, the phrase "institutionalizing ethics" became a codeword and referent point for much of the applied business ethics research that followed (e.g.. Center for Business Ethics, 1986; Hosmer, 1987). Due to the descriptive and limited nature of past research., prior efforts have failed to provide a basis for successfully institutionalizing ethics into business. Frorn a review of the literature in this field I discovered three findings: 1. a lack of utilizing consistent categorical frameworks to describe and assess the effectiveness of efforts seeking to institutionalize ethics into business, 2. a lack of recognition and assessment of the interrelationships between efforts seeking to institutionalize ethics in business, and, 3. a lack of a research focus linking the institutionalization of ethics with behavior. In this paper I present a multi-component model and research agenda in order to enhance our understanding of business organizations' efforts to institutionalize ethics into their decision-making structure and operations. The term "component" is 1993. Business Ethics Quarterly, Volume 3, Issue 4. ISSN 1052-150X. 0419-0436.

420

BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY

used to identify each of the specific organizational efforts embodied in a larger, complex system necessary for injecting ethics into the daily decisions and resulting behavior of organizational employees. Four components influencing ethical behavior are presented in the model (shown in Figure 1). While not exhaustive of all organizational efforts to ensure ethical employee decision making and behavior, the components do represent the most common and recommended attempts to institutionalize business ethics. By defining each component, conducting a review of previous research investigating this field, and developing testable research questions, this model enhances future research in three ways. FIGURE 1 A Multi-component Model to Institutionalize Ethics Into Business

EMPLOYEE ETHICS. TRAINING ORGANIZATIONAL ETHICAL CULTURE V. CODE OF _ ETHICS EMPLOYEE ETHICAL BEHAVIOR

ORGANIZATIONAL ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS

First, efforts to institutionalize ethics and study the success of these efforts are enhanced by establishing consistent categorical frameworks for each component. As presented in the following sections, much of the previous research conducted in this field typically has consisted of unstructured, exploratory surveys of corporate practices. These surveys have resulted in an abundance of data, but the findings are not comparable since a consistent measure to classify corporate practices was not used. By standardizing the categories used to classify and describe each component, this model enables future researchers to compare their findings with those reported by others using the same framework. Second, the model provides a framework to study the interrelationships between various efforts seeking to institutionalize ethics into business. Rather than continuing to analyze each component in isolation, this model challenges future researchers to identify the existence of, and linkages between, each of the components in the model. Whereas previous research has provided an incomplete and somewhat distorted view of corporate efforts to institutionalize ethics, the model can be used to guide researchers toward a more comprehensive investigation. Finally, to institutionalize ethics means to introduce "ethics formally and explicitly into daily business life" (Weber, 1981:47). It requires behavioral influence, and behavioral change if necessary. Research failing to address the

INSTITUTIONALIZING BUSINESS ETHICS

421

behavioral implications of these efforts is incomplete. The linkage hetween each component enabling the business organization to institutionalize ethics and enhance employees' ethical behavior must be assessed. Thus, investigations of the efforts to institutionalize ethics into business are enhanced if they are categorically consistent, recognize the interrelationships of the components, and focus upon behavior. Figure 1 presents a model which enables researchers to address each of these three issues. Ethical Employee Behavior The importance of promoting ethical behavior among employees is rarely questioned among researchers in the business ethics field. However, defining what is meant by "ethical employee behavior" is problematic. Randall and Gibson's review of the literature reported that "there is little consensus regarding what constitutes 'ethical' beliefs or 'ethical' behavior in an organizational setting" (1990:461). They refer to Lewis' (1985) work as an illustration. He identified over 300 different definitions of the term "business ethics" found in articles, books, and textbooks in the field. As an alternative to adding to the plethora of definitions of business ethics, most authors of business ethics articles offer no definition at all for the term (Randall & Gibson, 1990). If a firm is to institutionalize ethics, the starting point must be in defining the term "ethical behavior." Rather than adding to the already voluminous list of definitions, the challenge for ethics researchers is to return to the roots of the fieldphilosophy. Ethical behavior must be understood in reference to the premises underlying ethics theory. That is, ethical action is justified when it maximizes the greatest good for the greatest number (utilitarianism), when it adheres to the ethical principles of justice, fairness, and a respect for individual rights, or when it complies with the moral duty entrusted to the individual (deontology). Based upon the justifications or rationale embodied in ethics theory, ethical behavior can be defined. Previous research in the business ethics field has considered a wide spectrum of behaviors as "ethical behavior," ranging from compliance with governmental regulation or societal laws to employee whistleblowing. Yet, it is not the act itself that is "ethical," rather the act must be understood and assessed in the context of the reasoning used by the employee which leads to the action. For example, the act of whistleblowing is not necessarily ethical or unethical. "Ethical whistleblowing" seeks to promote the common good, to advocate a sense of justice or fairness, or to ensure the protection of individual rights. The absence of these underlying justifications may lead to whistleblowing that is self-serving at the expense of others or contrary to ethical principles. When subjected to ethical analysis, this latter form of behavior would be assessed as an unethical act. In order for organizations to institutionalize business ethics the first step must be to clearly define the concept of "ethical employee behavior." The decisionmaking process and resulting action of employees must be scrutinized by using the premises embodied in ethics theory. Researchers seeking to investigate the

422

BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY

institutionalization of ethics into business organizations must likewise develop and clearly state a definition of ethical employee behavior based upon core philosophical principles. It is only after this concept is defined that it is possible to explore the remaining research questions contained in the model I present in this paper. Organization Ethical Culture As depicted in Figure 1, the critical, first component of the model is the organizational ethical culture. Organizational theorists claim that the primary influence upon corporate behavior lies in organizational culture (Deal & Kennedy, 1982). Researchers generally define "culture" as the social or normative glue that holds the organization together. It is believed that the organizational culture expresses the group's shared values and beliefs (Schein, 1985; Smircich, 1983). Organizational theorists posit that culture influences all aspects of operations within the organization. With regard to ethical behavior, organizational culture provides collective norms about what is and what is not appropriate action (Trevino, 1990). Employees generally understand that conformity to group or organizational norms is expected and rewarded in the workplace. Efforts to promote an ethical culture by rewarding ethical activities and by giving signals to its employees that the company is committed to integrity in all of its business dealings provides a firm with a powerful and positive force (Newton, 1986; Waters & Bird, 1987). Ethical culture is not merely an abstraction of organizational values and beliefs. As shown in Figure 1, it is also embodied in the corporation's ethical policy statement (code of ethics) and in the organizational influences upon employee ethical decision making and behavior through employee ethics training and organizational enforcement mechanisms. The necessity and advantages of an ethical organizational culture to promote ethical behavior at work have never been seriously challenged in the literature. Yet, it was not until recently that a method for assessing organizational ethical culture was developed. Bart Victor and John Cullen (1987) introduced the Ethical Climate Questionnairea survey instrument designed to assess the ethical climate of an organization. Their method is based upon the assumptions that "(1) each company or subunit has its own moral character, (2) group members know what this character is, and (3) the group members can tell an outsider about their organization's moral character in an objective way" (Cullen, Victor & Stephens, 1989:53).Victor and Cullen (1988) present evidence of a group's moral character through a survey of 872 employees at four firms. From their results they conclude that organizations have distinct types of ethical cultures. Five ethical culture types, identified by Victor and Cullen, are briefly described as: instrumental (maximization of self-interest on the individual or organizational level), caring (maximization of joint interests on all levels), independence (use of personal ethical principles), rules (use of organizational ethical principles), and law and code (use of ethical principles from outside the organization). [For a more complete description of the five ethical culture types see Victor and Cullen (1988).]

INSTITUTIONALIZING BUSINESS ETHICS

423

Researchers exploring the organizational ethical culture component of the model should utilize an established categorical framework to classify the culture types discovered. Since Victor and Cullen's five types of ethical culture is the first framework developed in the literature, subsequent researchers should validate the comprehensiveness and generalizability of the typology. Upon validation, consistent use of these categories would allow for cross-study comparisons and replications. Finally, this framework for identifying ethical culture types could be used to determine which culture type better promotes ethical employee behavior. The emphasis should ultimately be upon the behavioral implications of efforts to inject ethical values into business. Thus, researchers should explore the following research questions: RQla: Do the five ethical culture types (identified by Victor and Cullen [1988]) adequately serve as a categorical framework to describe organizational
ethical culture? RQlb: Do certain types of organizational ethical culture (identified by Victor and Cullen [1988]) better promote ethical employee behavior?

In theoretical discussions and Victor and Cullen's empirical assessment of organizational ethical cultures, the concept of culture is typically considered in isolation from other components in the model in Figure 1 One exception to this trend is developed by Trevino (1990). She "outlines a multisystem cultural approach to understanding the development and change of organizational ethics" (1990:197). Formal systems are identified, including rules and policies, reward systems, and employee orientation/training. Trevino's framework provides the potential for exploring the interrelationships between the components necessary to institutionalize ethics into business, although her framework does not specifically address the interrelationship issue as developed here. Trevino's work represents the only multiple component approach in the literature addressing the institutionalization of ethics in business. Generally, researchers have not developed theoretical models or conducted empirical investigations which link and assess the interrelationships between organizational ethical culture and codes of ethics, employee ethics training, or organizational enforcement mechanisms. A more comprehensive analysis of the linkages depicted in the model is essential to obtain a better understanding of the efforts to successfully institutionalize ethics into business, that is to integrate ethics "formally and explicitly into daily business life," as envisioned by Purcell and Weber. Thus, researchers should explore the following research questions:
RQ2a: Do specific organizational ethical culture types most often co-exist with, are most often aligned with, and better enhance the impact of, specific types of corporate codes of conduct? RQ2b: Do specific organizational ethical culture types most often co-exist with, are most often aligned with, and better enhance the impact of, specific types of employee ethics training? RQ2c: Do specific organizational ethical culture types most often co-exist with, are most often aligned with, and better enhance the impact of, specific types of organizational enforcement mechanisms?

424

BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY

Finally, organizational ethical culture must be more than a description of organizational values; it must also have an influence on ethical behavior. The culture-behavior relationship has been repeatedly asserted in the literature by identifying numerous behavioral advantages in developing a strong ethical culture. By developing an ethical culture, the organization can reduce "moral stress" for the managers (Waters & Bird, 1987), better achieve "moral excellence" (Hoffman, 1986), and enhance the organization's opportunities for profitability through ethical behavior (Newton, 1986). Although Hosmer (1987) warns that unethical behavior in the workplace can also be institutionalized through corporate structure and policy, an organization seeking to promote an ethical culture must establish ethical values at the core of the organization. Not only must the core ethical values be in place, but to further institutionalize ethics at this level, they must be communicated throughout the organization, creating a candid, ethical culture (Serpa, 1985). Thus, the link between organizational ethical culture and ethical employee behavior has been proposed, but has not yet been measured through empirical investigation. Researchers should explore whether certain organizational ethical cultures enhance occurrences of desired ethical behavior among the organization's employees.
RQ3: Do certain ethical culture types (identified by Victor and Cullen [1988]) more frequently result in ethical behavior, or result in behavior that is more ethical?

Summary
Organizational values and beliefs are measured through an assessment of organizational ethical culture. One promising typology of organizational ethical culture types was developed by Victor and Cullen (1988). Future research should test this typology to validate the comprehensiveness and generalizability of these types of ethical cultures. If the five ethical culture types are validated, this categorical framework should be consistently used. Since organizational ethical culture influences every aspect of the organization, including corporate documents and practices, the interrelationships between organizational ethical culture and code of ethics, employee ethics training, and organizational enforcement mechanisms should also be explored. Finally, the ultimate goal in institutionalizing ethics is to increase instances of ethical employee behavior. Future research must empirically investigate the culture-behavior relationship to determine the success of institutionalizing ethics in business.

Code of Ethics
As described in the previous section, organizational ethical culture is a major force for subsequent corporate action which creates an ethical environment in the workplace. Typically, the initial manifestation of a corporation's ethical culture is through the development of a code of ethics. A corporate code of ethics, or standards of conduct, is the written expression of organizational values and beliefs.

INSTITUTIONALIZING BUSINESS ETHICS

425

Research emphasizing corporate codes of ethics has been generally exploratory and descriptive. Numerous studies (Chatov, 1980; White & Montgomery, 1980; Cressey & Moore, 1983; Center for Business Ethics, 1986; Benson, 1989; and, Sweeney & Siers, 1990) have analyzed the content of corporate codes of ethics. These studies tended to report their results without utilizing a consistent categorical framework. Thus, there is limited potential for cross-study comparisons. One study did attempt to provide some structure to the categorization of corporate codes of ethics. Berenbeim (1988) identified three distinct types of codes. The three types are: constituency obligation (company commitment to various groups served), professional responsibility (presenting a series of general company principles to be followed), and, corporate mission (does not explicitly direct employee conduct, but does enunciate company objectives). Berenbeim did not develop normative rankings for these three types of corporate codes, nor did he indicate any interest in determining whether any type of ethical code more often led to better ethical reasoning than the other types of codes. However, the three types of codes of ethics do provide researchers with an initial categorical framework. The framework presented by Berenbeim needs to be validated in further research. In addition, the existence of additional types of codes should be explored, and, if found, added to Berenbeim's list to develop a more complete typology. The effectiveness of the code should also be investigated to determine which type of code better promotes ethical employee behavior. Thus, researchers should explore the following research questions:
RQ4a: Do the three types of codes of ethics (identified by Berenbeim [1988]) adequately serve as a categorical framework to describe corporate codes of ethics? RQ4b: Do certain types of corporate codes of conduct (identified by Berenbeim [1988]) better promote ethical employee behavior?

Researchers infrequently acknowledge the interrelationships between corporate codes and the other components of the model. When acknowledged, the relationship is generally theoretical and asserted, rather than empirically tested and verified. Raiborn and Payne (1990) recognize that, if a corporate code is to be effective in achieving its objectives, it must focus upon and reflect organizational ethical culture which influences employee behavior. Weber (1981) also recognized the linkage between corporate codes and other components in order to institutionalize ethics. He identified the link between codes and managerial development programs (employee ethics training), as well as the link between codes and both negative sanctions and positive rewards (organizational enforcement mechanisms) for employees. The link between code and enforcement is also drawn by Gellerman (1989). He argues that high rewards, severe punishments, and implicit sanctioning are essential for the institutionalization of a code. These researchers acknowledge the need to link a corporate code of ethics with other components, specifically organizational ethical culture, employee ethics training programs, and organizational enforcement mechanisms. Yet, previous research only alludes to these linkages. Subsequent research needs to empirically explore and assess these linkages more fully. Thus, researchers should explore the following research questions:

426

BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY

RQ5a: Do specific corporate codes of ethics most often co-exist with, are most often aligned with, and better enhance the impact of, specific organizational ethical culture types? RQ5b: Do specific corporate codes of ethics most often co-exist with, often aligned with, and better enhance the impact of, specific employee ethics training? RQ5c: Do specific corporate codes of ethics most often co-exist with, often aligned with, and better enhance the impact of, specific organizational enforcement mechanisms? are most types of are most types of

Research exploring corporate codes of ethics tends to emphasize a practitioner, "how to" approach. General guidelines for corporate managers interested in developing a corporate code of ethics in the company are suggested by Weber (1981), Berenbeim (1988), Guerrette (1988), Murphy (1988), and Raiborn and Payne (1990). Yet, none of these authors provide empirical evidence to verify that a code developed in the manner they recommend leads to the desired ethical behavior. Three studies have explored the impact of corporate codes of ethics upon ethical employee decision making, leading to ethical behavior. Hegarty and Sims (1978) found that the existence of a corporate code significantly reduced unethical decisions. However, Laczniak and Inderrieden (1987) and Mathews (1987) found that codes have little effect upon decision making or the amount of illegal activity. Each of these studies acknowledge that their results are limited, and additional empirical assessments should be undertaken to explore whether there is a significant, influential relationship between the existence of a corporate code of ethics and ethical employee decision making, leading to ethical behavior. These explorations, however, should use a consistent categorical framework to assess the code-behavior relationship. Thus, researchers should explore the following research question:
RQ6: Do certain types of corporate codes of conduct (identified by Berenbeim [1988]) more frequently result in ethical behavior, or result in behavior that is more ethical?

Summary
A corporate code of ethics frames the organization's values and beliefs which are manifestations of organizational ethical culture. This framing of culture has been initially captured by the identification of three types of corporate codes of ethics presented by Berenbeim (1988). These three types of codes require further validation as a classification schema in order to be used as a categorical framework in future investigations focusing upon institutionalizing ethics through corporate codes. In addition, the code of ethics should be investigated in relationship to the other components in the model, shown in Figure 1. The relationships between the code and organizational ethical culture, employee ethics training programs, and organizational enforcement mechanisms should be explored. Finally, corporate ethics codes should influence ethical behavior among the organization's employees. The effectiveness of this objective should be the subject of future empirical research.

INSTITUTIONALIZING BUSINESS ETHICS

427

Employee Ethics Training

Corporations traditionally conduct training programs to educate their employees. Training programs range from general orientations introducing the firm's organizational chart to an intensive indoctrination of employee health insurance benefits or an awareness of governmental regulations. Germane to the institutionalization of ethics is the development of an employee ethics training program that presents the organization's values (ethical culture) and corporate policies (code of ethics) to enhance employees' ability to make ethical judgments and act in an ethical manner. In order to integrate ethics into the employees' daily decision making, the organization must supplement the general ethical culture and writing of an ethics code with employee training. Maclagan (1990) argues that a firm must educate managers after drafting a code of ethics to fully develop moral behavior in the organization. To achieve this objective, ethics training programs attempt to develop in employees an awareness of existing and potential ethical issues in the workplace (Harrington, 1991). In addition, these programs provide the employees with specific guidance for ethical decision making (Trevino, 1990), which should lead to instances of ethical action. Trevino concludes that "[b]y offering ethics training, the organization not only offers specific skills to managers, but indirectly communicates that ethical behavior is valued and that ethical dimensions should be considered in decision making" (1990:207). Despite the importance placed upon employee ethics training, research emphasizing this component of institutionalizing ethics into business has been generally descriptive (Berenbeim, 1988; Thompson, 1990). Two attempts have been made to develop a framework to categorize types of ethics training programs and approaches taken by these programs. The Center for Business Ethics (1986) constructed an initial categorical typology of types of training programs: seminars, internally conducted courses, courses conducted by an external individual, courses conducted by an external institution, personal interviews, or orientation sessions. Unfortunately, from the Center for Business Ethics's list, we do not know which type of training program is most successful in assisting employees in ethical decision making and thus better promotes ethical employee behavior. Harrington (1991) also develops a categorical framework adaptable for future investigations. She identifies four approaches to ethics training: case studies, rules and guidelines, decision-making frameworks, and cognitive approaches. What is unknown after reading Harrington's work is whether one approach better aids the employee in decision making than the other approaches. Both the categorical frameworks of ethics training types presented by the Center for Business Ethics (1986), and the approaches for ethics training programs identified by Harrington (1991), should be utilized in future research. These frameworks need to be validated and assessed regarding their comprehensiveness and regarding which type or approach better promotes ethical employee behavior. Thus, researchers should explore the following research questions: RQ7a: Do the six types of employee ethics training programs (identified by the Center for Business Ethics [1986]) adequately serve as a categorical framework to describe types of employee ethics training programs?

428

BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY

RQ7b: Do the four approaches to employee ethics training programs (identified by Harrington [1991]) adequately serve as a categorical framework to describe approaches to employee ethics training programs? RQ7c: Do certain types of employee ethics training programs (identified by the Center for Business Ethics [1986]) better promote ethical employee behavior? RQ7d: Do certain approaches to employee ethics training (identified by Harrington [1991]) better promote ethical employee behavior? Although research exploring organizational ethical culture and codes of ethics tends to look at these efforts in isolation from the other components necessary to institutionalize ethics into business, this focus is generally not true when investigating ethics training programs. There is a general belief that ethics training should develop out of organizational ethical culture and codes of ethics. Harrington extensively discusses the culture-training link: "[f]or training to achieve an effect, executives must insure that the corporate culture is such that employees will understand and believe in the message that is being conveyed by training" (Harrington, 1991:28). Maclagan (1990) addresses the code-training link. He argues that, while corporate codes are necessary, organizations must go beyond merely drafting a code. The code of ethics provides the structure, in Maclagan's opinion, for moral behavior, but organizations must also address the process of ethical decision making which will lead to moral behavior. The process requires management development programs in which a "commitment to personal principles, a well integrated sense of personal integrity, and relevant interpersonal skills" are developed (Maclagan, 1990:17). Absent in the literature is a recognition of the need to link employee ethics training with organizational enforcement mechanisms. In addition, other linkages of the components to institutionalize ethics (culture-training, by Harrington [1991], and code-training, by Maclagan [1990]), shown in Figure 1, are theoretical and have not been empirically assessed. Thus, researchers should explore the following research questions: RQ8a: Do specific employee ethics training program types or approaches most often co-exist with, are most often aligned with, and better enhance the impact of, specific organizational ethical culture types? RQ8b: Do specific employee ethics training program types or approaches most often co-exist with, are most often aligned with, and better enhance the impact of, specific types of corporate codes of ethics? RQ8c: Do specific employee ethics training program types or approaches most often co-exist with, are most often aligned with, and better enhance the impact of, specific types of organizational enforcement mechanisms? Opinions in the literature consistently assert that employee ethics training leads to more ethical behavior (Trevino, 1990). Weber (1981) argues this point by presenting a framework for an ethics training module. "A corporation could further its efforts to institutionalize ethics by establishing an ethics training program within its management development program" (Weber, 1981:51). Weber continues by discussing the appropriate characteristics for the coordinator of the

INSTITUTIONALIZING BUSINESS ETHICS

429

program (versed in ethical theory and daily business operations), and the participants to be trained (selected from middle and lower management, moving up the organizational ladder). The specific procedure to be followed in the ethics module is also outlined by Weber. Initially participants should prepare for the training by constructing descriptions of ethical issues confronted at work. The coordinator evaluates these situations and prepares for the subsequent training program discussion. During a roundtable discussion, participants identify ethical issues inherent in the cases and discuss alternative resolutions. Weber cautions that "the session need not formulate specific solutions, but develop ethical guidelines for the managers to consider when confronted with similar issues" (1981:51). The training module should conclude with recommendations for additions to, or deletions from, the corporate ethics policy. Despite these theoretical positions, no empirical assessment has been undertaken to discover if the various types of employee ethics training programs presented by the Center for Business Ethics (1986), approaches to employee ethics training identified by Harrington (1991), or specific guidelines for constructing an ethics training module developed by Weber (1981), are, in fact, effective in promoting ethical behavior. Thus, researchers should explore the following research questions: RQ9a: Do the types of employee ethics training programs (identified by the Center for Business Ethics [1986]) more frequently result in ethical behavior, or result in behavior that is more ethical? RQ9b: Do the approaches to employee ethics training programs (identified by Harrington [1991]) more frequently result in ethical behavior, or result in behavior that is more ethical? RQ9c: Do the guidelines for constructing employee ethics training programs, (developed by Weber [1981]) provide for an environment that more frequently results in ethical behavior, or results in behavior that is more ethical?

Summary
It is encouraging to find a significant interest in developing a consistent framework to classify organizational ethics training programs in the literature. The categorical frameworks identifying the types of employee ethics training programs (Center for Business Ethics, 1986) and approaches to employee ethics training programs (Harrington, 1991) need to be validated in future research. In addition, the effectiveness of the types of, and approaches to, employee ethics training programs must be investigated regarding their success in institutionalizing ethics into business. There does exist in the literature a general acknowledgement of the linkages between ethical training programs and organizational ethical culture (Harrington, 1991) and codes of ethics (Maclagan, 1990). Yet these linkages are not widespread throughout the literature, and the linkage between training and organizational enforcement mechanisms is not recognized or developed. Future

430

BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY

researchers should continue to investigate the linkages between ethics training programs and the other components of institutionalizing ethics into business. Finally, there is a strong theoretical orientation toward developing employee ethics training programs that will influence, or change if necessary, ethical employee behavior. Empirical research should be undertaken to determine which type, approach, or structure of ethics training program is the most effective in achieving this goal. Thus, the training-behavior link should be further investigated.

Organizational Enforcement Mechanisms

In order for organizational ethical cultures, codes of ethics, and employee ethics training programs to fully enter the daily decision making and behavior of the organization's employees, these organizational values, policy guidelines, and training programs must be reinforced. This reinforcement occurs through the development and utilization of positive or negative organizational enforcement mechanisms. These mechanisms serve to provide a priori motivation and/or ex post facto rewards or punishment administered by the organization upon its employees. Descriptive accounts of organizational enforcement mechanisms are found in the literature (Center for Business Ethics, 1986; Benson, 1989). These surveys provide a description of what corporations are doing to further institutionalize ethics. Beyond a general description, Berenbeim's (1988) survey of corporate ethics activities provides an initial categorical framework of enforcement mechanisms: termination, suspension, demotion, probation, and appraisal comments. The five negative sanctions identified by Berenbeim need to be investigated to determine if they comprise a comprehensive list of organizational enforcement mechanisms that punish employees for unethical conduct. Research should also explore which negative sanction better promotes ethical employee behavior. Complimenting the need for negative sanctions as organizational enforcement mechanisms is the possibility of rewarding ethical employee behavior. Weber (1981) identifies four possible incentives to promote ethical behavior in the workplace: recognition, appreciation, commendation, and monetary rewards. Subsequent research in the field has generally ignored exploring the existence of positive rewards as organizational enforcement mechanisms in the workplace. Thus, future researchers should utilize Weber's list of positive rewards, in addition to Berenbeim's list of negative sanctions. Research should validate the comprehensiveness of Weber's four positive rewards, as a well as investigate which rewards better promote ethical employee behavior. Thus, researchers should explore the following research questions:
RQlOa: Do the five negative sanctions (identified by Berenbeim [1988]) adequately serve as a categorical framework to describe negative organizational enforcement mechanisms? RQ10b:Do the four positive rewards (identified by Weber [1981]) adequately serve as a categorical framework to describe positive organizational enforcement mechanisms?

INSTITUTIONALIZING BUSINESS ETHICS

RQlOc: Do certain types of negative sanctions (identified by Berenbeim [1988]) better promote ethical employee behavior? RQlOd: Do certain types of positive rewards (identified by Weber [1981]) better promote ethical employee behavior?

431

Enforcement mechanisms have occasionally been investigated in relationship with other components required to institutionalize ethics into business. Weber (1981), Lombardi (1987), and Beets and Killough (1990) have discussed a theoretical relationship between codes of ethics and organizational enforcement mechanisms. These authors realize that for a code to be fully influential in a firm it must have the backing of strong enforcement sanctions. Yet, this belief has not been empirically tested. In addition, the other relationships between organizational enforcement mechanisms and ethical culture and employee ethics training, shown in Figure 1, are unexplored. Thus, researchers should explore the following research questions:
RQlla:Do positive and/or negative organizational enforcement mechanisms most often co-exist with, are most often aligned with, and better enhance the impact of, specific organizational ethical culture types? RQ]lb:Do positive and/or negative organizational enforcement mechanisms most often co-exist with, are most often aligned with, and better enhance the impact of, specific types of corporate codes of ethics? RQllc:Do positive and/or negative organizational enforcement mechanisms most often co-exist with, are most often aligned with, and better enhance the impact of, specific types of employee ethics training programs?

The theoretical link between organizational enforcement mechanism and ethical employee behavior has been extensively investigated in the literature. Jansen and Von Glinow (1985) argue that organizational members typically seek information regarding what activities are endorsed as appropriate or acceptable by the organization, and thus are rewarded by the organization. This relationship goes back to the notion embodied in organizational ethical culture, where employees seek to understand the values supported by the organization. An extension of the cultural influence is the organizational development of rewards or sanctions to reinforce the values embedded in organizational culture. Thus, "the organization's reward system can influence the ethical/unethical behavior of its members through specific rewards and punishment" (Trevino, 1990:205). Numerous suggestions as to how to effectively enforce organizational preferences toward ethical actions have been made in the literature. Murphy (1988) calls for blunt and realistic sanctions to create an ethical business environment. Gellerman (1986) initially argued that the issue is not severity of punishment, but the probability of getting caught. He claims that if the organization raises the probability of employees getting caught when performing unethical acts, the frequency of these actions will decline. Three years later, Gellerman (1989) advocated a different approach to enforcing ethics in the workplace: unusually high rewards for good performance, unusually high punishments for bad performance, and an implicit sanctioning of explicitly forbidden acts. Differentiating between positive mechanisms (rewards) and negative mechanisms

432

BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY

(punishments) is considered by Weber (1981). He argues that rewards may be a more effective enforcement mechanism for promoting ethical behavior than the traditional corporate use of negative sanctions. Each of these suggestions suffers due to a lack of empirical validation. Some empirical research has been conducted to investigate the enforcement mechanism-behavior relationship. A positive relationship between rewards and/or punishments and ethical decisions and/or intended ethical behavior has been repeatedly found (Hegarty & Sims, 1978, 1979; Trevino, Sutton & Woodman, 1985; Worrell, Stead, Stead & Spalding, 1985; Laczniak & Inderrieden, 1987; Trevino & Ball, 1988, 1989). However, the most recent study investigating the enforcement-behavior link reported that rewards demonstrated an indirect link with ethical behavior. No link was found between negative punishments and ethical behavior (Trevino & Youngblood, 1990). Based upon the most recent findings, there appears to be a need for further investigation of the relationship. Thus, future researchers should explore the following research questions:
RQ12a: Do certain types of positive enforcement sanctions (rewards, identified by Weber [1981 ]) or negative enforcement mechanisms (sanctions, identified by Berenbeim [1988]) more frequently result in ethical behavior, or result in behaviors that are more ethical? RQ 12b: Does the degree that certain types of positive enforcement sanctions (rewards, identified by Weber [1981]) or certain types of negative enforcement mechanisms (sanctions, identified by Berenbeim [1988]) are exercised more frequently result in ethical behavior, or result in behaviors that are more ethical? RQ12c: Do positive enforcement mechanisms (rewards) more frequently influence employees to act in an ethical manner than negative enforcement mechanisms (argued by Weber [1981], and discovered by Trevino & Youngblood [1990])?

Summary
Empirical researchers have conducted extensive explorations regarding the corporation's use of enforcement mechanisms to fully institutionalize ethics into business. However, this research has failed to develop a validated categorical framework of negative sanctions or positive rewards. This framework could serve as a guide for subsequent research investigating the institutionalization of ethics into business through organizational enforcement mechanisms. There is a general belief that organizational enforcement mechanisms are a necessary extension from a corporate code of ethics, enabling the code to become an effective deterrent to unethical action or a promoter of ethical action. Yet, this relationship has not been empirically verified. In addition, other linkages between organizational enforcement mechanism to the other components of the modelorganizational ethical culture and employee ethics traininghave been unexplored. Finally, the most extensive empirical exploration in the field has involved the relationship between enforcement and ethical employee behavior. While earlier

INSTITUTIONALIZING BUSINESS ETHICS

433

explorations pointed to a strong relationship, a more recent study failed to uncover this relationship to the same degree. Further testing is needed to more fully understand the impact of organizational enforcement mechanisms on ethical employee behavior. Researchers should explore the issues of which rewards and/or punishments should be used, the degree that the rewards or punishments should be exercised, and whether rewards or punishments are more effective as a behavioral influence. Conclusions The model presented in Figure 1 provides greater form and detail to the initial conceptualization of institutionalizing ethics into business developed by Purcell (1977) and Weber (1981). Given the advantage of over ten years of exploratory research, I emphasize three aspects of the model: categorical frameworks, analysis linking components contained in the model, and research assessing the impact of these efforts upon ethical employee behavior. The three dimensions presented in the modelcategorical frameworks, interrelated components, and influence upon employee behaviornot only have significant research implications, but should also serve as guides for organizations seeking to institutionalize ethics. Based upon the components presented in the model, researchers may begin to answer questions frequently posed by managers: "How do I change my organization to be more ethical?" or, phrased differently: "How do I integrate ethics formally and explicitly into daily business life, making it a regular and normal part of business?" Managers are seeking answers to these questions, and researchers may be able to provide some initial answers as they begin to explore the research questions posed in this paper. The model presented here has as its roots the early conceptualization of what it means to institutionalize ethics into business. Subsequent research has begun to add structure and detail to the field, as well as clarifying what additional questions need to be addressed by future researchers. The model is an attempt to identify and support what has been done to further our understanding of the field, and to identify and provide guidance as to what issues still need to be addressed. Consistent throughout all past efforts and future challenges for this field is the hope of creating an environment within an organization which fosters ethical employee decision making and action.

Note
*The author would like to thank Sharon L. Green, Linda K. Trevino, and two anonymous reviewers for their comments on earlier drafts of this paper.

Bihliography Beets, S.D. & L.N. Killough (1990) "The Effectiveness of a Complaint-based Ethics Enforcement System: Evidence from the Accounting Profession," Journal of Business Ethics 9: 115-126.

434

BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY

Benson, G.C.S. (1989) "Codes of Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics 8: 305319. Berenbeim, R.E. (1988) Corporate Ethics: Research Report No. 900. New York: The Conference Board. Center for Business Ethics (1986) "Are Corporations Institutionalizing Ethics?" Journal of Business Ethics 5: 85-91. Chatov, R. (1980) "What Corporate Ethics Statements Say," California Management Review 22 (Summer): 20-29. Clark, J.M. (1916) "The Changing Basis of Economic Responsibility," Journal of Political Economy 24: 209-229. Cressey, D.H. & C.A Moore (1983) "Managerial Values and Corporate Codes of Ethics," California Management Review 25(4): 53-77. Cullen, J.B., B. Victor & C. Stephens (1989) "An Ethical Weather Report: Assessing the Organization's Ethical Climate," Organizational Dynamics 18(2): 50-62. Deal, T.E. & A.A. Kennedy (1982) Corporate Cultures: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Gellerman, S.W. (1986) "Why 'Good' Managers Make Bad Ethical Choices," Harvard Business Review July-August: 85-90. Gellerman, S.W. (1989) "Managing Ethics from the Top Down," Sloan Management Review Winter: 73-79. Guerrette, R.H. (1988) "Corporate Ethical Consulting: Developing Management Strategies for Corporate Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics 7: 373-380. Harrington, S.J. (1991) "What Corporate America is Teaching about Ethics," Academy of Management Executive 5(1): 21-30. Hegarty, W.H. & H.P. Sims, Jr. (1978) "Some Determinants of Unethical Decision Behavior: An Experiment," Journal of Applied Psychology 63(4): 451457. Hegarty, W.H. & H.P. Sims, Jr. (1979) "Organizational Philosophy, Policies, and Objectives Related to Unethical Decision Behavior: A Laboratory Experiment," Journal of Applied Psychology 64(3): 331-338. Hoffman, W.H. (1986) "What is Necessary for Corporate Moral Excellence?" Journal of Business Ethics 5: 233-242. Hosmer, L.T. (1987) "The Institutionalization of Unethical Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics 6: 439-447. Jansen, E. & M.A. Van Glinow (1985) "Ethical Ambivalence and Organizational Reward Systems," Academy of Management Review 10(4): 814-822. Laczniak, G.R. & E.J. Inderrieden (1987) "The Influence of Stated Organizational Concern Upon Ethical Decision Making," Journal of Business Ethics 6: 297-307. Lewis, P.V. (1985) "Defining 'Business Ethics': Like Nailing Jello to a Wall," Journal of Business Ethics 4: 377-383. Lombardi, L.G. (1987) "Self-regulation: Business and the Professions," Business and Professional Ethics Journal 5(2): 68-86. Maclagan, P. (1990) "Moral Behaviour in Organizations: The Contribution of Management Education and Development," British Journal of Management 1: 17-26. Mathews, M.C. (1987) "Codes of Ethics: Organizational Behavior and Misbehavior" in W.C. Frederick (Ed.) Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy: Empirical Studies of Business Ethics and Values, volume 9. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press: 107-130.

INSTITUTIONALIZING BUSINESS ETHICS

435

Murphy, P.E. (1988) "Implementing Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics 7: 907-915. Newton, L.H. (1986) "The Internal Morality of the Corporation," Journal of Business Ethics 5: 249-258. Purcell, S.J., T.V. (1977) "Institutionalizing Ethics into Top Management Decisions," Public Relations Quarterly 22 (Summer): 15-20. Purcell, S.J., T.V. & J. Weber, S.J. (1979) Institutionalizing Corporate Ethics: A Case History, special study no. 71. New York: The President's Association, American Management Association. Raiborn, C.A. & D. Payne (1990) "Corporate Codes of Conduct: A Collective Conscience and Continuum," Journal of Business Ethics 9: 879-889. Randall, D.M. & A.M. Gibson (1990) "Methodology in Business Ethics Research: A Review and Critical Assessment," Journal of Business Ethics 9: 457-471. Schein, E.H. (1985) Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Serpa, R. (1985) "Creating a Candid Corporate Culture,' Journal of Business Ethics 4: 425-430. Smircich, L. (1983) "Concepts of Culture and Organizational Analysis," Administrative Science Quarterly 28: 339-358. Sweeney, R.B. & H.L. Siers (1990) "Ethics in Corporate America," Management Accounting June: 34-35, 38-40. Thompson, B.L. (1990) "Ethics Training Enters the Real World," Training October: 82-87, 91-ff. Trevino, L.K. (1990) "A Cultural Perspective on Changing and Developing Organizational Ethics," in R. Woodman & W. Pasmore (Eds.) Research in Organizational Change and Development, volume 4. Greenwich, CT: .lAI Press: 195-230. Trevino, L.K. & G.A. Ball (1988) "The Use of Vicarious Punishment to Manage Unethical Behavior: Affective and Attitudinal Outcomes," paper presented at the national annual Academy of Management meeting, August. Trevino, L.K. & G.A. Ball (1989) "Punishing Unethical Behavior: The Just Organization Hypothesis," paper presented at the national annual Academy of Management meeting, August. Trevino, L.K., CD. Sutton & R.W. Woodman (1985) "Effects of Reinforcement Contingencies and Cognitive Moral Development on Ethical Decision-making Behavior: An Experiment," paper presented at the national annual Academy of Management meeting, August. Trevino, L.K. & S.A. Youngblood (1990) "Bad Apples in Bad Barrels: A Causal Analysis of Ethical Decision-making Behavior," Journal of Applied Psychology 75(4): 378-385. Victor, B. & J.B. Cullen (1987) "A theory and measure of ethical climate in organizations," in W.C. Frederick (Ed.) Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy: Empirical Studies of Business Ethics And Values, volume 9. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press: 51-71. Victor, B. & J.B. Cullen (1988) "The Organizational Bases of Ethical Work Climates," Administrative Science Quarterly 33: 101-125. Vogel, D. (1991) "The Ethical Roots of Business," Business Ethics Quarterly 1(1): 101-120.

436

BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY

Waters, J.A. & F. Bird (1987) "The Moral Dimension of Organizational Climate," Journal of Business Ethics 6: 15-22. Weber, J. (1981) "Institutionalizing Ethics into the Corporation," MSU Business Topics 29(2): 47-52. White, B.J. & B.R. Montgomery (1980) "Corporate Codes of Conduct," California Management Review 23(2): 80-87. Worrell, D.L., W.E. Stead, J.G. Stead & J.B. Spalding (1985) "Unethical Decisions: The Impact of Reinforcement Contingencies and Managerial Philosophies," Psychological Reports 57: 355-365.

1993. Business Ethics Quarterly, Volume 3, Issue 4. ISSN 1052-150X. 0419-0436.