Importance of Values for Success in Future Careers: Students’ Perspective
A/P Nasir Butrous
Australian Catholic University,
Brisbane Campus, Australia
PO Box 456, Virginia, QLD 4014
T: +61 7 3623 7208 F: +61 7 3623 7361
Email: [email protected]
Brief Bio
A/P Butrous was the foundation Head of the School of Business -Qld 1999-2004 and has been a
member of various faculty boards for more than ten years. In May 2004, Nasir was elected to
the ACU Senate for two years and in 2005 he was appointed as the Campus Community Engagement
Coordinator in addition to his position as A/P in Management. Nasir has been on the Executive Board
of the AUCEA (2009-2011) and the RDA Moreton Bay Management Committee since 2009. A/P Butrous’s research areas include Management & Leadership, and Strategic Decision-Making. He
has published in these areas and his interests are further enhanced by both voluntary and consultancy
activities.
Importance of Values for Success in Future Careers: Students’ Perspective
Abstract
Unethical behaviour has created an increasing number of headlines all around the world
during the past decade. Scandals in business, government, education, science, and religion
have decreased the public’s opinion that institutional leaders behave ethically. This amoral
attitude may be a reflection of a combination of many factors, such as personal and family
background, the values demonstrated in a particular organisational culture, and the impact of
the educational system, in particular the higher education sector. Given that most of the
leaders are graduates of higher educational institutions, there is a need to investigate what
values higher educational students perceive important in their future careers and to what
extent these values are reinforced by higher educational institutions as identified by the
students.
This research reports on the outcomes of using Maccoby’s (1976) Head and Heart survey of
character traits. The instrument involved more than 1100 students on four campuses of four
different universities in one capital city. This equates to 10% of student population on each
university campus taking part in this project.
This research affirms the relevant literature findings regarding higher educational
institution’s ability to do a good job, at different levels, of emphasising and
developing analytical skills (Head traits). However, it disagrees in relation to findings
that educational institutions do a poor job of developing the qualities of the heart
(Heart traits) that are normally associated with ethical behaviour.
Key words:
Values, character traits, career success, higher education institutions
Introduction
Ethical behaviour issues have created headlines all around the world during the past decade
and various scandals have decreased the public’s expectations that institutional leaders
behave ethically. The year 2002, for instance, witnessed corporate ethics challenged. Arthur
Anderson was convicted of obstructing justice, Enron, Global Crossing, WorldCom and
others tumbled to bankruptcy (McRichie, 2007). In this era of Enron, WorldCom and other
despicable business behaviour, there isn’t a more important topic for business school
graduates to study than ethics. Many executives witnessed their company's employees go
from being internet millionaires on paper to standing empty-handed when the bubble burst.
Some unethical behaviour is committed by people who are self-indulgent, greedy,
and, in their attempt to gain personal wealth and power, may know but do not care how their
decisions may affect others. However, Carroll, (1987), concluded that most unethical
behaviours are committed by managers, while pursuing personal goals or corporate
profitability, who are basically unaware of the effects of their decisions on others.
This amoral attitude may be a reflection of a combination of many factors such as
personal and family background, the values demonstrated in a particular organisational
culture in addition to the impact of educational systems, and in particular the higher
educational sector, given that most of the leaders are graduates of higher educational
institutions. Thus, the need to investigate what values higher educational institutions
reinforce by their teaching, role modelling, controlling and rewarding (Ruhe, 2003).
Value development and measurements
Critiques of ethical decision-making indicated that a finely tuned ability to examine ethical
questions is not enough to keep future leaders on the “straight and narrow path”. Knowing
what is right is not enough, doing what is right depends more on an individual’s values and
the organisational reinforcement of these values (Ruhe, 1998, p 11).
A number of researchers have developed typologies of personal values. Among the
most significant contributors to the values literature are those typologies developed by
Rockeach, (1973), Maccoby (1976) and Schwartz (1992). Rockeach’s typology included
“terminal values”, desirable ends-states of existence and “instrumental values”, preferable
modes of behaviour with eighteen individual value items in each category. From among a
larger sample of character traits, Maccoby chose nine traits or modes of conduct that were
classified as qualities of the “head” and ten traits that were classified as qualities of the
“heart”. Schwartz attempted to identify ten types of values related to different human needs
such as biological, social co-ordination and needs related to the welfare and survival of
groups.
Several other authors reviewed applied research value measures such as Payne,
(1988), Baron, (1998), and Oishi, Hahn, Schimmack, Radhakrishan, Dzokoto, & Ahadi,
(2005), to determine how the individual’s values and the organisation’s reinforcement can be
measured. One of the most used methods is “direct utility measurement” that involves
ratings, instead of rankings, and measure intensity levels of values. Maccoby (1976) in his
study of business executives, managers, and engineers used such method and argued that the
“Heart” or feeling qualities are the seeds of consciousness while the “Head” or thinking
qualities are related to conceptualisation. According to Maccoby, the imbalance between
head and heart values reflects the importance of achieving success in all aspects of life. He
also argued that individual values or ethical tendencies are a result of organisational culture
that determines and reinforces acceptable modes of conduct, values, and ethics. Maccoby
contends that Head and Heart traits should be balanced to ensure sensitivity to ethical
implications of business decisions (Ruhe, 1991).
On the other hand, Ferrell, Fraedrich and Ferrell (2013) contend that individual values
are learned from the socialisation in the institutional climates of educational systems,
business experiences as well as through family and religion.
Regardless of how values are developed, there seems to be an agreement amongst
most business ethics scholars that personal values are instrumental in ethical decisions-
making. While higher educational institutions have been found to do good jobs, at different
levels, of emphasising and developing analytical skills (Head traits), a number of studies
suggest that they have done a poor job of developing the qualities of the heart (Heart traits)
associated with ethical behaviour (Patten, 1990, Booth, Corriher, & Geurin, 1995, Ruhe,
2003 & 2008, Krambia-Kapardis, & Zopiatis, 2008 & 2011).
Research methods
Aims and objectives:
The research project seeks to gain an insight into values affecting student’s development and
assess their importance for success in their respectful future careers. It aims to determine
whether different students (male or female), enrolled in different courses, in different
disciplines, and at different university campuses perceive the importance of character traits
and the reinforcement of these traits differently. The research also seeks to compare the
importance of character traits and their reinforcement amongst the four campuses of the
universities. Comparisons of students by university campus will also give some indication as
to whether student characteristics and context determine what students’ value.
Research design:
The research is designed to incorporate Maccoby’s Head and Heart survey instrument of
character traits. Since 1980 this instrument has been used by various scholars and outcome of
their research has been published in in highly respected journals including Journal of
Business Ethics, Journal of Business Education, International Journal of Value-Based
Management, etc. and found to have high reliability and validity in various university settings
(Zikive & Zikive, 1993, Ruhe, 2003 & 2008, Hess, 2002, Krambia-Kapardis & Zopiatis,
2008 & 2011). Students are asked to rate each trait as to its perceived importance in
achieving career success and identify those traits that they consider have been stimulated or
reinforced by the relevant higher education institution during their course of study.
This study has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee at Australian
Catholic University, thus, aggregate data only will be reported and the identity of the
university/campus will not be revealed at any stage.
Sample participants
Sample participants in this research were drawn from four campuses of different universities
in one capital city. Students in undergraduate courses on each campus have been invited to
participate voluntarily in the survey. Students have been recruited outside the lecture time and
during class breaks while in the library, canteen, etc. Completed questionnaires have been
collected directly by the researcher within three weeks of approval being granted by the
relevant Senior Officer on each campus.
One thousand one hundred and ten completed and valid questionnaires were received
from the four campuses representing approximately 10% of the student population on each
campus/university. Each campus contributed between one-fifth to just above one-fourth to the
overall sample with campus two having the largest share of the sample accounting for 29%
followed by campuses one and four (26% each) whereas campus three amounting to 20% of
the sample. Figures show more than three-quarters (77%) of the sample being females and
the remaining one-fourth (23%) males. Figures also reveal more than three-quarters (77%)
were born in Australia and approximately one-fourth (23%) were born overseas.
Considering the field of the study, figures reveal Society & Culture contributed to
around one-third of the sample (30%) followed by Education and Health sciences (24%
each), Management & Commerce (18%) and Information Technology accounted for only 4%
of the sample students. Figures indicate more than one-third of the sample students (39%)
were in their first year of study followed by second year (37%) and the final year accounted
for 24%. Considering the age of the surveyed students, figures show 19 years or under were
the largest group in the sample accounting for 39% followed by those aged 20-24 years
(37%) whereas those aged between 25-34 years accounting for 15% and those aged 35 years
and over representing 9% of the sample.
Research outcomes:
Data collected have been entered onto SPSS for Windows version 19.0 and appropriate
analysis has been conducted to achieve the research aims and objectives. Descriptive
statistics have been employed to describe and compare responses in relation to the
importance of character traits and their reinforcement within each university campus based on
the degree discipline, gender, and place of birth. Differences amongst the four campuses of
the four universities regarding the importance of character traits and their reinforcement have
also been explored as follows:
Overall findings:
Participants were asked to indicate the extent to what they believed the traits of character help
one achieve success in a career. Ability to take initiative and self-confidence were regarded
as the most important traits of character by the vast majority in the sample (86.8% & 86.5%
respectively). Other Head traits that were regarded very important by more than three-
quarters of the sample included open-mindedness, cooperativeness, tolerance of people with
different beliefs and backgrounds, flexibility, in addition to honesty (83%, 81%, 79%, 79%
and 77% respectively) as illustrated in Figure 1. As to the least important traits, participants
cited strength of religious beliefs as the least important trait followed by generosity, idealism
and critical attitude toward authority with around one-third or less of the sample perceiving
these as important. The remaining traits of character were perceived as very important by
approximately half to two-thirds of the sample.
Figure 1: The overall importance of Head and Heart traits of character needed to achieve
successes in a career and the perceived reinforcement
Source: A Survey of Student Opinion
0 20 40 60 80 100
Strength of religious beliefs
Generosity
Idealism
Critical attitude toward authority
Sense of humour
Openness, spontaneity
Loyalty to Colleagues
Satisfaction in creating something …
Compassion
Friendliness
Independence
Pleasure in learning something new
Pride in performance
Honesty
Flexibility
Tolerance
Cooperativeness
Open-mindedness
Self-confidence
Ability to take the initiative
Importance
Reinforced
Considering which traits of character have been stimulated or reinforced during the
course of their study at the university level, more than half of participants revealed that
tolerance of people with different beliefs and backgrounds in addition to ability to take
initiative, open-mindedness and cooperativeness were mostly reinforced (62%, 59%, 56% &
56% respectively). As to the least reinforced traits, less than one-fifth of students surveyed
signalled strength of religious beliefs, idealism and generosity as being least reinforced
during the course of their study at the university level.
Character traits by university campus:
As indicated earlier, participants have been drawn from four campuses at four different
universities in one capital city. Figure 2 reveals that participants on each campus assigned
different importance to the traits of character helping to achieve success in a career and they
also perceived different levels of reinforcement at each campus. Despite differences amongst
the responses based on their university campus, none of Head traits of character were
perceived statistically different in their importance to help one achieve success in a career.
Participants indicated different levels of reinforcements by each campus with significant
differences in relation to open-mindedness, compassion, openness, friendliness,
independence, tolerance of people with different beliefs and backgrounds, and strength of
religious beliefs. Most of the Heart traits of character were perceived statistically different in
relation to their perceived importance to help one achieve success in a career and
reinforcement during their studies at various campuses (P>0.05 or higher).
For the Campus 1 sample, ability to take the initiative was the highest important Head
trait to achieve success in a career followed by self-confidence and open-mindedness (88%,
86% and 84% respectively). Tolerance of people with different beliefs and backgrounds was
perceived as the highest important Heart traits by Campus 1 sample followed by honesty and
independency (80%, 79% and 67% respectively). Figures show Campus 1 participants stated
higher importance to pleasure in learning something new, satisfaction in creating something
new, sense of humour, idealism, and generosity compared to other campuses. Regarding
reinforcement of character traits, Campus 1 participants perceived tolerance of people with
different beliefs and backgrounds as the highest reinforced character traits followed by
cooperativeness and ability to take initiative (56%, 56% and 54% respectively). The idealism
trait was perceived the least reinforced character by Campus 1 participants during their
studies followed by generosity and openness. It is worth noting that participants from
Campus 1 stated higher reinforcement to traits character of honesty, sense of humour and
strength of religious beliefs compared to other campuses as illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Highest and least importance and reinforced of traits of character by campus
Source: A Survey of Student Opinion
The vast majority of participants from Campus 2 assigned more importance to self-
confidence trait of character that helps one achieve success in their career, compared to other
campuses, followed by ability to take the initiative, open-mindedness, cooperativeness and
tolerance of people with different beliefs and backgrounds (87%, 85%, 82%, 82% and 82%
0
20
40
60
80
100 C 1 Imp
C 1 Rinf
C 2 Imp
C 2 Rinf
C 3 Imp
C 3 Rinf
C 4 Imp
C 4 Rinf
respectively). Figure 2 shows Campus 2 participants stated higher importance to honesty,
friendliness, compassion, loyalty to colleagues, openness, and critical attitude to authority
compared to other campuses. Campus 2 sample perceived tolerance of people with different
beliefs and backgrounds as the highest reinforced character traits, and significantly higher
than other campuses, followed by cooperativeness and ability to take initiative. Campus 2
participants, shared with other campuses, the least perceived reinforcement of strength of
religious beliefs, idealism and generosity. Figures also show participants from Campus 2
outscored other campuses regarding perceived reinforcement of flexibility, self-confidence,
loyalty to colleagues, compassion and openness.
Figure 2 shows more than three-quarters of participants from Campus 3 sample
assigned more importance to ability to take the initiative, self-confidence, tolerance of people
with different beliefs and backgrounds, flexibility, and cooperativeness (89%, 86%, 85%,
85% and 82% respectively) compared to other campuses to achieve success in a career. More
than half of Campus 3 participants observed open-mindedness, independence, tolerance of
people with different beliefs and backgrounds and ability to take the initiative as the highest
reinforced character traits (66%, 62%, 61% and 59% respectively). Figures also reveal
strength of religious beliefs was perceived the least reinforced trait compared to other
campuses followed by generosity and idealism. Participants from campus 3 outscored their
counterparts in other campuses in relation to perceiving highest reinforcement of pride in
performance, satisfaction in creating something new and critical attitude towards authority.
Open-mindedness was given significantly more importance (85%) by Campus 4
participants compared to other campuses. Sample 4 participants shared with other campuses
the high importance of self-confidence, ability to take the initiative, flexibility and
cooperativeness to achieve success in a career (87%, 86%, 78% and 76% respectively).
Campus 4 participants also joined other campuses in allocating significantly least importance
to strength of religious beliefs and generosity to help achieve success in a career. Figure 2
indicates Campus 4 sample reported highest reinforcement of ability to take the initiative
during their university studies followed by tolerance of people with different beliefs and
backgrounds, independence, and open-mindedness (64%, 58%, 57% and 57% respectively).
Campus 4 sample also shared with others the least reinforcement of strength of religious
beliefs, generosity and idealism during their course of study.
It is worth pointing out that there is an imbalance between what students perceived
important for success in a future career and what they reported being reinforced during their
studies at the university level. Percentage of students who perceived a character trait
important far exceeded the percentage who perceived the same character trait being
reinforced. This is the case for all campuses and for all the Head and Heart character traits
apart from strength of religious beliefs where 18% of students in Campus 1 perceived this
trait important for a career success whereas 25% of students reported this trait being
reinforced.
Character traits by field of study:
Participants in this research have been drawn from five major disciplines: society & culture
(30%), education (24%), health (24%), management & commerce (18%), and information
technology (4%). Figure 3 indicates that participants from each field of study assigned
different importance to traits of character needed to achieve success in a career and they also
perceived different levels of reinforcement. Significant differences were perceived regarding
the importance of three Head character traits compared to seven of the Heart traits. Similar
numbers of differences were also revealed in relation to the reinforcement of the Head and
Heart character traits. The society and culture sample indicated the highest importance to
only one character trait (strength of religious beliefs) but they reported highest reinforcement
in eight traits with seven of them recording significant differences (open-mindedness,
tolerance, honesty, self-confidence, critical toward authority, openness, generosity and
idealism).
Figure 3: Highest and least importance and reinforcement of traits of character by discipline
Source: A Survey of Student Opinion (Place figure 3 here)
The education sample outscored other fields of study samples in five of each of the
Head and Heart character traits with four of them recording significant differences
(cooperativeness, ability to take the initiative, self-confidence, flexibility, tolerance, pride in
performance, independence, friendliness, compassion, and generosity) but they only reported
higher reinforcement in three traits with two of them recording significant differences
(flexibility, loyalty, and strength of religious beliefs). The health sample reported the highest
importance for five character traits with four of them recording significant differences
(honesty, pleasure in learning something new, loyalty to colleagues, openness, and critical
attitude toward authority) and also higher reinforcement in four traits but only two of these
were significant (pleasure in learning something new, independence, compassion, and
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100 IT Importance
IT Reinforced
Health Importance
Health Reinforced
Education Importance
Education Reinforced
Manag & Com Importance
Manag & Com Reinforced
Soc & Culture Importance
Soc & Culture Reinforced
strength of religious beliefs). The IT sample outscored other field of study samples
considering the importance of three traits with only one of them recording significant
differences (satisfaction in creating something new, sense of humour and idealism) whereas
this sample reported higher reinforcement in six character traits with two of them recording
significant differences (flexibility, cooperativeness, satisfaction in creating something new,
pride in performance, friendliness, and sense of humour). The management and commerce
sample allocated the highest importance to open-mindedness and indicated highest
reinforcement in ability to take the initiative compared to other campuses.
Major gaps have been found between what character trait each discipline in the
sample perceived important for success in a career with what they reported as being
reinforced during their study apart from two occasions. IT students in the sample reported the
reverse situation and indicated higher reinforcement regarding flexibility compared to the
importance assigned to it. In the same way, education students in the sample indicated higher
reinforcement in relation to strength of religious beliefs compared to the importance given to
this character trait help one achieve success in a career. Self-confidence was signalled as the
character trait with the highest gap as perceived by the sample students from health,
education, management & commerce, and society and culture disciplines whereas pleasure in
learning something new was the trait with the highest gap identified by the IT sample.
Character traits by gender:
Analysing sample responses in relation to the importance of Head and Heart traits of
character to achieve success in a career and perceived reinforcement during their studies at
the university level, the figures reveal differences in sample responses based on their gender.
Females in the sample, signalled higher importance to fifteen of the Head and Heart twenty
character traits with eleven of these differences significant to the level of P>0.05 or higher.
Males outscored their female counterparts by only five traits and none of them amounted to a
significant difference. The picture was not different regarding reinforcement of the Head and
Heart character traits during their studies where females in the sample reported higher
reinforcement for seventeen out of the twenty traits and eight of these were significantly
different compared to only one significant trait (idealism) where males in the sample
outscored females as per figure 4.
Figure 4: Highest and least importance and reinforcement of traits of character by gender
Source: A Survey of Student Opinion
More than three-quarters of the female sample perceived that ability to take the
initiative, self-confidence, open-mindedness, cooperativeness, and tolerance of people with
different beliefs and backgrounds, and honesty are very important character traits that help
one achieve success in a career (89%, 86%, 85%, 83% 82% and 79% respectively). Figure 4
also shows more than two-thirds of female sample also indicated that pride in performance,
pleasure in learning something new, independence, and friendliness as important character
traits. In addition, only one-third to one-fifth of the female sample perceived critical attitude
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Female Importance
Male Importance
Female Reinforced
Male Reinforced
toward authority, generosity and strength of religious beliefs as important traits although they
outscored their male counterparts regarding the first and the last traits.
Considering male responses in the sample, more than three- quarters perceived self-
confidence as the most important character trait needed to achieve success in a future career
followed by ability to take the initiative and open-mindedness (88%, 82% and 77%
respectively). The importance that males in the sample placed on the first two character traits
is in reverse to their female counterparts but both agreed on placing the open-mindedness trait
in third place. Figures also show more than two-thirds of the male surveyed indicated the
importance of cooperativeness, flexibility, pride in performance, honesty, tolerance of people
with different beliefs and backgrounds, independence and pleasure in learning something new
as important character traits needed to achieve a career success (73%, 72%, 71%, 70%, 68%,
66% and 66% respectively). In addition, males in the sample agreed with their female
counterparts regarding placing critical attitude toward authority, generosity and strength of
religious beliefs as the least important character traits as illustrated in figure 4.
Regarding reinforcement of the Head and Heart character traits, figure 4 reveals
around two-third of the females in the sample reported tolerance of people with different
beliefs and backgrounds as the highest reinforced trait followed by ability to take the
initiatives, open-mindedness, independence and cooperativeness (65%, 61%, 60%, 58% and
57% respectively). Approximately half of the males in the sample regarded cooperation and
ability to take the initiative as the most reinforced traits followed by tolerance of people with
different beliefs and backgrounds and flexibility (52%, 51%, 48% and 48% respectively).
Both females and males in the sample agreed regarding reporting strength of religious beliefs
as the least character trait reinforced during their university study followed by idealism and
generosity.
When analysing what females and males in the sample perceived important for
success in a career with what they reported as being reinforced during their study, there was a
clear imbalance equally shared by both genders in the sample. The biggest imbalance for both
genders was regarding the honesty character trait whereas females reported the least
difference in relation to critical attitude toward authority compared with strength of religious
beliefs for males in the sample as illustrated in figure 4.
Character traits by place of birth:
Differences were found in sample responses born in Australia compared to those born
overseas regarding the importance of the Head and Heart traits of character helping one to
achieve success in a career and perceived reinforcement during their studies at the university
level. Considering the importance of character traits, the sample born in Australia shared with
those born overseas in the number of highest scores given to the character traits. However,
those born in Australia reported higher reinforcement to fourteen of the Head and Heart
character traits compared to those born overseas with three of these differences statistically
different. Both parts of the sample sharing in the level of reported reinforcement (56%) of the
open-mindedness trait as illustrated in figure 5.
The vast majority of the sample (90%) born in Australia perceived ability to take the
initiative as the most important character trait needed for success in a career followed by self-
confidence, open-mindedness, and cooperativeness (86% 83% and 82% respectively). Those
born overseas signalled self-confidence as the most important trait followed by open-
mindedness and pleasure in learning something new (87%, 85% and 79% respectively).
Figure 5 also shows more than three-quarters of the sample born in Australia indicated the
importance of cooperativeness, tolerance of people with different beliefs and backgrounds,
flexibility, honesty, and pride in performance. More than three-quarters of those born
overseas indicated the importance of honesty, flexibility, tolerance of people with different
beliefs and backgrounds, cooperativeness and ability to take the initiative. Sample surveyed
(those born in Australia and overseas) regarded strength of religious beliefs and generosity as
the least important traits needed to achieve success in a career although those born overseas
outscored their Australian counterparts as evidenced in figure 5.
Figure 5: Highest and least importance and reinforcement of traits of character by place of
birth
Source: A Survey of Student Opinion
In relation to reinforcement of the Head and Heart character traits, figures show more
than half of the sample surveyed (born in Australia and overseas) perceived tolerance of
people with different beliefs and backgrounds, ability to take the initiative, cooperativeness,
open-mindedness, flexibility, independence, and pleasure in learning something new as the
highest character traits reinforced during their course of study although those born in
Australia outscored those born overseas for most of the traits. Both parts of the sample
agreed in reporting strength of religious beliefs, idealism, and generosity as the least
character traits to be reinforced during their studies.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Australia Importance
Australia Reinforced
Overseas Importance
Overseas Reinforced
Analysing what those born in Australia and those born overseas in the sample
perceived important for success in a career with what they reported as being reinforced, there
is higher imbalance in the perception of those born overseas (the mismatch was evidence in
13 traits) compared to those born in Australia as illustrated in figure 5. The biggest difference
between what was perceived to be important and what has been reinforced for those born in
Australia was in relation to self-confidence compared to honesty for those born overseas.
Discussion and Conclusion
Using Maccoby’s (1976) Head and Heart survey instrument of character traits, this study
reports on research involving more than 1100 students in four campuses of four different
universities in one capital city. The three most important character traits perceived important
to help one achieve success in their career were all Head character traits whereas the least
three important were all Heart traits. Ability to take the initiative was regarded by the sample
students as the most important character trait needed to achieve success in a career. It was
also perceived the highest important character trait by females, campuses 1 & 3, Australian
born, and by health, education, and management & commerce students in the sample. Self-
confidence was seen as second highest important character trait by the overall sample but it
was perceived the most important character trait that helps one achieve success in a career by
males, campuses 2 & 4, overseas born and society & culture students in the sample whereas
information technology students perceived cooperativeness as the most important trait.
Strength of religious beliefs was reported as the least important character trait by the sample
students regardless of their campuses, gender, fields of study and place of birth.
The above findings are similar to Patten, 1990, Booth, Corriher, & Geurin, 1995,
Ruhe, 2003 & 2008, Krambia-Kapardis, and Zopiatis, 2008 & 2011 in relation to the ability
of higher educational institutions to do a good job, at different levels, of emphasising and
developing analytical skills and achieving success in all aspects of life that are founded on the
Maccoby’s Head values. It is possibly not surprising that students of different courses in
different campuses would have different views and perceptions about the importance of
character traits in achieving future success. However, it is not clear how students’ surveyed
developed these values or what impacted on them in perceiving Head traits most important
for future career success. It is also not clear if students’ surveyed had developed these values
prior to joining their respective courses through their family and friends’ environment or
secondary education as contends by Ferrell, Fraedrich and Ferrell (2013). There is also
uncertainty in relation to what impact their faculty staff, campus culture, and other students,
has had on developing such values (Booth, 1995), and if there were differences across first
year compared to final year students. Importance given to the Head values by students in
different campuses, enrolled in different courses and regardless of their gender and place of
birth could not be matched to the emphasis given to the Head traits by potential employers or
if it does meet their demands of university graduates. However, what could be concluded
from the importance given to the Head traits is that this is not only perceived by business
students in the sample, as documented by business ethics scholars, rather, students in other
disciplines do share with business students the importance of developing analytical skills in
order to achieve success in future careers. These findings also raise questions and doubts
about university claims that they develop unique graduate attributes in their students. These
findings could be highlighting more of the commonalities amongst the universities than
differences in their graduate attributes. These commonalities could be driven more by their
respective profession rather than the training institution and its culture.
Among the three most important character traits perceived to be reinforced during
university studies by the student sample was a Heart trait followed by two Head traits.
Tolerance of people with different beliefs and backgrounds was perceived, by the overall
sample, as the highest character trait that was reinforced during university studies. It was also
regarded as the highest reinforced trait by the sample regardless of place of birth, campus 1 &
2, females, education, and society & culture students. Ability to take the initiative was
reported as second highest reinforced character trait by the sample and perceived the highest
reinforced trait by campus 4, males, health, and management & commerce students in the
sample. Open-mindedness was seen as the most reinforced character trait by campus 3
students compared to cooperativeness as seen by information technology students in the
sample. Strength of religious beliefs was reported as the least reinforced character trait by the
sample students regardless of their, place of birth and by campus 2, 3, 4, IT, management &
commerce, and society & culture students in the sample. Campus 1, health, and education
students in the sample perceived idealism as the least reinforced character trait during their
university study.
These perceived reinforcement findings do not conform to the relevant literature,
especially that reported by business ethics scholars in relation to the reinforcement and
stimulation of Head traits by higher institutions (Patten, 1990, Booth, Corriher, & Geurin,
1995, Ruhe, 2003 & 2008, Krambia-Kapardis, & Zopiatis, 2008 & 2011). These findings are
in contrast to the imbalance between “Head and Heart values” that Maccoby, 1976, found in
his studies of business executives, managers and engineers. The findings reflect the needed
balance between “Head and Heart values” that Maccoby contends is needed to ensure
sensitivity to ethical implications of business decisions. Despite the importance of these
findings, it is not clear what influenced students in arriving at and in the development of this
perception and what other factors, if any, contributed to this development. These findings
raise doubt to the argument that business leaders (students today) are self-indulgent and
greedy. What could be concluded is that business students are no different to students
undertaking other courses. If leaders commit unethical behaviour, while pursuing personal
and corporate goals, they are more likely unaware of the effects of their decisions on others
as concluded by Carroll in his 1987 study. Despite this, one could not conclude that there is a
causation relationship between the balanced reinforcement of the “Head and Heart values”
and the role or impact of the higher educational institutions’ culture given that sample
students from all four campuses of four different universities reported similar result.
However, this may also reflect changes in overall societal perceptions in Australia and
worldwide rather than contributed to by the educational institutions alone (although they
played a significant role).
There is an imbalance between what students perceived important for success in a
future career and what they reported being reinforced during their studies at the university
level. In other words, the percentage of students who perceived a character trait important far
exceeded the percentage who perceived the same character trait being reinforced. Thus, an
imbalance has been identified between what the student perceived to be important and what
they experienced being reinforced and stimulated during their studies at the university level.
However, the extent of the imbalance does vary from one character trait to another with
greater imbalance in the Head character traits compared to the Heart. This imbalance was
evidenced in the sample responses regardless of their campuses, gender, discipline and place
of birth. In this sense, it could be concluded that universities are failing their student
populations by not meeting their expectations in relation to the reinforcement and stimulation
of character traits that they perceive important for success in future careers.
Findings of this research will impact and shape training of the next generation of
leaders in various disciplines, enhancing success and promoting ethical leadership in
organisations. More research is needed to validate the above findings and identify training
implications for each discipline; explore the relevancy of importance given to each of the
character traits by students to those assigned by employers of discipline graduates; and then
determine to what extent this matches the higher institutional expectations as highlighted by
their graduate attributes.
References:
Allen, W.R., Bacdaya, P., Kowalski, K.B. & Roy, M. (2005). Examining the impact of ethics
training on business student values. Education and Training, 47, (2/3), 170-182.
Allen, W.R., Davis, J.H., Ruhe, J.A. & Geurin, V.T. (1998). Character traits importance and
reinforcement for future leaders: a longitudinal assessment. Journal of Contemporary
Business, 6, (1), 5-22.
Booth, R., Corriher, S.E. & Geurin, V.S. (1995). The head rules the heart in business
education. Sam Advanced Management Journal, 60, (3) 40-47.
Caroll, A. (1987). In search of moral managers. Business Horizons, March-April, 44-45.
Ferrell, O.C., Fraedrich, J. & Ferrell, L. (2013). Business ethics: ethical decision making and
cases, 9th Ed, Cengage Learning, Mason, Ohio.
Hess, G.F. (2002). Heads and hearts: The teaching and learning environment in law school,
Journal of Legal Education, 52 (1-2), 75-111.
Kochunny, C.M. & Rogers, H. (1994). Head-heart disparity among future managers:
implications for ethical conduct, Journal of Business Ethics, 13, (9), 719-729.
Kochunny, C.M., Rogers, H., Ogbuehi, A.O. (1996). Head and heart orientation: a measure of
marketers’ predisposition for ethical conduct. Journal of Applied Business Research, 56
(1), 25-29.
Krambia-Kapardis, M. & Zopiatis, A. (2008). Investigating “head” and “heart” value traits of
tertiary students studying in Cyprus, EuroMed Journal of Business, 3 (2), 163-178.
Krambia-Kapardis, M. & Zopiatis, A. (2011). Personal values of accountants and accounting
trainees in Cyprus, Business Ethics, A European Review, 20 (1), 59-70.
McRichie, J. (2005). Corporate governance: what’s inside? Accessed, August 2012 on line
www.corpgov.net/inside/corporate-ethics-class.html.
Oishi, S., Hahn, J., Schimmack, U., Radhakrishan, P., Dzokoto, V., & Ahadi, S., (2005). The
measurement of values across cultures: a pairwise comparison approach, 299-305.
Maccoby, M. (1976). The gamesman. Simon & Schuster, New York.
Maupin, R. & Lehman, C. (1994). Talking heads: stereotypes, sex roles and satisfaction of
female and male auditors. Organisations and Society, 19 (4/5), 427-437.
Pascarella, R. & Terenzinin, P. (1991). How college affects students: findings and insights from
twenty years of research, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
Patten, D.M. (1990). The differential perception of accountants to Maccoby’s head/heart
traits. Journal of Business Ethics, 9, (10), 791-798.
Payne, S. (1988). Values and ethics related measures for management education. Journal of
Business Ethics, (7), 273-277.
Rockeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. The Free Press, NY.
Ruhe, J. (1991). Value importance for success: a longitudinal study, SAM, Advanced
Management Journal, Vol. 56, (1), 10-15.
Ruhe, J., Allen, W., Davis, J., Geurin, V., & Longenecker, J. (1998). Value traits reinforcement
and perceived importance: does context matter? International Journal of Value-Based
Management, Vol.11, (2), 103-124.
Ruhe, J. & Nahser, F. (2003). A Pedagogical Model and Practice, Paper presented at the 5th
International Symposium on Catholic Social Thought and Management Education, 15-
18/July 2003. Bilbao, Spain.
Ruche, J. & Lee, M. (2008). Teaching ethics in international business courses: the impact of
religion. Routledge.
Schwartz, S.H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances
and empirical test in twenty countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,
25, 1- 65.
Zikive, R & Zikive, A. (1993). The Japanese value system & Colon; an application of
Maccoby’s head and heart traits, Management Decision, 31, (4).