philosophy for marketing managers

EuropeanJournal ofMarketing3678

768

European Journal of MarketingVol 36 No 78 2002 pp 768-791 MCB UP Limited 0309-0566DOI 10110803090560210430791

Received March 2000Revised August 2000

Moral philosophies ofmarketing managers

A comparison of American Australianand Malaysian cultures

Kiran KarandeOld Dominion University Norfolk Virginia USA

CP RaoKuwait University Kuwait and

Anusorn SinghapakdiOld Dominion University Norfolk Virginia USA

Keywords Moral responsibility Ethics Australia Malaysia USA

Abstract A recent article pointed out that ` past research has paid relatively little attention tothe sources of individualsrsquo moral philosophies from either a conceptual or an empiricalstandpointrsquorsquo and investigated the determinants of idealism and relativism among Americanmarketers A literature review indicates that there is even less theoretical and empirical cross-cultural investigation of moral philosophies As more and more companies are expanding intoforeign markets problems related to cross-national ethics and social responsibility are becomingincreasingly prevalent Therefore this study proposes a framework explaining the differences inthe idealism and relativism of American Malaysian and Australian marketers based on countrydifferences (cultural differences and differences in economic and legalpolitical environment)corporate ethical values and gender and age of the marketer Results indicate that there aredifferences in the level of idealism and relativism exhibited by marketers from the three countriesIrrespective of country corporate ethical values are positively related to the idealism andnegatively related to the relativism of marketers Also irrespective of country women are moreidealistic than men and relativism increases with age Implications are offered and avenues forfuture research suggested

IntroductionGlobalization forces have been sweeping global and individual countryeconomies This emerging economic order has made it imperative for manybusinesses to deal with overseas market environments Issues such as globalwarming child labor green marketing software piracy protection of intellectualproperty rights and patent infringement have acquired increased prominence as aconsequence of these globalization trends (Czinkota and Ronkainen 1998)However these issues do not have the same importance in every country Vastdifferences exist across countries in terms of their economic development culturalstandards legalpolitical systems expectations regarding business conduct(Wotruba 1997) and enforcement of policies (Mittelstaedt and Mittelstaedt 1997)

The research register for this journal is available at

httpwwwemeraldinsightcomresearchregisters

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

httpwwwemeraldinsightcom0309-0566htm

The authors thank Mohd Rashid Ahmed and Zabid Md Rashid Universiti Pertanian MalaysiaMalaysia and Muris Cicic University of Wollongong NSW Australia for their assistance in thedata collection for this study They also thank Janet Marta fo her comments

Philosophies ofmarketingmanagers

769

Consequently what may be considered illegal in one country may be customaryor even acceptable in others (Czinkota and Ronkainen 1998) Under suchcircumstances understanding how marketers in different countries make ethicaljudgments about business situations involving ethical dilemmas is important

It is well accepted in the business ethics literature that managers applyethical guidelines based on their personal moral philosophies when confrontedwith ethical issues (Singhapakdi et al 1999) Moral philosophy refers to theprinciples or rules that people use to decide what is right or wrong (Ferrell andFraedrich 1997) Personal moral philosophy is depicted as one of the importantfactors influencing ethical decision making in established models of businessethics (eg Hunt and Vitell 1986 Trevino 1986 Ferrell and Gresham 1985)Ethical judgments may be explained parsimoniously by two aspects ofpersonal moral philosophies idealism and relativism (see also Schlenker andForsyth 1977) These two dimensions of moral philosophies have beenextensively used in the business ethics literature and have been shown toinfluence important variables in ethical decision making such as perceivedethical problem (Hunt and Vitell 1986) ethical intention (Singhapakdi et al1999) ethical sensitivity (Sparks and Hunt 1998) perceived importance ofethics and social responsibility (Singhapakdi et al 1995) ethical judgement(Vitell and Singhapakdi 1993) and perceived moral intensity (Singhapakdiet al 1999)

In a recent article Singhapakdi et al (1999 p 22) commented that ` pastresearch has paid relatively little attention to the sources of individualsrsquo moralphilosophies from either a conceptual or an empirical standpointrsquorsquo and theyinvestigated the determinants of idealism and relativism among Americanmarketers There is even less theoretical and empirical cross-culturalinvestigation of moral philosophies The present study focuses on cross-national differences in idealism and relativism and proposes a frameworkexplaining the variation in idealism and relativism of Australian Americanand Malaysian marketers by country differences (including cultural differencesand differences in economic and legalpolitical environment) corporate ethicalvalues and gender and age of the marketer

From a managerial perspective an understanding of the extent to whichmarketers from different countries apply the rules of idealism and relativismand why they apply these rules to a varying degree across countries is usefulIt helps managers comprehend the underlying thinking (philosophy) ofmarketers from different countries in evaluating ethical actions In theinternational context such an understanding can be used by corporatemanagers to develop training programs as well as develop codes of ethics thatwill enhance the ethical environment in corporations This study also providesinput on how corporate ethical values are related to the idealism and relativismof marketers and how gender and age influence the extent to which one isidealistic and relativistic which has implications in terms of developingmanagement policiesorganizational culture and planning of ethics trainingprograms


770

This research is organized as follows first we review the literature onmoral philosophies In the second section we present the theoretical foundationof the study and develop the hypotheses In the third section on methodologydetails about the sample the measures (including their reliability and validity)as well as measurement equivalence of the idealism relativism and thecorporate ethical values scales (Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1998) areprovided Next results are discussed In the fifth section managerialimplications are provided and finally limitations of the study andrecommendations for future research are given

Literature reviewBusiness ethics theorists generally agree that when faced with decisionsituations having ethical content managers apply ethical guidelines based onmoral philosophies (eg Ferrell and Gresham 1985 Hunt and Vitell 1986)Social psychologists also consider moral philosophies or ` personal ethicalsystemsrsquorsquo to be important factors influencing an individualrsquos ethicaljudgements In particular Forsyth (1980) identified two aspects of moralphilosophy relativism and idealism as important predictors of moraljudgement Relativism ` rejects the possibility of formulating or relying onuniversal moral rules when drawing conclusions about moral questionsrsquorsquo(Forsyth 1980 pp 175-6) According to Forsyth (1992)

Relativists generally feel that moral actions depend upon the nature of the situation and theindividuals involved and when judging others they weigh the circumstances more than theethical principal that was violated

Those who exhibit high relativism can be described as skeptics and theygenerally feel that moral actions depend upon the nature of the situation andthe principle involved On the other hand those who exhibit low relativismbelieve that morality requires acting in ways that are consistent with moralprinciples norms or laws

Idealism is defined as the degree to which individuals ` assume that desirableconsequences can with the right action always be obtainedrsquorsquo (p 175) Idealismdescribes the individualrsquos concern for the welfare of others Highly idealisticindividuals believe that harming others is always avoidable and they wouldrather not choose between the lesser of two evils that will lead to negativeconsequences for other people Those who are less idealistic feel that harm issometimes necessary to produce good (Forsyth 1980 1992) Idealism is notbased on an embrace of moral absolutes rather it involves values related toaltruism and a sense of optimism in considering responses to moral issues(Singhapakdi et al 1999) Therefore idealism and relativism are conceptuallyindependent and individuals may be high or low on either dimension (Forsyth1992)

It is important to highlight how idealism and relativism reconcile with manyof the schools of thought related to moral philosophy that researchers havedeveloped over the last several decades (for example teleology ethical


771

skepticism ethical egoism utilitarianism and deontology) as well as otherframeworks of moral thought (eg ` Survey of ethical attitudesrsquorsquo by Hogan (19701973) and cognitive moral development by Kohlberg (1976)) Forsyth (1980)argued that idealism and relativism together capture many otherconceptualizations of moral philosophy For example high relativism-lowidealism individuals exhibit ethical egoism which espouses that no moralstandards are valid except in reference to onersquos own behavior and defines rightor acceptable actions as those that maximize a particular personrsquos self-interestas defined by the individual High relativism-high idealism individuals exhibitidealistic skepticism which argues that morality should focus on ` a contextualappropriateness ndash not the `goodrsquo or the `rightrsquo but the `fittingrsquo with all actionsbased on love of othersrsquorsquo (Fletcher 1973 p 186) Low relativism-high idealismindividuals exhibit the moral philosophy of deontology which focuses on thepreservation of individual rights and on the intentions associated with aparticular behavior rather than on its consequences In deontologicalphilosophy there is some universal moral rule that is absolute in determiningright from wrong The statements endorsed by low relativism-low idealismindividuals are similar to the teleological thought which stipulates that acts aremorally right or acceptable if they produce some desired result such as therealization of self-interest or utility Low relativism-low idealism thought is alsocompatible with utilitarianism which defines right or acceptable actions asthose that maximize total utility or the greatest good for the greatest number ofpeople

Forsyth (1980) also argued that the relativism scale shared a commonfoundation with another frequently used measure of moral thought ndash Hoganrsquos` Survey of ethical attitudesrsquorsquo (Hogan 1970 1973) Further he also stated thatwhile Kohlbergrsquos (1976) cognitive moral development approach relies on thestage of moral development based on self-generated thoughts the idealism-relativism approach takes advantage of completely different criteria ndash idealismin evaluating consequences and moral relativism ndash when describing variationsin moral thought (Forsyth 1980) Therefore an individual who displays post-conventional moral reasoning as classified by Kohlberg could endorse any oneof the philosophies characterized by any of the four combinations of idealismand relativism

Many ethics studies testify to the fact that idealism and relativism affectdifferent aspects of ethical decision making Forsyth (1992) proposed thatidealism and relativism can influence business ethical decisions Sparks andHunt (1998) found that relativism was negatively related to ethical sensitivityof marketing research professionals where ethical sensitivity is the ability torecognize that a decision-making situation has ethical content Singhapakdiet al (1999) found that among marketing professionals idealism has a positiveeffect and relativism a negative effect on perceived moral intensity In anotherrelated study more idealistic and less relativistic marketers were found toperceive ethics and social responsibility to be more important than did theircounterparts (Singhapakdi et al 1995) Empirical research has also shown that


772

more idealistic and less relativistic marketers tend to exhibit higher honestyand integrity than less idealistic and more relativistic marketers (Vitell et al1993) Further the deontological norms of marketers are influenced positivelyby idealism and negatively by relativism (Vitell and Singhapakdi 1993) Insummary there is extensive literature demonstrating that idealism andrelativism influence ethical decision making

Theoretical foundation and hypothesesIn this section it is proposed that the variation in idealism and relativism ofmarketers is explained by country differences (including cultural differencesand differences in economic and legalpolitical environment) corporate ethicalvalues and individual characteristics of gender and age Figure 1 summarizesthe proposed framework

Country differencesCultural differences In this section cultural differences among the threecountries and their influence on idealism and relativism are described basedupon Hofstedersquos (1983) and Hofstede and Bondrsquos (1988) five dimensions ofculture Hofstedersquos typology is relevant for our study because it capturesculture along five different dimensions and has been widely used in studyingmarketing and managerial issues and specifically ethical decision making (egVitell et al 1993 Singhapakdi et al 1994)

Individualismcollectivism Individualism implies

A loosely knit social framework in which people are supposed to take care of themselves andof their immediate families only while collectivism is characterized by a tight socialframework in which people distinguish between in-groups and out-groups they expect theirin-group (relatives clan organizations) to look after them and in exchange for that they feelabsolute loyalty to it (Hofstede 1980 p 45)

In other words individualism indicates the extent of non-dependence on theorganization Marketers in collectivistic countries (such as Malaysia) would beexpected to be more loyal to their organizations because of greater dependenceand therefore concerned for their organizationrsquos wellbeing when makingdecisions

Idealistic individuals assume that desirable consequences can with the rightaction always be obtained feel that harming others is always avoidable andwould rather not choose between the lesser of two evils that will lead tonegative consequences for other people (Forsyth 1992) In other words intrying to make the right decisions idealistic individuals are likely to look afterthe welfare of others and society in general and consequently marketers fromindividualistic countries are likely to be less idealistic than those fromcollectivistic countries Alternatively collectivistic managers in order toprotect the organization might be tempted to act in ways that will harm othersthus influencing idealism negatively In other words individualism couldimpact idealism in both directions


773

Figure 1Theoretical frameworks

for idealism andrelativism


774

Relativism rejects the possibility of formulating or relying on universal moralrules when drawing conclusions about moral questions Collectivisticmanagers might be more prone to attribute their actions to situations orcircumstances in order to take care of their organization and colleagues becauserelativists generally feel that moral actions depend upon the nature of thesituation and the individuals involved In other words they are likely to bemore relativistic than individualistic managers Consistently the moreindividualistic managers with no pressures of loyalty might have fewerreasons to attribute actions to circumstances In other words managers fromcollectivistic countries are likely to be more relativistic than those fromindividualistic cultures

Masculinityfemininity Hofstede (1980) defined masculine cultures such asthe USA and Australia as those that value material success and assertivenessmore and the less masculine cultures such as Malaysia as those that placemore value on qualities like modesty humility benevolence interpersonalrelationships and concern for the weak which may contribute to marketersrsquoidealism and relativism For example in making decisions the more ambitiousand competitive marketers from countries ranking high on masculinity mightbe tempted to respond to pressure for greater efficiency at all costs Thereforethey may be more willing to consider taking actions that are harmful to othersmore than those who come from less masculine cultures and therefore showrelatively less idealistic tendencies As for relativism the more competitive andambitious marketers from masculine cultures would be expected to attributeactions to the situation in order to achieve greater efficiency and show superiorperformance which can be contrasted with those from less masculine cultureswho would have less motivation to do so Thus masculinity can be expected tobe positively related to relativism

Power distance Power distance is the degree to which the members of agroup or society accept that ` power in institutions and organizations isdistributed unequallyrsquorsquo (Hofstede 1980 p 45) Individuals from cultures withhigh power distance (such as Malaysia) usually accept the inequality of powerperceive differences between superiors and subordinates are reluctant todisagree with superiors and believe that superiors are entitled to privileges(Hofstede 1983) In contrast those from cultures with lower levels of powerdistance are less likely to tolerate class distinctions are more likely to preferdemocratic participation and are not afraid to disagree with superiorsConsequently marketers from high power distance countries are likely toperceive a need to minimize disagreement with superiors and satisfy superiorsby trying to act in ways that will not harm others and raise controversies Inother words power distance is positively related to idealism By a similarargument in determining the rightness of decisions marketers from highpower distance countries might be more prone to attribute certain actions tosituations so that they can satisfy their superiors and therefore are likely to bemore relativistic than those from low power distance countries


775

Uncertainty avoidance Hofstede (1980 p 45) defined uncertainty avoidanceas

A characteristic of culture that defines the extent to which people within a culture are madenervous by situations that they consider to be unstructured unclear or unpredictable and theextent to which they try to avoid such situations by adopting strict codes of behavior and abelief in absolute truths

The risk-taking orientation of marketers from low uncertainty avoidingcountries would lead them to take actions in order to improve efficiency andperformance even if they were harmful to others On the other hand the moreconservative managers from the high uncertainty avoiding countries would nottake actions that would be questionable (and risky) In other words managersfrom the uncertainty avoiding cultures are likely to be more idealistic thanthose from low uncertainty avoiding countries Along the same lines the risk-taking managers from low uncertainty avoidance countries would be prone toattributing certain actions to the situation and therefore be more relativisticthan those from the high uncertainty avoidance countries

Confucian dynamism Confucian dynamism is a work ethic that values thriftpersistence ordered relationships and having a sense of shame (Hofstede andBond 1988) They stated that individuals in countries ranking high onConfucian dynamism tend to adhere to the more future-oriented teachings ofConfucius those from countries ranking low on Confucian dynamism tend tobe more present- and past-oriented Marketers from cultures ranking high onConfucian dynamism have a strong sense of shame and are likely to be wary ofactions that are improper or disgraceful Marketers from high Confuciandynamism countries would therefore avoid any actions that are harmful toothers and bring disrepute to the company In other words they would exhibitgreater idealism than marketers from low Confucian dynamism countriesAlternatively it is also possible that marketers from high Confucian dynamismcountries might be sensitive to the shame arising out of inferior performance(within the company) and might therefore believe that greater efficiency andprofits are important even at the cost of harming others In other wordsConfucian dynamism on idealism could influence idealism in both directionsUsing similar arguments it can be argued that in order to avoid shamemanagers from the high Confucian dynamism cultures might be tempted toattribute actions to the situation and therefore be more relativisticConsistently those from low Confucian dynamism countries might be lessconcerned about the shame of low performance and be less relativistic

Table I summarizes Hofstedersquos ranking of the three countries on fivedimensions of culture (Hofstede 1980 Hofstede and Bond 1988) In generalAustralians and Americans are ranked higher on individualism andmasculinity and lower on uncertainty avoidance and power distance thanMalaysians On Confucian dynamism the USA and Australia are ranked veryclose but no ranking was available for Malaysia Based on masculinity powerdistance Malaysian marketers would be expected to have higher idealism thanthose from Australia and the USA Based on uncertainty avoidance Malaysian


776

marketers would be expected to have lower idealism than those from Australiaand the USA Further based on individualism and Confucian dynamismdifferences in idealism of marketers from the three countries could be in bothdirections Similarly Australian and American managers would be expected toexhibit higher relativism than Malaysian managers based on individualismand masculinity and Malaysian managers would be expected to exhibit higherrelativism than Australian and American managers based on power distanceuncertainty avoidance and Confucian dynamism

Differences in economic and legalpolitical environment The impact ofdifferences in economic development and the legalpolitical environmentamong nations has been noted by scholars (eg Mittelstaedt and Mittelstaedt1997 Wotruba 1997) In the context of protection of intellectual property (IP)Mittelstaedt and Mittelstaedt (1997 p 21) noted that ` it is clear that protectingan IP by excluding others from its use is viewed differently in developing anddeveloped countriesrsquorsquo and

Although this often seems to be a purely economic issue many developing nations also havecultural traditions that serve to reinforce the LDCrsquos economic interests For example for the` public goodrsquorsquo many developing nations neither allow patents by their own nationals norrecognize patents of others for such goods as medicines or food products (Ehrbar 1992)

From another perspective Laczniak and Murphy (1993 p 216) noted that` in many less developed countries pressures on organizations to succeedare often more fierce than in a developed country settingrsquorsquo Laczniak andMurphy (1993) further explained that in order to achieve primary needs firmsin less developed countries might have to take actions that will lead toimmediate financial improvement and stability They argued that it is not untilfinancial security has been attained that the firms will start to pay attention tosuch secondary needs as ` to be perceived as a good corporate citizen andconduct business ethicallyrsquorsquo (p 216) These studies suggest that in ethicalsituations managers from developing countries and developed countries arelikely to apply different criteria to gauge the ethicality of a situation and thusexhibit different moral philosophies In general managers from developedcountries are more likely to believe that actions should be taken withoutharming others than those from developing countries Also managers indeveloping countries are likely to believe that moral actions depend upon the

Table IScores (and ranks) forthe three countries onHofstedersquos dimensions

Country Power distance Individualism MasculinityUncertaintyavoidance

Confuciandynamism

Australia 36 (41) 90 (2) 61 (16) 51 (37) 31 (11-12)Malaysia 104 (1) 26 (36) 50 (25-26) 36 (46) naUSA 40 (38) 91 (1) 62 (15) 46 (43) 29 (14)

Notes Ranks range from 1-53 for all dimensions except Confucian dynamism 1-20

Source Hofstede (1980) and Hofstede and Bond (1988)


777

situation and therefore likely to be more relativistic than managers fromdeveloped countries

With regard to the legalpolitical environment the relationship between thelegal environment and moral philosophies has been implicitly noted by manybusiness ethics scholars For example Beauchamp and Bowie (1993 p 4) notedthat ` Law is the publicrsquos agency for translating morality into explicit socialguidelines and practices and stipulating offensesrsquorsquo Dunfee (1996 p 318) statedthat the legal system is sometimes required to nurture or to implement themoral preferences of society particularly with reference to universal moralprohibitions against physical harm He also stated that where moral viewshave not converged toward a sufficiently broad consensus the law may help tobring about a change in attitude Therefore the legalpolitical frameworkwithin a country can be expected to impact a managerrsquos moral philosophy andidealism and relativism

The legalpolitical systems vary across countries both in terms of contentand enforcement (eg Vogel 1992 Wotruba 1997) Vogel (1992) noted that inspite of globalization the norms of business (as well as business and academicinterest) in ethics were substantially higher in the USA than in other advancedcapitalist countries such as western Europe and Japan He attributed it to thedistinctive institutional legal social and cultural environment in the USA thatcontributes toward a stringent enforcement of law In another relevant studyWotruba (1997) stated that ` undoubtedly there are some less developingcountries for which comprehensive legislation on restrictive practices has yet tobe enacted And even in such countries where legislation does existenforcement is often negligible (Newman 1980)rsquorsquo In the context of this studythe legalpolitical systems (including the existence specificity as well as theenforcement of laws) can be expected to be different across the three countriesFor example there is evidence that in the USA the legalpolitical systems arewell-developed (eg Vogel 1992) and that in Malaysia they are evolving (egGupta and Sulaiman 1996) Although there is no academic research on theregulatory environment in Australia it can be expected to be different fromthat in the USA and Malaysia Marketers from countries with more stringentlegalpolitical environments are more likely to believe that desirableconsequences can with the right actions always be obtained and therefore aremore idealistic Also they are more likely to believe that morality requiresacting in ways that are consistent with the law and therefore exhibit lessrelativism than managers from countries with less stringent legalpoliticalenvironments In the context of this study Malaysian marketers are likely to bemore relativistic and less idealistic than Australian managers and Australianmanagers are likely to be more relativistic and less idealistic than Americanmanagers

In summary based on cultural differences and differences in economic andlegalpolitical environment we expect Australian Malaysian and Americanmarketers to exhibit different levels of idealism and relativism It is notpossible to hypothesize the direction of differences because multiple aspects of


778

country differences influence marketersrsquo idealism and relativism at times inconflicting ways Thus the following hypothesis was formulated

H1a There are differences in the idealism exhibited by marketers inMalaysia Australia and the USA

H1b There are differences in the relativism exhibited by marketers inMalaysia Australia and the USA

Corporate ethical valuesIn addition to country factors most models of ethical decision making positthat organizational factors such as an organizationrsquos ethical values influence amanagerrsquos ethical decision making (Hunt and Vitell 1986 1993 Ferrell andGresham 1985 Trevino 1986) Many researchers believe that in addition tothe individual moral standards unethical standards are affected byorganizational pressures (eg Ford and Richardson 1994) Hunt et al (1989)defined corporate ethical values as

A composite of the individual ethical values of managers and both the formal and informalpolicies on ethics of the organization

Corporate ethical values can be expected to influence the moral philosophy ofmanagers because they reflect a shared understanding regarding what iscorrect behavior and how ethical issues will be handled in the organization(DeConinck 1992) In other words corporate ethical values influence thestandards that delineate the ` rightrsquorsquo things to do and the things ` worth doingrsquorsquo(Jansen and Von Glinow 1985) Corporate ethical values have also been shownto influence managerial performance For example organizational success isenhanced when ethical standards of an organization are widely shared (Hunt etal 1989) Similarly Weeks and Nantel (1992) found that well-communicatedcodes of ethics led to higher ethical standards and superior job performance ofsalespeople in the USA The corporate ethical values-moral philosophyrelationship also depends upon the enforcement of the code of ethics Wellenforced consequences for misconduct and not just stated organizationalconcern are likely to make managers consider the morality of their actions (egLaczniak and Inderrieden 1987) Because acting ethically is rewarded andacting unethically is punished marketers working in companies with highercorporate ethical values are more likely to believe that desirable consequencescan with the right actions always be obtained Consequently they are likely tobe more idealistic than those managers who work in companies with lowercorporate ethical values

In a recent study of American marketers Singhapakdi et al (1995) showedcorporate ethical values influence managerial perceptions They found thatmanagers in organizations with high levels of corporate ethical values tendedto assign a higher level of importance to certain elements of corporate ethicsand social responsibility In a study specifically related to ours Singhapakdi etal (1999) argued that marketers in organizations with higher levels of ethicalvalues should have a higher moral standard on average than those in


779

organizations with lower levels of ethical values and therefore be morecommitted to finding ethical solutions to moral problems (ie be more idealistic)and rely more on rules and guidelines (ie be less relativistic) They found apositive corporate ethical values-idealism relationship but an insignificantrelationship between corporate ethical values and relativism Therefore wehypothesize that

H2a Corporate ethical values are positively related to the idealism ofmanagers

H2b Corporate ethical values are negatively related to the relativism ofmanagers

GenderResearchers have identified gender as an important demographic variableinfluencing an individualrsquos ethical decisions (eg Singhapakdi et al 1999) Forexample in a meta-analysis using data from more than 20000 respondents in66 samples Franke et al (1997) found that women are more likely than men torecognize that a business practice involves a moral issue From a theoreticalperspective Gilligan (1982) argued that men and women differ in their moralreasoning and identified characteristics of men and women that influence theirethical attitudes and behavior She stated that men are more likely to adhere tothe ` ethic of justicersquorsquo by emphasizing rules and individual rights whereaswomen are more likely to adhere to the ` ethic of carersquorsquo by emphasizingrelationships and compassion

In a recent study of American marketers Singhapakdi et al (1999) foundeven though women were found to more idealistic and less relativistic thanmen the gender effect was non-significant and small and therefore makes aninvestigation into this issue more important Based on Gilliganrsquos (1982) work itcan be argued that ` the ethic of caringrsquorsquo exhibited by women would lead them tobelieve that taking actions that are detrimental to others is avoidable thereforewomen exhibit greater idealism Men on the other hand tend to be more` independent masterful assertive and instrumentally competentrsquorsquo (Eagly andWood 1991 p 309) and therefore could attribute certain actions tocircumstances in order to demonstrate their competence With a morecommunal character women might have no motivation to do so In otherwords men would be expected to be more relativistic than women Thesearguments are compatible with the observations of Forsyth et al (1988 p 244)that ` the ethic of caring appears to be conceptually similar to the idealismdimensionrsquorsquo of moral philosophies and `may also be inversely related torelativism if individuals feel that caring for others is a fundamental moralprinciplersquorsquo These differences are also consistent with arguments made in thesection on the effect of cultural differences about the effect of masculinityfemininity on idealism and relativism Therefore we hypothesize that

H3a Women tend to be more idealistic than menH3b Women tend to be less relativistic than men


780

AgeThe relationship between age and moral philosophy can be explained usingdifferent theoretical perspectives For example Kohlbergrsquos (1981) cognitivemoral development theory contends that an individualrsquos cognition emotionand judgment may change as he or she moves through stages of moraldevelopment It can be argued that age and ethical behavior should be relatedbecause as individuals move through stages of moral development moraldevelopment occurs mainly due to life experiences Other researchers havereasoned that people tend to become more ethical as they grow older (Terpstraet al 1993) which can be explained by the argument that as people age theytend to become less concerned with wealth and advancement and moreinterested in personal growth (Hall 1976) From another perspective age andwork experience are highly correlated and because of their experience oldermanagers tend to be exposed to a variety of ethical problems and become moresensitive to the harm that ethical transgressions can do to the organization andits stakeholders (Singhapakdi et al 1999) They argued that more seniormanagers may therefore be less willing to make exceptions to ethical guidelinesand be more committed to produce desirable outcomes Therefore wehypothesize that

H4a A marketerrsquos age is positively related to his or her idealismH4b A marketerrsquos age is negatively related to his or her relativism

MethodologySampleA self-administered questionnaire was used as the data collection techniquefor all three groups of marketing practitioners For the American groupnational mailing lists of professional members of the American MarketingAssociation (AMA) were used as the sampling frame A random sample of2000 US practitioner members with primary areas of interest in marketingand sales management were mailed questionnaires Of the 1997 delivered453 responded for a response rate of 227 per cent The response rate iscomparable to previous marketing ethics studies that have also used AMAmailing lists (eg Hunt and Chonko 1984) For the Australian sample amailing list of recipients of the Australian Marketing Institute magazine wasused as the sampling frame The questionnaire was included in the magazineand 500 questionnaires were returned Since questionnaires were not directlymailed to the sample in Australia the response rate could not be assessed Forthe Malaysian group the sampling frame consisted of companies listed on theKuala Lumpur Stock Exchange and respondents were managers responsiblefor making marketing decisions A total of 350 questionnaires were mailed toa random sample from the list of which 156 replied for a response rate of4457 per cent The questionnaire was administered in English for all threesamples Because Malaysia and Australia are members of the BritishCommonwealth English is a well understood language particularly in thebusiness setting


781

The non-response bias for the US sample was assessed with an analysis ofvariance between the ` earlyrsquorsquo and ` latersquorsquo respondent groups (Armstrong andOverton 1977) There were no statistical differences between the early and laterespondents For the Australian and Malaysian sample the non-response biasbased on early and late respondents could not be assessed as this informationwas not coded at the time of data collection After eliminating incompletequestionnaires 369 responses from the USA 120 from Malaysia and 487 fromAustralia were used Table II summarizes the profile of the three samples

MeasuresIdealism and relativism The ethics position questionnaire (EPQ) developed byForsyth (1980) was used to measure moral philosophies (see the Appendix)The EPQ consists of two ten-item scales to measure idealism and relativism Anine-point Likert scale was used for measurement with 1 indicating` completely disagreersquorsquo and 9 indicating ` completely agreersquorsquo For this study eight

Table IIProfiles of respondentsin the US Malaysian

and Australian samples

USA Malaysian AustralianCharacteristics sample sample sampleof respondents (per cent) (per cent) (per cent)

SexMale 51 84 73Female 49 16 27

Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17

IndustryUSA and Australia

Wholesale or retail 12 ndash 2Manufacturer or construction 17 ndash 10Services 35 ndash 21Communications 9 ndash 34Advertising or public relations 7 ndash 6Marketing consulting 18 ndash 5Other 2 ndash 22

Malaysiaa

Consumer products ndash 37 ndashDiversified ndash 4 ndashConstruction ndash 3 ndashTrading services ndash 28 ndashFinance ndash 11 ndashProperties ndash 13 ndashPlantation ndash 3 ndashMining and primary resources ndash 1 ndash

Note a This categorization of industries is appropriate in the Malaysian context


782

of the ten relativism items were used The other two items were concerned witha specific ethical issue about lying (` No rule concerning lying can beformulated whether a lie is permissible or not permissible totally depends uponthe situationrsquorsquo and ` Whether a lie is judged to be moral or immoral dependsupon the circumstances surrounding the actionrsquorsquo) and were judged to beinappropriate for use with other more general items For each respondent theidealism and relativism scores were computed by summing the items

The convergent and discriminant validity of the idealism and relativismmeasures was also assessed Each scale was judged to have convergentvalidity if it exhibited unidimensional factor structures and had significantfactor loadings (p lt 001) greater than 05 for all indicators of the constructTwo items on the idealism scale (` Deciding whether or not to perform an act bybalancing the positive consequences of the act against the negativeconsequences of the act is immoralrsquorsquo and `Moral actions are those which closelymatch ideals of the most `perfectrsquo actionrsquorsquo) and one item on the relativism scale(` There are no ethical principles that are so important that they should be a partof any code of ethicsrsquorsquo) were dropped because of low factor loadings

The scales were judged to have good discriminant validity if the confidenceinterval around the correlations did not contain one (Anderson and Gerbing1988) Further discriminant validity was assessed by comparing the fit withthe correlation between the two constructs as opposed to being free If idealismand relativism are correlated then there should be a significant improvement infit with the model without constraints For all three countries the correlationvalues ranged from ndash015 to 007 and 95 per cent confidence intervals did notcontain the value of one There was no statistical difference in the fit based on achi-square test Therefore the idealism and relativism scales can be assumed toexhibit discriminant validity The reliability of the measures was assessedusing Cronbach alpha which ranged from 081-089 well above therecommended level of 070 (Nunnally 1978)

Corporate ethical values gender and age The corporate ethical values (CEV)scale developed by Hunt et al (1989) was used in this study to measurecorporate ethical values The scale was designed to reflect ` a composite of theindividual ethical values of managers and both the formal and informal policieson ethics of the organizationrsquorsquo (Hunt et al 1989) The CEV scale has five items(see The Appendix) and was measured using a nine-point Likert scale with1 =` completely disagreersquorsquo and 9 = ` completely agreersquorsquo For each respondent theCEV score was obtained by summing all CEV items (with items 1 and 2reverse-coded) A high CEV score means that the manager works in anorganization with higher corporate ethical values The CEV scale exhibitedgood convergent validity with all factor loadings significant and greater than05 for all three countries Cronbach alphas for the CEV scale were 069 for theMalaysian sample 081 for the Australian sample and 086 for the Americansample Gender was measured as a dichotomous variable and age wasmeasured in four categories


783

Measurement equivalence of the idealism relativism and CEV scalesThe cross-national measurement equivalence of the three scales wasestablished in three steps First using confirmatory factor analysis the fit ofthe proposed structure for each country was assessed[1] Second configuralequivalence (similarity of dimensionality of the construct and significance offactor loadings) was assessed using multi-group analysis with factor loadingsand error variances allowed to vary for the three countries[2] (Steenkamp andBaumgartner 1998) Third metric equivalence which measures the invarianceof factor loadings and error variances was assessed by measuring theimprovement in fit (chi-square) with two successive analyses that constrainedfactor loadings and error variances to be equal[3] (Bollen 1989) Based on theresults of the individual country convergent and discriminant validityreliability analysis and multi-group analysis the three scales can be assumedto show cross-cultural equivalence and therefore can be used to measure meandifferences in idealism and relativism of American Malaysian and Australianmarketers

ResultsMultivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was performed using idealismand relativism items as dependent variables and the country of residencecorporate ethical values gender and age as independent variables MANOVAresults show that overall country of residence corporate ethical values genderand age significantly explain differences between marketers from the threecountries in their idealism and relativism (F = 2127 based on Wilksrsquo lambdap lt 00001)

H1a and H1b state that there are differences in the level of idealism andrelativism exhibited by marketers from the three countries Univariate analysisof variance (ANOVA) identified significant cross-country differences betweenmarketers on both idealism (F = 2068 p lt 00001) and relativism (F = 1280p lt 00001) Therefore both hypothesis H1a and H1b were supported Toillustrate the differences average scores were computed for marketers from thethree countries on idealism and relativism As shown in Table III there aresignificant differences in idealism scores of marketers from the three countries(t = 336 p lt 001 between Australian and Malaysian marketers t = 606p lt 001 between American and Malaysian marketers and t = 439 p lt 001between Australian and American marketers) Malaysian managers (mean

Table IIIMean idealism scores

and t-values for pairedcomparisons

Mean idealism t-valuesscore Australia Malaysia USA

Australia 5737 ndashMalaysia 6128 ndash336a ndashUSA 5385 439a 606a ndash

Note a Differences significant at the 1 per cent level


784

idealism score = 6128) are found to be significantly more idealistic thanAustralian managers (mean idealism score = 5737) who in turn aresignificantly more idealistic than American managers (mean idealismscore = 5385) As shown in Table IV there are significant differences inrelativism scores of marketers from the three countries (t = 311 p lt 001between Australian and Malaysian marketers t = 493 p lt 001 betweenAmerican and Malaysian marketers and t = 302 p lt 001 between Australianand American marketers) Malaysian managers (mean relativism score = 4069)are found to be significantly more relativistic than Australian managers (meanrelativism score = 3696) who in turn are significantly more relativistic thanAmerican managers (mean relativism score = 3446)

The above analysis suggests that various country factors might play adifferential role in determining the idealism and relativism of marketers Forexample the economic environment and politicallegal environment might behaving a greater impact on the relativism of marketers On the other handcultural variables such as collectivism power distance and Confuciandynamism might be having a relatively greater influence on the idealism ofmarketers Since this is the first cross-cultural investigation into moralphilosophies of marketers more work is needed investigating cross-nationaldifferences in moral philosophy

H2a states that corporate ethical values positively influence managersrsquoidealism and H2b states that they negatively influence relativism Resultsindicate corporate ethical values have an influence on both idealism andrelativism with F statistics of 2523 and 994 (p lt 0001 for both F rsquos) ThereforeH2a and H2b are supported These results can be contrasted with those of asimilar study by Singhapakdi et al (1999) where they found that idealism wassignificantly influenced by CEV but not relativism

H3a states that women are more idealistic than men and H3b states thatwomen are less relativistic than men Mixed results were obtained for thesehypotheses While significant gender differences were found on idealism(F = 757 p lt 0001) differences in relativism were non-significant The meanidealism score for men was 5576 and that for women was 5924 The lack ofgender differences on relativism might be a reflection of the fact that womenmanagers in our sample might be as aggressive and competitive as malemanagers thus motivating them to a similar degree to attribute certain actionsto circumstances In a similar context with a sample of American marketers

Table IVMean relativism scoresand t-values for pairedcomparisons

Mean relativism t-valuesscore Australia Malaysia USA




785

the gender-relativism relationship was also found to be non-significant bySinghapakdi et al (1999)

H4a and H4b hypothesize the effect of age on idealism and relativism Whilesignificant age effects were found on relativism (F = 1138 p lt 0001) ageeffects on idealism were non-significant Mean relativism scores for the fourage groups were 4104 for the under 30 age group 3832 for the 30-39 age group3497 for the 40-49 age group and 3513 for the 50 and over age group A closeranalysis of the idealism results indicates that although the results are notsignificant at the 5 per cent level the mean idealism scores were 5593 57405770 and 5898 from the youngest to the oldest age groups which are in thehypothesized direction The direction of results is consistent with that found inearlier studies for the level of work experience by Singhapakdi et al (1999)

ImplicationsThe findings of this study investigating the variation in moral philosophies ofidealism and relativism has potential implications for international companiesMany companies have increased their presence in overseas markets using avariety of methods such as opening subsidiaries joint ventures exporting andlicensing Whether it is an employee in a subsidiary a joint venture partner oran exporting partner it is essential for an international manager to understandthe ethical thinking processes of the managers and their moral philosophies(idealism and relativism) because they can potentially result in unethical actsIn the international marketing arena cultural economic and other differencesbetween international buyers and sellers create the potential conflicts of valuesespecially in the areas of marketing ethics and social responsibility Ourfindings have implications in terms of measures that can be taken to reducesuch conflicts in the interest of establishing enduring international businessrelationships

This study identified cross-cultural differences in idealism and relativismand explained their variation across managers with cultural differences anddifferences in economic and legalpolitical environment differences incorporate ethical values and gender (only on idealism) and age (only onrelativism) differences Even though moral philosophies are individualcharacteristics our study shows that the societal environment (culturalpoliticallegal) as well as the corporate environment influences the manner inwhich people evaluate and judge unethical actions which means that society ingeneral and more specifically organizations can shape the moral philosophiesof individuals thereby influencing ethical behavior

The findings of this study can be incorporated in ethics training programsFirst through training international managers can be made aware that peoplediffer in their thinking with regards to ethics and social responsibilityspecifically in terms of idealism and relativism Second they can be madeaware of the potential reasons for the differences such as culture economicand legalpolitical environment corporate ethical values and individualdifferences More specifically scenarios and cases can be developed that


786

highlight situations where managers could potentially act in ways that aredetrimental to others Also situations under which it is critical that rules andregulations cannot be violated could be highlighted through cases Thesescenarios can be extended by including cross-national differences in cultureand economic and legalpolitical environment across countries While theissues discussed above can be incorporated in training on a regular basis thesecan especially be useful for employees being transferred overseas for short-term and long-term assignments Increasing their sensitivity to differences inthe moral philosophies of their counterparts should help them anticipateactions of subordinates colleagues superiors as well as other businessassociates in a foreign environment

Irrespective of the country corporate ethical values had a positive influenceon idealism and a negative influence relativism Therefore organizations fromdifferent countries with similar corporate ethical values can find commonground in the moral philosophies of their managers Hence internationalcompanies when scouting for suitable partners in foreign markets may lookfor overseas partners with similar corporate ethical values This would ensuresmoother business relations and interactions especially in the areas of ethicsand social responsibility Also it is useful for international marketers to knowthat in general women tend to be more idealistic than men and relativismincreases with age This is particularly relevant given the increase inemployment of women in the workplace

Limitations and extensionsThis study has some potential limitations A potential limitation concerns thenature of sampling frames used in this study Although a self-administeredquestionnaire was used as the data collection technique in the three countriesdifferent sampling frames were used In the USA and Australia the samplingframe was a national mailing list of professional members of the respectivemarketing associations In Malaysia however the sampling frame wasmanagers responsible for making marketing decisions from companies listedon the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange Also non-response could not beassessed with the Australian and Malaysian samples Therefore the findingsof this study should be viewed considering the differences in the nature of thesesampling frames and the measurement of non-response Another limitation ofthis study is that it did not account for the within country heterogeneity of thesamples For example the Malaysian population is heterogeneous withsubstantial Moslem Chinese and Malay segments that could potentiallyexhibit differences The results of our study have to be interpreted with theknowledge that this within country variation is not accounted for

This study can be extended in several ways Useful insights can be obtainedby extending the study to additional countries with different culturalorientations and legalpolitical environment such as those in Europe and SouthAmerica The current research is based upon the premise that moralphilosophies are antecedents of ethical decision making This study did not test


787

for the effects of idealism and relativism on any specific dependent variablesuch as ethical perception or ethical intention This could be tested in a cross-cultural study by addressing specific ethics and social responsibility issuessuch as intellectual property protection global warming and child labor Otherdeterminants of ethical decision making such as a societyrsquos moral climatecan be similarly studied This would help international marketers gain abetter understanding of cross-country differences that drive ethical decisionmaking

Notes

1 The chi-square goodness of fit index (GFI) adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) andcomparative fit index (CFI) model for the three samples were 4507-20841 (20 df)089-091 081-083 and 089-090 with a one-factor idealism 5375-9514 (14 df) 089-095077-091 and 087-093 for relativism 3204-15224 (5 df) 089-092 069-077 and 077-092for CEV Although the chi-square statistic was significant it is influenced by sample sizeThe recommended level for the other fit indices is 090 (Sharma 1996) However Bagozziand Yi (1988) point out that AGFI tends to be a conservative estimate of fit and is usuallylower than the GFI Our analysis indicates that a one-factor idealism and relativism modelprovide an adequate fit for the three samples and the CEV scale offers a moderate to lowfit

2 Three different models were estimated using multi-group analyses (Bollen 1989) First acompletely constrained model with the factor structure factor loadings and errorvariances of the indicator variables equal was estimated Second the constraint on theequality of factor loadings was relaxed (called the partially constrained model) Finally inthe third model the constraint on the equality of error variances was relaxed (called thecompletely free model) Configural equivalence was assessed with chi-square GFI and CFIof the completely free model (Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1998) For the completely freemodel the chi-square GFI and CFI are 91844 (329 df) 090 and 089 for idealism andrelativism and 25957 (15 df) 089 and 087 for CEV Although the chi-square statistic issignificant it is influenced by sample size and the other fit indices generally meet therecommended level of 090 (Sharma 1996) In addition all the factor loadings aresignificant for the three scales Therefore the three instruments can be considered to beconfigurally equivalent

3 The difference in chi-square between the completely constrained model and the partiallyconstrained model was 1738 (30 df) for idealism and relativism and 1295 (10 df) for theCEV All three differences were not significant at the 005 level Therefore the factorloadings for the three scales can be assumed to be similar in the three samples Thedifference in chi-square between the partially constrained model and the completely freemodel was 5235 (30 df) and 4870 (10 df) for CEV The difference is not significant at the005 level for the relativism scale Both differences in chi-square are significant The GFIand CFI however do not show an increase in fit The possibility of differences in errorvariances across the three samples for the idealism scale has to be considered ininterpreting the results

References

Anderson JC and Gerbing DW (1988) ` Structural equation modeling in practice areview and recommended two step approachrsquorsquo Psychological Bulletin Vol 103 No 3pp 411-23

Armstrong JS and Overton TS (1977) ` Estimating non-response bias in mail surveysrsquorsquoJournal of Marketing Research Vol 14 August pp 396-402


788

Aulakh PS and Kotabe M (1993) Àn assessment of theoretical and methodologicaldevelopments in international marketingrsquorsquo Journal of International Marketing Vol 7 No 2pp 5-28

Bagozzi RP and Yi Y (1988) ` On the evaluation of structural equation modelsrsquorsquo Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science Vol 16 No 1 pp 74-95

Beauchamp TL and Bowie NE (1993) Ethical Theory and Business Prentice-Hall EnglewoodCliffs NJ

Bollen K (1989) Structural Equations with Latent Variables John Wiley New York NY

Czinkota MR and Ronkainen IA (1998) International Marketing Dryden Press Orlando FL

DeConinck JB (1992) ` How sales managers control unethical sales force behaviorrsquorsquo Journal ofBusiness Ethics Vol 11 No 10 pp 789-98

Dunfee T (1996) ` On the synergistic interdependent relationship of business ethics and lawrsquorsquoAmerican Business Law Journal Vol 34 No 2 pp 317-28

Eagly A and Wood W (1991) ` Explaining sex differences in social behavior a meta-analyticperspectiversquorsquo Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin Vol 17 June pp 306-15

Ehrbar TJ (1992) Business Internationalrsquos Guide to International Marketing Building aLicensing Strategy for 14 Key Markets Around the World McGraw-Hill New York NY

Ferrell OC and Fraedrich J (1997) Business Ethics Ethical Decision Making and CasesHoughton Mifflin Company Boston MA

Ferrell OC and Gresham LG (1985) À contingency framework for understanding ethicaldecision making in marketingrsquorsquo Journal of Marketing Vol 49 Summer pp 87-96

Fletcher J (1973) ` Situations versus systemsrsquorsquo in Davis PE (Ed) Introduction to MoralPhilosophy Merrill OH

Ford RC and Richardson WD (1994) ` Ethical decision making a review of the empiricalliteraturersquorsquo Journal of Business Ethics Vol 13 No 3 pp 205-21

Forsyth DR (1980) À taxonomy of ethical ideologiesrsquorsquo Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology Vol 39 No 1 pp 175-84

Forsyth DR (1992) ` Judging the morality of business practices the influence of personal moralphilosophiesrsquorsquo Journal of Business Ethics Vol 11 May pp 461-70

Forsyth DR Nye JL and Kelley K (1988) ` Idealism relativism and the ethic of caringrsquorsquoJournal of Psychology Vol 122 May pp 243-8

Franke GR Crown DF and Spake DF ( 1997) ` Gender differences in ethical perceptions ofbusiness practicesrsquorsquo Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 82 December pp 920-34

Gilligan C (1982) In a Different Voice Psychological Theory and Womenrsquos DevelopmentHarvard University Press Cambridge MA

Gupta JL and Sulaiman M (1996) ` Ethical orientations of managers in Malaysiarsquorsquo Journal ofBusiness Ethics Vol 15 pp 735-48

Hall ET (1976) Beyond Culture Anchor Books Doubleday Garden City NY

Hofstede G (1980) `National cultures in four dimensions a research based theory of culturaldifferences among nationsrsquorsquo International Studies of Management and OrganizationVol 13 No 1-2 pp 46-74

Hofstede G (1983) `Motivation leadership and organization do American theories applyabroadrsquorsquo Organizational Dynamics Vol 11 Summer pp 42-63

Hofstede G and Bond MH (1988) ` The Confucious connection from cultural roots to economicgrowthrsquorsquo Organizational Dynamics Vol 16 Spring pp 5-21

Hogan R (1970) À dimension of moral judgmentrsquorsquo Journal of Clinical and CounselingPsychology Vol 35 pp 205-12


789

Hogan R (1973) `Moral conduct and moral character a psychological perspectiversquorsquo PsychologicalBulletin Vol 79 No 4 pp 217-32

Hunt SD and Chonko LB (1984) `Marketing and Machiavellianismrsquorsquo Journal of MarketingVol 48 Summer pp 30-42

Hunt SD and Vitell S (1986) À general theory of marketing ethicsrsquorsquo Journal ofMacromarketing Vol 8 Spring pp 5-16

Hunt SD Wood VR and Chonko LB (1989) `Corporate ethical values and organizationalcommitment in marketingrsquorsquo Journal of Marketing Vol 53 July pp 79-90

Jansen E and Vin Glinow MA (1985) ` Ethical ambience and organizational reward systemsrsquorsquoAcademy of Management Review Vol 10 No 4 pp 814-22

Kohlberg L (1976) `Moral stages and moralizationrsquorsquo in Lickona T (Ed) Moral Developmentand Behavior Theory Research and Social Issues Holt Rinehart amp Winston New YorkNY

Kohlberg L (1981) The Meaning and Measurement of Moral Development Clark UniversityPress Worcester MA

Laczniak GR and Inderrieden EJ (1987) ` The influence of stated organizational concern uponethical decision makingrsquorsquo Journal of Business Ethics Vol 6 No 4 pp 297-307

Laczniak GR and Murphy PE (1993) Ethical Marketing Decisions The Higher Road Allyn ampBacon Needham Heights MA

Mittelstaedt JD and Mittelstaedt RA (1997) ` The protection of intellectual propertyissues of origination and ownershiprsquorsquo Journal of Public Policy amp Marketing Vol 16 No 1pp 14-25

Newman B (1980) ` Consumer protection is underdeveloped in the Third Worldrsquorsquo The WallStreet Journal Vol 195 No 1 April 8 p 23

Nunnally JC (1978) Psychometric Theory McGraw-Hill New York NY

Schlenker BM and Forsyth DR (1977) ` On the ethics of psychological researchrsquorsquo Journal ofExperimental Social Psychology Vol 13 July pp 369-96

Sharma S (1996) Applied Multivariate Techniques John Wiley amp Sons New York NY

Singhapakdi A Vitell SJ and Franke GR (1999) Àntecedents consequences and mediatingeffects of perceived moral intensity and personal moral philosophiesrsquorsquo Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science Vol 27 No 1 pp 19-35

Singhapakdi A Vitell SJ and Leelakulthanit O (1994) À cross-cultural study of moralphilosophies ethical perceptions and judgments a comparison of American and Thaimarketersrsquorsquo International Marketing Review Vol 11 No 6 pp 65-78

Singhapakdi A Kraft KL Vitell SJ and Rallapalli KC (1995) ` The perceived importance ofethics and social responsibility on organizational effectiveness a survey of marketersrsquorsquoJournal of Academy of Marketing Science Vol 23 No 1 pp 49-56

Sparks JR and Hunt SD (1998) `Marketing researcher ethical sensitivity conceptualizationmeasurement and exploratory investigationrsquorsquo Journal of Marketing Vol 62 No 2pp 92-109

Steenkamp J-BEM and Baumgartner H (1998) Àssessing measurement invariancein cross-national consumer researchrsquorsquo Journal of Consumer Research Vol 25 No 1pp 78-90

Terpstra DE Rozell EJ and Robinson RK (1993) ` The influence of personality anddemographic variables on ethical decisions related to insider tradingrsquorsquo The Journal ofPsychology Vol 127 No 4 pp 375-89

Trevino LK (1986) ` Ethical decision making in organizations a person-situation interactionistmodelrsquorsquo Academy of Management Review Vol 11 No 3 pp 601-17


790

Vitell SJ and Singhapakdi A (1993) ` Ethical ideology and its influence on the norms andjudgments of marketing practitionersrsquorsquo Journal of Marketing Management Vol 3 SpringSummer pp 1-11

Vitell SJ Nwanchukwu SL and Barnes JH (1993) ` The effects of culture on ethical decision-making an application of Hofstedersquos typologyrsquorsquo Journal of Business Ethics Vol 12October pp 753-60

Vitell SJ Rallapalli K and Singhapakdi A (1993) `Marketing norms the influences ofpersonal moral philosophies and organizational ethical culturersquorsquo Journal of the Academy of

Marketing Science Vol 21 Fall pp 331-7

Vogel D (1992) ` The globalization of business ethics why America remains distinctiversquorsquoCalifornia Management Review Vol 35 No 1 pp 30-49

Weeks WA and Nantell J (1992) ` Corporate codes of ethics and sales force behavior a casestudyrsquorsquo Journal of Business Ethics Vol 11 No 10 pp 753-60

Wotruba TR ( 1997) ` Industry self-regulation a review and extension to a global settingrsquorsquoJournal of Public Policy amp Marketing Vol 16 No 1 pp 38-54

Appendix Measurement scales for idealism relativism and corporate ethicalvaluesIdealism (Forsyth 1980)

1 A person should make certain that their actions never intentionally harm another evento a small degree

2 Risks to another should never be tolerated irrespective of how small the risks might be

3 The existence of potential harm to others is always wrong irrespective of the benefits tobe gained

4 One should never psychologically or physically harm another person

5 One should not perform an action which might in any way threaten the dignity andwelfare of another individual

6 If an action could harm an innocent other then it should not be done

7 The dignity and welfare of people should be the most important concern in any society

8 It is never necessary to sacrifice the welfare of others

Relativism (Forsyth 1980)

1 What is ethical varies from one society to another

2 Moral standards should be seen as being individualistic what one person considers to bemoral may be judged to be immoral by another person

3 Different types of moralities cannot be compared as to ` rightnessrsquorsquo

4 Questions of what is ethical for everyone can never be resolved since what is moral orimmoral is up to the individual

5 Moral standards are simply personal rules which indicate how a person should behaveand are not to be applied in making judgements of others

6 Ethical considerations in interpersonal relations are so complex that individuals shouldbe allowed to formulate their own individual codes

7 Rigidly codifying an ethical position that prevents certain types of actions could stand inthe way of better human relations and adjustment


791

Corporate ethical values (Hunt et al 1989)

1 Managers in my company often engage in behavior that I consider to be unethical

2 In order to succeed in my company it is often necessary to compromise onersquos ethics

3 Top management in my company has let it be known in no uncertain terms thatunethical behaviors will not be tolerated

4 If a manager in my company is discovered to have engaged in unethical behavior thatresults in personal gain (rather than corporate gain) he or she will be promptlyreprimanded

5 If a manager in my company is discovered to have engaged in unethical behavior thatresults in corporate gain (rather than personal gain) he or she will be promptlyreprimanded


769

Consequently what may be considered illegal in one country may be customaryor even acceptable in others (Czinkota and Ronkainen 1998) Under suchcircumstances understanding how marketers in different countries make ethicaljudgments about business situations involving ethical dilemmas is important

It is well accepted in the business ethics literature that managers applyethical guidelines based on their personal moral philosophies when confrontedwith ethical issues (Singhapakdi et al 1999) Moral philosophy refers to theprinciples or rules that people use to decide what is right or wrong (Ferrell andFraedrich 1997) Personal moral philosophy is depicted as one of the importantfactors influencing ethical decision making in established models of businessethics (eg Hunt and Vitell 1986 Trevino 1986 Ferrell and Gresham 1985)Ethical judgments may be explained parsimoniously by two aspects ofpersonal moral philosophies idealism and relativism (see also Schlenker andForsyth 1977) These two dimensions of moral philosophies have beenextensively used in the business ethics literature and have been shown toinfluence important variables in ethical decision making such as perceivedethical problem (Hunt and Vitell 1986) ethical intention (Singhapakdi et al1999) ethical sensitivity (Sparks and Hunt 1998) perceived importance ofethics and social responsibility (Singhapakdi et al 1995) ethical judgement(Vitell and Singhapakdi 1993) and perceived moral intensity (Singhapakdiet al 1999)

In a recent article Singhapakdi et al (1999 p 22) commented that ` pastresearch has paid relatively little attention to the sources of individualsrsquo moralphilosophies from either a conceptual or an empirical standpointrsquorsquo and theyinvestigated the determinants of idealism and relativism among Americanmarketers There is even less theoretical and empirical cross-culturalinvestigation of moral philosophies The present study focuses on cross-national differences in idealism and relativism and proposes a frameworkexplaining the variation in idealism and relativism of Australian Americanand Malaysian marketers by country differences (including cultural differencesand differences in economic and legalpolitical environment) corporate ethicalvalues and gender and age of the marketer

From a managerial perspective an understanding of the extent to whichmarketers from different countries apply the rules of idealism and relativismand why they apply these rules to a varying degree across countries is usefulIt helps managers comprehend the underlying thinking (philosophy) ofmarketers from different countries in evaluating ethical actions In theinternational context such an understanding can be used by corporatemanagers to develop training programs as well as develop codes of ethics thatwill enhance the ethical environment in corporations This study also providesinput on how corporate ethical values are related to the idealism and relativismof marketers and how gender and age influence the extent to which one isidealistic and relativistic which has implications in terms of developingmanagement policiesorganizational culture and planning of ethics trainingprograms


770








771





772









773




774





775







776







Confuciandynamism





777






778









779








780





781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








770








771





772









773




774





775







776







Confuciandynamism





777






778









779








780





781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








771





772









773




774





775







776







Confuciandynamism





777






778









779








780





781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








772









773




774





775







776







Confuciandynamism





777






778









779








780





781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








773




774





775







776







Confuciandynamism





777






778









779








780





781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








774





775







776







Confuciandynamism





777






778









779








780





781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








775







776







Confuciandynamism





777






778









779








780





781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








776







Confuciandynamism





777






778









779








780





781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








777






778









779








780





781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








778









779








780





781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








779








780





781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








780





781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








781







Age grouplt 30 17 11 2030-39 37 39 3540-49 29 40 29gt 50 17 10 17



Malaysiaa




782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








782






783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








783










784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








784










785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








785







786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








786






787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








787


Notes




References




788


























789























790


























791








788


























789























790


























791








789























790


























791








790


























791








791







philosophy for marketing managers

Documents

relativism of marketers

relativism of american

raokuwait university

university of wollongong

australian marketers

determinants of idealism

level of idealism

economic development