-
Are Corporations Institutionalizing Ethics?Author(s): Center for
Business EthicsSource: Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 5, No. 2
(Apr., 1986), pp. 85-91Published by: SpringerStable URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/25071559 .Accessed: 23/04/2013
08:26
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the
Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars,
researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information
technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new
formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please
contact [email protected].
.
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Journal of Business Ethics.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 86.55.176.66 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013
08:26:19 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
Center for Are Corporations Institutionalizing Ethics? Business
Ethics
ABSTRACT. Very little has been done to find out what
corporations have done to build ethical values into
their organizations. In this report on a survey of 1984
Fortune 1000 industrial and service companies the Center for
Business Ethics reveals some facts
regarding codes of ethics, ethics committees, social audits,
ethics
training programs, boards of directors, and other areas
where corporations might institutionalize ethics. Based
on the survey, the Center for Business Ethics is convinced
that corporations are beginning to take steps to institu
tionalize ethics, while recognizing that in most cases
more specific mechanisms and strategies need to be
implemented to make their ethics efforts truly effective.
It is a well-known fact that the past decade has seen a
tremendous rise in interest and
activity in business ethics, especially in academic and research
circles. So many books and articles have been published on business
ethics that there are now book length bibliographies on the
Established in 1976, The Center for Business Ethics at
Bentley College is dedicated to providing a non
partisan forum for the exchange of ideas on business
ethics in an industrial society. Special emphasis is
placed on these ideas as they relate to the activities
of corporations, labor, government, special interest
groups, and the professions. The Center sponsors National
Conferences on Business Ethics, publishes
their proceedings, works with academic institutions
and corporations to set up business ethics courses
and programs, and generally serves as a clearing house
for ideas and materials on business ethics.
The report and survey were prepared by the
following people from the Center for Business Ethics: W. Michael
Hoffman, Director; Ann Lange, Research Associate; Jennifer Mills
Moore, Research Asso
ciate; Karen Donovan, Graduate Assistant; Paulette
Mungillo, Aileene McDonagh, Paula Vanetti, Linda Ledoux, Staff
Assistants.
field. Ethics centers on the subject continue to
grow, and it is now possible to attend a con ference or
workshop on business ethics almost
monthly. A 1980 survey by the Center for Business Ethics at
Bentley College indicated that there had been a 500% increase in
business ethics courses in
colleges and universities since 1973 - a trend that seems to be
continuing even today. But have corporations been taking any steps
to incorporate ethical values and concerns into their daily
operations?
The Center for Business Ethics has been asked this question so
often and by so many people and groups that the Center decided
to
make it a lead question in a lengthy question naire on
''Instilling Ethical Values in the Cor
poration" sent to the 1984 Fortune 500 list of industrial and
the Fortune 500 list of service
companies. Of the 279 responding companies (a 28% survey
response) 223 (almost 80%) indicated that they were taking steps to
in
corporate ethics (see Table I). This finding is encouraging
since it gives
some indication that, contrary to public opinion, some of
America's
major corporations are show ing interest in responding to the
need
? and
increasing public demand ? for greater social
responsibility and accountability. In fact, most of the
corporations listed the goal of being social
ly responsible as their primary reason for in
corporating ethics into their organizations rather than
simply complying with state and federal requirements (see Table
II).
Our survey was then designed around seven
specific areas relating to possible steps companies might have
taken to incorporate ethics: (1) codes;
(2) ethics committees; (3) judiciary boards; (4) ombudsmen; (5)
ethics training, (6) social
Journal of Business Ethics 5 (1986) 85-91. ? 1986 by D. Reidel
Publishing Company.
This content downloaded from 86.55.176.66 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013
08:26:19 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
86 Center for Business Ethics
TABLE I
No Yes No resp. Total # of # % # % # % responses
Has your company been taking
steps to incorporate ethical
values and concerns into the
daily operations of your organi zation? 56 20.1% 223 79.9% 0 0%
279 100%
TABLE II
Some specific goals
a company may want to achieve through its efforts to incorporate
ethical values in the corporate
environment are Usted below. Rank the top 3 in order of
importance to your company.
Reasonsa Most important 2nd most 3rd most Choice not in
important important top 3
_# %_# %_# %_# %
To improve management 35 15.7% 34 15.2% 26 11.7% 128 57.4% To
provide guidelines for
employees'behavior 62 27.8% 58 26.0% 39 17.5% 64 28.7% To
establish better corporate
culture 34 15.2% 30 13.5% 29 13.0% 130 58.3% To
comply with local, state or
federal guidelines 35 15.7% 25 11.2% 36 16.1% 127 57.0% To
reduce white collar crime 6 2.7% 6 2.7% 11 4.9% 200 89.7% To
improve public image 6 2.7% 7 3.1% 17 7.6% 193 86.6% To be a
socially responsible
corporation 76 34.1% 39 17.5% 45 20.2% 63 28.3% Other 8 3.6% 3
1.3% 2 0.9% 210 94.2%
a For each possible reason 223 companies responded. Some
respondents chose to give multiple answers for a given
ranking.
audits; and (7) changes in corporate structure. Table III
reveals the general findings of cor
porate activity in these areas.
Ethics codes
Of those companies taking steps to institutional ize ethics, 93%
have written codes of ethics in
place, representing about a 5 to 10% rise over a
1979 study by the Ethics Resource Center and almost a 40% rise
over a study for the Conference Board twenty years ago. Almost all
the com
panies communicate their ethics codes to their
employees through printed materials, but only 40% do so through
advice from a superior and 34% through an entrance interview. Only
21% use
workshops or seminars to communicate their codes, and only 11%
post them in the
workplace. Codes of ethics, therefore, are in
creasing, but it seems clear that the communica tion of them
to
employees is not sufficient in most
companies ? a lack which
surely diminishes their effectiveness, if not also their
fairness.
Over 80% of the companies having codes use dismissal as a
sanction for enforcement. Also, a
significant number of companies use formal
reprimands and demotion. Only 19% record
This content downloaded from 86.55.176.66 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013
08:26:19 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
Are Corporations Institutionalizing Ethics ? 87
TABLE III
Some ways that ethical values can be incorporated into
the corporate environment are listed below: Which of
these does your company use?
Yes No Total # # % # % responses
Code of conduct 208 93.3% 15 6.7% 223 100%
Ethics com
mittee 40 17.9% 183 82.1% 223 100%
Judiciary board 3 1.3% 220 98.7% 223 100%
Ombudsman 17 7.6% 206 92.4% 223 100%
Employee training in ethics 99 44.4% 124 55.6% 223 100%
Social audit
ing and
reporting 98 43.9% 125 56.1% 223 100%
Changes in
corporate structure 46 20.6% 177 79.4% 223 100%
None of the above 2 0.9% 221 99.1% 223 100%
TABLE IV
What is the function of the ethics committee ?
Yes No Total # % # % # %
To oversee ethics
activities in the
corporation 27 67.5% 13 32.5% 40 100% To review code
of conduct 26 65.0% 14 35.0% 40 100% To handle infrac
tions of the code ofeonduct 16 40.0% 24 60.0% 40 100%
To respond to
employee com
plaints 9 22.5% 31 77.5% 40 100% To answer ques
tions on cor
porate ethics
policies 21 52.5% 19 47.5% 40 100% To develop cor
porate policy on ethics 27 67.5% 13 32.5% 40 100%
Other 7 17.5% 33 82.5% 40 100%
violations in status reports and a few levy fines. Ten
responding companies having codes use no
formal sanctions at all.
Ethics committees, ombudsmen, judiciary boards
It is difficult to understand, however, how codes could be
overseen and enforced adequately and
consistently when only 18% of those companies incorporating
ethics have ethics committees,
only 8% have an ethical ombudsman, and only 3
responding companies indicated they have a
judiciary board. And in most companies that do have an ethics
committee, their functions seem
more policy making oriented rather than dealing with specific
violations and complaints (see Table IV). Only 40% of them handle
infractions and 23% respond to employee complaints.
This characterization of the functions of most
ethics committees seems consistent with the
make-up of their membership: 60% draw ethics committee members
from executive officers, 45% from the board of directors, and 23%
from
managers. On the other hand, only 8% have
representatives from outside the corporation as
members and only 8% have employees as
members below the managerial rank, of which
less than 3% are hourly employees. Further
more, the members of 88% of the companies with ethics committees
are appointed; only 8% have any members that are voted in. A
similar pattern holds for those few companies having an ombudsman:
94% are appointed and 94% come from inside, rather than outside,
the
company. This profile of the relatively few ethics
committees and ombudsmen suggests that their thrust is very much
upper-management directed,
designed without much input or representation from lower
level
employees or from people outside the company. It would seem that
more
representation in these mechanisms is important to their overall
effectiveness. And since most
ethics committees do not handle specific code violations or
employee complaints, it would also seem that this would make the
need for judiciary boards that much more necessary.
This content downloaded from 86.55.176.66 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013
08:26:19 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
88 Center for Business Ethics
Ethics training
Another step being taken by those companies incorporating ethics
is employee training in ethics. The Center has received many
calls,
especially in the last few years, from corpora tions interested
in setting up employee training in ethics, but we were pleasantly
surprised that over 44% of those taking ethical steps have such
training, with 53% stating that they use a
workshop or seminar as one method (see Table V). This ethics
training is mostly addressed to managers (86%), but a large percent
also include executive officers, management trainees, and
administrative staff, with hourly workers being included the least
(35%). This ethics training is a
requirement in 69% of the companies having it, and most list, in
order, the following two reasons for establishing such training:
(1) developing employee awareness of ethics in
business; and (2) drawing attention to ethical issues to which
an employee may be exposed.
TABLE V
What method or methods are used for training employees in the
area of ethics?
Yes No Total # % # % # %
Workshop or
seminar 52 52.5% 47 47.5% 99 100% Internal course 33 33.3% 66
66.7% 99 100%
Course conducted
by person from outside the
company 6 6.1% 93 93.9% 99 100% Course conducted
by institution other than
company 2 2.0% 97 98.0% 99 100% Personal interview 24 24.2% 75
75.8% 99 100% Orientation ses
sion 60 60.6% 39 39.4% 99 100% Other 15 15.2% 84 84.8% 99
100%
Social audits
Another encouraging sign revealed in the survey is that 43% of
those companies incorporating ethics perform a social autdit or
report which
analyzes the firm's activities in a number of ethical and
socially sensitive areas (see Table
VI). Unfortunately, this information in most cases is disclosed
through internal memoranda and circulated only at the highest
levels within the company (see Table VII). Only 22% disclose their
social audit or report to the general public and
only 21% do so to their shareholders.
Assuming corporations are performing respon sible activities in
the areas listed in Table VI, it
would seem they ought to disclose that to the
public and their shareholders if they want to
improve their public image. It could also be
argued that the public has a right to know.
Nevertheless, over 70% do not list "informing
TABLE VI
Some areas of corporate social performance that could
be included in a social audit or report are listed below. Which
ones does your company include ?
Yes No Total # % # % # %
Community in
volvement 66 67.3% 32 32.7% 98 100% Equal opportu
nity employ ment 87 88.8% 11 11.2% 98 100%
Compliance with laws and regu lations 79 80.6% 19 19.4% 98
100%
Safety in the
workplace 64 65.3% 34 34.7% 98 100% Protection of
the environment 54 55.1% 44 44.9% 98 100%
Quality of prod ucts and services 56 57.1% 42 42.9% 98 100%
Safety of prod ucts and services 43 43.9% 55 56.1% 98 100%
Conduct in multi
national opera tions 50 51.0% 48 49.0% 98 100%
Other 11 11.2% 87 88.8% 98 100%
This content downloaded from 86.55.176.66 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013
08:26:19 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
Are Corporations Institutionalizing Ethics? 89
TABLE VII
To whom is audit information disclosed ?
Yes No Total # % # % # %
All em
ployees 28 28.6% 70 71.4% 98 100% Shareholders 21 21.4% 77 78.6%
98 100% Board of
directors 66 67.3% 32 32.7% 98 100% Executive
officers 70 71.4% 28 28.6% 98 100%
Managers 48 49.0% 50 51.0% 98 100%
Hourly em
ployees 13 13.3% 85 86.7% 98 100% General
public 22 22.4% 76 77.6% 98 100% Other 18 18.4% 80 81.6% 98
100%
the public of impacts of corporate activities on
society" as one of their top three reasons for
performing a social audit (see Table VIII).
Changes in corporate structure
One of the most disappointing findings of the survey is the fact
that almost 80% of the com
panies incorporating ethics have made no changes in corporate
structure to accommodate their efforts. Most people working in the
field of busi ness ethics feel
strongly that corporate institu tionalization of ethics and the
development of a successful corporate ethical culture demands
important structural changes in the organiza tion. Table IX
reveals some of these changes being made by about 20% of the
companies taking ethical steps. The most changes have occurred in
the role or
membership of the board of directors, but an active decision
making role for workers remains very low. And a bill of rights
for employees is almost nonexistent (3 responding companies).
TABLE VIII
Possible reasons for performing a social audit or report are
listed below. Please rank the top three in order of importance to
your company.
Reasons a Most important
# %
2nd most
important # %
3rd most
important
Choice not in
top 3 # %
For public relations To shape company policy To provide
information for
management decisions
To increase accountability To inform management of im
pacts of corporate activities
on society
To inform management of costs
to the corporation
To inform the public of impacts of corporate activities on
society Other
4 24
25 35
10
4
15 4
4.1% 24.5%
25.5% 35.7%
10.2%
4.1%
15.3% 4.1%
3 22
20 14
17
4
4 2
3.1% 22.4%
20.4% 14.3%
17.3%
4.1%
4.1% 2.0%
12 16
14 15
11
6
12.2% 16.3%
14.3% 15.3%
11.2%
6.1%
9.2% 1.0%
79 36
39 34
60
84
70 91
80.6% 36.8%
39.8% 34.7%
61.2%
85.7%
71.4% 92.9%
a For each possible reason 98 companies responded. Some
respondents chose to give multiple answers for a given
ranking.
This content downloaded from 86.55.176.66 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013
08:26:19 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
90 Center for Business Ethics
TABLE IX
Possible changes in corporate structure are listed below. Which
changes has your company made?
Yes No Total # % # % # %
Changes in the role of the board of directors 18 39.1% 28 60.9%
46 100%
Changes in the role of board of director's members 17 37.0% 29
63.0% 46 100% Inclusion of outside directors as board members 19
41.3% 27 58.7% 46 100%
Representation on the board of an ethics officer 1 2.2% 45 97.8%
46 100% Worker participation in decision-making 11 23.9% 35 76.1%
46 100% Introduction of an employee bill of rights 3 6.5% 43 93.5%
46 100%
Other 13 28.3% 33 71.7% 46 100%
Highlights and summary
The Center for Business Ethics is pleased to discover that :
? 80% of the largest industrial and service
corporations responding to this survey have taken steps to
incorporate ethical values in their organizations.
We also find it encouraging that:
? 93% of the above companies have written codes of ethics.
? 44% have ethics training for employees and
nearly 70% require it. ? 44% have social audits, most of which
cover such areas as equal opportunity, safe
ty, community involvement, environ
mental protection, and multinational conduct.
However, this data must be tempered by the sur
vey's findings that specific implementation of stated ethical
goals is badly lagging. For example:
? Only 18% have ethics committees; only 8% have ethical
ombudsmen; only 1% have
judiciary boards. ? Of those having ethical committees, only 40%
handle infractions of the code and
only 23% handle employee complaints. ? Almost none of the ethics
committees include hourly or salaried employees other than managers
and very few include rep
resentatives from outside the company. ? Of the companies having
ethics training,
only 35% provide any for hourly employees. ? Only a little over
20% of the companies having social audits disclose them to the
public and to shareholders. ? Almost 80% have made no changes
in
corporate structure to accommodate their ethics efforts. And of
those which have
made such changes, only 24% have adopted
worker participation in decision making and only 7% have an
employee bill of rights.
One would hope that in the future corporations will strengthen
their ethics efforts with more
specific mechanisms and strategies for ethical
implementation. Perhaps this will come in time. We at the Center
believe that it will, for much
progress has already been made. But it should be pointed out
that:
- Of those companies which stated that they have taken ethical
steps 74% also state that
they are not planning to expand their efforts to incorporate
ethical values into the corporate environment.
Based on this survey, the Center for Business Ethics is
convinced that corporations are much more concerned with ethics
than in the past and have taken many positive steps to incorporate
ethics into their activities. We must continue, however, to press
for more progress toward
This content downloaded from 86.55.176.66 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013
08:26:19 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
Are Corporations Institutionalizing Ethics? 91
institutionalizing ethics within corporations. This would
include more ethics committees,
judiciary boards, and ombudsmen to oversee and enforce corporate
ethics, more ethics training for all corporate employees, more
social report
ing with more disclosure to the general public, more diverse
representation on all committees ?
including the board ?
relating to ethical
concerns and impacts, and more changes in
corporate structure which could provide more
responsiveness to ethical concerns inside the
organization, especially those of employees. Only when such
important details of implemen tation are more universally
established will
ethics truly be woven into corporate life.
Note
1 It might be argued that our survey is suspect because
we received only a 28% response. We agree that this is a
reason to be cautious about generalizing from our data.
It is possible that the companies who did not respond are not
taking any steps to institutionalize ethics. How
ever, not all the companies who responded are institu
tionalizing ethics; note that 56 responding companies said that
they are taking no such steps. We suspect that
most of the companies who did not respond decided not to because
of other reasons, perhaps primarily because
of the questionnaire's length (67 questions, taking probably an
hour to fill out). In fact, everyone we spoke to before and after
the survey was surprised that our
return was so high, especially since 70% of the returns
were completed by people of vice-presidential rank or above.
Furthermore, we found out after the data were
in that several corporations who did not respond to the
survey had taken steps to institutionalize ethics, but the
questionnaire simply did not reach an appropriate person in the
corporation and, as
a result, was not
completed.
Center for Business Ethics,
Bentley College, Waltham, MA 02254, U.S.A.
This publication is
available in microform.
University Microfilms
International
University Microfilms International reproduces this publication
in microform: micro
fiche and 16mm or 35mm film. For information about this
publication or any of the more than 13,000 titles we offer,
complete and mail the coupon to: University Microfilms
International, 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Call us
toll-free for an immediate response: 800-521-3044. Or call collect
in Michigan,
Alaska and Hawaii: 313-761-4700.
D Please send information about these titles:
Name
Company/Institution .
Address
City _
State_
Phone 1_
. Zip_
This content downloaded from 86.55.176.66 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013
08:26:19 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Article Contentsp. [85]p. 86p. 87p. 88p. 89p. 90p. 91
Issue Table of ContentsJournal of Business Ethics, Vol. 5, No. 2
(Apr., 1986), pp. 85-172Front MatterAre Corporations
Institutionalizing Ethics? [pp. 85-91]Responsibility and Moral
Reasoning: A Study in Business Ethics [pp. 93-117]ReviewReview:
untitled [pp. 118, 136, 150, 170-171]
Whose "Loyal Agent"? Towards an Ethic of Accounting [pp.
119-128]The Workers' Right to Know, Participate and Refuse
Hazardous Work: A Manifesto Right [pp. 129-136]Corporate Strategy
and Ethics [pp. 137-150]Collective Responsibility and Professional
Roles [pp. 151-154]Accountability and the Restraint of Freedom: A
Deontological Case for the Stricter Standard of Corporate
Disclosure [pp. 155-164]A Kantian Evaluation of Taylorism in the
Workplace [pp. 165-169]Back Matter