Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
decade of hypocrisy?
Jane Jones
School of Commerce
The Flinders University of South Australia
GPO Box 2100
Adelaide South Australia 5001
SCHOOL OF COMMERCE
RESEARCH PAPER SERIES: 00-6
ISSN: 1441-3906
1
Introduction
The debate over ethics in business is back on the public and corporate agendas thanks [in part]
to several recent, highly publicized scandals including the tarnished International Olympic
Committee member Phil Coles and allegations of improper behaviour, including graft and
corruption, during the 2000 Olympics Games bidding processes (Evans, 1999). Meanwhile in
January earlier this year, Telstra used footage of a 14 year-old girl, (who incidentally drowned
seconds after the film was taken) in San Antonio, Texas in a commercial that was designed to
show a community minded institution throughout the 1997 Katherine floods (Simper, 1999a).
And most recently, the cash for comments affair involving Australia’s highest paid broadcaster,
John Laws and the Australian Bankers’ Association (ABA), is now a mounting ethical crisis in
commercial radio, dragging in Law’s 2UE colleague, Alan Jones and some of Australia’s
biggest companies including Ansett, Qantas, AMP (Haslem & Elliott, 1999) and Cable and
As corporate Australia once again talks ethics and morality, [see for example, Mr. Frank
Cicutto, managing director of National Australia Bank and chairman of Australian Bankers’
Association, the keynote speaker at a recent seminar on “Ethics in Business”, who said of the
banking industry’s role in the John Laws cash-for-spin affair, that the public had “reason to
corporate sector” (cited in Davis & Collins, 1999 p. 3)] it becomes increasingly relevant to ask
questions such as: Why has business ethics entered the press and the agenda of Australian
boardrooms, large and small? What is the relevance of ethics to business? What constitutes
‘ethical’ business practices? Why do ethical dilemmas arise? How can organisations encourage
‘ethical’ behaviour?
2
In this paper these questions are addressed. The paper begins with a brief overview of the
reasons for the increasing attention to business ethics in Australia. The reasons why ethical
dilemmas occur in business are described, followed by a brief discussion of some of the schools
of philosophical normative ethical theory; their relevance to the business context is also
assessed. A review follows of some of the ways of encouraging ethical behaviour in the
corporate environment, including codes of ethics, together with a brief evaluation of their
efficacy. Finally, the question is asked if the new rhetoric coming from boardrooms and
The increasing interest in business ethics in Australia has resulted from a number of
culture of excesses and labelled the ‘decade of greed’ (Milton-Smith, 1997; Simmons, 1996;
Clark, cited in Jenison, 1997)-continuing into the 1990s involving some of Australia’s leading
business entrepreneurs, including Alan Bond, (ex-Bond Corp.), Christopher Skase, (ex-
Quintex) and Mr Solomon Lew, former Chairman of Coles Myer, [with its own alleged culture
of corruption involving secret commissions, and kickbacks for buyers, maintenance personnel,
and senior management, (Cromie, 1993)]; public officials [including Mr Jeff Kennett, Victorian
Premier and the so-called Guandong share transaction (Milton-Smith, 1997)]; as well as a
rorts affair, (Seccombe,1998) resulted in ethics and corporate behaviour becoming the focal
point in media reports. And today, as we enter the new millennium, the ethical values of
Consider for instance, the results of a recent survey by Roy Morgan Research, which found
that the “ethics and honesty” rating for bank managers has fallen from 66 per cent to 33 per
3
cent over the past couple of decades. In the same survey, respondents were also asked which
industries were doing a poor job for Australia and replied that banks had gone from the bottom
5 per cent to the top 44 per cent in a decade. Thus banks and bankers have gone from being
the most trusted and accepted members of society, to being among the least trusted and most
loathed, along with journalists, radio announcers and car salespeople (Morgan, 1999 cited in
Kohler, 1999).
The “economisation” of society trend-the philosophy that only what counts economically and
yields profits is relevant-has also given prominence to business ethics (Enderle, 1997). In
downsized, cutting costs and improving efficiency. Management structures became flatter and
decisions affecting themselves and their work. But what decisions should be made by top
managers and what should be left for others? In an era of financial globalisation, the activities
of the disgraced currency trader Nick Leeson, who single-handedly destroyed Barings Bank, is
an example of just what happens when poor ethics meets the exponential effect of today’s
With good corporate citizenship now firmly established (Longstaff cited in Johnson, 1999;
Longstaff cited in Macken, 1997; and Marsden cited in Thomas, 1997) and new standards of
public accountability (Clark, 1997 cited in Jemison, 1997) global telecommunications and
groups, ensure ethical reputations can be made or broken by the social impact a company has
4
The business community has focussed its attention on ethics too. Increasingly popular is the
notion that “good ethics is good for business” (Enderle, 1997; Desai & Rittenburg, 1997;
Abratt, Nel & Higgs, 1992; Tsalikis & Fritzsche, 1989; Solomon & Hanson, 1985).
Conversely, being unethical can also prove costly, as in the case of Exxon and the Valdez
disaster; Union Carbide and the Bhopal catastrophe in India (Shrivastava, 1987); Shell Oil and
its alleged environmental infringements in Nigeria (Longstaff cited in Macken, 1997; McElvoy,
1996); and BHP and its environmental negligence in Ok Tedi (Barker and Oldfield, 1999;
Barker, 1995).
The mounting interest in business ethics also reflects the globalisation of big business, the
formation of regional economic cooperative arrangements and trading blocks, (e.g., the North
Association of South East Asian Nations and Latin American Customs Union), and the
managers are more likely to be involved in international business in some way, and encounter
ethical dilemmas from the comparatively small scale decision making experienced daily [e.g.,
reporting others’ violations of organisation policies, (Jackson & Calafell Artola, 1997; Izraeli,
1988)] to the more strategic issues including bribery, environmental issues and copyright piracy
(Jackson & Calafell Artola, 1997). Australian managers need to be aware that their own
perception of ethical business practices may not match that of people from different cultural
backgrounds (Buller, Kohls & Anderson, 1997). What one organisation considers ethical in one
situation, at one time and in one culture, may not necessarily be viewed in the same light by
5
The task of distinguishing ethical conduct from unethical conduct is further complicated by the
‘grey areas’ in ethics (Tsalikis & Fritzsche, 1989), where the difference between an ethical and
unethical action is not clear, creating the problem of choosing between two different but
ethically correct answers. For instance does an employee aware of wrongdoing by his peers,
blow the whistle on his colleagues or maintain loyalty to his workmates? The Australian
concern with “mateship”, friendship and and group solidarity is well documented (Feather,
1975). As the NAB’s chief said in his keynote address at the recent Ethics in Business Series:
“You can have volumes of books and days of learned discussion on the subject of ethics
and still end up with the question ‘What is the right thing to do?’” (Cicutto, 1999 cited
in Bartholomeusz, 1999).
The recent cash-for-comments scandal, in which the Australian Bankers Association secretly
paid 1.2 million dollars to radio 2UE’s high profiler presenter John Laws to endorse banks
and/or refrain from broadcasting criticisms, raised a number of issues relating to ethical
behaviour. First and foremost, was the failure of some of the pillars of the Australia’s business
community to use ethical standards to guide their behaviour. Second, was the conduct and
broadcaster, with his morning radio programme syndicated on more than 70 stations
(Cameron, Lagan & Davies 1999) and 2 million listeners across Australia (Toohey, 1999)-with
Law’s situation is further complicated by the allegation that he approached the ABA to offer
his services (Allard & Davies, 1999; O’Riordan, 1999; Lyons, 1999), a situation that has seen
him the subject of at least one inquiry by the ABA (Davies, 1999; Allard & Davies, 1999). The
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), which had earlier said it was
6
interested in determining whether Laws, radio 2UE or the banks had engaged in misleading or
deceptive conduct, has since agreed that the ABA is the appropriate body to undertake the
inquiry. Similarly, the New South Wales Director of Public Prosecutions, concerned with
potential breaches of Section 100A of the Crimes Act (NSW), which makes it an offence “to
make unwarranted demands and to support those demands by agreeing not to communicate
material about a person”, together with the House of Representatives Standing Committee on
Economics, Finance and Public Administration, which was interested in why the banks
appeared to be purchasing publicity instead of addressing “the real issue of equity”, have both
said they will await the outcome of the ABA, before pursuing their own investigations
(Kavanagh, 1999).
And what about the role of the radio 2UE’s management, including its chairman John Conde a
former deputy chair of the not-for profit St James Ethics Centre (Guinness, 1999), established
to promote business and professional ethics, now forced to publicize radio 2UE’s policy
concerning the demarcation between advertising and editorial? (Simper, 1999b; O’Riordan,
1999)? Laws has also been quick to point out that his employer-radio 2UE-was party to the
bankers association contract, and furthermore, had benefited more from the arrangement than
himself (Meade, 1999; Meade, Elliott & Boreham, 1999; Lyons, 1999).
More broadly, the Law’s case has provoked a debate on media ethics including the grey area
known as “advertorials”-in essence paid advertising masked by the words “special supplement”
or “special event”-placed in newspapers by public relations companies, who are bound by their
own code of ethics and operating on the standard that they do not pay for coverage (Cameron
et al, 1999). In addition, the role of industry (self-) regulation in maintaining ethical standards
7
Frederick, Davis and Post (1988) identified a number of reasons why ethical problems occur in
business including competitive pressures; individual values in conflict with organisational goals;
Managers in organizations must balance their economic obligation to the firm, the bottom-line,
against moral obligations to other stakeholders including employees, customers, suppliers and
local communities (Frederick et al, 1988). But focusing on the ‘bottom-line’ may be at the
expense of these other groups (Vogel, 1991), and sometimes lead to unethical actions that can
The Commonwealth Bank for instance, despite having “serious ethical concerns about the
proposal” (Murray cited in Allard & Davies, 1999, p.1) to pay John Laws 1.2 million dollars to
endorse banks and/or refrain from criticising banks, succumbed to the pressure of the other
members of the banker’s lobby group (Allard & Davies, 1999) fearing it would be thrown out
if it failed to back the proposal. The Bank’s managing director, David Murray, has now been
forced to explain the Bank’s actions amidst unrest from one of its principal stakeholders, its
employees (Allard & Davies, 1999). Furthermore, from the perspective of its local community,
yet another key stakeholder, the deal has been a public relations disaster (Kohler, 1999;
Toohey, 1999).
This case has also highlighted the difficult conflict commercial radio must manage: balancing
the goals of maximizing returns to its shareholders (which at times will entail not offending big
8
Managerial values and attitudes may also encourage unethical conduct (Frederick et al, 1988).
A number of empirical studies (Baumhart, 1961; Carroll, 1975; Brenner & Molander, 1977;
Posner & Schmidt, 1984) have consistently found that the attitudes and behaviour of one’s
immediate supervisor and peers as influential factors effecting unethical decision-making. Top
management emphasize and clarify appropriate ethical behaviour for subordinates, while an
individual’s supervisor has the power to reward and punish acceptable and unacceptable ethical
behaviour. Simply put, these actions set the organisation’s ethical ethos.
The decision by the other members of the ABA-the Commonwealth Bank’s ‘peers’-to endorse
the ‘cash for comment’ proposal may be thought of as setting the standard of what was
(in)appropriate behaviour. Similarly, Law’s archrival but also his colleague, Alan Jones, had
similar deals [including a $2.6 million contract with Cable and Wireless Optus (Allard &
Davies, 1999; Meade, 1999) and with Qantas and Ansett] to provide favourable editorial
comments on air (Haslem & Elliott, 1999). Law’s employer-management at radio 2UE-as a
party to the ABA contract with a financial interest in it (Meade, 1999; Meade et al, 1999) in
The results of the latest KPMG Australia Fraud survey raise serious questions about the
quantify both the nature and extent of fraud in Australian business. The report found that
management fraud accounted for 21 per cent of overall corporate fraud (including fraud in
expense accounts, conflict of interest, purchase for personal use and misappropriation of
funds), while non-management employees were responsible for 57 per cent of the fraud (for
corporate sector had lost more than $1.3 billion in fraud since the previous 1997 survey. From
a firm perspective, the average cost of fraud had risen from $450,000 to $1.1 million. The
9
authors of the study suggest that these figures underestimate the true cost of actual fraud. For
instance, 12 percent of respondents failed to disclose the extent of losses, possibly because the
Managers may also feel that they sometimes need to compromise their personal principles to
conform to organisational expectations (Frederick et al, 1988; Lincoln et al, 1982 cited in
Kohut, 1994; Harris, 1990; Posner & Schmidt, 1987). Mr. David Murray, managing director of
the Commonwealth Bank, has repeatedly stated that he had “serious ethical concerns about the
proposal”(Murray cited in Allard & Davies, 1999, p.1) and argued strenuously against the deal,
considering it both risky and unethical. Nevertheless, heconceded to the needs of the lobby
The apparent leaking of the contract between Law’s and the ABA by one of the banks (Kohler,
1999; Lyons, 1999) suggests that someone blew the whistle on corporate wrongdoing.
Similarly, in the KPMG Australia Fraud survey, whistleblowers among employees, customers,
suppliers, the police and anonymous letters reported more fraud than did the (poor) internal
Personal financial need and ignorance, incompetence, corruption or greed can also result in
unethical decisions in business (Frederick et al, 1988; Brenner & Molander, 1977; Posner &
Schmidt 1984). While the bankers association wanted to buy favourable editorial comment,
Australia’s highest paid broadcaster (O’Riordan, 1999) and sixth on the annual BRW list of
Australia’s highest paid entertainers, earning 11 million plus (Shoebridge, 1999) appears to
10
Normative Philosophical Ethical Theories
Causal models of business ethics (for example, Bommer et al, 1987; Trevino, 1986; Hunt &
Vitell, 1986; Ferrell & Gresham 1985) depict ethical and unethical behaviour as a consequence
of a decision process, the individual and the situation in which the individual makes the
decision (Brady & Hatch, 1992). While the decision making process is seen as the main
determinant, internal (dispositional) factors including personality and locus of control and
external (situational or contextual) factors such as the work climate, influence and actions of
also influence the decision maker (Weber, 1996; Brady & Wheeler, 1996; Randall & Gibson,
1990).
Normative philosophical ethical theories in turn, have provided a number of alternative models
that can be employed to guide the decision making process (McDonald & Kan, 1996). Tsalikis
and Fritzsche (1989) distinguish consequential (or teleological) from non-consequential (or
deontological) ethical theories: the former refers to the tendency to evaluate ethical behaviour
in terms of its consequences; the latter excludes consideration of the consequences in decision-
making. Instead deontological theories emphasize duties and absolute rules and standards for
ethical decision making (i.e., performing one’s duty, respecting the rights of others, ensuring a
fair and just solution) (Weber, 1996; Brady & Wheeler, 1996).
Teleological Theories
Ethical Egoism
decision are good or bad. If the consequences are good the decision is ethical; if they are bad,
it’s unethical. Furthermore, if the evaluation of the consequences focuses solely on the
11
individual (or in the case of organizations, corporate entity’s) long run interest, the ethical
theory is called ethical egoism. Thus if a decision results in a greater ratio of good to bad in the
long run for the individual corporate entity compared with alternatives, the decision is ethical.
Utilitarianism
On the other hand, if the assessment of consequences considers everyone involved, the theory
is called utilitarianism. Utilitarianism requires the decision maker to consider the outcomes of
each decision alternative, and assess the impact of these consequences on all parties concerned
in order to select the one that produces the greatest good for the greatest number. This
approach is also known as the cost-benefit analysis (or utility approach) because the costs and
benefits of a decision are compared, in order to determine whether the overall result produces
Deontological Theories
Cavanagh, Moberg & Velasques (1981) identified three categories of ethical theories:
utilitarian theories, theories of rights and theories of justice. Theories of rights and theories of
justice are deontological-based ethics, emphasizing duty, rights, fairness and justice (Weber,
1996).
Theory of Rights
Under a ‘rights’ approach, the decision maker is required to respect the fundamental rights
shared by all human beings (e.g., the right of free consent; the right to privacy; the right of
freedom of conscience; the right of free speech; and the right of due process (Cavanagh et al,
1981). Thus an ethical decision occurs when the rights of those affected by the decision are
12
protected or not interfered with. Conversely, denying the rights of others, or failing to protect
Theory of Justice
Under the justice approach a decision is considered ethical if it is made fairly, equitably and
impartially. The decision maker is required to administer rules ‘fairly’ and ensure there is a
‘just’ distribution of the benefits and costs among all those concerned with the decision,
The distributive justice principle involves determining the equitable means by which benefits
and costs should be borne by different groups. In other words, individuals who are similar in
relevant aspects should be treated similarly, and individuals who differ in a relevant aspect
should be treated differently in proportion to the differences between them. The procedural
justice principle is concerned with developing and administering fair rules or procedures, and
ensuring they are consistently and impartially enforced (Cavanagh et al, 1981).
A number of other deontological rules have also been identified which might be employed by
individuals within organizations when making ethical decisions, including Kant’s ‘Categorical
Imperative’ or ‘universal rule’ (or law). This prominent deontological rule states that
‘I ought never to act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should
The decision-maker is concerned with whether he or she would be willing to have others act in
the same way. The only ethical courses of action are those where the action taken under the
circumstances could serve as a universal law of behaviour for everyone facing the same
13
circumstances. Thus a manager is required to search for the general principle that he or she
could follow in that particular case, and which, moreover, satisfies the test that he or she could
will all other managers to follow the same principle under similar circumstances.
This approach also embraces the Golden Rule, often cited as acceptable in business: ‘do unto
others as you would have them do unto you’ (Tsalikis & Fritzsche, 1989). In other words, treat
An alternate framework, seen as the most practical of the ethical frameworks, is the ‘light of
day’ principle, also known as the TV test (McDonald & Pak, 1997). Under this approach, the
most salient factor taken into consideration by the decision-making is the question, “What if
this information went public?"-That is, if the decision was reported on primetime news. The
decision maker is openly mindful of what might be the reaction of family, friends and
associates, if the details relating to their decision were publicity revealed, receiving extensive
TV coverage.
Do managers make ethical judgements using a utilitarian criteria comparing the costs and
benefits of various alternatives, and choosing the option that produces the greatest good for
the greatest number? Or is their foremost concern during the decision making process to
ensure that the decision is made such that it is in the best interests of the individual
corporation? Do managers ignore the consequences of their decision, and simply focus on
whether they would be willing to have everyone else act in the same way under the same
14
Traditionally it has been assumed that most managers in business use a utilitarian framework
when evaluating ethical dilemmas (Fritzsche & Becker, 1984; Cohen, Pant & Sharp, 1993;
Clark & Jonson, 1995). McDonald and Pak (1996) suggest that the strong role economics
plays in managerial decision making could explain this utilitarian disposition. Intuitively,
utilitarianism may also appeal to business people because of its reliance on the balancing of
Cavanagh (1990) states that cost-benefit analysis is the dominant criteria in 90 per cent of all
furthermore, consequences are measured by costs and benefits, it appears logical that the best
ethical action is that which maximises profit (Clark & Jonson, 1995, p. 3).
However, other studies have not supported these findings (Brady & Wheeler, 1996; Glover,
Bumpus, Logan & Ciesla 1997). Forrest, Cochran, Ray and Robin (1991) concluded managers
preferred a deontological approach, while Murphy and Daley (1990) found transportation
industry executives did not rely on any one principle (e.g., utilitarianism, justice or rights) as
Brady and Wheeler (1996) propose that the utilitarian results may be due in part to biases in
vignettes in these studies. Brady (1985) suggests that the ethical issues themselves may dictate
the form of reasoning. For instance, some ethical dilemmas may demand a more deontological
approach (for example, equal employment), and others a more utilitarian response, such as
downsizing decisions.
Reidenbach and Robin (1988, 1990) contend that individuals do not use clearly defined
normative concepts (i.e. utilitarian, rights or justice) in making ethical decisions, but mix these
15
philosophies (i.e. use a hybrid of the philosophies) in making an ethical evaluation. Similarly,
McDonald and Pak (1996) also concluded that ethical judgements are made using multiple
criteria.
Following an extensive literature review (Batten, Hettihewa & Mellor 1997; Milton-Smith,
1997; Westwood & Posner, 1997; Armstrong, 1996; Small, 1995; Soutar, McNeil & Molster
1995; Armstrong & Sweeney, 1994; Armstrong, 1992; Abratt, Nel & Higgs 1992; Small, 1992;
Armstrong et al., 1990), there appears to be a distinct lack of research into how or on what
basis, Australian managers make ethical judgements, with the notable exception of Jackson et
al, (1999b). Further research into how managers make ethical judgements (i.e., using what
criteria) is warranted, as this has implications for areas such as the effectiveness of codes of
conduct, ethics training and promoting ethical behaviour. For example, if the light of day
the theme of extensive public exposure, such as “What if you got caught?” advertisements.
Interestingly, in their study of managers from Hong Kong, Malaysia, New Zealand and Canada,
McDonald and Pak (1996) noted that the light of day framework was not a significant
‘neutralisation’ (rationalisations that deny hurt or damage), justice and categorical imperative
were the more salient cognitive frameworks employed. McDonald and Pak (1996) also
distinguished between what managers “indicate” (i.e., self report data) are the cognitive
frameworks used (the socially desirable duty and justice responses), and what multiple
regression analysis results suggests are used (self-interest and neutralisation). This too has
16
In one of the few empirical investigations into the structure of ethical decisions, Jackson et
al(in press) found that American managers used mainly consequential criteria. Given the
et al (in press) suggests that this raises concerns about the efficacy of the widespread use of
codes of conduct by American companies as a mechanism for assuring good business practices.
Australian managers were found to use both consequential and relativistic criteria, to make
people they most admire, their family and their culture, and influences the individual’s
perception of the ethical content of a situation. Further research into ethical frameworks used
A variety of methods have been suggested in order to encourage ethical conduct in business,
ranging from ethics training programs, ethics committees, ethics audits, judiciary boards,
internal ethics ombudsman (Soutar et al, 1995), a forum for the discussion of ethics (Batten et
al. 1997) through to an ethics advisor or ethics advocate (Singleton, 1999). However, the most
common response is the codes of ethics (Soutar et al, 1995; Tsalikis & Fritzsche, 1989;
Merchant, 1988 cited in Batten et al, 1997). However Soutar et al, (1995) notes it is not
Codes of Ethics
Hosmer (1987, p. 153) depicts codes as "statements of the norms and beliefs of an
organization…the way that the senior people in an organisation want others to think".
Fritzsche and Becker (1982) contend that a set of codes or rules should be developed that can
be used as a managerial guide to conduct when faced with specific types of ethical problems.
Furthermore, these rules should reflect the general values and expectations of society, and as a
17
result the ethical behaviour of organisations should improve. Similarily, Merchant (1988 cited
in Batten et al, 1997) believes that having a written code of ethics or a corporate code of
Batten et al, (1997) conducted an Australian wide survey and found that most firms (71per
cent) did not have a written code of ethics, although 37 per cent had a forum for discussion of
ethics. The authors concluded that larger firms were more likely to have a written code of
conduct than were smaller firms. Importantly, Batten et al (1997) contend that because of the
sample size and response rate, these results are indicative of practices of Australian firms in
different industries.
The Australian Institute of Management (1996, cited in Lawson, 1996) surveyed 222 large
companies consisting of more than 200 employees and found that approximately two thirds
had written codes of conduct. However, only 56 per cent had clear mechanisms for reporting
violations of those codes; and a further 10 per cent were in the process of developing such
mechanisms.
In yet another study, Wood (cited in Simons, 1996) concluded that more than one-quarter of
Australia’s largest 500 companies had codes of ethics; furthermore, by 1997, the numbers of
companies with codes were expected to have increased by half as much again. But while codes
were increasing in number, Wood also found that comparatively few companies had any
internal structures to back up the documents. Similarly, Soutar et al. (1995) examined the
mechanisms companies used to formalize ethics and only a handful of companies had a
feedback mechanism, such as social audits or reports, and still fewer reward or sanctioning
18
‘Institutionalising ethics’ is the term used to describe incorporating ethics formally and
explicitly into business, making it a regular, normal part of day-to-day business. Ethics is
included in company policy-making at both the board and senior management levels, and,
through a formal code, integrated into all daily decision-making and work practices for all
Cohen (1997, cited in Moodie, 1997) concludes that the most effective code is one that is the
product of consultation of the people working in the business. The code should reflect what
the business is about; and what qualities, virtues and behaviour the employees should both
have and display. Furthermore, once the code is finalised, regular reviews with staff and ethical
audits should be conducted to measure the ethical performance of the company, and ensure
McDonald and Zepp (1989) identified a number of advantages and disadvantages of codes of
ethics. They concluded that codes elucidate exactly what constitutes unethical behaviour; focus
employee attention upon ethical issues; define limits of conduct; provide employees with the
philosophy; and help in inducting and training new employees. Disadvantages focused on their
generality; the codes themselves are not prioritised, and are not believed by employees.
Ethical codes are not a panacea. While a comprehensive examination of the disadvantages of
ethical codes of conduct is beyond the scope of this paper, as stated above, one criticism
focuses upon their generality [McDonald and Zepp (1989). For a detailed discussion of
generalized versus detailed codes of conduct, see Laczniak (1983), Hoffman (1983) and
Johnson (1983)]. Tsalikis and Fritzsche (1989) argue, that in order to be useful, codes,
including codes for professional associations, must be specific. Unfortunately, codes tend to
19
lack specificity. That is, professional codes of conduct, fail to address many important issues.
Kohler (1999) suggests that as a result of the Laws affair, the Australian Broadcasting
Authority will be forced to rewrite if not the broadcasting code, at least the definition of what a
journalist is, and what a journalist does. John Laws argues that he is not a journalist
responsible for the provision of “news and current affairs”, and as a result not bound by any
Andrews (1989) has suggested that corporate ethics has three facets: first, the ethics of
individual managers; second, the informal influences in the work environment which impact
upon ethical behaviour; and third, the formal institutionalization of ethics within the workplace.
Thus in order to ensure an ethical organisation, firms should first ensure their recruitment and
selection policies, procedures and practices are designed such that they minimize the possibility
of people entering the orgnanisation who are inclined to behave in an unethical manner,
through for instance, the use of honesty testing, thorough referencing checking and so forth.
It has been well documented that the attitudes and behaviour of one’s immediate supervisor
and peers are influential factors effecting (un)ethical decision making (Baumhart, 1961;
Carroll, 1975; Brenner & Molander, 1977; Posner & Schmidt, 1984). Thus ethical attitudes
and behaviour by top management and one's peers should be managed such that they set the
ethical mores of the company, which in turn, is supported by formal processes in the
organization, including a code of conduct, provision of ethics training, ethics audit and so forth
( Soutar et al 1995).
Conclusion
The Laws affair, like the events following the 1980s, has again raised the debate of ethics and
business. As many of the ’80s business leaders [e.g., Brian Yuill (Spedly Securities), Laurie
20
Connell (ex-Rothwells Ltd), Alan Bond (ex-Bond Corp) and George Herscu (ex-Hooker) and
politicians alike, (e.g., Brian Burke, former premier of West Australia), went before the courts,
were convicted and jailed, some of Australia’s biggest companies moved to strengthen
conduct (Maiden, 1999). Cable and Wireless Optus, Telstra, Ansett and the big four banks for
instance, all have codes of conduct. Cable and Wireless Optus’ code bans outside business
dealings that create a conflict of interest. Telstra has a code of conduct and Ansett an ethical
creed, which in one form or another, explicitly prohibit both the payment and receipt of bribes,
pay-offs, kickbacks or other illegal payments or transfers in business. The National Australia
Bank’s code includes “ethics in all our actions”, while the ANZ’s stresses staff conduct such
that “honesty is beyond question” (cited in Maiden, 1999 p.13). Interestingly, Maiden writes
that the Commonwealth Bank was unable to proved their code for his recent article.
But the Laws’s cash for comments affair, [indirectly] involving these same companies, together
with a brief review of newspaper headlines involving inquiries conducted by the National
Crime Authority, ACCC, Australian Companies and Securities Commission and royal
commissions to name a few, into both prominent individuals and corporations, would raise
serious doubts as to whether corporations and management have shed the morally bankrupt
ethos that dominated the 1980s and evolved stronger ethical cultures.
For instance, former Macquarie Bank executive director Simon Hannes was recently convicted
of insider trading (Lampe, 1999), while a former chairman of the Adelaide Stock Exchange and
board member of the Australian Stock Exchange, Malcom McLachlan was recently banned by
the Australian Securities and Investments Commission following a finding of failing to fulfill his
duties “…honestly, fairly and efficiently” (Reece, 1999). Partners of Allen, Allen & Hemsley,
one of Sydney’s oldest and largest law firms, must now find $23 million following a court
21
ruling in which it was held responsible for a ‘dishonest and fraudulent conduct by a former
colleague (Walkley & Lampe, 1999). Meanwhile a former CEO of Switzerland General
Insurance’s Australian operations, recently told the NSW Supreme court that entertaining
family members at company expense was common practice in the late 1980s, saying that purely
personal (restaurant meal) expenses, were “provided for in the company standards” (cited in
Bica, 1999, p.2). Furthermore, he claims it continues today. In yet another recent example, the
fast food giant, McDonald’s has been accused of operating its controversial “Monopoly
McMatch and win” game in a misleading and unconscionable way and is expected to face
Federal Court (Howell, 1999). For a more detailed discussion of unethical behaviour see
Brown (1999).
history. In his new book, “Rorting: The Great Australian Crime”, he traces its origins,
beginning with the transportation of petty crooks-largely thieves and forgers-on the First Fleet;
followed by colonial traders who seized upon and exploited opportunities by selling goods in
short supply, sometimes at a profit of 4,000 per cent; continuing through the nineteenth
century with corrupt arrangements between colonial police and bushrangers, and allegations of
bribery at both state and local government levels in the early 1900s; black-marketing in the
Second World War; large scale illegal betting in metropolitan Sydney in the 1960s; and
corruption and illegal casinos in NSW in the 1970s. More recently, Brown identifies Federal
politicians who have been found guilty of rorting their travel expenses allowances.
For instance, former Liberal senator Bob Woods pleaded guilty to false claims for travel and
private vehicle allowances; former National Party MP Michael Cobbs was found guilty of fraud
related to a travel allowance claim; Noel Crichton-Browne also a Liberal senator, pleaded
22
guilty to two charges of rorting his parliamentary travel allowances; while now Independent
senator Mal Colston, faced charges for alleged travel allowance fraud (Henderson, 1999).
Then there were the unprecedented number of scandals about ministerial propriety, which saw
a number of Coalition ministers either, resign voluntarily, or by force, for breach of the Prime
Of more concern, however, is the widespread nature of fraud identified in the latest Australian
Institute of Criminology (AIM) Report, also known as the KPMG Fraud Survey (cited in
Hepworth, 1999). In the survey, 57 per cent of responding companies reported being the
victim of at least one incident of fraud, while 69 per cent experienced more than one incident.
Losses resulting from fraudulent activity amounted to 239 million dollars, up from 104 million
in 1997. The report’s authors, argue that these figures are only the tip of the iceberg.
Dr Russell Smith, one of the authors, found that Australian companies were reluctant to report
fraud, fearing the negative effect the resulting publicity would have on their commercial
reputation, and loss of business. Similarly, while high technology fraud was found to be
increasingly common, he argues that the resulting losses of $16 million were probably
underestimated because companies were ignorant of the extent to which they were being
concern that publishing security flaws would expose them to similar actions by other
perpetrators.
However, Smith argues that by failing to report fraud, offenders may believe that they are free
to continue to act illegally, and that the companies’ lack of action would negate deterrents for
23
Poor internal controls were found to be the most significant factor enabling frauds to occur
(KPMG Fraud Survey cited in Hayes, 1999). Merchant (1988 cited in Batten et al, 1997)
argues that efficient, effective comprehensive internal control systems are a complementary
device in assuring good business practices. However, a recurring theme in the literature and
applied ethicists alike [e.g., Dr Simon Longstaff and Attracta Lagan, executive director and
director of consulting at St James Ethics Centre, respectively (Vines, 1999; Guinness, 1999;
Singleton, 1999)], in promoting ethical business practices is the role of senior management in
clearly stating its values, seen to be practicing and endorsing them, and communicating and
ensuring staff in the organization understand and accept those values (Batten et al, 1997;
Milton-Smith, 1992; Southee cited in Small, 1992; Merchant, 1988 cited in Batten et al, 1997).
Conversely, the influences of the perceived attitudes (and behaviour) of immediate supervisors
and peers on unethical decision making is also well documented (Baumhart, 1961; Carroll,
1975; Brenner & Molander, 1977; Posner & Schmidt, 1984). Given the recent findings of
Jackson et al, (in press), with respect to the relativistic criteria used by Australian managers to
evaluate decisions with an ethical component, further research into Australian managerial
values and their relationship to ethical decision making is warranted, and is that of their peers
and supervisors.
24
REFERENCES
Abratt, R, Nel, D & Higgs, N (1992), ‘An examination of the ethical beliefs of managers using
pp. 29-35.
Allard, T & Davies, A (1999), ‘Banks ready to dump Laws’, The Sydney Morning Herald,
Armstrong, RW (1996) ‘The relationship between culture and perceptions of ethical problems
problems encountered by Australian Firms’, Journal of Business Ethics, 11, pp. 161-
171.
Armstrong, RW, Stenning, JK, Ryans, L, Marks and Mayo, M (1990), ‘International marketing
25
Armstrong, RW & Sweeney, J (1994) ‘Industry type, culture, mode of entry and perceptions
Barker, G (1995), ‘Dead fish, ethics and Ok Tedi’, Financial Review, October 9.
Barker, G & Oldfield, S (1999), ‘BHP admits Ok Tedi’s a mess, but Downer says dig in’, The
Bartholomeusz, S (1999), ‘Balance low in bank of ethics’, The Sydney Morning Herald, July
23, p.21
Batten, JS, Hettihewa, R & Mellor (1997), ‘The ethical management practices of Australian
Baumhart, R (1961), ‘How Ethical Are Businessmen’? Harvard Business Review, 39, pp. 6-31.
Bice, K (1999), ‘Sacked CEO exposes culture of expense abuse’, The Australian Financial
Bommer, M, Gratto, C, Gravander, J, & Tuttle, M (1987), ‘A behavioural model of ethical and
Boreham, T & Dalton, R (1999), ‘Laws deal: we’re sorry now, says top banker’, The
Brady, FN & Wheeler, GE (1996), ‘An empirical study of ethical predispositions’, Journal of
Brady, NF & Hatch, MJ (1992), ‘General causal models in business ethics: an essay on
26
Brenner, SN & Molander, EA (1977), ‘Is the ethics of business executives changing?’,
Brown, M (1999), ‘Wide world of rorts’, The Sydney Morning Herald, Sept., 11. p. 7.
Buller, PF, Kohls, JJ & Anderson, KS (1997), ‘A model for addressing cross-cultural ethical
Cameron, D, Lagan, B & Davies, A (1999)’ ‘His masters’ voice’, The Sydney Morning
Carroll, A (1975), ‘Managerial ethics: a post Watergate view’, Business Horizons, April, pp.
75-80.
Cavanagh GH (1990), American Business Values. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Cavanagh GF, Moberg, DJ & Velasques, M (1981), ‘The ethics of organisational politics’,
Cazalet, G (1999), ‘Business must learn that money cannot buy trust’, The Australian
Clark, GL & Jonson, EP (1995), Management Ethics: Theory, Cases and Practice. Australia:
Harper Educational.
Collins, L (1999), ‘2UE sets up policy ‘council’’, The Australian Financial Review, July, 28
p.8.
Collins, L (1999), ‘ABA chases Laws’ contract’, The Australian Financial Review, July, 27
p.9.
Cromie, A (1983), ‘Coles Myer’s Web of Corruption’, Business Review Weekly, March 26.
Davies, A (1999), ‘Laws’s $200,000 Qantas deal’, The Sydney Morning Herald, July, 17, p. 8.
Davis, M & Collins, L (1999), ‘Cicutto on the wages of spin’, The Australian Financial
Review, July, 23 p. 3.
De George, RT (1987), ‘The status of business ethics: past and future’, Journal of Business
27
Desai, AB & Rittenburg, T (1997), ‘Global ethics: an integrative framework for MNEs’,
Enderle, GA (1997), ‘Worldwide survey of business ethics in the 1990s’, Journal of Business
Evans, M (1999), ‘All the things Phil Coles can’t quite explain’, The Sydney Morning Herald,
May 6.
Feather, N. T. (1975). Values in education and society. New York: Free Press.
Forrest, PJ, Cochran, DS, Ray, DF, & Robin, DP (1990), ‘ An empirical examination of four
Frederick, WC, Davis, K, & Post, JE (1988), Business and Society (International Edition).
Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
Fritzsche, DJ & Becker, H (1982), ‘Business ethics of future marketing managers’, Journal of
Guinness, D (1999), ‘Ethic cleansing’, The Sydney Morning Herald, August 21, p. 3
Harris, J (1990), ‘Ethical values of individuals at different levels in the organisational hierarchy
Haslem, B & Elliott, G (1999) ‘Airlines weigh in to Laws furore’, The Australian, 20 July, p.
6.
Hayes, J (1999), ‘Lax companies pay heavy cost in fraud’, The Australian Financial Review,
April 4.
Henderson, G (1999), ‘The rorters caught in the ACT’, The Sydney Morning Herald, Jun 22,
28
p. 13.
Jackson, T & Artola, MC (1997), ‘Ethical beliefs and management behaviour: a cross-cultural
Jackson, T., Li, J., Lau, K. F., LO, A., Yeung, K, Rohmetra, N. & Tidwell, P. (In Press)
Jemison, S (1997), ‘Governance is dynamic’, The Australian Financial Review, February, 14.
Johnson, A (1999), ‘Business cultivates a more natural image’ The Australian Financial
Kavanagh, J (1999), ‘Laws’ inquisitors lay off’, Business Review Weekly, August 27, p18.
Kohler, A (1999), ‘The trouble with Laws’, The Australian Financial Review, Weekend, July,
17-18, p. 27.
Kohut, GF & Corriher, SE (1994), ‘The relationship of age, gender, experience and awareness
29
Lampe, A (1999), ‘Insider trader Hannes prepares for his judgement day’, The Sydney
Lawson, M (1997), ‘And let Nick be a Leeson in ethics for all’, The Australian Financial
Lawson, M (1996), ‘Many firms lack written code of ethics’, The Australian Financial
Lyons, J (1999), ‘John Laws. Inside the court of the talkback king’, The Bulletin, July, 27, pp.
24-31.
McDonald, G & Pak, P (1996), ‘It’s all fair in love, war, and business: Cognitive philosophies
in ethical decision making’, Journal of Business Ethics, Sep; 15(9, pp. 973-996.
McDonald, G and Zepp, RA (1988), ‘Ethical perceptions of Hong Kong Chinese business
McElvoy, A (1996), ‘The New Morality Maze’, The Australian Financial Review, January 24,
p. 14
Milton-Smith, J (1997), ‘Business ethics in Australia and New Zealand’, Journal of Business
Moodie, A (1997), ‘A code of ethics doesn’t ensure business ethics’, The Australian Financial
Meade, A (1999), ‘Station bosses lay down their law’, The Australian, July 19, p.3
Meade, A, Elliott, G, & Boreham, T (1999), ‘Laws’s million-dollar bank deal off’, The
Opinion, (1999), ‘Testing time for self-regulation’, The Australian Financial Review, July 22,
p. 16.
O’Riordan, B (1999), ‘Clearing the airwaves: Laws on notice as bankers fued’, The Australian
30
Posner, BZ & Schmidt, WH (1984), ‘Values and the American Manager: An update’,
Randall, DM & Gibson, AM (1990), ‘Methodology in business ethics research: a review and
Reece, N (1999), ‘Broking ban on McLachlan’, The Australian Finacnial Review, September
24, p.19.
Reidenbach, RE, & Robin, DP (1988) Some initial steps towards improving the measurement
Reidenbach, RE, & Robin, DP (1990), ‘Toward the development of a multidimensional scale
for improving evaluations of business ethics’, Journal of Business Ethics, 9, pp. 639-
653.
Rogers, I & O’Riordan, B (1999), ‘Bankers in turmoil as Laws drops whole story’, The
Seccombe, M (1999), ‘You have to be a Rhodes scholar to be this stupid’, The Sydney
Shoebridge, N (1999), ‘Savage Garden counts even more after Mel’s millions go’, Business
Simons, M (1996), ‘Born again business’, The Weekend Australian, December 28-29,
Review,p.1, 4.
31
Simper, E (1999b), ‘A desperate case of stating the obvious’, The Australian, July 19, p.3
Small, MW (1992), ‘Attitudes towards business ethics held by West Australian students: a
Small, MW (1995), ‘Business ethics and commercial morality in Western Australia’, Journal of
Solomon, RC & Hanson, K (1985), Its Good Business, New York: Harper and Row.
Tomas, J-C (1997), ‘Ethics belongs on the agenda’, The Australian Financial Review,
February 14.
Toohey, B (1999), ‘Struggling to get the right mix’, The Australian Financial Review,
Tsalikis, J & Fritzsche, DJ (1989), ‘Business ethics: a literature review with a focus on
Vines, H (1999), ‘Ethics: the core of good business’, HR Monthly, June, pp17-19.
Walkley, B & Lampe, A (1999), ‘Law firm to pay $23m for fraud’, The Sydney
Weber, J (1996), ‘Influences upon managerial moral decision making: nature of the harm and
Westwood, R. J. and Posner, B. Z. (1997) Managerial values across cultures: Australia, Hong
Kong and the United States, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 14, pp. 31-66.
32