Rallying researchers to examine the interplay between management control and ethics

Abstract

On an increasingly frequent basis, I read in the papers or hear on the news of people treating others badly. Sometimes it seems as though it is becoming acceptable to be non-accepting, to be judgmental, to act with malice towards others, to tweet inappropriately, and to engage in overall bad behavior. The Golden Rule that we all learn early in life, which many hold as a universal ethical principle, is to treat others as you yourself would want to be treated (Putnam, 2006). Is it no longer relevant for the 21st century? Has it gone out of style? Does it not or should it not apply to organizations and organizational behaviors? I believe that the Golden Rule and ethical behavior are relevant whether we are engaging in personal or professional behaviors. Unfortunately, though, a study that examined the public’s perceptions of U.S. business executives found that public perception of the honesty and ethical standards of business executives, as compared to other professions, has decreased. In 1990, out of 25 professions, business executives ranked in the 48th percentile. In 2000, out of 32 professions, their ranking had dropped to the 77th percentile. So, what is ethics and ethical behavior? MerriamWebster (n.d.) defines ethics as “the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation.” Ethics concerns behaviors in which other are not harmed, even when doing so might be in one’s own best interest (Robin, 2008). It exists when the world in which we live is healthier than it would be in the absence of ethics. Ethical norms guide people to behave in a moral way whereby individuals do not inflict harm on others. Many contend that a world with ethics is a better, happier place than a world without ethics (Robin, 2008). Unfortunately, though, organizations and ethical behavior have a troubling and uneasy relationship. Over the past few decades, organizations have faced increasing scrutiny over their business ethics as external stakeholders (e.g. the public, institutions such as large pension funds and regulatory agencies, etc.) have made known their desire for more demanding ethical norms (Kaptein, 2017). Changing technology and an increasingly global and competitive landscape have forced organizations to deal with new technologies (e.g. bitcoin) and differences in cultures and norms from increased globalization. Public awareness has been raised due to scandals at well-known companies (e.g. Volkswagen and Wells Fargo) which have brought harm to others, precisely the definition of unethical behavior (Kaptein, 2017). This author claims that a tremendous gap now exists between what the ethical norms organizations should have versus what they do have. One of the primary purposes of management control is to motivate and direct behaviors (Anthony, 1965; Otley, 1999; Sprinkle, 2003). In the management control literature, we know this as the decision-influencing role, the purpose of which is to align individual behaviors with those of the organization (Sprinkle, 2003). The study of management control often examines various design (e.g. use of controls such as behavior and outcomes controls or how they are related as a system or package) and use (e.g. enabling and coercive control uses) features and their relationship with employee behavior. Based on the decline in adherence to the Golden Rule and the increase in unethical behaviors displayed in organizations, one important aspect of behavior that deserves more attention is how control practices can motivate professionals to engage in ethical behaviors. In this editorial, I am not interested in the organization, per se, but in the individuals that comprise the organization. Kaptein (2017) writes of the temptations and pressures that drive people to act unethically. He describes them as forces that either pull or push people, respectively, into committing acts that harm others. One temptation is excessive individualism, which Kaptein (2017) ascribes as