“亲爱的,你必须做正确的事”:持证金融顾问常见的道德决策挑战和策略

IF 1.9 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Qualitative Research in financial Markets Pub Date : 2023-05-29 DOI:10.1108/qrfm-09-2022-0151
M. Wilcoxson, Jana L. Craft
{"title":"“亲爱的,你必须做正确的事”:持证金融顾问常见的道德决策挑战和策略","authors":"M. Wilcoxson, Jana L. Craft","doi":"10.1108/qrfm-09-2022-0151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to explore the common ethical decision-making challenges faced by financial advisers and how they meet these challenges. The purpose is to identify successful decision-making tools used by investment advisers in doing business ethically. Additionally, the authors uncover common challenges and offer decision-making tools to provide support for supplemental ethics training in the future.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nQuestions were analyzed through a qualitative approach using individual interviews to examine a range of experiences and attitudes of active financial advisers. The sample was represented by 11 practicing financial advisers affiliated with US independent broker-dealers: six women and five men, each with 10 or more years of experience, ranging in age from 35 to 75. Grounded in four ethical decision-making models, this research examines individual ethical decision-making using individual (internal, personal) and organizational (external, situational) factors.\n\n\nFindings\nThe method used uncovered struggles and revealed strategies used in making ethical decisions. Two research questions were examined: what are the common ethical decision-making challenges faced by financial advisers in the US financial industry? How do financial advisers handle ethical decision-making challenges? Four themes emerged that impacted ethical decision-making: needs of the individual, needs of others, needs of the firm and needs of the marketplace. Financial advisers identified moral obligation, self-control and consulting with others as major considerations when they contemplate difficult decisions.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nA limitation of this review is its small sample size. A more robust sample size from investment advisers with a broader range of experiences could have widened the findings from the study.\n\n\nPractical implications\nInvestment advisers can use the findings of this study as a tool for improving their own ethical decision-making or designing training for their employees to be better decision-makers.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe study explores the decision-making experiences of investment advisers to reveal multifaceted, often private struggles that qualitative methods can uncover. The study provides support for the development of additional training in ethical decision-making specific to investment advisers.\n","PeriodicalId":45060,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research in financial Markets","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Honey, you’ve got to do what’s right”: common ethical decision-making challenges and strategies of licensed financial advisers\",\"authors\":\"M. Wilcoxson, Jana L. Craft\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/qrfm-09-2022-0151\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis paper aims to explore the common ethical decision-making challenges faced by financial advisers and how they meet these challenges. The purpose is to identify successful decision-making tools used by investment advisers in doing business ethically. Additionally, the authors uncover common challenges and offer decision-making tools to provide support for supplemental ethics training in the future.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nQuestions were analyzed through a qualitative approach using individual interviews to examine a range of experiences and attitudes of active financial advisers. The sample was represented by 11 practicing financial advisers affiliated with US independent broker-dealers: six women and five men, each with 10 or more years of experience, ranging in age from 35 to 75. Grounded in four ethical decision-making models, this research examines individual ethical decision-making using individual (internal, personal) and organizational (external, situational) factors.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe method used uncovered struggles and revealed strategies used in making ethical decisions. Two research questions were examined: what are the common ethical decision-making challenges faced by financial advisers in the US financial industry? How do financial advisers handle ethical decision-making challenges? Four themes emerged that impacted ethical decision-making: needs of the individual, needs of others, needs of the firm and needs of the marketplace. Financial advisers identified moral obligation, self-control and consulting with others as major considerations when they contemplate difficult decisions.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nA limitation of this review is its small sample size. A more robust sample size from investment advisers with a broader range of experiences could have widened the findings from the study.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nInvestment advisers can use the findings of this study as a tool for improving their own ethical decision-making or designing training for their employees to be better decision-makers.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThe study explores the decision-making experiences of investment advisers to reveal multifaceted, often private struggles that qualitative methods can uncover. The study provides support for the development of additional training in ethical decision-making specific to investment advisers.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":45060,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qualitative Research in financial Markets\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Qualitative Research in financial Markets\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/qrfm-09-2022-0151\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research in financial Markets","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/qrfm-09-2022-0151","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本文旨在探讨财务顾问面临的常见道德决策挑战,以及他们如何应对这些挑战。其目的是确定投资顾问在道德经营中使用的成功决策工具。此外,作者还发现了常见的挑战,并提供了决策工具,为未来的补充道德培训提供支持。设计/方法/方法通过定性方法分析问题,使用个人访谈来检查积极的财务顾问的一系列经验和态度。样本由11名隶属于美国独立经纪公司的执业财务顾问代表:6名女性和5名男性,每个人都有10年或10年以上的经验,年龄从35岁到75岁不等。本研究以四个伦理决策模型为基础,利用个人(内部、个人)和组织(外部、情境)因素考察了个人的伦理决策。发现在做出道德决策时,该方法使用了未发现的斗争和揭示的策略。考察了两个研究问题:美国金融业财务顾问面临的常见道德决策挑战是什么?财务顾问如何应对道德决策挑战?出现了四个影响道德决策的主题:个人需求、他人需求、公司需求和市场需求。财务顾问认为,当他们考虑艰难的决定时,道德义务、自制力和与他人协商是主要考虑因素。研究局限性/含义本综述的局限性在于样本量小。来自具有更广泛经验的投资顾问的更稳健的样本量本可以扩大研究结果。实际含义投资顾问可以将这项研究的结果作为改进自己道德决策的工具,或为员工设计培训,使其成为更好的决策者。独创性/价值该研究探索了投资顾问的决策经验,揭示了定性方法可以揭示的多方面的、往往是私人的斗争。该研究为发展专门针对投资顾问的道德决策方面的额外培训提供了支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“Honey, you’ve got to do what’s right”: common ethical decision-making challenges and strategies of licensed financial advisers
Purpose This paper aims to explore the common ethical decision-making challenges faced by financial advisers and how they meet these challenges. The purpose is to identify successful decision-making tools used by investment advisers in doing business ethically. Additionally, the authors uncover common challenges and offer decision-making tools to provide support for supplemental ethics training in the future. Design/methodology/approach Questions were analyzed through a qualitative approach using individual interviews to examine a range of experiences and attitudes of active financial advisers. The sample was represented by 11 practicing financial advisers affiliated with US independent broker-dealers: six women and five men, each with 10 or more years of experience, ranging in age from 35 to 75. Grounded in four ethical decision-making models, this research examines individual ethical decision-making using individual (internal, personal) and organizational (external, situational) factors. Findings The method used uncovered struggles and revealed strategies used in making ethical decisions. Two research questions were examined: what are the common ethical decision-making challenges faced by financial advisers in the US financial industry? How do financial advisers handle ethical decision-making challenges? Four themes emerged that impacted ethical decision-making: needs of the individual, needs of others, needs of the firm and needs of the marketplace. Financial advisers identified moral obligation, self-control and consulting with others as major considerations when they contemplate difficult decisions. Research limitations/implications A limitation of this review is its small sample size. A more robust sample size from investment advisers with a broader range of experiences could have widened the findings from the study. Practical implications Investment advisers can use the findings of this study as a tool for improving their own ethical decision-making or designing training for their employees to be better decision-makers. Originality/value The study explores the decision-making experiences of investment advisers to reveal multifaceted, often private struggles that qualitative methods can uncover. The study provides support for the development of additional training in ethical decision-making specific to investment advisers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Qualitative Research in Financial Markets is the only peer-reviewed journal dedicated to exploring the rapidly-growing area of research activity in finance that uses qualitative methods. Building on a long pedigree of finance research, the journal publishes international and innovative analyses and novel insights into financial markets worldwide
期刊最新文献
Exploring the potential impact of big data on the collection of sufficient, appropriate audit evidence: insights from auditors in the UAE Determinants inhibiting digital payment system adoption: an Indian perspective Debt advice in Europe: a search of the good practices to fight over-indebtedness A qualitative investigation into financial well-being and social capital of retired government school teachers The implications of Maqasid al-Shari’ah for integrated sustainability practices among businesses: a qualitative inquiry
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1