Content uploaded by Vlad Vaiman
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Vlad Vaiman on May 08, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
1 23
Journal of Business Ethics
ISSN 0167-4544
J Bus Ethics
DOI 10.1007/s10551-014-2202-z
Managers’ Views on Ethics Education in
Business Schools: An Empirical Study
Throstur Olaf Sigurjonsson, Audur
Arna Arnardottir, Vlad Vaiman & Pall
Rikhardsson
1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and all
rights are held exclusively by Springer Science
+Business Media Dordrecht. This e-offprint
is for personal use only and shall not be self-
archived in electronic repositories. If you wish
to self-archive your article, please use the
accepted manuscript version for posting on
your own website. You may further deposit
the accepted manuscript version in any
repository, provided it is only made publicly
available 12 months after official publication
or later and provided acknowledgement is
given to the original source of publication
and a link is inserted to the published article
on Springer's website. The link must be
accompanied by the following text: "The final
publication is available at link.springer.com”.
Managers’ Views on Ethics Education in Business Schools:
An Empirical Study
Throstur Olaf Sigurjonsson •Audur Arna Arnardottir •
Vlad Vaiman •Pall Rikhardsson
Received: 25 October 2013 / Accepted: 22 April 2014
Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014
Abstract More and more scholars are expressing their
apprehensions regarding the current state of management
education. The increased number of corporate scandals has
fueled their concerns that training students to have sound
business ethics upon graduation has failed. Consequently,
research is emerging that focuses on the lack of impact that
business ethics teaching has had on students in recent
years. Remarkably, the voice of managers has barely been
heard in this area, even though they are the ones who are
among those best suited to evaluate graduates’ capabilities
to solve ethical dilemmas. This research presents the
managers’ view on the role of business schools in training
students in business ethics, and the managers’ evaluation of
business schools’ success in that area. The findings reveal
that managers are quite disappointed with the lack of
improvement in the ethics of graduating students. Manag-
ers nonetheless provide a range of ideas for business
schools to work on, and particularly, call for closer col-
laboration between industry and business schools.
Keywords Business ethics Business ethics teaching
Demand side Iceland Management education
Introduction
With all the ethics-centered activities taking place within
business schools, it comes as a surprise that the view-
point of business managers toward business ethics edu-
cation has not been better explored. The vast majority of
research seems to come from the ‘‘supply side’’ of
business ethics education, whereas research from the
‘‘demand side’’ (that is, the managers’ view) is very hard
to find. It is the managers, however, who have the
opportunity to evaluate graduates’ capabilities to solve
ethical dilemmas in the workplace and therefore it is the
managers who have an important role in judging the
success of business schools in establishing the ethical
values of their students.
Sigurjonsson et al. (2013) conducted research on man-
agers’ opinions of how business schools can contribute to
providing a solid ethics education to their students. A fuller
understanding is needed of the managers’ perspective on
how potential collaboration between business schools and
industry can be achieved, in regard to teaching business
ethics and developing a positive ethical attitude in students.
The objective of this research is to shed light on the
‘‘demand side’’ of business ethics education from the
viewpoint of Icelandic managers. Hence, five research
questions were explored: (1) How do managers view the
role of business schools in relation to educating the next
generation of managers in business ethics? (2) How have
business schools succeeded in their quest for providing
ethically responsible graduates? (3) What, if anything, is
lacking in graduates’ ethical capabilities? (4) What could
business schools do to further strengthen their efforts
toward successful business ethics education? and (5) Can
business schools and industry collaborate in any way in this
matter, and if so, how? Managers’ views on these questions
T. O. Sigurjonsson (&)
Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen, Denmark
e-mail: osi.int@cbs.dk
T. O. Sigurjonsson A. A. Arnardottir P. Rikhardsson
Reykjavik University, Reykjavı
´k, Iceland
e-mail: auduraa@ru.is
P. Rikhardsson
e-mail: pallrik@ru.is
V. Vaiman
California Lutheran University, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA
e-mail: vvaiman@callutheran.edu
123
J Bus Ethics
DOI 10.1007/s10551-014-2202-z
Author's personal copy
can provide a clearer path for business schools to follow in
their ethics education in the future.
Next is a theoretical perspective on the issue, followed
by a description of the research design and methodology
used. The results are then presented, and the paper con-
cludes with the discussion of the study implications and of
the opportunities for future research.
Theoretical Perspective
The role of management education is to ‘‘Prepare students
to contribute to their organization and the larger society
and to grow personally and professionally throughout their
careers,’’ as defined by Association to Advance Collegiate
Schools of Business or AACSB (AACSB International
2009). Some experts, however, express their doubts that
business schools have managed to graduate socially
responsible and ‘‘contributing’’ managers, and have asser-
ted that the large amount of business misconduct reported
during the last decade has had a spillover effect toward
more frequent criticism and lack of trust in management
education (Dyck and Schroeder 2005; Ferraro et al. 2005;
Ghoshal 2005; Giacalone and Thompson 2006; Podolny
2009). This is unsurprising, as business schools have edu-
cated business leaders, some of whom have been associated
with ethical misconduct (Ashforth et al. 2008; Sackett and
DeVore 2001). Correspondingly, mistrust in societies has
grown, leading to public cynicism toward businesses and
important institutions, such as parliaments and financial
supervisory authorities (Dean et al. 1998; Special Investi-
gation Commission 2010).
As a result, scholars, and sometimes the media, have
blamed business schools as being partially responsible
for the unethical behavior of their graduates (Donaldson
2005; Ghoshal 2005; Pfeffer 2005). Many have expres-
sed concerns about the manner in which management
education is provided and about the curriculum itself,
claiming that business schools might have even con-
tributed directly to the unethical behavior of their grad-
uates (Gioia 2002,2003). The manner in which
management education has been provided is criticized
for not connecting what business students are taught and
what they actually have to do and how to behave when
entering the workforce (Schlegelmilch and Thomas 2011;
Mintzberg and Gosling 2002). However, a consensus
seems to have been reached according to which, business
schools should be responsible for encouraging students to
take a socially responsible view toward integrity in
organizations (Evans and Marcal 2005; Giacalone and
Thompson 2006; Locke 2006). A recent survey from the
Graduate Management Admission Council confirms that
managers seek integrity in business graduates more than
most other desired qualities, as they rank integrity fifth
out of the nineteen desired qualities for hiring decisions
(GMAC 2012). For this reason, management education is
seen as an important part of the process toward
improved business ethics, and business education as a
key opportunity to equip students with values and
capabilities to promote ethical awareness (Ashforth et al.
2008).
At the same time, students are showing more interest
in business ethics by signing up for elective courses and
other related subjects (Wayne 2009), and business
schoolsthatwanttobeaccreditedbyAACSBmust
now show consideration to business ethics learning
processes (AACSB International 2009). On the other
hand, recent research on the content and structures of
business school programs shows that they emphasize
functional business knowledge (e.g., marketing,
accounting, economics, finance and strategy), rather
than interpersonal skills and ethical awareness (Segon
and Booth 2012; Schlegelmilch and Thomas 2011;
Gosling and Mintzberg 2004). A quick desk research
revealed that the same applies in Iceland, the country
for which this data collection was conducted. The sur-
vey shows only a minor increase in supply of business
ethics courses during the last 7 years.
Despite the wave of corporate scandals during the last
decade, and assuming that business schools were
responsible for educating future managers in business
ethics, surprisingly little has changed in institutions of
higher education. The debate is there; scholars have
taken part in the discussion, and the media occasionally
reports on the issue, but nothing much seems to have
changed in developing students’ understanding of ethical
considerations in business (Adler 2002; Rutherford et al.
2012). This is even more interesting, considering that
business students make up an increasingly large portion
of undergraduate and graduate degrees. In the US,
business degrees accounted for nearly 35 % of all
undergraduate degrees awarded in 2008–2009 (Ruther-
ford et al. 2012). New research speculates that self-
interested behavior, which contradicts main ethical
standards, is a learned behavior, and students can adopt
it by studying business administration and economics
(Neubaum et al. 2009; Ferraro et al. 2005). Furthermore,
a whole series of studies analyzing the specific attributes
of this reveal more worrying results. McCabe et al.
(2006) found that MBA students cheat more than other
students; Wang et al. (2011) found a positive correlation
between students studying economics and levels of
greed; Cadsby and Maynes (1998) found that business
and economics majors are more likely to free-ride;
Carter and Irons (1991) found that business students are
more likely to keep resources for themselves compared
T. O. Sigurjonsson et al.
123
Author's personal copy
to students in other professions; and Frank and Schultz
(2000) found that these students are more susceptible to
corruption than others. Of most concern is that some
research shows that business students do not enter
business schools with these attitudes, but learn about the
principle of rational self-interest and grow into believing
they are to behave in this way (Miller 1999). Hence, the
risk is that business schools might be developing prag-
matics who believe that unethical behavior for personal
benefit is justifiable in certain circumstances, as found in
Ashkanasy et al. (2006). In their recent study, Schle-
gelmilch and Thomas (2011) share these concerns. In
talking to the deans of business schools they found that
there is an urgent need to rebalance the curriculum in
order to produce graduates who combine analytical
capabilities, managerial skills and attention to ethics and
CSR. These findings, among others, have lead many
scholars to advocate re-thinking the whole structure of
management education in order to address the current
ethical dilemmas that businesses seem to be so fre-
quently faced with (Giacalone and Thompson 2006).
Believing that change is necessary is one thing; acting
on it is another. A number of scholars have supported the
development of an alternative approach to management
education (Donaldson 2005; Mintzberg 2005; Mintzberg
and Gosling 2002; Pfeffer 2005). Academics have put
forward various ideas. Many of these alternative ideas
promote developing management education based on the
philosophical foundation of ‘‘socially significant goals’’ by
taking a holistic view of society and its stakeholders (Ha-
mel 2009; Ghoshal 2005; Margolis and Walsh 2003). This
theory pushes business schools to look at management
education models in a new way, particularly regarding how
the creation of shareholder value is taking place. The
message to students should reflect the idea that success
may be measured in more ways than just profits. However,
this requires significant adjustments to both the mindset of
the faculty, and the current curriculum, which would need
to contain training in values, perspectives and ways of
discerning the long-term interest of society, stakeholders
and the environment (Waddock and McIntosh 2009).
Finding the opinion of managers regarding pedagogy
within the field of management education seems to draw a
blank. A considerable literature search has delivered little
written material on the managerial view of business ethics
education. Few scholars appear to have actively sought the
perspective of managers, or tried to assess what businesses
actually demand from business schools. Asking managers
directly about their views might produce altered or new
ideas for business schools to consider when developing
business ethics education curricula. Revealing the manag-
ers’ view is also important for understanding potential
future developments in ethical behavior within companies,
where managers can exert significant influence on the
ethical behavior of employees (Brown and Trevin
˜o2006;
Mayer et al. 2010; Walumbwa et al. 2011).
Methodology
Participants and Procedure
Empirical research was conducted by sending an online
survey to managers of Iceland’s 300 largest organizations.
Iceland is interesting in this context because it was one of
the countries hit the hardest in the financial crisis of 2008,
and ethical issues played a major role in the specifics of the
Icelandic crisis (Special Investigation Commission 2010;
Vaiman et al. 2011).
To understand the context, it is important to look at what
happened in Iceland, and what precipitated the crisis. By
and large, the collapse of the financial sector and a sub-
sequent economic crisis in Iceland in 2008 was caused by a
weak business culture that enabled an environment con-
ducive to unethical business practices. The weak business
culture in the country was enhanced by the omnipresence
of close personal networks in managerial relationships and
organizational ownership. To intensify Iceland’s situation,
traditional nepotism (which is quite common to small,
closely knit societies), political practices, and a history of
heavy state intervention in the economy helped to create an
unprecedented bond between politics and business, where a
joint elite was making all major business decisions. Close
connections between politics and business, as well as total
contempt for commonly accepted business ethics stan-
dards, rendered the civil service’s attempts to regulate the
business environment ineffective, therefore making both
regulation and oversight next to impossible. This lack of
supervision in turn led to an unsustainable expansion of
Icelandic financial institutions, which prompted the entire
crisis and resonated loudly around the world (Vaiman et al.
2011).
On a positive note, Iceland is a small western society,
with good access to top-level managers for data gathering,
and with strong education system as verified by interna-
tional accrediting bodies (e.g., EQUIS, AMBA). By using
the 300 largest companies, the research covers all listed
firms, and most large and mid-size firms with a great
variety in ownership structure, from fully family owned
firms to private equity owned firms and multi-nationals.
After structuring and pilot testing of the questionnaire,
which assessed the length and clarity of content, an intro-
ductory letter, with a link to an online survey, was sent via
email to those listed as top managers within the organiza-
tion. All introduction text and questions were stated both in
Icelandic and English, as some managers were non-
Managers’ Views on Ethics Education in Business Schools
123
Author's personal copy
Icelandic. A certified translator assured the reliability of the
translation. The survey was conducted between the 17th
and the 27th of March 2013, and out of the 600 people
receiving the questionnaire 243 replied, giving a response
rate of 40.5 %, during which time three reminder emails
were sent to participants, urging them to participate. Due to
missing values in the answers to some of the background
questions, participant numbers vary slightly in the quanti-
tative analysis. Among respondents, 22 % are female and
78 % male. The age distribution of the respondents is the
following: 16 % are younger than 35 years of age, 21 % of
them are between 35 and 45 years old, 36 % are between
46 and 55 years old, and 24 % are older than 56. Most
respondents, or 60 %, categorize themselves as top man-
agers. Middle line managers are 7 % of the respondents,
specialists are 25 %, and others are 5 %. Respondents
come from a variety of industries, with 10 % from finance,
3 % from accounting, 9 % from production/fishing indus-
try, 26 % from services, 11 % from retail, and 26 % from
IT. A total of 74 % of the respondents came from privately
owned companies, and 26 % from public companies.
Measures and Methodology
In the introductory letter the term ‘‘business school’’ was
used and no reference to any specific business program,
such as an MBA program, has been provided. There are
four universities in Iceland with business schools, and all of
them have a variety of programs, both at undergraduate and
graduate level.
The questionnaire was divided into three major sections:
general questions about business ethics, ethics in the
company of the respondent, and the role of business
schools in teaching business ethics. The questionnaire is
shown in Appendix 1and contained in all 27 questions of
which some included sub-questions. The questions were
developed by the researchers based on the research litera-
ture and insight from industry obtained through a pilot
testing of the questionnaire. Answers to most of the ques-
tions were measured on a 5 point Likert scale, that ranged
from 1 (highly disagree) to 5 (highly agree). However,
where participants were asked to assess the importance of
different methods of teaching business ethics, they
answered on a 10 point scale, that ranged from 0 (not
important at all/does not matter at all) to 10 (extremely
important). Descriptive statistics and non-parametric test-
ing were used in analyzing the quantitative data due to
violation of the assumptions of normal distribution.
The questionnaire also contained 7 open-ended ques-
tions of which, five are reported on in this article: What do
you see as lacking in knowledge or skills from business
graduates so they can better assess and respond to ethical
dilemmas in business? How can business schools better
prepare their students for ethical dilemmas in business?
What could business schools do to strengthen cooperation
with the business community to improve business ethics?
What could the business community do to strengthen
cooperation with business schools for improving business
ethics? And finally, How can business schools best support
organizations in improving business ethics? For the open-
ended, questions two researchers independently coded and
categorized the replies according to the themes addressed
in the answers. There was high inter-rater reliability when
coding was compared.
Results
Managers’ View on Business Ethics in Iceland
In order to put the answers in context, questions were asked
about their fundamental opinions regarding both their view
toward ethics in general and their view of ethical behavior
in their own firms. When asked whether Icelandic firms
practice good business ethics, only 42 % of respondents
agreed or strongly agreed with that statement while 26 %
disagreed or strongly disagreed. No significant difference
in response was found across gender, age, sector, and pri-
vate and public organizations. A significant difference
could be found depending on the management level of
respondents, where top managers (Mdn =3.00) saw ethi-
cal behavior in a more positive light than those respondents
who were not top managers (Mdn =3.00), U=5.140,
p\.001, r=.19.
The major ethical issues in Icelandic business culture, as
identified by Icelandic managers, are cross-ownership
(M=3.86), conflict of interest (M=3.62), and lack of
transparency (M=3.61). As can be seen in Table 1, there
was a significant difference between the opinion of top
managers and those at lower managerial levels regarding
these ethical issues, with top managers, on average, seeing
the stated issues as less of a problem than others. Also,
women felt more strongly than others that nepotism is a
problem in the Icelandic business culture, although effect
sizes were low.
Ethics in the Companies of the Respondents
Respondents see ethical behavior violations more in their
overall assessment of others, but not when asked to focus
inwards to their own company or personal behavior. Most
participants (68 %) report not having seen ethical viola-
tions over the last 2 years in their firms, 23 % state that
they can report 1–2 instances, 6 % state they can report 3–5
incidents and 3 % of respondents marked more than 5
instances over the last 2 years.
T. O. Sigurjonsson et al.
123
Author's personal copy
Participants state that good business ethics are conducted
in their firms on a five point scale (M=4.35, SD =.79).
Participants on average state that clear consequences follow
unethical behavior in their firms (M=3.96, SD =1.17),
and they think that their board of directors provide good
monitoring of the issue (M=4.00, SD =1.00). Male
respondents were significantly more of the opinion that
good business ethics were practiced in their firms
(Mdn =5.00) than females (Mdn =4.00), U=3,739,
p\.01. This represented a small sized effect r=.17. A
significant difference could also be found between partici-
pants in top management positions (Mdn =5.00) versus
participant at lower managerial levels (Mdn =4.00),
U=3.762, p\.001, representing a medium sized effect
r=.40. Top-level respondents were significantly more of
the opinion that clear consequences would follow unethical
behavior in their firms (Mdn =5.00) than respondents in
lower managerial levels (Mdn =4.00), U=4.952,
p\.01, representing a small sized effect r=.21. Fur-
thermore, top-level respondents were significantly more of
the opinion that the board of directors do provide managers
with the necessary monitoring of ethical business behavior
(Mdn =5.00) than participants in lower managerial levels
(Mdn =4.00), U=4.215, p\.001, representing a small
effect size r=.28. Male respondents were also signifi-
cantly more of the opinion (Mdn =5.00) than female
respondents (Mdn =4.00), U=3.724, p\.10, which is a
small effect size r=.14.
Participants were asked to identify the key measures that
their company has taken to support internal ethical
behavior. The answers do not significantly vary across
gender, managerial level, or public versus private sector.
Highest ranked, on a 5 point scale, is that ethical business
practices are part of the organization’s strategy
(M=4.38), followed by having introduced ethical codes
(M=3.49). Next is the claim that employees are made
responsible for good ethical conduct in performance
appraisals (M=3.31). Fewer state that they have installed
processes that employees can apply when they witness
unethical practices (M=2.97) and very few have intro-
duced communication channels for whistleblowers
(M=1.64).
The Role of Business Schools Teaching Business
Ethics
Nearly all of the respondents agree that it is the role of
business schools to strengthen the ethical awareness of
students (M=4.54, SD =0.75), that ethics studies should
be mandatory (M=4.53, SD =0.85), and that companies
have to share the responsibility of supporting and
strengthening their own employees’ ethical behavior
(M=4.63, SD =0.56). Respondents are not content with
how business universities have managed to fulfill their role
of strengthening business ethics in the minds of students
(M=3.05, SD =0.91), they see students as not having
Table 1 Mann–Whitney tests for questions on business ethics issues in Icelandic business culture
Uvalue Zvalue Sign Effect size (r)
Favorism/nepotism
Gender 3,562 -2.623 .009*** Male \female .17
Managerial level 4,150 -4.432 .000*** Top \other .29
Bribes
Managerial level 4,717 -3.699 .000*** Top \other .24
Lack of transparency
Gender 3,748 -2.523 .012** Male \female .16
Managerial level 4,608 -3.859 .000*** Top \other .25
Lack of reliability/accountability
Managerial level 5,157 -2.553 .011** Top \other .16
Unusual political interference
Conflict of interest
Managerial level 4,534 -3.940 .000*** Top \other .25
Unreliable public data
Managerial level 5,351 -2.224 .026** Top \other .14
Cross-ownership
Managerial level 4,980 -3.070 .002*** Top \other .20
Insider trading
Managerial level 5,430 -2.234 .025** Top \other .14
*p\.10, ** p\.05, *** p\.01
Managers’ Views on Ethics Education in Business Schools
123
Author's personal copy
very strong business ethics upon entering the workforce
(M=3.01, SD =0.80), and that since the financial crisis
in 2008, the students coming into the workforce are not
more ethically oriented than before (M=3.00,
SD =0.78). Comparing participants’ gender, managerial
role, or public versus private organization, a significant
difference could only be found where those working in the
public sector are more of the opinion that it is the role of
universities to strengthen students ethical awareness
(Mdn =5.00) than individuals in the private sector
(Mdn =5.00), U=4.278, p\.05, r=.14, and those in
top management positions see students who have graduated
since 2008 as more ethically oriented (Mdn =3.00), while
managers on lower levels agree less with that statement
(Mdn =3.00), U=5.190, p\.01, r=.16.
A follow-up open question was asked regarding what
students need the most in order to have sound business
ethics upon graduation (see Fig. 1). An analysis of the
responses reveals that being able to have a constructive
dialogue on ethical matters and dilemmas (15 %) ranked
the highest, second is students having strong values
established (13 %), third is values awareness (11 %), and
fourth is to possess critical thinking (10 %). As one
respondent wrote: ‘‘Graduates are not used to debating
[ethical] dilemmas and applying critical thinking and self-
criticism.’’ Values and personal development were often
mentioned simultaneously, with the comments that stu-
dents do not get much education and development in this
area. A participant stated: ‘‘Graduates need more self-
confidence and personal values when faced with ethical
dilemmas, because their managers are most often those
responsible for any wrong-doings.’’ Ethical awareness and
critical thinking skills were frequently mentioned, a typical
answer being: ‘‘Graduates do not realize when they face
ethical dilemmas, so they don’t react,’’ and another said:
‘‘When graduates join us they do not have in mind the
ethical dimension of the business.’’
Managers were asked to assess, on a 0–10 point scale,
how important various teaching methods are in strength-
ening business ethics, and also to name the most important
method (naming only one out of the eight different
options). Figure 2shows that studying the fundamentals of
business ethics received the highest mean grade
(M=8.33), cases and active training in problem-solving
the second highest (M=8.12), and helping students
identify their core personal values had the third highest
average grade (M=7.45). When participants could only
mark one option as the most important out of the eight, the
study of the fundamentals of ethics was most often put in
first place, and second was helping students identify their
core personal values. Analysis showed that female
respondents placed a significantly higher value on the
importance of knowing their own personal values
(Mdn =8.00) than male respondents (Mdn =8.00),
U=3.702, p\.05, r=.14, though effect size is low.
When managers were asked in an open-ended question
‘‘How can business schools prepare graduates better in
dealing with ethical dilemmas,’’ they came up with ideas
centered on industry opening up their doors for students,
and for stronger collaboration with business schools. The
most frequent answers were ‘‘Internship’’ and to ‘‘Increase
[students’] practical experience.’’ These ideas are two sides
of the same coin, as one manager wrote: ‘‘[Business
schools] must increase practical experience [of students] by
providing internship’’ and another manager wrote: ‘‘Life is
not always as described in the textbooks, hence we are
willing to accept students for internship or specific
assignments and get them exposed to the difficulty of
solving ethical dilemmas.’’
The ideas ranked next by managers further indicate their
focus on practice, as they name the importance of using
case studies and guest lecturers. Many of them want to see
a broader use of guest lecturers by inviting people from
politics, the health industry, arts, science, etc. and have
them discuss ethical issues in their fields. The respondents
recommend inviting guests with both good and bad
5%
8%
12%
11%
5%
9%
3%
14%
9%
8%
6%
8%
5%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
Respondents' rating
Fig. 1 What is lacking in the skills of business graduates so that they
become better prepared to solve ethical dilemmas in future
employment?
8,33 8,12 7,35 6,97 7,26 7,45 7,18
1,15
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Rating
on scale 1-10
Fig. 2 How should business ethics be taught at business schools?
Please rate the following methods
T. O. Sigurjonsson et al.
123
Author's personal copy
reputations, as the following comment reveals: Guest
speakers should in general be good role models, but to
bring in convicted white collar criminals might constitute a
necessary ‘‘shock therapy.’’ Furthermore, respondents
mention the importance of business school faculty not
having a poor ethical reputation themselves. Managers
express concerns of the image that ethics courses have.
They claim that students do not take these courses seri-
ously. One writes: ‘‘Business schools must strengthen the
image of business ethics courses as students do not take
them as seriously as accounting, finance and strategy
courses.’’
Industry and Business Schools’ Cooperation
Managers call for closer collaboration between industry
and business schools. This idea was supported by a
majority of the participants (M=3.91, SD =.93), with
71 % rather agreeing or highly agreeing with the statement.
No significant difference could be found among partici-
pants in top management positions versus participants on
lower managerial levels, across different genders, or those
working in the public or private sector.
A follow-up open question then asked what type of
collaboration there could be between industry and business
schools. Research collaboration was number one. In order
to understand this result and what managers have in mind
when the term ‘‘Research Collaboration’’ is used, it helps to
quote the managers directly; ‘‘Business schools should
emphasize business ethics research more and collaborate
with industry when doing that,’’ ‘‘Business schools could
provide businesses with situational assessments on their
business ethics, and use the data for research purposes,’’
‘‘Faculty could bring students into solve ethical dilemmas,
collect data, analyze and present alternatives, material that
later could be used for research and teaching purposes,’’
‘‘[Faculty should] publish research not only in academic
journals, but in outlets we read, such as in newspapers and
industry outlets.’’
Retraining employees in business ethics ranked the
second highest on the managers’ list. Managers obviously
understand that ethics education and training does not stop
at the point of graduation and ask for continual education
for their employees. Comments such as the following ones
were frequent: ‘‘Business Schools should follow up on
students’ education by collaborating with industry by
providing in-house training on business ethics,’’ ‘‘Industry
needs to re-educate its employees in business ethics and
business schools should have a stronger role therein.’’
Some businesses seem to already use business schools in
some sense but ask for ‘‘…[i]mprovements in teaching
materials from business schools on business ethics.’’ Others
claim they would like to see more advice offered by faculty
members; ‘‘Business schools should continue to provide
short seminars, which could then lead to advisory assign-
ments and case writing.’’
Managers seem to be willing to open their doors to
students and grant them the opportunity to work on prac-
tical assignments, either through an internship or specific
projects. Managers believe they can contribute a different
kind of knowledge to what the faculty offers. As one
respondent wrote; ‘‘Managers have different experience [in
business ethics] than faculty and can, therefore, be used
alongside faculty.’’ Some suggested that promoting ethi-
cally responsible organizations via business schools col-
laborating with them can, in a very visual way, be a step
toward rewarding sound business practices; ‘‘Choose
partners that have stood out for sound business practices
and grant them exclusivity for adjunct teaching, collabo-
rating on conferences and others projects that business
schools and industry can do together.’’ Figure 3shows a
summary of respondents’ answers.
When managers are asked what they (industry) can do
in order to strengthen collaboration with business
schools, re-education of their employees ranks the
highest. This agrees with the managers’ ideas on what
business schools should do. Second in the managers’
ranking is promoting good business ethics in collabora-
tion with business. This must be seen as a positive
result, because while managers do not give business
schools the highest marks for having delivered industry
graduates with good business ethics, they do trust them
to promote good business ethics. Third on the ranking is
that organizations should get more use out of research
outcomes. Again, this fits well with prior findings in this
research, where managers claim they would like to get
more use out of academic research. Managers would also
like to get more faculties’ advice on ethical issues,
which is fourth on the list. This might include using
business schools’ faculty as advisory boards: ‘‘Industry
could come in stronger by supporting business schools,
11%
9%
6%
8%
7%
6% 6%
7%
5%
9% 9%
7%
4%
6%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
Respondents' rating
Fig. 3 What could collaboration between industry and business
schools look like?
Managers’ Views on Ethics Education in Business Schools
123
Author's personal copy
as sponsoring chairs in business ethics, [and] financing
research and development work.’’
The last open-ended question asks how business schools
can assist businesses directly in improving their business
ethics. To provide short seminars and advice ranks first and
second is assistance in establishing sound procedures in
order to prevent ethical misfortunes as well as to assist
organizations when they have gone down the wrong path:
‘‘Provide advice on ethical issues, both as prevention and
also for turnaround situations.’’ Next on the ranking is the
managers’ desire to receive help to assess ethical dilem-
mas, and through this have clear guidelines for solving
them. ‘‘Establishing measures’’ is most likely the other side
of the same coin. Managers are in need of clear measures to
apply when assessing and solving ethical dilemmas.
Combined, this makes up the largest ‘‘request’’ from
managers. Many comments were on this issue, so it seems
that managers are ill-equipped with the right tools and
methodologies to resolve ethical issues. Examples of
quotes that were typical include: ‘‘There are no measures to
use when assessing ethical dilemmas,’’ ‘‘Business plans are
made, strategy plans are made, marketing plans are made,
but plans for sound business practices are not made,’’
‘‘There are no plans for the board of directors on how to
promote business ethics,’’ ‘‘All practical materials are
lacking, such as guidelines, handbooks, presentations and
other materials firms can use in-house to promote business
ethics.’’
Discussion
Research Background
It is important to bear in mind the background of this
research. Iceland is one of the countries that was hit the
hardest in the 2008 financial crisis. As described earlier, a
certain business culture had been created that did not
promote ethical behavior, and the impact of the crisis was
magnified by the lack of diversity, intimate personal net-
works, close managerial relationships and ownership, as
well as heavy state interference in business affairs (Si-
gurjonsson et al. 2013; Special Investigation Commission
2010; Wade 2009). This is currently recognized by Ice-
landic managers and can, therefore, influence their ideas of
how business schools should and could contribute to pro-
viding sound ethics education to their students, the future
business leaders.
This research has looked at how managers, post-crisis,
view the importance of ethics and where the training or
education in ethical awareness should come from. There is
a clear call from managers for ethics education in business
schools on the one hand, but on the other, they believe
business schools have not succeeded so far in their edu-
cating ethically responsible graduates. This lack of success
supports the outcomes of previous studies by Rutherford
et al. (2012) and Sigurjonsson et al. (2013). It is important
to keep in mind, however, that the answers are likely to be
colored by the fact that managers are considering these
issues in the wake of the financial and ethical crisis that
took place in Iceland. The Icelandic situation is also spe-
cific in the sense that business schools, given the country’s
weak business culture, are seen by others, such as the
media and the political system, to have an important role
when it comes to ethics: Iceland’s universities in general
and business schools in particular are viewed as a source of
important knowledge and expertise that should benefit the
general public. This may be a further explanation of why
the managers responded as they did, placing both trust and
accountability in what business schools do for its students,
potential employers of these students, and the society as a
whole.
Possible Implications for Business Schools
Managers state that business graduates are lacking strong
personal values as well as fundamental knowledge of
business ethics and the necessary critical thinking to
understand when ethical dilemmas arise and to be able to
apply their knowledge and experience to solve those
dilemmas. Once again, recent studies by Rutherford et al.
(2012) and Sigurjonsson et al. (2013) confirm these find-
ings. Managers furthermore believe that no improvements
in this area have been apparent since the financial crisis of
2008. That goes hand in hand with the fact that local
business schools have, in general, not altered their structure
or curriculum to focus more on business ethics. So what are
the possible implications for business schools? The man-
agers believe that business schools have an important role
in improving business ethics in society. There is a real and
a strong call for something to be done in order to rees-
tablish strong business ethics, which is lagging behind
neighboring countries, and does not seem to be improving
(Mixa and Sigurjonsson 2013; Vaiman et al. 2011; Si-
gurjonsson and Mixa 2011). Hence, managers see business
schools as instrumental for both educating and training
future managers within business ethics, and additionally,
managers call for closer collaboration with business
schools in improving business ethics in their organizations
and society. Managers, however, do not place all respon-
sibility on business schools and admit that industry has real
accountability as well. This somewhat contradicts Ash-
kanasy et al. (2006), Donaldson (2005), and Pfeffer (2005),
who think that business schools are at least partially
responsible for the unethical behavior of their graduates.
Furthermore, Icelandic managers see collaboration
T. O. Sigurjonsson et al.
123
Author's personal copy
between industry and business school as salient for
improving business ethics in society at large.
The recommendations of the managers can be divided
into focusing on internal and external issues. The internal
issues have to do with what business schools can do within
the business school curricula and classroom, whereas the
external recommendations refer to what happens outside of
the classroom, mostly regarding collaboration with
industry.
Internal Issues
Internally, the managers suggest that business schools
should increase students’ fundamental understanding of
business ethics, strengthen their values, and allow for much
stronger personal development. Business schools should
provide students with ethics education and training across
disciplines (that is, throughout the whole variety of cour-
ses, such as finance, marketing, strategy, human resource
management, and more), an opinion also shared by a few
leading scholars in the area (Segon and Booth 2012;
Schlegelmilch and Thomas 2011). Managers also stress the
necessity of training students in dealing with ethical
dilemmas when the students enter the workforce. They also
propose to use extensively the case study method as a tool
of exposing students to real world issues, which actually
contradicts Gosling and Mintzberg (2004) who suggest that
using cases may be problematic due to their limitations in
terms of data and their inappropriate use by instructors. In
addition, managers think that inviting guest lecturers with
both bad and good experiences of dealing with business
ethics dilemmas would be a worthy undertaking. Maybe
surprisingly to some, managers offer to open their doors to
students working on real assignments as stand-alone pro-
jects and additionally to conduct empirical research at their
sites. High on the managers’ list of concerns is a desire that
graduates must be able to analyze and solve ethical
dilemmas. Hence they focus on experience and application.
When asked to suggest what can be done to provide stu-
dents with the necessary support to meet this requirement,
managers mention internships, stand-alone assignments
and empirical research. They, therefore, seem to be ready
to assume a more active role in strengthening students’
training in working with business ethics. However, pro-
viding business ethics focused internships would mean
allocating more credits/units to business ethics education.
For some business schools this would require changing the
business curricula, which is usually functionally structured
(marketing, finance, human resources, etc.) and cross-dis-
ciplinary subjects such as ethics are often taught as stand-
alone electives. Enabling business students in all disci-
plines to choose ethics focused internships and stand-alone
assignments could be an ideal way of implementing a cross
disciplinary competency such as ethics. These are all
potentially useful recommendations, which business
schools could take into consideration when designing and
developing business school curricula.
External Issues
The results of the survey should prove the assumption of
many business schools that there is true interest from the
‘‘demand side’’ for training in ethical issues. Even better,
according to the findings, business schools do not have to
do this alone. The vast majority of managers want to invite
business schools to collaborate, and a high participation
rate in the survey is an indicator that managers are serious
in this respect—which is good news, especially in light of
fairly recent findings that the business curriculum by
default may encourage selfish and unethical behavior (see
Frank and Schultz 2000; McCabe et al. 2006; Neubaum
et al. 2009; Wang et al. 2011). Business schools should use
this chance and proactively interact with managers and
craft what such collaboration could look like. It seems
sensible to jointly reach a decision on what business
graduates need in terms of establishing sound business
ethics. A variety of responses was received from managers
regarding potential dialogue with business schools, from
opening doors to students via internships, hands-on
assignments, and mixing students and employees in pro-
jects, to asking for various sorts of in-house and external
short and long term courses and training.
A pleasant surprise is that scoring second highest in
potential industry/business school collaboration is partici-
pating in research. Taking this seriously means gaining
access to very valuable data where few empirical studies
are yet available, which will provide insight into how
organizations have dealt (or not) with ethical dilemmas.
Likewise, managers still complain that academic research
is hard to access and they ask for other channels for dis-
tribution of academic research. This is something that
should give business schools’ faculty some food for
thought.
What is also interesting is that managers do not focus
solely on the role of students, but also express their interest
in training their employees in business ethics. Hence, they
seem to take seriously the notion that business ethics is not
only to be studied at business schools, but organizations
have to continue their work and train employees after
graduation, thereby creating a culture of improved business
ethics. This push from industry will undoubtedly add to
positive changes in the business curriculum itself, which
may have contributed to developing pure pragmatics who
believe that unethical behavior may be justifiable in cer-
tain situations (Ashkanasy et al. 2006). It should also
provide a clear signal to business school that their job is not
Managers’ Views on Ethics Education in Business Schools
123
Author's personal copy
done when students graduate with undergraduate or post-
graduate degrees. The continuing training and education of
managers, especially in difficult and evolving issues such
as business ethics, is also a business school responsibility
and should be addressed through continuing education
programs and executive education initiatives.
Among the respondents, there were relatively consistent
differences between the younger managers and the older
managers in their views toward the impact of business
ethics education, with younger managers being more
skeptical than those who are older. Could it also be that the
younger managers have a better understanding of the limits
of the current academic curriculum in ethics education? Or
could it be that the older managers are aware of the limits
of practice (experience) and thus hope that education can
address those limits? In either case, the difference may be
driven by the age of the respondents and their exposure to
education vis-a
´-vis work experience.
Conclusion and Future Research
In conclusion, it is important to reiterate that this paper
attempted to explore the so-called demand side of business
ethics education by giving managers the opportunity to
evaluate business school graduates’ capabilities to solve
ethical dilemmas in the workplace, and thereby indicate the
quality of the ethics education provided by business
schools. The survey focused on five research questions
relating to managers’ view on the role of business schools
in ethics education; the degree of success in business
schools’ drive for producing ethically responsible gradu-
ates; current graduates’ capability to solve ethical dilem-
mas; potential measures business schools should take to
strengthen ethics education; and the ways for industry and
business schools to collaborate in the area of ethics were
explored. Below we present the most important findings of
this study.
It is clear in the responses of the managers that they
view strengthening business ethics awareness in business
students as a collaborative endeavor between business
schools and industry. However, they indicate that business
schools could potentially improve their approach to
teaching business ethics. One of the issues pointed out is
the link between the ‘‘traditional’’ business subjects of, for
example, accounting, finance, and operations on one hand,
and teaching business ethics on the other. The traditional
business subjects taught in business schools are usually
utilitarian in approach, quantitative in nature, and focus on
one right answer. The question is whether business schools
should continue to separate teachings of business ethics
and traditional business school subjects or attempt to
integrate business ethics teaching into traditional business
subjects, where ethical issues are often absent. If students
see the main subjects of business schools without focus on
ethical dilemmas, and business ethics being relegated to a
separate (often minor) course, then they are more liable to
downplay the importance of studying business ethics.
Managers’ responses regarding participation in research
and offers to participate in educating business students are
to be admired, but might have to be taken with a grain of
salt. Although it shows a willingness to participate in
educating business students, the reality is that often man-
agers are hard pressed to find time to actually deliver on
their intentions. In a corporate world where most managers
have more than enough to do, allocating time to help
business schools in strengthening student business ethics
skills might not be given a high priority. It would, there-
fore, seem that it falls on business schools to design new
models for cooperation which enable companies and
managers to participate in business ethics teaching and
developing students’ ethical awareness. Without business
schools actively focusing on this and reaching out to
business, it is reasonable to assume that relatively few
cooperation initiatives will emerge, despite good intentions
on the ‘‘demand side.’’
It is also necessary to mention that the most significant
limitation of this study is that it is confined to Iceland and
Icelandic companies. In particular, the high survey partic-
ipation rate, and the apparent frankness of managers in
responding to many of the open ended questions, might
differentiate the survey results from similar surveys in
other countries Even though this is a serious limitation,
some inferences for other—mostly Western nations—can
still be made. Given Icelandic cultural characteristics (see
Vaiman et al. 2011), it is an open, well-developed, modern
Western society, with a well-pronounced Scandinavian
background and strong US influence. Therefore, some
results of this study may be applicable to other nations with
similar cultural characteristics, e.g., Denmark, Sweden,
Norway, Finland, some Western European countries and
the US and Canada. What, in this case, favorably contrasts
Icelandic managers from, for example, their US counter-
parts is the willingness to discuss openly many difficult
ethical situations and their implications, as there is less fear
of certain liability litigations in the Icelandic legal system
than in the US one.
Based on the results of this project, some interesting
issues for future research emerge. One is whether there is a
difference between various business graduates in their
ability to solve ethical dilemmas. There are different types
of business graduates with expertise ranging from ‘‘soft
focus’’ on management, strategy and human resources to
‘‘harder focus’’ including accounting, operation manage-
ment and finance. It would be interesting to learn whether
these different types of business graduates exhibit different
T. O. Sigurjonsson et al.
123
Author's personal copy
approaches to ethical dilemmas, given their different study
focus. Another potentially interesting research question
could deal with modeling an appropriate teaching approach
that would work best for instilling ethical thinking in
business graduates. Different teaching approaches cur-
rently used in business studies include case studies, lec-
tures, projects, etc., but the question is whether these are
suitable for teaching ethical issues. Combining the afore-
mentioned methods with internships and company
anchored projects, as suggested by managers, may of
course be possible, but it is still unclear if the development
of ethical reflection and behaviors could be best achieved
through these combinations. Finally, an interesting quali-
tative study could be to examine managerial decision
making to examine what role ethical standards and criteria
play in the decision-making process versus other important
criteria such as finances, quality of products and/or ser-
vices, and national culture.
Appendix 1
I. General questions about business ethics in Iceland
1. Icelandic firms practice good business ethics.
2. Business ethics in Iceland are good compared to
neighboring countries.
3. Business ethics in Iceland have improved since the
fall of 2008.
4. Icelandic firms emphasize business ethics in their
strategy.
5. To what extent do you believe the following are
common problems in Icelandic business?
a. Nepotism
b. Bribes
c. Lack of transparency
d. Lack of accountability
e. Inappropriate interference by politicians
f. Conflicts of interest
g. Unreliability of public information
h. Cross-ownership
i. Insider trading
6. If you believe business ethics in Iceland are poor,
could you please explain?
II. Ethics in own firm
7. Good business ethics are practiced in my firm.
8. There are clear consequences if poor ethics are
practiced in my firm.
9. The firm‘s board of directors adequately acts as
a check of good business practice.
10. My firm demonstrates its commitment to ethics
by:
a. Has incorporated business ethics into its
strategy
b. Has implemented a code of conduct
c. Holds employees accountable for their
actions through performance appraisals
d. Has systems in place that help employees
with reporting if unethical behavior is
suspected or witnessed
e. Has established employee hotlines for
whistle-blowing
11. During the past 2 years I have witnessed uneth-
ical business practices in our firm:
i. Never
ii. 1–2 times
iii. 3–5 times
iv. More than 5 times
12. If your answer to last question was positive,
please mention the type of unethical business
practices you have experienced.
III. The role of business schools teaching business
ethics.
13. It is a role of business schools to help their
students become more ethically conscious.
14. The business schools have done well in their
role of improving students’ business ethics.
15. Business students have strong ethical standards
before entering the workforce.
16. Business graduates are more ethically respon-
sible now than before 2008.
17. Employers’ role should be to strengthen and
foster employees’ good business ethics.
18. It should be mandatory for business students to
learn about business ethics at university.
19. How should business ethics be taught at
business schools? Please rate the following
methods)
a. Study fundamentals of business ethics
b. Training in problem solving
c. Guest lecturers (managers) that have dealt
with ethical dilemmas
d. A broad range of guests’ lecturers, such as
politicians, philosophers, lawyers, medi-
cal doctors, etc.
Managers’ Views on Ethics Education in Business Schools
123
Author's personal copy
e. Provide practical ‘‘tools’’ on how to
analyze and solve ethical dilemmas
f. Help students learn to recognize, clarify,
speak and act on their values when ethical
conflicts arise
g. Train students in how to respond and to
raise ethical issues in an effective manner
(e.g., what he/she needs to do and say in
order to be heard)
h. Other methods—answer in text box below
20. Please mention one item you believe is the most
important in question 25: ___ (only one choice,
a–h)
21. What is lacking in current business graduates in
terms of their ability to solve ethical dilemmas?
22. How can the business schools better prepare their
students for ethical dilemmas in a workplace?
23. I believe a stronger cooperation between
industry and the business schools necessary to
improve business ethics (disagree–agree).
24. How can such increased cooperation be
implemented?
25. What can the business schools do?
26. What can industry do?
27. How can business schools assist industry better
in order to improve business ethics?
a. Assist managers?
b. Assist employees?
Background questions
1. What is your gender?
a. Male
b. Female
2. How old are you? ___
3. What is your education?
a. Business
b. Law
c. Engineering
d. Natural science other than engineering
e. Other social sciences
f. Other
4. What is your occupation?
a. Top-level manager
b. Mid-level manager
c. Specialist
d. Other
5. In what industry is your employer?
a. Financial/Banking
b. Auditing
c. Professional services
d. Retail
e. Manufacturing/Fishing
f. IT
g. Service
References
Adler, P. S. (2002). Corporate scandals: It’s time for reflection in
business schools. Academy of Management Executive, 16(3),
148–149.
Ashforth, B. E., Gioia, D. A., Robinson, S. L., & Trevin
˜o, L. K. I.
(2008). Re-viewing organizational corruption. Academy of
Management Review, 33, 670–684.
Ashkanasy, N. M., Windsor, C. A., & Trevin
˜o, L. K. (2006). Bad
apples in bad barrels revisited: Cognitive moral development,
just world beliefs, rewards, and ethical decision-making. Busi-
ness Ethics Quarterly, 16(4), 449–473.
Brown, M. E., & Trevin
˜o, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review
and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 595–616.
Cadsby, C. B., & Maynes, E. (1998). Choosing between socially
efficient and free-riding equilibrium: Nurses versus economics
and business students. Journal of Economic Behavior &
Organization, 37, 183–192.
Carter, J. R., & Irons, M. D. (1991). Are economists different, and if
so, why? Journal of Economics Perspectives, 5(2), 171–177.
Dean, J. W., Brandes, P., & Dharwadkar, T. (1998). Organizational
cynicism. Academy of Management Review, 23, 341–352.
Donaldson, L. (2005). For positive management theories while
retaining science: Reply to Ghoshal. Academy of Management
Review, 22(1), 20–47.
Dyck, B., & Schroeder, D. (2005). Management, theology and moral
points of view: Towards an alternative to the conventional
materialist-individualist ideal-type of management. Journal of
Management Studies, 42(4), 705–735.
Evans, F. J., & Marcal, L. E. (2005). Educating for ethics: Business
deans perspectives. Business and Society Review, 110, 233–248.
Ferraro, F., Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2005). Economics language
and assumptions: How theories can become self-fulfilling.
Academy of Management Review, 30, 8–24.
Frank, B., & Schultz, G. G. (2000). Does economics make citizens
corrupt? Journal of Economics Behavior and Organization, 43,
101–113.
Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good
management practices. Academy of Management Learning and
Education, 4, 75–91.
Giacalone, R. A., & Thompson, K. R. (2006). Business ethics and
social responsibility education: Shifting the worldview. Academy
of Management Learning and Education, 5, 266–277.
Gioia, D. A. (2002). Business education’s role in the crisis of
corporate confidence. Academy of Management Executive, 16,
142–144.
Gioia, D. A. (2003). Teaching teachers to teach corporate governance
differently. Journal of Management and Governance, 7,
255–262.
GMAC. (2012). The Global Management Education Graduate
Survey. Reston, VA: Graduate Management Admission Council.
Gosling, J., & Mintzberg, H. (2004). The education of practicing
managers. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(4), 19–22.
T. O. Sigurjonsson et al.
123
Author's personal copy
Hamel, G. (2009). Moon shots from management. Harvard Business
Review, 87(2), 91–98.
Locke, E. A. (2006). Business ethics: A way out of the morass.
Academy of Management Learning and Education, 5, 324–332.
Margolis, J., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves company:
Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 48, 268–305.
Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., & Greenbaum, R. L. (2010). Examining
the link between ethical leadership and employee misconduct:
The mediating role of ethical climate. Journal of Business
Ethics, 95, 7–16.
McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D., & Trevin
˜o, L. K. (2006). Academic
dishonesty in graduate business programs: Prevalence, causes
and proposed action. Academy of Management Learning and
Education, 5, 294–305.
Miller, D. T. (1999). The norm of self-interest. American Psychol-
ogists, 54, 1053–1060.
Mintzberg, H. (2005). How inspiring. How sad. Comment on
Sumantra Ghoshal’s paper. Academy of Management Learning
and Education, 4, 101–108.
Mintzberg, H., & Gosling, J. R. (2002). Reality programming for
MBAs. Strategy and Business, 26(1), 28–31.
Mixa, W. M., & Sigurjonsson, T. O. (2013). Lessons not learned—
Iceland’s financial crisis compared to the Nordic countries. In C.
A. Hawthorne (Ed.), Financial crises: Identification, forecasting
and effects on transition economies (pp. 129–147). New York:
Nova Science Publishers Inc.
Neubaum, D. O., Pagell, M., Drexler, J. A., McKee-Ryan, F. M., &
Larson, E. (2009). Business education and its relationship to
student personal moral philosophies and attitudes towards
profits: An empirical response to critics. Academy of Manage-
ment Learning and Education, 8, 9–24.
Pfeffer, J. (2005). Why do bad management theories persist? A
comment on Ghoshal. Academy of Management Learning and
Education, 4(4), 96–100.
Podolny, J. (2009). The buck stops (and starts) at business school.
Harvard Business Review, 87(6), 62–67.
Rutherford, M., Parks, L., Cavazos, D., & White, C. D. (2012).
Business ethics as a required course: Investigating the factors
impacting the decision to require ethics in the undergraduate
business core curriculum. Academy of Management Learning
and Education, 11, 174–186.
Sackett, P. R., & DeVore, C. J. (2001). Counterproductive behaviors
at work. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, & C.
Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organi-
zational psychology, vol. 1: Personal psychology (pp. 145–161).
London: Sage.
Schlegelmilch, B. B., & Thomas, H. (2011). The MBA in 2020: Will
there still be one? Journal of Management Development, 30(5),
474–482.
Segon, M., & Booth, C. (2012). Are MBAs meeting business’s needs?
World Journal of Management, 4(2), 1–13.
Sigurjonsson, T. O., & Mixa, M. W. (2011). Learning from the ‘Worst
behaved’: Iceland’s financial crisis and the Nordic comparison.
Thunderbird International Business Review, 53(2), 209–223.
Sigurjonsson, T. O., Vaiman, V., & Arnardottir, A. A. (2013). The role
of business schools in ethics education in Iceland; The managers’
perspective. Journal of Business Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-
1755-6.
Special Investigation Commission. (2010). Report of the special
investigation commission. Accessed February 10, 2013, from
http://sic.althingi.is/.
The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business
(AACSB) International. (2009). Eligibility procedures and
accreditation standards for business accreditation. Tampa, FL:
Author.
Vaiman, V., Sigurjonsson, T. O., & Davidsson, P. A. (2011). Weak
business culture as an antecedent of economics crisis: The case
of Iceland. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(2), 259–272.
Waddock, S., & McIntosh, M. (2009). Beyond corporate responsi-
bility: Implications for management development. Business and
Society Review, 114(3), 295–325.
Wade, R. (2009). Iceland as Icarus. Challenge, 52(3), 5–33.
Walumbwa, F. O., Mayer, D. M., Wang, P., Wnag, H., Workman, K.,
& Christensen, A. L. (2011). Linking ethical leadership to
employee performance: The roles of leader–member exchange,
self-efficacy, and organizational identification. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115, 204–213.
Wang, L., Malhotra, D., & Murnighan, J. K. (2011). Economics
education and greed. Academy of Management Learning and
Education, 10, 643–660.
Wayne, L. (2009). A promise to be ethical in an era of immorality.
New York Times. Retrieved June 12, 2013, from http://www.
nytimes.com/2009/05/30/business/30oath.html?_r=0.
Managers’ Views on Ethics Education in Business Schools
123
Author's personal copy
