IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v9y1999i03p507-526_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Obedience to Authority and Ethical Dilemmas in Hong Kong Companies

Author

Listed:
  • Snell, Robin S.

Abstract

This paper reports a phenomenological sub-study of a larger project investigating the way Hong Kong Chinese staff tackled their own ethical dilemmas at work. A special analysis was conducted of eight dilemma cases arising from a request by a boss or superior authority to do something regarded as ethically wrong. In reports of most such cases, staff expressed feelings of contractual or interpersonally based obligation to obey. They sought to save face and preserve harmony in their relationship with authority by choosing between “little potato” obedience, token obedience, and undercover disobedience. Only where no such obligation existed was face in relation to authority unimportant, and open disobedience chosen. In Kohlbergian terms, ethical reasoning at the conventional stages (three and four) predominated in dilemmas of obedience. Findings imply that if corruption were to originate at the top, codes of conduct recently introduced into Hong Kong may be of limited effect in stalling it.

Suggested Citation

  • Snell, Robin S., 1999. "Obedience to Authority and Ethical Dilemmas in Hong Kong Companies," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 507-526, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:9:y:1999:i:03:p:507-526_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00004541/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ashkan Mirzay Fashami & Pran Krishansing Boolaky & Kamil Omoteso, 2020. "Threats to Auditor Independence: Evidence from Iran," Athens Journal of Business & Economics, Athens Institute for Education and Research (ATINER), vol. 6(4), pages 253-302, October.
    2. Chia-Yi Cheng & Chia-Hung Hsieh & Yu-Song Yang, 2014. "Who would engage in unethical behavior? Should organizations bear the responsibility?," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 2341-2354, July.
    3. Cynthia Ho & Kylie Redfern, 2010. "Consideration of the Role of Guanxi in the Ethical Judgments of Chinese Managers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(2), pages 207-221, October.
    4. Wu, Bao & Fang, Chevy-Hanqing & Wang, Qi & Huang, Qiongxian, 2023. "Does managerial networking impinge our morality in Guanxi context? The moderating effect of corruption perception," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:9:y:1999:i:03:p:507-526_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.