IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v176y2022i3d10.1007_s10551-020-04729-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“It’s Just Business”: Understanding How Business Frames Differ from Ethical Frames and the Effect on Unethical Behavior

Author

Listed:
  • McKenzie R. Rees

    (Southern Methodist University)

  • Ann E. Tenbrunsel

    (University of Notre Dame)

  • Kristina A. Diekmann

    (University of Utah)

Abstract

Unfortunately, business is often associated with unethical behavior. While research has offered a number of explanations for why business might encourage unethical behavior, we argue that how a person frames a situation may provide important insight. Drawing on the decision frame literature, the goal of the current research is to identify the differences in cognitive processing associated with two decision frames dominant in the business ethics literature—business and ethical—and, with that knowledge, examine ways to mitigate the detrimental influence of frame on unethical behavior. We first demonstrate the causal link between frame and misrepresentation (Study 1), and then identify several differences in cognitive processing—cost–benefit analyses, concern for others, and construal level—that distinguish business and ethical frames, and investigate their effects on misrepresentation (Study 2). In our final set of studies (Studies 3a–c), we demonstrate that the influence of these frames on misrepresentation can be altered by manipulating these cognitive processes, both mitigating and exacerbating a decision maker’s engagement in misrepresentation. We conclude by summarizing our findings and their potential impact on unethical behavior more broadly.

Suggested Citation

  • McKenzie R. Rees & Ann E. Tenbrunsel & Kristina A. Diekmann, 2022. "“It’s Just Business”: Understanding How Business Frames Differ from Ethical Frames and the Effect on Unethical Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 176(3), pages 429-449, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:176:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s10551-020-04729-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-020-04729-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-020-04729-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-020-04729-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hoffman Elizabeth & McCabe Kevin & Shachat Keith & Smith Vernon, 1994. "Preferences, Property Rights, and Anonymity in Bargaining Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 346-380, November.
    2. Robert H. Frank & Thomas Gilovich & Dennis T. Regan, 1993. "Does Studying Economics Inhibit Cooperation?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 159-171, Spring.
    3. Yip, Jeremy A. & Schweitzer, Maurice E. & Nurmohamed, Samir, 2018. "Trash-talking: Competitive incivility motivates rivalry, performance, and unethical behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 125-144.
    4. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1986. "Fairness and the Assumptions of Economics," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 285-300, October.
    5. Jennifer Kish-Gephart & James Detert & Linda Treviño & Vicki Baker & Sean Martin, 2014. "Situational Moral Disengagement: Can the Effects of Self-Interest be Mitigated?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 267-285, December.
    6. Shao, Ruodan & Aquino, Karl & Freeman, Dan, 2008. "Beyond Moral Reasoning: A Review of Moral Identity Research and Its Implications for Business Ethics," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 513-540, October.
    7. Weaver, Gary R. & Trevino, Linda Klebe, 1994. "Normative And Empirical Business Ethics: Separation, Marriage Of Convenience, Or Marriage Of Necessity?," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 129-143, April.
    8. Yip, Jeremy A. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2016. "Mad and misleading: Incidental anger promotes deception," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 207-217.
    9. Vincent P. Crawford, 2003. "Lying for Strategic Advantage: Rational and Boundedly Rational Misrepresentation of Intentions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 133-149, March.
    10. Victor Manuel Bennett & Lamar Pierce & Jason A. Snyder & Michael W. Toffel, 2013. "Customer-Driven Misconduct: How Competition Corrupts Business Practices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(8), pages 1725-1742, August.
    11. Harris, Jared D. & Freeman, R. Edward, 2008. "The Impossibility of the Separation Thesis: A Response to Joakim Sandberg," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 541-548, October.
    12. Kouchaki, Maryam & Smith-Crowe, Kristin & Brief, Arthur P. & Sousa, Carlos, 2013. "Seeing green: Mere exposure to money triggers a business decision frame and unethical outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 53-61.
    13. Sandberg, Joakim, 2008. "Understanding the Separation Thesis," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 213-232, April.
    14. Duska, Ronald, 2000. "Business Ethics: Oxymoron or Good Business?," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 111-129, January.
    15. Messick, David M., 1999. "Alternative logics for decision making in social settings," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 11-28, May.
    16. Song, Fei & Zhong, Chen-Bo, 2015. "You scratch his back, he scratches mine and I’ll scratch yours: Deception in simultaneous cyclic networks," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 98-111.
    17. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 153-174, Spring.
    18. Yuanqiong He & Junfang Zhang & Yuanyuan Zhou & Zhilin Yang, 2019. "“Monkey See, Monkey Do?”: The Effect of Construal Level on Consumers’ Reactions to Others’ Unethical Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(2), pages 455-472, May.
    19. Pillutla, Madan M. & Chen, Xiao-Ping, 1999. "Social Norms and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas: The Effects of Context and Feedback, , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 81-103, May.
    20. Mulder, Laetitia B. & Jordan, Jennifer & Rink, Floor, 2015. "The effect of specific and general rules on ethical decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 115-129.
    21. Grant, Adam M. & Campbell, Elizabeth M. & Chen, Grace & Cottone, Keenan & Lapedis, David & Lee, Karen, 2007. "Impact and the art of motivation maintenance: The effects of contact with beneficiaries on persistence behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 53-67, May.
    22. James P. Walsh, 1995. "Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 280-321, June.
    23. Frank, Bjorn & Schulze, Gunther G., 2000. "Does economics make citizens corrupt?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 101-113, September.
    24. Mogilner, Cassie & Aaker, Jennifer L., 2009. "The Time vs. Money Effect: Shifting Product Attitudes and Decisions through Personal Connection," Research Papers 2014, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    25. Andrew Abela & Ryan Shea, 2015. "Avoiding the Separation Thesis While Maintaining a Positive/Normative Distinction," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 31-41, September.
    26. Sieck, Winston & Yates, J. Frank, 1997. "Exposition Effects on Decision Making: Choice and Confidence in Choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 207-219, June.
    27. Cassie Mogilner & Jennifer Aaker, 2009. ""The Time vs. Money Effect": Shifting Product Attitudes and Decisions through Personal Connection," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(2), pages 277-291.
    28. Takezawa, Masanori & Gummerum, Michaela & Keller, Monika, 2006. "A stage for the rational tail of the emotional dog: Roles of moral reasoning in group decision making," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 117-139, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Shi, Yujie & Mao, Jih-Yu & Guo, Li & Mu, Xinyan & Liu, Wenxing & He, Weiqun, 2024. "License for Wrongdoing: Why better relationships with leaders lead to employee unethical behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kouchaki, Maryam & Smith-Crowe, Kristin & Brief, Arthur P. & Sousa, Carlos, 2013. "Seeing green: Mere exposure to money triggers a business decision frame and unethical outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 53-61.
    2. Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Tosun, 2022. "Endogenous Game Choice and Giving Behavior in Distribution Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-32, November.
    3. Pamela Jakiela, 2013. "Equity vs. efficiency vs. self-interest: on the use of dictator games to measure distributional preferences," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(2), pages 208-221, June.
    4. Bart J. Wilson, 2012. "Contra Private Fairness," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 407-435, April.
    5. Frigau, Luca & Medda, Tiziana & Pelligra, Vittorio, 2019. "From the field to the lab. An experiment on the representativeness of standard laboratory subjects," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 160-169.
    6. Utz Weitzel & Diemo Urbig & Sameeksha Desai & Mark Sanders & Zoltán J. Ács, 2015. "The good, the bad, and the talented: Entrepreneurial talent and selfish behavior," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 2, pages 24-41, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Ruske, René & Suttner, Johannes, 2012. "Wie (un-)fair sind Ökonomen? Neue empirische Evidenz zur Marktbewertung und Rationalität," CIW Discussion Papers 03/2012, University of Münster, Center for Interdisciplinary Economics (CIW).
    8. Rode, Julian, 2007. "Truth and Trust in Communication: An Experimental Study of Behavior under Asymmetric Information," Ratio Working Papers 111, The Ratio Institute.
    9. Ruske René & Suttner Johannes, 2012. "Wie (un-)fair sind Ökonomen? – Neue empirische Evidenz zur Marktbewertung und Rationalität / How (un-)fair are economists? New empirical evidence on market valuation and rationality," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 63(1), pages 179-194, January.
    10. Walkowitz, Gari, 2019. "On the Validity of Probabilistic (and Cost-Saving) Incentives in Dictator Games: A Systematic Test," MPRA Paper 91541, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Miguel Alzola, 2011. "The Reconciliation Project: Separation and Integration in Business Ethics Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 99(1), pages 19-36, March.
    12. Andrew Abela & Ryan Shea, 2015. "Avoiding the Separation Thesis While Maintaining a Positive/Normative Distinction," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 31-41, September.
    13. Mehmet Karacuka & Asad Zaman, 2012. "The empirical evidence against neoclassical utility theory: a review of the literature," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(4), pages 366-414.
    14. Anna Dreber & Tore Ellingsen & Magnus Johannesson & David Rand, 2013. "Do people care about social context? Framing effects in dictator games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(3), pages 349-371, September.
    15. Philipp Gerlach, 2017. "The games economists play: Why economics students behave more selfishly than other students," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-17, September.
    16. Damon Tomlin, 2015. "Rational Constraints and the Evolution of Fairness in the Ultimatum Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    17. Walkowitz, Gari, 2021. "Dictator game variants with probabilistic (and cost-saving) payoffs: A systematic test," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    18. João Carlos Graça & João Carlos Lopes & Rita Gomes Correia, 2014. "Economics education: literacy or mind framing? Evidence from a survey on the social building of trust in Portugal," Working Papers Department of Economics 2014/20, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    19. Theresa Thompson Chaudhry & Misha Saleem, 2011. "Norms of Cooperation, Trust, Altruism, and Fairness: Evidence from Lab Experiments on Pakistani Students," Lahore Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, The Lahore School of Economics, vol. 16(Special E), pages 347-375, September.
    20. Hong Zhang & Jiawei Zhu & Li Wei & Wenting Zhang, 2021. "A Comparison between the Psychological Benefits of Giving Money vs. Giving Time," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 2677-2701, August.

    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:kap:jbuset:v:176:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s10551-020-04729-5. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.