01-111122-238
BBA 6 A
ADVANCED METHOD AND TECHNIQUES
FINAL PROJECT
SUBMITTED TO: SIR ATIF BILAL
DATED: 3-06-2015
KEYWORDS:
Leadership Characteristics, Behavioral Intention, Organizational support and
Responsible leader.
INTRODUCTION:
Responsible leadership has emerged as a major theme in academic and practical
management discourse. We see that a leader can make or break any organization, it
is just a leader who can take the organization up and bring the organization down,
leadership characteristics are important for any individual. In this paper we provide
an overview and synthesis of existing and emerging research on responsible
leadership that who actually are responsible leader, how they can take the
organization to upper limits and come up as a motivation for their staff and people
working under them moreover we would see that how any individual can be a good
leader and propose a unifying framework for explaining leaders, there can be a
mediating thing as well which has an impact on responsible leader that can be the
behavioral intention of an individual, it is understood that behaviors decide every
certain thing likewise the behavior of a person decides or indicates that if someone
wants to be a good leader or he doesnt wants to be a leader. A person not
particular about time and takes his decision without knowing the situation, is pretty
causal about its work can never be a good leader because it is understood that he
doesnt want to be a leader or a person of dignity. Propensity to engage in two
types of socially responsible behavior: do well do well is a very broad terminology
this word says that if a leader can do well in a certain area, not just this but the real
meaning of this word is that a person as leader has to do well if he is a leader then
and only then he can be called as an effective leader if someone is not able to do so
he is unfortunately an ordinary leader and can never be a good leader and avoid
harm is another terminology the second trait of a leader it says everything this
means that the leader not just has to do well but he has to avoid harm too, if he is
giving company a profit of 50M and doing this there are a lot of causalities for no
reason this is not a good leadership habit this is a poor display of work a leader has
to avoid harm, or maybe you can say that there are two types of leader one who try
to do good and take positive steps and the others just avoid harm and take baby
steps to the success they both are getting success in other way. The framework
models the linkages among individual, situational, organizational, institutional, and
supranational influences on responsible leader behavior and describes the
mechanisms by which these factors may affect a leaders decisions and actions. Our
analysis suggests that do well and avoid harm behaviors are conceptually
distinct categories, with different psychological bases and different antecedents
that predict them. Further, we find that individual level and contextual factors
combine and interact to influence responsible leader behavior, and a key aspect of
the environment in which leaders act and make decisionssituational strength
moderates the relationship between individual-level factors and a leaders
propensity to engage in do good and avoid harm behavior. In addition to
providing directions for future research on responsible leader behavior, this article
has several implications for practice, specifically how to select, train and develop
social leaders. Moderator can be a key factor in deciding the leadership traits
moderator can be the organization support in it, this means that the
organization has an important role in defining a leader, if a person is backed
by the organization therefore he would take positive steps and take
initiatives thus he would come out as a motivational leader for its staff. On
the other hand if organization support is not enough then he would be
careful while taking decisions and doing anything. A leader would not come
out as a motivation for his staff.
As the world is recovering from a major economic crisis and, as some have argued,
a crisis of management ethics (e.g., Ghoshal, 2005; Waldman & Galvin, 2008),
business leaders are under increased scrutiny. Top executives in the West and
elsewhere have been exposed for dishonesty, greed, and unethical business
practices. These highly publicized instances of management misconduct have
eroded public faith in business and brought to the forefront the recognition that
business leaders may be acting irresponsibly more often than previously thought. As
a result, trust in business is at one of the lowest levels on record, particularly in the
United States and Europe (Edelman Trust Barometer, 2012).1 recent calls for more
ethical managerial conduct are a reaction to these scandals and crises. They are
also a result of changes and new demands in the global marketplace, such as
increased stakeholder activism and scrutiny (e.g., Aguilera, Rupp, Williams, &
Ganapathi, 2007; Doh & Guay, 2006; Husted & Allen, 2006). As sociopolitical and
environmental challenges intensify around the world there is increasing pressure
from stakeholdersamong them governments, local communities, NGOs, and
consumers on corporations and their leaders to engage in self-regulation and take
more active roles as global citizens (Stahl, Pless, & Maak, 2013).
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK:
Leadership
MEWORK:
Characteristics
Personality Traits
Affective Thinking
Values/Moral
Behavioral
Intention
Responsible Leader
Doing Good
Avoiding Harm
Organizational
Support
GAP ANALYSIS:
Talking about the responsible leader, there are two basic terms that an
individual should have one is that they should do good to the firm or they
come out beneficial to the sector and they would be an outstanding team
member by doing this, there is another type of leader considered responsible
and that is which does not do actually any good to the firm but they focus on
avoiding harm and damages which can occur in the sector they tend them to
keep away from them. This is the pervious study done by the authors
references are enlisted below. The study was carried out in England and
Ireland.
We conducted a survey in Government sector considering these two
variables and checking their position and knowing their responsibility level.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES:
This is to check the relationship of Leadership Characteristics and
Responsible leader keeping the mediator as Behavioral Intention
The relationship of Leadership Characteristics and Responsible leader
keeping the mediator as Behavioral Intention
RESEARCH QUESTION:
HYPOTHSIS:
LEADERSHIP CHARCTERSTICS:
These pioneers are sure however humble and their beingwho they are
is charming to others as in they have a trademark region that unites with
others and addresses others at a more significant enthusiastic level. "This
is taking into account a certified perception and affirmation of one's
uniquenesspersonality, motivations, qualities and weaknesses and an
assurance that connotes 'I don't need to claim to be someone I am
definitely not.'" This is moreover displayed in unsurprising behavior. "An
unmistakable and developed qualities and conviction system also serves
to smooth out senseless swings of behavior." "Current pioneers ought to
LEADERSHIP CHARCTERSTICS:
Organizational Support is the support given by the organization, how and
what organization provides you. Organizational support is for the leader
especially and it is to ensure that if a leader willing to work or he is interested to
make new steps in any organization. Organizational support is important what
actually is organizational support now, it is the support given by the organization to
their employees and leaders moreover it is the trust that organizational has on his
own employees. Likewise people who are from any organization and then they do
anything or take any step the organization backs them and supports them in what
so ever way it may be. If any organization fails to do it, the organization has to bear
its consiquenceses, the people wont have the comfort working there, people would
be afraid to taking any positive or good steps, they would rather just do their job
and kill time for no reason, another thing which can turn out as a threat for any
company that is that people could leave their company and jump on to another
company
ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT:
The absence of regard for relevant impacts in existing behavioral morals
exploration has driven KishGephart also, associates (2010, p. 23) to finish up
that "there is a requirement for more extensive band inquire about that
researches more perplexing designs of person, good issue, and hierarchical
environment variables." This requires more noteworthy clarity concerning
how relevant conditions may direct singular distinction impacts. We
recommend that the situational, authoritative, institutional, and
supranational impacts talked about above advance or thwart dependable
pioneer conduct by expanding the mental quality of the circumstances
confronting supervisors in their workplaces. Mischel (1973) recommended
that the mental elements of circumstances impact the behavioral expression
of identity characteristics. He contended that the behavioral articulation of
attitudes is liable to be stifled by exceptionally compelling "solid"
circumstances, however, that these airs will probably be authorized in
"feeble" circumstances. Mentally solid circumstances are those in which
there are solid behavioral standards, solid motivations for particular sorts of
practices, and clear assumptions about what practices are remunerated and
rebuffed. Along these lines, in associations that are very formalized and
represented by settled part desires, rules, strategies, and methodology,
there is less open door for directors to behaviorally express their
dispositional inclinations (House & Aditya, 1997). Such mentally solid
circumstances are described not just by confined choice making limit
furthermore, extent of activity, additionally by constrained capacity to
impact behavioral results. By complexity, in associations where directors are
less obliged by guidelines, strategies, and regulations and have more
noteworthy circumspection over their exercises, there is more open door for
them to express their airs and to impact hierarchical results. Such powerless
circumstances permit a more extensive scope of practices and thus grant
the distal setting at the institutional level, the national society what's more,
lawful framework inside which directors work will probably influence the
mental quality of the circumstance and, subsequently, directors' penchant to
take part in dependable and unreliable conduct. Case in point, a domain
where partner rights are not administered, law implementation is remiss,
corporate administration structures are frail, and 246 The Academy of
Management Perspectives August the part of the media is limited makes a
frail circumstance that would likely not advance mindful administrative
conduct. Then again, when directors work in situations where partner rights
are secured through instruments like the UNGC, hearty corporate
administration structures exist, and laws and regulations are stringently
upheld (consequently making a mentally solid circumstance), there is both
less opportunity and less requirement for supervisors to behaviorally express
their attitudes, great or awful.
RESPONSIBLE LEADER
An audit of the behavioral morals and dependable administration writings
demonstrates that most variables 240 The Academy of Management
Perspectives August distinguished as predecessors of socially dependable
decisions are individual-level qualities. They incorporate identity qualities, for
example, the "Huge Five" components of neuroticism, extraversion,
openness, appropriateness, and principles (Kalshoven et al., 2010); qualities
and convictions (Crilly et al., 2008); psychological procedures (Green &
Weber, 1997); summed up hopes, for example, locus-of-control introduction
(Shapeero, Koh, & Killough, 2003); and emotional states (Judge, Scott, & Ilies,
2006). Research on other individual-level attributes incorporates hazard
observations (Fraedrich & Ferrell, 1992); phases of intellectual good
advancement (Trevio, 1986); and capacities, abilities, and behavioral
manners, such as dependable administration skills (Cameron & Caza, 2005),
dependable administration introductions (Pless, Maak, & Waldman, 2012),
and worldwide administration abilities (Miska, Stahl, & Mendenhall, 2013), as
well as demographics, including sex, age, and instruction level (Franke,
Crown, & Spake, 1997). Albeit the majority of the studies explored don't
expressly concentrate on administration conduct, the elements recognized in
observational research as precursors of people's moral decisions may be
seen as potential impacts on pioneers' inclination to lock in in socially
mindful or flighty behavior. These studies propose, for instance, that
directors with identity qualities and qualities that stress quest for one's own
advantage, rather than the more noteworthy normal great, are more prone
to take part in exercises that put partners at danger or hurt and less inclined
to take part in exercises that upgrade societal welfare (Crilly et al., 2008). By
difference, supervisors who grasp self-extraordinary qualities are more prone
to settle on choices and take activities that advantage society and maintain
a strategic distance from destructive results for others (Ashkanasy, Windsor,
& Trevio, 2006; Kalshoven et al., 2010). Among the numerous individuallevel elements that have been mulled over in the association are four key
elements that we audit here: sympathy, subjective moral advancement,
Machiavellianism, and good theories. Compassion alludes to another-situated
passionate reaction consistent with the apparent welfare of another (Batson,
Duncan, Ackerman, Buckey, & Birch, 1981) and mirrors the capacity of a
individual to nearly imitate someone else's enthusiastic state (Eisenberg,
2000). Sympathy related reacting has been reliably discovered to be related
with prosocial conduct (Eisenberg, 1986). In spite of the fact that compassion
has been generally considered in test settings (see Batson, 1991, for a
survey), administration analysts are progressively perceiving its significance
for administration in a hierarchical connection (e.g., Kellett, Humphrey, &
Sleeth, 2006; Sadri, Weber, & Gentry, 2011). Researchers have
recommended that compassion is a premise for connectedness what's more,
charitableness (Pavlovich & Krahnke, 2012) and corporate altruism (Muller,
Pfarrer, & Little, 2014). At long last, compassion has been experimentally
demonstrated to diminish an administrator's inclination to go along with
solicitations by power figures to participate in conduct that has destructive
outcomes for workers (Dietz & Kleinlogel, 2013). Intellectual good
improvement (CMD) hypothesis alludes to the phases of intellectual manysided quality through which people's ethical activities climb (Kohlberg, 1984).
CMD is made out of five successive levels that people hypothetically
progress through in life, turning out to be generally steady at adulthood. The
fifth or post-traditional level demonstrates an advanced level of good
thinking in which people apply standards of equity and rights and consider
societal great in choice making (Kish-Gephart et al., 2010). People who are at
the higher phases of CMD have been discovered to be less inclined to
participate in dishonest conduct (see Trevio, 1992, for an audit of CMD and
dishonest conduct in the work environment) and to be more inclined to
participate in moral conduct, for example, whistleblowing (Road, 1995). CMD
is therefore prone to impact both the "do great" and "maintain a strategic
distance from damage" measurements of capable pioneer conduct.
Machiavellianism, usually known as a political hypothesis, has been
conceptualized in behavioral morals examine as an identity build or
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
Research Methodology This section provides insights about the methodology
used to conduct this research. The discussion describes the methodology
used for this study under the headings of research approach and design,
instrument development, population, sample, unit of analysis, time horizon,
pilot testing, data collection procedure, data analysis technique, tests for
data analysis and software used. The present research is quantitative in its
approach. The research design of the present study is hypothesis testing,
type of investigation is causal and cross sectional. The instrument used for
the data collection was a survey questionnaire containing structured closeended questions. The questionnaire had two sections. Section A comprised
of demographic information such as sector (public or private) with gender,
age, experience, education and managerial tier, section B comprised the
questions which enclosed of different items to measure responses on the
variables. All questions were adapted using the five likert scale (Likert,
1967), form ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Table 1
Measures Variable Population of the study was the employees from banking
sector of Pakistan. The sample size of the study included workers of Telecom
industry from IslamabadThe sampling strategy used for this study is
convenience sampling technique. Unit of analysis for this study is individual
analysis that includes the employees of telecom sector. A pilot test of 30-50
respondents was conducted from the employees. The result of pilot test
indicated that all the items of the instrument were reliable with ( > 0.600)
showing high level of internal consistency for all variables (Nunnally, 1978).
Structured questionnaire was used as an instrument for data collection. The
questionnaire was distributed to the employees of banking sector (faysal
bank) in Islamabad. A total number of 356 questionnaires were distributed
out of which 300 were returned back with a response rate of 75%. The tests
used in this study were descriptive, correlation and regression analysis.
Baron and Kenny (1986) discussed a four step regression analysis to
determine the mediating and moderating effect of variables, these steps
have been undertaken in order to find the mediating and moderating role of
the variable. SPSS version 20 is used to perform these tests. It had been
ensured that the respect and dignity of all research respondents must be
maintained. It was highly guaranteed to protect the privacy of research
subjects, ensuring the confidentiality of research data and also protecting the
anonymity of individuals who participated. Participants were provided with
an information sheet outlining the purpose of the study and given
assurances that their data would be treated confidentially. Complete honesty
and transparency has been maintained while communicating about the
research. The content and face validity is assured for a reliable and validate
scale. Content and face validity was done with the help of professional
experts in the field, instrument was modified according to the
recommendations made by them. The purpose of content validity is to
examine that up to what extent items are addressing all dimensions of a
particular construct and to ensure that items constructed in a way that all
respondents can read them conveniently (Cooper & Schindler, 2001). Based
on feedback certain items were deleted. The revised questionnaire was than
distributed among the respondents for pilot testing with covering letter
explaining academic purpose of the research.
Results:N
300
Gender
Frequency
222
Male
Female
78
Age
The sample size is of 300 people from banking sector in which 222
were male and 78 were female, from 25 to 36 or more. Their
experience lies from 1 year to 20 years.
Variable
Leadership
characteristics
Behavioral
intention
Organizational
support
Responsible
leader
Number of items
Cronbachs Alpha
0.64
0.743
0.832
0.732
Mean
3.93
3.62
S.D
.5832
0.4734
1
1
.370**
2
.380**
1
3
.542**
..488**
4
.389**
.506**
OS
3.24
.5654
RL
3.57
.6534
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Hypothesis+37:437:40
R Square
Steps
IV
DV
LC
RL
LC
BI
BI
RL
.551**
.380**
S.E
.432**
.510**
t-test
..568**
1.00
1
.448 **
F-test
Sig.
0.160
0.411
0.51
8.36
70.36
0.00
0.155
0.21
0.035
8.22
70.2
0.00
0.256
0.699
.062
11.55
5
133.3
33
0.00
F-test
t- stat
Sig.
70.36
8.36
70.2
8.22
R2
133.333
11.547
.671 85.02
4
LC+BI
RL
0.456 0.256 0.699
8.964, 10.012
2
H4 : Creativity has negative mediating relationship between Motivation and Innovation.
Steps
IV
DV
LC
RL
0.381
LC
BI
BI
RL
Moderator
RL
0.15
5
0.60
4
0.785
R2
0.16
0
0.15
5
0.32
5
0.732
0
0
0.41
1
F-test
t- stat
Sig.
70.36
8.36
0.21
0.67
4
0.138
70.2
8.22
133.34
11.547
1205.522
32.49
0
0
and O'Fallon and Butterfield (2005) found that just 20 (out of 384) studies
included in their audit of the moral choice making writing inspected
mediators. Hence, there is a requirement for more experimental exploration
that investigates the relevant conditions that direct individual distinction
impacts, especially the part of situational quality. Our investigation
recommends that, notwithstanding acting as a mediator variable, situational
quality may intercede the connections between the relevant impacts and
pioneers' affinity to participate in dependable conduct. For instance, an
institutional environment where partner rights are ensured, vigorous
corporate administration structures exist, furthermore, laws and regulations
are stringently implemented makes a mentally solid circumstance that
possible advances capable administration conduct. This is genuine
particularly when pioneers work inside of the imperatives forced by an
association with obvious models for moral behavior, have a corporate society
that advances and supports capable conduct, and establish execution
administration furthermore, compensate frameworks that hold
administrators responsible for their choices and activities. In such
circumstances, pioneers don't just have less open door to "do hurt," yet they
additionally have more motivations to "do great." Paradoxically, however, our
examination recommends that in such a situation, there may additionally be
less requirement for pioneers to do great or to dodge hurt, on the grounds
that settled part desires, principles, approaches, and techniques can work as
a substitute for mindful pioneer conduct. Future exploration ought to test the
arranging structure propelled in this paper and set up its relevance to the
universal connection. Globalization has brought social and natural concerns
to administration's plan, and more and more supervisors work in a worldwide
domain. It is settled that when universal supervisors take part in deceptive or
illicit exercises outside their nations of origin it is regularly on the grounds
that they follow to an innocent type of social relativism of the "when in Rome
. . ." kind (Stahl et al., 2013). The peril is 2014 Stahl and Sully de Luque 247
especially intense in situations where nearby guidelines (e.g., natural and
wellbeing measures) are extensively less stringent than the principles in the
home nation. Such a situation, consolidated with a deficient and wrong
comprehension of the nearby connection, makes a mentally frail
circumstance that conceivable advances flippant conduct. We suggest that
the build of situational quality is of significant heuristic esteem in
comprehension the moral problems confronting supervisors in the worldwide
enclosure and how they adapt to those problems. Identified with the past
point, with a couple of remarkable special cases, existing research on
behavioral morals has been socially visually impaired, in that studies have
CONCLUSION:
The advantages of mindful initiative to society, also, the harm caused by
administration unfortunate behavior, make it vital to build up structures for
future exploration. Our contentions that individual-level and context oriented
elements consolidate what's more, cooperate to impact capable pioneer
conduct are key segments of our proposed system. Most outstandingly, the
vital part of the administration choice making environment situational
quality conservatives the relationship between individual-level components
and a pioneer's affinity to take part in "do great" and "evadehurt" conduct. It
is our aim that this system will help others to further examinethe systems
impacting dependable administration,which thusly may develop pioneers
with an introduction toward obligation.
QUESTIONARRE:
Male
Age:
Female
20-25
Experience:
26-30
6-10
years
GENDER:
31-35
11-15
years
36
16 and
above
1-5 years
LEADERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS:
1: Stays fixed on the goals, despite
Interference.
STRON
GLY
DISAGR
EE
STRON
GLY
DISAGR
EE
STRON
GLY
DISAGR
EE
STRON
GLY
DISAGR
EE
STRON
GLY
DISAGR
EE
DISAG
REE
DISAG
REE
NEUTR
AL
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONG
LY
AGREE
AGR
EE
STONG
LY
AGREE
DISAG
REE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONG
LY
AGREE
DISAG
REE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONG
LY
AGREE
DISAG
REE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONG
LY
AGREE
BEHAVIORAL INTENTION:
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONGL
Y
AGREE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONGL
Y
AGREE
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONGL
Y
AGREE
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONGL
Y
AGREE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
STONGL
Y
AGREE
ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT:
1: I can work on my own ideas without
any approval or notice.
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONGL
Y AGREE
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONGL
Y AGREE
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONGL
Y AGREE
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONGL
Y AGREE
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGR
EE
STONGL
Y AGREE
RESPONSIBLE LEADER:
1: You have positive relationship with
people working under you?
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGRE
E
STONGLY
AGREE
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGRE
E
STONGLY
AGREE
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGRE
E
STONGLY
AGREE
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGRE
E
STONGLY
AGREE
STRONG
LY
DISAGR
EE
DISAGR
EE
NEUTR
AL
AGRE
E
STONGLY
AGREE
REFERENCES
Agle, B. R., Donaldson, T., Freeman, R. E., Jensen, M. C.,
Mitchell, R. K., & Wood, D. J. (2008). Dialogue: Toward
superior stakeholder theory. Business Ethics
Quarterly, 18(2), 153190.
Aguilera, R., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J.
(2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility:
A multilevel theory of social change in organizations.
Academy of Management Review, 3,
836 863.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
50, 179 211.
Arvidsson, S. (2010). Communication of corporate social
responsibility: A study of the views of management
teams in large companies. Journal of Business Ethics,
96(3), 339 354.
Ashkanasy, N. M., Windsor, C. A., & Trevio, L. K.
(2006). Bad apples in bad barrels revisited: Cognitive
697.
Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom
line of 21st-century business. Oxford, UK: Capstone.
European Foundation for Management Development
(2005). Globally responsible leadership: A call for
engagement. Available at http://www.grli.org/index.
php/resources
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention,
and behavior: An introduction to theory and
research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fraedrich, J. P., & Ferrell, O. C. (1992). The impact of
perceived risk and moral philosophy type on ethical
250 The Academy of Management Perspectives August
decision-making in business organizations. Journal
of Business Research, 24, 283295.
Franke, G. R., Crown, D. F., & Spake, D. F. (1997). Gender
differences in ethical perceptions of business practices:
A social role theory perspective. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 82(6), 920 934.
Freeman, R. E. (1994). The politics of stakeholder theory.
Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 409 421.
Freeman, R. E., Wicks, A. C., & Parmar, B. (2004). Stakeholder
theory and The corporate objective revisited.
Organization Science, 15(3), 364 369.
Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility
118.
Schminke, M., & Wells, D. (1999). Group processes and
performance and their effects on individuals ethical
framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 18, 367381.
Schneider, S. C., Barsoux, J.-L., & Stahl, G. K. (2014).
Managing across cultures. Essex, UK: Pearson/
Financial Times.
Schwartz, M. S., & Carroll, A. B. (2003). Corporate social
responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business
Ethics Quarterly, 13(4), 503530.
Scroggins, W. A., Thomas, S. L., & Morris, J. A. (2009).
Psychological testing in personnel selection, part III:
The resurgence of personality testing. Public Personnel
Management, 38(1), 6777.
Shapeero, M. P., Koh, H. C., & Killough, L. N. (2003).
Underreporting and premature sign-off in public accounting.
Managerial Auditing Journal, 18(6/7),
478 489.
Sims, R. R. (1992). Linking groupthink to unethical behavior
in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics,
11(9), 651 662.
Spencer, J., & Gomez, C. (2011). MNEs and corruption:
The impact of national institutions and subsidiary
strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 32(3), 280
300.