Ethical Problems of Marketing Researchers

Author(s): Shelby D. Hunt, Lawrence B. Chonko, James B. Wilcox

Source: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Aug., 1984), pp. 309-324
Published by: American Marketing Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3151607
Accessed: 03/03/2010 15:03

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ama.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Marketing Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Journal of Marketing Research.

http://www.jstor.org
 D. HUNT,LAWRENCE
SHELBY B. CHONKO,and JAMESB. WILCOX*

Almostall studieson ethics in marketingresearchhave focused on either delin-

and obligationsof researchersto respondentsand clients
eating the responsibilities
or exploringwhethervariousgroups perceivecertain marketingresearchpractices
to be ethicalor unethical.Theauthorsempiricallyexaminefour researchquestions:
What are the majorethical problemsof marketingresearchers?To what extent do
our professionalcodes of conductaddressthe majorethicalproblemsof marketing
researchers?Howextensiveare the ethicalproblemsof marketingresearchers?How
effectiveare the actions of top managementin reducingethical problemsof mar-
keting researchers?

Ethical Problems of Marketing Researchers

Marketingactivities often pose significant ethical systematic"(p. 262). They identifyseveralareaswhere

problemsin business. In a classic studyof businesseth-
ics, Baumhart(1961) identifiedthe majorethical prob-
lems thatbusinesspeople wantedto eliminate:(1) gifts,
gratuities,bribes, and "call girls," (2) price discrimi-
nationand unfairpricing, (3) dishonestadvertising,(4)
miscellaneousunfaircompetitivepractices,(5) cheating
customers,unfaircredit practices, and overselling, (6)
pricecollusionby competitors,(7) dishonestyin making
or keeping a contract,and (8) unfairnessto employees
andprejudicein hiring.Note that five of the eight most
importantethical problemspertainto marketingactivi-
ties. BrennerandMolander(1977) conducteda followup
study and found the same set of undesirablepractices,
thoughthe orderof importance changedfor severalitems.
Findings such as these led Murphyand Laczniak(1981)
to concludethat"thefunctionwithinbusinessfirmsmost
often chargedwith ethicalabuseis marketing"(p. 251),
andpromptedus to exploreempiricallythe natureof the
ethicalproblemsof marketingresearchers.
Murphy and Laczniak (1981) comprehensivelyre-
viewed ethics researchand found thatresearch"related
to marketingethics has been less than innovativeand
*ShelbyD. Huntis Paul WhitfieldHornProfessorof Marketing,
LawrenceB. Chonkois AssociateProfessorof Marketing,andJames
B. Wilcox is Professorof Marketing,Texas Tech University.
The authorsexpresstheir sincereappreciationto the membersof
the AmericanMarketingAssociationwho participatedin the research
project.They also gratefullyacknowledgethe financialsupportof the
Officeof BusinessResearch,Collegeof BusinessAdministration,Texas
TechUniversity.The timelyassistanceof PaulSurgiSpeckat various
stagesof the researchprojectis appreciated.
more researchis critically needed, including "ranking
(in termsof importance)the variousareasof ethicalabuse
in marketing"and "findingout whetherthe behaviorof
the chief marketingofficer is the crucialvariablein set-
ting the moral tone of the marketingorganization"(p.
262). The purposeof our researchprojectwas to ex-
aminethese issues. Specifically,the studyaddressedfour
researchquestions.
1. What are the majorethical problemsof marketingre-
searchers?
2. To whatextentdo our professionalcodes of conductad-
dressthe majorethicalproblemsof marketingresearch-
ers?
3. How extensiveare the ethicalproblemsof marketingre-
searchers?
4. How effective are the actionsof top managementin re-
ducingthe ethicalproblemsof marketingresearchers?
We exploredthesequestionsusinga sampleof morethan
450 practicingmarketingresearchprofessionals.Before
we examinethe resultsof the study, a discussionof the
natureof ethical problemsin marketingresearchis ap-
propriate.
THENATUREOF ETHICALPROBLEMSOF
MARKETING RESEARCHERS
Ethicalproblemsare relationshipkinds of problems.
Thatis, ethicalproblemsoccuronly when an individual
interactswith otherpeople.The ethicalphilosopherBaier
(1958, p. 215) pointsout that"a worldof RobinsonCru-
soes has no need for morality."Partof the value system
of each individualis a perceivedset of obligations,du-
ties, andresponsibilitiestowardothergroupsof people.

309

Journal of Marketing Research

Vol. XXI (August 1984), 309-24
310
For example, a researcher has the responsibility to treat
respondents fairly in a research study. At the same time,
a researcher has a responsibility to the client to gather
accurate, reliable information.
Ethical conflict occurs when an individual perceives
that his/her duties and responsibilities toward one group
are inconsistent with his/her duties and responsibilities
toward some other group (including one's self). The in-
dividual then must attempt to resolve these opposing ob-
ligations. For example, a researcher might resolve an
ethical conflict as follows: "In order to gather accurate
and reliable data (satisfying my duty to my client), I shall
deceive the respondents in my study about the true na-
ture of the study, but shall 'debrief the respondentsabout
the true purpose of the study upon its completion (thus
satisfying my obligation of fairness to my respondents)."
Other researchers might choose a different solution to
the ethical conflict, such as sacrificing the interests of
the client by gathering less reliable data. Bartels (1967,
p. 24) succinctly states the nature of ethical conflict.
In a pluralisticsocietynot one butmanyexpectationsmust
be met. Therefore,resolutionof what is rightto do pro-
duces a balanceof obligationsand satisfactions.Ideally,
full satisfactionof the expectationsof all partieswould
constitutethe most ethical behavior.This is impossible,
for expectationsare often contradictoryand sometimes
exceedsocialsanction.Therefore,skill andjudgmentmust
be used to guide one in determiningthe point at which
his own integritycan be best maintained.
As Murphy and Laczniak (1981) point out, the "most
longstanding thrust within marketing research ethics is
the delineation of the rights of all parties involved in the
research process" (p. 253). Most of the ethics research
pertains to the duties of researchers toward respondents
and clients. For example, Tybout and Zaltman (1974)
set forth a "bill of rights" for respondents: the right to
choose, the right to safety, and the right to be informed.
Similarly, Schneider (1977) examined ways in which re-
spondents' rights can be abused, including deceptive
practices by researchers, invasion of privacy, and lack
of consideration for respondents. Crawford (1970) ex-
amined the responsibilities of researchers toward both
respondents and society in general. Using primarily
"scenario" techniques, Coney and Murphy (1976) and
McGown (1979) also examined responsibilities of re-
searchers toward respondents and clients.
Almost all studies on ethics in marketingresearchhave
focused on either delineating the responsibilities and ob-
ligations of researchers toward respondents and clients
or exploring whether various groups perceive certain
marketing research practices to be ethical or unethical.
No research has been done to determine empiricially the
major issues that practicing researchersperceive to result
in ethical conflict. Furthermore, though it is well estab-
lished that ethical conflict results from balancing the in-
terests of various groups, no research has addressed the
frequency with which different groups are involved in
JOURNALOF MARKETING AUGUST1984
RESEARCH,
the relationships producing ethical conflict for marketing
researchers. Though Murphy and Laczniak (1981) con-
clude that "there appears to be a general dissatisfaction
with the ethical performance of marketing researchers,"
(p. 255), no research has documented empirically the
extent of ethical problems of marketing researchers. The
preceding discussion emphasizes the importance of two
of the research questions addressed in this study: "What
are the major ethical problems of marketing research-
ers?" and "How extensive are the ethical problems of
marketing researchers?"
Previous studies have suggested three things that top
management can do to help resolve employees' ethical
conflict: (1) serve as role models by conducting their own
activities impeccably, (2) encourage ethical behaviors by
promptly reprimanding unethical conduct, and (3) draft
and promote both corporate and industry codes of con-
duct. Ferrell and Weaver (1978) examined the ethical
beliefs of marketing managers and concluded that "these
findings suggest that top management must assume at
least part of the responsibility for the ethical conduct of
marketerswithin their organization. By establishing and
enforcing policy, the frame of reference for ethical be-
havior could be improved" (p. 73). Similarly, Kaikati
and Label (1980) examined American bribery legislation
and concluded that "no code of ethical behavior is likely
to be observed unless the chief executive officer declares
that violators will be punished. When a company fails
to take strict disciplinary actions, many employees may
assume that their unethical acts are accepted standards
of corporate behavior" (p. 42).
Corporatecodes of conduct are very common. A study
conducted by the Ethics Resource Center (1979) found
that approximately three-fourths of corporations had a
written code of ethics. Similarly, the American Market-
ing Association has both a general code of ethics for
marketers and a specific code for marketing research
(Twedt 1963). Apparently believing the national asso-
ciation's code of conduct to be deficient, the New York
Chapter of the American Marketing Association has en-
dorsed its own code of ethics for marketing research
(MarketingNews 1980, p. 24). Despite the existence of
many corporate, industry, and professional codes, em-
pirical evidence that these codes effectively help resolve
ethical conflict is lacking. Murphy and Laczniak (1981)
examined the evidence and concluded that "corporate
codes are somewhat controversial" (p. 259). Therefore
we investigated the effectiveness of top management ac-
tions and corporateethical codes in reducing ethical con-
flict, as well as the extent to which our professional eth-
ical codes address the major ethical problems.
METHOD
The data we report are from a larger study examining
marketing ethics, Machiavellianism, and attitudes to-
ward the job by means of a self-administered question-
naire sent to 4282 marketing practitioners. These indi-
viduals represented a systematic sample of one of every
 PROBLEMS
ETHICAL 311

four marketingpractitionersin the AmericanMarketing Table 1

Association.As our focus was on the ethical problems CHARACTERISTICS
OF SAMPLEa
of researchersemployedeitherby marketresearchagen-
cies or by businessorganizationsas "in-house"research- Characteristic %
ers, educatorsandstudentswere excludedfromthe sam- Typeof organization
ple frame. The questionnairewas pretested with a 1. In-houseresearchers 75
conveniencesampleof 200 marketers(also obtainedfrom 2. Agencyresearchers 25
the AMA directory).The final set of mailings, sent in Job title
1. Junioranalyst 6
the summerof 1982, consistedof the questionnaireit- 2. Analyst 29
self, a cover letter, a stamped,pre-addressedreply en- 3. Assistantmanager/director 12
velope, a prenotificationpostcardsent one week before 4. Manager/director 33
the questionnaire, and a followuppostcardsent one week 5. Vice president 13
afterthe questionnaire. 6. President,owner 7
Size of firm
A total of 1076 usable questionnaireswere returned, 1. 1 1
for a responserateof 25.1%. Responseratesat this level 2. 2 to 9 5
arenot uncommonwhen marketingpractitioners are used 3. 10 to 19 5
as a sample. For example, Myers, Massy, and Greyser 4. 20 to 49 7
5. 50 to 99 4
(1980) obtaineda responserateof 28.5% in theirsurvey 6. 100 to 249 10
of the AmericanMarketingAssociationmembership,and 7. 250 to 499 9
a straightforward membershipsurvey of AMA practi- 8. 500 to 999 10
tionersconductedby the Associationproducedonly a 9. 1000 or more 49
41% response rate (American MarketingAssociation Educationlevel
1. No college degree 4
1982). These studies had the sponsorshipof either or 2. Bachelor's 34
boththe AmericanMarketingAssociationand the Mar- 3. Master's 58
ketingScience Institutewhereasour studyhad no spon- 4. Doctorate 4
sorshipotherthanour universityaffiliation.This differ- Sex
ence probablyaccountsfor our lower responserate. 1. Male 59
2. Female 41
Fromthe total of 1076 usable questionnaires,the re- Maritalstatus
sponsesof the 460 individualswho identifiedthemselves 1. Married 65
(in the questionnaire)as marketingresearchersconstitute 2. Single 35
the database for our analysis.The characteristicsof the Income
1. Less than$10,000 1
sample(Table 1) indicatethat respondentshave varied 2. $10,000 to $19,999 9
educational backgrounds but, as expected,almostall have 3. $20,000 to $29,999 28
college degrees.The sampleincludesboth in-houseand 4. $30,000 to $39,999 25
marketresearchagency researchersemployedby firms 5. $40,000 to $49,999 17
6. $50,000 to $59,999 9
rangingin size fromone to morethan 1000 employees. 7. $60,000 to $69,999 4
Advertisingagency researchersare not in the sample. 8. $70,000 to $79,999 3
Also, the respondentsspan a wide range of ages, in- 9. $80,000 to $89,999 1
comes, andjob titles. 10. $90,000 to $99,999 1
11. $100,000 or more 3
RESULTS Age
1. 20-29 24
Ethical Problems 2. 30-39 38
3. 40-49 19
Our first researchquestion is, "Whatare the major 4. 50-59 15
ethical problems of marketingresearchers?"The ab- 5. 60 or more 4
sence of previousresearchon this questionnecessitated Majorfield of study
an exploratoryresearchprocedure.Marketingresearch- 1. Generalbusiness 19b
2. Business-marketing 23
ers were asked to respondin an open-endedmannerto 3. Business-accounting 1
the followingquestion. 4. Business-management 1
In all professions(e.g., law, medicine, education, ac- 5. Business-statistics 3
6. Business-finance 1
counting,marketing,etc.), managersare exposed to at 7. Engineering 4
least some situationsthat pose a moralor ethical prob- 8. Othertechnical
lem. Wouldyou please brieflydescribethe job situation (e.g. physics) 10
thatposes the mostdifficultethicalor moralproblemfor 9. Social studies 21
you? 10. Humanities 9
11. Other(e.g., education) 8
Thesubjectof ethics is alwaysa sensitiveresearchtopic. aN = 460.
Pretestsindicatedthat many respondentsbelieved (mis- bManyof these are probablymarketingmajorswho simply speci-
takenly)that the purposeof the researchwas to single fied "Bachelor'sdegreein business."
312 JOURNALOF MARKETING AUGUST1984
RESEARCH,

out marketingas uniquein havingethicalproblems.Re- any manager.Issues such as personnelproblems,gifts,

spondentsseemedmuchmorewilling to answerthe eth-
ics questionwhenit was precededby the "desensitizing"
firststatement.The responseratewas 55%on the open-
endedquestion.
As is consistentwith ethical theory, the ethical prob-
lems identifiedby respondentswere coded accordingto
the differentissues and conflicts involved. Two inde-
pendentjudges coded all 254 responsesand, thoughthe
codingof open-endedquestionsinherentlyinvolves sub-
jectivity, the interjudgereliabilitywas 95% for issues
and94%for conflicts. Categorieswere developedto be
as consistentas possible with the AmericanMarketing
Associationcode of ethics.
Tables2, 3, and4 displaythe resultsfor ethicalissues
and conflicts. The ethical issue most often indicatedby
bothmarketingresearchagencyandin-houseresearchers
involvesproblemswith researchintegrity(Table2). Note
that the questionposed to respondentsdid not restrict
them exclusively to ethical problemsin the practice of
marketingresearch.Therefore,thoughthe firstfour eth-
ical issues relate directlyto respondents'activities qua
researchers,severalotherscould be ethicalproblemsfor
bribes, and entertainment,and the misuse of funds are
not uniquelymarketingresearchethical issues.
The most often reportedethical conflict of in-house
researchersis attemptingto balancethe reseacher'sself-
interestagainstthe researcher'sresponsibilitiesto clients
withinone's own company(Table3). Similarly,the eth-
ical conflictmost often indicatedby marketingresearch
agency respondentsis attemptingto balance one's re-
sponsibilitiesto a clientoutsidethe companyagainstone's
companyresponsibilities(Table4). We discuss each of
the majorethical issues in turn.
Researchintegrity.The firstcategoryaccountsfor 33%
of all responsesand includessuch items as deliberately
withholdinginformation,falsifying figures, alteringre-
searchresults,misusingstatistics,ignoringpertinentdata,
compromisingthe design of a researchproject,and mis-
interpreting the resultsof a researchprojectwith the ob-
jective supportinga predeterminedpersonalor cor-
of
poratepoint of view. All of these practiceshave the
commonthemeof deliberateproductionof dishonestor
less-than-completely-honest research.We label the cat-
egory "research integrity,"because any dishonestyin re-

Table 2
ISSUESIN MARKETING
ETHICAL RESEARCHa

In-house researchers' Agency researchers' Total

frequencyb frequencyb frequencyb AMA New York
Issue No. % No. % No. % coded AMA code'
1. Researchintegrity 62 31 37 37 99 33 A1,Bl, A1,2,3,4
C1 B1,2,3,4
2. Treatingoutside
clientsfairly 15 8 16 16 31 11 - A5,6
C1,3
3. Researchconfidentiality 15 8 12 12 27 9 B2,3 C2
4. Marketingmix
social issues 17 9 6 6 23 8 - D4,E
5. Personnel issues 14 7 6 6 20 7
6. Treatingrespondentsfairly 17 9 2 2 19 6 A2 D1,2,3
7. Treatingothersin
companyfairly 11 6 1 1 12 4 -A5,6
C1,3
8. Interviewerdishonesty 1 1 9 9 10 3 D1,2,3,4 B3
9. Gifts, bribes,and
entertainment 6 3 2 2 8 3
10. Treating suppliers fairly 8 4 - - 8 3 - C4
11. Legal issues 8 4 - - 8 3
12. Misuseof funds 5 3 1 1 6 2
13. Other 17 9 7 7 24 8
n = 196 102 n = 99 99 n = 295 100
to
aResponse open-endedquestion: "In all professions(e.g., law, medicine,education,accounting,marketing,etc.), managersare exposed to
at least some situationsthat pose a moralor ethical problem.Would you please briefly describethe job situationthat poses the most difficult
ethicalor moralproblemfor you?"
bThoughrespondentswere asked to describeonly one ethical problem,38 respondentsdescribedtwo coequal problemsand one respondent
describedthreecoequalproblems.Therefore,n is the numberof problemsdescribedby all valid responses,i.e., 254 respondentsdescribed295
problems (n = 295).
cIssuesare rankedby total frequency.Spearmanrankordercorrelation= .09 n.s.
dSectionof AMA (national)code addressingthis issue (See AppendixA for key).
'Sectionof AMA (New YorkChapter)code addressingthis issue (See AppendixB for key).
ETHICAL
PROBLEMS 313

Table 3 must be very tactful and diplomatic-use finesse. Suc-

ETHICAL
CONFLICTS
REPORTED
BYIN-HOUSE cessful marketing researchers within a company are usu-
RESEARCHERSa ally extensions of management. Firms should always use
independent research facilities if they want the straight
story. I could write a book on this subject. When a bad
Rank Party one Party two No. % decision is made by management, it becomes very dif-
1 Self Clientwithin 24 12 ficult for the marketing personnel. You either support the
2 Self Company 18 9 decision halfheartedly, support the decision and offer al-
3 Company Society 13 7 ternatives, or look for another job. It is tough to be in a
4 Self Management 13 7 position where you criticize management. Much market-
5 Company Management 12 6
6 12 6 ing research is only "eye wash" for the wholesale buyers
Company Competitors to convince them that the product is indeed needed and
7 Company Suppliers 11 6
8 Outsideclients 10 5 will sell in volume-almost a "fraudulent" situation.
Company
9 Self Co-workers 10 5
Otherconflictsb 73 37 Another in-house researcher reported, "[I] refused to
196 100 alter research results and as a result I was eventually
'Read: "Thenumberone ethical conflict reportedby in-housere- fired for failure to think strategically." A sporting goods
searcherswas attemptingto balanceone's self-interestswith the in- marketing research manager described passing off "soft
terestsof clients withinone's own company." data" as "hard."
bOfthese otherconflicts, eight accountedfor 43 reportedinstances
(22%): company-customer(8 instances), company-respondent (7), Managers, wishing to provide backup for their proposals
company-co-worker(6), self-outside client (5), self-respondent(5), and/or analyses of some situation, ask me to "estimate"
company-subordinate (4), management-outsideclient (4), and co- the dollars, percentage, etc. They then put these gross
worker-outsideclient (4). Eighteenotherconflictrelationshipsmade
estimates, guesses and sometimes completely fake fig-
up the remaining30 instances(15%). ures into their reports with two decimal accuracy! They
do this ratherthan defend their opinions as "my best busi-
search compromises its fundamental integrity. This ness judgment" and admit we can't afford or haven't had
the time to do an actual study. I generally comply [with
interpretation is consistent with Blankenship's (1964) these requests] making clear how later reliance on these
description of integrity (p. 26). numbers may cause poor decisions and warn that if it ever
Integrity is a voluntary, spontaneous, positive form of comes to it, I will freely admit how the numbers were
honesty, where one takes initiative in being honest, being derived! If the president of the company had any back-
almost aggressive about it. The person with integrity says bone and a better understandingof all the "guessing" that
or stands up for what he thinks is right without waiting goes into our reports to our corporate parent. But who is
for anyone to ask him how he feels. going to tell him? The issue can easily be positioned as
just a matter of opinion as to these being educated esti-
For example, a consumer goods marketing services di- mates or a snow job to avoid having to put one's neck
rector reported a conflict between his own self-interests on the line when there's little to go on but "seat of the
for honest research and pressures from management for pants" judgment.
research that would support a particular decision.
As an example of a research integrity issue for an
Market research is a treacherous business-one that puts agency researcher, one respondent reported a conflict
you in a position to second-guess top management. You between self-interest for an honest project and the de-
sires of the client: "when a client requests a methodology
Table 4 or procedure that will guarantee the results he wants."
ETHICAL
CONFLICTS BYAGENCY
REPORTED Finally, an agency executive vice president described a
research integrity problem involving errors in study de-
RESEARCHERSa
sign.
Rank Party one Party two No. % The most difficult moral problem is how to handle a sit-
1 Outsideclient 35 35 uation in which our company has made a mistake in study
Company
2 Outsideclient Self 24 24 design (or in study execution) which results in obtaining
3 Outsideclient Society 8 8 results that are unreliable or invalid. We try to bury the
4 Outsideclient Outsideclient 7 7 mistake and concentrate on the valid parts of the study
5 Outsideclient Competitor 6 6 in those results.
6 Company Subordinate 5 5
Other conflictsb 14 14
Treating outside clientsfairly. The second-ranked eth-
99 99 ical issue involves clients outside one's own company
'Read: "The numberone ethical conflict reportedby researchers and is labeled "treating outside clients fairly." One re-
workingat a marketingresearchagencywas attemptingto balancethe searcher reported that "hidden charges are often passed
interestsof the client with the interestsof one's agency."
'Theseotherconflictrelationshipsincludedself-company(2), out- on to the customer and reversed only if the customer
side client-management(2), self-management(2), outside client- complains." An agency researcher reported a conflict
supplier(2), and six otherconflictsnoted only once each. between company interests and outside client interests
314
when "requiring subcontractors to follow all specifica-
tions demanded by our clients, especially when costs are
running higher than estimated. Must decide to overlook
validation problems or require questionnaire replace-
ment." Many of the conflicts involve pricing in some
way, as illustrated by the problem of an agency senior
consultant.
Our firm encouragesus to sell clients retainer-typeser-
vices, ratherthan fixed-pricecontracts.Under the "re-
tainer-type"situation,clients are chargedhowevermany
hoursit takes to completea study and more often than
not this turnsout to be more expensive(thancontracts).
Whatto do? Recommendthe "retainer" or act in the best
interestsof the client and recommendthe contractap-
proach?
Confidentiality. Marketing researchers often have ac-
cess to data that are in some sense confidential. The pro-
tection of these data sources is the third most often iden-
tified ethical issue. Sometimes a researcher must balance
what is fair to a competitor with what is best for one's
own company.
Competitiveintelligence;whatis an ethicalversusuneth-
ical sourceof information.Forexampleif I receivea con-
fidential document from a competitorregardingtheir
pricingand exceptionschedules.It is informationgiven
by an unethicalemployee of anotherbank. Should one
supressthe informationor "publish"it to field manage-
ment?
Other in-house researchers discussed balancing the in-
terests of different clients in the same corporation. For
example, a research manager for an insurance company
reported, "Since the corporation has several related sub-
sidiaries, occasionally the research I do for one subsid-
iary may be beneficial to another subsidiary or to the
field sales force. The proprietary nature of the findings
must be respected in most cases in spite of pressures
placed on us by the field or other subsidiaries."
Most of the confidentiality issues for agency research-
ers arise when they try to balance their obligations to-
ward different outside clients. As one researcher put it,
"Wheredoes 'backgroundknowledge' stop and conflicts
exist [as a result of work with a previous client]?" An-
other agency researcher discussed the issue in more de-
tail.
I get involved in a numberof proprietarystudies. The
problemthatoften arisesis thatsome studiesend up cov-
eringsimilarsubjectmatteras previousstudies.Ourcode
of ethics statesthatyou cannotuse datafromone project
in a relatedprojectfor a competitor.However, since I
often know some informationabout an area, I end up
compromisingmy original client. Even though upper
managementformallystates that it should not be done,
they also expect it to be done to cut down on expenses.
This conflictof interestsituationis difficultto deal with.
At least in my firm, I don't see a resolutionto the issue.
It is not a one time situation,but rathera process that
perpetuatesitself. To make individualsredo portionsof
studieswhich have recentlybeen done, is ludicrous,and
JOURNALOF MARKETING AUGUST1984
RESEARCH,
to forgopotentialnew businessis almostimpossiblefrom
a financialperspective.
Social issues and marketing mix. The fourth ethical
issue pertains to social issues related to various com-
ponents of the marketing mix. Conflict most often in-
volves balancing the interests of society with the inter-
ests of the company in the context of either product
decisions or advertising decisions. Several respondents
mentioned "advertising to children" as being the number
one ethical issue. Others simply responded "advertising
products I don't believe in." An agency account exec-
utive mentioned "conductingresearch for companies that
produce products which are hazardous to one's health-
for instance, certain chemicals, cigarettes, etc." One
agency directorcriticized trivial products in general: "My
company must aid the manufacturers who are flooding
the nation with useless (or worse) products, so my com-
pany can survive to perform our other more socially ben-
eficial work (which is also profitable but not of great
volume)."
Personnel decisions form the fifth set of ethical issues.
Ethical issues in hiring and firing employees are most
troublesome. Researchers experienced conflict in their
attempts to balance their responsibilities to both em-
ployees and potential employees against their company
responsibilities. For example, one agency branch man-
ager reported "telling a person who is over-qualified but
received improper training and can't be hired. The in-
dividual is usually an older person with set ideas and
ways." Another agency president reported that his most
difficult ethical problem is "firing/releasing older em-
ployees who have become very poor workers."
Treating respondents fairly is the sixth most impor-
tant ethical issue. It often stems from temptations to con-
ceal from the respondent the purpose or the sponsor of
the research. Protecting the anonymity of the respondent
also poses problems. The ethical conflict usually centers
on the researcher's attempts to balance the interests of
the respondent against the interests of the company. For
example, a research manager for a publishing company
indicated her major problem as "concealing my firm's
identity and involvement when doing research." Another
reported having "been asked to misrepresent myself for
the sake of unbiased information-which I have re-
fused." Finally, an analyst for an industrial goods com-
pany reported:
Often in getting competitive data, such as unit sales,
productcharacteristics,etc., it is temptingto call the
competitor'sfunctionalpeople underfalse pretenses(en-
gineers,sales-marketing people, plantmanagement,etc.).
I have called for existing productinformation(not up-
comingintroductions)using my own identity.I have also
called without giving my name (if the other party de-
mandedto know who he was talkingto I've hung up or
somehowside-steppedthe question).
Other issues. The final six sets of issues, in order, are:
treating others in the company fairly, interviewer dis-
 PROBLEMS
ETHICAL
honesty, gifts, bribes, and entertainment,treatingsup-
pliersfairly, legal issues, and the misuse of funds. The
"othersin the company"categoryincludesissues related
to peer relationshipsand conductingresearchto make
othersin the firm look bad. Interviewerdishonestyin-
volves suchissues as falsifyingdataand interviewerbias.
Respondentsindicatedpressuresfrom customersto give
gifts to securebusinessand pressuresfrom suppliersto
accept gifts for additionalbusiness. Treatingsuppliers
fairly often centerson the problemof personalfriends
wantingto be given specialtreatment.Legal issues usu-
ally involve problemsof talkingwith competitorsabout
pricing. The misuse of funds includes "padding"ex-
pense accountsand questionable"slush"funds.
ProfessionalCodes of Ethics
Our secondresearchquestionis, "To what extent do
ourprofessionalcodes of conductaddressthe majoreth-
ical problemsof marketingresearchers?" AppendicesA
and B reproducethe AmericanMarketingAssociation
nationalcode of conductfor marketingresearchand the
code of conductproposedby the New York Chapterof
the AmericanMarketingAssociation.The last two col-
umns in Table 2 indicatethe sections of each code that
apply to each of the majorethical issues of marketing
researchers.
The nationalcode of the AMA has sections which in
some way addressthe issues of researchintegrity,con-
fidentiality,treatingrespondentsfairly, and interviewer
dishonesty.However, it does not have sections govern-
ing the treatmentof outsideclients, marketingmix social
issues, personnelissues, the treatmentof others in the
company,gifts, bribes,andentertainment,the treatment
of suppliers,legal issues, and the misuseof funds. Rea-
sonableargumentscan be advancedthatpersonnelissues
and the misuse of funds are topics that belong in cor-
poratecodes of conduct, but not professionalcodes of
conduct.Nevertheless,there seems to be ample oppor-
tunityandjustificationfor addressingsome of the other
issues in our professionalcode of conduct.
Thecode of ethicsproposedby the New YorkChapter
of theAMAis muchlongerandconsequently coversmany
more of the major issues delineatedin Table 2. The
treatmentof two issues is conspicuouslyabsent:gifts,
bribes, and entertainmentand legal issues. These two
issues might warrantinclusionin the code proposedby
the New YorkChapter.Note thatBrennarandMolander
(1977, p. 62) found "gifts, gratuities,'call girls,' and
bribes"to be the numberone ethical problemin busi-
ness.
Extentof EthicalProblems
The precedingdiscussionfocuses on the most difficult
ethicalproblemsfacing marketingresearchersin terms
of issues and conflicts. Though many differentethical
issues areidentified,maintainingresearchintegrityis by
far the most often reported.Ourthirdresearchquestion
is, "Howextensivearethe ethicalproblemsof marketing
315
researchers?" Table5 shows the resultsof 10 items spe-
cificallydirectedat assessingthe extentof ethicalprob-
lems perceivedby marketingresearchers.The items are
groupedin termsof respondents'perceptionsof (1) the
frequencyof unethicalbehaviors(Al and A2), (2) the
opportunitiesfor unethicalbehaviors(B1 and B2), (3)
the relationshipbetweensuccess andgenerallyunethical
behavior(C1 and C2), and (4) the relationshipbetween
successandspecificunethicalbehaviors(Dl throughD4).
ItemsD3 and D4 are comparablewith two items found
to be unethicalby Ferrelland Weaver(1978). ItemsD1
and D2 were generatedin the exploratoryphase of the
project.
The descriptivestatisticsin Table5 revealthata large
proportion(almosthalf) of ourrespondentsbelieve man-
agers in their respectivecompanieshave ample oppor-
tunitiesto engage in unethicalbehaviors.Nevertheless,
only a small percentage(18% of in-house researchers
and 15%of agency researchers)believe that managers
in theircompaniesfrequentlyengage in such behaviors.
The comparablefiguresare muchhigherwhen research-
ers refer to industrybehaviorratherthan companybe-
havior. Seventy-onepercentof our agency researchers
believe managersin theirindustryhave manyopportun-
ities to engage in unethicalbehaviorsand 44% believe
that researchersin their industryoften engage in such
behaviors.Similarly, 58% of in-house researchersbe-
lieve managersin theirindustryhave manyopportunities
to engage in unethicalbehaviorsand 27% believe that
managersin their industryoften engage in such behav-
iors.
Though the opportunityfor and the frequency of
unethicalbehaviorsare important,the relationshipbe-
tween success and unethicalbehaviorsis probablycru-
cial. If researchersbelieve unethicalbehaviorsare nec-
essaryfor successin marketingresearch,suchperceptions
would be powerful motivatorsfor unethicalbehavior.
Items C1 and C2 show only a small percentageof re-
searchers(eitherin-house or agency) believe it is nec-
essaryto compromiseone's ethics to succeedor believe
successfulmanagersin their companiesare less ethical
thanunsuccessfulmanagers.However, the findings are
somewhatdifferentwhen specificunethicalbehaviorsare
the stimuli.Items D1 throughD4 examinethe relation-
ship between success and the specific unethicalbehav-
iors of (1) withholdinginformationdetrimentalto self-
interests,(2) makingrivals look bad in the eyes of oth-
ers, (3) looking for "scapegoats"for a failure, and (4)
takingcreditfor the ideas and accomplishmentsof oth-
ers. In comparisonwith the generalsuccess items, each
of these items shows a largerpercentageof researchers
believe successfulmanagersengage in these behaviors.
In-houseresearchersdiffer significantlyfrom agency
researcherson each of the specific unethicalbehaviors.
Higherproportionsof in-houseresearchersbelieve that
successfulmanagersin their companiesengage in such
behaviors.Almost half of all in-house researchersbe-
lieve that successful managersin their companies (1)
316 JOURNALOF MARKETINGRESEARCH,AUGUST 1984

Table5
EXTENTOF ETHICALPROBLEMSIN MARKETINGRESEARCH

In-house researchersa Agency researchersb Totalc

% agreed Mean' S.D. % agree Mean S.D. % agree Mean S.D.
A. Frequency of unethical behaviors
1. Marketingmanagersin my COMPANY
oftenengagein behaviorsthatI consider
to be unethical 18 5.1 1.6 15 5.3 1.6 17 5.1 1.6
2. Marketingmanagersin my INDUSTRY
oftenengagein behaviorsthatI consider
to be unethical 27 4.48 1.5 44 3.7g 1.5 31 4.2 1.5
B. Opportunitiesfor unethical behaviors
1. There are many opportunitiesfor mar-
keting managersin my COMPANYto
engagein unethicalbehaviors 43 3.9 1.7 44 3.8 1.7 43 3.9 1.7
2. Thereare many opportunitiesfor mar-
keting managersin my INDUSTRYto
engagein unethicalbehaviors 58 3.49 1.5 71 2.98 1.6 61 3.3 1.5
C. Success and unethical behaviors
1. Successful marketingmanagersin my
COMPANYare generallymore unethi-
cal thanunsuccessfulmanagers 14 4.7 1.4 13 5.0 1.7 13 4.8 1.5
2. In orderto succeed in my COMPANY
it is oftennecessaryto compromiseone's
ethics 15 5.38 1.5 12 5.8g 1.6 15 5.5 1.6
D. Success and specific unethical behaviors
1. Successful managersin my company
withholdinformationthatis detrimental
to theirself-interests 47 3.6g 1.5 21 4.7g 1.6 40 3.9 1.6
2. Successful managersin my company
makerivalslook bad in the eyes of im-
portantpeople in my company 26 4.39 1.5 15 5.48 1.6 23 4.6 1.6
3. Successfulmanagersin my companylook
for a "scapegoat"when they feel they
may be associatedwith failure 37 4.28 1.7 16 4.9g 1.7 32 4.3 1.7
4. Successfulmanagersin my companytake
creditfor the ideasandaccomplishments
of others 50 3.68 1.5 26 4.68 1.6 44 3.8 1.6
E. Top management actions and unethical behavic)rs
1. Topmanagementin my companyhas let
it be knownin no uncertainterms that
unethicalbehaviorswill not be tolerated 58 3.2 1.8 64 3.2 2.2 60 3.2 1.9
2. If a managerin my companyis discov-
ered to have engaged in unethicalbe-
haviorthatresultsprimarilyin personal
gain (ratherthancorporategain) he will
be promptlyreprimanded 66 2.8 1.4 72 2.7 1.7 68 2.8 1.5
3. If a managerin my companyis discov-
ered to have engaged in unethicalbe-
havior that results in primarilycorpo-
rate gain (ratherthanpersonalgain) he
will be promptlyreprimanded 49 3.3 1.5 65 3.1 1.9 53 3.3 1.6
'N = 343.
bN = 117.
CN= 460.
dPercentresponding"slightlyagree," "agree,"or "stronglyagree."
'On a 7-pointscale with 1 = "stronglyagree"and 7 = "stronglydisagree."
fThis item was reverse-phrased in the questionnaire,i.e., "moreethical."
gDifferencessignificantat .01 level by t-tests.

withholdinformationthat would be detrimentalto their problems of marketing researchers?" To examine this

self-interestsand (2) take credit for the ideas and ac-
complishmentsof others.
Top Management Actions
The fourth research question is, "How effective are
the actions of top management in reducing the ethical
question we needed measures of (1) the extent of ethical
problems and (2) the extent of top management actions.
As no scale existed for measuring the extent of ethical
problems of marketing researchers, a scale was devel-
oped. Table 6 shows the factor analysis of Items Al,
B1, C1, C2, D1, D2, D3, and D4 from Table 5, all of
ETHICAL
PROBLEMS
which relate to perceived ethical problems in the re-
spondent's company. The factor analysis shows a one-
factor solution with all eight items loading in excess of
0.3 on the single factor. Coefficient alpha for the eight
items is 0.82. Therefore, for exploratory purposes these
items can be treated as a single scale measuring the la-
tent construct "ethical problems of marketing research-
ers."
Measuring the actions of top management also neces-
sitated scale development. Items El, E2, and E3 in Ta-
ble 5 address the kinds of behaviors that writers previ-
ously have suggested should be undertaken by top
management. That is, "unethical behaviors will not be
tolerated" and unethical behaviors will be "promptly
reprimanded."The factor analysis in Table 7 shows all
three items loading on a single factor in a one-factor so-
lution. Coefficient alpha for the three items is 0.74, sug-
gesting that the three items can be appropriatelyconsid-
ered a scale measuring the latent construct "top
management actions."
Writershave suggested that top managementalso should
establish corporate codes of conduct to curb unethical
actions. Therefore, we asked whether the respondents'
companies and industries had established formal codes
of conduct. Twenty-four percent of in-house researchers
and 61% of agency researchers reported industry codes
of ethics. Similarly, 46% and 21%, respectively, indi-
cated company codes of ethics. The smaller figure for
agency codes probably reflects the fact that most re-
search agencies are smaller than the corporations that
employ in-house researchers and thus are less likely to
have company codes.
Table 8 shows the regression results with the factor
Table 6
FACTOR
ANALYSIS
OF ETHICAL
PROBLEMS
SCALEa
Factor 1
Item
loading
1. Marketingmanagersin my companyoftenengagein
behaviorsthatI considerto be unethical 0.58
2. There are many opportunitiesfor marketingman-
agersin my companyto engage in unethicalbehav-
iors 0.33
3. Successfulmarketingmanagersin my companyare
generallymoreethicalthanunsuccessfulmanagersb 0.41
4. In orderto succeedin my companyit is often nec-
essaryto compromiseone's ethics 0.64
5. Successfulmanagersin my companywithholdin-
formationthatis detrimentalto theirself-interests 0.68
6. Successfulmanagersin my companymakerivalslook
bad in the eyes of importantpeople in my company 0.82
7. Successful managersin my company look for a
"scapegoat"when they feel they may be associated
with failure 0.77
8. Successfulmanagersin my companytake creditfor
the ideas and accomplishments of others
0.65
Eigenvalue3.2
% varianceexplained40%
Coefficientalpha = 0.82
'Principalaxis.
bItemwas reverse-scored.
317
Table 7
FACTOR
ANALYSIS
OF TOPMANAGEMENT
ACTIONSSCALEa
Factor 1
Item loading
1. Topmanagementin my companyhas let it be known
in no uncertaintermsthat unethicalbehaviorswill
not be tolerated 0.49
2. If a managerin my companyis discoveredto have
engagedin unethicalbehaviorthatresultsprimarily
in personalgain (ratherthancorporategain) he will
be promptlyreprimanded 0.70
3. If a managerin my companyis discoveredto have
engaged in unethicalbehaviorthat results in pri-
marilycorporategain (ratherthanpersonalgain) he
will be promptlyreprimanded 0.99
Eigenvalue1.71
% varianceexplained57%
Coefficientalpha = 0.74
"Principalaxis.
scores on the ethical problems scale as the dependent
variable. Preliminary analyses indicated that both the re-
spondent's title and industry were related significantly
to the extent of ethical problems. That is, presidents and
vice-presidents were less likely to see problems than an-
alysts and junior analysts. Similarly, the agency re-
searchers perceived fewer problems than in-house re-
searchers. Therefore, both "title" and "industry" were
entered as control variables in the regression.
On the basis of other researchers' suggestions, we ex-
pected that specific actions by top management to en-
courage ethical behavior and discourage unethical be-
havior would decrease the extent of ethical problems
perceivedby marketingresearchers.The results show that,
of the variables we examined, the actions of top man-
agement are the single best predictor of perceived ethical
problems of marketing researchers, explaining 15% of
the total variance. (Obviously, with 75% unexplained
variance, there may be other factors which taken indi-
vidually explain more than 15% of the variance.)
A corporate code of ethics made no difference in the
respondents' perceptions of ethical problems. The sim-
ple correlation between ethical problems and a corporate
code of ethics is not significant, nor is the beta coeffi-
cient in the regression. Similarly, though there is a sig-
nificant negative simple correlation between an industry
code of ethics and the extent of ethical problems, the
fact that the relationship is nonsignificant in the regres-
sion equation suggests a spurious correlation.
DISCUSSION AND LIMITATIONS
Readers should be mindful that our research involved
an "insiders"ratherthan an "outsiders" research design.
Actual researchers were the respondents instead of other
potentially interested parties (e.g., consumers, consumer
advocates, corporate managers, interviewing agency
personnel, academic marketing researchers). Such out-
side parties might view the major problems differently.
318
Table 8
DETERMINANTS
REGRESSION: OF ETHICAL
PROBLEMSa
Simple
Independentvariable correlation
Titleb -.259
Industry' -.249
Top managementactionsd -.429
Industry code of ethics' -.178
Corporatecode of ethicsf +.06
Constant = 7.22
R2 = .25
F = 28.18
aDependent variableis factorscore on ethicalproblemsscale (see Table 6). Highernumbersindicatemore problems.
bHighnumbersare highertitles thanlow numbers(see Table 1 for categories).
cResearchers workingfor a marketingresearchagency are 1, othersare 0.
dFactorscoreson top managementactionsscale (see Table 7). Highernumbersindicatemore actionsby top management.
'Dummyvariablewith 1 as presenceof an industrycode of ethics.
fDummyvariablewith 1 as presenceof a corporatecode of ethics.
gSignificantat .01 level.
hSignificantat .05 level.
The finding that maintaining research integrity is by
farthe mostdifficultethicalissue of marketingresearch-
ers shouldbe interpretedcarefully.Recall thatthe ques-
tionwas to "describethejob situationthatposes the most
difficultethical or moral problemfor you." The most
difficultethicalproblemis not the same as the problem
that occurs mostfrequently. Nor does "most difficult"
necessarilyimply that the problemoccurs regularlyor
withgreatfrequency.Nevertheless,given the tone of the
respondents'comments,the resultssuggestthatmarket-
ing researchersperceive significantproblemsin main-
tainingthe integrityof theirmarketingresearch.
Agency researcherscited "treatingoutsideclients"as
a difficultethical issue more frequently(16% vs. 8%)
thanin-houseresearchers.In ourclassification,when an
in-houseresearcherdid a projectfor a separatedivision
of the companythe workwas classifiedas thoughit were
done for an outsideclient. As most agency researchin-
volves a transferof services from one firm to another,
ourresultis not surprising.Similarly,in-houseresearch-
ers seem moreconcernedabouttreatingrespondentsand
othersin the companyfairly. These researchersengage
in researchin whichorganizationpeersare respondents.
Questionsof anonymity,fairness,and the like are more
importantto them becausetheir respondentsare people
they are likely to know throughtheirwork experience.
The substantiveimportof the findingson ethicalcon-
flicts (Tables3 and 4) lies as much in what we did not
find as what we did. Many writerson ethical problems
in marketingresearchhave focused almost exclusively
on conflictsinvolvingrespondents.Forexample,Tybout
andZaltman(1975) devoteall theirattentionto the rights
of subjectsin the researchprocessandcall for additional
researchon the "conflictsbetweenclient rightsand sub-
ject rightswith respectto ethical issues and their reso-
lution"(p. 236). We did not find many researchersin-
dicating fundamentalconflicts involving the rights of
JOURNALOF MARKETING AUGUST1984
RESEARCH,
Increment Standardized
to R2 beta coefficient t
.06 -.10 2.2h
.03 -.16 3.49
.15 -.39 9.28
.00 -.07 1.6
.00 +.05 1.0
respondentsor subjectsused in marketingresearch.Only
12 in-houseresearchersand one agency researcherre-
portedthese kinds of conflicts (see footnotes, Tables 3
and4).
Ourfindingsat least partiallysupportthe position of
Day (1975), who questionedthe usefulnessof restricting
discussionsof researchethics to conflicts involving re-
spondents.He called for broaderstudies(alongthe lines
of our researchproject)by pointingout, "Whatis per-
haps more interesting,and possibly of greatersignifi-
cance to the value of marketingresearch,is the ethics
or moralityof the researcherwith respect to the inter-
pretationof data from survey work" (p. 233). He con-
tinuedby suggesting,"Thereare few fields of scientific
activitythat are as susceptibleto fraudas some aspects
of consumerresearch"(p. 233). Day's referencesto the
problemsof "interpretation of data" and "fraud"are
consistentwith our findingthatmaintainingresearchin-
tegrity is the most difficult ethical problemfacing re-
searchers.
The resultsin Table 5, comparingcompanybehavior
with industrybehavior,are consistentwith researchon
marketers'perceptionsof the ethics of theirpeers in the
same company.Ferrelland Weaver(1978) investigated
the ethicalbeliefs of 280 marketingmanagersbelonging
to the AmericanMarketingAssociation.They concluded
that"respondentsbelieve thatthey makedecisionsin an
organizationalenvironmentwhere peers and top man-
agementhavelowerethicalstandardsthantheirown" (p.
72). Similarly,we find that marketingresearchersbe-
lieve they makedecisionsin an environmentwheretheir
peers in otherfirms have lower ethical standards.
In comparisonwith agency researchers,why do more
in-houseresearchersconsistentlyreport (Table 5) that
successfulmanagersin their companiesengage in spe-
cific unethicalpractices?The explanationmay lie in the
natureof the practicesand the size of the organization.
ETHICAL
PROBLEMS
These specific practices may be more prevalent in bu-
reaucracies with many organizational levels. Marketing
research agencies are likely to be smaller and have fewer
organizational levels than the corporations where the in-
house researchers work. Thus, the specific unethical
practices are less likely to lead to success in the less
bureaucraticallyoriented agencies.
Several factors may explain the findings in Table 5
that researchers perceive success and unethical behavior
in general to be unrelated but perceive a relationship be-
tween success and specific unethical behaviors. Re-
searchers may perceive that success and unethical be-
havior are related, but are unwilling to admit the
relationship (even to themselves). Another possible ex-
planation is that the specific unethical behaviors selected
for our research were perceived to be only moderately
unethical. That is, when researchers were responding to
items C1 and C2, they were thinking of more serious
breaches of ethics than the kinds of unethical behaviors
specifically identified in items D1 through D4. There-
fore, if the unethicalbehaviors had spanned a wider range
of severity, the results might have been different. Fi-
nally, the findings may be an artifact of the way the
questions were constructed. Items C1 and C2 had, re-
spectively, the qualifiers "generally" and "often." Be-
cause items D1 through D4 had no such qualifiers, re-
spondents may have interpreted them differently.
Nevertheless, the factor analysis showed all six items
loading on the same factor (Table 6) and therefore the
evidence suggests that respondents viewed all six items
similarly.
Why did corporate codes of ethics seem to make no
differencein the extent of ethical problems?Fulmer (1969)
reviewed problem areas in corporate codes of ethics and
identifiedseveral consistentweaknesses. Prominentamong
these weaknesses were (1) vagueness, (2) the assump-
tion of automatic acceptance of provisions, (3) the as-
sumption that codes, once drafted, need never be re-
vised, and (4) incorrect assumptions about what are the
important ethical problems. Though corporate research
codes may have any or all of these problems, the last
weakness may be particularly relevant to marketing re-
search. Perhaps corporate codes for research are simply
not addressing the salient issues.
CONCLUSIONSAND RECOMMENDATIONS
Our findings suggest nine conclusions. The first three
relate to our first research question. Conclusions four
throughsix pertainto our thirdquestion, conclusions seven
and eight to our fourth question, and conclusion nine to
our second question.
1. The most difficultethical problemfacing marketingre-
searchersis maintainingthe integrityof theirresearchef-
forts. Manyotherethicalproblemsare involved in mar-
ketingresearch,butthe issue of maintainingfundamental
researchintegritydominates.
2. The primaryethicalconflictsfor in-houseresearchersare
two: balancingthe interestsof self againstthe interests
319
of otherpartiesand balancingthe interestsof the com-
pany againstthe interestsof otherparties.
3. All of the primaryethicalconflictsof agencyresearchers
involve balancingthe interestsof their outside clients
againstthe interestsof variousother parties, including
company,self, society, competitors,and otherclients.
4. Thoughmarketingresearchersperceivemanyopportuni-
ties for engagingin unethicalbehavior,they perceive a
relativelylow frequencyof unethicalbehavior.
5. Marketingresearchersdo not believe that unethicalbe-
haviorsin generallead to success in marketingresearch.
6. A relativelylarge proportionof marketingresearchers
believes thatsuccessfulmanagersengage in certainspe-
cific formsof unethicalbehavior.
7. The actionsof top managementin reprimandinguneth-
ical behaviorcan significantlyreduce the ethical prob-
lems of marketingresearchers.
8. The presenceof either corporateor industrycodes of
conductseems to be unrelatedto the extent of ethical
problemsin marketingresearch.
9. In comparisonwith the official AmericanMarketingAs-
sociationcode of conductfor marketingresearch,the code
proposedby the New York Chaptercovers many more
of the most difficultethical issues facing marketingre-
searchers.
Managerial Issues
Marketingresearchershave long sought recognition of
their professional status. Coe and Coe (1976, p. 257)
identify "governance through a code of ethics and dis-
ciplinary procedures for violation of the code of ethics"
as one of the four criteriadistinguishingprofessions from
other occupations. Our findings imply significant defi-
ciencies in the present official marketing research code
of conduct of the American Marketing Association. The
code does not address many of the important ethical is-
sues confronting marketing researchers. In contrast, the
code proposed by the New York Chapter of the AMA
is much more comprehensive. We recommend that the
Marketing Research Division of the AMA revise the of-
ficial code so that it addresses the major issues facing
marketing researchers. The code proposed by the New
York Chapter can serve as a useful starting point for
analysis.
Our findings suggest that top management actions do
make a difference. When top managementlets it be known
that unethical behavior will not be tolerated, marketing
researchers experience fewer ethical problems. How-
ever, the absence of a relationshipbetween corporatecodes
of conduct and ethical problems does not imply that cor-
porate codes are useless. If members of top management
are going to reprimandunethical behavior, they have an
obligation to other members of their organization to state
clearly the guidelines for acceptable and unacceptable
behavior. Therefore, though corporate codes of conduct
alone do not appear effective, we believe they are useful
starting points for other actions by top management to
encourage ethical behavior.
The preceding discussion must be tempered with the
realization that many marketing research executives do
320
not realizethe extent of ethical problemsin their orga-
nizations.Recall our finding(Table 8) thattop research
executives perceivedfewer ethical problemsthan per-
sons of lower rank. This finding is consistentwith the
conclusionsof Carroll(1975), who examinedthe ethical
problemsof a sampleof businessexecutivesfroma broad
spectrumof industriesand occupations.He found that
middleandlowermanagersexperiencemorepressurethan
top managersto compromisepersonal ethical beliefs.
Carrollconcludes that "top managementcan be inad-
vertentlyinsulatedfrom organizationalreality with re-
spect to particular[ethical] issues" (p. 79). Top mar-
ketingresearchexecutivesseem to be similarlyisolated.
We recommendthat those in-house researchdepart-
mentsand agency companieshavingcodes of ethics re-
view and updatethem. Departmentsand agencies lack-
ing codesshouldinitiatetheirdevelopment.Fulmer(1969)
gives severalexcellentrecommendations on developing
codes. First, he suggests avoiding the "temptationto
borrowsections from existing codes on the assumption
thattheseprovisionshave workedbefore"(p. 56). With
such a procedure,he points out, one assumes identical
problemsacrossorganizations.Second, he suggeststhat
draftersof codes seek outside professionalassistance,
though"thedraftingof a code shouldnot be left com-
pletelyto outsiders"(p. 56). Third,internalparticipation
in the draftingof the code shouldbe encouragedbecause
"thosewho are to be governedby the code are much
morelikely to supportthe provisionsit containsif they
have a choice in its formulation"(p. 56). Finally, as is
consistentwith our findings,he suggeststhattheremust
be "provisionfor enforcement"(p. 56).
ResearchIssues
Ourfindingsalso suggest potentiallyfruitfulavenues
for additionalresearchon ethicalproblemsin marketing
research.Furtherinquiryinto the relationshipbetween
successandspecificunethicalbehaviorsin marketingre-
searchseems important.Such researchmight startwith
the specific ethical problemswe identify and examine
the relationship,if any, betweenthese specificbehaviors
andsuccessin marketingresearch.Success mightbe de-
fined by an individual'sincome, position in the orga-
nization,job performance,or variouskinds of satisfac-
tions (e.g. job, career, life). Decision processes in sit-
uationsinvolvingethicalproblemsalso warrantsystem-
atic investigation.How do marketingresearchers"solve"
theirethicalproblems?Are thesedecisionprocessesfun-
damentallydeontological(focusingon the intrinsicright-
ness or wrongnessof specific behaviors), teleological
(focusingon the goodnessor the badnessof the conse-
quencesof behaviors),or both?
Furtherresearch on corporatecodes of conduct is
needed. Such researchshouldanalyzethe actualprovi-
sions of such codes. To whatextentdo they addresssa-
lient issues? Are they vague? Are they often revised?
How are they formulated?Comparingthe specific pro-
visionsof codeswiththeextentof specificproblemswithin
firmswould be useful.
JOURNALOF MARKETING AUGUST1984
RESEARCH,
The lack of empiricalwork on ethical problemsin
marketingresearchstems in part from the lack of the-
oreticalefforts. Most of the theorizingin ethics is nor-
mative. Such work is an attemptto provide normative
guidelinesfor ethicalbehavior.Notablylackingarepos-
itive theoriesthat purportto explain and predictethical
behaviorand, thus, could guideempiricalresearch.What
is needed is a generaltheory focusing on the determi-
nantsandconsequencesof ethicalbeliefs andbehaviors,
withspecificemphasison the role of organizational,per-
sonal, and culturalvariablesin the formationof ethical
beliefs.
We agree with Murphyand Laczniak(1981) that the
use of scenariosto exploreresearchethics has been un-
imaginative.Simply asking variouskinds of people to
judgethe degreeto whichthey believe certainbehaviors
are unethicalis raw empiricismin the extreme. At the
very least, the scenariosshouldbe manipulatedsystem-
atically to explore why differentgroups hold different
views. The work of Kohlberg(1981) provides a good
model. He developeda series of moral dilemmas(sce-
narios)thataremanipulated systematicallyto explorewhat
he calls "stageof moraldevelopment."His primarycon-
clusion is that people seem to go throughsix distinct
stages of moral developmentand that these six stages
are not culture-bound.ThoughKohlberg'smoraldilem-
mas are not directlyapplicableto ethical issues in mar-
ketingresearch,his methodologyis. Kohlbergidentifies
"six stages of moraljudgment,"rangingfrom a com-
pletely egocentricpoint of view to a state that assumes
guidanceby universalprinciples.It-wouldbe interesting
to classifyresearchersby these categoriesandthenrelate
these perceptionsto the researchers'assessmentsof a
troublesomeethicalissue.
We were dismayedto learnthat so many of our mar-
ketingresearchcolleaguesexperiencegreatpressuresto
compromisethe fundamentalintegrity of their work.
Sometimesthe very exposureof an importantproblem
in a professionis a significantfirst step towardits so-
lution. We sincerelyhope that our study providesthat
"firststep."
APPENDIXA
CODEOF MARKETING RESEARCHETHICSFOR
THEAMERICAN MARKETING ASSOCIATION
A For Research Users, Practitioners and
Interviewers
1. No individualor organizationwill undertakeany
activitywhich is directlyor indirectlyrepresented
to be marketingresearch,but whichhas as its real
purposethe attemptedsale of merchandiseor ser-
vices to some or all of the respondentsinterviewed
in the courseof the research.
2. If a respondenthas been led to believe, directlyor
indirectly,that he is participatingin a marketing
researchsurvey and that his anonymitywill be
protected,his name shall not be made known to
ETHICAL
PROBLEMS
anyone outside the researchorganizationor re-
searchdepartment,or used for otherthanresearch
purposes.
B For Research Practitioners
1. Therewill be no intentionalor deliberatemisrep-
resentationof researchmethodsor results.An ad-
equate descriptionof methodsemployed will be
madeavailableuponrequestto the sponsorof the
research.Evidencethatfield work has been com-
pleted accordingto specificationswill, upon re-
quest, be made availableto buyersof research.
2. The identityof the surveysponsorand/or the ul-
timateclient for whom a surveyis being done will
be held in confidenceat all times, unlessthis iden-
tity is to be revealedas partof the researchdesign.
Researchinformationshall be held in confidence
by the researchorganizationor departmentandnot
used for personalgain or made availableto any
outsidepartyunless the client specificallyauthor-
izes such release.
3. A researchorganizationshall not undertakemar-
keting studies for competitiveclients when such
studieswouldjeopardizethe confidentialnatureof
client-agencyrelationships.
C For Users of Marketing Research
1. A user of researchshall not knowingly dissemi-
nate conclusionsfrom a given researchprojector
servicethatare inconsistentwith or not warranted
by the data.
2. To the extent that there is involved in a research
projecta uniquedesign involvingtechniques,ap-
proachesor concepts not commonlyavailableto
researchpractitioners,the prospectiveuser of re-
search shall not solicit such a design from one
practitionerand deliverit to anotherfor execution
withoutthe approvalof the design originator.
D For Field Interviewers
1. Researchassignmentsand materialsreceived, as
well as information
obtainedfromrespondents, shall
be held in confidenceby the interviewerand re-
vealed to no one except the researchorganization
conductingthe marketingstudy.
2. No informationgained througha marketingre-
searchactivityshall be used directlyor indirectly
for the personalgain or advantageof the inter-
viewer.
3. Interviewsshall be conductedin strictaccordance
with specificationsand instructionsreceived.
4. An interviewershall not carry out two or more
interviewingassignments simultaneouslyunless
authorizedby all contractorsor employers con-
cerned.
321
Membersof the AmericanMarketingAssociation
will be expectedto conductthemselvesin accor-
dance with the provisionsof this Code in all of
theirmarketingresearchactivities.
Source: American Marketing Association.
APPENDIXB
"A PERSONALCODE FOR PRACTICINGMARKET
AND OPINION RESEARCH"BY THE NEW YORK
CHAPTER OF THE AMA
A My commitmentto scientific practice
1. I WILL follow the principlesanduse the methods
of scientificinvestigationin the researchI do. Re-
search, as I define it, means seeking knowledge
throughscientificstudy.It can be practicedat many
levels of complexity and precision and through
manyapproaches,but to fit my definitionit must
have a seriouspurpose,use orderlyand objective
thinking,and show a respect for data. Whatever
researchI do will reflect,in these qualities,its sci-
entific orientation.
2. I will do research in the framework of the sci-
entific method
-Serious researchis a process that follows the
scientific method. It starts with defining the
problemand ends with challengingthe results
throughtesting and reanalysis.
3. I will use scientific techniques that fit the in-
dividual problem.
-In the collection and analysis of information,
researchmay use proceduresfrom a varietyof
scientificdisciplines.I cannotmasterall of the
availableapproaches,but I will understandand
use a range of techniques.I will put the best
tools I can againstthe problemat hand.
4. I will present each research study for what it is
and claim for it the precision and significance
it deserves to have.
-In the field of marketandopinionresearch,even
the best designs are imperfectand the best re-
sultsapproximations. The dataare estimates,the
methodsare affordablecompromises;thereusu-
ally are none of the externalchecks or the crit-
ical discussionthatmightcome with open pub-
lication.
-In these circumstancesthe burdenof objectivity
is on the researcherto provide a professional
explanationappropriate to the way the research
was done and the way it will be used.
-I will put each study I do into perspective,as-
sess its reliabilityand application,and say how
its technicalaspectsaffect its meaning.
5. I will encourage users to make independent
evaluations of my research.
-I will questionandcheckandchallengethe work
thatothersdo for me andhope thatthose I work
322
for will follow the same practice.
-I will urgeusersto go beyondcheckingfor con-
sistency and plausibility,since regularityover
time or betweensmall samplescan resultfrom
insensitive measurements or undisclosed
smoothingof the data and may say little or
nothingabouthow well the researchwas done.
-I see rigorousexaminationand ventilationas the
best tests of good researchand the best incen-
tives for doing it.
6. I will give the users of my research the infor-
mation they need to understand it.
-I respect the rights of those who pay for my
researchand, if the researchis published,of all
who use it, to be told how the researchwas con-
ducted,in suchdetailthata goodresearcher could
redo the studywithoutfurtherinformation.
-Additionally, I will providesuch informationas
the rates of sample completion, the results of
field validations,the statisticalerrorlimits, and
possible sources of other errors, when this is
relevantand would help users understandthe
research.
-I will conceal or misrepresentnothing with a
seriousbearingon how the researchwas done,
how good it is, or what it means.
My commitmentto scientificpracticegives me the
approach,the tools, the point of view, and the
challengeI need for productivestudy. It is what
identifiesme, at least to myself, as a professional
in the practiceof research.
B My commitment to honest research
1. I AM committedto honestresearchand to honest
researchinformation.I see simple honesty as ba-
sic to the researchconceptand honest counts and
honest meaningas fundamentalto researchprac-
tice. Most of the researchI do is used to make
money, or supporta point of view, or strengthen
an argument.I believe thathonestresearchcan be
done towardsuch objectives, but only if the re-
search is objectively designed, impartiallycon-
ducted, and deliveredfree of cosmetic alteration
or biased interpretation.
2. I will base research on honest plans, set up to
get germane and honest answers.
-Honest researchis not designed to mislead or
misrepresent,or to use measurementsmadeun-
der abnormalor manipulatedconditionsas rep-
resentationsof the public's normalbehavior.
3. I will work insistently for sound field opera-
tions, for the collection, in the field, of honest
information.
-Whether or not a good design translatesinto
honestdata dependson how the data are gath-
ered.
JOURNALOF MARKETING AUGUST1984
RESEARCH,
-I have seen how easily researchcan be cor-
ruptedby failuresto follow instructions,by in-
ventedresponses,or by misrepresentation of how
or from whom the data were collected. I know
how often such problemsare linkedto unwork-
able questionnaires,and unfair time and pro-
ductivity demandsfrom those conductingthe
survey.
-I will not exert or permitthe kind of pressures
that force such abuses.
-I will instead make a conscious effort to un-
derstandthe realitiesof field operations.I will
insist on the carefulselectionof field people. I
will providepositiveincentivesfor qualitywork,
and check the work I get with an objectiveand
rigoroussystem of validations.
4. I will resist temptations to shade results, to
overstate their significance, and to reach con-
clusions that go beyond the findings.
-I will not alterthe findingsof researchto protect
my income or my reputation.
-I believe it is my duty, as a researcher,to draw
as much meaning as I can from collected in-
formation. But I will not go beyond honest
analysisin an effort to give sponsorswhat they
wantto hear or whatthey thinkthey have paid
for.
I will personallyguaranteethe integrityof what-
ever data I report.I will acceptresponsibilityfor
the conclusionsI draw. If I cannot do research
honestly,I will not do it at all.
C My commitment to fair business dealings
1. I WILL protectthe interestsof those I serve and
deal fairly with people and organizationswho do
researchor performresearchfunctions.Thosewho
pay for research,andthose who do it, have a right
to seek a profitfromtheirresearchoperations.But
this has to accomplishedthroughbusinesslikeand
responsibleconduct. If the findings of my re-
search are to be above suspicion, the business
practicesinvolved in the researchmust also be
above suspicion.
2. I will treat all of the informationinvolved in my
research as privileged.
-I will protectthe confidentialityof unpublished
proprietary researchandof anythingI learnfrom
a sponsoraboutthe sponsor'sbusiness.
-I will expect that a researchplan or proposal
submittedin confidencewill be treatedas pro-
prietaryand not used or disclosed withoutap-
provaloutsidethe companyto whichit was sub-
mitted.
3. I will keep my relations with those I work for
professional and responsible.
-I will make it a point to discuss with sponsors
ETHICAL
PROBLEMS
any problems in conducting research as the
problems are encountered.
-I will not add unrelated questions to a study
without the sponsor's consent.
-I will fit the scope of any research I do to the
importance of the insights and the need for pre-
cision in the information the research is de-
signed to provide.
4. I will compete fairly against others who do re-
search and deal fairly with those who do or sell
research services.
-I support active competition for research as-
signments and believe researchers should com-
pete on terms or conditions as well as the qual-
ity of their skills and the excellence of their
thinking. But I will not buy or sell research at
terms or conditions or with specifications that
make honest work impossible or with commit-
ments to do work or to produce results that can-
not be honored.
-I will keep the agreements I make with inter-
viewers and other researchworkers and pay them
promptly when their work is completed. I will
not contract for research work unless I can pay
for that work.
-I consider kickbacks and other illicit favors given
in return for research business to be incompat-
ible with research and below the minimum lev-
els of research ethics.
-I will get and give full value for the money spent
through me for research or research services.
In the practice of research, I will hold to the high-
est standards of legality and business ethics, and
beyond that, I will do whatever is necessary to in-
sure the confidence of those I work for, and those
who provide me with help or information.
D My commitment to the public interest
1. I WILL protect the rights of respondents and the
general public to fair treatment from the research
I do. I recognize that my research may intrude on
the time and privacy of those who give me infor-
mation. But I will make every effort to minimize
their discomfort, protect their identity, and make
sure their views are heard and reported.
2. I will do research without harming, embar-
rassing, or taking unfair advantage of respon-
dents.
-I believe that, with care and imagination, par-
ticipationin an honest and productivesurvey can
be made a positive experience for most re-
spondents, and I believe this can be accom-
plished without compromising the interests of
the sponsor, or the scientific integrity of the re-
search.
-I will not drain the public's goodwill and co-
operation through unnecessarily long interviews
323
or poorly designed questioning procedures. And
I will not tolerate those who use the pretense of
conducting research to get money from, exploit,
propagandize, or otherwise take advantage of
people.
3. I will protect the right to privacy by guarding
the identity of individual respondents.
-I will not release the names of respondents to
anyone for any purpose other than legitimate
validation, because the guarantee of anonymity
is the respondent's only insurance against the
disclosure of personal matters.
4. I will encourage sponsors to do research that
seeks out and effectively represents the needs
and views of the public.
-It is my responsibility, as a researcher, to listen
for the voice of the people, and to make it heard.
-Research serves its highest purpose when it
speaks for the citizen or the consumer, when it
brings the wants and wishes and ideas of people
to light, not for manipulation or exploitation,
but for translationinto needed productsand laws
and services.
E
I stand, by my own election, as an honest broker be-
tween those who give their money for research and
those who give their information. I will assure a fair
exchange between the parties. I will practice research
to serve the public as well as the private interest.
REFERENCES
AmericanMarketingAssociation(1982), MembershipSurvey
(March),conductedby HiggenbothamAssociates,Houston.
Baier,Kurt(1958), MoralPoint of View:A RationalBasis of
Ethics. Ithaca,NY: CornellUniversityPress.
Bartels,Robert(1967), "A Model for Ethics in Marketing,"
Journalof Marketing,31 (January),20-6.
Baumhart,RaymondC. (1961), "How Ethicalare Business-
men?"HarvardBusinessReview, 39 (July-August),6-19,
156-76.
Blankenship,A. B. (1964), "SomeAspectsof Ethicsin Mar-
ketingResearch,"Journalof MarketingResearch, 1 (May),
26-31.
Brenner,StevenN. andEarlA. Molander(1977), "Isthe Eth-
ics of Business Changing,"HarvardBusiness Review, 55
(January-February),57-71.
Carroll,Archie B. (1975), "ManagerialEthics: A Post-Wa-
tergateView," BusinessHorizons, 18 (April), 75-80.
Coe, Ted L. and BarbaraCoe (1976), "MarketingResearch:
The Searchfor Professionalism,"in Marketing:1776-1976
andBeyond,KennethL. Berhardt, ed. Chicago,IL:Amer-
ican MarketingAssociation,257-9.
Coney, KennethA. and John H. Murphy(1976), "Attitudes
of MarketersTowardEthical and ProfessionalMarketing
ResearchPractices,"in Proceedings:SouthernMarketing
Association,HenryW. Naoh and Donald P. Robin, eds.,
172-4.
Crawford,Merle C. (1970), "Attitudesof MarketingExecu-
324 JOURNALOF MARKETING AUGUST1984
RESEARCH,

tives TowardEthics in MarketingResearch,"Journal of tionof MarketingResearchPractitioners

Marketing, 34 (April), 46-52.
Day, RobertL. (1975), "A Commenton Ethics in Marketing
Research-Their PracticalRelevance,"Journalof Market-
ing Research, 12 (May), 232-3.
Ethics Resource Center (1979), Codes of Ethics in Corpora-
tions and Trade Associations and the Teaching of Ethics in
Graduate Business Schools. Princeton, NJ: Opinion Re-
searchCorporation.
Ferrell,O. C. and K. MarkWeaver(1978), "EthicalBeliefs
of MarketingManagers,"Journalof Marketing,42 (July),
69-73.
Fulmer,RobertM. (1969), "EthicalCodesof Business,"Per-
sonnel Administration, 36 (May-June), 49-57.
Kaikati, Jack G. and Wayne A. Label (1980), "American
BriberyLegislation:An Obstacleto InternationalMarket-
ing," Journal of Marketing, 44 (Fall), 38-43.
Kohlberg, Lawrence (1981), The Meaning and Measurement
of Moral Development. Worcester, MA: Clark University
Press.
MarketingNews (1980), "A Pledge:A PersonalCodefor Prac-
ticing Marketand OpinionResearch"(September19), 24.
McGown,K. L. (1979), "EthicalIssues Involvingthe Protec-
andRespondents,"
in Proceedings of the American Institute of Decision Sci-
ences, J. F. Hair, ed., 195-7.
Murphy,PatrickE. andGeneR. Laczniak(1981), "Marketing
Ethics:A Review with Implicationsfor Managers,Educa-
tors and Researchers," in Review of Marketing, 1981, Ben
M. Enis and KennethJ. Roering, eds. Chicago:American
MarketingAssociation,251-66.
Myers,JohnG., WilliamF. Massy, and StephenA. Greyser
(1980), Marketing Research and Knowledge Development:
An Assessmentfor MarketingManagement. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall,Inc.
Schneider,KennethC. (1977), "SubjectandRespondentAbuse
in MarketingResearch,"MSUBusinessTopics(Spring),13-
20.
Twedt,Dik Warren(1963), "Whya MarketingResearchCode
of Ethics," Journal of Marketing, 27 (October), 48-50.
Tybout,Alice M. andGeraldZaltman(1974), "Ethicsin Mar-
keting Research:Their PracticalRelevance," Journal of
Marketing Research, 11 (November), 357-68.
and (1975), "A Replyto 'Commentson Ethics
in MarketingResearch:Their PracticalRelevance,'"Jour-
nal of Marketing Research, 12 (May), 234-7.

EmergingPerspectives on Services Marketing

20
a proceedings edited by Leonard L. Berry,G. LynnShostack and
GregoryD. Upah
160pp. $11/AMAmembers $16/nonmembers
15

10

To help you develop more effective marketing strategies, here is a compilationof papers given at the 2nd
marketingservices conference held in West Palm Beach, Florida,in November1982. The meetings focused on the
need for and means of developing effective marketingstrategies for services industries.Materialon services
marketingresearchis also included.
mmm___mm__ ___ __mm__ __mm__ _-__mm__-

To: AMAOrderDept.,250 SouthWackerDr.,Chicago,IL60606

Pleasesendme: copiesof EmergingPerspectiveson ServicesMarketing.
Enclosedis mycheckfor$ . Orchargemy:
l MasterCard No. O Visa No.
Date:
Expiration O Billme (Ifbilling a $2.00handling charge will be added.)
is requested,
Nameand MailingAddress: * I *

AE RICAN
U4RKETING
ASOCIA TON