Attitudes of University Students towardBusiness Ethics: A Cross-National Investigation of Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong Ian Phau Garick Kea ABSTRACT. With the current globalisation and com- plexity of today’s business environment, there are increasing concerns on the role of business ethics. Using culture and religion as the determinants, this paper pre- sents a cross-national study of attitudes toward business ethics among three countries: Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong. The results of this paper have shown the attitudes toward business ethics to be significantly differ- ent among the three countries. It was also found that respondents who practised their religion tend to consider themselves more ethically minded than those who do not. Additional findings on gender have also revealed signifi- cant differences between the males and females for respondents in Singapore and Australia. Males are gen- erally considered more ethical than females across the three countries studied. KEY WORDS: Business ethics, religion, culture, ethical attitudes and values Introduction Research interest into the field of business ethics as pioneered by Baumhart (1961) has emerged as one of the most important research directions for inter- national business (Cardy and Selvarajan, 2006; Lindfelt and To¨rnroos, 2006). Most have attributed the phenomenal globalisation of businesses as the main factor influencing the study of business ethics (Ahmed et al., 2003; Al-Khatib et al., 1995; Barclay and Smith, 2003; Beekun et al., 2003; Cherry et al., 2003; Christie et al., 2003; Lim, 2003; Moore and Radloff, 1996; Walker and Jeurissen, 2003). The recent spate of scandals and corruptions in large corporations (such as Enron, WorldCom, Tyco International, Arthur Anderson and Qwest Com- munications) has also magnified the emphasis on the ethics morality of today’s business. More impor- tantly, with the growing power of transnational business corporations, the role of business ethics would have to be articulated and conceptualised to effectively satisfy the growing concern for improved methods of accountability and governance for cor- porations (Barclay and Smith, 2003). Research has also indicated that the cost of operating business in a corrupted environment to be much higher than ‘clean’ one. For instance, Inter- national consulting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers, had estimated that the cost of corruption in 35 emerging and developing countries might amount to as much as US$500 billion in 1997–1998 alone (Lim, 2003). Arthur Anderson, who was previously re- nowned for its all-time active contributions and sponsorships in endorsing the teaching of business ethics, further accentuate the severity of unethical practices in business when the firm was exposed of their involvement in the Enron accounting scandal (Vitell and Muncy, 1992). Among the several determinants identified to influence business ethical attitudes, most practitioners and researchers have attributed culture to be the Dr. Ian Phau teaches Marketing at the Curtin University of Technology. He is an avid researcher in the area of country image and branding issues. He also edits a peer reviewed marketing journal. Garick Kea is a researcher with the Curtin University of Technology. His research interests include consumer ethno- centrism, Consumer Animosity and marketing ethics. Journal of Business Ethics (2007) 72:61–75 Ó Springer 2006 DOI 10.1007/s10551-006-9156-8 predominant factor influencing the differences in business ethics attitudes across countries (such as, Ahmed et al., 2003; Christie et al., 2003; Moore and Radloff, 1996; Sims and Gegez, 2004). This notion is supported by numerous cross-national/cultural stud- ies being conducted (Beekun et al., 2003; Christie et al., 2003). While the culture–ethics relationship towards business ethics have been examined in many different perspectives (such as using Hofstede’s cultural topology and Integrative Social Contracts Theory), some papers (such as Moore and Radloff, 1996; Sims and Gegez, 2004; Small, 1992; Preble and Reichel, 1988) utilised the Attitudes Towards Busi- ness Ethics Questionnaire (ATBEQ) as the survey instrument to investigate the cross-cultural implica- tions on business ethical attitudes. However, the cultural influences examined and discussed in these studies are based on the comparison of previous results reported from the earlier independent studies. The analytical results from these studies have provided limited or only descriptive conclusions, thereby sug- gesting reliability and validity concerns in using the ATBEQ scale to examine cultural implications on business ethical attitudes. Based on these premises, this study aims to achieve two fundamental research objectives by replicating earlier studies that have used the ATBEQ scale. First, instead of conducting a cross-national/ cultural study comparing results based on previous studies’ results, this paper will conduct its cross-na- tional comparison using new samples collected for the sole purpose of this study. Second, departing from the limited and descriptive findings of earlier studies, a more robust analysis approach will be undertaken to assess the reliability and validity concerns of the ATBEQ scale. However, to ensure comparability with earlier studies, this replication study will adhere closely to the parameters and definitions denoted by Hubbard and Armstrong (1994) and Reid et al.’s (1981) paper. Fundamen- tally, the study will not alter the conceptual aspects or introduce new theoretical concepts that may deviate from the original research design, limiting the replication to acceptable extensions or changes on the sampling and analysis methods. To conduct cross-national comparison using new samples, a three-nation comparative study will be administered in Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong. While the implications of culture on ethical attitudes had been independently studied in these countries (Australia – Small, 1992; Hong Kong – Tang and Chiu, 2003; McDonald and Raymond, 1988; Singapore – Lim, 2003; Snell et al., 1999), this paper will be examining these countries on the basis of comparing their cultural differences as well as their earlier findings. Australia is a developed country with vast natural resources and stable economic growth. As a com- monwealth country with close and historical linkage to the west (particularly with the United Kingdom), Australia is considered a western society, despite its locality in the Asia-Pacific region. Despite the influx of migrants into Australia, particularly from Asia over the last few decades, its ideologies and culture have not changed dramatically from the West (Pecotich and Shultz II, 1998). For instance, Small (1992) found that there was no significant difference between the Western Australian’s ethical attitudes and those of the Americans. A similar version of the Enron-Arthur Anderson accounting scandal had surfaced recently in Australia with collapsed property giant Westpoint made high-profile headlines impli- cating its auditor, KPMG. Singapore is classified as an advanced developing nation and has established itself as one of the major financial hub in Asia. With its strict laws and gov- ernment regulations, Singapore is reputable for its corrupt-free environment (Pecotich and Shultz II, 1998). The government’s emphasis on education had also resulted in high literacy rate with majority of the population receiving formal education. While the ethnic Chinese, who forms majority of the population are brought up based on Confucian values, they are largely influenced by Western cul- ture (Pecotich and Shultz II, 1998). After Hong Kong’s return to China in 1997, the business activities between the Special Administra- tive Region (SAR) and its mainland has increased tremendously. Despite being under British rule for a century (justifying the presence of western culture influence) and notably established as a highly developed city, the people are largely exposed to the mainland China’s culture and business practices (that has been negatively perceived). There has been concern about a possible rise in corruption in Hong Kong associated with the 1997 transfer of sover- eignty (Chan and Leung 1995; Kraar 1995; Schoenberger 1996 cited in Snell et al. 1999), 62 Ian Phau and Garick Kea especially when ‘‘under table dealings’’ and personal relationship, i.e. guanxi (Tang and Chiu 2003; Dunfee and Warren 2001) had been witnessed in many successful business transactions between Hong Kong businessmen and their counterparts. As the study is conducted on the primary premise of replicating earlier studies and validating the AT- BEQ scale, the key research questions are developed and delineated as follows: (1) What are the attitudinal differences towards business ethics between the three countries? (2) What are the implications of gender on atti- tudes of business ethics between and across the three countries? (3) What is the relationship between religiosity and self-consideration of ethics morality? This paper will first present a comprehensive liter- ature review on the implications of culture and religion on business ethics. The research method- ology will be detailed, followed by an analysis of the data and discussion of the findings. A summary detailing a critical evaluation of the ATBEQ scale will also be presented. The paper will conclude with a discussion of the limitations and future directions of this study. Relevant literature Reasoned action and planned behaviour theory The theory of reasoned action by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) suggests that there is link between attitudes and behaviours, which will help explain how a consumer leads to a certain buying behaviour (Fishbein, 1980). It is purported that ‘‘attitude to- ward buying’’ and ‘‘subjective norm’’ are the two antecedents of performed behaviour. ‘‘Attitudes to- wards the behaviour’’ measures how an individual measure the favourability of the behaviour. ‘‘Sub- jective norm’’ refers to how expectation of relevant others (such as family, friends and peers) may be a major factor in the final behavioural performances. However, under certain circumstances, behaviour may not be completely under an individual’s con- trol. As such, the construct of perceived control was then introduced to improve this measure giving rise to the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen 1985, 1988). The earlier version of the theory states that behavioural control is mediated by intention. However, it was later suggested that there is a direct link between perceived behavioural control and behaviour instead of mediation by intention (Ajzen, 1988). These theories have been applied to different domains including voting intentions (Granberg and Holmberg, 1990), college retention decisions (Bid- dle et al., 1987), brand loyalty (Ha, 1998), adoption of internet banking (Shin and Fang, 2004) just to name a few. Interestingly, a number of studies reflect results deviating from the theories. For instance, Charng et al. (1988) found that the role identity as adopted by an individual as a blood donor will influence intentions to blood donation indepen- dently of the attitude towards the activity of blood donation. Results from other studies have similar findings, which seem to allude to two conclusions. First, ‘‘intentions to behave’’ is a better predictor to subsequent behaviours than do ‘‘attitudes’’. Second, attitudes only moderately predict intentions. These issues have implications to the behaviour towards business ethics of university students. For instance, the culture of the organisation that a business student works in future is more likely to influence their employee behaviour rather than the type of attitude that these students possess in the first place. The collapse of high profile cases such as Enron in the United States of America and Westpoint in Australia suggests that it was the organisational culture that supported unethical behaviour rather than the employees already held unethical attitudes. Culture and business ethics Among all determinants identified as interdependent variables influencing business ethics, culture is probably the most explored variable (Al-Khatib et al., 1995; Ahmed et al., 2003; Beekun et al., 2003; Cherry et al., 2003; Christie et al., 2003; Lim, 2003; Moore and Radloff, 1996). Business organi- sations embracing the exploding global business opportunities are finding variables such as cultural values, economic background and ethnicity to vary significantly across national boundaries. With an increase in transnational trade and investment over Attitudes of University Students toward Business Ethics 63 the past decades, an understanding of acceptable business practices across cultural boundaries is particularly more important than before (Ahmed et al., 2003). Certain values, ethical behaviours or moral principles considered to be conducive to the economic development for one country may not be for another. Hence, understanding the relationship between culture and business ethics would be vital for organisations and their managers to operate effectively and efficiently in the global market. While the above have provided the fundamental rationale behind the culture–ethics study, research have also further identified some current situational issues or cross-cultural settings that require the in- depth understanding into the implications of culture on business ethics (Cherry et al., 2003; Lim, 2003). A good example is the increasing flow of labour resulting from growing cross-border business activ- ities (Lim, 2003). The lack of mutual understanding between people from different cultures, causing major failures in cross-cultural work and business relations, greatly substantiates the need to understand the ethical attitudes across countries (Jackson and Artola, 1997 cited in Lim, 2003). As most research on business ethics tend to demonstrate moral reasoning using vignettes, the theoretical implications of the nature of moral rea- soning involved had not been sufficiently considered (Cherry et al., 2003). An understanding of how different cultures may differ on this ethical judge- ment dimension will enable theorists, researchers, and practitioners to predict and manage individual reactions to questionable practices across cultures more effectively. Despite the numerous contributions made to identify the cultural influence on business ethics, there is no consensus to the key cultural determi- nants, which have the greatest influence. Whether it is the cultural divergence or convergence that exists, implicating the ethical issues in our globalising economies remains a point of debate for many researchers. For instance, Moore and Radloff (1996, p. 863) argued that ‘‘the increasing globalising of international economies is making business practices more uniform and the social organisation... increasing similar’’. Also supporting the premise of convergence, Ahmed et al. (2003, p. 90) concurred that ‘‘today’s products are being sold across cultural boundaries with little or no need for modification to suit local conditions’’. While both research advocate the cultural convergence of our globalising envi- ronment, Blodgett et al. (2001) argued otherwise. They justified that it is the existing cultural diver- gence that makes the study of business ethics studies pertinent and relevant in today’s business. Countries still differ greatly in terms of economic development, legal-political systems, cultural standards and expec- tations of business conduct despite the effects of globalisation. Similarly, some comparative research between various countries and the attitudes towards business ethics seem to indicate the cultural diver- gence phenomenon (Vitell and Muncy, 1992). In comparative studies between the Western and Asian culture (Ahmed et al., 2003; Cherry et al., 2003; Christie et al., 2003), the concept of ‘‘Guanxi’’ is particularly relevant. Dunfee and Warren (2001) define guanxi as ‘‘the social interactions within the network place and its members in the equivalent of an infinitely repeated game with a set of people they know’’. However, in some Asian culture such as China, guanxi is a synonymous term associated with bureaucratic corruption or bribery (Su and Littlefield, 2001). As a result, guanxi may represent an ethical dilemma for many global managers. This is especially for western managers, who find it difficult to differ- entiate between the use of guanxi as ‘‘a way to build long-term business relationship’’ or ‘‘a conspiracy in corruption and bribery’’. Culture is a loaded and complex variable that includes an extensive number of dimensions and values. Findings only demonstrated that though two countries can be similar in a particular cultural dimension, they may be highly different in various other dimensions (Beekun et al., 2003; Christie et al., 2003). For example, Beekun et al.’s (2003) found that while the Brazilians and Americans do not differ significantly when they use egoistic criteria for evaluating ethical decision-making; ethical decisions of the countries are very different when the utilitarian criteria are applied. Hence, Christie et al. (2003) have argued that formal investigations do not show the influence of culture in specific and the extent of it to ethical attitudes and behaviours. While the relationship between culture and ethics had been widely identified as the prominent area of research in business ethics, the difficulty to provide consistency in findings is still a major concern. 64 Ian Phau and Garick Kea Religion and business ethics Religion, in many aspects of life, has demonstrated its influential role towards the development of our society. It was indicated that ‘‘the level of our reli- gious commitment is a stronger determinant of our values’’ than almost any other form of predictor (Connecticut Study, 1981, p. 17 cited in Kennedy and Lawton, 1998). Similarly, many studies have also provided strong theoretical support to evidence the existence of a relationship between the relevancy of religiousness and attitudes towards business ethics. In the functionalist theory, religion is described to be serving a number of very important purposes for the societies as well as individuals. The theory shows that religion plays an integrative role in societies as a whole and on the individuals within them (Kennedy and Lawton, 1998). Religion has promoted social solidarity, partly by providing norms that reduce conflict and also by imposing sanctions against conduct (Kennedy and Lawton, 1998, p. 164). While functionalism had provided a strong the- oretical base on the relationship between religion and ethics, Hunt and Vitell (1993) proposed a re- vised model, which has explicitly demonstrated that religiousness can influence an individual’s perception of an ethical problem and other components of ethical decisions. Since religiosity is a key personal characteristic, it is expected to influence an indi- vidual’s ethical behaviour and attitude in a positive way. With the strong basis evidencing the relevant role of religion in the society, many studies have tried to examine if this is an important determinant of ethical attitude and behaviour (Arslan, 2001; Gould, 1995; Kennedy and Lawton, 1998; Lee et al., 2003; Ros- souw, 1994; Tang and Chiu, 2003; Vitell and Pa- olillo, 2003). The results were mixed. Wiebe and Fleck (1980) concluded that people who have greater concern for higher moral stan- dards, discipline and responsibility are those who have religion as the central focus of their life as compared to those who are non-religious. Clark and Dawson (1996, p. 369) reveal that ‘‘strong religious influences are present in individual ethical evalua- tion’’. Kidwell et al. (1987) in their survey of man- agers, found no association between church attendance and perceptions of what is considered ethical. Barnett et al. (1996) found that high religiousness is not correlated with idealism, but is negatively correlated with relativism. The studies of the relationship between Buddhism (Gould, 1995), Islam (Saeed et al., 2001), Catholi- cism (Pierucci, 1997) and business ethics are some of the more recent religion-ethics investigations. The common objective of these researchers was to demonstrate how religion can impact the business environment and how these studies can be important to practitioners and academics in the understanding of the nature of business ethics. Research methodology Data methods and collection A convenience sampling is used in this study. Students from a large Australian University in 3 different campuses (i.e. Western Australia, Singa- pore and Hong Kong) participated in this research through a self-administered survey. The use of 1st- year undergraduate students in this study is docu- mented to be relevant and useful (Ahmed et al., 2003). They are likely to be the prospective man- agers and professional practitioners of their fields in the future. They are currently studying in the era with increasing interest and awareness to the ethical dimensions of business practices. The questionnaires were distributed to the university students during their classes and collected once completed. Two screening questions were included in the ques- tionnaire. First, they must be nationals of the country. Second, they were asked to state the number of years they have been out of their home country. This is to ensure that there is no bias of acculturation effects. Non-nationals and those who have stayed or studied in a foreign campus for more than 6 months were excluded from participating in the research (Palumbo and Teich, 2004; Quester and Chong 2001). Of 358 questionnaires distributed, 343 (95.8%) were usable returns. 15 (4.2%) questionnaires were discarded as they consist of a large proportion of unsatisfactory responses (such as non-response, inconsistency, and ambiguity response). Among the 343 respondents, there were 119 from Australia (34.7%), 101 from Singapore (29.4%) and 123 from Hong Kong (35.9%). Attitudes of University Students toward Business Ethics 65 Research instrument The main questionnaire was divided into two parts. In the first section, the attitudes of the respondents towards business ethics were administered using the Attitude Towards Business Ethics Questionnaire (ATBEQ). This is originally developed by Neumann and Reichel and was based on the Stevens (1979) ‘‘Values Clarification Exercises’’ (Small, 1992, p. 746). In the ATBEQ section, respondents were asked to express their opinions regarding attitudes towards business ethics. Thirty questions were listed and the respondents were asked to score the level of agreement to each of these questions on a five-point scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). In the second section, the demographic profiles of the respondents were recorded. These include data on the respondents’ gender, education, place of birth and religion. A question measuring the degree to which the respondent considered themselves as ethically minded persons was also included. Results & discussion Demographic profiles of respondents Table I presents the demographic profiles of the Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong respondents. Australia Of all the returns 66.4% came from females. Most of the respondents major in business (86.6%), followed by Arts/Education (6.7%), with the remainder being other majors. Almost 45% are Catholic/Anglican and 24.4% reported no religious affiliation. Two- thirds of the respondents practice their religions (either sometimes or always). This indicates that of those 90 respondents reported with religious affilia- TABLE I Descriptive statistics–demographic profiles of respondents Demographic profile Australia Hong Kong Singapore Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Male 40 33.6 37 30.1 47 46.5 Female 79 66.4 86 69.9 54 53.5 Undergraduate 119 100.0 112 91.1 94 93.1 Postgraduate 0 0 11 8.9 7 6.9 Arts/Education 8 6.7 4 3.3 0 0 Business 103 86.6 112 91.1 93 92.1 Others 8 6.7 7 5.7 8 7.9 Anglican 12 10.1 3 2.4 4 4.0 Catholic 42 35.3 7 5.7 6 5.9 Buddhist/Taoist 6 5.0 12 9.8 43 42.6 Muslim 10 8.4 0 0 8 7.9 Hindu 3 2.5 0 0 1 1.0 No religion 29 24.4 91 74.0 28 27.7 Others 17 14.3 10 8.1 11 10.9 Never 39 32.8 91 74.0 25 24.8 Sometimes 52 43.7 26 21.1 49 48.5 Always 28 23.5 6 4.9 27 26.7 Not true at all 5 4.2 7 5.7 2 2.0 Somewhat true 67 56.3 91 74.0 83 82.2 Totally true 47 39.5 25 20.3 16 15.8 Total sample size 119 100.0 123 100.0 101 100.0 66 Ian Phau and Garick Kea tion, 10 of them have never practiced their religions. More than 95% of the respondents considered themselves as ethically minded. Singapore Half of the respondents were females (53.5%). Of the returns 93.1% are undergraduates and 6.9% are postgraduates. A higher proportion of the respondents in Singapore major in business (92.1% as compared to 86.6% in Australia), with the remainder being other majors. In contrast to the Australian sample, less than 10% of the respondents are Anglican/Catholic. Nearly 43% and 8% of returns are Buddhists/Taoists and Muslims respectively. More Singapore respondents (27.7% as compared to 24.4% in Australia) reported no religious affiliation. Three-quarters of the respon- dents practice their religions (either sometimes or always). About 98% of the respondents considered them as ethically minded. Hong Kong Majority of the returns came from females (69.9%). Out of 123 respondents 112 (91.1%) are undergraduates whereas 8.9% are postgraduates. Most of the returns major in business (91.1%), followed by Arts/Education (3.3%), with the remainder being other majors. Majority of the Hong Kong respondents do not have religious background as 74% of them reported no religious affiliation. Of those respondents with religious background, one-third of them are either Anglican or Catholic, slightly more than one-third of them are Buddhist/Taoist, with the remainder being other religions. Around 94.3% of the respondents considered them as either totally or somewhat ethically minded sort of persons. Respondents’ attitudes towards business ethics A Cronbach test of the scale yields an alpha of 0.82 when eight variables (13, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25, 29 and 30) out of the thirty variables were removed. Table II presents the country-wide mean scores and standard deviations (SD) on each of those remaining 22 variables. Total mean scores and standard devia- tions are computed by combining the data of all 343 respondents from the three groups. It would appear that respondents from Singapore (x ¼ 2:94 SD = 1.15). and Hong Kong (x ¼ 2:92 SD = 0.90) more ‘‘ethical’’ than the Australia (x ¼ 2:55 SD = 1.01) (significant at p <0.01). Singa- pore’s ‘‘high ethical maturity’’ can be explained by its Government’s years of emphasis on building and maintaining a corruption-free environment via a lead-by-example political leadership, a well-managed and efficient civil service, and tough laws against unethical, immoral, and criminal behaviours. As with Australia, the findings contradicted past comparative studies. Specifically, it deviates from Small’s (1992) study, alluding to a shift in attitudes from a longi- tudinal perspective. For example, one would suspect that culturally, Australians are more law abiding than Hong Kongers in business transactions. However, the results show otherwise as reflected in the item ‘‘Act according to law and you can’t go wrong morally’’. Australians were rated significantly lower than Hong Kongers. ANOVA was used as a statistical technique to examine and identify significant differences among the three country groups. The examination of ANOVA results in Table III indicates that eighteen variables were found to be significant at 0.05 levels. A summary of the Post Hoc test (using Scheffe test) results are presented in Table III. The findings based on ANOVA test showed significant differences in eighteen variables. The Scheffe tests indicated there were 10 variables which differed significantly among Australia and Hong Kong respondents. In the case of the Australia and Singapore respondents, fourteen variables were sig- nificantly different. As with the Hong Kong and Singapore respondents, there were only four vari- ables which differed significantly. The difference in ethical attitudes between Australia versus Singapore and Australia versus Hong Kong can be largely attributed to the cultural differences between them. Australia is largely perceived to be a western society while Singapore and Hong Kong are both from an eastern cultural background. With majority of the population in Hong Kong and Singapore to be ethnic Chinese, respondents are likely to share similar values, culture and religious background. As such, the small significant difference that exists be- tween both Hong Kong and Singapore respondents is not unexpected. Attitudes of University Students toward Business Ethics 67 Attitudes towards business ethics between males and females of individual country A summary of the t-test results is presented in Table IV. The T-test results, showing a p-value of <0.05, have illustrated statistically significant differ- ences between male and female respondents from Australia, and between male and female respondents from Singapore. As such, these results have indicated that gender has a significant influence on the attitudes towards business ethics. This mirrored studies from past research. For instance, Peterson et al. (2001) had identified the importance of gender in business ethical attitudes. An interesting finding is that there is no signifi- cant difference between the Hong Kong males and females (p-value >0.05). The role of gender in business ethics attitudes can also be argued that the females initially hold different values due to early socialisation process. But their value systems become more similar to males as they enter the work force (Markham et al., 1985 cited in Peterson et al. 2001). However, it can also be suggested that the gender variable may be moderated by other variables such as the age of the respondents. Comparison between all males and all females across the three groups An aggregate of male and female respondents of the three countries seem to indicate a higher level of ethical attitudes among males than females. This differs from several prior findings that reported fe- males to be exhibiting a higher level of ethical behaviour than the males (Peterson et al., 2001), or that there are no differences between males and fe- males (Kidwell et al., 1987; Singhapakdi and Vitell, 1990 cited in Peterson et al., 2001). TABLE II Descriptive statistics-Australia, Singapore & Hong Kong respondents’ attitudes towards business ethics Variable Australia Singapore Hong Kong Total Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean S.D. 1 2.61 1.22 3.05 1.38 2.98 1.04 2.88 1.21 2 1.71 0.81 2.20 1.17 2.37 1.03 2.09 1.00 3 2.99 1.11 2.69 1.07 3.01 0.85 2.90 1.01 4 2.34 0.97 3.04 1.22 3.15 0.93 2.84 1.04 5 3.12 0.93 3.63 0.94 3.27 0.89 3.34 0.92 6 2.98 0.98 3.45 1.09 3.18 0.86 3.20 0.98 7 2.10 1.12 2.52 1.22 2.61 0.97 2.41 1.11 8 2.82 0.94 3.23 0.82 3.06 0.67 3.04 0.81 9 2.35 0.93 2.93 1.22 2.65 0.88 2.64 1.01 10 2.19 1.18 2.92 1.34 2.74 1.10 2.62 1.21 11 2.87 1.06 2.98 1.12 3.05 0.89 2.96 1.02 12 3.03 1.00 3.37 1.01 3.05 0.89 3.15 0.97 14 1.89 1.09 2.15 1.31 2.94 1.08 2.32 1.16 15 2.10 1.03 2.59 1.20 2.75 0.80 2.48 1.01 16 2.32 1.13 2.80 1.31 2.72 0.95 2.61 1.13 17 2.60 0.93 2.42 1.18 2.99 0.98 2.67 1.03 20 2.89 1.11 3.56 1.07 2.90 0.99 3.12 1.06 21 2.11 1.10 3.03 1.62 2.74 0.92 2.63 1.21 22 2.83 0.91 2.95 1.00 2.89 0.77 2.89 0.89 26 2.73 1.06 3.45 0.96 3.31 0.76 3.16 0.93 27 2.94 0.84 3.08 0.90 3.09 0.72 3.04 0.82 28 2.51 0.90 2.66 1.08 2.80 0.76 2.66 0.91 Average 2.55 1.01 2.94 1.15 2.92 0.90 2.80 1.02 68 Ian Phau and Garick Kea T A B L E I I I S c h e f f e t e s t – m u l t i p l e c o m p a r i s o n s b e t w e e n r e s p o n s e g r o u p s N o . D e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e C o u n t r y S i g . 1 T h e o n l y m o r a l o f b u s i n e s s i s m a k i n g m o n e y A U H . K . 0 . 0 6 0 H . K . S I N 0 . 9 2 1 S I N A U 0 . 0 3 0 * 2 A p e r s o n d o i n g w e l l i n b u s i n e s s d o e s n o t h a v e t o w o r r y a b o u t m o r a l p r o b l e m A U H . K . 0 . 0 0 0 * H . K . S I N 0 . 4 2 6 S I N A U 0 . 0 0 2 * 3 E v e r y b u s i n e s s p e r s o n a c t s a c c o r d i n g t o m o r a l , w h e t h e r h e / s h e i s a w a r e o f i t o r n o t A U H . K . 0 . 9 9 2 H . K . S I N 0 . 0 7 0 S I N A U 0 . 0 9 5 4 A c t a c c o r d i n g t o l a w a n d y o u c a n ’ t g o w r o n g m o r a l l y A U H . K . 0 . 0 0 0 * H . K . S I N 0 . 7 1 1 S I N A U 0 . 0 0 0 * 5 E t h i c s i n b u s i n e s s i s b a s i c a l l y a n a d j u s t m e n t b e t w e e n e x p e c t a t i o n s a n d t h e w a y p e o p l e b e h a v e A U H . K . 0 . 4 4 3 H . K . S I N 0 . 0 1 3 * S I N A U 0 . 0 0 0 * 6 B u s i n e s s d e c i s i o n s i n v o l v e a r e a l i s t i c e c o n o m i c a t t i t u d e a n d n o t a m o r a l p h i l o s o p h y . A U H . K . 0 . 2 9 7 H . K . S I N 0 . 1 2 7 S I N A U 0 . 0 0 2 * 7 M o r a l v a l u e s a r e i r r e l e v a n t t o t h e b u s i n e s s w o r l d A U H . K . 0 . 0 0 2 * H . K . S I N 0 . 8 4 8 S I N A U 0 . 0 1 8 * 8 L a c k o f p u b l i c c o n fi d e n c e i n e t h i c s o f b u s i n e s s p e o p l e i s n o t j u s t i fi e d A U H . K . 0 . 0 8 5 H . K . S I N 0 . 2 9 7 S I N A U 0 . 0 0 1 * 9 ‘ ‘ B u s i n e s s e t h i c s ’ ’ i s c o n c e p t f o r p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s o n l y A U H . K . 0 . 0 7 2 H . K . S I N 0 . 1 1 7 S I N A U 0 . 0 0 0 * 1 0 B u s i n e s s w o r l d t o d a y i s n o t d i f f e r e n t f r o m w h a t i t u s e d t o b e i n p a s t A U H . K . 0 . 0 0 2 * H . K . S I N 0 . 5 3 4 S I N A U 0 . 0 0 0 * 1 2 C o n d i t i o n s o f f r e e e c o n o m y w i l l s e r v e b e s t t h e n e e d s o f s o c i e t y . L i m i t i n g c o m p e t i t i o n c a n o n l y h u r t s o c i e t y & a c t u a l l y v i o l a t e s b a s i c n a t u r a l l a w s A U H . K . 0 . 9 8 2 H . K . S I N 0 . 0 5 2 S I N A U 0 . 0 3 5 * Attitudes of University Students toward Business Ethics 69 T A B L E I I I C o n t i n u e d N o . D e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e C o u n t r y S i g . 1 4 W h i l e S h o p p i n g a t s u p e r m a r k e t , i t i s a p p r o p r i a t e t o s w i t c h p r i c e t a g s o r p a c k a g e s A U H . K . 0 . 0 0 0 * H . K . S I N 0 . 0 0 0 * S I N A U 0 . 2 6 0 1 5 I t ’ s O K f o r e m p l o y e e t o t a k e o f fi c e s u p p l i e s h o m e A U H . K . 0 . 0 0 0 * H . K . S I N 0 . 5 2 5 S I N A U 0 . 0 0 2 * 1 6 I v i e w s i c k d a y s a s v a c a t i o n d a y s t h a t I d e s e r v e A U H . K . 0 . 0 2 5 * H . K . S I N 0 . 8 4 9 S I N A U 0 . 0 0 7 * 1 7 E m p l o y e e w a g e s s h o u l d b e d e t e r m i n e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e l a w s o f d e m a n d a n d s u p p l y A U H . K . 0 . 0 1 2 H . K . S I N 0 . 0 0 0 * S I N A U 0 . 4 2 9 2 0 B u s i n e s s d e c i s i o n b a s e d u p o n p r o fi t a b l e o n l y A U H . K . 0 . 9 9 6 H . K . S I N 0 . 0 0 0 * S I N A U 0 . 0 0 0 * 2 1 I n m y g r o c e r y s t o r e – I r a i s e t h e p r i c e o f a c e r t a i n p r o d u c t & m a r k i t ‘ ‘ o n s a l e ’ ’ – t h e r e ’ s n o t h i n g w r o n g A U H . K . 0 . 0 0 0 * H . K . S I N 0 . 2 1 2 S I N A U 0 . 0 0 0 * 2 6 I w o u l d r a t h e r h a v e t r u t h & p e r s o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t h a n u n c o n d i t i o n a l l o v e & b e l o n g i n g n e s s A U H . K . 0 . 0 0 0 * H . K . S I N 0 . 5 5 1 S I N A U 0 . 0 0 0 * * T h e m e a n d i f f e r e n c e i s s i g n i fi c a n t a t t h e 0 . 0 5 l e v e l . 70 Ian Phau and Garick Kea The results of the ANOVA analysis on the three groups of male respondents from Australia, Singa- pore and Hong Kong as presented in Table V show a significant difference. The Scheffe test further indicated that while significant differences (p-value <0.05) exist between Australia and Singapore male respondents, there are no significant differences be- tween Australia and Hong Kong male respondents, and Singapore and Hong Kong male respondents. The ANOVA and Scheffe test results of the female respondents across the 3 groups (Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong) are presented in Table VI. The post- hoc Scheffe test indicated that significant differences (p-value <0.05) exist between Australia and Singa- pore and Australia and Hong Kong female respon- dents whereas no significant differences between Singapore and Hong Kong female respondents. Relationship between religiosity and self-consideration of ethics morality The last two questions of the questionnaire were sought to ascertain whether there is any association between the respondents who practised their reli- gions and the degree to which they considered TABLE IV T-test-attitudes towards business ethics between males and females respondents (Australia, Singapore & Hong Kong) Gender N Mean SD Sig. (2-tailed) AUS Male 40 2.7682 0.49897 0.000* Female 79 2.4350 0.41677 SIN Male 47 3.0571 0.50380 0.019* Female 54 2.8401 0.40845 HK Male 37 2.9300 0.29683 0.829* Female 86 2.9160 0.34247 *Significant at 0.05 level. TABLE V ANOVA & Scheffe test-comparison between ALL males across 3 groups Descriptive: male respondents average means N Mean SD SE AU 40 2.7682 0.49897 0.07889 HK 37 2.9300 0.29683 0.04880 SIN 47 3.0571 0.50380 0.07349 Total 124 2.9260 0.46295 0.04157 ANOVA: male respondents average means Sum of squares df Mean square F Sig. Between groups 1.804 2 0.902 4.445 0.014 Within groups 24.557 121 0.203 Total 26.361 123 Multiple comparisons: male respondents ‘average means (I ) Country male: 3 Groups – Male – AU, HK, SIN ( J ) Country Male: 3 Groups – Male – AU, HK, SIN Mean difference (I)J ) SE Sig. AU HK )0.1618 0.10276 0.293 HK SIN )0.1271 0.09901 0.441 SIN AU 0.2889 0.09691 0.014* *The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. Attitudes of University Students toward Business Ethics 71 themselves as ethically minded persons. The results from the regression analysis show a significant and positive relationship (p < 0.05) between individuals who practise religion and those who describe themselves as ethically minded persons. These results hence support Wiebe and Fleck’s (1980) and Clark and Dawson’s (1996) findings on the role of religi- osity in ethics. Concluding comments This paper attempts to answer three research ques- tions designed to have a better understanding of business ethics across Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong. The results reflect similar findings from pre- vious studies but there are also differences from a longitudinal point of view. More importantly, the paper also provided the provision of evaluating the ATBEQ scale as a measurement of business ethical attitudes. While ATBEQ has been widely used in past cross- national business ethics studies (e.g. Moore and Radloff, 1996; Preble and Reichel, 1988; Sims and Gegez, 2004; Small, 1992), the research methodolo- gies and analytical methods engaged by the earlier authors were very different. Most statistical analyses provided were descriptive or with limited findings. For instance, in Preble and Reichel’s (1988) and Small’s (1992) papers, their data reported are limited to comparison of means and standard deviations; sug- gesting that such analysis and interpretation of data could be the most ‘‘appropriate’’ provision for meaningful findings when the ATBEQ was being administered. For Moore and Radloff’s (1996) study, factor analysis was conducted to group the thirty variables of the ATBEQ. However, the 11 set of factors presented did not provide significant justifi- cations or interpretations for the purpose of the anal- ysis. The findings were also limited due to the absence of the reliability indices of the factors. Further, not all the variables within the set of factors (e.g. moral val- ues) conformto the stated theoretical labels. Similarly, in Sims and Gegez (2004)’s study, descriptive statistics were drawn as part of their paper’s findings with fur- ther discussion mainly based on differences between respondents for the 30 items in the ATEBQ scale. The interpretation of the data and findings in various studies (including this paper) differs from the intended objectivity of the ATBEQ as a measure- ment of the differences in ethical business attitudes. This raised the issue of reliability, validity and TABLE VI ANOVA & Scheffe test-comparison between ALL females across 3 groups Descriptive: female respondents average means N Mean SD SE AU 79 2.4350 0.41677 0.04689 HK 86 2.9160 0.34247 0.03693 SIN 54 2.8401 0.40845 0.05558 Total 219 2.7237 0.44337 0.02996 ANOVA: female respondents average means Sum of squares df Mean square F Sig. Between groups 10.495 2 5.248 35.029 0.000 Within groups 32.359 216 0.150 Total 42.855 218 Multiple comparisons: female respondents’ average means (I ) Country Female: 3 Groups – Female – AU, HK, SIN ( J ) Country Female: 3 Groups- Female-AU, HK, SIN Mean difference (I–J ) SE Sig. AU HK )0.4810 0.06032 0.000* HK SIN 0.0759 0.06720 0.530 SIN AU 0.4051 0.06834 0.000* *The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. 72 Ian Phau and Garick Kea generalisability of the scale. More fine-tuning of the ATBEQ may be required to enhance its measure- ment. Earlier authors (Moore and Radloff, 1996; Sims and Gegez, 2004) expressed the same sentiment. As Sims and Gegez (2004) replicated earlier studies with previous data, they suggested that ‘‘ANOVA or MANOVA would have been the statistical methods of choice’’ (Sim and Gegez, 2004 p. 258), Moore and Radloff, (1996) also recommended refinement in its construct validity, design and scoring structure. In addition, they also proposed comparative investiga- tion between the ATBEQ and other known valid measuring instruments of ethical attitudes to deter- mine its performance as a scale. This study however replicated earlier work by employing a more scientific data analysis method. With a more robust technique, data was collected simultaneously from the three countries and were compared. A T-test was conducted to determine if there is any significance difference between the males and females of each individual country. ANOVA analysis was utilised to explore the differ- ences between the males of all three countries and the females of the three countries. To determine the relevance of religion with the respondents’ self- consideration of ethics morality, a regression analysis was employed. Conclusively, the varying ethical attitudes found across the three studied countries provide important implications for global firms and managers. What may be considered ethically acceptable in one country’s culture may be translated as otherwise in another country. Hence, understanding how differ- ent cultures may differ in the ethical judgement is an imperative norm for businesses expanding beyond their boundaries in this globalising arena. This study has however several limitations. Spe- cifically, the effects of other demographic factors, such as the age of the respondents, were not con- sidered. Research had found that people tend to be ‘‘more ethical’’ as they grow older (Vitell and Muncy, 1992; Peterson et al., 2001). But the nature of the student sample limits this area of study. As a convenience sampling was used, the results may not be a true representation of the three countries. For instance, despite being part of a same country, the attitudes and behaviour of the Hong Kongers may differ from the rest of the regions in China due to its British colonial past (Tang and Chiu 2003). Western Australia respondents may not be a true representation of the whole of Australia. Using self-administered questionnaires, respondents are likely to rate themselves as more ethical than they actually are. This ‘‘self-serving bias,’’ a common phenomenon in studies particularly related to ethics, was not fully controlled in this research. Further, the research design for future replication or extension studies should consider more rigorous multivariate analysis to provide more robust findings. Since culture is a very complex and loaded variable, many different dimensions of culture may need to be examined in order to achieve an in- depth understanding on the cultural differences between these three countries. For instance, Hof- stede’s (1987) 5-dimension cultural typology such as power distance, masculinity vs. femininity, uncertainty avoidance, individualism vs. collectiv- ism, and long-term vs. short-term orientation may be employed to gain further insights into the implication of culture. References Ahmed, M., K. Chung and J. Eichenseher: 2003, ÔBusi- ness Students’ Perception of Ethics and Moral Judg- ment: A Cross-Cultural StudyÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 43(1/2), 89. Ajzen, I.: 1985, ÔFrom Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned BehaviourÕ, in J. Kuhl and J. Beckmann (eds.), Action Control: From Cognition to Behaviour (Springer, Berlin), pp. 11–39. Ajzen, I: 1988, Attitudes, Personality and Behaviour (Open University Press, Milton Keynes, UK). Al-Khatib, J., K. Dobie and S. Vitell: 1995, ÔConsumer Ethics in Developing Countries: An Empirical Inves- tigationÕ, Journal of Euro-Marketing 4(2), 87. Arslan, M.: 2001, ÔThe Work Ethic Values of Protestant British, Catholic Irish and Muslim Turkish ManagersÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 31(4), 321. Barclay, J. and K. Smith: 2003, ÔBusiness Ethics and the Transitional Economy: A Tale of Two ModernitiesÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 47(4), 315. Barnett, T., K. Bass and G. Brown: 1996, ÔReligiosity, Ethical Ideology, and Intentions to Report a Peer’s WrongdoingÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 15(11), 1161. Baumhart, R.: 1961, ÔHow Ethical are Businessmen?Õ, Harvard Business Review 39( July–August), 6. Beekun, R., Y. Stedham and J. Yamamura: 2003, ÔBusiness Ethics in Brazil and the U.S.: A Comparative InvestigationÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 42(3), 267. Attitudes of University Students toward Business Ethics 73 Biddle, B., B. Bank and R. Slavings: 1987, ÔNorms, Preferences, Identities and Retention DecisionsÕ, Social Psychology Quarterly 50(4), 322–337. Blodgett, J., L. Lu, G. Rose and S. Vitell: 2001, ÔEthical Sensitivity to Stakeholder Interests: A Cross-Cultural ComparisonÕ, Academy of Marketing Science Journal 29(2), 190. Cardy, R and T. Selvarajan: 2006, ÔAssessing Ethical Behavior: The Impact of Outcomes on Judgment BiasÕ, Journal of Managerial Psychology 21(1), 52. Charng, H., J. Piliavin and P. Callero: 1988, ÔRole Identity and Reasoned Action in the Prediction of Repeated BehaviourÕ, Social Psychology Quarterly 51(4), 303–317. Cherry, J., M. Lee and C. Chien: 2003, ÔA Cross-Cultural Application of a Theoretical Model of Business Ethics: Bridging the Gap BetweenÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 44(4), 359. Christie, M., I. Kwon and P. Raymond: 2003, ÔA Cross- Cultural Comparison of Ethical Attitudes of Business Managers: India, Korea and the United StatesÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 46(3), 263. Clark, J. and L. Dawson: 1996, ÔPersonal Religiousness and Ethical Judgements: An Empirical AnalysisÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 15(3), 359. Dunfee, T. and D. Warren: 2001, ÔIs Guanxi Ethical? A Normative Analysis of Doing Business in ChinaÕ, Journal of Business Ethics [CD-ROM] 32(3), 191–204. Fishbein, M.: 1980, ‘A Theory of Reasoned Action: Some Applications and Implications’, 1979, Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Lincoln: University of Ne- braska Press). Fishbein, M. and I. Ajzen: 1975, Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behaviour: An Introduction to Theory and Research (Addison-Wesley, Reading MA). Gould, S.: 1995, ÔThe Buddhist Perspective on Business Ethics: Experiential ExperimentÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 14(1), 63. Granberg, D. and S. Holmberg: 1990, ÔThe Intention- Behaviour Relationship among US and Swedish VotersÕ, Social Psychology Quarterly 53(1), 44–54. Ha, C.: 1998, ÔThe Theory of Reasoned Action Applied to Brand LoyaltyÕ, Internet Research 7(1), 51–61. Hofstede, G.: 1987, ÔThe Applicability of McGregor’s Theories in Southeast AsiaÕ, Journal of Management Development 6(3), 9. Hubbard, R. and J. Armstrong: 1994, ÔReplications and Extensions in Marketing: Rarely Published but Quite ContraryÕ, International Journal of Research in Marketing 11, 233. Kennedy, E. and L. Lawton: 1998, ÔReligiousness and Business EthicsÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 17(2), 163. Kidwell, J., R. Stevens and A. Bethke: 1987, ÔDifferences in the Ethical Perceptions between Male and Female Managers: Myth or RealityÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 6(6), 489. Lee, K., D. McCann and M. Ching: 2003, ÔChrist and Business Culture: A Study of Christian Executives in Hong KongÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 43(1/2), 103. Lindfelt, L. and J. To¨rnroos: 2006, ÔEthics and Value Creation in Business Research: Comparing Two Ap- proachesÕ, European Journal of Marketing 40(3/4), 328– 351. Lim, G.: 2003, ÔDifferences in Ethical Judgement be- tween Chinese and Singaporeans: Individual Reactions to Self and Organisational Interest ConsiderationsÕ, Singapore Management Review 25(2), 1. McDonald, G. and A. Raymond: 1988, ÔEthical Percep- tions of Hong Kong Chinese Business ManagersÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 7(11), 835. Moore, R. and S. Radloff: 1996, ÔAttitudes towards Business Ethics held by South African StudentsÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 15(8), 863. Preble, J. and A. Reichel: 1988, ÔAttitudes Towards Business Ethics of Future Managers in the US and IsraelÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 7(12), 941. Pecotich, A. and C. Shultz II: 1998, Marketing and Con- sumer Behaviour in East and South-east Asia, (McGraw Hill, Australia). Peterson, D., A. Rhoads and B. Vaught: 2001, ‘Ethical Beliefs of Business Professionals: A Study of Gender, Age and External Factors’, Journal of Business 31(3), p. 225. Pierucci, E.: 1997, ÔEnhancing the Catholic Character of an Undergraduate Business Law CourseÕ, Review of Business 19(1), 22. Palumbo, F. and I. Teich: 2004, ÔMarket Segmentation based on Level of AcculturationÕ, Marketing Intelligence & Planning 22(4), 472. Quester, P. and I. Chong: 2001, ÔValidating Accultura- tion Models: The Case of the Australian–Chinese ConsumersÕ, Journal of Consumer Marketing 18(3), 203. Reid, L., L. Soley and R. Wimmer: 1981, ÔReplication in Advertising Research: 1977, 1978, 1979Õ, Journal of Advertising 10, 3. Rossouw, G.: 1994, ÔBusiness Ethics: Where have all the Christians Gone?Õ, Journal of Business Ethics 13(7), 557. Saeed, M., Z. Ahmed and S. Mukhtar: 2001, ÔInterna- tional Marketing Ethics from an Islamic Perspective: A Value-Maximization ApproachÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 32(2), 127. Shih, Y. and K. Fang: 2004, ÔThe Use of a Decomposed Theory of Planned Behavior to Study Internet Bank- ing in TaiwanÕ, Internet Research 14(3), 213–223. 74 Ian Phau and Garick Kea Small, M.: 1992, ÔAttitudes towards Business Ethics held by Western Australian Students: A Comparative StudyÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 11(10), 745. Sims, R. and A. Gegez: 2004, ÔAttitudes Towards Busi- ness Ethics: A Five Nation Comparative StudyÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 50(3), 253. Snell, R, A. Chak and J. Chu: 1999, ÔCodes of Ethics in Hong Kong: Their Adoption and Impact in the Run Up to the 1997 Transition of Sovereignty to ChinaÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 22(4), 281. Su, C. and E. Littlefield: 2001, ÔEntering Guanxi: A Business Ethical Dilemma in Mainland ChinaÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 33(3), 199–210. Tang, T. and R. Chiu: 2003, ÔIncome, Money Ethic, Pay Satisfaction, Commitment, and Unethical Behaviour: Is the Love of Money the Root of Evil for Hong Kong Employees?Õ, Journal of Business Ethics 46(1), 13. Vitell, S. and J. Muncy: 1992, ÔConsumer Ethics: An Empirical Investigation of Factors Influencing Ethical Judgments of the Final ConsumerÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 11(8), 585. Vitell, S. and J. Paolillo: 2003, ÔConsumer Ethics: The Role of ReligiosityÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 46(2), 151. Walker, R. and R. Jeurissen: 2003, ÔE-Based Solutions to Support Intercultural Business Ethics Instruction: An Exploratory Approach in Course Design and Deliv- eryÕ, Journal of Business Ethics 48(1), 113. Wiebe, K. and J. Fleck: 1980, ÔPersonality Correlates of Intrinsic, Extrinsic and Non-Religious orientationsÕ, Journal of Psychology 105, 181. School of Marketing Curtin University of Technology GPO Box U1987, Perth WA 6845, Australia E-mail:
[email protected] Attitudes of University Students toward Business Ethics 75