Search results for 'Neil A. Granitz' (try it on Scholar)

  1. Neil A. Granitz (2003). Individual, Social and Organizational Sources of Sharing and Variation in the Ethical Reasoning of Managers. Journal of Business Ethics 42 (2):101 - 124.score: 960.0
    A growth in consumer and media ethical consciousness has resulted in the need for organizations to ensure that members understand, share and project an approved and unified set of ethics. Thus understanding which variables are related to sharing and variation of ethical reasoning and moral intent, and the relative strength of these variables is critical. While past research has examined individual (attitudes, values, etc.), social (peers, significant others, etc.) and organizational (codes of conduct, senior management, etc.) variables, it has focused (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Neil A. Granitz & James C. Ward (2001). Actual and Perceived Sharing of Ethical Reasoning and Moral Intent Among in-Group and Out-Group Members. Journal of Business Ethics 33 (4):299 - 322.score: 870.0
    Despite an extensive amount of research studying the influence of significant others on an individual's ethical behavior, researchers have not examined this variable in the context of organizational group boundaries. This study tests actual and perceptual sharing and variation in ethical reasoning and moral intent within and across functional groups in an organization. Integrating theory on ethical behavior, group dynamics, and culture, it is proposed that organizational structure affects cognitive structure. Departmental boundaries create stronger social ties within the group as (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Neil Granitz & Dana Loewy (2007). Applying Ethical Theories: Interpreting and Responding to Student Plagiarism. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 72 (3):293 - 306.score: 450.0
    Given the tremendous proliferation of student plagiarism involving the Internet, the purpose of this study is to determine which theory of ethical reasoning students invoke when defending their transgressions: deontology, utilitarianism, rational self-interest, Machiavellianism, cultural relativism, or situational ethics. Understanding which theory of ethical reasoning students employ is critical, as preemptive steps can be taken by faculty to counteract this reasoning and prevent plagiarism. Additionally, it has been demonstrated that unethical behavior in school can lead to unethical behavior in business; (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation