Abstract
Ethics failure in academia is not new, yet its prevalence, causes, and methods to prevent it remain a matter of debate. The author’s premise is that value dissonance underlies most of the reasons ethics failure occurs. Vignettes are used to illustrate value dissonance at the individual and institutional levels. Suggestions are offered for ways academic institutions can assume greater responsibility as a moral agency to prevent the occurrence of ethics failure.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Notes
Value dissonance is not always expressed verbally. We cannot assume that if value conflict is not openly expressed that it does not exist. Similarly, without such overt expression it is not possible to evaluate the degree of value conflict an individual is experiencing and their coping repertoire. This explains why unethical behavior is least expected of some individuals.
Turnover in academic institutions has not been a topic of great concern in the literature, perhaps because the student is seen as the consumer. In general, faculty turnover rates in large universities with faculties of 500 or more averages about 5% compared to an average national faculty turnover rate for all sizes of institutions of 7%. The three reasons given most often by faculty for leaving their jobs as expressed in exit interviews are: personal, better opportunity, and work environment. Johnsrud and Rosser (2002) studied faculty members’ morale and their intention to leave their institution. They found that faculty are rarely satisfied with their own institutions. They see administrators as incompetent, communication as poor, and their influence as declining. This discontent is in contrast to their satisfaction with their intellectual lives, the courses they teach, and their collegial relationships. The extent to which faculty actually act on their discontent remains an empirical question. Turnover is both a blessing and a curse for institutions, however, too often the faculty who leave are those the institution would prefer to retain. A greater understanding of what constitutes this value dissonance, especially personal conflict that leads to negative actions toward the institutions and colleagues warrants serious research by educational institutions.
The department is especially important in the determination of professional values, especially those values that graduate students acquire during socialization (Becher and Kogan 1992). Research has shown that students who experience their departments as competitive and unfair are more likely to have been exposed to research misconduct (Anderson et al. 1994). This led Louis et al. (1995) to hypothesize that, in departments where the sense of collective responsibility is strong, collegial interaction may create disincentives to engage in “sloppy science,” while competitive departments may have fewer perceived restraints of misconduct. In a faculty survey of 98 departments in 49 research institutions they found that highly productive departments were just as likely as less productive departments to show instances of misconduct. There were no disciplinary differences in the rates of research and personal misconduct when they controlled for department characteristics, yet the researchers acknowledged that certain forms of research misconduct may be discipline specific. They concluded that departmental climate is more important than structure in affecting the context of graduate education (Anderson et al. 1994). Climate makes a difference as a variable that can be affected through administrative intervention and organizational development (Louis et al. 1995).
A major source of institutional value dissonance is what some in academia refer to as “rigid disciplinary silos,” many of which seem to behave as if they existed independently from the institution of which they are a part. Edwards (1999) criticizes departments as “bastions of traditional academic ways,” Damrosch (1995) decries “departmental nationalism,” and Tierney and Bensimon (1996) lament the “loss of an academic community because faculty find intellectual homes in the disciplines rather than institutional peers” (p. 11). Failure to attain institutional rewards is often blamed on faulty socialization and inadequate mentoring in departments, while departments blame the college and institution for poor communication, faulty processes (biases and politics), behavioral inconsistencies (treating people differently), and unclear policies and procedures.
Buchholz and Rosenthal (2006) emphasize that, to develop a moral organization or institution, every individual must hold themselves morally responsible for the jobs they are doing, and they must hold others morally responsible for doing their jobs. In this way a culture of moral responsibility can be created where moral conduct is institutionalized.
References
Anderson, M. S., Louis, K. S., & Earle, J. (1994). Disciplinary and departmental effects on observations of faculty and graduate student misconduct. Journal of Higher Education, 65(3), 331–350.
Anglen, R., & Holstege, S. (2007). Educator reaps public dollars. The Arizona Republic, A1, A18–A19, (March 25).
Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & Smith, D. M. (1985). Action science. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Austin, A. E., & Baldwin, R. G. (1992). Faculty collaboration: Enhancing the quality of scholarship and teaching. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report Series. Washington, DC: George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
Becher, T., & Kogan, M. (1992). Process and structure in higher education. London: Routledge.
Bennett, J. B. (1998). Collegial professionalism: The academy, individualism, and the common good. Phoenix: The American Council on Education/The Oryx.
Bohen, S. J., & Stiles, J. (1998). Experimenting with models of faculty collaboration: Factors that promote their success. New Directions for Institutional Research, 98, 39–55, (Winter).
Braxton, J. M. (Ed.) (1999). Perspectives on scholarly misconduct in the sciences. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
Braxton, J. M., & Bayer, A. E. (2003). Faculty misconduct in collegiate teaching. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Braxton, J. M., & Mann, M. R. (2004). Incidence and student response to faculty teaching norm violations. In J. M. Braxton, & A. E. Bayer (Eds.) Addressing faculty and student classroom improprieties. New directions for teaching and learning. Issue 99 (pp. 35–40). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bruhn, J. G. (2002). Trust and the health of organizations. New York: Kluwer.
Bruhn, J. G., Zajac, G., Al-Kazemi, A. A., & Prescott, L. D. (2002). Moral positions and academic conduct: Parameters of tolerance for ethics failure. Journal of Higher Education, 73(4), 461–493.
Brumfiel, G. (2007). Misconduct? It’s all academic. Nature, 445, 240–241, (18 January).
Buchholz, R. A., & Rosenthal, S. B. (2006). Integrating ethics all the way through: The issue of moral agency reconsidered. Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 233–239.
Chang, K. (2002). Panel says Bell scientists faked discoveries in physics. New York Times, 26, A-1.
Chong, S., & Normile, D. (2006). How young Korean researchers helped unearth a scandal. Science, 311, 22–25.
Clouthier, S. G. (2005). Misconduct: Lower ranks take most of the blame. Nature, 436, 460.
Cohen, C. M. (2004). Confronting the social context of science. The American Society of Cell Biology Newsletter, 27(1), 32–33.
Corlett, J. A. (2005). The good professor. Journal of Academic Ethics, 3(1), 27–54.
Damrosch, D. (1995). We scholars: Changing the culture of the university. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
De Russy, C. (2003). Professional ethics begin on the college campus. The Chronicle of Higher Education, B20, September 19.
De Vries, D. L. (1975). The relationship of role expectations to faculty behavior. Research in Higher Education, 3(2), 111–129.
De Vries, R., Anderson, M. S., & Martinson, B. C. (2006). Normal misbehavior: Scientists talk about the ethics of research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 1(1), 43–50.
Edwards, R. (1999). The academic department: How does it fit into the university reform agenda? Change, 31, 17–27, (September–October).
Eliot, M. (2000). How prevalent is fraud? That’s a million dollar question. Science, 290(5497), 1662–1663.
Evans, D., Smith, M., & Willen, L. (2005). Big Pharma’s shameful secret. Bloomberg Markets, 14, 36–62.
Feldman, D. C. (1984). The development and enforcement of group norms. Academy of Management Review, 9(1), 47–53.
Felicio, D. M., & Plenladz, J. (1999). Ethics in higher education: Red flags and gray areas. Feminism & Psychology, 9(1), 53–73.
Hamilton, N. W. (2002). Academic ethics: Problems and materials on professional conduct and shared governance. Westport, CT: American Council on Education and Praeger.
Hamilton, N. W. (2007). Faculty autonomy and obligation. Academe Online, January–February. AAUP: Washington DC.
Hart, J. (2003). Racism, sexism persist on U.S. college campuses, study finds. Black Issues in Higher Education, 20(22), 15.
Heeren, J. W., & Shichor, D. (1993). Faculty malfeasance: Understanding faculty deviance. Sociological Inquiry, 63(1), 49–63.
Johnsrud, L. K., & Rosser, V. J. (2002). Faculty members’ morale and their intention to leave: A multilevel explanation. Journal of Higher Education, 73(4), 518–542.
Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (2003). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high performance organization. New York: Harper Business.
Kelley, P. C., & Chang, P. L. (2007). A typology of university ethical lapses: Types, levels of seriousness, and originating location. Journal of Higher Education, 78(4), 402–429.
Kerr, J., & Slocum, J. W. (2005). Managing corporate culture through reward systems. Academy of Management Executive, 19, 130–138.
Kintisch, E. (2005). Researcher faces prison for fraud in NIH grant applications and papers. Science, 307, 1851.
Klein, J. (2007). A collegiate dilemma: The lack of formal training in ethics for professors. Journal of College & Character, 2, 1–10.
Knight, J., & Auster, C. J. (1999). Faculty conduct: An empirical study of ethical activism. Journal of Higher Education, 70(2), 188–210.
Langlais, P. J. (2006). Ethics for the next generation. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(19), B11.
Lattuca, L. R. (2002). Learning interdisciplinarity: Sociocultural perspectives on academic work. Journal of Higher Education, 73(6), 711–739.
Lewis, A., Chester, M., & Forman, T. A. (2000). The impact of “colorblind” ideologies on students of color: Intergroup relations at a predominately white university. The Journal of Negro Education, 69(1/2), 74–91.
Louis, K. S., Anderson, M. S., & Rosenberg, L. (1995). Academic misconduct and values: The department’s influence. Review of Higher Education, 18(4), 393–422.
Martinson, B. C., Anderson, M. S., & De Vries, R. G. (2005). Scientists behaving badly. Nature, 435, 737–738.
Meier, B. (2005). Implant program for heart device was a sales spur. New York Times, September 27, A-1.
Paludi, M. A. (Ed.) (1996). Sexual harassment on college campuses: Abusing the ivory power. Ithaca, NY: SUNY Press.
Pryor, E. R., Habermann, B., & Broome, M. E. (2007). Scientific misconduct from the perspective of research coordinators: A national survey. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33, 265–269.
Robie, C., & Keeping, L. (2004). Perceptions of ethical behavior among business faculty in Canada. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2(3), 221–247.
Roworth, W. W. (2002). Professional ethics, day by day: What are the ethical obligations of faculty members? Academe, 88(1), 24–27.
Smart, J. C., & St. John, E. P. (1996). Organizational culture and effectiveness in higher education: A test of the “culture type” and “strong culture” hypotheses. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18(3), 219–241.
Tierney, W. G., & Bensimon, E. M. (1996). Promotion and tenure: Community and socialization in academe. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Tretkoff, E. (2004). Junior members respond to APS ethics survey. APS News, 13(1), 1.
Trevino, L. K. (1990). A cultural perspective on changing and developing organizational ethics. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 4, 195–230.
Wade, N. (2002). A new look at old data may discredit a theory on race. New York Times, October 8, F3.
Wadman, M. (2005). One in three scientists confesses to having sinned. Nature, 435, 718–719, (Jun 9).
Whitley, B. E., & Keith-Spiegel, P. (2001). Academic integrity as an institutional issue. Ethics & Behavior, 11(3), 325–342.
Wilcox, J. R., & Ebbs, S. L. (1992). The leadership compass: Values and ethics in higher education (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1). Washington, DC: School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University.
Wysocki, B. (2005). Cash injection: As universities get billions in grants, some see abuses. Wall Street Journal, A-1, August 16.
Zajac, G. (1996). Beyond Hammurabi: A public service definition of ethics failure. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6, 145–190.
Zajac, G., & Comfort, L. K. (1997). The spirit of watchfulness: Public ethics as organizational learning. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 7(4), 541–570.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bruhn, J.G. Value Dissonance and Ethics Failure in Academia: A Causal Connection?. J Acad Ethics 6, 17–32 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-008-9054-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-008-9054-z