Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 48, Issue 2, pp 139–154 | Cite as

The Effect of Context on Moral Intensity of Ethical Issues: Revising Jones's Issue-Contingent Model

  • Patricia C. Kelley
  • Dawn R. Elm


Jones's (1991) issue-contingent model of ethical decision making posits that six dimensions of moral intensity influence decision makers' recognition of an issue as a moral problem and subsequent behavior. He notes that "organizational settings present special challenges to moral agents" (1991, p. 390) and that organizational factors affect "moral decision making and behavior at two points: establishing moral intent and engaging in moral behavior" (1991, p. 391). This model, however, minimizes both the impact of organizational setting and organizational factors on these experiences of ethical issues. In this theory, context is modeled as affecting the moral intent and behavior of the actor rather than directly affecting the issue's moral intensity. Here we look specifically at the effect of context on the moral intensity of ethical issues through a phenomenological study. Our results indicate that in certain environments, context may be critical in affecting the moral intensity of ethical issues. Thus, researchers should consider it more fully when assessing these issues' moral intensity.

contextual effects on ethical decision making ethical decision making ethical decision making in a social service context moral intensity revising Jones's issue-contingent model 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bacharach, S. B.: 1989, 'Organizational Theories: Some Criteria for Evaluation', Academy of Management Review 14(4), 496-515.Google Scholar
  2. Barnard, C.: 1938, The Functions of the Executive (Harvard University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  3. Beach, L. R.: 1997, The Psychology of Decision Making: People in Organizations (Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
  4. Bommer, M., C. Gratto, J. Gravander and M. Tuttle: 1987, 'A Behavioral Model of Unethical Decision-Making', Journal of Business Ethics 6, 265-280.Google Scholar
  5. Creswell, J.: 1998, Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among the Five Traditions (Sage Publications Inc. Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
  6. Dutton, J. and S. Jackson: 1987, 'Categorizing Strategic Issues: Links to Organizational Action', Academy of Management Review 12(1), 76-90.Google Scholar
  7. Elm, D. R. and M. L. Nichols: 1993, 'An Investigation of Managers' Moral Reasoning', Journal of Business Ethics 12, 167-187Google Scholar
  8. Elm, D. R., E. J. Kennedy and L. Lawton: 2001, 'Determinants of Moral Reasoning: Sex Role Orientation, Gender, and Academic Factors', Business & Society 40(3), 241-265.Google Scholar
  9. Ferrell, O. C. and L. G. Gresham: 1985, 'A Contingency Framework for Understanding Ethical Decision Making in Marketing', Journal of Marketing 49(3), 87-96.Google Scholar
  10. Fiske, S. T. and S. E. Taylor: 1984, Social Cognition (Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., Reading, MA).Google Scholar
  11. Frey, B. F.: 2000, 'Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers', Journal of Business Ethics 32, 423-431.Google Scholar
  12. Glaser, B. G. and A. L. Strauss: 1976, The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research (Aldine, Hawthorne, NY).Google Scholar
  13. Glick, W. H.: 1988, 'Comment: Organizations do not Cognize; Response: Organizations are not Central Tendencies: Shadowboxing in the Dark, Round 2', Academy of Management Review 13(1), 129-137.Google Scholar
  14. Hunt, S. D. and S. J. Vitell: 1986, 'A General Theory of Marketing Ethics', Journal of Macromarketing 8, 5-16.Google Scholar
  15. Jones, T.: 1991, 'Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model', Academy of Management Review 16(2), 366-395.Google Scholar
  16. Kahneman, D., P. Slovic and A. Tversky: 1982, Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (Cambridge University Press, New York, NY).Google Scholar
  17. Kohlberg, L.: 1976, 'Moral Stages and Moralization', in T. Lickona (ed.), Moral Development and Behavior: Theory, Research, and Social Issues (Holt, Rhinehart, & Winston, New York).Google Scholar
  18. Kram, K., P. Yeager and G. Reed: 1989, 'Decisions and Dilemmas: The Ethical Dimension in the Corporate Culture', in Post (ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, Vol. 11 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT).Google Scholar
  19. Liedtka, J.: 1991, 'Organizational Value Contention and Managerial Mindsets', Journal of Business Ethics 10(7), 543-557.Google Scholar
  20. Marshall, B. and P. Dewe: 1997, 'An Investigation of the Components of Moral Intensity', Journal of Business Ethics 16, 521-530.Google Scholar
  21. May, D. R. and K. P. Pauli: 2002, 'The Role of Moral Intensity in Ethical Decision Making: Review and Investigation of Moral Recognition Evaluation and Intention', Business and Society 4(1), 84-117.Google Scholar
  22. Messick, D. M. and M. H. Bazerman: 1996, 'Ethical Leadership and the Psychology of Decision making', Sloan Management Review 37(2), 9-22.Google Scholar
  23. Schein, E. H.: 1984, 'Coming to a New Awareness of Organizational Culture', Sloan Management Review 25(2), 3-16.Google Scholar
  24. Schneider, B.: 1983, 'Work Climates: An Interactionist Perspective', in N. W. Feimer and E. S. Geiler (eds.), Environmental Psychology: Directions and Perspectives (Praeger, New York, NY).Google Scholar
  25. Sims, R. L. and T. L. Keon: 1999, 'Determinants of Ethical Decision Making: The Relationship of the Perceived Organizational Environment', Journal of Business Ethics 19(4), 393-401.Google Scholar
  26. Sims, R. L. and T. L. Keon: 2000, 'The Influence of Organizational Expectations on Ethical Decision Making Conflict', Journal of Business Ethics 23(2), 219-228.Google Scholar
  27. Singhapakdi, A., S. J. Vitell and K. L. Kraft: 1996, 'Moral Intensity and Ethical Decision-Making of Marketing Professionals', Journal of Business Research 36, 245-255.Google Scholar
  28. Taylor, S. T. and R. Bogdan: 1998, Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods: A Guidebook and Resource (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York).Google Scholar
  29. Trevino, L. K.: 1986, 'Ethical Decision Making in Organizations: A Person-Situation Interactionist Model', Academy of Management Review 11(3), 601-617.Google Scholar
  30. Van Mannen and Schein: 1979, 'Toward a Theory of Organizational Socialization', Research in Organizational Behavior 1, 209-264.Google Scholar
  31. Victor, B. & Cullen, J. (1988). The organizational bases of ethical work climates. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33 (1), 101-125.Google Scholar
  32. Vitell, S. J. and S. D. Hunt: 1990, 'The General Theory of Marketing Ethics: A Partial Test of the Model', in J. D. Seth (ed.), Research in Marketing, Vol. 10 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT).Google Scholar
  33. Webb, E. J., D. T. Campbell, R. D. Schwartz, L. Sechrest and J. Below: 1981, Nonreactive Measures in the Social Sciences (Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA).Google Scholar
  34. Weber, J. and J. Gillespie: 1998, Ethical Initiatives in Southwestern Pennsylvania: A Benchmark Report from the Beard Center for Leadership in Ethics (Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, PA).Google Scholar
  35. Weber, J. and D. Wasieleski: 2001, 'Investigating Influences on Managers' Moral Reasoning: The Impact of Context and Personal and Organizational Factors', Business & Society 40(1), 79-111.Google Scholar
  36. Weber, J.: 1996, 'Influences upon Managerial Moral Decision Making: Nature of the Harm and Magnitude of Consequences', Human Relations 49, 1-22.Google Scholar
  37. Whetten, D. A.: 1998, 'What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution?', Academy of Management Review 14(4), 490-495.Google Scholar
  38. Wimbush, J. C.: 1999, 'The Effect of Cognitive Moral Development and Supervisory Influence on Subordinates Ethical Behavior', Journal of Business Ethics 18(4), 383-395.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patricia C. Kelley
    • 1
  • Dawn R. Elm
    • 2
  1. 1.University of WashingtonBothell, BothellU.S.A.
  2. 2.College of BusinessUniversity of St. ThomasMinneapolisU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations