Understanding Unethical Decision-Making in Organizations and Proposals for Its Avoidance: The Contribution of Neuroscience

  • J. Félix LozanoEmail author
Part of the Advances in Neuroethics book series (AIN)


The aim of this chapter is to propose strategies for improving ethical decision-making in organizations by taking into consideration the contributions of neuroethics research. Our hypothesis is that results from research in neuroscience and cognitive science offer new insight and perspectives on ethical decision-making in organizations.

This chapter has three main parts. The first part is descriptive, and we present the main factors affecting unethical decision-making in organizations. Understanding why good people make or contribute to unethical decisions in organizations is a first step. In the second part, we discuss the contribution of neuroscience research to ethical decision-making. Finally, we propose strategies and actions that managers should take into account to develop a more consistent ethical decision-making model for individuals and organizations.


Ethical decision-making Rationalism Intuitionism Neuroethics 



This research is part of the Project FFI2016-76753-C2-1-P, financed by the Spanish Ministry for Science, Innovation and Universities; and is part of the Excelence Research Group PROMETEO/2018/121 by Generalitat Valenciana.


  1. Adams JS, Tashchian A, Shore TH. Codes of ethics as signals for ethical behavior. J Bus Ethics. 2001;29(3):199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Apel KO. Transformation der Philosophie. Frankfurt am Main: Surhkamp; 1973.Google Scholar
  3. Arendt H. Eichman in Jerusalem: a report on the banality of evil. New York: Viking; 1963.Google Scholar
  4. Ariely D. Predictably irrational: the hidden forces that shape our decisions. New York: Harper-Collins; 2008.Google Scholar
  5. Ariely D. The honest truth about dishonesty: how we lie to everyone-specially ourselves. New York: Harper-Collins; 2012.Google Scholar
  6. Aristotle. The complete works of Aristotle: The revised Oxford translation. Baumrin, Bernard H. Metaphilosophy. 1986;17:350–1.Google Scholar
  7. Ashkanasy NM, Becker WJ, Waldman DA. Neuroscience and organizational behavior: avoiding both neuro-euphoria and neuro-phobia. J Organ Behav. 2014;35:909–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bandura A, Barbaranelli C, Caprara GV, Pastorelli C. Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1996;71(2):364–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bandura A, Caprara GV, Zsolnai L. Corporate transgressions through moral disengagement. J Hum Values. 2000;6(1):57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bazerman MH, Tenbrunsel AE. Blind spot. Why we fail to do what’s right and what to do about it. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Becker GS. Crime and punishment: an economic approach. In: Becker G, Landes W, editors. Essays in the economics of crime and punishment. New York: Columbia University Press; 1974.Google Scholar
  12. Becker WJ, Cropanzano R. Organizational neuroscience: the promise and prospects of an emerging discipline. J Organ Behav. 2010;31:1055–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Becker WJ, Cropanzano R, Sanfey AG. Organizational neuroscience: taking organizational theory inside the neural black box. J Manage. 2011;37(4):933–61.Google Scholar
  14. Browing CR. Ordinary men. Reserve police battalion 101 and the final solution in Poland. New York: Harper Perennial; 1993.Google Scholar
  15. Butler MJR, Senior C. Toward an organizational cognitive neuroscience. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2007;1118(0):1–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Butler MJR, O’Broin HLR, Lee N, Senior C. How organizational cognitive neuroscience can deepen understanding of managerial decision-making: a review of the recent literature and future directions. Int J Manag Rev. 2016;18(4):542–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Caruso EM, Gino F. Blind ethics: closing one’s eyes polarizes moral judgments and discourages dishonest behavior. Cognition [Internet]. Elsevier; 2011 Feb 1 (cited 2018 May 13);118(2):280–5. Available from
  18. Conill J. Horizontes de economía ética. Madrid: Tecnos; 2006.Google Scholar
  19. Cortina A. Neuroética y Neuropolítica. Sugerencias para la educación moral. Madrid: Tecnos; 2011.Google Scholar
  20. Cortina A. Guía Comares de Neurofilosofía Práctica. Granada: Comares; 2012.Google Scholar
  21. Crockett MJ. Models of morality. Trends Cogn Sci [Internet]. 2013;17(8):363–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Crockett MJ. How formal models can illuminate mechanisms of moral judgment and decision making. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2016;25(2):85–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Crockett MJ, et al. Harm to others outweighs harm to self in moral decision making. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2015;112(4):E381. Scholar
  24. Damasio A. Descartes’ error. Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Penguin Books; 1994.Google Scholar
  25. Dubljević V. Is it time to abandon the strong interpretation of the dual-process model in neuroethics? In: Racine E, Aspler J, editors. Debates about neuroethics. Advanced in neuroethics. New York: Springer; 2017. p. 129–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dubljević V, Racine E. The ADC of moral judgment: opening the black box of moral intuitions with heuristics about agents, deeds, and consequences. AJOB Neurosci. 2014;5(4):3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Edmons D. Would you kill the fat man? The trolley problem and what your answer tell about right and wrong. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2014.Google Scholar
  28. Erwin PM. Corporate codes of conduct: the effects of code content and quality on ethical performance. J Bus Ethics. 2011;99(4):535–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Everett JAC, Pizarro D, Crockett MJ. Inference of trustworthiness from intuitive moral judgments. J Exp Psychol Gen Everett 2016;145(6):772–87. Available from file:///C:/Users/mbesw/Downloads/SSRN-id2726330.pdfGoogle Scholar
  30. Evers K, Sales A, Farisco M. Theoretical framing of neuroethics: the need for a conceptual approach. In: Racine E, Aspler J, editors. Debates about neuroethics. New York: Springer International; 2017. p. 89–107. Scholar
  31. Fernández JL, Camacho J. Effective elements to establish an ethical infrastructure: an exploratory study of SMEs in the Madrid region. J Bus Ethics. 2016;138(1):113–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Galbraith JK. The economics of innocent fraud. Truth for our time. New York: Penguin Books; 2004.Google Scholar
  33. Galnnon W. Free will and the brain. Neuroscientific, philosophical and legal perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. García-Marzá D. Kant’s principle of publicity: the intrinsic relationship between the two formulations. Kant-Studien. Philos. Zeitschrift der Kant-Gesellschaft. 2012;103(1):96–113.Google Scholar
  35. Ghoshal S. Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Acad Manag Learn Educ. 2005;4(1):75–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gino F. Understanding ordinary unethical behavior: why people who value morality act immorally. Curr Opin Behav Sci. 2015;3:107–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Gino F, Schweitzer M, Mead N, Ariely D. Unable to resist temptation: how self-control depletion promotes unethical behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2011;115(2):191–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gold JI, Shadlen MN. The neural basis of decision making. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2007;30(1):535–74. Scholar
  39. Greene J. Moral tribes. Emotion, reason and the gap between us and them. New York: Penguin Books; 2013.Google Scholar
  40. Haase M, Raufflet E. Ideologies in markets, organizations, and business ethics: drafting a map: introduction to the special issue. J Bus Ethics. 2017;142(4):629–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Habermas J. Erkenntnis Und Interesse. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag; 1968.Google Scholar
  42. Habermas J. Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Bd. 1: Handlungsrationalität und gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung; Bd. 2: Zur Kritik der funktionalistischen Vernunft. Frankfurt am Main: Surhkamp; 1981.Google Scholar
  43. Haidt J. The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgement. Psychol Rev. 2001;108(4):814834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hallsson BG, Siebner HR, Hulme OJ. Fairness, fast and slow: a review of dual process models of fairness. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2018;89:49–60. Scholar
  45. Jones TM. Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: an issue-contingent model. Acad Manag Rev. 1991;16(2):366–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kahneman D. Maps of bounded rationality: economics psychology for behavioral. Am Econ Rev. 2003;93(5):1449–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kahneman D. Thinking fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 2011.Google Scholar
  48. Kahneman D, Twersky A. Choices, values, and frames: APA Award Address; 1983.Google Scholar
  49. Kalis A, Mojzsch A, Schweizer TS, Kaiser S. Weakness of will, akrasia, and the neuropsychiatry of decision making: an interdisciplinary perspective. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2008;8(4):402–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kant I. Beantwortung der Frage: was ist Aufklärung. (1994). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht; 1784.Google Scholar
  51. Kant I. Kritik der praktischen Vernunft. Frankfurt am main: Surhkamp; 1787.Google Scholar
  52. Kaptein M, Schwartz MS. The effectiveness of business codes: a critical examination of existing studies and the development of an integrated research model. J Bus Ethics. 2008;77(2):111–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lancaster BL. Spirituality and cognitive neuroscience: a partnership for refining maps of the mind. Bern: Springer International; 2016. p. 95–106.Google Scholar
  54. Levy N. Introducing neuroethics. Neuroethics. 2008;1:1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Libet B. Do we have free will? J Conscious Stud. 1999;6(8):47–57. Available from Google Scholar
  56. Lindebaum D, Zundel M. Not quite a revolution: scrutinizing organizational neuroscience in leadership studies. Hum Relat. 2013;66(6):857–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lozano JF. Educating responsible managers. The role of university ethos. J Acad Ethics. 2012;10:213–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lozano JF, Escrich T. Cultural diversity in business: a critical reflection on the ideology of tolerance. J Bus Ethics. 2017;142(4):679–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Martineau JT, Johnson KJ, Pauchant TC. The pluralist theory of ethics programs orientations and ideologies: an empirical study anchored in requisite variety. J Bus Ethics. 2017;142(4):791–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. McDevitt R, Giapponi C, Tromley C. A model of ethical decision making: the integration of process and content. J Bus Ethics. 2007;73(2):219–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Mead NL, Baumeister RF, Gino F. Too tired to tell the truth self control resource depletion and dishonesty. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2009;45(3):594–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Mecacci G, Haselager P. A reason to be free: operationalizing free action. Neuroethics. 2015;8:327–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Milgram S. Obedience to authority: an experimental view. New York: Harper and Row; 1974.Google Scholar
  64. Mintzberg H. The nature of managerial work. New York: Harper & Row; 1973.Google Scholar
  65. Mintzberg H. Managers, not MBA. San Francisco: Berret-Koehler; 2004.Google Scholar
  66. Mintzberg H. Managing. San Francisco: Berret-Koehler; 2009.Google Scholar
  67. Moore C, Detert JR, Treviño LK, Baker VL, Mayer DM. Why employees do bad things: moral disengagement and unethical organizational behavior. Pers Psychol. 2012;65:1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Nida-Rümelin J. Economic rationality and practical reason. Dordrecht: Springer; 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Palazzo G, Krings F, Hoffrage U. Ethical blindness. J Bus Ethics. 2012;109(3):323–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Potemkowski A. Neurobiology of decision making: methodology in decision-making research. Neuroanatomical and neurobiochemical fundamentals. In: Nermend, K. and Latuszynska M, editors. Neuroeconomic and behavioral aspects of decision making. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics; 2017. p. 3–47.Google Scholar
  71. Robertson DC, Voegtlin C, Maak T. Business ethics: the promise of neuroscience. J Bus Ethics. 2017;144(4):679–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Saigle V, Dubljević V, Racine E. The impact of a landmark neuroscience study on free will: a qualitative analysis of articles using libet and colleagues’ methods. AJOB Neurosci. 2018;9(1):29–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Salvador R, Folger RG. Business ethics and the brain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009.Google Scholar
  74. Sanfey AG. Expectations and social decision-making: biasing effects of prior knowledge on Ultimatum responses. Mind Soc. 2009;8:93–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sanfey AG, Rilling JK, Aronson JA, Nystrom LE, Cohen JD. The neural basis of economic decision making in the Ultimatum Game. Science. 2003;300(5626):1755–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  76. Schwartz MS. Ethical decision-making theory: an integrated approach. J Bus Ethics. 2016;139(4):755–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Sen A. Rational fools: a critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. Philos Public Aff. 1977;6(4):317–44.Google Scholar
  78. Sen A. Consequential evaluation and practical reason. J Philos. 1997;9(2000):477–502.Google Scholar
  79. Sonenshein S. The role of construction, intuition, and justification in responding to ethical issues at work: the sensemaking-intuition model. Acad Manag Rev. 2007;32(4):1022–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Steinmann H, Löhr A. Grundlagen der unternehmensethik. Stuttgart: Schaffer-Poeschel; 1994.Google Scholar
  81. Story GW, Vlaev I, Metcalfe RD, Crockett MJ, Kurth-Nelson Z, Darzi A, Donan RJ. Social redistribution of pain and money. Sci Rep. 2015;5:1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Tenbrunsel AE, Messick DE. Ethical fading: the role of self-deception in unethical behavior. Soc Justice Res. 2004;17(2):223–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Tenbrunsel AE, Smith-Crowe K, Umphress EE. Building houses on rocks: the role of the ethical infrastructure in organizations. Soc Justice Res. 2003;16(3):285–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Thiel CE, Bagdasarov Z, Harkrider L, Johnson JF, Mumford MD. Leader ethical decision-making in organizations: strategies for sensemaking. J Bus Ethics. 2012;107(1):49–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Tomasello M. Why we cooperate. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Trevino LK. Ethical decision making in organizations: a person-situation interactionist model. Acad Manag Rev. 1986;11(3):601–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Util Probab Hum Decis Mak. 1975;185(4157):141–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Walach H, Schmidt S, Jonas BW. Neuroscience, consciousness and spirituality [Internet]. New York: Springer Science and Business; 2011. Scholar
  89. Werhane PH, Hartman LP, Archer C, Englehardt EE, Pritchard MS. Obstacles to ethical decision-making: mental models, Milgram and the problem of obedience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010.Google Scholar
  90. Woiceshyn J. A model for ethical decision making in business: reasoning, intuition, and rational moral principles. J Bus Ethics. 2011;104(3):311–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Woodward J. Emotion versus cognition in moral decision-making: a dubious dichotomy. In: Liao SM, editor. Moral brains. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2016.Google Scholar
  92. Zimbardo P. The Lucifer effect: understanding how good people turn evil. New York: Random House; 2007.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instituto Ingenio (CSIC-UPV)Universitat Politècnica de ValènciaValenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations