10.1177/1052562905280842JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION / February 2006Matherne et al. / PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY
“WALK THE TALK”: DEVELOPING
PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY
THROUGH A BUSINESS
PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM
Brett P. Matherne
Loyola University
Steve Gove
Victor Forlani
Jay J. Janney
University of Dayton
This article proposes a pedagogical approach dedicated to help students
develop personal ethical agency—the ability to make decisions that involve
ethical dilemmas consistent with an individual’s ethical standards and profes-
sional standards of practice. The approach presented involves a tripartite
gathering of students, business executives, and faculty in discussions of cases
embedded with ethical dilemmas. Sessions highlight ethical issues that closely
correspond with core components from courses. The article provides a descrip-
tion of personal ethical agency, the developmental stages of the Walk the Talk
program, and assessment of the program and concludes with plans for future
program development and expansion.
Keywords: business ethics; pedagogy; personal ethical agency; business ex-
ecutives; professional standards of practice
Recent corporate scandals have highlighted many unethical decisions by
business leaders, decisions of consequence not only to these executives but
106
Authors’Note: Please address correspondence to Brett P. Matherne, Loyola University, 3636 St.
Charles Avenue, New Orleans, LA 70118; e-mail: matherne@loyno.edu
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION, Vol. 30 No. 1, February 2006 106-133
DOI: 10.1177/1052562905280842
© 2006 Organizational Behavior Teaching Society
also to broader stakeholder communities (e.g., employees, communities,
investors, etc.). With the backdrop of these corporate scandals, the ethical
values of business leaders and the ethics education provided by business
schools are coming into question. The issues underlying these scandals arise
from the decisions of individuals, many of whom possess undergraduate and/
or advanced degrees from elite business schools and prestigious universities
(Jennings, 2004). Accordingly, the role that business schools play in devel-
oping the ethical standards of graduates is at the forefront of this debate.
Business schools are being evaluated, whether they acknowledge it, on
their ability to develop the personal ethical agency of business students—the
ability to identify and resolve issues in a manner consistent with (a) individ-
ual ethical and moral foundations and beliefs, (b) the norms and expectations
of the firm and profession they represent, and (c) as a legal agent of an organi-
zation. How might business schools develop personal ethical agency in their
students? Different pathways for resolution emerge depending on the initial
assumptions about the underlying causes of these lapses. If the problem of
ethical lapses and the resulting scandals rests within the individual, then busi-
ness schools may be tempted to wash their hands completely of the issues
involved, as they are largely powerless to help firms identify those most
likely to engage in unethical behavior. If, however, the scandals are not due
solely to individual causes, but rather are the results of a training void, then
business schools are ideally suited to address this shortcoming.
We suggest that the lack of experience among undergraduate students
with business situations involving ethical dilemmas is one such underlying
cause. In turn, this presents an opportunity to design a targeted program to
improve the development of students’ personal ethical agency. We propose a
pedagogical approach to address these shortcomings in ethics education, one
that aids students in recognizing the subtleties of ethical behavior present in
business by addressing business performance and societal implications of
business decisions (Aspen Institute, 2003; Caux Round Table, 1994) using
case vignettes. We believe this pedagogical approach is the start of an effec-
tive and context-integrated ethics education program that infuses the experi-
ence and insight of business executives into ethics discussions with students.
This effort responds to the current heightened ethical concerns in the busi-
ness world and calls for research and instructional methodologies for inte-
grating ethics within business education beyond add-on modules with
minimal long-term impact (Tanner & Cuff, 1999).
We structure our article as follows: We begin by discussing the concept of
personal ethical agency and its ties to the moral reasoning and cognition liter-
atures. Next, we discuss how a need for professional standards of practice
ethics education developed, using insights from the socialization theory liter-
Matherne et al. / PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY 107
ature to support this approach. Following this, we present our Walk the Talk
ethics program, the learning objectives of this program, its potential benefits
and limitations. We use examples from our incorporation of this approach in
a required senior-level capstone strategic management course at the Univer-
sity of Dayton to illustrate the program. We conclude with direction for
future expansion of this program.
Personal Ethical Agency
How do individuals recognize the ethical dimensions of issues in an envi-
ronment where no clear standards exist? The cognition literature (e.g.,
Walsh, 1995) provides insight by suggesting that individuals develop and use
ethical schemas. When grounded in the routines within a professional field,
an ethical schema can serve as the basis for the development of personal ethi-
cal agency. However, an agency problem can occur when an individual, hired
by an organization to represent the owner’s interest, is presented with an ethi-
cal dilemma where choices include actions that are ethical yet may be con-
trary to the owner’s interest (Fama, 1980). When such a dilemma arises, the
individual is faced with his or her own ethical standards, his or her field’s eth-
ical standards, and the agency relationship inherent in his or her organiza-
tional position. These complex systems of beliefs may not be in complete
alignment at all times; and, therefore, the individual is faced with balancing
between these sometimes-competing perspectives. While moral reasoning
has been identified as the basis of cognitive moral development in complex
social systems (Kohlberg, 1969), the addition of the agency problem adds a
nuance that many individuals will face as employees and that changes the
reasoning process. Therefore, personal ethical agency is a special case of
cognitive moral development in that the ethical decision is being made by an
individual that has fiduciary responsibilities to represent the owner’s best
interests.
The ethical schema of individuals is influenced by the personal values of
each individual. Empirical research on values has demonstrated nine dimen-
sions (Kahle, 1983; Rokeach, 1973) that influence individual decision mak-
ing. Some of these dimensions (self-respect, respect of others, and sense of
belonging) are directly influenced by social interaction. The social learning
that occurs through interaction among a professional community of practice
creates a schema that the individual may draw on when facing ethical issues
and a need for a decision.
The ability of an individual to change his or her stance on an issue in
response to events and criticisms is a necessary component of moral selfhood
108 JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION / February 2006
(Solomon, 1993). This change in one’s ethical stance may be precipitated by
situations to which the individual is exposed or even by criticisms of his or
her particular stance. The introduction of business executives into the discus-
sion of ethical aspects of business decisions can further develop a student’s
personal ethical agency. By including business executives in this approach,
we are attempting to integrate individuals that may be at a higher level of
moral reasoning than students. The conversations are deliberately attempting
to bring the social systems of the organization and society into focus for stu-
dents and are consistent with the conventional level of Kohlberg’s (1969)
moral reasoning development model.
In fields where the answers to the ethical questions have not reached a suf-
ficient level of codification, socialization into the expectations of the com-
munity of practice of that field represents an important aspect of ethics edu-
cation. Without a schema, individuals may be unaware that issues even
involve ethical issues. Accordingly, ethical standards within individual fields
are socially constructed, and the ethical schemas of individuals within that
field are also shaped by members within that field and society at large. We
argue that providing students grounding in philosophy-based ethics, an
exposure to broad ethical issues via a business ethics course, and the opportu-
nity to develop an ethical schema that corresponds to professionals within a
student’s professional field represents significant progress in ethics
education. It is this latter aspect that our program addresses.
PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS OF PRACTICE APPROACH
The pluralistic world of today encompasses many different philosophical
perspectives regarding ethical behavior, thereby agreeing on a single per-
spective for judging business practice is impossible. However, the use of pro-
fessional standards of practice is commonplace and provides a set of guide-
lines that are accepted by practitioners and in law. In an attempt to move from
merely teaching concepts to influencing student behavior in a positive way,
the use of professional standards as the ethical yardstick helps to bridge the
gap of cultural and philosophical differences. Various business fields, includ-
ing the business ethics field, have developed ethics training specifically
linked to professional standards for different business fields. We label this a
professional standards of practice approach. These approaches have been
developed within specific academic disciplines and focus on providing ethics
training that is specific (and sometimes unique) to those disciplines. For pro-
fessional standards of practice approaches, the ethical guidelines are the stan-
dards of practice within a profession (Cressey & Moore, 1983; Nash, 1981);
the expectations of the student’s future “community of practice” (J. S. Brown
Matherne et al. / PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY 109
& Duguid, 1998; Wenger, 1998). While these standards of practice are typi-
cally rooted in classical ethics concepts, they are one step removed from them
and may not specifically reference them. Thus students may interpret the
expectations of their field as divorced from formal ethical theory. As research
in business ethics has found, occupational socialization can influence how
people respond to issues that violate or test the standards of the field (Smith &
Rogers, 2000). These results signal the usefulness of professional standards
of practice ethics training that provide actionable knowledge for students.
Across business disciplines, the degree of reliance on codes of behavior
varies significantly. The accounting field was an early adopter of the profes-
sional standards of practice approach to ethics education. In most other areas,
codification and professional licensing lags. Management is one such field.
At the extreme, priorities and objectives at the heart of ethics and ethical deci-
sion making are not clear. For example, within strategic management there
exists continued debate regarding corporate service to shareholders versus
broader stakeholders (e.g., Davis, Schoorman, & Donaldson, 1997;
Sundaram & Inkpen, 2004). There simply is not, and is not likely to be, a uni-
versal consensus to resolve these competing interests. There exists no
agreed-on standard to codify, thus a pluralistic approach grounded in ethical
principles to processing these competing interests and perspectives is
necessary.
The community of practice’s view on appropriate ethical stances can best
be articulated by the business professionals that face such dilemmas. These
standards are a socially constructed reality that develops in the absence of
codes of ethics or licensing requirements. Therefore, in disciplines where
there is little or no codification, there is an especially strong need to link eth-
ics education in the discipline with standards that exist only within the mem-
bers of the community of practice. Recognizing that these standards exist,
understanding that they are based on formal ethical principles, and identify-
ing ways to discover and apply them is essential for development of personal
ethical agency. This is the aim of our Walk the Talk program.
Walk the Talk Program Overview
The Walk the Talk ethics program consists of a series of luncheons among
students, business executives, and faculty members to discuss ethical dilem-
mas in business decisions. The intention of the program is to build on the eth-
ics foundation developed in philosophy and theology courses. The Walk the
Talk program consists of four aspects that differentiate it from other ethics
programs: a relaxed luncheon environment where students and business
110 JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION / February 2006
executives discuss cases vignettes that parallel concepts and issues in linked
courses. We discuss this pedagogical approach by explaining the conceptual-
ization, development, implementation, assessment, and integration stages of
our program.
PROGRAM CONCEPTUALIZATION
Learning Objectives
1. Use the theoretical basis of ethics. A critical aspect of our pedagogical ap-
proach is that we build on the theoretical foundation provided by earlier
coursework in ethics. This learning objective requires a conscious effort to
connect with other courses to ensure that reinforcement occurs.
2. Incorporate ethical dimensions into business decision making to develop eth-
ics schema. Our approach stresses that ethical dimensions exist in most busi-
ness decisions and should be addressed as part of the decision-making process,
not as a separate component when focusing on the ethical dimensions of these
decisions. Some ethical dimensions may be addressed with heuristics; how-
ever, others are more complex and require direct attention. We focus
specifically on the more complex dimensions.
3. Promote awareness and identification of ethical dilemmas in real-world sce-
narios. The specifically crafted case vignettes are designed with this learning
objective in mind by using recent popular business press articles of companies
facing ethical dimensions of business decisions. In addition, the essential as-
pect of having business executives discuss these ethical dilemmas with
students adds an additional real-world context.
4. Begin to develop personal ethical agency in students. We rely on foundation
ethics course requirements within our curriculum while augmenting this edu-
cation with discipline-specific business decisions that incorporate ethical di-
mensions. The discussion with members from a community of practice helps
to create personal ethical agency within our students.
5. Promote long-term learning via reflection and synthesis of ethical dimensions
of business decisions. The impact of ethical discussions with business execu-
tives about discipline-specific case vignettes is the core of this approach; how-
ever, creating a lasting impression in students requires reflection on these dis-
cussions. Therefore, the associated assignment requires a written summary of
the case vignette discussion. Follow-up discussion in the linked course aids
long-term learning and more directly examines the philosophical
underpinnings of a community of practice.
Necessary Components for Program
Development and Implementation
We discuss the following checklist of necessary components of our Walk
the Talk program to assist others who wish to replicate this program in their
organizations. These insights emerge from 5 years of experience refining our
Matherne et al. / PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY 111
Walk the Talk program. When founded, our Walk the Talk program was an
informal, non-course-related place for students and the local business com-
munity to meet to discuss business ethics. After reviewing the ethics educa-
tion literature and programs of many universities, we found little evidence of
programs that provide students with detailed insight into ethical issues asso-
ciated with specific academic majors and/or business fields. We reviewed our
existing curriculum and found our students were well grounded in classical
ethical theories and foundations and had completed a general business ethics
course but lacked professional standards of practice ethics education for stu-
dents in fields lacking codified professional ethics standards. Hence, the
Walk the Talk program was revised to fulfill this objective. The following dis-
cussion contains necessary components to maximize the value of our Walk
the Talk program.
1. Foundation ethics courses. Philosophy-based and/or religious ethics education
is an essential aspect of a liberal arts foundation on which our program relies.
We do seek not to replicate this education, nor do we propose our Walk the Talk
program as a substitute for this element. Rather, the Walk the Talk program
provides the opportunity for ethical frameworks learned in these foundational
courses to be applied in a discipline-specific context. Drawing on previously
learned frameworks for assessing ethical issues, participants discuss the bene-
fits and drawbacks of resolution alternatives. As in the work environment in
which the students will be employed, they must then propose practical, action-
able responses to the situation faced. This is consistent with calls in the busi-
ness ethics community to focus on “discovering ways to do what is morally
right and socially responsible without ruining your career and company”
(Ciulla, as cited in Stark, 1993, p. 46).
2. Case vignettes specifically linked to courses. The use of case vignettes that di-
rectly relate to ethical issues and primary course concepts is essential to our ap-
proach. In most instances, we have crafted case vignettes specifically for the
program. Such crafting allows alignment of case vignettes with the content of
the course beyond the detail found in existing ethics cases, grounding this ap-
proach with community-of-practice elements (LeClair & Ferrell, 2000). The
benefit of having custom-crafted ethics case vignettes directly tied to the con-
tent of the class (strategic management in this case) is that it allows for seam-
less integration of ethical dilemmas within the relevant field of practice. Stu-
dents can begin to appreciate ethics not as a separate functional area (e.g.,
management, marketing, accounting) but as an integrated philosophy applica-
ble within these other functional areas, relevant throughout their careers. In ad-
dition, course lectures provide the broad ramifications of business decisions on
the corporation, while the case vignettes expand the ramifications of business
decisions to specifically focus on the ethical dimensions of those business de-
cisions. The vignettes not only infuse ethics into a course but also offer levels
of details sufficient to also act as reinforcement of the course content addressed
in the case vignettes through correspondence with identical elements found in
the community of practice.
112 JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION / February 2006
3. Integration into curriculum. The impact of such a program is greatly enhanced
by how it is integrated within the curriculum. In our capstone strategic manage-
ment course, we require each student to attend at least one of the five scheduled
strategic management-oriented Walk the Talk sessions, submit a written sum-
mary of the discussions of the session they attended, and engage in follow-up
classroom discussions. Our approach uses a required course component (5% of
course grade) to encourage reflection after experiencing the discussions with
business executives. The follow-up classroom discussions reiterate the ethical
foundations for some of the ethical issues in each Walk the Talk session. Al-
though students are required to attend one of the Walk the Talk sessions, they
are exposed to all five case vignettes through the classroom discussions follow-
ing each session. This approach allows for multiple discussions about the ethi-
cal dimensions of strategic decision making and the ethical stance of members
from the community of practice.
4. Participation of business executives. The role of our business partners in the
program is a vital element for success. Our partners are typically the owners of
businesses or general managers of larger operations. They are the community
of practice: the managers responsible for the financial performance and the
long-term success of the organization in the community while maintaining an
ethical standing. Whereas business academics tend to focus on theoretical and
analytical aspects, the practitioner provides insight into actual practice (P. R.
Brown & Lint, 1982). We have found that during the sessions, students often
seek to gain insight on practical issues from our business partners.
Undergraduates perceive the business partners as successful, endowing
them with greater credibility for ethical issues relative to faculty members. In
our experience, students do not fully appreciate the importance of ethical
dimensions relating to course topics. Class discussions of mergers and acqui-
sitions, for example, tend to focus on conceptual issues covered in the course
text. Phraseology such as downsize, workforce reduction, and restructuring
masks the reality of implementation: taking jobs away from employees.
Many of our business partners have experienced these effects firsthand. Their
personal experiences allow underaddressed issues to be explored, the conse-
quences of decisions considered, and actual experiences shared. As Master
(2002) noted “there’s really no substitution for live interaction” (p. 52).
Where many students consider ethical issues to be confined to significant,
isolated events, practitioners actively share a different perspective.
The level of commitment of business executives engaged in Walk the Talk
luncheons requires a reciprocal level of commitment by students and faculty,
directly during the luncheon and indirectly through course assignments. Stu-
dent commitments necessary for this program include active discussion of
case vignettes and ethical dilemmas identified with business executives dur-
ing luncheons, willingness of at least one student at each table to present the
analysis of the ethical dilemma(s) identified and decisions made to resolve
Matherne et al. / PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY 113
the dilemma(s), preparation of a written summary of discussions about the
ethical dilemma(s) of the session, and classroom discussion of case vignettes
subsequent to the luncheon session. The faculty’s commitment consists of
course structuring, classroom discussions, and integration of the Walk the
Talk program into course concepts.
5. School of Business administration support. The undertaking of a program in-
volving students, business executives, and faculty members takes tremendous
support by administrators. Program endorsement by the dean of the School of
Business increases the legitimacy of the program and encourages business ex-
ecutives and faculty involvement. This endorsement is critical; however, just as
critical is financial support necessary to provide meals for students and busi-
ness executives and cover program administrative costs.
DEVELOPMENT
Luncheon meetings work well for our Walk the Talks, enabling business
partners to attend with limited scheduling hassle—most of them are free dur-
ing the lunch hour. In addition, we found luncheons are better for students
than breakfast or dinner in terms of their schedules, personal and academic.
The meal setting creates a relaxed atmosphere, with students conversing with
professionals who are not grading them. The sessions last 1 hour and 15 min-
utes, allowing everyone to have air time. A benefit for business partners is the
fact that they do not have to formally prepare and deliver remarks. They
receive the cases in advance, normally reading and mulling them over before-
hand; however, their key contribution is their experiences and discussions
with students at the table. Students are not required to prepare in advance.
The schedule incorporates 15 minutes for reading the case during the session.
This process promotes a relaxed atmosphere that encourages frankness and
allows students to probe the attitudes and perspectives of these professionals.
Selection and development of case vignettes. The selection of case
vignettes begins with selecting broad course-content areas that embody ethi-
cal dimensions, such as downsizing and/or offshore manufacturing. We
search for cases that correspond to current business scenarios that illustrate
the broad subject area of the course chosen for a particular Walk the Talk ses-
sion. If an appropriate case is not identified, it is developed by faculty. Spe-
cific issues from business press articles are judiciously used in the develop-
ment of a fictitious case vignette to add relevancy. Care must be taken to tie
the content to relevant issues in current business operations without allowing
specific attributions to be made to any one business organization. In addition,
a certain amount of vagueness regarding decision outcomes is necessary to
114 JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION / February 2006
foster the discussion of the ethical dimensions in the case vignette. We
include a full range of issues relating to a topic, including actions that clearly
are ethical all the way to those that are unethical, even illegal.
The introduction of red herrings allows students to apply heuristics for
identifying whether an ethical dilemma exists and which dilemmas are most
complex and require the most discussion. The business executives assist stu-
dents by helping them sift through any red herrings and decide which dilem-
mas represent the more complex ethical issues. In the Uniday case (see
Appendix A), we inserted the following sentence to lead business students
directly to a dilemma of following the competition versus determining the
most ethical course of action: “A current trend among other subassembly
manufacturers to address the cost consciousness of the national manufactur-
ers is to close domestic plants and open plants in foreign countries with lower
wages.” Frequently, we hear our business partners indicate that they have
faced similar issues of simply following the trend versus determining the
most appropriate ethical course of action. This reinforces the issue that ethi-
cal challenges are not milestone events but rather ongoing aspects of their
everyday professional and personal lives. The insight about the importance
of ethics in business decisions addresses a common criticism of the case
method—that students are removed from the context of the case, and
decisions may seem parochial and remote (Giacalone, Jurkiewicz, &
Knouse, 2003, p. 591).
The length of case vignettes and level of detail is dictated by the length of
the luncheon (approximately 75 minutes). A 1- to 2-page case provides
enough details for discussion but does not overwhelm either the students or
business executives. In addition to case vignettes, general questions that help
to foster discussion about the ethical dimensions of the case should be sup-
plied to business executives.
As an illustration of how custom-crafted case vignettes facilitate discus-
sion of ethical dilemmas within a discipline, we refer to the issue of corporate
downsizing considered in the Uniday case. When first examined, students
typically develop binary, yes-or-no opinions as to whether the firm should
downsize and export the jobs offshore. In this regard, the case highlights clas-
sic ethical issues associated with downsizing decisions. However, the case is
crafted specifically to draw linkages to multiple strategic management top-
ics; its inclusion in the Walk the Talk program was timed to correspond to in-
class coverage of these issues. For example, the case highlights ethical issues
relating to restructuring and international strategies and to environmental
analysis. The failure of the firm’s management to identify and respond to a
changing general and industry environment and the resultant inconsistency
between internal capabilities and this environment is an ethical issue. In our
Matherne et al. / PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY 115
experience, ethical issues and implications of environmental analysis are dif-
ficult for students to grasp. However, during discussions of the Uniday case,
students typically raise a broad spectrum of issues, such as questioning if fail-
ures in analysis are themselves ethical issues, asking, “Where was the firm’s
management when this storm was brewing?”
Business professional participation. All of the students enrolled in the
course in which we integrate the Walk the Talk program are undergraduate
seniors and are transitioning from student to professional. By integrating this
program into this course, it provides students with an opportunity to gain
insights on the community of practice, the environment in which they will
soon be members. Interaction with business executives (particularly those
who are business owners and managers) provides realistic previews of the
behaviors expected of professionals—a vital influence on actual behaviors
(Trevino, 1986). By connecting business executives and students in this way,
informal mentoring begins to aid students in their transition from student to
professional. This approach follows the recommendation of Woo (2003) to
heighten the awareness of students to ethical dimensions of everyday busi-
ness decisions with the help of business executives’real-world perspectives.
Recruiting capable and interested business partners is the most important
task. There are many ways to engage individuals in this ongoing program.
Possibilities include mailing invitations to business alumni, obtaining faculty
recommendations and/or leads for business partners, identifying people in
groups such as Rotary, Chambers of Commerce, or Service Corps of Retired
Executives who can give you access to their members. In addition, reporting
on the program in university and business school publications and having an
attractive, clear, succinct description of the program to send prospective busi-
ness partners is extremely helpful. We have used all of these methods and
have 48 active business partners, most of whom are repeat participators.
We find that e-mail is critical to efficient, cost-effective scheduling and
communication with participants. It is essential to keep the mailing list up-to-
date, constantly noting changes plus dropping and adding contacts. We alert
our partners of all Walk the Talk dates at the beginning of each semester. We
remind them about a week before each Walk the Talk and ask them to respond
as to whether they will attend. Reminders and specific commitments are
important for ensuring that we have an appropriate balance between students
and faculty and executives (about 5:1:2). They also are effective in terms of
ensuring attendance.
After recruiting business partners, it is important to manage those rela-
tionships well. Managing the relationship with these involved business part-
ners by thanking them and inviting them to university events such as lectures
116 JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION / February 2006
and seminars and sending them university publications they may value is
important for sustaining the program. At the beginning of each session, we
greet our business executives, keeping in touch regarding their lives and
maintaining good rapport. Faculty members also participate in many external
groups, such as the Chamber of Commerce, who become more likely to sup-
port the program. These visits, besides being a professional courtesy, are an
effective way to inform and answer questions, to thank and acknowledge cur-
rent partners, and to encourage prospective participants. Participation pat-
terns vary among business executives. Some attend often, others less so.
Some choose to attend based on the topic, coming for subjects with which
they are familiar. Some do not work out; however, others are very involved
and recruit colleagues or friends.
Funding. Depending on the number of luncheon sessions and number of
attendees, the necessary financial support can reach a sizeable amount. Last
term, for example, the University of Dayton spent about U.S.$2,500, based
on an average of 40 people attending six Walk the Talks per semester with
food charges of about $8 per person and room charges of $60 per session. The
direct costs for luncheons were $2,280, and the balance of the funds was used
for incidentals, mailings, and so on. The administrative costs include course
releases for a faculty member and a graduate assistant designated to this pro-
gram are not included in the direct cost figure. Our program is currently
funded completely by our School of Business; however, there are efforts
under way with our financial development office to receive private support
for the Walk the Talk program.
IMPLEMENTATION
The luncheon discussion sessions where students, members of the busi-
ness community, and faculty meet to discuss the ethical dilemmas in a case
vignette is the core of this pedagogical approach from which ethical schemas
develop further and change within students. A fundamental aspect of the
approach is to train students to identify ethical issues. While ethics is at the
heart of the Walk the Talks, discussion of concepts such as altruism and moral
virtue are rarely explicit. Rather, they are undercurrents—forming the basis
for decision making but rarely seen as the primary issues. We highlight for-
mal ethics concepts during in-class discussions in linked courses following
each Walk the Talk session. These discussions demonstrate to students that
while the terminology of moral and philosophical ethics per se may have
been absent in the Walk the Talk sessions, the underlying ethical principles
are at the heart of the community of practice’s stance on ethical issues. As has
Matherne et al. / PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY 117
been noted, this dimension is critical for business students as “ethical dilem-
mas do not arrive bathed in red lights. There is no sign that says ‘You’re about
to enter an ethical zone’” (Woo, 2003, p. 24).
The luncheons begin with faculty and students greeting business members
at the door and guiding them to a table. It is important to spread out the busi-
ness professionals and professors among the students evenly; a group of six
students, two business executives and one faculty member is ideal to foster
student discussion.
Copies of the case vignette to be discussed are provided for all partici-
pants; however, business members and faculty members receive the case and
accompanying questions in an e-mail prior to arrival at the Walk the Talk.
When guests, faculty, and students are seated, the facilitator welcomes all
participants and explains the process of the Walk the Talk. The facilitator
invites the guests to help themselves to the buffet that is simple but ample. All
are encouraged to begin their meal and discuss the case vignette for the next
hour.
Business executives lead the case vignette discussions with the sample
questions received via prior e-mail, exposing students to the ethical dilem-
mas embedded in the case vignettes. It is through this dialog that students are
exposed to the community of practice. After an hour of discussion, the partic-
ipants are asked to conclude their table discussions and have one student
from each table provide to the whole group a summary presentation of his or
her table’s discussions. These summaries expose all students to the insights
and views from every table and from all business executive perspectives at
the luncheon. Following their attendance at a Walk the Talk, students must
reflect on the discussions and write a summary of the resolution agreed on at
their table, explain why they agree or disagree with this resolution, and
describe the linkages they can identify in the case vignette with the course’s
content (see Appendix B for an excerpt from the course syllabus for a
description of these components). This assignment requires students to
reflect on their own personal values and discern their level of agreement with
their table’s resolution, using their personal ethics and the community of
practice’s view of these issues.
A final component of the program reiterates the ethical dilemmas of the
case vignette for students through classroom discussions, allowing students
to extend the learning experience and to include those who did not attend that
particular Walk the Talk session. Ideally, this in-class activity is conducted in
the days immediately following the Walk the Talk session. In this activity,
instructors provide students a copy of the case along with the in-class exer-
cise (see Table 1 for an example from the Uniday case vignette), break stu-
118 JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION / February 2006
(text continues on p. 123)
119
TA
BL
E
1
Fr
am
ew
o
rk
fo
r
In
st
ru
ct
or
L
ed
In
-C
la
ss
E
xe
rc
ise
1.
Id
en
tif
y
th
re
e
al
te
rn
at
iv
e
co
u
rs
es
o
f a
ct
io
n
th
at
th
e
m
an
ag
em
en
t o
f U
ni
da
y
m
ay
u
nd
er
ta
ke
to
re
so
lv
e
th
e
et
hi
ca
l i
ss
ue
w
ith
in
th
e
ca
se
.
1.
_
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
_
2.
_
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
_
3.
_
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
_
2.
A
ss
es
s t
he
e
th
ic
al
ity
o
f e
ac
h
al
te
rn
at
iv
e
ba
se
d
on
c
on
sis
te
nc
y
w
ith
e
ac
h
ap
pr
oa
ch
to
e
th
ic
al
d
ec
isi
on
m
ak
in
g
an
d
its
im
pa
ct
o
n
e
ac
h
sta
ke
ho
ld
er
g
ro
up
.
Ap
pr
o
a
ch
es
to
E
th
ic
al
D
ec
isi
on
M
ak
in
g
M
or
a
l L
aw
Ju
st
ic
e
Vi
rt
ue
a
n
d
D
ut
y
Re
lig
io
us
Ri
gh
ts
Eq
ui
ty
a
nd
Id
ea
l /
G
ol
de
n
Co
ns
ist
en
t
D
oi
ng
w
ha
t
fai
rn
ess
in
Ru
le
U
til
ita
ria
ni
sm
de
ci
sio
n
is
ri
gh
t
Re
sp
ec
t fo
r
pr
o
ce
du
ra
l,
Ca
rin
g
Ca
ux
R
ou
nd
Ta
bl
e
m
a
ki
ng
be
ca
us
e i
t i
s
in
di
vi
du
al
a
nd
co
m
pe
ns
at
or
y,
D
o
on
to
o
th
er
s
St
ak
eh
ol
de
r G
ro
u
ps
,
M
ax
im
iz
at
io
n
co
n
si
st
en
t
co
n
si
st
en
t
o
rg
an
iz
at
io
na
l
re
tr
ib
u
tiv
e,

a
n
d
Re
sp
on
si
bi
lit
y
a
s
yo
u
w
ou
ld
ge
n
er
a
l p
rin
ci
pl
e &
o
f s
oc
iet
al
w
ith
w
ith
fre
ed
om
a
nd
di
str
ib
u
tiv
e
o
w
ed
d
ue
to
w
is
h
th
em
d
o
se
le
ct
ed
re
sp
on
si
bi
lit
ie
sa
be
ne
fits
ch
ar
a
ct
er
pr
in
ci
pl
es
pr
o
pe
rt
y
di
m
en
sio
ns
re
la
tio
ns
hi
p
o
n
to
y
ou
Cu
sto
m
er
s:
tre
at
c
us
to
m
er
s
w
ith
d
ig
ni
ty
an
d
re
sp
ec
t
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
pr
ov
id
e
qu
al
ity
p
ro
du
ct
s a
nd
se
rv
ic
es
m
ee
tin
g
re
qu
ire
m
en
ts
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
en
ha
nc
e
en
v
iro
nm
en
t,
he
al
th
,
an
d
sa
fe
ty
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
en
su
re
r
es
pe
ct
fo
r d
ig
ni
ty
in
pr
od
uc
ts
an
d
m
ar
ke
tin
g
(co
nti
nu
ed
)
120
Em
pl
oy
ee
s:
tre
at
e
m
pl
oy
ee
s
w
ith
d
ig
ni
ty
an
d
re
sp
ec
t
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
pr
ov
id
e
co
m
pe
ns
at
io
n
th
at
im
pr
ov
es
li
v
in
g
co
nd
iti
on
s
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
pr
ov
id
e
he
al
th
ily
a
nd
d
ig
ni
fie
d
w
o
rk
in
g
co
nd
iti
on
s
n
eg
ot
ia
te
in
g
oo
d
fa
ith
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
de
v
el
op
re
le
v
an
t a
nd
tr
an
sf
er
ab
le
sk
ill
s
be
se
ns
iti
v
e
to
a
nd
a
dd
re
ss
di
slo
ca
tio
n
pr
ob
le
m
s a
ss
oc
ia
te
d
w
ith
b
u
sin
es
s d
ec
isi
on
s
O
w
ne
rs
a
nd
in
v
es
to
rs
: h
on
or
th
e
tr
us
t o
f o
w
n
er
s
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
se
cu
re
a
fa
ir
an
d
co
m
pe
tit
iv
e
re
tu
rn
o
n
in
v
es
tm
en
t
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
TA
BL
E
1
(co
nt
inu
ed
)
Ap
pr
o
a
ch
es
to
E
th
ic
al
D
ec
isi
on
M
ak
in
g
M
or
a
l L
aw
Ju
st
ic
e
Vi
rt
ue
a
n
d
D
ut
y
Re
lig
io
us
Ri
gh
ts
Eq
ui
ty
a
nd
Id
ea
l /
G
ol
de
n
Co
ns
ist
en
t
D
oi
ng
w
ha
t
fai
rn
ess
in
Ru
le
U
til
ita
ria
ni
sm
de
ci
sio
n
is
ri
gh
t
Re
sp
ec
t fo
r
pr
o
ce
du
ra
l,
Ca
rin
g
Ca
ux
R
ou
nd
Ta
bl
e
m
a
ki
ng
be
ca
us
e i
t i
s
in
di
vi
du
al
a
nd
co
m
pe
ns
at
or
y,
D
o
on
to
o
th
er
s
St
ak
eh
ol
de
r G
ro
u
ps
,
M
ax
im
iz
at
io
n
co
n
si
st
en
t
co
n
si
st
en
t
o
rg
an
iz
at
io
na
l
re
tr
ib
u
tiv
e,

a
n
d
Re
sp
on
si
bi
lit
y
a
s
yo
u
w
ou
ld
ge
n
er
a
l p
rin
ci
pl
e &
o
f s
oc
iet
al
w
ith
w
ith
fre
ed
om
a
nd
di
str
ib
u
tiv
e
o
w
ed
d
ue
to
w
is
h
th
em
d
o
se
le
ct
ed
re
sp
on
si
bi
lit
ie
sa
be
ne
fits
ch
ar
a
ct
er
pr
in
ci
pl
es
pr
o
pe
rt
y
di
m
en
sio
ns
re
la
tio
ns
hi
p
o
n
to
y
ou
121
di
sc
lo
se
re
lev
an
t i
nf
or
m
at
io
n
co
n
se
rv
e,
p
ro
te
ct
, a
nd
in
cr
ea
se
as
se
ts
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
Su
pp
lie
rs
: m
ai
nt
ai
n
m
ut
ua
l
re
sp
ec
t w
ith
su
pp
lie
rs
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
en
su
re
b
u
sin
es
s a
ct
iv
iti
es
a
re
fre
e
fro
m
c
oe
rc
io
n
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
fo
ste
r l
on
g-
te
rm
st
ab
ili
ty
in
re
tu
rn
fo
r v
al
ue
, q
ua
lit
y,
co
m
pe
tit
iv
en
es
s
an
d
re
lia
bi
lit
y
pa
y
su
pp
lie
rs
o
n
tim
e
in
ac
co
rd
an
ce
w
ith
ag
re
ed
te
rm
s
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
se
le
ct
su
pp
lie
rs
w
ho
re
sp
ec
t
hu
m
an
d
ig
ni
ty
Co
m
pe
tit
or
s:
m
ai
nt
ai
n
fa
ir
ec
o
n
o
m
ic
c
om
pe
tit
io
n
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
fo
ste
r o
pe
n
tra
de
a
nd
in
v
es
tm
en
t
m
ar
ke
ts
pr
om
ot
e
so
ci
al
ly
a
nd
en
v
iro
nm
en
ta
lly
b
en
ef
ic
ia
l
be
ha
v
io
r
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
re
fra
in
fr
om
q
ue
sti
on
ab
le
pa
ym
en
ts
or
fa
v
o
rs
re
sp
ec
t t
an
gi
bl
e
an
d
in
te
lle
ct
ua
l
pr
op
er
ty
ri
gh
ts
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
re
fu
se
to
u
se
in
fo
rm
at
io
n
ac
qu
ire
d
th
ro
ug
h
di
sh
on
es
t m
ea
ns
(co
nti
nu
ed
)
122
Co
m
m
un
iti
es
: b
e
go
od
c
or
po
ra
te
ci
tiz
en
s
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
re
co
gn
iz
e
go
v
er
n
m
en
t’s
o
bl
ig
at
io
n
to
so
ci
et
y
ra
ise
e
co
no
m
ic
w
el
l-b
ei
ng
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
pr
om
ot
e
an
d
sti
m
ul
at
e
su
st
ai
na
bl
e
de
v
el
op
m
en
t
re
sp
ec
t t
he
in
te
gr
ity
o
f l
oc
al
cu
ltu
re
s
co
n
tr
ib
u
te
to
th
e
co
m
m
un
ity
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
v
ia
c
ha
rit
y,
ed
uc
at
io
na
l a
nd
cu
ltu
ra
l e
nd
ea
v
o
rs
,
an
d
pa
rti
ci
pa
tio
n
a.
C
au
x
Ro
un
d
Ta
bl
e
(19
94
);
mo
dif
ie
d
an
d
ed
ite
d
fo
r l
en
gt
h.
TA
BL
E
1
(co
nt
inu
ed
)
Ap
pr
o
a
ch
es
to
E
th
ic
al
D
ec
isi
on
M
ak
in
g
M
or
a
l L
aw
Ju
st
ic
e
Vi
rt
ue
a
n
d
D
ut
y
Re
lig
io
us
Ri
gh
ts
Eq
ui
ty
a
nd
Id
ea
l /
G
ol
de
n
Co
ns
ist
en
t
D
oi
ng
w
ha
t
fai
rn
ess
in
Ru
le
U
til
ita
ria
ni
sm
de
ci
sio
n
is
ri
gh
t
Re
sp
ec
t fo
r
pr
o
ce
du
ra
l,
Ca
rin
g
Ca
ux
R
ou
nd
Ta
bl
e
m
a
ki
ng
be
ca
us
e i
t i
s
in
di
vi
du
al
a
nd
co
m
pe
ns
at
or
y,
D
o
on
to
o
th
er
s
St
ak
eh
ol
de
r G
ro
u
ps
,
M
ax
im
iz
at
io
n
co
n
si
st
en
t
co
n
si
st
en
t
o
rg
an
iz
at
io
na
l
re
tr
ib
u
tiv
e,

a
n
d
Re
sp
on
si
bi
lit
y
a
s
yo
u
w
ou
ld
ge
n
er
a
l p
rin
ci
pl
e &
o
f s
oc
iet
al
w
ith
w
ith
fre
ed
om
a
nd
di
str
ib
u
tiv
e
o
w
ed
d
ue
to
w
is
h
th
em
d
o
se
le
ct
ed
re
sp
on
si
bi
lit
ie
sa
be
ne
fits
ch
ar
a
ct
er
pr
in
ci
pl
es
pr
o
pe
rt
y
di
m
en
sio
ns
re
la
tio
ns
hi
p
o
n
to
y
ou
dents into groups, making sure to disperse Walk the Talk participants among
the groups. Walk the Talk participants should be advised to take on the role of
discussion leaders, not solution providers.
The instructor requests that each group read the case and develop three
actionable resolutions for the issue presented. The ethicality of these alterna-
tives is then assessed based on the criteria for ethical decision making and its
effect on each stakeholder group. In the strategic management course-
oriented sessions we use the Caux Round Table (1994) categorization of
stakeholders, and the responsibilities of organizations to serve these groups.
Class teams are given 20 to 30 minutes to develop and assess alternatives
before they are asked to present their assessment of the ethical dilemma and
to propose one alternative. When the class teams have completed their pre-
sentations, Walk the Talk participants are asked to share their experiences,
particularly the views expressed by the business professionals, and how these
fit into the more formal models of ethical considerations. The class concludes
by having students identify the ethical standard of the community of practice
in terms of the issue examined.
This approach nicely integrates the practical and philosophical
approaches to decision making and highlights the underlying ethical dimen-
sions of decision making within a community of practice. Students inevitably
realize that there is not a single solution that can fully satisfy all stakeholder
groups and be fully consistent with any one ethical decision-making princi-
ple. Effective evaluation of alternatives requires a pluralistic approach (see
Burton, Dunn, & Goldsby, 2005 [this issue]; Becker, 1992; Timmons, 2002),
whereby the complementary nature of multiple approaches to moral decision
making is assessed in conjunction with its impact on the multiple
stakeholders involved.
ASSESSMENT
As with any pedagogical approach, there are benefits and drawbacks to
the Walk the Talk program. In this section, we discuss benefits for students,
business executives, faculty members, and Schools of Business, and some
drawbacks of this program.
Quantitative findings of student benefits. We conducted two exploratory
tests of program efficacy. First, we compared course evaluations prior to and
following Walk the Talk program implementation. Course evaluations
include one item assessing the degree to which the course exposes the student
“to ethical issues associated with business strategy and policy.” Responses
are anchored on a Likert-type scale with 1 (strong disagree) and 5 (strongly
Matherne et al. / PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY 123
agree). Scores on this metric increased nearly 50%, from 1.75 (n = 55) to 2.60
(n = 52), a significant increase (p < .05) following implementation of the
program.
In a subsequent term, we assessed attitudinal differences between stu-
dents who had and had not yet attended a Walk the Talk session. This was
conducted as part of a midterm evaluation using the same survey item. Stu-
dents who had attended a program session rated the course as providing
greater benefit for exposing ethical issues underlying strategic actions and
decisions. The mean rating for students who had not attended a session (M =
2.7, n = 43) was significantly lower (p < .01) than for those who had attended
(M = 3.5, n = 51). These two findings suggest that the Walk the Talk program
is achieving desired objectives. The reader is, however, cautioned that further
assessment utilizing a validated test instrument, full experimental controls,
and randomized groups is necessary before causal statements regarding
program efficacy can be fully supported.
Qualitative findings of student benefits. We gathered qualitative data via
student assignments to analyze whether our approach met the previously
stated program objectives. Qualitative comments support the quantitative
assessment and provide deeper insight into the effect of the program on the
specific learning objectives stated previously. Table 2 contains sample
qualitative data.
Business professional benefits. The impetus for creating this pedagogical
approach was to incorporate ethical dilemmas of business decisions in a spe-
cific business discipline. By using business executives as the leaders of dis-
cussions, we sought to bring a real-world perspective to the forefront of dis-
cussions about ethical dilemmas. However, an unanticipated benefit for our
business executives began to surface as we continued with the series of dis-
cussions. The feedback we began to receive from our enlisted business exec-
utives suggested that they were also receiving benefits from participating in
the ethical discussions with our students. Some of their comments spoke
directly to the content of the case vignettes. This feedback helps to validate
the relevance of our case vignettes in the minds of business executives from
our local community and provides a credible link for our students between
the conceptual world of academics and the applied world of business.
School of business benefits. Although this program began prior to the rev-
elation of many of the current ethics lapses in business practice, it received
added attention after the publicity of those ethical lapses. Positive feedback
124 JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION / February 2006
(text continues on p. 127)
TA
BL
E
2
Qu
ali
tat
ive

D
at
a
Su
pp
or
tin
g
Le
ar
ni
ng
O
bje
cti
v
es
So
ur
ce
1
So
ur
ce
2
O
bje
cti
v
e
1:
U
til
iz
e
th
e
th
eo
re
tic
al
b
as
is
of
e
th
ic
s.
I b
el
iev
e
th
at
U
D
C
sh
ou
ld
p
ut
a
c
om
bi
na
tio
n
of
th
es
e
al
te
rn
a -
tiv
es
in
to
a
ct
io
n.
I
lik
e
to
th
in
k
of
th
e
so
lu
tio
n
in
te
rm
s o
f
so
ci
al
re
sp
on
sib
ili
ty,

m
ea
n
in
g
th
e
gr
ea
te
st
go
od
fo
r t
he
gr
ea
te
st
nu
m
be
r o
f p
eo
pl
e.
W
e
di
sc
us
se
d
th
e
dr
am
at
ic
e
ffe
ct
s t
ha
t a
p
la
nt
c
lo
su
re
w
o
u
ld
h
av
e
o
n
th
e
co
m
m
un
ity
a
nd
h
ow
it
w
o
u
ld
b
as
i-
ca
lly
d
es
tro
y
th
e
ec
on
om
y.
It
w
o
u
ld
a
ffe
ct
th
e
em
pl
oy
-
ee
s
w
ho
w
o
u
ld
h
av
e
n
o
m
o
n
ey
to
sp
en
d
w
hi
ch
w
o
u
ld
in
tu
rn
tr
ic
kl
e
do
w
n
th
ro
ug
h
ot
he
r b
u
sin
es
se
s.
O
bje
cti
v
e
2:
In
co
rp
or
at
e
et
hi
ca
l d
im
en
sio
ns
in
to
bu
sin
es
s d
ec
isi
on
m
ak
in
g
to
d
ev
el
op
e
th
ic
s s
ch
em
a.
Th
is
le
d
th
e
gr
ou
p
to
d
ev
o
te
m
uc
h
tim
e
di
sc
us
sin
g
th
e
m
ea
ni
ng
o
f e
th
ic
s a
nd
h
ow
it
re
la
te
d
to
th
is
ca
se
. E
th
ic
s i
s a
lw
ay
s a
n
im
po
rta
nt
is
su
e
w
he
n
it
co
m
es
to
st
ra
teg
ic
al
ly
m
an
ag
in
g
an
y
ty
pe
o
f b
u
sin
es
s.
In
th
is
co
ur
se
, w
e
ha
v
e
di
sc
us
se
d
th
e
go
al
o
f
st
ra
te
gy
a
nd
h
ow
to
e
ffe
ct
iv
el
y
m
an
ag
e
th
em
. W
e
ha
v
e
al
so
lo
ok
ed
a
t d
iff
er
en
t t
yp
es
o
f s
ta
ke
ho
ld
er
s a
nd
th
ei
r i
m
po
rta
nc
e
to
th
e
fir
m
. T
hi
s p
ar
tic
ul
ar
c
as
e
de
m
on
str
at
ed
h
ow
e
as
y
it
ca
n
be
to
n
eg
le
ct
th
e
sta
ke
ho
ld
er
s a
nd
th
ei
r v
al
ue
to
th
e
fir
m
.
Th
e
bi
gg
es
t i
ss
ue
s t
ha
t w
e
ta
lk
ed
a
bo
ut
w
as
h
ow
o
r
if
th
e
m
an
ag
er
s s
ho
ul
d
co
m
m
un
ic
at
e
th
e
sta
te
o
f t
he
bu
sin
es
s
to
th
ei
r e
m
pl
oy
ee
s a
nd
h
ow
to
id
en
tif
y
pr
ob
le
m
s a
nd
ge
t e
m
pl
oy
ee
s t
o
w
o
rk
to
ge
th
er
to
o
v
er
co
m
e
th
ei
r
cr
isi
s.
O
bje
cti
v
e
3:
P
ro
m
ot
e
aw
ar
en
es
s
an
d
id
en
tif
ic
a-
tio
n
of
e
th
ic
al
d
ile
m
m
as
in
re
al
-w
o
rld
sc
en
ar
io
s.
H
e
(bu
sin
es
s p
ro
fe
ss
io
na
l)
sai
d t
he
re
are
a
lot
of
fa
ct
or
s
to
c
on
-
sid
er
a
bo
ut
th
e
sit
ua
tio
n.
P
ro
ba
bl
y
th
e
m
os
t i
m
po
rta
nt
fa
ct
or
be
in
g
fin
an
ci
al
. W
ha
t i
f y
ou
h
av
e
a
br
an
d
ne
w
c
ar
a
n
d
a
ho
us
e?
W
o
u
ld
y
ou
fo
llo
w
y
ou
r i
nt
eg
rit
y
an
d
do
w
ha
t i
s r
ig
ht
?
Th
is
w
as
th
e
bu
lk
o
f t
he
d
isc
us
sio
n
ab
ou
t t
he
e
th
ic
al
is
su
e.
I h
av
e
le
ar
ne
d
th
at
a
d
ec
isi
on
c
an
a
ffe
ct
m
or
e
th
an
th
e
pe
op
le
in
v
o
lv
ed
. I
d
id
n
ot
re
al
ly
th
in
k
ab
ou
t t
he
b
an
ks
,
ed
uc
at
io
n
sy
ste
m
, t
ax
d
ol
la
rs
, a
nd
th
e
ho
us
e
m
ar
ke
ts
. I
th
ou
gh
t t
he
o
nl
y
pe
op
le
w
ho
w
o
u
ld
b
e
af
fe
ct
ed
w
o
u
ld
be
th
e
pe
op
le
b
ei
ng
la
id
o
ff
an
d
th
e
co
m
pa
ny
in
v
o
lv
ed
.
(co
nti
nu
ed
)
125
126
O
bje
cti
v
e
4:
B
eg
in
to
de
v
el
op
p
er
so
na
l e
th
ic
al
ag
en
cy
in
st
ud
en
ts.
Th
is
ca
se
is
o
ne
th
at
g
av
e
m
y
ta
bl
e
a
lo
t o
f t
ro
ub
le
. T
he
sit
ua
tio
n
is
a
ve
ry
d
iff
ic
ul
t o
ne
to
a
ss
es
s w
ith
th
e
fe
w
fa
ct
s
w
e
ha
d.
W
ha
t’s

be
st
fo
r t
he
c
om
pa
ny
a
nd
w
ha
t’s

be
st
fo
r t
he
to
w
n
a
re
d
iff
er
en
t.
Ri
gh
t n
ow
U
D
C
is
co
ns
id
er
in
g
m
ov
in
g
th
ei
r p
la
nt
to
a
lo
ca
tio
n
w
he
re
th
e
wa
ge
s a
re
ex
tr
em
el
y
lo
w
.
I’
m
n
ot
su
re
if
th
at
’
s
et
hi
ca
l i
n
its
el
f t
o
be
p
ay
in
g
su
ch
a
lo
w
w
ag
e
fo
r a
sk
ill
ed
p
os
iti
on
.
Th
e
ca
se
is
p
re
tty
v
ag
ue
b
u
t g
iv
es
a
lo
t o
f i
ns
ig
ht
to
th
e
et
hi
ca
l d
ile
m
m
as
th
at
m
an
ag
er
s a
re
p
ut
in
w
hi
le
ru
n -
n
in
g
a
bu
sin
es
s.
Th
er
e
is
an
o
bl
ig
at
io
n
to
th
e
co
m
m
u-
n
ity
,

sh
ar
eh
ol
de
rs
, e
m
pl
oy
ee
s,
et
c.
O
bje
cti
v
e
5:
P
ro
m
ot
e l
on
g-
te
rm
le
ar
ni
ng
v
ia
re
fle
ct
io
n
an
d
sy
nt
he
sis
o
n
et
hi
ca
l d
i-
m
en
sio
ns
o
f b
u
sin
es
s d
ec
i-
sio
ns
.
U
ni
da
y
is
a
sm
al
l t
ow
n
th
at
is
e
co
no
m
ic
al
ly
d
ep
en
da
nt
o
n
U
D
C.
U
D
C
em
pl
oy
s a
bo
ut
1
0,
00
0
pe
op
le
, w
hi
ch
is
o
ne
te
nt
h
o
f t
he
e
nt
ire
p
op
ul
at
io
n
fo
r U
ni
da
y.
H
al
f o
f t
ho
se
p
eo
pl
e
w
ill
im
m
ed
ia
te
ly
lo
se
th
ei
r jo
bs,
an
d t
his
lo
ss
wi
ll c
rea
te
a l
arg
e
v
ac
u
u
m
w
ith
in
th
e
co
m
m
un
ity
.

Fa
m
ili
es
w
ill
h
av
e
to
m
ov
e
o
u
t
o
f U
ni
da
y,
pu
ll
th
ei
r c
hi
ld
re
n
ou
t o
f s
ch
oo
ls,
a
nd
fi
nd
n
ew
w
o
rk
e
lse
w
he
re
. T
he
re
m
ai
nd
er
o
f t
he
w
o
rk
fo
rc
e
m
ay
b
ec
om
e
re
se
n
tfu
l o
f t
he
m
an
ag
em
en
t a
t U
D
C.
T
he
u
ni
on
a
nd
th
e
re
st
o
f t
he
w
o
rk
er
s
m
ay
b
ec
om
e
le
ss
p
ro
du
ct
iv
e
be
ca
us
e
of
th
is
re
se
n
tm
en
t.
W
e
ca
n
s
ee
in
sig
ht
s a
nd
v
iew
po
in
ts
of
a
ll
di
ffe
re
nt
p
eo
pl
e,
so
m
e
o
f w
ho
m
a
re
m
y
pe
er
s,
te
ac
he
rs
in
th
e
bu
sin
es
s
sc
ho
ol
, a
nd
p
ro
fe
ss
io
na
ls
in
th
e
co
m
m
un
ity
.

Th
e
di
sc
us
-
sio
n
of
a
p
ro
bl
em
a
nd
fi
nd
in
g
w
ay
s t
o
ov
er
co
m
e
it
or
de
al
w
ith
it
is
a
v
er
y
im
po
rta
nt
sk
ill
to
h
av
e.
In
m
y
fu
-
tu
re
I
am
g
oi
ng
to
e
nc
ou
nt
er
p
ro
bl
em
s a
nd
w
ill
h
av
e
to
so
rt
th
em
o
ut
n
ot
o
nl
y
in
di
v
id
ua
lly
b
u
t w
ith
o
th
er
p
eo
-
pl
e
as
w
el
l t
o
fin
d
a
pr
ob
ab
ly
so
lu
tio
n.
N
OT
E:
U
D
C
=
U
ni
da
y
D
ev
ic
es
C
or
po
ra
tio
n.
TA
BL
E
2
Qu
ali
tat
ive

D
at
a
Su
pp
or
tin
g
Le
ar
ni
ng
O
bje
cti
v
es
So
ur
ce
1
So
ur
ce
2
from the local business community, alumni boards, and business advisory
boards encouraged further development of the program. Business Advisory
Council members requested a presentation to gain more insight to how stu-
dents were being trained to view ethical dimensions of business decisions. In
addition, this program is consistent with the revised standards of the Associa-
tion to Advance Collegiate Business Schools (AACSB; Section 2, Standard
15) for the assurance of learning standards pertaining to ethics education (see
AACSB, 2004, p. 22). The program also received praise during our recent
AACSB review using this new standard.
While students and practitioners are the primary recipients of program
benefits, business school faculty members also benefit by participating in this
program. Many business faculty members have limited exposure to the topic
of ethics (Shaw, 1996) and lack pedagogical approaches for conveying ethi-
cal dimensions of course topics. Our program seeks to overcome this as it
highlights the expertise of business executives rather than the shortcomings
of business faculty. The program provides a “plug-and-play” approach for
incorporating ethics into a course. Faculty may fear that students will not be
interested in ethical issues and coverage may hurt course evaluations. We
found the opposite to be true, having seen increases in evaluation metrics dur-
ing the term with the incorporation of ethics. If course evaluations systemati-
cally included the assessment of ethics coverage, the value of the program
across a business curriculum can be better assessed.
Limitations. In this pedagogical approach of infusing ethics within the
business decision-making process, there are potential pitfalls associated with
the content derived in the case vignettes and the use of business executives to
inject the realism of ethical dilemmas. One pitfall associated with the case
vignettes is that connections to real-life situations in a student’s own life may
cloud his or her ability to view a business decision from an organizational
member’s point of view. We encountered this particular pitfall with our
downsizing case vignette. Some of our student’s parents were downsized in
recent years, and their view of the ethical dilemma associated with downsiz-
ing did not allow them to view the other side of this ethical issue. The risk of
using current events from the popular business press includes this trade-off.
Another potential pitfall is the dependence on business executives for
their input on ethical dilemmas. Those within organizations may have views
of ethics and the responsibility of management far removed from that of
broader segments of society or communities of practice (Cressey & Moore,
1983). We faced this problem in a case vignette crafted to illustrate the ethical
considerations of corporate intelligence. One of our business executives for
this luncheon discussion, unbeknownst to us, was a former military intelli-
Matherne et al. / PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY 127
gence agent. His views on the ethics of intelligence gathering was steeped in
national security interests and led to some interesting conclusions with his
group of students. Although it is difficult to safeguard against these types of
unknown experiences and potential biases, care must be taken to revisit dis-
cussions in the classroom to identify students’ ability to focus on the ethical
dilemma. On the positive side, such differing perspectives can add to the
value for students by introducing multiple perspectives in which to view any
particular ethical dilemma.
The phraseology used to describe some of the ethical dilemmas to prevent
immediate identification of an ethical dilemma by students may convey a less
severe nature than if described in other terms. The use of words such as down-
sizing and rightsizing are prime examples of euphemisms used to make
actions seem less offensive than by using descriptions such as firing employ-
ees. Indeed, the use of euphemisms has been used as a mechanism of rational-
ization (Ashforth & Anand, 2003) for actual actions of business decision
makers. In fact, Trevino and Brown (2004) discussed the downloading of
music from the Internet as one such euphemism that may be viewed differ-
ently by students if the word stealing were used instead of downloading.
INTEGRATION
At present, the Walk the Talk program is an integrated component of the
capstone undergraduate business course; however, future enhancements can
increase the scope of this program. As the program has progressed from
semester to semester, more and more faculty members have begun to attend
these luncheon sessions. Since its inception, several faculty members have
written cases and incorporated the Walk the Talk program into their courses
by writing case vignettes specific to their course concepts. Eager to expose
their students to ethical dilemmas in their fields through this program, faculty
members in marketing, management information systems, and accounting
have also submitted cases for inclusion in the Walk the Talk luncheon ses-
sions. This case vignette generation indicates one direction for this program:
expansion into course components of other business disciplines.
While leveraging the benefits and costs of the program by extending to
other business disciplines is an immediate initiative, extending this program
to other academic disciplines beyond the Business School is also a possibil-
ity. Considering the ethical debate surrounding bioengineering of foods,
there seems to be a possible extension into the hard science side of many uni-
versities. Current ethical issues of the No Child Left Behind program is also a
possible venue for introducing this into public administration and education
128 JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION / February 2006
schools. These are only two examples of potential extensions across campus,
but ones that seem topical.
Outside of extensions to other undergraduate programs, we also envision
the opportunity to expand this program into graduate programs and executive
education. Given that many MBA programs group students into cohorts that
matriculate through core courses together, a separate Walk the Talk could be
organized around issues for graduate students. The program time frame may
need to be extended to allow these students, who typically possess more busi-
ness experience, to share their perspectives and discuss the ethical dilemmas.
There is a possibility within MBA programs to coordinate the delivery of a
Walk the Talk program in the capstone management class, many of which are
case-based classes. Beyond graduate programs, there may be opportunities
to deliver a Walk the Talk program in companies. Because ethics violations
have become such a high profile issue for media outlets, we perceive that
companies may want only internal members to take part in such a program.
The structure of the program is flexible enough to take any particular concern
into account.
Finally, we envision the future direction of this program as a type of part-
nership beyond the confines of the immediate university community (Friga,
Bettis, & Sullivan, 2003). In this current period of heightened awareness of
ethical issues among many stakeholders in companies, businesses may be
interested in how to help create a stronger awareness of ethical issues among
their employees. This desire of businesses to increase ethics awareness cre-
ates an avenue for partnerships. However, there is also an opportunity to part-
ner with other universities and community colleges on the topic of ethics edu-
cation. The range of perspectives can increase when including others from
different backgrounds and experiences just as the program incorporates the
community-of-practice perspective directly into the program. Recalling the
suggestions of Friga et al. (2003) that partnerships in a variety of contexts
represent business school strategies for the next century, we foresee this pro-
gram as a springboard to creating partnerships with other entities and other
initiatives.
Conclusion
In this article, we outlined our Walk the Talk program for conveying
discipline-specific ethics to business undergraduates. The core benefit of the
program is the conveyance of the ethics practices pertinent to practitioners in
a student’s academic field—their professional community of practice. This
program contains many unique aspects that differentiates it from other
Matherne et al. / PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY 129
approaches to ethics training and incorporates many of the best practices
forwarded in ethics education.
The Walk the Talk program is unique in the direct incorporation of busi-
ness executives into the ethics training of business students. This partnership
with the business community serves as an effective means of conveying the
expectations of the professional community for addressing ethical issues and
decisions. Our business partners provide insight into the relevance and preva-
lence of ethical issues in the everyday work environment. By continually
attending Walk the Talk events, they signal to students their commitment to
ethics in their everyday work lives. In return, the business community
benefits from continued ethics training.
Appendix A
Case Vignette Example
The Business Case for Downsizing: UDC and Uniday
Uniday is a small town located in the southwest corner of Ohio and home to the
headquarters of Uniday Devices Corporation (UDC), a subassembly manufacturer
for a number of national manufacturers. Uniday and UDC have grown together over
the past 50 years with the town’s population reaching 50,000 people and employment
at the UDC plant at around 9,875 people in 1999. Uniday and its citizens have enjoyed
the growing demand for the national manufacturers’ products over the past 50 years.
The period of economic growth has pushed the standard of living upward in Uniday,
and in 1996, the town was voted as one of the best towns by Fortunate magazine based
on quality-of-life components such as average annual household income, quality of
life, and infrastructure. The union at UDC had not pushed for greater job assurances
during UDC’s history because employment continued to grow modestly each year
and because UDC was one of the few subassembly manufacturers that institutional-
ized a profit-sharing plan for all members of the organization. UDC always led the
subassembly industry in worker productivity, a fact on which they prided themselves.
However, the economic recession of the past 5 years has increased competition
among the national manufacturers, UDC’s customers, resulting in major price wars.
The push for lower prices from the national manufacturers has trickled down to
their suppliers, and UDC has watched their profits dwindle from U.S.$70M in 1998 to
just $5.5M in 2002. A current trend among other subassembly manufacturers to
address the cost consciousness of the national manufacturers is to close domestic
plants and open plants in foreign countries with lower wages. UDC’s union did not
seek wage concessions during the current downturn as many of their competitors did
but continued with the current level of employees and issued a memo of understand-
ing to the union in May of 1999 that they would maintain the employment level at
9,875. However, the continued pressure to reduce costs is rumored to contribute to
UDC’s first loss in 2003, and the top management team is searching for ways to
130 JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION / February 2006
Matherne et al. / PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY 131
address this issue. The board of directors meeting is in 2 weeks, and management
must present their plan at the meeting and seek approval for their plan. In addition to
the industry experts on the board, the superintendent of the school system, a council-
woman, and the town’s tax assessor are all members of the board. The chief financial
officer of UDC has pitched a plan to the CEO to cut 4,000 jobs and open a manufactur-
ing facility in southern Mexico to take advantage of NAFTA and continue to maintain
a healthy wage for the remaining workers employed in UDC’s Uniday facility. How-
ever, the CEO has not decided what proposal he will present to the board.
NOTE: This case concerns a fictional town and a fictional business. Any similarity to existing
towns or businesses is coincidental.
Appendix B
Syllabus Excerpt
Individual Ethics Assignment
The ethical aspects of organizational actions are increasingly being scrutinized by
a range of constituents including employees, investors, and regulators. Full consider-
ation of the ethical implications of strategic actions is imperative. During the course
of the semester, you will have the opportunity to attend a luncheon with area business
executives that will include small group discussions focused on the ethics of strategic
situations. Advance registration will be required and space for each session is on a
first-come, first-serve basis. Specific dates and times will be available at the time of
event sign-up. Topics are expected to include
September Competitive Intelligence & Information Gathering
October Corporate Restructuring & Stakeholders
November Corporate Governance
Following the luncheon, you are to provide a 1-page report to include the
following:
identification of the ethical issue and the chapter to which it relates
a brief summary of the different views expressed regarding the issue by those in
your discussion
a summary of the alternatives for resolving the issue proposed
the specific course of action that you would recommend for resolving the issue
Address the following question: What other chapters and/or issues covered in
the course might a similar situation apply?
The written assignment is due at the start of class on the first day following the lun-
cheon. Attendees will be provided an opportunity to provide the class with an over-
view of the issue and the discussion. Grading will be based on your participation at the
luncheon, your written work, and your contribution to the in-class discussion.
References
Association to Advance Collegiate Business Schools. (2004). Ethics education in business
schools: Report of the Ethics Education Task Force to AACSB International’s Board of
Directors. St. Louis, MO: AACSB International.
Ashforth, B. E., & Anand, V. (2003). The normalization of corruption in organizations. In R. M.
Kramer & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 25, pp. 1-52).
Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Aspen Institute. (2003). The state of affairs for management education and social responsibility.
Aspen, CO: Author.
Becker, L. C. (1992). Places for pluralism. Ethics, 102, 707-719.
Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1998). Organizational knowledge. California Management Review,
40(3), 90-111.
Brown, P. R., & Lint, P. E. (1982). Co-teaching: A key to auditing instruction. Journal of Accoun-
tancy, 154(3), 94-98.
Burton, B. K., Dunn, C. P., & Goldsby, M.. (2005). Moral philosophies in business ethics educa-
tion: It is about time. Journal of Management Education, 30, 90-105.
Caux Round Table. (1994). Principles for business. St. Paul, MN: Author.
Cressey, D. R., & Moore, C. A. (1983). Managerial values and corporate codes of ethics. Califor-
nia Management Review, 25(4), 53-77.
Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of manage-
ment. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 20-47.
Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy,
88(2), 288-307.
Friga, P. N., Bettis, R. A., & Sullivan, R. S. (2003). Changes in graduate management education
and new business school strategies for the 21st century. Academy of Management Learning
and Education, 2(3), 233-249.
Giacalone, R. A., Jurkiewicz, C. L., & Knouse, S. B. (2003). A capstone project in business eth-
ics: Building an ethics training program. Journal of Management Education, 27(5), 590-607.
Jennings, M. M. (2004). Incorporating ethics and professionalism into accounting education and
research: A discussion of the voids and advocacy for training in seminal works in business
ethics. Issues in Accounting Education, 19(1), 7-26.
Kahle, L. R. (1983). Social values and social change: Adaptation of life in America. New York:
Praeger
Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive development approach to socialization,
In D. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347-480). Chicago:
Rand McNally.
LeClair, D. T., & Ferrell, L. (2000). Innovation in experiential business ethics training. Journal of
Business Ethics, 23, 313-322.
Master, M. (2002). Ethics at work: The disconnect in ethics training. Across the Board, 39(5), 51-
52.
Nash, L. L. (1981). Ethics without the sermon. Harvard Business Review, 59(6), 78-90.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.
Shaw, W. H. (1996). Business ethics today: A survey. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 489-500.
Smith, A., & Rogers, V. (2000). Ethics-related responses to specific situation vignettes: Evi-
dence of gender-based differences and occupational socialization. Journal of Business Eth-
ics, 28, 73-86.
132 JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION / February 2006
Solomon, R. (1993). Ethics and excellence: Cooperation and integrity in business. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Stark, A. (1993, May/June). What’s the matter with business ethics? Harvard Business Review,
17(3), 38-48.
Sundaram, A. K., & Inkpen, A. C. (2004). The corporate objective revisited. Organization Sci-
ence, 15(3), 350-363.
Tanner, J., & Cuff, M. (1999). The transient effects of limited ethics training. Journal of Educa-
tion for Business, 74(6), 332-338.
Timmons, M. (2002). Moral theory: An introduction. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Trevino, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision making in organizations: A person-situation
interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 601-617.
Trevino, L. K., & Brown, M. E. (2004). Managing to be ethical: Debunking five business ethics
myths. Academy of Management Executive, 18(2), 69-81.
Walsh, J. P. (1995). Managerial and organizational cognition: Notes from a trip down memory
lane. Organization Science, 6(3), 280-321.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Woo, C. A. (2003, May/June). Personally responsible. BizEd, 22-27.
Matherne et al. / PERSONAL ETHICAL AGENCY 133