Interppret the results of the research just saw presented. How do these results support the core relationship posited in the model?

An ethical judgment is an evaluation of the degree to which we believe some action whether or not we've taken the action already or we're just considering it. We have the decision situation, ethical sensitivity, which leads to the deontological and teleological evaluations that produce ethical judgment. The question is, to what degree do we combine those when we think? Each sales manager was randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups and each saw only one experimental treatment. There was no control group, but nonetheless, it still provided some really good experimental results.

Each treatment group was defined along two variables with two levels each. One level was deontology, that is the treatment involved in ethical action that was wrong versus an ethical act that was right. If a salesperson tells a client that your plant capacity is going to be down, should I order more from him? And the client thinks, gosh, that was a nice thing to do. And therefore, by doing the right thing, he comes home with much more orders.

If he doesn't tell the truth, the client says, well, in that case, I won't order as much. And so the sales has suffered from that particular salesperson. So we have four conditions here: one that's deontologically wrong with a negative outcome and then a positive outcome. The wrong thing to do gets lower scores than the right thing when it comes to arriving at ethical judgments, according to a study by the Pew Research Center. The study asked sales managers what they would do if they found out that a salesperson engaged in the way described in the scenario.

Negative responses mean that they would punish the salesperson, positive responses mean they would reward the sales person along a scale that ranged from negative to positive. If we look at what happens with the deontologically right thing to do, a pay raise for one and a pat on the back for someone that does the right thing with a negative outcome associated with it. It's an important component because it helps us then build a tool kit around which we can analyze the ethical decisions.

So let's look at the mean replies for each circumstance.

2.95 for the deontologically wrong but teleologically right outcome.

In the negative outcome, a 2.06.

When salespeople did the right thing with a positive outcome, big difference 6.24 and 5.82 when they do the right thing with a negative outcome.

Are you looking closely at the data and the results?

If you are, one of the things that you notice is the obvious result that the wrong thing to do gets lower scores than the right thing.

When comparing within a group, our sales managers tended to value doing the right thing more when the outcome was positive.

They gave it a 6.24 versus a negative outcome, they gave a 5.82.

Not a huge difference, but it was statistically significant.

That is, I will judge or evaluate you better if you do the right thing and it yields a positive result than if you do the right thing but it yields a negative consequence.

What is the underlying message here?

The underlying message is that the tleology and the deontology both matter when it comes to arriving at ethical judgments.

Look at the same thing with the deontologically wrong action.

If I lie and the conclusion is positive, it's still horrible, but not as bad as if the outcome is negative.

2.95 versus 2.06, also statistically significant.

So again, evidence that we combine deontology and teleology in our arrival of ethical judgments.

And we do it all the time.

So, let's look at this from a behavioral standpoint.

We ask the sales managers what they would do in terms of their action toward the salesperson if they found out that the salesperson had engaged in the way described in the scenario.

In other words, what would you do?

Positive responses suggest they would reward the salesperson, while negative responses mean they would punish the salesperson.

Zero, meaning I'd ignore it and do nothing.

So negative things signify bad things happening to the salesperson, positive things mean good things happening to the salesperson.

Let's take a look at the mean score of that particular scale.

Negative scores for the wrong action, but just 1.5 for the right outcome.

A negative outcome produces a stronger negative response.

That is, if my salesperson does something wrong, it is awful.

But it's incredibly horrible if it's the opposite.

On the same line, behaviorally, if we look at what happens with the deontologically right thing to do, well, those that produce a positive outcome is going to be up around three.

..

One negative outcome.

So a pay raise for one and a little pat on the back for someone that does the right thing with a negative outcome associated with it.