Bloemfontein
tải về 463.97 Kb. Chế độ xem pdf
|
| Second phase
The individual enters an organisation during the second phase, and is exposed to various organisational factors such as a managerial philosophy, managerial behaviours, reinforcement systems and cha- racteristics of the job, which may have a definite influence on the ethical behaviour of the individual (Stead et al., 1994:61). Various external forces such as competitive pressures, resource needs, economic conditions, scarce resources, political and social institutions, and multiple stakeholders simultaneously influence the individual’s ethical behaviour. Companies frequently have to choose between ethical conduct, at the possible sacrifice of competitive edge, and ethically questionable behaviour for the sake of profit- ability (Stead et al., 1994:62). Stead et al. (1994:62) state that re- source scarcity, volatile economic conditions, and pressure from stakeholders may undermine ethical behaviour in organisations. 3. Locus of control According to Spector (2008:236) and Hellrigel et al. (2010:82) locus of control refers to the extent to which individuals believe that they can control events which affect them. Rotter (1966:1) distinguishes between two orientations in locus of control, namely an internal and external orientation. Rotter defines internal locus of control as the degree to which individuals feel in control of their behaviour. Such individuals would be inclined to hold that God helps those who help themselves (Rotter, 1966:1; Spector, 2008:236). According to Rotter
external factors (e.g. luck or fate) control behaviour (Rotter, 1966:1; Spector, 2008:237). Besides internal and external locus of control, Schepers (1995:2) identifies a third dimension of the locus of control construct, namely autonomy. Schepers (2005:2) defines autonomy as “the tendency to attempt to master or be effective in the environ- ment, to impose one’s wishes and designs on it”. The locus of control construct was conceived from Rotter’s social learning theory and Heider’s attribution theory (Bothma & Schepers, 1997:45). According to the social learning theory, reinforcement of behaviour leads to a heightened expectation that specific behaviour will lead to the same reinforcement in the future. Therefore, the re- action to an occurrence is largely determined by an individual’s perception that a reward will follow a specific behaviour. This is in contrast to the degree to which the reward is experienced as being controlled by external powers, regardless of individual behaviour. The relationship between locus of control & ethical behaviour … in the financial sector 292
The social learning theory proposes that both reinforcement and punishment have indirect effects on learning, and that reinforcement and punishment influences the extent to which an individual exhibits a behaviour which has been learned (Bothma & Schepers, 1997:45; Boshoff, 2001:44; Schepers, 2005:2). The attribution theory forms the theoretical basis for the clarification of the means by which individuals interpret others’ behaviour, by providing causal explanations for behaviour (Heider, 1958; Martin, 2005:99; Robbins & Judge, 2007:56; Boshoff 2009:65). The attribu- tion theory was developed by Fritz Heider, and is based on the principle that behaviour can be attributed to internal factors that are related to the individual (e.g. ability and motivation), or external fac- tors from the environment (e.g. level of difficulty of the task and aid from others) (Heider, 1958; McShane & Von Glinow, 2000:174; Kreitner & Kinicki, 2007:224; Boshoff 2009:65). Three criteria which determine whether an individual will develop an internal or external attribution can be identified, namely differentiation (which refers to an individual’s unique behaviour in a specific situation), consistency (which refers to the stability of an individual’s behaviour and the degree to which an individual displays the same behaviour in similar situations at different times), and consensus (which refers to the degree to which an individual’s behaviour concurs with the beha- viour of other individuals who find themselves in similar situations) (Greenberg & Baron, 2000:58; Kreitner & Kinicki, 2007:224-225; Robbins & Judge, 2007:148-149; Boshoff 2009:65-66). Should it be observed that the person’s behaviour corresponds with the behaviour of other persons (consensus is high), that the per- son’s behaviour varies over time (consistency is low), and that the person’s behaviour differs in different situations (differentiation is high), external attributions will be made. In other words the person’s behaviour will be ascribed to external factors from the environment. Should it, however, be observed that the person’s behaviour differs from that of other persons (consensus is low), that the person’s behaviour remains the same over time (consistency is high), and that the person’s behaviour is the same in different situations (differentiation is low), internal attributions will be made. In other words, the person’s behaviour will be attributed to internal factors which relate to the individual (Greenberg & Baron, 2000:58; Robbins & Judge, 2007:148-149; Boshoff, 2009:65-67).
|