IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v118y2013i3p515-527.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

If You Can’t See the Forest for the Trees, You Might Just Cut Down the Forest: The Perils of Forced Choice on “Seemingly” Unethical Decision-Making

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Wood
  • Theodore Noseworthy
  • Scott Colwell

Abstract

Why do otherwise well-intentioned managers make decisions that have negative social or environmental consequences? To answer this question, the authors combine the literature on construal level theory with the compromise effect to explore the circumstances that lead to seemingly unethical decision-making. The results of two studies suggest that the degree to which managers make high-risk tradeoffs is highly influenced by how they mentally represent the decision context. The authors find that managers are more likely to make seemingly unethical tradeoffs when psychological distance is high (rather than low) and when they are forced to choose between competing alternatives. However, when given the option not to choose, managers better reflect on the consequences of each alternative, and thus become more likely to choose options with less risk of negative consequences. The results suggest that simply offering managers the option not to choose may reduce psychological distance and help organizations avoid seemingly unethical decision-making. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Wood & Theodore Noseworthy & Scott Colwell, 2013. "If You Can’t See the Forest for the Trees, You Might Just Cut Down the Forest: The Perils of Forced Choice on “Seemingly” Unethical Decision-Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 515-527, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:118:y:2013:i:3:p:515-527
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-012-1606-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10551-012-1606-x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-012-1606-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    2. Lora Reed & Deborah Vidaver-Cohen & Scott Colwell, 2011. "Erratum to: A New Scale to Measure Executive Servant Leadership: Development, Analysis, and Implications for Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(3), pages 507-508, July.
    3. Dhar, Ravi, 1997. "Consumer Preference for a No-Choice Option," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(2), pages 215-231, September.
    4. Maurice Schweitzer & Donald Gibson, 2008. "Fairness, Feelings, and Ethical Decision- Making: Consequences of Violating Community Standards of Fairness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 77(3), pages 287-301, February.
    5. John Sparks & Yue Pan, 2010. "Ethical Judgments in Business Ethics Research: Definition, and Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 91(3), pages 405-418, February.
    6. David Fritzsche & E. Oz, 2007. "Personal Values’ Influence on the Ethical Dimension of Decision Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 75(4), pages 335-343, November.
    7. Sean Valentine & Terri Rittenburg, 2007. "The Ethical Decision Making of Men and Women Executives in International Business Situations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 125-134, March.
    8. Simonson, Itamar & Nowlis, Stephen M, 2000. "The Role of Explanations and Need for Uniqueness in Consumer Decision Making: Unconventional Choices Based on Reasons," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(1), pages 49-68, June.
    9. Shani, Yaniv & Igou, Eric R. & Zeelenberg, Marcel, 2009. "Different ways of looking at unpleasant truths: How construal levels influence information search," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 36-44, September.
    10. Malkoc, Selin A. & Zauberman, Gal & Bettman, James R., 2010. "Unstuck from the concrete: Carryover effects of abstract mindsets in intertemporal preferences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 112-126, November.
    11. Simonson, Itamar & Nowlis, Stephen M., 2000. "The Role of Explanations and Need for Uniqueness in Consumer Decision Making: Unconventional Choices Based on Reasons," Research Papers 1610, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    12. Theodore J. Noseworthy & June Cotte & Seung Hwan (Mark) Lee, 2011. "The Effects of Ad Context and Gender on the Identification of Visually Incongruent Products," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 38(2), pages 358-375.
    13. Karni, Edi & Schwartz, Aba, 1977. "Search theory: The case of search with uncertain recall," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 38-52, October.
    14. Lora Reed & Deborah Vidaver-Cohen & Scott Colwell, 2011. "A New Scale to Measure Executive Servant Leadership: Development, Analysis, and Implications for Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(3), pages 415-434, July.
    15. Scott Colwell & Michael Zyphur & Marshall Schminke, 2011. "When does Ethical Code Enforcement Matter in the Inter-Organizational Context? The Moderating Role of Switching Costs," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 104(1), pages 47-58, November.
    16. Andranik Tumasjan & Maria Strobel & Isabell Welpe, 2011. "Ethical Leadership Evaluations After Moral Transgression: Social Distance Makes the Difference," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 99(4), pages 609-622, April.
    17. Vitell, Scott J. & Paolillo, Joseph G. P. & Thomas, James L., 2003. "The Perceived Role of Ethics and Social Responsibility: A Study of Marketing Professionals," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 63-86, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ulrike Reisach, 2016. "The creation of meaning and critical ethical reflection in operational research," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 4(1), pages 5-32, June.
    2. Theodorakis, Ioannis G. & Painesis, Grigorios, 2022. "Ad eroticism from a psychological distance perspective: Investigating its effects in light of consumers’ sex, ethical judgments, and moral attentiveness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 524-539.
    3. Perko, Igor, 2017. "Behaviour-based short-term invoice probability of default evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(3), pages 1045-1054.
    4. Merriam Haffar & Cory Searcy, 2017. "Classification of Trade-offs Encountered in the Practice of Corporate Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 495-522, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hristina Nikolova & Cait Lamberton, 2016. "Men and the Middle: Gender Differences in Dyadic Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 43(3), pages 355-371.
    2. Yan, Huan & Chang, En-Chung & Chou, Ting-Jui & Tang, Xiaofei, 2015. "The over-categorization effect: How the number of categorizations influences shoppers' perceptions of variety and satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 631-638.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:2:p:136-149 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Claire I. Tsai & Min Zhao & Dilip Soman, 2022. "Salient knowledge that others are also evaluating reduces judgment extremity," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 366-387, March.
    5. Christian Hildebrand & Gerald Häubl & Andreas Herrmann & Jan R. Landwehr, 2013. "When Social Media Can Be Bad for You: Community Feedback Stifles Consumer Creativity and Reduces Satisfaction with Self-Designed Products," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 14-29, March.
    6. Alexander Dilger & Thomas Gehrig & Marko Sarstedt, 2019. "(Ir)Rationality of decisions in business research and practice: introduction to the special issue," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 1-7, April.
    7. Raphael Thomadsen & Robert P. Rooderkerk & On Amir & Neeraj Arora & Bryan Bollinger & Karsten Hansen & Leslie John & Wendy Liu & Aner Sela & Vishal Singh & K. Sudhir & Wendy Wood, 2018. "How Context Affects Choice," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 3-14, March.
    8. Pinger, Pia & Ruhmer-Krell, Isabel & Schumacher, Heiner, 2016. "The compromise effect in action: Lessons from a restaurant's menu," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 14-34.
    9. Carly Wayne & Roni Porat & Maya Tamir & Eran Halperin, 2016. "Rationalizing Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 60(8), pages 1473-1502, December.
    10. Vishal Bindroo & Xin He & Raj Echambadi, 2016. "Satisfaction—Repurchase Intentions Relationship: Exploring the Contingent Roles of Consideration Set Size and Price Consciousness," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 3(3), pages 115-125, December.
    11. Christopher K. Hsee & Yuval Rottenstreich & Alois Stutzer, 2012. "Suboptimal choices and the need for experienced individual well-being in economic analysis," International Journal of Happiness and Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(1), pages 63-85.
    12. Kim, Jungkeun & Spence, Mark T. & Marshall, Roger, 2018. "The Color of Choice: The Influence of Presenting Product Information in Color on the Compromise Effect," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 167-185.
    13. Didi Alaoui, Mohamed & Valette-Florence, Pierre & Cova, Véronique, 2022. "How psychological distance shapes hedonic consumption: The moderating role of the need to justify," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 57-69.
    14. Ruiz-Palomino, Pablo & Bañón-Gomis, Alexis, 2017. "The negative impact of chameleon-inducing personalities on employees' ethical work intentions: The mediating role of Machiavellianism," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 102-115.
    15. Terry Connolly & Jochen Reb & Edgar E. Kausel, 2013. "Regret salience and accountability in the decoy effect," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(2), pages 136-149, March.
    16. Simonson, Itamar & Kramer, Thomas & Young, Maia, 2003. "Effect Propensity: The Location of the Reference State in the Option Space as a Determinant of the Direction of Effects on Choice," Research Papers 1788, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    17. Simonson, Itamar, 2007. "Will I Like A "Medium" Pillow? Another Look At Constructed And Inherent Preferences," Research Papers 1977r1, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    18. Sohn, Yong Seok & Ko, Man Ting, 2021. "The impact of planned vs. unplanned purchases on subsequent purchase decision making in sequential buying situations," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    19. Liang Guo, 2016. "Contextual Deliberation and Preference Construction," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2977-2993, October.
    20. Utpal M. Dholakia & Itamar Simonson, 2005. "The Effect of Explicit Reference Points on Consumer Choice and Online Bidding Behavior," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 206-217, October.
    21. Simonson, Itamar & Sela, Aner, 2009. "On the Heritability of Choice, Judgment, and "Irrationality": Genetic Effects on Prudence and Constructive Predispositions," Research Papers 2029, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:118:y:2013:i:3:p:515-527. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.