IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/qrfmpp/qrfm-09-2022-0151.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“Honey, you’ve got to do what’s right”: common ethical decision-making challenges and strategies of licensed financial advisers

Author

Listed:
  • Martha Wilcoxson
  • Jana Craft

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to explore the common ethical decision-making challenges faced by financial advisers and how they meet these challenges. The purpose is to identify successful decision-making tools used by investment advisers in doing business ethically. Additionally, the authors uncover common challenges and offer decision-making tools to provide support for supplemental ethics training in the future. Design/methodology/approach - Questions were analyzed through a qualitative approach using individual interviews to examine a range of experiences and attitudes of active financial advisers. The sample was represented by 11 practicing financial advisers affiliated with US independent broker-dealers: six women and five men, each with 10 or more years of experience, ranging in age from 35 to 75. Grounded in four ethical decision-making models, this research examines individual ethical decision-making using individual (internal, personal) and organizational (external, situational) factors. Findings - The method used uncovered struggles and revealed strategies used in making ethical decisions. Two research questions were examined: what are the common ethical decision-making challenges faced by financial advisers in the US financial industry? How do financial advisers handle ethical decision-making challenges? Four themes emerged that impacted ethical decision-making: needs of the individual, needs of others, needs of the firm and needs of the marketplace. Financial advisers identified moral obligation, self-control and consulting with others as major considerations when they contemplate difficult decisions. Research limitations/implications - A limitation of this review is its small sample size. A more robust sample size from investment advisers with a broader range of experiences could have widened the findings from the study. Practical implications - Investment advisers can use the findings of this study as a tool for improving their own ethical decision-making or designing training for their employees to be better decision-makers. Originality/value - The study explores the decision-making experiences of investment advisers to reveal multifaceted, often private struggles that qualitative methods can uncover. The study provides support for the development of additional training in ethical decision-making specific to investment advisers.

Suggested Citation

  • Martha Wilcoxson & Jana Craft, 2023. "“Honey, you’ve got to do what’s right”: common ethical decision-making challenges and strategies of licensed financial advisers," Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 16(1), pages 183-211, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:qrfmpp:qrfm-09-2022-0151
    DOI: 10.1108/QRFM-09-2022-0151
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/QRFM-09-2022-0151/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/QRFM-09-2022-0151/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/QRFM-09-2022-0151?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.

    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:eme:qrfmpp:qrfm-09-2022-0151. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.