IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v11y2021i1p16-d506633.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Student Perception of the Social Value of Responsible Management

Author

Listed:
  • Crisanta-Alina Mazilescu

    (Teacher Training Department, Politehnica University Timisoara, 300596 Timisoara, Romania)

  • Laurent Auzoult-Chagnault

    (Laboratoire Psy-DREPI, UFR Sciences Humaines, 21072 Dijon, France)

  • Loredana Ileana Viscu

    (Faculty of Psychology, Tibiscus University of Timisoara, 300559 Timisoara, Romania)

  • Bernard Gangloff

    (Laboratoire Parisien de Psychologie Sociale, Université Paris Nanterre, 92001 Nanterre, France)

Abstract

In responsible management, managerial efficiency and sustainable development meet and influence each other. In order to give meaning to their organisation, to respect and look after their collaborators, a manager must promote a set of values on a personal, organisational and societal level. The purpose of this paper is to study the social value attributed to responsible management by students of a technical university. We have therefore undertaken to study a set of seven values attributed to responsible management and, more precisely, their utility and social desirability on a personal, organisational and societal level. The values have been operationalized with personality descriptors. The 60 participants in this study are students from a Romanian technical university. They had to assess, on four scales of seven points each (two for desirability and two for social utility), the value of a person characterised by one of the seven values attributed to responsible management. The results show us that efficiency is the value perceived by the students as being the most desirable for responsible management, and that in terms of social utility, agility is the most appreciated value. We found that there is indeed an effect of the context in which these values are perceived. Efficiency, audacity, dedication and integrity are perceived as more useful at an organisational level, while solidarity was perceived as more useful on a societal level. At the organisational level we also found a gender effect, in the sense that women appreciate people who are efficient, have integrity or are humble more than men do.

Suggested Citation

  • Crisanta-Alina Mazilescu & Laurent Auzoult-Chagnault & Loredana Ileana Viscu & Bernard Gangloff, 2021. "Student Perception of the Social Value of Responsible Management," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:11:y:2021:i:1:p:16-:d:506633
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/11/1/16/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/11/1/16/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chen, Zhuoqiong (Charlie) & Ong, David & Sheremeta, Roman M., 2015. "The gender difference in the value of winning," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 226-229.
    2. James Andreoni & Lise Vesterlund, 2001. "Which is the Fair Sex? Gender Differences in Altruism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(1), pages 293-312.
    3. Lin, Ching-Torng & Chiu, Hero & Tseng, Yi-Hong, 2006. "Agility evaluation using fuzzy logic," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 353-368, June.
    4. Daniel Bageac & Olivier Furrer & Emmanuelle Reynaud, 2011. "Management Students’ Attitudes Toward Business Ethics: A Comparison Between France and Romania," Post-Print hal-01796502, HAL.
    5. Edmond Awad & Sohan Dsouza & Richard Kim & Jonathan Schulz & Joseph Henrich & Azim Shariff & Jean-François Bonnefon & Iyad Rahwan, 2018. "The Moral Machine experiment," Nature, Nature, vol. 563(7729), pages 59-64, November.
    6. Grosch, Kerstin & Rau, Holger A., 2016. "Gender Differences in Compliance: The Role of Social Value Orientation," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 245702, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    7. Kerstin Grosch & Holger A. Rau, 2020. "Procedural Unfair Wage Differentials And Their Effects On Unethical Behavior," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 58(4), pages 1689-1706, October.
    8. Grosch, Kerstin & Rau, Holger, 2017. "Gender differences in honesty: The role of social value orientation," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 308, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    9. Unknown, 2005. "Forward," 2005 Conference: Slovenia in the EU - Challenges for Agriculture, Food Science and Rural Affairs, November 10-11, 2005, Moravske Toplice, Slovenia 183804, Slovenian Association of Agricultural Economists (DAES).
    10. Sharifi, H. & Zhang, Z., 1999. "A methodology for achieving agility in manufacturing organisations: An introduction," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1-2), pages 7-22, May.
    11. Grosch, Kerstin & Rau, Holger A., 2017. "Gender differences in honesty: The role of social value orientation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 258-267.
    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. Goran Livazović, 2022. "Problems in Adolescents: What Are the Psychological, Social and Financial Consequences?," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-3, March.

    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. Kerstin Grosch & Stephan Müller & Holger A. Rau & Lilia Wasserka-Zhurakhovska, 2020. "Gender Differences in Dishonesty Disappear When Leaders Make Decisions on Behalf of Their Team," CESifo Working Paper Series 8514, CESifo.
    2. Veronika Grimm & Holger A Rau & Simeon Schächtele, 2020. "Gender differences in multi-employee gift exchange with self-reported contributions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-19, September.
    3. Grosch, Kerstin & Ibañez, Marcela & Viceisza, Angelino, 2022. "Competition and prosociality: A lab-in-the-field experiment in Ghana," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    4. Kerstin Grosch, Kerstin & Müller, Stephan & Rau, Holger A. & Zhurakhovska, Lilia, 2020. "Selection into Leadership and Dishonest Behavior of Leaders: A Gender Experiment," IHS Working Paper Series 19, Institute for Advanced Studies.
    5. Christian Schitter & Jürgen Fleiß & Stefan Palan, 2017. "To claim or not to claim: Anonymity, reciprocal externalities and honesty," Working Paper Series, Social and Economic Sciences 2017-01, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Karl-Franzens-University Graz.
    6. Kim L. Böhm & Sebastian J. Goerg & Lilia Wasserka-Zhurakhovska, 2023. "How Does Unethical Behavior Spread? Gender Matters!," CESifo Working Paper Series 10314, CESifo.
    7. Justus Haucap & Christina Heldman & Holger A. Rau, 2022. "Gender and Cooperation in the Presence of Negative Externalities," CESifo Working Paper Series 9614, CESifo.
    8. James Alm & Antoine Malézieux, 2021. "40 years of tax evasion games: a meta-analysis," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(3), pages 699-750, September.
    9. Rob Kim Marjerison & Matthew Andrews & George Kuan, 2022. "Creating Sustainable Organizations through Knowledge Sharing and Organizational Agility: Empirical Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-23, April.
    10. John W D’Attoma & Clara Volintiru & Antoine Malézieux, 0. "Gender, Social Value Orientation, and Tax Compliance," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 66(3), pages 265-284.
    11. Benistant, Julien & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2019. "Unethical behavior and group identity in contests," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 128-155.
    12. Ciampi, Francesco & Faraoni, Monica & Ballerini, Jacopo & Meli, Francesco, 2022. "The co-evolutionary relationship between digitalization and organizational agility: Ongoing debates, theoretical developments and future research perspectives," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    13. Rameshwar Dubey & Tripti Singh & Omprakash K. Gupta, 2015. "Impact of Agility, Adaptability and Alignment on Humanitarian Logistics Performance: Mediating Effect of Leadership," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 16(5), pages 812-831, October.
    14. Anna-Theresa Walter, 2021. "Organizational agility: ill-defined and somewhat confusing? A systematic literature review and conceptualization," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 343-391, April.
    15. Vázquez-Suárez, Luis & Mejía-Vásquez, Pericles Ramón & Serafim da Silva, Sheila & Sánchez-Gómez, Roberto, 2022. "Gender’s moderating role in the relationship between organisational form and performance in the Spanish supermarket industry," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    16. Bruno De Rosa, 2022. "Il controllo nelle "agile organizations": new wine or just new bottles?," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2022(1), pages 121-148.
    17. Cheng, Yuanyuan, 2023. "A method of 3R to evaluate the correlation and predictive value of variables," OSF Preprints c79tu, Center for Open Science.
    18. Alexander, Phyllis & Balavac-Orlic, Merima, 2022. "Tax morale: Framing and fairness," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 46(1).
    19. Lohse, Tim & Qari, Salmai, 2021. "Gender differences in face-to-face deceptive behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 1-15.
    20. Alice Guerra & Emanuela Randon & Antonello E. Scorcu, 2022. "Gender and deception: Evidence from survey data among adolescent gamblers," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(4), pages 618-645, November.

    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:gam:jsoctx:v:11:y:2021:i:1:p:16-:d:506633. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.