IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The Influence of Decision Frames and Vision Priming on Decision Outcomes in Work Groups: Motivating Stakeholder Considerations

Listed author(s):
  • Kevin Clark


  • Narda Quigley


  • Stephen Stumpf


Registered author(s):

    Organizational leaders are increasingly emphasizing a stakeholder perspective in order to address concerns about business ethics. This study examined the choices of 94 groups in the context of a business decision-making simulation to determine how specific actions and communications can facilitate the consideration of different stakeholder perspectives. In particular, we examined whether generally framing the business situation as one involving diverse stakeholders versus a primarily profit-driven operation (referred to as framing), and whether specific suggestions that participants consider the concerns of stakeholders versus stockholders in maximizing the value of the firm (referred to as vision priming), would influence group choices and decision outcomes. We tested four experimental conditions against a control in a 2 × 2 experimental design to determine the effects that group choices had on decision outcomes when groups were exposed to stakeholder versus stockholder decision framing and stakeholder versus stockholder vision priming. The results revealed that the consistent conditions outperformed the control condition and that vision priming has a greater impact on decision outcomes than decision framing. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Springer in its journal Journal of Business Ethics.

    Volume (Year): 120 (2014)
    Issue (Month): 1 (March)
    Pages: 27-38

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:120:y:2014:i:1:p:27-38
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-013-1648-8
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Robert H. Frank & Thomas Gilovich & Dennis T. Regan, 1993. "Does Studying Economics Inhibit Cooperation?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 159-171, Spring.
    2. Thomas Maak & Nicola Pless, 2009. "Business Leaders as Citizens of the World. Advancing Humanism on a Global Scale," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(3), pages 537-550, September.
    3. Thomas Maak, 2007. "Responsible Leadership, Stakeholder Engagement, and the Emergence of Social Capital," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 329-343, September.
    4. Barbara Ritter, 2006. "Can Business Ethics be Trained? A Study of the Ethical Decision-making Process in Business Students," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 153-164, October.
    5. Susanne Arvidsson, 2010. "Communication of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Study of the Views of Management Teams in Large Companies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(3), pages 339-354, October.
    6. Harting, Troy R. & Harmeling, Susan S. & Venkataraman, S., 2006. "Innovative Stakeholder Relations: When “Ethics Pays” (and When it Doesn’t)," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(01), pages 43-68, January.
    7. N. Leila Trapp, 2011. "Staff Attitudes to Talking Openly About Ethical Dilemmas: The Role of Business Ethics Conceptions and Trust," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 103(4), pages 543-552, November.
    8. Ashkanasy, Neal M. & Windsor, Carolyn A. & Treviño, Linda K., 2006. "Bad Apples in Bad Barrels Revisited: Cognitive Moral Development, Just World Beliefs, Rewards, and Ethical Decision-Making," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(04), pages 449-473, October.
    9. Robert H. Frank & Thomas D. Gilovich & Dennis T. Regan, 1996. "Do Economists Make Bad Citizens?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 187-192, Winter.
    10. Church, Bryan & Gaa, James C. & Khalid Nainar, S. M. & Shehata, Mohamed M., 2005. "Experimental Evidence Relating to the Person-Situation Interactionist Model of Ethical Decision Making," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(03), pages 363-383, July.
    11. Cragg, Wesley, 2002. "Business Ethics and Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(02), pages 113-142, April.
    12. Hayden Teo & Donella Caspersz, 2011. "Dissenting Discourse: Exploring Alternatives to the Whistleblowing/Silence Dichotomy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 237-249, December.
    13. Thomas Maak & Nicola M. Pless, 2006. "Responsible Leadership in a Stakeholder Society – A Relational Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 99-115, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:120:y:2014:i:1:p:27-38. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla)

    or (Rebekah McClure)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.