Information Systems Faculty Perceptions of Ethical Work Climate and Job Satisfaction

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to provide an overview of the current research literature in the areas of ethical work climate and employee job satisfaction, and then present a model that will help guide future research on the relationship among egoistic ethical work climate, benevolent ethical work climate, and principled ethical work climate and job satisfaction as perceived by information systems faculty at institutions of higher education in the southeastern United States. The study determined which ethical work climates were significantly positively and negatively correlated to job satisfaction of individuals employed in higher education. The analysis demonstrated a foundation for higher education institutions to choose to implement a particular ethical work climate to increase job satisfaction. The paper concluded with implications for future research.

Keywords

Ethical Work Climate, Job Satisfaction, Information Systems Faculty, Higher Education

Introduction

In recent years, institutions of higher education have been faced with profound changes and challenges. In the current economic climate, extensive budget cuts have become commonplace resulting in little to no money for faculty pay raises. At the same time, increased faculty workload, larger classroom size, and increased accountability have become common place (Wilson, 2011). Lake (2011) reported an increase in faculty workload amid budget cuts. A recent Inside Higher Ed. article (Kiley, 2013) cited efforts to increase graduation rates, performance-funding policies, and alignment with state goals as top issues for academe. Given the changing work climate at higher education institutions, a major concern for higher education leaders is to ensure continued faculty job satisfaction.

In a study conducted by Gormley (2010), the organizational work climate can have a significant impact on organization performance and job satisfaction. Additionally, ethical work climate has been found to influence employee job satisfaction (Parker et al. 2003). A challenge for higher education leaders is to create what Jose and Thibodeaux (1999) referred to as an “ethical fit,” a fit between the institutions ethical strategy and its systems, structures, and culture in an effort to create an ethical organization work climate that helps foster faculty job satisfaction despite the ever growing and emerging challenges facing academe.

Ethical work climate plays a major role in shaping employee attitudes and organizational relationships. Therefore, understanding the relationship among the ethical work climate and job satisfaction is an important area of research. While previous studies have been published on job satisfaction and ethical work climate, the relationship between ethical work climate and job satisfaction in higher education, particularly among IS faculty is currently under researched. This study will attempt to bridge this gap by examining the causal relationships among ethical work climate and employee job satisfaction among IS faculty in higher education.

Theoritical Background

Ethical Work Climate and Job Satisfaction

Research (e.g., Bartels, Harrick, Martell, & Strickland, 1998; Cohen, 1995; Malloy & Agarwal, 2003) has shown a significant correlation between organizational work climate and employee productivity and job satisfaction. The work climate is a factor that can have a significant impact on the productivity and satisfaction of its employees (Malloy & Agarwal, 2003). In addition, numerous studies have suggested that work climate can play a major role in influencing ethical conduct among groups and individuals (Ambrose, Arnaud, & Schminke, 2008; Andreoli & Lefkowitz, 2009; Cohen, 1995; Malloy & Agarwal, 2003; Scheider, 1975; Victor & Cullen, 1988).

As there are several antecedents that lead to job satisfaction, this study focused specifically on the type of ethical work climate and how it affects job satisfaction. In a study of 1,174 working adults, Elci and Alpkan (2009) discovered a significant positive relationship between the egoistic work climate and low levels of work satisfaction. The study specifically showed that a self-interest climate type proved to have a negative influence on job satisfaction, whereas team interest, social responsibility, and principled climates positively impacts work satisfaction.

In an egoistic climate decisions are made to benefit the individual's interest, company, social, or economical interest. Research (Woodbine, 2006; Joseph & Deshpande, 1997), has concluded that an egoistic work climate is a strong predictor of job dissatisfaction.

The benevolent work climate focuses on the interests of a social group as a whole. In a benevolent work climate, decisions are aimed to coincide with socially responsible behavior. Deshpande (1996) discovered a higher level of job satisfaction in organizations that fostered a benevolent or caring work climate.

A principled work climate proposes that decisions are made in accordance with the established rules and codes. Deshpande (1996) concludes that in a principled climate law and professional codes lead to a positive overall satisfaction. However, the study fails to support a significant finding when exploring personal morality, which is one of the dimensions of the principled work climate.

Several studies have demonstrated that dimensions of ethical climate lead to more satisfied employees ( Babin, Boles, & Robin, 2000; Deshpande, 1996; Herndon et al., 1999; Jaramillo, Prakash, & Solomon, 2006; Joseph & Deshpande, 1997; Koh & Boo, 2001; Martin & Cullen, 2006; Mulki, Jaramillo, & Locander, 2006; Schneider & Snyder, 1975; Schwepker, 2001; Schwepker & Hartline, 2005; Sims & Keon, 1997; Ulrich, O’Donnell, Taylor, Farrar, Danis, & Grady, 2007). Subsequently, a conflict between an employee’s personal ethics and the perceptions of top manager’s ethical values has been found to increase stress and reduce job satisfaction. A significant positive relationship exists when there is a caring or benevolent ethical work climate (Ambrose, Arnaud, & Schminke, 2008). Deshpande (1996) found that climate types did not significantly influence satisfaction with pay, but did influence employee’s satisfaction with other job facets such as, promotions, supervisors, work, and the overall job. Employees within an organization that exhibited a caring work climate were significantly more satisfied.

While much has been written about corporate ethical work climate and their impact on job satisfaction in the business organization, the search for comparable literature in higher education has been unsuccessful. Since little, if any, research currently exists, further analysis is needed to investigate the role of ethical work climate and job satisfaction in higher education. Based on previous research findings (Babin, Boles, & Robin, 2000; Deshpande, 1996; Herndon et al., 1999; Jaramillo, Prakash, & Solomon, 2006; Joseph & Deshpande, 1997; Koh & Boo, 2001; Martin & Cullen, 2006; Mulki, Jaramillo, & Locander, 2006; Schwepker, 2001; Schwepker & Hartline, 2005; Sims & Keon, 1997; Ulrich, O’Donnell, Taylor, Farrar, Danis, & Grady, 2007) , a research model was hypothesized (see Fig. 1) and the following hypotheses were examined:

• H₁: Benevolent ethical work climate has a positive effect on IS faculty job satisfaction
• H₂: Egoistic ethical work climate has a negative effect on IS faculty job satisfaction.
• H₃: Principled ethical work climate has a positive effect on IS faculty job satisfaction

Figure 1: Ethical Work Climate and Job Satisfaction Hypothesized Model

Methodology

This study uses the Abridged Job Descriptive Index/Job In General (aJDI/JIG) scale (Ironson, Smith, Brannick, Gibson & Paul, 1989) and the Ethical Work Climate questionnaire used to measure ethical work climate by Victor and Cullen (1987). Participants include IS faculty from institutions of higher education in the Southeastern United States. Results are analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) and Smart PLS (Ringle, Wende, Will, 2005).

Results

The descriptive statistics for, and the correlation between, benevolent ethical work climate, principled ethical work climate, egoistic ethical work climate, and job satisfaction are presented in Table 1. Statistical analysis reveals that there is a negative and significant correlation (r=-.542; p<.001) between the egoistic EWC and job satisfaction (supporting H1). A positive and significant correlation at the (r=.381; p<.001) exists between the benevolent ethical work climate and job satisfaction (supporting H2). However, the results did not find a significant correlation (r=.080; p=.292) between the principled EWC and faculty job satisfaction, which meant that hypothesis 3 was rejected.

Table 1: Spearman Correlations and Descriptive Statistics

	BEWC	EEWC	PEWC	JS
Benevolent EWC	—
Egoistic EWC	-.456**	—
Principled EWC	.654**	-.327**	—
Job Satisfaction	.381**	-.542**	.080	—
Mean	3.10	2.52	3.85	2.11
Standard Dev.	.92	.72	.79	.59
Scale Min/Max	1 to 5	1 to 5	1 to 5	0,3
Cronbach’s α	.883	.763	.797	.916
**p < .001

To further distinguish the contribution of ethical work climate on job satisfaction, a path model was performed using SmartPLS (partial least squares) with EWC as the latent variables and job satisfaction as the dependent variable. The path analysis shows that 71.8% of the variance in job satisfaction can be explained by the perceived EWC of the organization.

The hypothesized structural model was tested using Smart PLS. As shown in table 2, the results suggested that model fits well with the data. Figure 2 presents the standardized path coefficients and significance of the relationships of the variables in the model. The first hypothesis on the impact of benevolent ethical work climate on job satisfaction was supported (β=0.381; t=5.620; p=0.000). According to hypothesis two, the egoistic ethical work climate had an indirect effect on job satisfaction (β=-0.542; t=10.577; p=0.000). Lastly, the principled ethical work climate had no impact on faculty job satisfaction (β=0.080; t=1.055; p=0.292).

Table 2: Parameter Estimates of the Structured Equation Model

	Relationship of variables	β	Sample Mean	Standard Deviation	t-statistic	p-value
H1	BEWC ->JS	0.381	0.375	0.068	5.620	0.000**
H2	EEWC -> JS	-0.542	-0.548	0.051	10.577	0.000**
H3	PEWC -> JS	0.080	0.085	0.076	1.055	0.292
**p < 0.01

Figure 2: The Structured Equation Model

Discussion and Implications

The purpose of this research was to provide an overview of the current research literature in the areas of ethical work climate and employee job satisfaction, and then present a model that will help guide future research on the relationship among egoistic ethical work climate, benevolent ethical work climate, and principled ethical work climate and job satisfaction as perceived by information systems faculty at institutions of higher education in the southeastern United States. Currently, there is little if any, research on job satisfaction and ethical work climate in higher education. The results of this study will hopefully contribute to the literature on job satisfaction and ethical work climate, particularly in the area of higher education. The research could also be used as a framework to measure the effects of the ethical work climate in relation to job satisfaction of non-IS higher education faculty members in the Southeastern United States. Additionally, based on the results of the study, there is the opportunity to continue to refine and strengthen the EWC and Job Satisfaction instrument.

This study hypothesized that the benevolent and principled ethical work climate had a positive effect and egoistic ethical work climate has a negative effect on job satisfaction among IS faculty. One of the most significant findings is the strong indirect effect of the egoistic ethical work climate on job satisfaction. This is consistent with previous studies that report egoism or egotistic ethical work climate within the organization and a negative impact on job satisfaction (Woodbine, 2006; Deshpande, 1996). This suggests that faculty who agree that their work climate is focused on individual’s interests, and company, social, or economic interests, tend to disagree that they are satisfied with their jobs.

On the other hand benevolent ethical work climate had a positive effect on job satisfaction. This finding suggests that when faculty perceives the ethical work climate within their academic department to be based on socially responsible behavior, job satisfaction is high. This is consistent with findings by Upchurch and Ruhland (1995) and Deshpande (1996). Cullen et al. (2003) explained that through employee empowerment, managers can bolster employees’ sense of personal responsibility for individual decision and promote the development of a benevolent ethical work climate and in turn discourage the introduction of an egoistic ethical work climate and consequently reduce the incidence of ethical crises. The development of a benevolent ethical work climate may also significantly reduce self-centered interests and concerns that are typical in an egoistic ethical work climate. Cullen et al. (2003) suggested that in a benevolent ethical work climate, employees are more likely to take the benefit of the entire organization into consideration.

Third, there was no significant correlation between principled ethical work climate and job satisfaction, principled ethical. This suggests that the development of a benevolent ethical work climate that promotes team interest, esprit de corps, communication, and social responsibility will likely empower employees and raise the level of IS faculty job satisfaction more so than a principled ethical work climate based on codes of conduct, ethics training programs, rules, ethics policies, and compliance with professional standards. This finding is consistent with previous research reporting mixed results on the effectiveness of codes of ethics with only 35% of studies indicating that codes are effective in determining unethical behavior (Kaptein & Schwartz, 2007). Codes of ethics are only effective in deterring unethical behavior if leadership is willing to enforce the rules and take appropriate action against employees’ who violate it (Chonko & Hunt, 1985; Trevino, 1992).

Another important implication of this study is that job satisfaction among faculty contributes to positive outcomes for students (Hagedorn, 2000). This may provide further incentive for leadership within IS academic departments to work to foster more benevolent ethical work climates.

Overall, the results reported in this study provide important information to the role that an ethical work climate, particularly a benevolent ethical work climate, plays faculty job satisfaction. Leadership can foster a benevolent climate by encouraging team interest or faculty working together for the overall benefit of the department. This could include faculty collaboration in the areas of research and service. Faculty development programs that emphasize benevolent reasoning and seek faculty input may also help to ensure a caring and productive academic environment. A key factor is the effort of leadership to keep faculty involved in the decision making process and seeking faculty input for continuous improvement. An environment where leadership emphasizes the ideals of professionalism, team work, and mentoring will ultimately have a greater impact than those that rely on codes of ethics or organizational guidelines as a means of promoting an ethical climate conducive to job satisfaction.

Limitations and Future Research

This study was restricted by the following limitations. First, causality cannot be confirmed since the research design was cross-sectional in nature. The effect of temporality can be examined in longitudinal studies. Secondly, this study attempted to measure perceptions of the ethical work climate by faculty in higher education. When participants are asked ethical questions it is possible that the respondents may attempt to answer the ethics related questions as they deem to be socially or culturally acceptable.

In addition, the sample for this study was limited to faculty at institutions of higher education that teach a technology related discipline within the Southeastern United States. Future works on ethical work climate and job satisfaction can include institutions from other regions of the United States to further validate the outcomes of this study. This research can be used as a framework to measure the effects of the ethical work climate in relation to job satisfaction of non-IS higher education faculty members in the Southeastern United States or of IS faculty outside of the Southeastern United States. Additionally, based on the results of the study, there is the opportunity to continue to refine and strengthen the EWC and Job Satisfaction instrument.

Third, the ethical work climate fostered in an institution is not the single factor that correlates with overall job satisfaction. The ethical work climate affects job satisfaction in general as well as the vast number of factors that relate to differing levels of satisfaction for individuals. Future studies could attempt to differentiate individual ethics, organizational ethics, and ethical intention (Elango, Paul, Kundu & Paudel, 2010). This study did not explicitly study personal versus organizational ethics.

Additionally, while this study did not focus directly on the relationship between principled and benevolent ethical work climate, it is worth noting the significant and positive relationship between the two constructs (r=.628; p<.001). The strong correlation suggests that almost 40% of the variance in benevolent is related to principled ethical work climate. This may be an indication that principled work climate leads to a benevolent ethical work climate or vice-versa. Future research is needed to future explore this relationship.

Finally, it appears that leadership plays an active role in the development of an ethical work climate and a climate that ultimately leads to job satisfaction. Future research should be conducted to explore whether certain types of leadership are more conducive to the development of and ethical work climate.

Conclusion

In previous empirical studies, positive correlations were noted between the levels of job satisfaction in organization, and the levels of productivity and efficiency. Employers should seek to increase job satisfaction to improve the operations of the organization. This study specifically focused on information systems faculty from institutions of higher education in the Southeastern United States. Faculty members that experience higher levels of job satisfaction are more likely to have low levels of absenteeism, higher involvement in their responsibilities as a faculty member, and increased performance.

One of the antecedents of job satisfaction is the ethical work climate. This study theorizes that there are three general ethical work climates; egoistic, benevolent, and principled. The study also hypothesized that there is a negative correlation between the egoistic work climate and job satisfaction and there is a positive correlation between the principled and benevolent work climate, and job satisfaction. The hypotheses were tested by using a 34 question survey. The results indicate no relationship between principled ethical work climate and job satisfaction, a significant and positive relationship between benevolent ethical work climate and job satisfaction, and a significant and negative relationship between egoistic ethical work climate and job satisfaction.

References

• Abelson, M. A. (1987). Examination of avoidable and unavoidable turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(3), 382–386. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.72.3.382
• Ambrose, M., Arnaud, A., & Schminke, M. (2008). Individual Moral Development and Ethical Climate: The Influence of Person–Organization Fit on Job Attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 77(3), 323-333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9352-1
• Andreoli, N., & Lefkowitz, J. (2009). Individual and Organizational Antecedents of Misconduct in Organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(3), 309-332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9772-6
• Arnold, H. J. & Feldman, D. C. A. (1982). Multivariate analysis of the determinants of job turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(3), 350–360. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.67.3.350
• Babin, B. J., Boles, J. S., & Robin, D. P. (2000). Representing the perceived ethical work climate among marketing employees. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28, 345-358. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0092070300283004
• Baroudi, J. J. (1985). The impact of role variables on is personnel work attitudes and intentions. MIS Quarterly, 9(4), 341–356. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/249234
• Bartels, K. K., Harrick, E., Martell, K., & Strickland, D. (1998). The Relationship between Ethical Climate and Ethical Problems within Human Resource Management. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(7), 799-804. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1005817401688
• Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
• Bollen, K.A., & Long, J.S. (1993). Testing structural equation models. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Brown, S. P. & Peterson, R.A. (1994). The effect on sales performance and job satisfaction. Journal of Marketing, 58, 70–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1252270
• Chonko, L.B., Hunt, S.D. (1985). Ethics and marketing management: An empirical investigation. Journal of Business Research, 13, 339-359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(85)90006-2
• Clinard, M. B., & Yeager, P. C. (1980). Corporate crime. New York: Free Press.
• Clinard, M. B. (1983). Corporate ethics and crime. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
• Cohen, D. V. (1995). Creating ethical work climates: A socioeconomic perspective. Journal of Socio-Economics, 24(2), 317-343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/1053-5357(95)90024-1
• Cullen, F. T., Maakestad, W. J., & Cavender, G. (1987). Corporate crime under attack. Cincinnati: Anderson.
• Cullen, J. B., Parboteeah, K. P., & Victor, B. (2003). The effects of ethical climates on organizational commitment: A two-study analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 46, 127-141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1025089819456
• Deshpande, S. P. (1996). The impact of ethical climate types on facets of job satisfaction: An empirical investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(6), 655-660. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00411800
• Elango, B., Paul, K., Kundu, S. K., & Paudel, S. K. (2010). Organizational ethics, individual ethics, and ethical intentions in international decision-making. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(4), 543-561. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0524-z
• Elçi, M., & Alpkan, L. (2008). The impact of perceived organizational ethical climate on work satisfaction. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(3), 297-311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9709-0
• Gormley, D.K. (2010). Influence of work role and perceptions of climate on faculty organizational commitment. Journal of Professional Nursing, 26(2), 108-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2009.11.001
• Hagedorn, L.S. (2000). Conceptualizing faculty job satisfaction: Components, theories, and outcomes. New Directions for Institutional Research, 105, 5-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ir.10501
• Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2009). Multivariate Data Analysis. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
• Herndon, N. C., Jr., Ferrell, O. C., LeClair, D. Y., & Ferrell, L. K. (1999). Relationship of individual moral values and perceived ethical climate to satisfaction, commitment, and turnover in a sales organization. Research in Marketing, 15, 25-48.
• Ironson, G. H., Smith, P. C., Brannick, M. T., Gibson, W. M. & Paul, K. B. (1989). Construction of a job in general scale: A comparison of global, composite and specific measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 1-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.2.193
• Jaramillo, F., Mulki, J. P., & Solomon, P. (2006). The role of ethical climate on salesperson’s role, stress, job attitudes, turnover intention, and job performance. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 26, 271-282. http://dx.doi.org/10.2753/PSS0885-3134260302
• Joseph, J., & Deshpande, S. P. (1997). The impact of ethical climate on job satisfaction of nurses. Health Care Management Review, 22, 76-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004010-199701000-00010
• Jose, A., & Thibodeaux, M. S. (1999). Institutionalization of ethics: The perspective of managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 22, 133-143. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1006027423495
• Kaptein, M, & Schwartz, M.S. (2007). The effectiveness of business codes: A critical examination of existing studies and the development of an integrated model. Journal of Business Ethics, 78, 111-127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9305-0
• Kiley, K. (2013). State higher ed. group: Budget cuts no longer top issue. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved July 18, 2013 from http://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2013/01/09/state-higher-ed-group-budget-cuts-no-longer-top-issue
• Koh, H. C., & Boo, E. H. Y. (2001). The link between organizational ethics and job satisfaction: A study of managers in Singapore. Journal of Business Ethics, 29(4), 309-324. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1010741519818
• Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization, in D. A. Goslin (Ed.). Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
• Lake, R. (2011). Workload has picked up, faculty at UNLV say. Las Vegas Review Journal. Retrieved July 15, 2013 from http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/education/workload-has-picked-faculty-unlv-say.
• Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In. M. D. Dunnette (ed.). Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297-1349). Chicago: Rand McNally.
• Malloy, D. C., & Agarwal, J. (2003). Factors influencing ethical climate in a nonprofit organisation: an empirical investigation. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 8(3), 224-250. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.215
• Martin, K., & Cullen, J. (2006). Continuities and extensions of ethical climate theory: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Business Ethics, 69(2), 175-194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9084-7
• Mulki, J., Jaramillo, J., & Locander, W. (2008). Effect of ethical climate on turnover intention: Linking attitudinal- and stress theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(4), 559-574. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9368-6
• Mulki, J. P., Jaramillo, F., & Locander, W. B. (2006). Effects of ethical climate and supervisory trust on salesperson's job attitudes and intentions to quit. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 26(1), 19-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.2753/PSS0885-3134260102
• Parker, P. P., Baltes, B.B., Young, S.A., Huff, J.W., Altman, RA, Larnst, HA (2003). Relationships between psychological climate perceptions and work outcomes: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 389-416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.198
• Payne, R. L. (1990). Method in our madness: A reply to jackofsky and Slocum. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, 77-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.4030110110
• Ringle, C.M., Wende, S., & Will A. (2005). SmartPLS 2.0 (beta). Retrieved from http://www.smartpls.de.
• Salkind, N.J. (2008). Statistics for people who think they hate statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Sager, J. K. & Johnston, M. W. (1989). Antecedents and outcomes of organisational commitment: A study of salespeople. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management 9(4), 30–41.
• Sager, J. K., Varadarajan, P. R., & Futrell, C. M. (1988). Understanding salesperson turnover: A partial evaluation of Mobley’s turnover process model. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 8(4), 20–35.
• Schminke, M., Arnaud, A., & Kuenzi, M. (2007). The power of ethical work climates. Organizational Dynamics, 36(2), 171-186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2007.03.005
• Schneider, B., & Rentsch, J. (1988). Managing climates and cultures: A future perspective. In J. Hage (Ed.), The future of organization (pp.181-200). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
• Schneider, B. (1975). Organizational climate: An essay. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 447-479. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01386.x
• Schneider, B., & Synder, R.A. (1975). Some relationships between job satisfaction and organizational climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(3), 313-328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0076756
• Schneider, B. (1983). Work climates: An interactionist perspective. In N.W. Feimer and E. S. Geller (Eds.), Environmental Psychology: Directions and Perspectives (pp. 106-128). New York: Praeger.
• Schwepker, C.H. (2001). Ethical climate’s relationship to job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intention in the sales force. Journal of Business Research, 54(1), 39-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00125-9
• Schwepker, C. H., & Hartline, M. D. (2005). Managing the ethical climate of customer-contact service employees. Journal of Service Research, 7(4), 377-397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1094670504273966
• Seashore, S. E. & Taber, T. D. (1975). Job satisfaction indicators and their correlates. American Behavior and Scientist, 18(3), 333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000276427501800303
• Shaffer, M. S. & Harrison, D. A. (1998). Expatriate’s psychological withdrawal from international assignments: Work, non-work, and family influences. Personnel Psychology, 51(1), 87-118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1998.tb00717.x
• Sims, R. L., & Keon, T. L. (1997). Ethical work climate as a factor in the development of person-organization fit. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(11), 1095-1105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1017914502117
• Singh, J., Verbeke, W., & Rhoads, G. K. (1996). Do organizational practices matter in role stress processes? A study of direct and moderating effects for marketing-oriented boundary spanners. Journal of Marketing, 60, 69–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1251842
• Smith, P. C. (1985). Summary report on the Job-in-General scale of the JDI. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green University Department of Psychology.
• Smith, P. C., Kendall, L. M., Hulin, C. L. (1975). The measurement of satisfaction in work and retirement. Chicago: Rand McNally.
• Sprinthall, R.C. (2003). Basic Statistical Analysis. Boston: Allyn & Bacon
• Trevino, L.K. (1992). The social effects of punishment in organizations: A justice perspective. Academy of Management Review, 17(4), 647-676.
• Ulrich, C., O'Donnell, P., Taylor, C., Farrar, A., Danis, M., & Grady, C. (2007). Ethical climate, ethics stress, and the job satisfaction of nurses and social workers in the United States. Social Science & Medicine, 65(8), 1708-1719. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.050
• Upchurch, R.S., & Ruhland, S.K. (1995). An analysis of ethical work climate and leadership relationship in lodging operations. Journal of Travel Research, 34(2), 36-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/004728759503400208
• Verbos, A. K., Gerard, J. A., Forshey, P. R., Harding, C. S., & Miller, J. S. (2007). The positive ethical organization: Enacting a living code of ethics and ethical organizational identity. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(1), 17-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9275-2
• Victor, B., & Cullen, J. B. (1987). A theory and measure of ethical climate in organizations. In W. C. Frederick (Ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy (pp. 51-71). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Victor, B., & Cullen, J. B. (1988). The organizational bases of ethical work climates. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33(1), 101-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2392857
• Vroom, V.H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.
• Weber, J. (1995). Influences upon organizational ethical subclimates: A multi-departmental analysis of a single firm. Organizational Science, 6(5), 509-523. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.6.5.509
• Weiss, W. L. (1983). Minerva’s owl: Building a corporate value system. Journal of Business Ethics, 5, 243-247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00383632
• Wilson, R. (2011). Colleges are calling off the deals that allowed many professors time out from teaching. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved July 1, 2013 from http://chronicle.com/article/Colleges-Are-Calling/129429/.
• Woodbine, G.F. (2006). Ethical climate types and job satisfaction: Study of Chinese financial institutions. International Review of Business Papers 2(1), 86-99.

Appendix