Download Study 1

Are Groups Less Ethical than Individuals?
R. Scott Tindale, Zhenyan Shi, Katharina Kluwe,
& Jeremy Winget – Loyola University Chicago
There is now a fair amount of
evidence that groups tend to be
less cooperative and more
competitive compared to
individuals acting alone (Wildschut
et al, 2003). There is also
evidence that when in intergroup
situations, groups will act
unethically for their own benefit
(Stawiski et al., 2009). However, it
is unclear whether groups will be
less ethical than individuals in
situations that are not directly
competitive. This is the questions
we attempted to address in the
following two studies.
Method
Study 1
Individuals and three-person
groups were asked to first respond
to the nine decomposed prisoner’s
dilemma games that make up the
measure of Social Value
Orientation (Van Lange et al.,
1997). Groups were asked to
assume they were playing against
another group. Group members
made individual choices prior to
group discussion and consensus..
After responding to the SVO items,
both individuals and groups
responded to two ethical dilemma
scenarios. The first scenario
asked them to decide whether to
make an investment based on
insider information that they
accidentally obtained. The second
scenario asked them to decide
whether to disclose new pricing
information after reaching a
negotiated agreement based on
higher prices for needed materials.
Study 2
Individuals and four-person
groups were asked to role play in
a corporate decision making
scenario. The scenario was
based on the “Panalba” case
where Upjohn Pharmaceutical
company is deciding what to do
about one of their best selling
drugs. The drug was approved
many years before but has
potentially life threatening side
effects. New drugs on the market
(but not yet sold or produced by
Upjohn) treat the same ailments
but without the deadly side effects.
Individuals played the role of
Board Chairperson while group
members played one of four roles:
Board Chair, Board Vice Chair,
President, or Vice President and
Director of business operations.
Individuals and groups has six
choices for decision options
ranging from least ethical (lobby
the FDA to keep approval and
market drug intensely until it is no
longer approved) to most ethical
(immediately pull Panalba off the
market and destroy all
inventories).
Individuals made their initial
choice, list the reasons for their
choice, and then made their
choice a second time. Group
members made an initial individual
choice and then groups were
asked to discuss and reach a
consensus on which option they
should choose. Comparisons
were made between group
choices and individual second
choices.
“
Conclusion
Results
Method continued
Introduction
Study 1 - SVO
Study 1 Ethical Dilemma 1
Individuals and groups were
coded as prosocial, proself,
or competitive if they
responded to six of the nine
games in the same way.
Individuals were most likely to
choose the prosocial option
(even outcomes) while
groups were most likely to
choose the competitive option
(max difference in outcomes).
Also, for groups, majorities
favoring competition were far
more likely to win (72%) than
majorities favoring prosocial
(59%).
For the first ethical dilemma
(insider trading), groups were
less likely than individuals to
make the ethical choice –
less than half of the groups
chose not to use the
information. No differences
between individuals and
groups were found for the
second ethical dilemma
problem.
Study 2 – Ethical Choices
In Study 1, groups responded
more competitively and less
prosocially than did
individuals. This was also
found for group members so
simply putting people in an
intergroup setting seemed to
create the more competitive
mindset. In addition, group
members who favored the
competitive option seemed to
be more influential in the
group consensus process as
compared to members who
favored the prosocial option.
Groups were also more likely
than individuals to make the
unethical choice for the insider
trading dilemma. However, no
differences were found for the
second scenario. Preliminary
analyses of group discussions
indicate that groups were
afraid of being caught I the
second scenario.
In study 2, groups chose less
ethically than individuals and
group processes favored the
less ethical choices. Thus,
groups do seem less ethical
than individuals when they
see it as in their best interests.
References
For Study 2, groups were
more likely to make less
ethical choices compared to
individuals. No individuals
made the least ethical choice
and no groups made the
most ethical choice. After
dividing choice options into
least (A, B, & C) and most
(D, E, & F) ethical, majorities
favoring the less ethical
options were more likely to
win (96%) than were
majorities favoring the most
ethical options (62%).
Stawiski, S., Tindale, R. S., & Dykema-Engblade, A.
(2009). The effects of ethical climate on group
and individual level deception in negotiation.
International Journal of Conflict Management,
20, 287-308.
Van lange P. A. M., Otten W., De Brun. E. M. N., and
Joireman, J. A. (1997). Development of prosocial,
individualistic, and competitive orientations: Theory and
preliminary evidence, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 73, 733-746.
Wildschut, T., Pinter, B., Vevea, J. L., Insko, C. A. &
Schopler, J. (2003). Beyond the group mind: a
quantitative review of the interindividualintergroup discontinuity effect. Psychological
Bulletin, 129, (5), 698-722.