Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business by Center for Scholastic Inquiry

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 9, Page 1

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry:

Business Business Edition, Volume 11, Issue 1

Fall 2020

Published by: Center for Scholastic Inquiry, LLC ISSN: 2330-6807 (online) ISSN: 2330-6815 (print)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 2

ISSN: 2330-6807 (online) ISSN: 2330-6815 (print)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Fall 2020

Volume 11, Issue 1

www.csiresearch.com

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 3

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business The Center for Scholastic Inquiry (CSI) publishes the Journal of Scholastic Inquiry to recognize, celebrate, and highlight scholarly research, discovery, and evidence-based practice. Academic research emphasizing leading edge inquiry, distinguishing and fostering best practice, and validating promising methods will be considered for publication. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method study designs representing diverse philosophical frameworks and perspectives are welcome. The JOSI publishes papers that perpetuate thought-leadership and represent critical enrichment. The JOSI is a rigorously juried journal. If you are interested in publishing in the JOSI, feel free to contact our office or visit our website. Sincerely,

Dr. Tanya McCoss-Yerigan Executive Director & Managing Editor Center for Scholastic Inquiry 4857 Hwy 67, Suite #2 Granite Falls, MN 56241

Web: www.csiresearch.com

Phone: 855-855-8764

Email: editor@csiresearch.com

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 4

JOURNAL OF SCHOLASTIC INQUIRY: Business Fall 2020, Volume 11, Issue 1

Editor-in-Chief Dr. Dennis Lamb

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD Shirley Barnes, Alabama State University Joan Berry, University of Mary Hardin-Baylor Brooke Burks, Auburn University at Montgomery Timothy Harrington, Chicago State University Michelle Beach, Southwest Minnesota State University Kenneth Goldberg, National University Linda Rae Markert, State University of New York at Oswego Lucinda Woodward, Indiana University Southeast Robin Davis, Virginia Union University

PEER REVIEWERS Francis Turner Jason Styles Philip Fioravante William Young Shawnee Meek

Andrew Pueschel Mary Tucker Janis Zaima Colin Gabler

Lisa Knowles Katherine Hartman Cynthia Palmer Mason John Hatcher Marianne Marar Yacobian

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 5

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Publication Agreement and Assurance of Integrity Ethical Standards in Publishing Disclaimer of Liability Research Manuscripts Change is Happening at Hyper Speed: Is Management Education Keeping Up? Mary L. Tucker, Ohio University Andrew Pueschel, Ohio University Ikenna Uzuegbunam, Ohio University Kimberly Jordan, Ohio University Shawnee Meek, Ohio University Creating Significant Cross-Functional Leadership Development Opportunities: An “Ecological” Approach Andrew Pueschel, Ohio University David Bayless, Ohio University Katherine Hartman, Ohio University From Academia to Industry: C-Suite Perspectives on Neurodiversity in the Workplace Lisa J. Knowles, St. Thomas University Jason K. Styles, University of The Bahamas The Gender Effect on Millennials’ Perception of Corporate Social Irresponsibility and Consumer Behavior Marianne Marar Yacobian, Menlo College Frances Turner, Wilkes University Sidhu School of Business Janis K. Zaima, Menlo College Leader’s Personal Ethics Dilemma and Conflict with Organizational Ethics Farai Katsande, Regent University Location, Location, Location? The Impact of Site Selection on Global Learning and Student Satisfaction in Short-Term Study Abroad Colin B. Gabler, Ohio University Andy Goodnite, Ohio University Andrew Pueschel, Ohio University William A. Young II, Ohio University The Shepherd Leader: Orienting, Harnessing, and Adapting the Collective Intelligence of the Team Philip L. Fioravante, Walsh College Manuscript Submission Guide Why Read Our Journals

8-146 8

88 107

123 147 149

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 7

PUBLICATION AGREEMENT AND ASSURANCE OF INTEGRITY By submitting a manuscript for publication, authors confirm that the research and writing is their exclusive, original, and unpublished work. Upon acceptance of the manuscript for publication, authors grant the Center for Scholastic Inquiry, LLC (CSI) the sole and permanent right to publish the manuscript, at its option, in one of its academic research journals, on the CSI's website, in other germane, academic publications; and/or on an alternate hosting site or database. Authors retain copyright ownership of their research and writing for all other purposes. ETHICAL STANDARDS IN PUBLISHING The CSI insists on and meets the most distinguished benchmarks for publication of academic journals to foster the advancement of accurate scientific knowledge and to defend intellectual property rights. The CSI stipulates and expects that all practitioners and professionals submit original, unpublished manuscripts in accordance with its code of ethics and ethical principles of academic research and writing. DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY The CSI does not endorse any of the ideas, concepts, and theories published within the JOSI: B. Furthermore, we accept no responsibility or liability for outcomes based upon implementation of the individual author’s ideas, concepts, or theories. Each manuscript is the copyrighted property of the author.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 8

Change is Happening at Hyper Speed: Is Management Education Keeping Up? Mary L. Tucker Ohio University Andrew Pueschel Ohio University Ikenna Uzuegbunam Ohio University Kimberly Jordan Ohio University Shawnee Meek Ohio University

Abstract Change today is happening at hyper speed. In order for management education to keep up, we must be vigilant in assessing our management education programs to assure that our students are successful at career entry. This paper reviews the literature and presents research findings from management alumni and current students at a Midwestern university. Results show the importance of 21st century skills for alumni and how students view their preparedness on these skills. It is imperative that business schools seek input from their alumni and assess classroom learning in order to continuously adapt to the competencies employers need in new hires. Keywords: Business education, student success, workforce skills, assessment, learning

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 9

Introduction U.S. and European employers are facing constant change in a globalized economy and, at the same time, looking for skill savvy new hires without the need for extensive training. Business schools, then, must constantly review curriculum and adapt to match what employers need in new hires (Ghannadian, 2014). In this time of turbulent change, are business schools providing competitive graduates? To stay relevant, business schools must continually seek input from industry to determine if, in fact, our business curriculum is providing competencies employers want in new hires. This paper will review the literature and present findings following research that queried management alumni and current students. Literature Review What Employers Want There is a plethora of research seeking to determine whether business skills prized by industry match business management curricula (i.e., David & David, 2011; Davidson, 2017; Ghannadian, 2014; VanDam & Guidone, 2018). Industry research shows that employers want business school graduates with solid tech skills and human skills like critical thinking, problem solving, teamwork, and persuasion (VanDam & Guidone, 2018). Looking at skills employers identify as important, David and David (2011) reviewed corporate job descriptions, new graduate resumes, and business school syllabi, and found gaps between what employers want and what business schools offered. The other skills not addressed by business schools include soft skills: self-awareness, long-term planning, time management, task prioritization, empathy, and persistence (Ghannadian, 2014). More recently, Jeff Selingo presented “2027: The Decade Ahead for Higher Education” and spoke of the “opportunity to forge deeper alliances among institutions and remake higher education for the demands of the 21st century” (as cited in Davidson, 2017, para. 3). Selingo notes that students need the ability to navigate ambiguity, resilience, curiosity, and entrepreneurship because of the dynamic job market and the need to move through different roles. Farrugia and Sanger (2017) encapsulated a compendium of research findings, and assert that employers generally value technical skills at a lower level than soft skills in new employees

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 10

(Alston, Cromartie, Wakefield, & English, 2009; Crawford, Lang, Fink, Dalton, & Fielitz, 2011; Harder, Andenoro, Roberts, Stedman, Newberry, Parker, & Rodriguez, 2015; Jogan & Herring, 2007; Robinson, Garton, & Terry, 2007; Robinson, Garton, &Vaughn, 2007). Farrrugia and Sanger (2017) built a list of twenty-first century workforce skills most sought by employers (see Figure 1) from previous European and U.S. research (National Association of Colleges and Employers, 2017; European Commission, Education and Culture, 2014; Leppanen, Saarinen, & Airas, 2014; Tobin & Pettingell, 2008; Robles, 2012). Employers are less sure that communication, writing, and critical thinking are being effectively taught and these are the top skills that employers want, but no longer believe are embedded in a college degree (Davidson, 2017). There are two issues here: (1) Teaching skills like communication, writing, and critical thinking is hard; (2) Employers are less sure that the college degree is the strongest signal of these skills. Most of our degree programs include too much information when students just need smaller amounts, for example, short-term certificates that can also fuel continuous learning (Davidson, 2017). According to Henderson (2018), there’s a transition within companies to move from the short-term to the long-term when considering social responsibility and sustainability. Some companies with long-term focus on social and environmental responsibility are more profitable (Henderson, 2018). As a result, some universities are forming networks, 38 management schools across the world, to change their curriculum, partnerships, and research to center on responsible management education (Weybrecht, 2018). It is clear from the research that Ghannadian (2014) is correct to reminds us, “schools must view curriculum revision as constant – it’s a task that’s never done” (p.7). This current research seeks to determine our alumni views on what competencies are sought in new hires and to determine our students’ views about how well their management major is preparing them on the skills reported by executives to be important skills needed in the twenty-first century workforce. Methodology Quantitative data were collected from alumni, as well as current undergraduate management majors (3rd and 4th year) in a College of Business at a Midwestern university using

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 11

a convenience sampling. Alumni with graduation dates ranging from 1980-2018 (N= 3,703) were sent a Qualtrics survey stating, “Your help is needed as we update our Management Major curriculum to position every graduate for success in their first job after graduation.” Responding to the survey were 170 alumni participants from the following decades: 80’s (53), 90’s (46), 00’s (46), and 10’s (25). Alumni participation to the survey resulted in a 4.59% response rate. The survey sent to current undergraduate junior and senior management majors (N=187) resulted in 50 responses from juniors (36) and senior students (14). Undergraduate participation response rate was 26.7%. The 21st century skills (Farrugia & Sanger, 2017) were used and alumni were asked to rate each skill utilizing a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not important at all) to 5 (extremely important). The survey sent to current undergraduate junior and senior management majors also utilized a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not important at all) to 5 (extremely important) and asked students, “How well did the Management Department prepare you for the following (21st century work force) skills?” Results This research focused on alumni views about competencies sought in new hires based on the 21st century skills competencies denoted most valuable from worldwide research (Farrugia & Sanger, 2017). Also reviewed were undergraduates’ views about how well the management major is preparing them on these same skills. As indicated in the following figure, alumni ranked the skills very high, while undergraduates indicated gaps in communication skills and technical/computer software skills training. To What Degree Do the Alumni Survey Results Match Twenty-First Century Work Force Skills? The results in Figure 2 indicate that these alumni rate 21st century skills very high overall. The highest average ratings are for communication skills (4.82) and work ethic skills (4.7), followed by flexibility/adaptability skills (4.56), leadership skills (4.57) and problem-solving skills (4.61), respectively. The lowest rated skill is academic major knowledge (i.e. their knowledge of management, average rating of 3.45). Considering that the scale goes from 1 (low)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 12

to 5 (high) in terms of importance, a 3.45 average rating for academic major knowledge is still trending toward above moderate level of importance, even for the lowest average rating 21st century skills in the list. See Appendix A for the summary statistics and bivariate correlations. To What Degree Do the Student Survey Results Match Twenty-First Century Work Force Skills? Figure 2 also shows the average responses of current students on how well prepared they are relative to the 21st century skills. The biggest gap between current student responses and alumni appear to be in the area of communication skills and technical/computer software skills. In both cases, alumni provided higher ratings for the importance of these skills in the 21st century compared to students’ responses on how well prepared they are relative to these skills. Discussion It is clear that the alumni respondents in this study believe that the 21st century skills, as outlined in Farrugia and Sanger’s (2017) meta-study are important. Likewise, overall students believe that they are being well prepared in these 21st century skills. Ghannadian (2014) reminds us that curriculum changes are crucial; however, “it’s often slow, due to bureaucratic university structures, which can cause a lag between what businesses want and what business schools supply” (p. 6). This delay becomes more challenging as change accelerates across the world’s economy. Today’s top business school programs are focused on ethics and social responsibility, critical thinking, and business communication, which are offered in conjunction with analytic and technical offerings. Undergraduates have choices that include micro units that build together from a menu of options to complement each learner. As part of these choices, classes in managerial skills such as negotiation, power, and cross-cultural management are being offered. According to Henderson (2018), there is a transition within companies to move from the shortterm to the longer term when considering corporate social responsibility and sustainability. Some companies with long-term focus on social and environmental responsibility are more profitable, i.e., Apple, Facebook, and BlackRock (Henderson, 2018). As a result, some universities are forming and joining networks, such as the United Nations-supported initiative

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 13

founded in 2007, Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME). This platform seeks to raise the profile of sustainability and consists of 38 management schools across the world that agree to change their curriculum, partnerships, and research to center on responsible management education (Weybrecht, 2018). It is critical for the faculty of management departments to continuously assess and improve their program, in order to successfully prepare students for success entering their first career. Limitations This study is limited to the alumni and students of one Midwestern university. The small response rate may have impacted the results. Further, since the survey was mailed by the university alumni office, it is also possible that many emails were outdated resulting in an unknown number of emails going unopened. In addition, this study’s population limits the generalizability of the study; however, it can be easily replicated to include a wide variety of participants in both educational and professional settings. The self-reporting of the data by the students and alumni are the main limitation of this study. Those who have completed the survey are subject to biases. However, former research concludes that self-reported data are useful for understanding the participants’ psychological experience and are not as strongly limited as we assume, because people often realistically perceive their social environment (Balzer & Sulsky, 1992; Funder, Kolar, & Blackman, 1995; Murphy, Jako, & Anhalt, 1992; Spector, 1994). Conclusion Ghannadian (2014) discusses the importance of business schools and highlights the impact that can be made through a well-thought-out business curriculum. It is imperative that business schools seek input from their alumni in the workforce and continuously adapt curriculum to the competencies employers need in new hires. This paper reviewed the literature and presented findings following research that queried management alumni and current students. Results show the importance of 21st century skills for alumni and how students view their preparedness on these skills. Change today is happening at hyper speed. In order for management education to keep up, we must be vigilant in assessing our management education programs to assure that our students are successful at career entry.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 14

Author Biographies Mary L. Tucker is a Professor of Management at Ohio University. She teaches management, organizational behavior, and cross-cultural leadership and management. Current research interests include leadership, management pedagogy, and assessing learning. She has provided leadership training for both private and public-sector organizations, including the American Association of Highway Transportation Officials, 3M, and State Farm. Andrew Pueschel is an Assistant Professor of Instruction in the Management Department of the College of Business at Ohio University and Director of the Emerging Leaders program in the Robert D. Walter Center for Strategic Leadership. He received his PhD in Instructional Leadership and Management from Robert Morris University and his Masters in Public Policy and Management at the Carnegie Mellon’s Heinz School. His research interests include leading for wellness, positivity, leadership, organizational behavior, and culture change. Ikenna Uzuegbunam is an Associate Professor of Strategy, Entrepreneurship, and International Business and the Director of the One-Year MBA program in the College of Business at Ohio University. He teaches strategic management, managing innovation and corporate entrepreneurship, and ideation and business models. His research focuses on the resources and sociocultural forces that impact innovation and entrepreneurship around the world. Kimberly R. Jordan is an Assistant Professor of Instruction for the Management Department and the Director of the Strategic Leadership Certificate for the Walter Center for Strategic Leadership in the College of Business at Ohio University. Kim teaches strategic business communication in the Integrated Business Cluster and strategic leadership onboarding. Her research interests are in storytelling, brains, and leadership. Shawnee Meek is an Assistant Professor of Instruction of Management at Ohio University. She teaches strategic business communication and leadership. Current research interests include workplace effectiveness, positivity, and leadership. She has provided leadership training for both private and public-sector organizations, including Global Cooling and GallopNYC.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 15

References Alston, A.J., Cromartie, D., Wakefield, D., & English, C. W. (2009). The importance of employability skills as perceived by the employers of United States’ Land-Grant College and university graduates. Journal of Southern Agricultural Education Research, 59, 5669. Balzer W. & Sulsky, L.M. (1992). Halo and performance appraisal research: A critical examination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 975-985. Crawford, P., Lang, S., Fink, W., Dalton, R., & Fielitz, L. (2011). Comparative analysis of soft skills: Perceptions of employers, alum, faculty and students. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University. David, F., & David, M. (2011). What are business schools doing for business today? Business Horizons, 54(1), 51-62. doi:10.1016/J.BUSHOR.2010.09.001 Davidson, L. (2017, November 1). “Alliances, ambiguity, appetizers: Jeff Selingo forecasts future workforce needs.” www.aacsb.edu/blog/2017/november/alliancesambiguity-appetizers-jeff-selingo-forecasts-future-workforce-needs European Commission, Education, and Culture. (2014) The Erasmus impact study. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Farrugia, C. & Sanger, J. (2017, October). Gaining an employment edge: The impact of study abroad on 21st century skills & career prospects in the United States. https://www.iie.org/Research-and-Insights/Publications/Gaining-an-Employment-Edge--The-Impact-of-Study-Abroad Funder, D.C., Kolar, D.C., & Blackman, M.C. (1995). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 656-672. Ghannadian, F. F. (2014, March 1). What employers want, what we teach. BizEd. http://bized.aacsb.edu/articles/2013/03/what-employers-want-what-we-teach Harder, A., Andenoro, A., Roberts, T., Stedman, N., Newberry, M. I., Parker S., & Rodriguez, M. (2015). Does study abroad increase employability? NACTA Journal. 41-48. Henderson, R. M. (2018). More and more CEOs are taking their social responsibility seriously. Harvard Business Review Digital Articles, 2-5.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 16

Jogan, K. S. & Herring, D. R. (2007). Selected potential employers’ assessment of competencies taught in the D. E. King Equine Program of the University of Arkansas. Journal of Southern Agricultural Education Research, 57, 29-42. Leppanen J., Saarinen, M., & Airas, M. (2014). Faktaa. Facts and figures: Hidden competences. Helsinki, Finland: Centre for International Mobility. Murphy, K.R., Jako, R.A., & Anhalt, R.L. (1992). Nature and consequences of halo error: A critical analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 218-229. National Association of Colleges and Employers. (2017). Career readiness defined. http//www.naceweb.org/career-readiness/competencies/career-readiness-defined/ Robinson, J. S., Garton, B. L., & Terry, R., Jr. (2007). Identifying the employability skills needed in the workplace according to supervisors of college of agriculture, food, and natural resources graduates. Journal of Southern Agricultural Education Research, 57(1), 95-109. Robinson, J. S., Garton, B. L., & Vaughn, P. R. (2007). Becoming employable: A look at graduates’ and supervisors’ perceptions of the skills needed for employability. NACTA Journal, 19-26. Robles, M. (2012). Executive perceptions of the top 10 soft skills needed in today’s workplace. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 75(4), 453-465. Spector, P.E. (1994). Using self-report questionnaires in OB research: A comment on the use of a controversial method. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 385-392. Tobin, D. R., & Pettingell, M. S. (2008). The AMA guide to management development. AMACOM/American Management Association. VanDam, N. & Guidone, J. (2018, March 1). Lifelong learning will be the hallmark of the digital age: How can business schools prepare to educate tomorrow’s workforce? BizEd. http://bized.aacsb.edu/articles/2018/03/learning-in-the-digital-age Weybrecht, G. (2018, February 12). Developing a sustainability disposition. https://primetime.unprme.org/2018/02/12/developing-a-sustainability-disposition-latrobe-business-school/

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 17

Figure 1 Twenty-First Century Work Force Skills Communication Skills

The ability to convey ideas to others through verbal and written means, using clear and effective language that accounts for the audience.

Confidence

The ability to make decisions based on one’s own convictions and to trust in one’s own competence.

Course or Major-

Proficiency in one’s chosen academic major or course content.

Related Knowledge Curiosity

The openness to new experiences and desire to learn.

Flexibility/Adaptability The ability to adjust one’s own behavior to changing circumstances and to work in ambiguous environments. This skill includes the ability to learn and to be teachable. Intercultural Skills

The ability to understand and respect different cultural contexts and viewpoints. Includes an openness to new ideas and ways of thinking.

Interpersonal Skills

Having a positive attitude to get along with others that includes social awareness, the ability to listen, and display good etiquette.

Language Skills

The ability to communicate in spoken and written form in a language other than English.

Leadership

The ability to leverage the strengths of others to achieve common goals, and use interpersonal skills to coach and develop others. The ability to assess and manage one’s emotions and those of others; to use empathetic skills to guide and motivate; and to organize, prioritize, and delegate work.

Problem-Solving Skills The ability to identify work-related problems; analyze problems in a systematic but timely manner; to draw correct and realistic conclusions based on data and information; and to accurately assess root cause before moving to solutions. Self-Awareness

The ability to self-reflect and understand one’s strengths and

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 18

weaknesses. Teamwork

The ability to collaborate with a diverse team, work within a team structure, and negotiate and manage conflict.

Technical/Computer

The ability to select and use appropriate technology to accomplish a

Software Skills

given task, or apply computing skills to solve problems.

Tolerance for

The ability to be comfortable with uncertainty, unpredictability,

Ambiguity

conflicting directions, and multiple demands. In essence, tolerance for ambiguity is manifest in a person’s ability to operate effectively in an uncertain environment.

Work Ethic

Demonstrates personal accountability and effective work habits, e.g., punctuality, working productively with others, time/workload management. Understands the impact of non-verbal communication on professional work image. The individual demonstrates integrity and ethical behavior, acts responsibly with the interests of the larger community in mind, and is able to learn from his/her mistakes. (Farrugia & Sanger, 2017, p.7)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business Figure 2 Department of Management Alumni/Students Ratings on 21st Century Skills

Volume 11 Page 19

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 20

Appendix A: Summary Statistics and Bivariate Correlations*

[1] [1] Communication skills

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[12]

[13

[14]

[15]

[2] Confidence related skills

0.19

[3] Academic major knowledge

0.04

0.15

[4] Curiosity-related skills

0.26

-0.03

-0.05

[5] Flexibility/Adaptability

0.1

0.22

-0.04

0.33

[6] Intercultural skills

0.12

0.11

0.13

0.31

0.25

[7] Interpersonal skills

0.12

0.09

-0.05

0.29

0.27

0.36

[8] Leadership skills

0.16

0.19

0.09

0.02

0.15

0.14

[9] Problem-solving skills

0.29

0.11

0.05

0.19

0.08

0.21

0.39

-0.01

0.21

0.06

0.22

0.15

0.42

0.26

0.16

0.14

[10] Self-awareness

[11]

[11] Teamwork skills

0.16

0.07

0.16

0.29

0.20

0.32

0.31

0.20

0.22

0.23

[12] Tech./Computer skills

0.12

0.22

0.39

-0.01

0.01

0.06

0.08

0.17

0.10

-0.05

0.22

[13] Tolerance for ambiguity

0.22

0.14

0.08

0.22

0.23

0.25

0.28

0.14

0.16

0.20

0.36

0.25

[14] Work ethic

0.13

0.08

0.02

0.26

0.23

0.26

0.12

0.25

0.23

0.31

0.11

0.30

-0.01

0.12

-0.17

0.14

0.12

-0.07

-0.10

-0.20

-0.03

0.12

-0.02

-0.05

-0.02

Mean

4.82

3.98

3.45

4.44

4.56

3.98

4.57

4.31

4.61

4.25

4.44

3.91

4.13

4.70

2.25

S.D.

0.40

0.74

0.86

0.63

0.58

0.87

0.61

0.69

0.53

0.68

0.67

0.76

0.73

0.57

1.06

Min

Max

[15] Graduation year

*Bivariate correlations with absolute value greater than or equal to 0.22, 0.16, and 0.14 are significant at the p<0.01, p<0.05, and p<0.1 levels respectively. Most significant correlations are indicated with bold faced font.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 21

Creating Significant Cross-Functional Leadership Development Opportunities: An “Ecological” Approach Andrew Pueschel Ohio University David Bayless Ohio University Katherine Hartman Ohio University

Abstract Although extant research suggests experience with cross-functional teams is suggested to maximize student leadership development, there are challenges to implementing cross-functional teams in an academic learning environment. This study examines the effectiveness of a sustainability-focused, semester-long, course-based learning experience that integrated students across academic colleges. As compared to students not participating in a cross-functional experience, the results suggest students self-reported greater confidence in the development of leadership skills. The discussion offers suggestions for designing cross-functional team engagement opportunities for students. Keywords: Leadership development, business education, experiential learning

Introduction At a time when students are unable to see the need or the benefits of working in crossdisciplinary teams, there is a need for an explanation for why these models are best practices in

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 22

the professional arena. This study integrated a series of experiential learning modules to prime students for leadership growth through communication, conflict management, and strategic leadership training. By introducing participants to these concepts through experiential learning modules, this study analyzed to what levels, students can become more aware of the ability they possess to achieve new heights in their leadership development personally. The purpose of the study was to explore the effects of cross-functional leadership teams on engineering students’ self-assessment, leadership knowledge and skillsets, and confidence in academic abilities. Literature Review There is a body of literature regarding the need for students to learn to work more effectively with other disciplines within a business structure to attain project success. Whether espoused through visionary calls (National Academy of Engineering, 2004) or compilation of industrial feedback (ASEE, 2013), it is generally accepted that engineers need “soft” skill development to succeed in team environments in the “real world.” Some efforts have either documented the need for the development of skills necessary to work in cross-functional teams or methods to address the development of such skills, but not explicitly engaged in a crossfunctional or multi-disciplinary team effort. Extant research argues that engineering students need to learn to work with other disciplines in business environments (e.g., Shuman et al., 2005; Froyd et al., 2012; Summers et al., 2004; Teichmann et al., 2013; Khalid et al., 2013; Rogers, & Freuler, 2015). While there are dozens of other studies, these works were used as the basis for the justification for using a cross-functional team format. Prior research describes methods of interfacing students with business concepts, business student teams, or co-curricular activities (Ezekoye et al., 2002; Fisher et al., 2014; Siller et al., 2009; Frank, 2018; Rosales et al., 2016). However, the cited literature establishes that it is possible to help engineering students learn aspects of successful teamwork with students in other disciplines. Yet, the literature also reveals a pain-point – the diverse nature of such teams may lead to a rapid breakdown if effective leadership is not employed (Jassawalla & Sashittal, 2000). With cross-functional teams becoming more widespread and critical to success in addressing issues that cannot be solved within corporate silos (Holland, S., Gaston, K. & Gomes, J., 2000), challenges are also becoming more evident including documented widespread dysfunction

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 23

(Tabrizi, 2015). Dysfunction may be a result of (a) team members answering to both the crossfunctional team and their functional department, which may or may not compete for resources),(b) diverse ideas leading to a breakdown in communications, and (c) high-achievers who may feel disenfranchised from the team when competing ideas are selected over their ideas. For this work, a cross-functional team is defined as a group with different functional (or discipline) expertise working with a high degree of interdependence toward a common goal to address a challenge that crosses departmental boundaries. This definition is an amalgamation of several works focusing on how to build successful business models through more effective use of cross-functional teams (Krajewski & Ritzman, 2005; Figliuolo, 2019.) While this literature provided insight into the roles and functionality of cross-functional teams, the final definition was crafted through discussion with Russ College of Engineering alumni leaders that were stakeholders in the EcoChallenge program. These alumni noted the value of using crossfunctional teams to stimulate innovation, to create consensus on direction, to enhance cross-unit communication and alignment of purpose, cut through barriers that inhibit product development, improve accountability for action, and develop leadership skills within an organization. Crossfunctional teams are widely recognized as a valuable and strategic tool for bringing new ideas and products into the marketplace by cutting through obstacles that tend to inhibit innovation (Holland et al., 2000). While it has been found that experience with cross-functional teams is necessary for students to grasp the need to develop skills that will allow such teams to succeed (Sundheim & Asquith, 2010; Bhavnani & Aldridge, 2000), the challenges to implementing a significant learning activity using a cross-functional team experience is non-trivial. Business and engineering schools have different expected outcomes, accreditation, and assessment criteria. One successful example of integrating business and engineering students in an assessed (graded) class using cross-functional teams that is focused on delivering a tangible outcome is the EPICS program at Purdue (Cummings et al., 2013). Yet, there are challenges to implement a similar model in an environment where curricular ‘crossing of boundaries’ is not embraced. How can a sustainability-focused, semester-long, course-based learning experience that integrates students across academic colleges be used to help students develop leadership skills?

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 24

The ECO Challenge The ECO Challenge, a semester-long cross-disciplinary applied leadership project, is a select program where the outstanding student leaders of an engineering college, business college, and scholars program engage in identifying and solving sustainability issues. Focusing on the campus or the geographical region near campus, ECO Challenge students identify sustainability issues, determine which issue to focus on as a team, envision a solution to the problem, engage stakeholders to clarify the vision, and present a business pitch for the refined solution to a panel of experts who will assess the quality of the pitch and the solution. Participants in the ECO Challenge were the subjects of this study. The following sections describe the methodology and the results of the study itself. Methodology Data were collected from respondents using an online survey using Qualtrics. All respondents were full-time, undergraduate students enrolled in a state university in the Midwestern United States. Respondents were invited to participate in the survey through email and in-class announcements. Data were collected toward the end of the semester. All responses were anonymous. All respondents were enrolled in a third-year management course focused on practical applications of leadership knowledge and skills. Sample 1 (n = 20) respondents were students enrolled in a traditional, lecture-based section in which students worked informally in teams during face-to-face class meetings. Sample 1 respondents did not participate in a formalized cross-functional team. By comparison, sample 2 (n = 22) respondents were enrolled in a section of the same course that also partnered with students enrolled in another course outside of the college to work in formalized, cross-functional teams throughout the semester. Students were organized into cross-functional teams and participated in a series of skill development workshops throughout the semester. Sample 1 (non-cross-functional teams) included business majors (50%), communication majors (35%), education majors (5%), and other majors (10%). Sample 2 (cross-functional teams) included business majors (27%), engineering majors (50%), communication majors

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 25

(13%), education majors (5%), and other majors (5%). Survey questions for both samples included seven questions about confidence in leadership knowledge and skills, as well as three demographic questions. For respondents participating in cross-functional teams, the survey also included five questions about confidence in working with teams. Average survey response time was less than five minutes (M= 290 seconds, SD= 149 seconds). Data used for the analysis included seven self-reported measures about confidence in leadership knowledge and skills that prior research has indicated as important to cross-functional team success: 1) defining key factors and issues, 2) demonstrating leadership practice, 3) developing leadership skills, 4) identifying outcomes, 5) presenting an analysis of leadership strategies, 6) constructing leadership arguments, and 7) designing leadership practices. Each item was measured using a five-point scale from very unconfident (1) to very confident (5). Separately, the seven-item scale demonstrated good reliability for sample 1 (α = .92) and sample 2 (α = .96). Combining both samples, the seven-item scale was also highly reliable (α = .95). Results Prior to the study, students who participated in cross-functional teams were expected to self-report stronger confidence in leadership knowledge and skills as compared to students who did not participate in cross-functional teams. To test for differences between students who participated in the cross-functional teams and students who did not, mean differences for each of the seven items measuring leadership knowledge and skills were analyzed using independent sample t-tests. Mean scores for each item and a composite (average) confidence score were compared between sample 1 and sample 2. The results suggested that all mean differences were significant (p < .05), where the average self-reported confidence in leadership knowledge and skills was higher for respondents who participated in a cross-functional team as compared to those who did not. Mean difference effect sizes were analyzed using Cohen’s d. All effect sizes were moderate (d range: 0.69 – 0.77) to large (d range: 1.02 – 1.35). Effect sizes were moderate for three items: confidence in respondents’ ability to demonstrate leadership practices (t(40) = 2.24, p < .05, d = 0.69), to identify outcomes (t(40) = 2.35, p < .05, d = 0.72), and to develop leadership skills (t(40) = 2.50, p < .05, d = 0.77). Effect sizes were large for four items:

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 26

confidence in respondents’ ability to define key factors and issues relevant to effective strategic leadership in practice (t(40) = 3.36, p < .01, d = 1.03), to present an analysis of leadership strategies (t(40) = 4.40, p < .01, d = 1.35), to construct leadership arguments through analysis and research (t(40) = 3.30, p < .01, d = 1.02), and to design strategic leadership practices to achieve results (t(40) = 3.68, p < .01, d = 1.13). Table 1 provides the results associated with the seven areas identified as important to cross-functional team success. Discussion Our findings suggest that the overall experience of the ECO Challenge helped to advance the leadership development skills of those who participated, since the reporting of ability for skills was higher for respondents who participated in a cross-functional team as compared to those who did not. Within the program, there is a chance that students will be assigned to teams in which their leadership skills will be tested more rigorously than others because the quality of the work ethic and ability of each student may vary by individual. While the results indicated that participants reported higher confidence in the seven areas of importance to cross-functional team success, this outcome is logical given that the ECO Challenge was created to enhance the opportunities for individuals to increase their professional abilities in a team-based setting. Best practices for maximizing leadership development strategies and tactics through the ECO Challenge have been organically formalized, due to the strong levels of yearly participation from students, as well as the desire of the institution’s administration and program sponsor to enhance the experience for all stakeholders involved continuously. Workshops on executive presence, stakeholder communication, and project management help to bridge gaps in learning between the disciplines, as well as motivate participants through a common purpose. Activities such as team effectiveness, conflict management, and ideation through brainstorming break down stereotypes and inspire collaboration at various levels. Originally conceived as an idea created to help spark an interest in cross-disciplinary professional development, the ECO Challenge has become a publicly attended event in which thought leaders and topical stakeholders participated in each year (see appendix A for the program’s project timeline).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 27

Limitations and Future Study While its generalizability is limited by sample size and type of population, the study can be easily replicated to include a wide variety of participants in both educational and professional settings. The study could inspire longitudinal research because the ECO Challenge is an annual event in which data can be collected and compared over time. The self-reporting of the data by the students can also serve as a limitation of this study. As participants often realistically perceive their social environment (Balzer & Sulsky, 1992; Funder et al., 1995; Murphy et al., 1993; Spector, 1994), self-reported data are useful for understanding the participants’ psychological experience. As such, the biases might not be as strongly limited as initially thought. The study could inspire longitudinal research since the ECO Challenge is an annual event in which data can be collected and compared over time. Such data could yield additional insights into the impact on leadership development via 1) gender differences, 2) instructor effectiveness, 3) specific majors, 4) concentrations outside business and engineering, 5) homogeneous vs. heterogeneous teams, and 6) virtual vs. face-to-face training. Conclusion While many students question the importance of learning in team settings, let alone in cross-disciplinary environments, Sundheim and Asquith (2010) remind us that these experiences support leadership development. This study contributes to the literature by examining the effectiveness of leadership skill development within the ECO Challenge, which was a semester-long cross-disciplinary applied leadership project that integrated students from a diverse sampling across campus to identify and solve sustainability issues. Overall, skills were higher for respondents who participated in a cross-functional team, as compared to those who did not. Results indicate that seven areas in which confidence levels increase the most within cross-function team interaction, specifically 1) defining key factors and issues, 2) demonstrating leadership practice, 3) developing leadership skills, 4) identifying outcomes, 5) presenting an analysis of leadership strategies, 6) constructing leadership arguments, and 7) designing leadership practices. The practical and managerial implications of this study underscore the success of utilizing professional development training-based learning experiences that integrate

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 28

employees from across an organization. Programs like the ECO Challenge can strengthen the effectiveness of future teams in organizations, as well as positively impact managers’ assignment of cross-disciplinary roles. Therefore, the workforce benefits from knowing that issue definition, analysis, and research, and the designing of strategic leadership practices to achieve results can be enhanced through multi-disciplinary team interaction. Author Biographies Dr. Andrew Pueschel is an Assistant Professor of Instruction in the Management Department of the College of Business at Ohio University and Director of the Emerging Leaders Program in the Robert D. Walter Center for Strategic Leadership. His research interests include leading for wellness, positivity, leadership, organizational behavior, and culture change. Dr. David Bayless is the Gerald Loehr Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Ohio University where he is the Director of the Center for Algal Engineering Research and Commercialization (an Ohio Third Frontier Wright Project) focusing on the energy and environmental technology creation. Dr. Katherine Hartman is the Fox Associate Professor and Chair of the Marketing Department in the College of Business at Ohio University. She teaches marketing strategy, marketing research, and consumer behavior. Her research interests include assessment, accreditation, problem-based learning, general education, and intercultural competency.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 29

References ASEE, (2013). Transforming undergraduate education of engineers—Phase 1: Synthesizing and integrating industry perspectives. American Society of Engineering Education, Washington DC. Balzer, W. K., & Sulsky, L. M. (1992). Halo and performance appraisal research: A critical examination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(6), 975-985. Bhavnani, S. H., & Aldridge, M. D. (2000). Teamwork across disciplinary borders: A bridge between college and the work place. Journal of Engineering Education, 89(1), 13-16. Cummings, A., Huff, J., Oakes, W., & Zoltowski, C. (2013). An assessment approach to project-based service learning. Proceedings of the 120th Annual ASEE Conference, Atlanta, GA, paper 7121. Ezekoye, O.A., Patil, T.S., Nichols, S., Butler, J.S., & Doggett, J. (2002). Development of business skills in engineering students through collaborative engineering-business school activities. Proceedings of the 109th Annual ASEE Conference, Montreal, Canada. Figliuolo, M. (2019). Managing a cross-functional team, LinkedIn, https://www.linkedin.com/learning/managing-a-cross-functional-team/what-is-a-crossfunctional-team Fisher, D.R., Bagiati, A., & Sarma, S. (20114). Fostering 21st-century skills in engineering undergraduates through co-curricular involvement. Proceedings of the 121st Annual ASEE Conference, Indianapolis, Indiana, Paper 9561. Frank, K. (2018). New program combines engineering and business to meet industry needs. https://engineering.osu.edu/news/2014/01/new-program-combines-engine Froyd, J., Wankat, P., & Smith, K. (2012). Five major shifts in 100 years of engineering education. Proceedings of the IEEE, 100, 1344-1360. Funder, D.C., Kolar D.C., & Blackman, M.C. (1995). Agreement among judges of personality: Interpersonal relations, similarity, and acquaintanceship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 656-672. Holland, S., Gaston, K., & Gomes, J. (2000). Critical success factors for cross-functional

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 30

teamwork in new product development. International Journal of Management Reviews, 2(3), 231-259. Jassawalla, A. R., & Sashittal, H. C. (2000). Cross-functional dynamics in new product development. Research-Technology Management, 43(1), 46-49. Khalid, A., Chin, C., Atiqullah, M., Sweigart, J., Stutzmann, B., Zhou, W. (2013). Building a better engineer: The importance of humanities in engineering curriculum. Proceedings of the 120th Annual ASEE Conference, Atlanta, GA, paper 6052. Krajewski, L. J., & Ritzman, L.P. (2005). Operations management: Processes and value chains. Pearson Education, 7th Edition. Murphy, K. R., Jako, R. A., & Anhalt, R. L. (1993). Nature and consequences of halo error: A critical analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2), 218-225. National Academy of Engineering, (2004). The Engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. Rogers, P., & Freuler, R. (2015). The T-shaped engineer. Proceedings of the 122nd Annual ASEE Conference, Seattle, Paper 11576. Rosales, A., Leland, A., Notoros, O., Toftness, R., Siller, T., De Miranda, M., Cook, A., Reese, M., Bryne, Z., Weston, J., & Maciejewski, A. (2016). Preliminary work on weaving professionalism throughout the engineering curriculum, Proceedings of the 123rd Annual ASEE Conference, New Orleans, LA, Paper 16532. Shuman, L. J., Besterfield-Sacre, M., & Mcgourty, J. (2005). The ABET “professional skills” – Can they be taught? Can they be assessed? Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 4155. Siller, T., Rosales, A., Haines, J., & Benally, A. (2009). Development of undergraduate students’ professional skills. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 135(3), 102-108. Spector, P. E. (1994). Using self-report questionnaires in OB research: A comment on the use of a controversial method. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(5), 385-392. Summers, M., Davis, B., & Tovic, C. (2004). When engineering and technology skills are not enough: Engineering leaders out of their element, Proceedings of the 2004 CIEC Conference, Biloxi, MS, Paper ETD 342-1.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 31

Sundheim, N., & Asquith, J. (2010) First-year cross-functional design teams: Engineering and business. 2010 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Washington, DC, pp. T4E-1-T4E-6. Teichmann, M., Parts, V., Kerikmäe, T., Murdvee, M., & Pevkur, A. (2013). A Heuristic model of non-technical competences for engineers. Recent Advances in Educational Methods; Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Engineering Education (EDUCATION '13), 40-49. Tabrizi, B. (2015) 75% of cross-functional teams are dysfunctional. Harvard Business Review, https://hbr.org/2015/06/75-of-cross-functional-teams-are-dysfunctional

Table 1 Confidence in Leadership Differences using t-tests Equality of Means Sample 1

Sample 2

t-test

Cohen’s d

1. Define key factors and issues

3.65

0.88

4.45

0.67

3.36**

1.03

2. Demonstrate leadership practices

3.65

0.99

4.32

0.95

2.24*

0.69

3. Develop leadership skills

3.75

0.91

4.41

0.80

2.50*

0.77

4. Identify outcomes

3.80

1.01

4.41

0.67

2.34*

0.72

5. Present analysis of leadership

3.25

1.02

4.41

0.67

4.40**

1.35

6. Construct leadership arguments

3.20

0.95

4.14

0.89

3.30**

1.02

7. Design leadership practices

3.25

0.97

4.23

0.75

3.68**

1.13

Composite (average) confidence

3.51

0.79

4.34

0.70

3.61**

1.11

Measurement Item

strategies

* p < .05; ** p < .01

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 32

APPENDIX A Project Timeline Date

Activity or Deadline

August 29

ECO Challenge Kick off

September 12

Team selection and formation.

September 17

Preliminary ideas presented to faculty

September 19

Teams will submit their ideas for problems to be solved in 2-3 minute pitches. (PowerPoint with video submission)

September 24

Review of projects with sustainability leaders and facilities experts from the campus to help teams connect to resources. Discussion of ROI analysis parameters. Report on stakeholder engagement and questions to be answered.

October 8

Preliminary project report including ROI milestone 

ROI analysis based on breakeven time with cash flow



IRR analysis using Excel with cash flow and capital expenditures for three years



Discuss how the financial data was obtained, including who was engaged



Provide actual information or describe plans to provide the following o Description of the sustainability problem to be solved o A description of your solution o Details of the claimed benefits o Description of the implementation practicality and risk factors that could inhibit implementation and/or acceptance. This includes 

Adequately addressing the concerns of the stakeholders



Estimate of the impact the change could have on people, economic savings



A list of possible stakeholders that would have to be engaged for funding/approval/buy-in

October 10

Stakeholder communication with Dan Squiller.

October 22

Executive coaching on providing pitches with Dr. Pueschel

November 5

Project management with Dr. Bayless.

November 7

Video of team dry run of the presentation. Feedback from Bayless, Pueschel,

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 33

and Squiller. 

Video (no more than twelve minutes, please) should cover the following o Description of the sustainability problem to be solved o A description of your solution o Details of the claimed benefits



Description of the implementation practicality and risk factors that could inhibit implementation and/or acceptance. This includes o Adequately addressing the concerns of the stakeholders o Estimate of the impact the change could have on people, economic savings o A list of possible stakeholders that would have to be engaged for funding/approval/buy-in

 November 13

Return on investment analysis both breakeven and three-year IRR

Competition date – first round. 

November 20

Each team will make a 10-15 minute pitch to describe their problem and their envisioned solution. Meet with faculty for a more detailed debrief with individual teams.

December 4

Final round presentations for the prize

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 34

From Academia to Industry: C-Suite Perspectives on Neurodiversity in the Workplace Lisa J. Knowles St. Thomas University Jason K. Styles University of The Bahamas Abstract After completing qualitative academic research seeking human resource managers’ perceptions of workers with learning disabilities in the workplace, the results were presented at a recent industry conference. Attendees included managers holding various human resource positions, as well as vice presidents and top decision-makers from many of the top banking, industry, government, and tourist organizations in the Bahamas. After presenting this group with the findings from our initial research on workers with neurodiversity, the researchers asked attendees to respond to the same demographic questions as the original research. Then, attendees were asked to write down what they, as industry professionals, could do to assist those with learning disabilities in the workplace. The research utilized Boyer’s Model of scholarship’s third element, that is, the application of research findings shared directly with those in a professional association. Thus, we had academic research presented to those in industry, who then added to the existing research by providing their perspectives after attending the academic presentation. This qualitative inquiry utilized a collaborative social research methodology. The generated responses were coded and analyzed. NVIVO software further analyzed the results by producing a word frequency cloud. This research adds to the knowledge of addressing workers in the

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 35

workplace that possess a learning disability and human resource management’s (HRM) responsibility and knowledge to train, educate, and make reasonable accommodations in accordance with HRM’s diversity requirements. Keywords: HRM practices, neurodiversity, neurodiverse employees (NDE’s), Bahamas society human resource management (B-SHRM)

Introduction Academic research serves educators well by providing new knowledge built upon previous research. However, when academic research is extended to the greater community, it seems only reasonable that more people benefit from the knowledge acquired. Bringing academic research front and center to industry professionals is not always a common practice. However, when it does occur, as is the case of this paper, the real benefit of research is gleaned by a wider audience. The essence of this paper reflects a true praxis, as “it is knowledge that is infused with human organizations and human interest as represented in the situation under study.” (Evered & Louis, 2001, p. 390). Embracing workplace diversity capitalizes on the creative and innovative benefits brought to the work environment; it also represents socially responsible practices that are further enforced by equal opportunity and non-discriminatory legal obligations. Robbins and Judge (2018) defined diversity as surface-level and deep-level differences. Surface-level differences are those that are visibly noticeable, such as age or gender. Deep-level differences embrace areas such as values and personality. The aspects of neurodiversity fall under the deep-level

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 36

differences as described in Robbins’ and Judge’s (2018) dichotomy, since they are not easily perceivable in the workplace. Collaborative social research is a qualitative research strategy described by Miles and Huberman (1994) that is “undertaken in a social setting,” (p. 8). The social setting for this research is an industry conference presentation of academic research findings. Following the presentation, conference participants were asked to identify four demographics: position, years in position, gender, and public or private organization. These attendees were then asked to offer written responses as to how they could help their workers who may possess neurodiversity. The intent of this research is to provide additional knowledge for both industry and academic professionals. Gleaning new knowledge from the conference on a deep-level diversity topic with little previous dissemination to the industry exemplifies the approach of presenting the right message to the right individuals. Senior management and HR professionals in attendance now have new material and knowledge to share with their respective organizations and make a difference in how they view and develop their workforce moving forward.

Rationale Capitalizing on worker talent and managing such in today’s workplace environments are essential for organizations to maintain a competitive advantage. Lawler (2008) defends that “business strategy is determined by talent considerations, and it in turn drives human capital management practices,” (p. 9). Styles and Knowles (2019) demonstrated that human resource managers did, in fact, view learning-disabled workers as being potential leaders, one may now conclude that developing talent must include neurodiverse workers. Furthermore, “strategic

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 37

talent management is the ability to identity key talent and plan for future talent needs,” (Anderson, 2019, p. 168). To increase the benefits of academic research, Boyer (1997) furthers the “scholarship” concept to include a four-level framework. His framework consists of discovery, integration, application, and teaching (Boyer, 1997). Emphasis on the application level serves this research well. Boyer (1997) defends the application framework as an “aid to society and professions in addressing problems,” (University of Phoenix 2016 and Nibert, 2020).

Background Previous research by Styles and Knowles (2019) identified human resource managers’ perspectives of workers with learning disabilities in The Bahamas. Study results indicate that human resource professionals are not aware of effectively addressing workers with learning disabilities (Styles & Knowles, 2019). The overall impact of underutilizing a talented worker, if not for a neurodiverse factor, inevitably could hinder the full potential of a productive workforce. Neurodiversity may be subtle and well hidden by an individual. Leadership potential may be underutilized also, as these workers may carry great leadership potential, but err on the side of caution in the workplace, due to hiding a learning disability.

Literature Review Neurodiversity Neurodiversity emerging phenomena was initially introduced by Harvey Blume (1998) in an article name the Neurodiversity: On the neurological underpinnings of geekdom. According

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 38

to Blume (1998), neurodiversity may be crucial for the human race as biodiversity is for life in general. Not to mention, the concept continued to grow through the establishment of support groups, representing a new addition to the familiar political categories of class/gender/race, augmenting the insights of the social model of disability (Armstrong, 2010; Baron‐Cohen, 2017). Another pioneer, Judy Singer, a sociologist in 1999, defined neurodiversity as the impression of autism and Asperger’s. However, it took on broader labeling as a movement among individuals who present a natural range of differences in human brain function, and among employers, becoming the term to describe alternative thinking styles including dyslexia, autism, ADHD, and dyspraxia as they relate to diversity and inclusion in the workplace (Armstrong, 2010; Baker, 2011; Banerjee, et al., 2020; Dalton, 2013). Loiacono and Ren (2018) postulate that organizations must embrace neurodiversity because its’ powerful impetus enables real diversity of thought and perspective in an organization. Furthermore, integrating and taking account of neurodiversity enables companies to succeed in the continuous global market (Brinzea, 2019; Powers, 2019). Significantly, Kapp et al. (2013) substantiated how neurodiversity promotes subjective well-being and adaptive rather than typical functioning, such as reliability, but not necessarily spoken communication, and subjective well-being (p.6). Notwithstanding, organizations need to recognize the individual differences in their employees as they capitalize on workers’ unique strengths, which is beneficial for organizations (Styles & Knowles, 2019).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 39

Neuro Diverse Employees (NDE’s) According to Armstrong (2010), Baker (2011), and Dalton (2013), everyone is, to some extent, differently-abled, or no two neurodiverse persons are precisely similar. Neurodiverse employees exist in all organizations and come from all walks of life-impacting organizations worldwide on the individual, group, and organizational levels (Loiacono & Ren 2018; Visagie, Linde, & Havenga, 2011). Neurodiverse employees (NDE) are not readily identifiable because, sometimes, they might be diagnosed later in life or outside the workplace context (Krzeminska et al.,2019; Powers, 2019). Moreover, as Styles and Knowles (2019) explicated organizations must not focus on the negative tone against neurodiverse individuals, as talent may be overlooked. Most compelling evidence about NDE, Powers (2019) in an article How to Attract and Support Neurodiverse Talent highlights how cognitive diversity produces better results because these individuals analyze a problem through a different lens. Additionally, Powers (2019) adds that having people with different problem-solving abilities, such as NDE, think differently, contribute more and are critical for organizational success. Providing NDE both economic security and the context in which they can contribute their talents and skills to society, anchor themselves in a social role (Krzeminska et al., 2019). This talent type is untapped, and organizations must create stratagems to foster and integrate NDE’s into the organizational culture without destroying the person (Loiacono & Ren, 2018; Styles & Knowles, 2019; Trivedi and Trivedi, 2018).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 40

Human Resources Management Accommodations for Neuro Diverse Employees (NDEs) To increase awareness and utilize NDEs to foster organizational effectiveness, human resource management (HRM) is the impetus for managing diversity challenges and opportunities. Austin and Pisano (2017) eruditely recommended that HRM must apply changeability to the mix when hiring, recruiting, and including people and ideas from “the edges,” in other words, neurodiverse talent. Because, as Sam and Berry (2010) and Jin et al. (2017) both excoriate that human resources are globally advancing, driving HRM practices to acknowledge diversity management and actively promote an inclusive organizational climate for NDEs. For HRM to succeed in creating an inclusive organizational culture for NDE, companies’ implementation practices need to be agile, innovative, astute, and, in turn, this requires a diverse workforce with a variety of views and talents. Expressively, HRM orchestrating a diverse workforce leads to increased adaptability and flexibility to meet customer demands (Brinzea, 2019; Loiacono & Ren, 2018). Necessary to realize, for HRM to accommodate NDEs, Rouvalis (2020) mentions much of this depends on if the NDEs disclose their disability to the employer. Furthermore, the employer only should accommodate a disability, once aware, based on the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (Rouvalis, 2020). As mentioned earlier, NDEs do not relay having challenges because of the negative tone against them, so they instead remain private and keep their health conditions private to refrain from any repercussion (Styles & Knowles, 2019). At the same time, worldwide companies, including SAP, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Microsoft, Willis Towers Watson, Ford, EY, Caterpillar, Dell Technologies, Deloitte, IBM, JPMorgan Chase, and UBS are increasing awareness and accommodating by reforming HRM practices for NDE (Austin & Pisano, 2017).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 41

HRM Accommodations for Neurodiverse Employees (NDEs) in The Bahamas In regards for HRM accommodating NDEs in the Bahamas, it is not enforced but for Equal Protection of the Law: The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities) Act, 2014, Bahamas presence. However, according to Bain (2016), there is a lacuna or gap in the law, which hinders purposeful rights. In detail, The Bahamas, a developing nation, suffers many shortcomings that prevent them from attaining higher levels of performance and productivity (Styles & Knowles, 2020; Marquardt et al., 2004). Furthermore, identified as a collectivist society, the Bahamian society emphasizes family interest, and business leaders with family companies are currently the dominant type of local businesses (Hofstede et al., 2011). The Bahamas power distance, as defined by Hofstede et al. (2011), is high due to a post-colonial mindset deriving from the British vestiges. According to Styles and Knowles (2020), this continues to impede the development of an elaborate system of licenses, regulations, and accompanying red tape to establish a business, which in turn, affects intrinsic rewards, employee satisfaction, career success, overall HRM practices. To emphasize, private and public organizations must create reasonable accommodations for qualified employees to perform their jobs. However, according to the Equal Protection of the Law: The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities) Act, 2014, in The Bahamas, Bain (2016) states: how to accommodate NDE's the Minister responsible for Labour, Social Services, Youth, Sports and Culture, and Education shall design, collaborate and implement programs that provide NDE's too engaged as apprentices or learners; (b) persons with disabilities with skills to enable them to engage in gainful employment; and (c) appropriate vocational measures which serve to develop the skills and potential of persons with disabilities and enable them to compete favorably

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 42

for available, productive and remunerative employment opportunities in the labor market. (pp.910) Concerning the HRM accommodation, Styles and Knowles (2019) reveal how public and private organizations fail to embrace neurodiversity, via recruitment practices, and enabling NDE's to perform at their best once they are in the assigned role.

Methodology An initial qualitative research inquiry of Bahamian human resource managers’ perspectives towards workers with learning disabilities gained visibility at the closing general session of the Bahamas Society for Human Resource Managers (B-SHRM) 2019 annual conference. In an effort to glean from this prestigious audience, researchers invited the attendees to hold an interactive question and answer period, and participants were also invited to help further our research. Miles and Huberman (1994) identify collaborative social research as research that is a “collective action undertaken in a social setting.” With senior vice-presidents, human resource managers, executive officers, and talent managers in attendance, the opportunity to glean from this group of specialized and highly seasoned professionals’ perspectives within the collaborative social research setting as described by Miles and Huberman (1994) provided a unique qualitative research experience. Participants were asked, at the end of the session, to provide their position, years in their position, gender, and whether they were employed by a private, public, or quasi organization. This is the only demographic information gleaned. One open-ended, qualitative research question was presented: What can you do to help workers with learning disabilities? Responses

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 43

totaled 70 (N=70). Although the conference hosted over 150 participants, there were approximately 80 attendees remaining by the closing session. Furthermore, Corbin and Strauss (2015) emphasize the researcher as an active participant. For this present research, after findings were presented, the audience gleaned from the presentation, and were then asked, introspectively, how they can now basically become part of a solution, given their various leadership and human resource management positions. After collecting the conference participants’ responses, a spreadsheet was initially compiled. Responses were then coded resulting with two distinct outcomes as either actions or behaviors or emotional impact. In addition, researchers utilized NVIVO computer program to create a word frequency cloud using all the open-ended responses.

Data Analysis The researcher estimated there were about 80 total attendees for the closing general session. A total of 70 (N=70) responses were received at the end of the conference time. This was a response rate of 87.5%. Demographics identified 91% female with 9% male attendees as depicted in Table 1. The listings of position include senior executives, human resource managers, and a few identify as clerical. Table 2 depicts the breakdown of the participants’ position in their organization. In summary, 23% are senior executives, 69% are human resource managers, 5% are clerical, and 3% did not identify their formal workplace position. Length of time in present position is also identified. Table 3 illustrates general statistical measures for years in present position: 40% reflect 2-8 years, 29% are under 2 years, and 29%

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 44

are over 30 years in their present position. The mean is 7 years, mode is 4 and the median is both 2 and 4 years, respectively. Overall, length of time in present position ranged from 3 days to 30 years.

Results and Findings Two strong themes emerge after coding responses to the open-ended question: What can you do to help workers with learning disabilities? Coded responses emerged into two different categories. The first category identified actions/behaviors to take or implement. The second category identified emotional responses. Action/behavior responses include: “train/educate”, “respect”, “seek strengths”, “accommodate,” and “mentor”. A full listing of these are presented in Table 4. Responses coded as emotional include: “sympathy”, “empathy”, “understanding”, “supportiveness”, and “sensitivity”. Table 5 contains the full listing of the codified emotion-items. In addition, an NVIVO word frequency creates the content for Figure 1. This was a summary of all the wording compiled from the responses recreated in the spreadsheet and then translated into the NVIVO software program. A review of the most cited wording is as follows: “manager”, “training”, “disabilities”, “awareness”, “assistance”, and “persons” and is based upon the size and placement in the frequency cloud. These words appear to stand out as the most frequently used words as represented in the NVIVO software analysis. The additional wording throughout the frequency cloud shows all the other most frequently used words from the responses, such as “accommodate”, “educate”, “respect”, “assist”, “mentor”, “encourage”, and “understand” to name a few.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 45

Discussion Human resource managers and senior administrators in public, private, and quasi organizations have the task of maximizing employees’ talent to benefit the goals and aspirations of their organizations. This point emphasizes that it is employees who perform in a collective fashion that enable organizational attainment. Harvesting human talent may often be overlooked when employees with learning disabilities refrain from reaching their maximum potential, due to their uniqueness. Reaching out to leadership and management with ways to help them better understand their workforce is beneficial for both the employees and the organization. Organizations that strive towards continuous improvement are learning ways to develop their people, inclusive of diversity (Lawler, 2008; Styles & Knowles, 2019). Overall, managers benefit with greater awareness while employees benefit with more training. Neurodiverse workers can further develop their talent and skills by employer actions and emotional considerations. Organizations benefit with greater productivity. Greater productivity leans towards continuous improvement and goal attainment. This research aides HRM and c-suite executives with a broader perspective on how to deal with a hidden diversity: neurodiversity (Styles & Knowles, 2019). This research represents an interactive experience between the researchers presenting at an annual conference and responses on how they can help after learning from this research will bring the praxis to life, full circle. Whenever decision-makers are a captive audience and they can be challenged on how they can be part of solving people issues and problems, they are fulfilling their social responsibility in ways that benefit the major stakeholders, that of ownership, management, and employees.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 46

Our research started small with only 10 managers in a qualitative study. The results were then shared with cumulating responses from 70 managers, in a qualitative inquiry. Quantitative research provides data with numbers to support findings. Future research is necessary to acquire solutions for helping the workforce develop their talent, despite their differences, even when they are deep-level and nearly invisible with neurodiversity, is just one more way to foster continuous improvement for both people and organizations. Furthermore, to identify hands-on practices for management to implement, one may begin by looking at the action/behaviors that emerged from this research as a place to begin. Organizational leaders and HRMs who strategize to further develop their workforce (Anderson, 2019) have a new perspective of neurodiversity from which to train and improve their employees’ talent.

Conclusion This qualitative research, gleaned from an interactive session at the Bahamas Society of Human Research Management annual conference, provides insight on what upper management and human resource managers perceive when it comes to actions to take with regards to neurodiverse employees. In addition, the management participants identified the emotional need for sensitivity in the overall workforce to comfortably embrace neurodiverse employees. Although this is rather unique research, reproducing the model presented, that is, sharing academic research directly to decision-makers in organizations, thereby maximizes benefits of what academic research finds and how it becomes most useful to those in industry.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 47

References American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association: The official guide to APA style, 7th ed. American Psychological Association. Anderson, D.L. (2019). Organization design: Creating strategic and agile organizations. SAGE Publications. Armstrong, T. (2010). Neurodiversity: Discovering the extraordinary gifts of autism, ADHD, dyslexia, and other brain differences. ReadHowYouWant.com. Austin, R. D., & Pisano, G. P. (2017). Neurodiversity as a competitive advantage. Harvard Business Review, 95(3), 96-103. Bain, B. (2016). Equal protection of the law: The persons with disabilities (Equal Opportunities) Act, 2014, Bahamas. International Journal of Bahamian Studies, 22, 7-15. Baker, D. L. (2011). The Politics of Neurodiversity: Why public policy matters. Lynne Rienner Publishers. Banerjee, R., Aggarwal, L., Aggarwal, R., & Aggarwal, V. K (2020). On an attempt to study the inter-relationships amongst enablers of inclusion of neuro diverse individuals at educational and professional workplaces. International Journal of Computer Applications, 975, 8887. Baron‐Cohen, S. (2017). Editorial perspective: Neurodiversity–a revolutionary concept for autism and psychiatry. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58(6), 744-747. Blume, H. (1998). Neurodiversity: On the neurological underpinnings of geekdom. The Atlantic, 30. Boyer, E. L. (1997). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Jossey-Bass. Brinzea, V. M. (2019). Encouraging neurodiversity in the evolving workforce: The next frontier to a diverse workplace. Scientific Bulletin-Economic Sciences, 18(3), 13-25. Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. Dalton, N. S. (2013). Neurodiversity & HCI. In CHI'13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2295-2304).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 48

Garg, P., & Rastogi, R. (2006). New model of job design: Motivating employees' performance. Journal of Management Development, 25(6), 572-587. doi:10.1108/02621710610670137 Havenga, W., Linde, H. M., & Visagie, J. C. (2011). Leadership competencies for managing diversity. Managing Global Transitions, 9(3), 225. Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 2307-0919. Jin, M., Lee, J., & Lee, M. (2017). Does leadership matter in diversity management? Assessing the relative impact of diversity policy and inclusive leadership in the public sector. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38(2), 303-319. Kapp, S. K., Gillespie-Lynch, K., Sherman, L. E., & Hutman, T. (2013). Deficit, difference, or both? Autism and neurodiversity. Developmental Psychology, 49(1), 59. Krzeminska, A., Austin, R. D., Bruyère, S. M., & Hedley, D. (2019). The advantages and challenges of neurodiversity employment in organizations. Journal of Management an Organization, 25(4), 453-463. Lawler, E. E., III. (2008). Talent: Making people your competitive advantage. Jossey-Bass. Loiacono, E. T., & Ren, H. (2018). Building a neurodiverse high-tech workforce. MIS Quarterly Executive, 17(4). Marquart, M., Berger, N., & Loan, P. (2004). HRD in the age of globalization: A practical guide to workplace learning in the third millennium. Basic Books. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. 2nd ed. SAGE Publications. Nibert, M. (2020) 2.5.1 Boyer’s model of scholarship. http://www.facultyguidebook.com/test/2_5_1.htm. Powers, M. P. (2019). How to attract and support neurodiverse talent. https://www.shrm.org/hrtoday/news/hr-magazine/0618/pages/how-to-attract-and-support-neurodiversetalent.aspx. Price, C. (2016). Boyer’s series: Introduction to Boyer’s model. University of Phoenix. Robbins, S. & Judge, T. A. (2018). Organizational behavior. Pearson Higher Education AU. Rouvalis, C. (2020). Neurodiverse employees may need accommodations for remote work. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/employee

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 49

relations/pages/neurodiverse-employees-may-need-accommodations-for-remotework.aspx Sam, D. L., & Berry, J. W. (2010). Acculturation: When individuals and groups of different cultural backgrounds meet. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(4), 472-481. Styles, J. K. & Knowles, L. J. (2019). The human resource managers’ perceptions of workers with learning disabilities. Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business, 10(1), 47-75. Styles, J. K., & Knowles, L. J. (2020). Why become a learning organization: Measuring the dimensions of learning at the University of the Bahamas. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 20(4). https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v20i4.2987. Trivedi, V., & Trivedi, V. (2018). Neurodiversity management: A step towards inclusivity. IUP Law Review, 8(3).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 50

Appendix A

Table 1 Demographic characteristics of the respondents Gender Number Percentage Male 28 9.% Female 93 91 % N=70 respondents

Table 2 Positions of the respondents Position Senior/executive HR Managers Clerical Unidentified

Percentage 23.% 69.% 5% 3%

Note. General statistical measures for year in present position: 40% reflect 2-8 years, 29% under 2 years, and 29% were over 30 years

Table 3 Years in present position of the respondents Years Less than 2 years 2-8 years 8-30 years

Percentage 29% 40% 29%

Range 3 days to 30 years 93

Mean 7 years 76.9%

Mode 4 years

Median 2 and 4 years

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 51

Table 4 Findings: Action/Behavior Items

Train/educate Respect Seek strengths Accommodate Mentor Provide inclusion

Embrace diversity Help adjust Trust Confidential Manage talent Promoter Awareness

Impact Culture embracing differences Relevant job fit Specialized work methods Create anti-discriminatory policies/ Procedures

Table 5 Findings: Emotions Sympathetic

Patient Empathetic Understanding Sensitive Fairness

Open-mindedness Supportive Build confidence Anti-discriminatory

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 52

Figure 1

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 53

The Gender Effect on Millennials’ Perception of Corporate Social Irresponsibility and Consumer Behavior Marianne Marar Yacobian Menlo College Frances Turner Wilkes University Sidhu School of Business Janis K. Zaima Menlo College

Abstract While Millennials agree that corporate social responsibility (CSR) is important and object to corporate social irresponsibility (CSiR), they are reluctant to give up the electronic devices they purchased from a leading brand. Our study finds there is a gendered difference in Millennial consumers’ reactions to incidences of CSiR. Females are more dissatisfied with a company involved in CSiR and are likely to try another brand the next time they are in the market for a new device, while males are neutral about the firm’s CSiR. Females strongly disagree with the statement, “I am happy with corporate profits made by using the cheapest labor,” while males somewhat disagree. Finally, Millennials show loyalty to the brand’s firm despite that company’s CSiR behavior.

Keywords: Corporate social irresponsibility, consumer behavior, gender effect

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 54

Introduction Consumers believe companies should do more for the greater good vis-à-vis corporate social responsibility (CSR). For example, Ipsos (2013) reports 73% of consumers held this opinion. Cone Communications (2017) finds 87% of consumers buy a firm’s offerings when it champions their causes, while 76% refrain from doing so where a company backs issues antithetical to their convictions. Due directly to increasing “consumer expectations and demand” that companies “become more purpose-driven and sustainable,” Forbes (2018) notes firms are raising standards for their suppliers. When corporations engage in CSR, they are informing the market that they allocate resources into supporting fair treatment of people (e.g., equitable wages), goods and services (e.g., fair trade), and the environment (e.g., pollution). CSR enables companies to signal they are going beyond legal and compliance mandates, acknowledging the importance of the greater good (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001). On the other hand, corporate social irresponsibility (CSiR) refers to actions that negatively impact some stakeholder interests (Strike, Gao, & Bansal, 2006). CSiR occurs when firms engage in actions, behaviors, and/or practices that are harmful to people, the environment, and/or the greater good. Our study focuses on the CSiR regarding a U.S. company and a news article describing irresponsible behavior by a manufacturer that assembles electronic devices for the company. Our objective is to explore Millennials’ perceptions of CSiR and their views about the subject firm. First, we examined study participants’ consumption behavior towards a product made by a generic U.S. company. Next, we pose the same questions for the actual company featured in the article, Apple, Inc.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 55

Our study adds to the literature by focusing on Millennials as a consumer group, examining their reactions to CSiR behavior and linking those reactions to this group’s product purchase behavior mediated by sex (female/male). Studies have examined CSR and/or CSiR and their effects on perception and buying intentions, but have not extended this connection based on gender for a specific product and firm. We augment the literature by making this extension, exploring female and male Millennials’ decisions to continue using a specific product and the relationship to brand loyalty, ease of brand substitution, and perception of the firm and its product. In marketing an offering, many firms segment and target specific audiences based upon observable factors such as age, sex, socioeconomic class, and others. However, individual reactions to various CSR initiatives are not easily noticeable, making it difficult to determine whether potential customers are offended or unaffected by a specific negative initiative and how it impacts their purchasing behaviors. For example, Kölbel, Busch, and Jancso (2017) found firms involved in negative news may be hurt by purchase decisions linked to CSiR for a specific group of customers. Hence, determining whether females or males react significantly different in making buying decisions based on a firm’s CSiR is an important marketing issue to consider. Further, insight about consumers’ perceptions of a specific CSiR action can help a firm better understand how to address or navigate the challenges of CSR. Our study findings show gendered reactions matter. Females disagree with the statement, “I am happy with corporate profits made by using the cheapest labor,” while males somewhat disagree. Also, in contrast to males, females are more likely to purchase another brand the next time they are in the market to buy the same type of device, and their impression of a generic U.S.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 56

company is very unsatisfactory. However, when Apple, Inc., is revealed as the firm, both genders are less critical of it than of the generic U.S. company. In fact, after being informed of Apple’s CSiR behavior, the overall impression of Apple by study participants’ is neutral to satisfactory, whereas perception of the generic U.S. company is very unsatisfactory to unsatisfactory. Brand loyalty appears to create a halo effect (Thorndike, 1920) for Apple. With iPhone users comprising 88% of our sample, we test whether current owners of Apple products are more likely to stay with those offerings in the context of CSiR. Possessing CSR beliefs and disapproving of a firm that engages in CSiR seems easy, but having to give up a product frequently used while knowing of a firm’s CSiR activities is more difficult. The tradeoff decision is the point where we can implicitly conclude Millennials’ conviction towards CSR, or objections of CSiR, outweighs their demand for a firm’s product. While we find Millennials recognize Apple’s CSiR conduct as unacceptable, these consumers would not surrender their devices due to the company’s behavior. Our results show Millennial respondents’ intentions to buy from Apple are either neutral or somewhat likely, overriding their CSR beliefs. The remainder of our paper is organized as follows: We review the relevant literature regarding CSR, CSiR, gender and Millennials, then pose our hypotheses. We proceed to describe the study’s methodology, followed by presentation of results. Next, we discuss our findings, offering contributions to theory, and implications for practice. The paper concludes with recommendations for future study.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 57

Literature Review

Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Irresponsibility Although the meanings of CSR and CSiR appear to be opposing sides of the same concept, they are not two sides of the same coin, but rather two different paradigms that can sometimes work in tandem (Jones, Bowd, & Tench, 2009; Lin-Hi & Müller, 2013; Kölbel et al., 2017). While CSR might be a company’s focus or intention (genuine or otherwise), CSiR is usually a byproduct of a lack of investment in and focus on the greater good. A firm can engage in CSR and CSiR simultaneously, thereby muddying the good/bad dichotomy of a corporation and its reputation. This seemingly paradoxical milieu can and does operate in a firm inasmuch as that firm might be exhibiting CSR in one arena (e.g., environmental relief), but not in another (e.g., ethical transnational practices). Ormiston and Wong (2013) emphasize the rising pressures put on the firm through demands from its stakeholders - shareholders, consumers, and employees - to heed their interests. In this sense, CSiR could potentially lend itself to a more heightened need for CSR. For example, if a corporation engages in unfair labor practices that are not necessarily illegal but are viewed as immoral, then external or internal pressure might prompt that company’s recalibration of its priorities, thereby shifting energy and resources to CSR. Studies examine CSR and its relationship to financial performance, addressing whether or not CSR adds value to the firm. If CSR uses scarce resources of the firm, some marketing and finance scholarship imply CSR initiatives must be a source of company value. Yet, extant studies find mixed results regarding CSR and its impact on firm performance. Some scholars

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 58

affirm CSR is positively associated with a firm’s financials (Margolis & Walsh, 2003; Orlitzky, Schmidt, & Rhynes, 2003, Lee, Lau, & Cheng, 2013). Others indicate weak or no relationship. Pava and Krausz (1996) examined 21studies finding 12 presented a positive relationship between CSR and financial performance, one observed a negative relationship, and 8 discovered no relationship. Through closer analysis of these and other work, Stanwick and Stanwick (1998) discovered, at best, a weak positive correlation between CSR and firm financial performance. Some research on the importance of CSR as seen from the ‘eyes of the beholder’ focus on the effects of CSR and its perception by stakeholder groups, including customers and employees (Brown & Dacin, 1997; Öberseder, Schlegelmilch, & Murphy, 2013). These studies argue that how an individual views CSR initiative affects how that person views the firm, and ultimately impacts that individual’s evaluation of the company’s products. For example, Brown and Dacin (1997) find “negative CSR associations can have a detrimental effect on overall product evaluations, whereas positive CSR associations can enhance product evaluations” (p.237). Also, they show negative and positive CSR affects firms differently. While positive CSR leads to consumers’ purchases, Brown and Dacin (1997) do not explore the consumer-company relationship and its impact on CSR. On the other hand, Öberseder et al. (2013) examine the link between “corporate practice and consumers' perceptions of CSR” considering “differences in perception regarding the importance of stakeholder domains” for both the individual and firm. Sen and Bhattacharya (2001) present their framework to capture consumers’ reactions to organizations and products relative to their reactions to CSR. They find company-specific factors (i.e., CSR issues adopted by the firm), quality of the company’s products, and individualspecific factors (i.e., an individual’s perception of and general beliefs about CSR) are key

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 59

determinants of how consumers respond to CSR. Additionally, a consumer’s strong support for the firm’s CSR increases the relative relationship, or bond, between the consumer and the company, establishing a “C-C” congruence (2001). This congruence may increase a consumer’s purchase intention. Interestingly, Sen and Bhattacharya also find some CSR initiatives can decrease a consumer’s intention to buy a company’s products. Under certain CSR domains such as labor relations and employee working conditions, consumers with certain CSR beliefs can be more linked to the firm’s products. In fact, these consumers may be so tied to these products that they believe CSR initiatives are realized at the expense of the company: perceiving the firm is trading off product quality for CSR, buyers may refrain from purchasing the company’s offerings. Sen and Bhattacharya (2001) show there are multiple layers of CSR’s effect on consumer behavior. Their work provides an important framework that allows a better understanding of how individuals’ level of support for a specific CSR activity can impact their behaviors. However, a priori we cannot tell how a consumer will react to various CSR initiatives engaged by the firm. Our study extends the literature by examining whether certain identifiable groups, specifically different genders and generational cohorts, have similar reactions to a specific CSR initiative.

Gender, Millennials, CSR and CSiR Arlow (1991) studied 138 college students measuring business ethics, as well as evaluations of CSR to determine personal characteristics and views of undergraduate students. He found non-business majors were more cynical about and questioned the intentions of CSR.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 60

His results suggest non-business students saw CSR as a marketing ploy used by companies to generate more profit. Notably, Arlow found females were more ethical than their male counterparts and more socially responsible. Females scored significantly lower on Machiavellianism, Darwinism, and Ethical Relativism indicating that women place less emphasis on expediency and selfish interests. Also, female participants saw a greater need to balance the needs of society with those of shareholders. Although there were minimal differences between business and non-business college students related to their evaluations of ethical values, non-business students were found to be wearier of CSR efforts than their counterparts, business majors. Arlow confirmed females appear to exhibit a greater desire and expectation that corporations expend more resources directed at solving societal woes. In a more recent study, Klimkiewicz and Oltra (2017) sought to determine the importance of CSR for Millennial job seekers. Their findings confirm individuals with stronger perceptions of CSR are more likely to reject employment offers from employers who failed to meet CSR requirements. Even though Millennials were not particularly focused on CSR during their job search, they were likelier to reject job offers from CSR non-compliant employers.

Hypotheses Though past research exists on CSiR and Millennials, as well as CSR and female undergraduate students, we have yet to find studies combining gender, Millennials, and their perceptions of CSiR. Our examination attempts to understand whether or not Millennial female and male undergraduates are more or less likely to be deterred by a company’s CSiR. We seek

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 61

to uncover whether or not there is a gendered difference in student responses and the importance the sexes place on CSiR. In fusing undergraduate Millennials across a range of courses and class sections taught by three different instructors, we focus our attention on how Millennials (de)prioritize CSiR and whether or not the results differ based on gender. By identifying Millennials through a gendered lens, we can understand their perceptions of CSiR and its impact on purchase intentions. Therefore, based on the review of the literature, we propose the following: H1: Males and females react differently to specific CSiR actions related to a U.S. company. H2: Males’ and females’ decisions to buy from a U.S. company that engages in corporate socially irresponsible behavior will differ. H3: Males and females react differently to specific CSiR actions related to Apple, Inc. H4: Males’ and females’ decisions to buy from Apple, Inc., known to have been involved in corporate socially irresponsible behavior, will differ.

Methodology

Sample Academic and practitioner sources vary in the years they designate as the Millennial generation (or Generation Y), spanning from as early as 1978 to as late as 2004 (Tyler, 2007; Howe & Strauss, 1991). The Pew Research Center (2015; 2018) defines Millennials as those born between 1981 and 1996. Kurz, Li & Vine (2019) use 1981 to 1997 as the cutoff for their

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 62

study in the Handbook of U.S. Consumer Economics, noting “a lack of overall consensus” (p. 4) about the specific time span. They depart slightly from but acknowledge Pew’s 2015 and 2018 designations while also citing the U.S. Census utilization of the year 2000 as the endpoint for this generation. Credited with coining the term “Millennials” due to most of the generation coming of age in the new millennium, Howe and Strauss (1991) delineate the cohort as consisting of individuals born between 1982 and 2004. Keeping these definitions of Millennials in mind, 96% of our sample is comprised of respondents born between 1982-2000, with 54% born 1982-1996, and 42% born 1997-2000. 83% of our sample is comprised of respondents with birth years spanning 1994 to 1998, i.e., 20- to 24-year-olds at the time we fielded our study in spring 2018. Undergraduates at a small U.S. college in ten class sections of accounting, global studies, marketing, and management capstone courses participated in the study, which involved reading two versions of a real-world scenario about employee working conditions and pay, and answering survey questions regarding their perceptions of the companies cited in each scenario, CSiR and other factors of interest. In total, 168 students participated in the study, but not all completed it in its entirety, reducing the useable sample size to 160 (see Table 1). As demonstrated by our hypotheses, the study examines whether gender impacts consumer perceptions of a firm based upon news coverage of a CSiR situation concerning the company. In our analysis, we divide the sample by gender and test the mean difference in scores between them using t-tests for our four hypotheses, H1-H4. The statistical null hypothesis states that there is no difference between the subgroups, while the alternative hypothesis implies that there is a difference at the 1% and 5% significance levels. As displayed in Table 1, gender in our

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 63

sample is split between males and females at 43% and 55%, respectively. Four students’ responses were eliminated because they responded “other” to the gender question.

Study Design and Questionnaire Participants read an edited excerpt of a news article (see Appendix B) about an unidentified, generic U.S. company whose foreign manufacturing partner is reported as creating poor working conditions and unsafe environments for its employees. Immediately after completing the reading, students responded to several questions about the article and the generic company. Next, participants were instructed to consider again the same news article about the unidentified U.S. firm. After doing so, respondents answered the same questions posed earlier with Apple replacing references to the previously unidentified U.S. company. Presenting these two scenarios allowed us to test for the brand effect of Apple products: 88% of the study sample use iPhones, providing support for examining these consumers’ loyalty to the Apple brand versus their convictions regarding CSiR. Survey questions posed include selected items adapted from the Muncy-Vitell Consumer Ethics Scale (2005), as well as queries about students’ backgrounds and their knowledge/usage of technology. Respondents answered questions based on a Likert scale of 1 to 7, with “1” corresponding to response choices such as “not so familiar/strongly disagree/extremely unlikely/extremely unsatisfactory” and “7” relating to response choices “very familiar/strongly agree/extremely likely/extremely satisfactory”.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 64

Results/Findings After examining Millennials’ perceptions on human rights and CSR issues, then asking participants to read the article on negative corporate social actions, we found females are much more conscious about human rights issues. Of the 51 responses indicating a score of 7 (“definitely true of me”), 31% are male and 69% are female (see Figure 1). Similar results persist in responses regarding advocacy for CSR (see Figure 2). Again, Millennials’ awareness of and advocacy for CSR is high. Of the 47 subjects who responded with a score of 7 (“definitely true of me”), 38% are male and 62% are female. The gender differences are not as dramatic for those who scored their perceptions of CSR as a 6 or 5, but females’ score for CSR advocacy is still higher. These results are consistent with Arlow (1991), who concludes that females appear to be more ethical and exhibit greater desire to have corporations expend more resources directed at addressing societal issues. Overall, both sexes are concerned about social issues and advocate for human rights and CSR indicating Millennials are generally aware and sympathetic to these matters.

Scenario 1: A Generic U.S. Company We proceed to examine questions testing study respondents’ reactions to CSR related to a generic U.S. company. Table 2 displays the average score for males and females for select questions labeled US_1 through US_7. Initially, we asked questions regarding survey participants’ reactions to situations that may be viewed as CSiR, such as exposing employees to an unsafe work environment or poor working conditions. As noted in Table 2, question US_1 about safe surroundings shows no notable difference between genders. The mean score is 6.15

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 65

for males and 6.38 for females. While the average score is higher for females, the difference is not statistically significant. Similar results exist for US_2 regarding working conditions for employees. At mean responses of 6.13 and 6.34 for men and women, both genders agree the U.S. company violates CSR by permitting its manufacturer to expose employees to an unsafe work environment or poor working conditions. Considering CSiR relative to corporate profits, results of responses to questions about this relationship are significantly different and statistically significant at the 1% level (t-statistic = -5.06). The average score for males is 3.03, while females’ average is 1.90 indicating a strong disagreement with the statement, “Based on what I read in the scenario, I am happy with the corporate profits made by using the cheapest labor” (US_3). It appears that males are willing to trade off using cheap labor for profits, while females are opposed to this practice. With males disagreeing somewhat, but females disagreeing strongly, H1 is supported: gender makes a difference in Millennials’ views towards CSiR for a U.S. company. Following questions about CSiR, we asked students about their intended actions towards the firm’s product. Participants responded to the following statement, “If a product I own/use is made by the U.S. company mentioned in the scenario, I will stop using it” (US_4). Neither gender is willing to give up using the products made by the generic firm, despite their relatively strong objection to the company’s irresponsible behavior. It appears that convenience and regard for their mobile devices as necessities make it difficult for Millennials to give up or change their devices to assert their social beliefs. The average score of the response to US_4 is “somewhat agree”, i.e., 3.28 for males and 3.69 for females. These results support Sen and Bhattacharya’s (2001) study indicating that under certain

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 66

CSR domains, such as labor relations and employee working conditions, consumers with particular CSR beliefs can be more linked to a firm’s products rather than to the company’s CSR actions. Results testing CSiR indicate Millennials are more interested in the products to which they are attached than to issues of corporate irresponsibility, even if they initially supported the importance of CSR. Responses to question US_5, “If the mobile phone I own/use is made by the U.S. company mentioned in the scenario, I will buy another brand next time I am in the market to buy,” demonstrate respondents are more willing to substitute their current devices for those of another brand. The average score for males is 3.99 or neutral to the statement, while females’ average score is 4.76, indicating they somewhat agree with the statement. The difference between genders is statistically significant at the 5% level (t-statistic = 2.86) thereby supporting H2 that Millennial consumers’ behavior, given their awareness of the generic U.S. company’s CSiR, is dependent on gender. With respect to the statement, “My overall impression of the U.S. company is….” (US_6), students are asked about their impression of the U.S. company with answer choices ranging from extremely unsatisfied (score of 1) to extremely satisfied (score of 7). The average score for males is 3.18 (unsatisfactory), while females’ average is 2.47 (very unsatisfactory) with the U.S. company, a difference statistically significant at the 1% significance level (t-statistic = 3.62). These results support H1, indicating the overall impression of the U.S. company, due to the firm’s CSiR is based on gender. Question US_7, “If you needed a mobile phone right now, how likely is it that you would buy it from the U.S. company?” generated an average response of 4.71 for males and 4.31 for

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 67

females. Thus, it appears females are more impartial about foregoing purchase of the generic phone than their male counterparts when knowing the U.S. company has been socially irresponsible.

Scenario 2: Apple, Inc. After considering a second scenario in which Apple, Inc. is the subject company, respondents are asked to score the firm using the same questions previously posed about the generic U.S. company. Table 3 displays the average score for males and females for select questions labeled Apple_1 through Apple_8. While study participants agree that Apple acted in a socially irresponsible manner by partnering with a manufacturer who has employees work in an unsafe environment (Apple_1), or in poor working conditions (Apple_2), respondents are not as strongly opposed to Apple’s behavior as they are in the case of the U.S. company. Males’ average score is 6.00 and 5.94, respectively (versus their average score for the generic U.S. company at 6.15 and 6.13), while females’ average response is 6.22 and 6.23, respectively (versus those for the U.S. company at 6.38 and 6.34). As it is for the U.S. company, the difference in the average scores between genders is not statistically significant. For question Apple_3 where respondents are asked if they agree with the statement, “I am happy with the corporate profits by using the cheapest labor,” the results exhibit a strong difference in reaction towards Apple. Females average response is 2.60, while males’ answers are relatively neutral at an average of 3.50, indicating a statistically significant difference in scores at the 1% level (t-statistic = -3.21). Both genders appear to disagree less when they are told the company is Apple versus the U.S. company: males’ average score increases from 3.03

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 68

for the generic company to 3.50 for Apple, and from 1.90 to 2.60 for females. It is difficult to disentangle these results as we are unable to pinpoint whether they are due to the markedly high 88% of our sample who currently own an iPhone, or if product loyalty tempers respondents’ views. Regardless, these findings support H3 where females’ views differ notably from those of males when Apple is making profits using the cheapest labor. While gender plays a role in CSiR’s impact on Millennial’s perceptions, respondents are more willing to agree with the statements the survey posed about CSiR when the company is unnamed versus identified as Apple, Inc. How do study participants react to Apple and purchases of the firm’s products? Question Apple_4 asks the same question as US_4 about study participants’ decisions to “stop using it” (the electronic device). Males’ average response to the statement is 2.75 (disagree), females’ answers average 2.57, but the difference between them is not significant. Likewise, for Apple_5, “I will buy another brand next time I am in the market to buy,” the average scores are close, 3.24 for males and 3.53 for females, providing evidence that rejects H4. Question Apple_7, “If you needed a mobile phone right now, how likely is it that you would buy it from Apple?” generated an average response of 5.19 for males and 5.19 for females (somewhat likely). Both genders agree, indicating neither are willing to forego their Apple products, even if they recognize the company has been socially irresponsible. Question Apple_8 asks, “As a consumer of technology devices, my buying intentions toward Apple’s product would be ____?” Males’ average response is 4.74 and females is 4.51, suggesting both genders are neutral to somewhat likely to buy from Apple. Despite the response to Apple_6, which asks respondents about their overall impression of Apple, average scores are 4.19 and 4.50 for males

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 69

and females, respectively, signifying neutral (score of 4) to satisfactory (score of 5) responses after recognizing Apple’s irresponsible behavior.

Discussion The results of our analysis show Millennials are opposed to CSiR in general, regardless of gender. However, when a corporation earns profits by using the cheapest labor, gender matters. Females are considerably more opposed to this practice than males. Also, females are more likely to substitute brands when they are in the market to buy another device. A firm like Apple with strong brand recognition and consumer loyalty appears to overcome some CSiR behavior, regardless of gender. Both males and females express a neutral to satisfactory impression of Apple even when the company is socially irresponsible. When Millennial consumers own offerings from a well-known company, in this case Apple, Inc., it appears they are torn between their desire to continue using the products they like and their inclination to oppose CSiR behavior: these consumers’ high preference for a firm’s branded product appears to supersede their commitment to the company’s corporate social awareness practices.

Theoretical Implications and Contributions Though the extant literature has examined the impact of CSR on Millennials, it has not assessed their perceptions of CSiR or its effect on future purchases. We fill this gap by exploring empirically Millennial views of CSiR, considering their consequent buying decisions, and offering insights into gender’s role on their behavior relative to a company’s socially irresponsible acts.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 70

Using a sample of students who are considered Millennials, we examine gender differences among a distinct segment and their impressions of CSiR, whilst further exploring the impact of these consumers’ reactions to social irresponsibility on purchase intentions. As noted earlier, gender plays a significant role in Millennials’ perception of CSiR when the brand is unidentified; but its impact is tempered and not as harsh when the same socially irresponsible behavior is attributed to the Apple brand where both males and females are unwilling to give up or switch brands when shopping for devices in the future. While impressions of the generic U.S. company generate quite unsatisfactory responses, study participants’ views of Apple remain neutral. Traditional Millennial college students are likely to purchase technology devices from both Apple and the generic U.S. company, but more favorably inclined to buy these products from Apple. Further, Millennials recognize CSiR and object to it but are willing to overlook such behavior for the benefit of owning and using technology devices that support their lifestyles. Between genders, females are more likely to support their views of CSiR and consider giving up brands of firms engaging in socially irresponsible actions. In delving deeper into whether Millennials believe they should punish Apple for misdeeds, we show a strong gender effect. Females believe their decision to stop purchasing Apple products to punish them may have some consequence and significance to the firm. Males are more neutral, rationalizing their actions would not have much effect on the company.

Managerial Implications and Recommendations Our findings have implications for CSR and its relationship to a firm’s marketing of its products. While Millennials are generally opposed to CSiR, its negative effects are perceived

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 71

more strongly by females than by males. Though aware of a firm’s bad behavior, males are prone to overlook effects of CSiR if a product benefits them, but females are likelier to seek alternative offerings in the future. These results imply companies with products targeted to women should carefully review their corporate social behavior and attempt to avoid and/or address socially irresponsible acts. Such bad behavior, or CSiR, could affect company revenues negatively for offerings geared towards female markets. Conversely, firms engaging in socially responsible actions should publicize and market such CSR initiatives directly to their female target audiences because these markets will be more inclined to respond to such activities with increased sales.

Limitations and Future Research The literature on Millennials in the context of CSiR is rather limited, particularly in the area of gendered reactions to a company’s misdeeds. While we further this area of research and offer new insights, we are aware of the limitations of our study. A larger sample size would explicate more clearly gendered and generational similarities and differences. Also, we conducted this work in the heart of the Silicon Valley, the mecca for technology. It would be interesting to see a comparative analysis of how and whether or not findings would differ in other regions of the United States, let alone in other countries. Would results vary if we asked the same questions of students located in Denver or New Zealand, for example? Another limitation is that the study was conducted at a college with a strong focus in business. Future research could include teasing out whether business majors vary from Arts & Sciences majors, and, if so, in what ways. Further, study participants’ responses are another

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 72

limitation as the subjectivity of self-disclosure can be perceived as subjective bias. Because Millennials range from approximately 18-35 years of age, and we directed our attention to the traditional college-aged student segment within this generation, we do not know how ‘older’ Millennials might view CSiR. As such, a longitudinal study might be worth exploring to see how these undergraduates evolve (or not) in their opinions of CSiR, and gain insights relative to gender differences, brand perceptions, and purchase intentions. Lastly, it would be interesting to compare and explore differences and similarities of Generation Z’s perceptions of CSiR with those of Millennials born during the later years of the latter’s cohort.

Concluding Comments While not a comprehensive examination of Millennials and their consumer behavior, our study adds to the existing literature in a meaningful way. Pew Research Center (2018) reports that before 2020, Millennials will exceed Baby Boomers to become the largest living generation in the United States. Though studies characterize Millennials as achievement-oriented and hardworking, they are also often seen as feeling entitled to certain lifestyles and products (Stein, 2013; Kane, 2019). Our research shows this generation is keenly aware of the shortcomings of society and corporate social behavior, but are not willing to trade the products they use and cherish due to these issues. As they become the largest work force in U.S. history, Millennials will wield enormous economic power (Nielsen, 2017; Forbes, 2018). They should be aware they can greatly affect how corporations do business: if Millennials truly believe in supporting the

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 73

greater good, their generation will exert an extraordinary influence on how firms benefit and help all stakeholders.

Author Biographies Marianne Marar Yacobian is Professor of Global Studies at Menlo College. She received her doctoral degree from University of San Francisco. Her areas of expertise include diaspora studies, human rights education, and tribal-collectivism. Frances Turner is Associate Professor of Management, Marketing and Economics at Christian Brothers University in Memphis, TN, USA. She received her DBA from Grenoble Ecole de Management in France. Her research is in the areas of consumer perceived value, mass customization, individual thinking style, and consumer experience. Janis K. Zaima is Professor of Accounting and Finance at Menlo College. She received her Ph.D. from University of Washington in Seattle. Her area of interests includes the relationship between corporate social responsibility/irresponsibility and investment/consumer decisions.

References Arlow, P. (1991). Personal characteristics in college students' evaluations of business ethics and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(1), 63-69. Bloomberg News (2018). Apple supplier workers describe noxious hazards at China factory. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-16/workers-at-apple-suppliercatcher-describe-harsh-conditions Brown, T. J., & Dacin, P. A. (1997). The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses. Journal of Marketing, 61(1), 68-84. Cone Communications (2017). 2017 Cone Communications CSR study.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 74

https://www.conecomm.com/2017-cone-communications-csr-study-pdf. Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (1992). Generations: The history of America's future, 1584 to 2069. Harper Collins. Forbes (2018). Eight corporate social responsibility (CSR) trends to look for in 2018. https://www.forbes.com/sites/susanmcpherson/2018/01/12/8-corporate-socialresponsibility-csr-trends-to-look-for-in-2018/ Forbes (2018). Understanding the research on Millennial shopping behaviors. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesagencycouncil/2018/06/04/understanding-theresearch-on-millennial-shopping-behaviors/ Ipsos (2013). Eight out of ten Australians rate corporate social responsibility as important. http://ipsos.com.au/wp-content/uploads/ 2013/06/Corporate-social-responsibility-mediarelease-FINAL Jones, B., Bowd, R., & Tench, R. (2009). Corporate irresponsibility and corporate social responsibility: Competing realities. Social Responsibility Journal, 5(3), 300-310. Kane, S. (2019). The common characteristics of Millennial professionals. https://www.thebalancecareers.com/common-characteristics-of-generation-yprofessionals-2164683 Klimkiewicz, K., & Oltra, V. (2017). Does CSR enhance employer attractiveness? The role of Millennial job seekers' attitudes. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24(5), 449-463. Kölbel, J. F., Busch, T., & Jancso, L. M. (2017). How media coverage of corporate social

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 75

irresponsibility increases financial risk. Strategic Management Journal, 38(11), 22662284. Kurz, C. J., Li, G., & Vine, D. J. (2019). Are millennials different? In A. Haughwout, & B. Mandel, B. (Eds.), Handbook of US Consumer Economics (pp. 193-232). Academic Press. Lee, P.K., Lau, A.K., & Cheng, T.C.E. (2013). Employee rights protection and financial performance. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1861-1869. Lin-Hi, N., & Müller, K. (2013). The CSR bottom line: Preventing corporate social Irresponsibility. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1928-1936. Margolis, J., & Walsh, J. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268-305. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117–127. Nielsen (2017). Nielsen unveils first comprehensive study on the purchasing power and influence of the multicultural Millennial. https://www.nielsen.com/us/ en/press-releases/2017/nielsen-unveils-first-comprehensive-study-on-the-purchasingpower-of-multicultural-millennial/. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403-441. Ormiston, M. E., & Wong, E. M. (2013). License to ill: The effects of corporate social responsibility and CEO moral identity on corporate social irresponsibility. Personnel Psychology, 66(4), 861–893.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 76

Öberseder, M., Schlegelmilch, B.B., & Murphy, P. (2013). CSR practices and consumer perceptions. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1839–1851. Pava, M. L., & Krausz, J. (1996). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost. Quorum Books. Pew Research Center (2015). The whys and hows of generations research. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2015/09/03/the-whys-and-hows-of-generationsresearch/ Pew Research Center (2018). Where Millennials end and Generation Z begins. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/17/where-millennials-end-andgeneration-z-begins/ Pew Research Center (2018). Millennials projected to overtake Baby Boomers as America’s largest generation. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/01/ millennials-overtake-baby-boomers/ Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225243. Stanwick, P. A., & Stanwick, S. D. (1998). The relationship between corporate social performance and organizational size, financial performance, and environmental performance: An empirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(2), 195-204. Stein, J. (2013). Millennials: The me me me generation. https://time.com/ 247/millennials-the-me-me-me-generation/ Strike, V. M., Gao, J., & Bansal, P. (2006). Being good while being bad: Social responsibility

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 77

and the international diversification of US firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(6), 850-862. Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological rating. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(1), 25–29. Tyler, K. (2007). The tethered generation. HR Magazine, 52(5). https://www.shrm.org/hrtoday/news/hr-magazine/pages/0507cover.aspx Vitell S. J., & Muncy, J. (2005). The Muncy–Vitell consumer ethics scale: A modification and application. Journal of Business Ethics, 62(3), 267-275.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 78

Tables and Figures Table 1 Summary Statistics of Sample by Classification Gender

Number

Percentage

Male

43%

Female

55%

Other/No response

160

100%

Millennials (19821996)

54%

Millennials (19972000)

42%

Gen X

No response

Totals (N =)

160

100%

140

88%

Samsung

ZTE

Huawei

Totals (N =)

Age

Mobile Phone Ownership iPhone

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 79

Android

Cell phone

Moto

Essential

No response/no phone

160

100%

Totals (N =)

Note: Given the small number of respondents identifying themselves as “other”, our study does not reflect transgender and/or gender nonconforming groups.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 80

Figure 1. Advocate for Human Rights

Note: Each bar represents the frequency of males (females) who gave scores of 1 to 7 in blue (orange) regarding human rights issues. The response score of 1 indicates the participant believes the question “definitely is not true of me”, 2 indicates “somewhat not true of me”, 3 indicates “not true of me”, 4 indicates “neutral”, 5 indicates “true of me”, 6 indicates “somewhat true of me”, and 7 indicates “definitely true of me”.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 81

Figure 2. Advocate for Corporate Social Responsibility

Note: Each bar represents the frequency of males (females) who gave scores of 1 to 7 in blue (orange) regarding CSR advocacy. The response score of 1 indicates the participant believes the question “definitely is not true of me”, 2 indicates “somewhat not true of me”, 3 indicates “not true of me”, 4 indicates “neutral”, 5 indicates “true of me”, 6 indicates “somewhat true of me”, and 7 indicates “definitely true of me”.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 82

Table 2 Average score for males and females for each question related to generic U.S. company U.S.

Average

t-statistic

Company

Score for

Questions

Males

Females

Difference

US_1

6.15

6.38

1.01

US_2

6.13

6.34

0.93

US_3

3.03

1.90

-5.06

US_4

3.28

3.69

1.57

US_5

3.99

4.76

2.86

US_6

3.18

2.47

-3.62

***

US_7

4.71

4.31

-1.41

Significance

***

Note: Statistical significance at the 5% and 1% level are denoted as ** and ***, respectively (see Appendix A).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 83

Table 3 Average score for males and females for each question related to Apple, Inc. U.S.

Average

t-statistic

Company

Score for

Questions

Males

Females

Difference

Apple_1

6.00

6.22

0.96

Apple_2

5.94

6.23

1.33

Apple_3

3.50

2.60

-3.21

Apple_4

2.75

2.57

-0.75

Apple_5

3.24

3.53

1.00

Apple_6

4.19

4.50

-1.55

Apple_7

5.19

0.01

Apple_8

4.74

4.51

0.84

Significance

***

Note: Statistical significance at the 5% and 1% level are denoted as ** and ***, respectively (see Appendix A).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 84

Appendix A Selected Survey Questions Study participants were asked to read an edited excerpt of an article describing corporate social irresponsibility (CSiR) practices of an overseas manufacturer who produces digital devices for an unidentified U.S. company. Respondents replied to questions about this generic firm, after which they were asked to reconsider the scenario and respond to the same questions as if Apple was the company that had engaged in the actions noted in the excerpt. Below are the selected set of questions referenced in the study about the generic company, labeled U1-U7, and Apple, Inc. labeled Apple_1-Apple_8. Questions

Questions

for

U.S. Company

Apple, Inc.

Selected Survey Items

Response choices for questions below: (1) Strongly Disagree (2) Disagree (3) Somewhat Disagree (4) Neither Agree nor Disagree (5) Somewhat Agree (6) Agree (7) Strongly Agree

US_1

Apple_1

In my opinion, the U.S. company [Apple] in the scenario acts socially irresponsible when it partners with manufacturers who are having employees work in an unsafe environment.

US_2

Apple_2

In my opinion, the U.S. company [Apple] in the scenario acts socially irresponsible when it partners with manufacturers providing poor working conditions to employees.

US_3

Apple_3

Based on what I read in the scenario, I am happy with the corporate profits made by using the cheapest labor.

US_4

Apple_4

Please rate each of the following statements: If a product I own/use is made by the U.S. company mentioned in the scenario I will stop using it.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 85

US_5

Apple_5

Please rate each of the following statements: If the mobile phone I own/use is made by the U.S. company mentioned in the scenario I will buy another brand next time I am in the market to buy. Response choices for questions below: (1) Extremely unsatisfactory (2) Very unsatisfactory (3) Unsatisfactory (4) Neither unsatisfactory nor satisfactory (5) Satisfactory (6) Very satisfactory (7) Extremely satisfactory

US_6

Apple_6

My overall impression of the U.S. company [Apple] is ____________________? Response choices for questions below: (1) Completely unlikely (1% likelihood) (2) Very unlikely (3) Somewhat unlikely (4) Neither unlikely nor likely (5) Somewhat likely (6) Very likely (7) Completely likely (99% likelihood)

US_7

Apple_7

If you needed a mobile phone right now, how likely is it that you would buy it from the U.S. company [Apple]?

Apple_8

As a consumer of technology devices, my buying intention toward Apple's products would be _________________?

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 86

Appendix B Survey Scenario Presented to Study Participants (edited from Bloomberg, 2018) At a Catcher Technology Co. manufacturing complex in the Chinese industrial city of Suqian, about six hours’ drive from Shanghai, workers stand for up to 10 hours a day in hot workshops slicing and blasting, handling noxious chemicals sometimes without proper gloves or masks. These conditions — some described in a recent report by advocacy group China Labor Watch and others in Bloomberg News interviews with Catcher workers — show the downside of a high-tech boom buoying the world’s second-largest economy. Chinese recruiters play up the chance to build advanced consumer electronics to attract the millions of typically impoverished, uneducated laborers without whom production of cell phones and other digital gadgets would be impossible. Goggles and earplugs are not always available, a problem when some factory machines are noisy and spray tiny metallic particles or coolant, according to interviews with workers. CLW said the noise was about 80 decibels or more. That’s roughly equivalent to an average factory or a garbage disposal, according to IAC Acoustics, an industrial noise-control specialist. Hundreds throng a workshop where the main door opens only about 12 inches. Off duty, they return to debris strewn dorms bereft of showers or hot water. Many go without washing for days at a time, workers said. “My hands turned bloodless white after a day of work,” said one of the workers, who makes just over $2 an hour in her first job outside her home province of Henan. She turned to Catcher because her husband’s home decorating business was struggling. “I only tell good things to my family and keep the sufferings like this for myself.” All workers who spoke with Bloomberg asked not to be identified out of fear of recrimination. Companies spent years upbraiding manufacturers after a rash of suicides at its main partner, Foxconn Technology Group, in 2010 provoked outrage over the harsh working environments in which its upscale gadgets were made. Foxconn hired psychological counselors, set up a 24-hour care center, and attached large nets to factory buildings to prevent impulsive suicides, according to the US Company’s progress report. Soon after, companies developed standards and started audits of the hundreds of companies that produce components for its devices, threatening to pull business from those that flout labor laws. A company spokeswoman said the company has its own employees at Catcher facilities but sent an additional team to audit the complex upon hearing of China Labor Watch’s impending report. After interviewing 150 people, the team found no evidence of violations of its standards, she

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 87

added. “We know our work is never done and we investigate each and every allegation that’s made. We remain dedicated to doing all we can to protect the workers in our supply chain,” the spokeswoman added. In its supplier-responsibility report covering 2016, it conducted a record 705 comprehensive site audits. The number of high performing supplier locations increased by 59 percent, while low-performing sites decreased by 31 percent, the company reported. Catcher facilities were the subject of scrutiny in 2013 and 2014, when another investigation by CLW and Green America found 22 issues, including forced, unpaid overtime and improper handling of hazardous materials. At the time, companies dispatched a team to investigate, and reiterated its commitment to “ensuring safe and fair working conditions for everyone in our supply chain.” The US Company continued to work with Catcher, according to its annual supplier lists. Catcher’s factory-floor staff is mainly low-skilled laborers recruited through hiring agencies from rural areas across China. As seasonal workers far away from their families, they may be reluctant to push back against managers and complain about conditions for fear of losing shifts. One production line is required to crank out about 1,450 units during a 12-hour shift, which includes breaks for meals, according to CLW. In interviews with Bloomberg, workers expressed concern about safety issues and a lack of training about the materials they come into contact with. Some have to quickly switch among at least four machines, increasing the risk of accidents, the workers said.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 88

Leader’s Personal Ethics Dilemma and Conflict with Organizational Ethics Farai Katsande Regent University

Abstract In this case study, the researcher studied a national team leader of a non-profit Christian organization in Zimbabwe. The researcher investigated: How do leaders maintain moral behavior when faced with personal and organizational ethical conflict? The study concluded with eight elements a leader applies in dealing with a personal and organizational ethical dilemma. The elements included making moral decisions; showing compassion; reverting to spirituality and culture as the basis for moral and ethical convictions; doing the right thing and explaining the reason; making extraordinary decisions in extraordinary situations; considering what is at stake, helping stakeholders understand the rationale of choices, and making decisions that honor God; and serving people. A recommendation for further investigation on the influence of culture on personal and organizational ethics among Africans was made. Keywords: Utilitarianism, pragmatism, ethics, morals, culture, spirituality, altruism Introduction The primary purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore the effect of ethical dilemma or conflict on a leader's ethics and organizational ethics. Personal ethics guides the leader how to respond to different situations in decision-making and problem solving (Paige & Martin,1996). Individuals get their influence from culture or the socialization process (Matsuo, Brown, Norasakkunkit, & Karasawa, 2019). Individuals develop a set of morals and ethics as they grow. Chances exist that leaders face ethical dilemmas or conflict with organizational ethics, due to the individual's character, values, and norms (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 89

This paper is a case study of a leader within a non-profit organization who has faced personal ethics in conflict with organizational ethics. The researcher explored the situation and circumstance of the ethical dilemma, and in what ways the leader created a balance to bridge the gap between personal ethical practice and organizational ethical practice. In this case study, the researcher selected a missionary leader within a non-profit Christian organization. The non-profit organization is based in Zimbabwe as a branch of a United States of America organization. The funding model of the organization requires each individual staff find a team of donors to meet their financial needs (Bright, 2002). Staff without adequate support cannot have their financial needs met from other funds (SEA Policy manual, 2004). The model utilizes western culture, which enforces individualistic culture (House, Hanges, Javidan, & Dorfman, 2004). The organization’s western individualistic policy causes ethical dilemma in humane collectivism culture in Zimbabwean context (House et al.,2004). This researcher explored how leaders applied ethical decision making in meeting employees critical needs when staff had no support. The case study involved one leader, who faced ethical conflict with organizational ethics. The researcher limited the case study to a single leader from a non-profit Christian organization. According to Roberts (2010), the researcher set a boundary for the study to focus on a selected sample. The leader chosen in this study is considered to exercise spiritual leadership and has been chosen on the basis of his experiences in dealing with issues that conflicted with organizational ethics. Literature Review The aspect of ethical behavior is experiential; in this case, the researcher reviewed the experiences of the respondent in applying personal ethics to organizational ethics and the experienced ethical dilemmas. To ascertain the behaviors, understanding ethics from both personal and organizational perspectives reveals the ethical dilemmas individual leaders face. Defining Ethics Ethics can be defined as a set of moral principles regulating individual or organizational behavior (French, 1995). Hazels (2015) further defined ethics as a code of rules subscribed to by a group of people or society, bringing moral engagement among people. Morals emerge

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 90

intrinsically from knowing what is wrong and right (Skubinn & Herzog, 2016; Thayer, Johannesen, & Hardt, 1980). Resnik (2011) viewed ethics as norms detailing what is wrong and right, helping to enforce consistent procedures and processes for solving problems. Ethical behavior emanates from moral behavior and attitude rather than from a set of laid down principles (Alfano, Rusch, & Uhl, 2018). The concept of ethics originates from the Greek word ethos, meaning the custom practice of a group of people, or individuals (Moriarty, 2012). The ethical behavior is demonstrated through a person’s honesty, objectivity, integrity, care, openness, respect, humility, and confidentiality (Johnson, 2018; Resnik, 2011). Personal Ethics The term ethos refers to customs and norms regulating individual morals (Ambrose, Arnaud, & Schminke, 2007). The individual demonstrates ethics through internalized moral values in decision-making and solving problems (Skubinn & Herzog, 2016). Personal ethics, the basis on moral principles fostering self-governance of behavior, informs an individual’s way and system for decision-making (Luxon, 2008). Individual personal ethics consist of integrity, credibility, fairness, transparency, prudence courage, temperance, and justices (Olson, 2013;Johnson, 2018; Resnik, 2011). Ethical values influence personal choices based on how one views the right thing to do due to internalized moral values (Abaymi, 2016; Skubinn & Herzog, 2016). Personal ethics drives self-control, fulfillment, sense of responsibility, and fair judgment, with consciousness to eliminate harm (Mihelič, Lipičnik, & Tekavcic, 2010; Skubinn & Herzog, 2016). Organizational Ethics The concept of Organizational Ethics refers to the set of agreed norms and values governing organizational behavior, regulating its members to act and behave according to laid down customs (Lozano, 2005). Ethics involves broader values enshrined in ethics codes governing a wider category of organizations (Schwartz, 2002). Individual organizations develop their ethics specific to the organizations, informed by the organizational culture and values (Sekerka, Comer, & Godwin, 2014). Organizational ethics regulate how leaders make decisions

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 91

and how organizational members behave as good organizational citizens (Mcleod, Tyge Payne, & Evert, 2016). Individual Morals and Organizational Ethics Johnson (2018) compiled a whole section titled “Combating Evil”, dealing with perspectives hindering ethical behavior. In organizational ethics, individuals should resist behaviors disrupting ethics, such as dreadful pleasure, an exclusion that focuses selectively on people, deception, bureaucracy, and bad choices (pp.110-115). In a real sense, organization culture and ethics come together as an institutionalization of personal ethics (Carlson & Perrewe, 1995; Foote & Ruona, 2008; Koh & Boo, 2001; Sims, 1991). Because of personal and organizational culture and value differences, the possibility of an ethical dilemma exists that individuals in the organization should always seek to deal with. Kant's moral theory already exposes the ethical conflict between individuals and organization ethics. Kant’s advocacy for treatment of human beings as an end, and not as a means, conflicts with real organizational practices; such as organizations that would do all they can to make profits, or achieve their purpose at the expense of paying the workers well (Szkudlarek, 2009). Ethical Perspectives Utilitarianism calls for rationality in making choices; it is viewed as personal morality, and theory of public choice (Sen, Williams, & Williams, 1982). The downside to utilitarianism is its lack of determining the interests of the individual causing the challenge of ethical conflict of interest (Sen et al., 1982). According to Johnson (2018), the dilemma occurs because leaders cannot predict the consequences, and therefore the outcome of every situation becomes different (William & Smart, 1973). Justice as Fairness as an ethical perspective, perceives the same treatment of people in a similar situation (Johnson, 2018). Situations for people in organizations differ, and therefore, the aspect of equal treatment faces an ethical dilemma. Pragmatism perspective advocates for transparent processes leading to moral decision making (Johnson, 2018). Pointing at Dewey's views of a scientific approach to decision making requires a balance with making value-driven decisions. However, following a scientific approach

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 92

to decision making can miss the moral aspect of dealing with issues that affect individuals when such issues contradict the ethical codes. Altruism as an ethical perspective would drive leaders to make decisions viewed as controversial; altruistic behavior drives people to go out of their way to serve life and meet the needs of other people (Darlington & Macker, 1966). The altruistic behavior may conflict with organizational ethics, especially in collectivist cultures, where the leader plays a parental role to followers (Hoffman, 1975). Culture, Spirituality and Moral Theory Lu, Rose, and Blodgett (1999) and Okpara (2014) explored the impact of culture on organizational ethics. Ethics within a cross-cultural context takes a different form based on culture (Aycan, 2008; Dickson, Den Hartog, & Mitchelson, 2003; Weaver, 2001). The behavior of leaders in approaching the ethical perspectives stated by Johnson (2018), would differ between western cultures, known as individualistic, and African cultures, considered collectivist and humane culture (Den Hartog et al.,1999; House et al., 2002; Northouse, 2018). Studies in organizational performance and effectiveness have considered spirituality as an important variable in organizational performance (Ashmos & Duchon, 2000). The significance of spirituality in influencing behavior has grown to receive much attention in the study of management ethics (Zsolnai, 2011). The spiritual leadership theory by Blackaby and Blackaby (2011) attributed leadership behavior as having a direct influence from God. Spirituality is considered as personal moral principles centered on God (Reave, 2005). According to Nasir, Nordin, Akma, Seman, and Rahmat (2014), "Spirituality can be a source of quality for the individual and the society. But it can also be a source of quality for the organization.” (p. 15). Methodology The researcher used a case study to investigate the experiences of a respected leader within a non-profit organization. The researcher investigated the participant’s experiences in balancing personal ethical values and organizational ethics (Elango, Paul, Kundu, & Paudel, 2010), and how spirituality influenced decision making. A qualitative phenomenological study was applied to investigate the experiences of the leader selected. Phenomenology studies life

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 93

experiences (Moustakas, 1994). Case studies require that the method addresses the expectations of readers and should exhaustively interrogate the phenomena under review (Yin, 2018). Effective case study research requires that the researcher fully understand the subject and case study research methods to ensure adequate research exploration (Yin, 2018). Research Questions The research question investigated in this case study is, How do leaders maintain moral, behavior when faced with personal and organizational ethical conflict? According to Yin (2018), case study research responds to what and how questions. In this case study, understanding the process taken to make a decision forms part of addressing ethical dilemmas faced (Johnson, 2018). The Design Yin’s (2018) model of design informed this research. The case study involved one respected leader. The researcher applied phenomenoligical design to the leader’s moral and ethical experiences in relation to organizational ethics. The research design involved sample selection and data collection using open-ended interview questions. The participant required anonymity, and therefore, the researcher agreed not to state the name of the participant and the organization. Sample Selection The case study involved only one sample selected from a non-profit organization. The respondent is a national team leader for the non-profit organization. The respondent was chosen on the basis of what the researcher knew concerning radical decisions. The respondent made decisions viewed as defiling organizational policies. The selection of the respondent as a case study resonates with Yin (2018) who purported that the participant selected should have firsthand experience of the matter being investigated.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 94

Data Collection Methods As recommended by Yin (2018), the researcher asked pertinent questions related to the the study to gain knowledge of the experiences of the participant. The researcher required flexibility, exploratory skills, and consent from the participant (Yin, 2018). Data collection involved administering interview questions which explored the actions taken by the participant and how they dealt with emerging conflict. The interview lasted one hour. The following openended interview questions were used to collect data.

Data Analysis Data transcription took place using electronic type over voice in Google docs. The transcribed data was coded using primary coding (Saldaña, 2015). Manual coding applied to this study and emerging codes were clustered into themes to allow an exhaustive analytical process (Basit, 2003). The coding process used INVIVO, which used words and phrases contained in the transcript (Saldaña, 2015). The coding process revealed themes reflective to investigating the question, How do leaders maintain moral behavior when faced with personal and organizational ethical conflict? The interview questions provided eight themes describing leadership behavior where personal ethics conflict with organizational ethics. Findings and Results Eight semi-structured interview questions were administered to the participant, and eight themes emerged from the analysis of the transcribed data as follows: Moral decision making; Cause for compassion; Spirituality, culture and ethical conviction; Justice and doing the right thing; Extraodinary situations and decisions; Taking risk, personal values, and accountability; Considering what is at stake; Helping stakeholders understand the rationale; and Honoring God and serving people.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 95

Moral Decision-Making, and Cause for Compassion Interview Question 1: Have you made decisions conflicting organizational policies? The respondent said decision-making is complex, and requires rationality, rather than one-size-fitsall. The findings from the response showed that decision-making should follow the spirit of the law, rather than the letter. The respondent said, “When it comes to delicate staff issues that are a matter of life and death, I choose to follow my convictions." Beyond personal conviction, the respondent said, “the African culture, being a communal practice, consider it inhuman to not help because policy does not allow”. Failure to help, especially when resources are available, becomes a moral and ethical issue, and unacceptable within society. Spirituality, Culture and Ethical Behavior Interview Question 2: What decisions have you made that conflicted with organization policies? The respondent pointed out that he chose to pay rentals, medical care, and sometimes fees for staff children when the staff’s support is low. The respondent futher narrated when there were life-threatening issues he chose to violate the policy. According to the respondent, if he did not make the decision, a staff member would have faced amputation of his whole leg. In his view, it was morally right to serve life, but ethically wrong to use designated funds for that purpose. In that case, the guiding factor for decision-making would involve the word of God. He said, “I feel comfortable to follow my heart backed by the word of God whenever personal ethics and organizational ethics have such a tension.”

Justice and Doing the Right thing Interview Question 3: What legal implications did the decision have? The response generated seven codes: three concerning the spirit of the law conflicting what is right, culturally expected, moral action than ethical, right motives, and sacrifice to serve resulting in the theme of choosing to do the right thing and explaining the reason. The respondent contested that rules and laws should focus on serving people and advocated for understanding the basis in which certain

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 96

policies were formulated. The aspect of the spirit of the law appeared three times, emphasizing the fact that it is sometimes fine to bend the rules to serve life. His response indicated that while ethics appear cast in stone, morals require situational behavior (Skubinn & Herzog, 2016). He further said, "The law was made for man, man was not made for the law, in such instances, when our motives are right and in favor of serving staff, I would have acted morally right.” Extraodinary Situations and Decisions Interview Question 4: How did your personal ethics conflict with organizational ethics, and why did you choose your decision? The responses generated 20 codes: rationale for helping, interest of serving, valuing people, unpopular decisions, save his life, life risk, take responsibility, ethical conflict, explain the decision, exceptional decision, sacrifice (2), ethics of care, conflict, organizational reputation, compassionate decisions, staff life is in danger, saving life, higher calling, spiritual leadership, and answerable to God. In his response, he stated leaders make unpopular decisions and pointed out the purpose of spiritual leadership as serving people. The exceptional decision involves risk taking and the potential of being misunderstood. The motivation for making a sacrificial decision centers on one's spirituality and relationship with God (Ashmos & Duchon, 2000). The respondent said, "Now when you do something like that there are standard rules for the organization which all are supposed to follow, this looks like your convictions or ethical values seem to override that of the organization.” Doing the right thing is of higher moral value than just following a set code of ethics. “Even when we appear to be correct ethical organizationally, we may be wrong in the eyes of God.” Taking Risk, Personal Values, and Accountability Interview Question 5: How would you place your morals when there is a conflict with the organizational requirement? The respondent said “when making decisions, I reflect on my values, norms, and apply the rules morally, knowing that I am answerable to God, but also being

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 97

alive to the fact that every decision has consequences”. The responses generated 21 codes: exceptional situations, to resign, categorical imperative, good and bad ethics, accountable to high values, taking risk, breaking the norm, personal values, mitigate such risks, guided by the word of God, answerable to God, responsibility, values, valuing people, secure, serve from a heart, love of God, serving mankind better, blessing to fellow, mankind, spiritual leader, and interest of people. Extraordinary decisions sometimes entail going against the norms; mitigating the conflict may require negotiation, explaining the situation, servitude attitude, accountability, and making decisions in the interest of the common good (Buller, Kohls, & Anderson, 2000; Johnson, 2018). Considering What is at Stake Interview Question 6: What compromise do you take when the cons weigh more than the pros? In answering the question, 10 codes emerged: what is at stake, extraordinary decisions, no compromise, sacrifice life, protecting my job, life and death, personal convictions, subscribe to God’s clear process, and morals enforce ethics. The theme emerging from the codes, considering what is at stake (Buller et al., 2000), helps with good judgment in decision making. In the event of an ethical dilemma, the leader can make decisions to do the right thing (Johnson, 2018). In weighing out options, the respondent replied, "When we raise the bar in our leadership to serve from a heart motivated by the love of God, and honor and submission to His word, the risks and sanctions diminish into minor obstacles that can be overlooked for the sake of serving mankind better." Following a transparent process further helps in making ethical decisions. Helping Stakeholders Understand the Rationale Interview Question 7: How do you defend your actions when you make radical decisions? The respondent's comments generated five codes: good judgment, saving a life, serves humankind selflessly, selfless service, and value system. The emerging theme, helping stakeholders understand the rationale, explains the importance of building context to a different situation. According to the respondent, decisions made without self-interest carry moral values.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 98

Ethical leadership requires that decisions are moral based. The respondent further said, “I consider the decisions I make as just exercising leadership judgment on areas that may not specifically be attended to in policy.” Honoring God and Serving People Interview Question 8: How do you then re-align your ethics to organizational ethics? The responses generated three codes: value system, answerable to God, and serving. The theme involved decisions honoring God and serving people. As people, we carry our own biases, which lead to unethical decisions (Johnson, Kidwell, Lowe, & Reckers, 2019). The respondent emphasized accountability to a higher power as pertinent for building moral values leading to ethical behavior. He said "I think we must all act from our value system that is anchored in God's word. And we must always remember that as spiritual leaders, we are first and foremost answerable to God, and therefore, we must always be motivated by the love of God as we serve as leaders.” Discussion The results of the case study indicated that personal morals and ethics might come to a clash, as experienced by the respondent in the case study. An ethical dilemma occurs when gray areas emerge which do not have an obvious solution to the problem (Johnson, 2018). Overcoming the ethical dilemma requires understanding the issues at stake, available options to deal with the problem, and consulting others in dealing with the problem (Resnik, 2011). The case study revealed that consultation and involving stakeholders deals with ethical conflict. Another cause for ethical dilemma is emergence of disasters, and such events may not be fully provided for in the organization’s ethical codes. Such situations require extraordinary decisions which may create ethical conflict; individual morals may contradict with organizational policies (Ardichvili, 2013). Organizations have ethical codes, policies, and processes guiding decision making (Buller et al., 2000; Olson, 2013). Individuals view each situation differently because of their spirituality and cultural orientation, which influence the leader’s decision-making process

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 99

(Gocen & Özgan, 2019; Lu et al., 1999). The interview responses indicated spirituality and culture as strong variables influencing personal moral values and ethics (Thayer et al., 1980; Treviñ & Brown, 2004; Weaver, 2001). The aspect of culture has been argued in leadership studies as having impact on the leaders’ behavior and that leadership styles are influenced by culture (House et al., 2004; House et al., 2002). Leaders with a strong sense of personal morals more likely would not compromise on certain personal behaviors. Reflecting on the interview, the researcher found consistent references to being accountable to God, seeking to please God, and serving people as stronger values, which created ethical conflict on non-biblical values (Ferguson, 1993). In making decisions in unclear situations, the leader takes the responsibility of explaining the decision and taking responsibility (Thayer et al., 1980). Conclusion The aspect of individual ethics and organizational ethics as a field of study needs further exploration. In carrying out the case study research, several variables emerged, which require empirical research to determine the impact of culture on ethics and the leader’s personal ethical dilemma and conflict with organizational ethics. The GLOBE studies created a glimpse of cultural dynamics and behavior, and the study by Rashid and Ibrahim (2008) explored the impact of culture on ethics. However, it would be necessary for future researchers to engage in a study on how African cultures deal with personal and organizational ethical conflict. Author Biography Farai Katsande is from Zimbabwe, married to Chipo Katsande. He serves as the Executive Director for Campus Crusade for Christ International in Southern and Eastern Africa. He supervises 24 nations. Farai Katsande is experienced in strategic leadership and leading change. Prior to working with Campus Crusade for Christ, he acquired experience in Financial management and accounting in 3 different corporations. Farai Katsande holds Diploma in Accounting, BA, theology with Petra Theological Seminary, Executive Diploma in Business Leadership; Zimbabwe Institute of Management, Master in Leading Innovation and change; York St. John’s University, Doctorate in Transformational leadership, Bakke

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 100

Graduate University. Currently Farai Katsande is pursuing Ph.D. Organizational Leadership with Regent University. He also the founding president of the Zimbabwe Council of Pentecostal Churches. References Abaymi, O, S. (2016). Personal ethics and fraudster motivation: The missing link in fraud triangle and fraud diamond theories. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v6-i2/2020 Alfano, M., Rusch, H., & Uhl, M. (2018). Ethics, morality, and game theory. Games, 9(2), 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/g9020020 Ambrose, M. L., Arnaud, A., & Schminke, M. (2007). Individual moral development and ethical climate: The influence of person-organization fit on job attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 77(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9352-1 Ardichvili, A. (2013). The role of HRD in CSR, sustainability, and ethics: A relational model. Human Resource Development Review, 12(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484313478421 Ashmos, D. P., & Duchon, D. (2000). Spirituality at work: A conceptualization and measure. Journal of Management Inquiry, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/105649260092008 Aycan, Z. (2008). Cross-cultural approaches to leadership. In P. Smith, M. Peterson, & D. Thomas (Eds.), The Handbook of Cross-Cultural Management Research (pp. 219–238). Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412982764.n13 Basit, T. N. (2003). Manual or electronic? The role of coding in qualitative data analysis. Educational Research, 45(2), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188032000133548 Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181-217. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00016-8 Bright, B. (2002). Come help change the world. New Life Publications. Buller, P. F., Kohls, J. J., & Anderson, K. S. (2000). Managing conflicts across cultures. Organizational Dynamics, 28(4), 52–66.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 101

Carlson, D. S., & Perrewe, P. L. (1995). Institutionalization of organizational ethics through transformational leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 14(10), 829–838. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00872349 Darlington, R. B., & Macker, C. E. (1966). Displacement of guilt-produced altruistic behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(4), 442–443. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0023743 Den Hartog, D. N., House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dorfman, P. W., Abdalla, I., . . . Zhou, J. (1999). Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed? The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 219–256. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984399000181 Dickson, M. W., Den Hartog, D. N., & Mitchelson, J. K. (2003). Research on leadership in a cross-cultural context: Making progress, and raising new questions. Leadership Quarterly, 14(6), 729–768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.09.002 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, 543-561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0524-z Ferguson, E. (Ed.). (1993). Christian life: Ethics, morality, and discipline in the early church. Garland. Foote, M. F., & Ruona, W. E. A. (2008). Institutionalizing ethics: A synthesis of frameworks and the implications for HRD. Human Resource Development Review, 7(3), 292-308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484308321844 French, P. (1995). Corporate ethics. http://pdftransitional.info/corporate-ethics-few-paragraphspeter-a-french.pdf Gocen, A., & Özgan, H. (2019). Spirituality and ethics: A literature review. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 17, 58–65. https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.452152 Hazels, T. (2015). Ethics and morality: What should be taught in business law? Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 19.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 102

Hoffman, M. L. (1975). Altruistic behavior and the parent-child relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(5), 937. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/197527238-001 House, R. J., Javidan, M., Hanges, P., & Dorfman, P. (2002). Understanding cultures and implicit leadership theories across the globe: An introduction to project GLOBE. Journal of World Business, 37(1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-9516(01)00069-4 House, R. J., Hanges, P., Javidan, M., & Dorfman, P. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=4MByAwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1& dq=globe+studies+2004&ots=7hkEIrg68G&sig=ZxX7c6Wem0B1qADSAk2VziOUaiQ Johnson,E, C. (2018). Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership. SAGE Publications Inc. Johnson, E. N., Kidwell, L. A., Lowe, D. J., & Reckers, P. M. J. (2019). Who follows the unethical leader? The association between followers’ personal characteristics and intentions to comply in committing organizational fraud. Journal of Business Ethics, 154, 181-193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3457-y Kaptein, M. (2013). Workplace morality: Behavioral ethics in organizations. Emerald Group Publishing. Kim, D. M., Ko, J. W., & Kim, S. J. (2015, April 3). Exploring the ethical aspects of leadership: From a Korean perspective. Asian Philosophy, 25(2), 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2015.1013732 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. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010741519818 Lozano, J. M. (2005). An approach to organizational ethics. Ethical Perspectives, 10(1), 46–65. https://doi.org/10.2143/ep.10.1.503870 Lu, L. C., Rose, G. M., & Blodgett, J. G. (1999). The effects of cultural dimensions on ethical decision making in marketing: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Ethics, 18, 91105. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006038012256

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 103

Luxon, N. (2008). Ethics and subjectivity: Practices of self-governance in the late lectures of Michel Foucault. Political Theory, 36(3), 377–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591708315143 Matsuo, A., Brown, C. M., Norasakkunkit, V., & Karasawa, M. (2019). How can I become a member of my culture? Shared representations of community-related moral violation in Japan and the U.S. Culture and Brain. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40167-019-00084-z Mcleod, M. S., Tyge Payne, G., & Evert, R. E. (2016). Organizational ethics research: A systematic review of methods and analytical techniques. Journal of Business Ethics, 134(3), 430–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2436-9 Mihelič, K. K., Lipičnik, B., & Tekavcic, M. (2010). Ethical Leadership. International Journal of Management & Information Systems (IJMIS), 14(5). https://doi.org/10.19030/ijmis.v14i5.11 Moriarty, G. (2012). Ethics, ethos and the professions. Professional Ethics, A Multidisciplinary Journal, 4(1), 75–93. https://doi.org/10.5840/profethics1995413 Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=MZA5DQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1& dq=moustakas+phenomenology&ots=Yile-ISbw4&sig=C2WwMj2Dd6WjVSkhCPr5-HZM9o Nasir, H. M., Nordin, R., Akma, S., Seman, A., & Rahmat, A. (2014). The relationship of leadership styles and organizational performance among IPTA academic leaders in Klang Valley Area, Malaysia. Business & Entrepreneurship Journal, 3. Olson, D. S. (2013). Shaping an ethical work culture. https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/trends-andforecasting/special-reports-and-expert-views/Documents/Ethical-Workplace-Culture.pdf Okpara, J. O. (2014). The effects of national culture on managers’ attitudes toward business ethics: Implications for organizational change. Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change, 10(2), 174–189. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-07-2012-0046 Paige, R. M., & Martin, J. (1996). Ethics in intercultural training. In D. Landis & Bhagat, R. (Eds.). Handbook of Intercultural Training (2nd ed.). Sage Publications. http://www.sietarusa.org/Resources/Documents/EoEArticles/4EthicsinInterculturalTraini ngPaige_Martin.pdf

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 104

Rashid, M. Z., & Ibrahim, S. (2008, November). The effect of culture and religiosity on business ethics: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 907–917. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9601-3 Reave, L. (2005). Spiritual values and practices related to leadership effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(5), 655–687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.07.003 Resnik, D. B. (2011). What is ethics in research & why is it important? http://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/whatis/ Roberts, C. M. (2010). A practical and comprehensive guide to planning, writing, and defending your dissertation. Corwin. www.corwin.com Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage Publications. www.sagepublications.com Schwartz, M. S. (2002). A code of ethics for corporate code of ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 41, 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021393904930 SEA Policy Manual. (2004). Campus Crusade for Christ southern and eastern Africa personal policy manual. Harare, Zimbabwe. Sekerka, L. E., Comer, D. R., & Godwin, L. N. (2014). Positive organizational ethics: Cultivating and sustaining moral performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 119, 435–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1911-z Sen, A., Williams, B., & Williams, B. (1982). Utilitarianism and beyond. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=w4WpmLw9u7QC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7& dq=Utilitarianism&ots=3KLKxEvcKG&sig=5iCdH2Mg5aBUv8LU5vDOzgGsVQU Simpson, A. (2017). Moral foundations theory. In V. Ziegler-Hill & T. Shackelford (Eds.). Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences (pp. 40-76). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1253-1 Sims, R. R. (1991). The institutionalization of organizational ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(7), 493–506. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00383348 Skubinn, R., & Herzog, L. (2016). Internalized moral identity in ethical leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 133, 249–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2369-3 Szkudlarek, B. (2009). Through western eyes: Insights into the intercultural training field. Organization Studies, 30(9). https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840609338987

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 105

Thayer, L., Johannesen, R. L., & Hardt, H. (1980). Ethics, morality, and the media: Reflections on American culture. Hastings House. Treviñ, L. K., & Brown, M. E. (2004). Managing to be ethical: Debunking five business ethics myths. Academy of Management Perspectives, 18(2), 69–81. Weaver, G. R. (2001). Ethics programs in global businesses: Culture’s role in managing ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 30, 3-15. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006475223493 William, B., & Smart, J, J. (1973). A critique for utilitarianism. Cambridge, UK. Wotruba, T. R., Chonko, L. B., & Loe, T. W. (2001). The impact of ethics code familiarity on manager behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 33(1), 59–69. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011925009588 Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications. Sage Publications. Zsolnai, L. (Ed.). (2011). Spirituality and ethics in management. Netherlands: Springer.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 106

Table 1 Guiding Questions Interrogating Data Interview Questions 1) Have you made decisions conflicting organizational policies?

Theoretical Framework Determining morals that govern an individual's values, and ascertain commitment to personal doctrine or system of life (Abaymi, 2016).

2) What decisions have you made that conflicted with organization policies?

Morality is considered intrinsically ingrained, learned through the progression of consciousness of the desire to do the right thing (Simpson, 2017).

3) What legal implications did the decision have?

Ethical decision requires critical process, avoiding reputational damage on self and organization (Foote & Ruona, 2008)

4) How did your personal ethics conflict with the organizational ethics, and why did you choose your decision?

Applying Kant’s categorical perspective, doing good to everyone (Johnson, 2018).

5) How would you place your morals when there is a conflict with the organizational requirement?

Choosing to do the right thing, regardless of the cost (Johnson, 2018; Kim et al., 2015).

6) What compromise do you take when the cons weigh more than the pros?

Ethical decision making follows the process, applying ethical codes to ensure fairness, and justice (Johnson, 2018; Wotruba, Chonko, & Loe, 2001).

7) How do you defend your actions when you make radical decisions?

Ethical actions require cognitive dissonance and rationality (Kaptein, 2013).

8) How do you then re-align your ethics to organizational ethics?

Personal ethics and organizational ethics require behavioral congruence (Elango et al., 2010).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 107

Location, Location, Location? The Impact of Site Selection on Global Learning and Student Satisfaction in Short-Term Study Abroad Colin B. Gabler Ohio University Andy Goodnite Ohio University Andrew Pueschel Ohio University William A. Young II Ohio University

Abstract The Global Consulting Program (GCP) can be a highly transformative learning experience, and while there are no such things as the perfect programs or perfect students, there is evidence that there is the perfect program for every student (Tucker, Hartman, & Gabler, 2019). Studies highlight working within multi-disciplinary teams and thus the utilization of a tailor-made diversification algorithm should maximize these benefits. But is this needed? Our study measures student learning assessments, global citizenship metrics, and overall satisfaction of students who received their top location preference versus those who did not. Measured immediately after the experience, and again six months later to uncover any lag effects, we present implications for international program development optimizing student experiences and overall cohort dynamics. Results provide insights into undergraduate global program placement, maximizing administrative efficiency, maximizing the effectiveness of on-site location assignments, and the impact of future job and internship acceptances. Keywords: Study Abroad, Student Satisfaction, Global Learning

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 108

Introduction While deciding between ECON 330 or PSYC 410 certainly has repercussions for the general undergraduate student, studying abroad in Spain versus Nigeria raises the stakes. In a time where academic programming and funding are being cut due to diminishing budgets and a global pandemic is limiting (or canceling) international travel, it is important to remember the positive impact that experiential opportunities can have on the lives of young adults. Through immersion in individual, organizational, and national cultures, we are preparing the next generation of international business professionals through study abroad programs (Loh, Steagall, Gallo & Michelman, 2011). With competing directives and/or priorities, GCP programs must balance the needs of all stakeholders. These include: 1) students think they will have their best experience at their 1ST priority site, 2) site directors (on-site instructors) want the best students for their sites given the variety of activities built into their experience, and 3) the program director who is aiming for equal and fair distribution of student characteristics across all sites. When focusing on the overall satisfaction of the students’ experience, we must consider that changes in students’ attitudes and affect (Gullekson, Tucker, Coombs, & Wright, 2011, Gullekson & Tucker, 2012), and their sense of community, can be established through a variety of modalities, including in-course readings in a pretravel class, meetings while abroad, and living together in an international setting (Davis & Coryell, 2020). Study abroad research has found that students’ cultural learning (Varela & Gatlin-Watts, 2014), course objectives, and assignment requirements can influence the extent to which students develop (Roberts, Raulerson, Telg, Harder, & Stedman, 2018) and how students acclimate to new cultures and customs (Savicki, 2010, Wood & St. Peters, 2014). It is important to note that through established on-site relationships, site directors can create a unique experience that highlights their location. Based on the personalities and experience of the participating students, integrated classes and field trips enable different forms of development (Knight, Davis, Kinoshita, Twyman, & Ogilvie, 2019) and enhance the perceived satisfaction of the participants involved. Focusing on administrative needs, maximizing efficiency, effectiveness, and participant placement relies on the resources available to the administrative office at the time of planning. A

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 109

selection/assignment algorithm for prioritizing selection criteria requires the development of feasible, tailored optimization methods (Belloni, Lovett, Boulding, & Staelin, 2012) that can decrease the amount of time in which administrators spend on placing students within a plethora of possible combinations. In this paper, we set out to explore whether an algorithm, which optimized student diversity (based on a mix of seven decision criteria) at the expense of student choice, had negative effects on learning outcomes and overall student satisfaction within shortterm learning abroad programs. We propose that when creating environments in which participants thrive in a multi-disciplinary world, it is critical that their experiences are not limited to the physical location. As the literature outlined, the challenges faced by global academic programming are focused on balancing stakeholders (students, administration, and faculty) wants versus student goals and learning outcomes. Algorithms can help with the placement of students according to specific criteria while simultaneously decreasing the cumbersome effort and time traditionally placed upon the program administration. The next section of this paper includes an overview of the optimization model, including the indices, parameters, and formulas for the multi-objective optimization model. GCP Optimization Model and Algorithm For this study, a designed optimization model was created and utilized by the program administrators to define the program requirements and decision criteria for the program’s stakeholders. Program requirements were to fill all locations (seven sites) with a maximum number of participants (24) with multi-disciplinary teams based on seven decision criteria. Specific indications resulting from the criteria, as well as the program goals, can be seen in Appendix A: Decision Criteria Overview. Once the initial criteria were selected, three indices (students, site location, and criteria) were further examined to assign students to a best-fit location to meet the overall needs of the program (creating multi-disciplinary teams). Indices include further detail on the students, site location, and criteria indices utilized in the optimization model can be seen in Appendix B: Indices. The parameters allow the possible solutions (maximum participation) of the programming model to be able to deviate from the ideal target solution, thus allowing for a

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 110

variety of locations to be selected for the participant based on data not linked to their initial application. Further details on the parameters of the optimization model can be found in Appendix C: Parameters. Within the multi-objective optimization are decision variables, constraints, and objective functions. Decision variables, being structural or deviational, represent how close possible solutions can come to meeting a specified ideal target value for a particular site. As participants are selected for a site, the decision variables help to make sure that the program directors do not over or under populate a site. Hard constraints may not be violated (e.g., the maximum number at a site), while soft constraints may be violated (e.g., goals that are flexible and allow for acceptable solutions). The utilization of constraints helps manage consistency and quality among groups. The objective function minimizes error and allows for maximization of success regarding both stakeholder satisfaction and program effectiveness. It improves the ability for multi-goals to be achieved. The actual decision variables, constraints, and objective function can be found in Appendix D: Formulate for Multi-objective Optimization. In the next section, we discuss the methodology of the study itself focusing on how the study was conducted, and the timing and questions asked throughout the process.

Methodology Data were collected in three stages across six months in 2018-2019. The sample consisted of undergraduate students at a midsized university who completed a study abroad experience. Measurement Instrument The initial survey was the program application in fall 2018 where students identified their top site and rank-ordered the other sites by personal preference (Time 1). Over the coming weeks, students were either assigned to their top choice or one of the other six locations. After a preparation course, student/faculty social events, and cultural training in the spring of 2019, the actual study abroad trips occurred in summer 2019. The second data collection occurred two weeks after the trip was completed (Time 2). This exit survey asked students to rank the overall program experience on a four-point scale

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 111

(1=poor, 2=fair, 3=good, 4=excellent). A six-month follow-up survey was sent to gauge the potential halo effect or positive feelings that may have lingered after the trip for two weeks, but evaporated (or strengthened) as students had time to reflect (Time 3). This survey repeated the question about the overall experience, but also added the following items using the same 4-point scale: “This experience pushed me out of my comfort zone,” “This experience was useful,” “This experience was challenging,” and “I learned a lot through this experience.” Sample After attrition between collections, our final sample was 74 students, with 54% female, 73% sophomore/junior, and 90% business majors. Of these students, 69% were assigned to their top choice, while 31% were not. Our overarching hypothesis was that student satisfaction would not be negatively impacted by final site placement, meaning, students who received their second or third choice would have the same level of experience as those who received their first choice. To assess this, we conducted T-test and Chi-Square hypothesis tests on our two samples (first choice and not first choice). We then used significance tests (p-values) to determine if the populations were significantly different. Results Our analytical focus was to compare the means of our two samples, Group 1 (students who received their top choice) versus Group 2 (students who did not receive their top choice). Our results indicate that the two groups do not differ significantly in the exit survey (Time 2) on the overall experience (Mean G1=3.78, Mean G2 = 3.91; p=ns). Interestingly, while the means are not significantly different, Group 2 shows a higher mean than Group 1. Turning to Time 3 (see Table 1), the follow-up data collection, we again find no significant difference across groups for the overall experience. We then examine the additional variables and find support for our hypotheses as there was no significant difference in comfort zone, usefulness, the challenge of the experience, and learning.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 112

Table 1 Hypothesis Test Results 1st Choice Mean

Not 1st Choice Mean

p‐value

Chi‐ Square p‐value

Is the GCP experience different based on receiving 1st Priority Location?

3.85

3.95

14.4%

98.8%

The GCP pushed me out of my comfort zone

3.78

3.62

21.9%

93.7%

Is the GCP experience useful?

3.75

3.68

65.1%

86.5%

How challenging was the academic/project work involved in the GCP?

3.06

3.00

70.3%

23.0%

I learned a lot on the GCP trip

3.71

3.55

32.9%

88.0%

Question (Time 3)

T‐Test

Result Not a significant difference Not a significant difference Not a significant difference Not a significant difference Not a significant difference

Taken together, our results indicate that Group 1 and Group 2 evaluated the GCP experience the same, meaning site location did not factor into perceptions of the experience. In the next section, we discuss what these null findings mean in practice and offer implications from our algorithm for international program development.

Discussion Our findings suggest that the overall experience was not impacted by site preference, and therefore, we explored how the algorithm could be used to optimize teams in study abroad programs. Within our program, there is a chance that students will be assigned to their top choice, second choice, and even third or fourth choice, as they are choosing between seven different global locations. The algorithm determined the final offer based on several criteria, and while student preference was weighted heavily, so were several other factors. We break this into three main contributions. First, the GCP program itself is achieving a high level of student satisfaction. Examining the means, regardless of site, faculty, duration, country, preference, cohort, etc., students had a fantastic and challenging experience where they learned a lot and were pushed out of their comfort zones. Therefore, we propose more universities add ‘work abroad’ programs to their portfolio of study abroad offerings. This program fulfills the College internship requirement, as well as the global perspectives requirement and is an instant resume differentiator. As faculty, we

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 113

are always looking for ways to set our students apart, and participation in the GCP program does just that. We understand others cannot create something like this overnight, but mutual colleagues at partner universities (at home and abroad) are often eager to discuss these opportunities. Reaching out with outcomes to reinforce the program’s benefits could lead to fruitful relationships quite quickly. Second, student site preference did not impact the student experience. This is the crux of the paper and the main goal of the algorithm that spurred this research. We recognize that finding the null hypothesis is supported can be anticlimactic; however, in this instance, we present it as validation that 1) the algorithm is useful and 2) students are adaptable. Imagine signing up for a trip to Greece, outlining why you chose that location in an essay, researching the cuisine, culture, and beaches--generally getting excited about it. Then imagine that you are confirmed a spot on the GCP to Hungary. Certainly, there could be negative reactions, especially when other classmates received their first choice. For this reason, we offer that our findings ring loudly for student grit and flexibility. To solidify this argument, we asked students in the follow-up survey the following question: “If you did not receive your first choice and were allowed to do it all over again, would you change your location and go to your first-choice site?” The overwhelming response was “No,” adding robustness to our findings. Third, the algorithm ‘works’. Remembering that the whole goal of the algorithm was to maximize the number of students who complete the GCP program while optimizing the diversity across sites, we advance this as a success. See Figure 1. Over half of the students received their first-choice site while two-thirds received either their first or second choice. This is remarkable when one considers that capacity is 24 students per site and some sites had over 50 students who chose their site as the top choice, while others had fewer than 10. Our point is that there is no feasible way to ensure all students do get their top choice, so it is in everyone’s best interest to take other steps to optimize the experience. Further, the year the algorithm was implemented saw an increase in the overall number of student participants with no increase in the number of sites. The reason is simple. Students were offered more options. Instead of being offered a spot on the waitlist to the popular sites (e.g., with 50 students who also chose that as their top choice), students were offered an actual spot on

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 114

the less popular sites (e.g., the site with fewer than 10 students who chose it as their top site). This naturally leads to filling cohorts and the overall program. Finally, given that student experience did not diminish, we can shed light on the positive outcomes of the algorithm. We strongly advocate that a diverse cohort is a better cohort, and our algorithm allowed us to do that across our program. By taking into consideration the student’s GPA, intent essay, diversity (however they defined it), gender, class standing, major, business cluster experience, and combining it with their site preference, we created seven diverse cohorts. Because each site had students who fell into multiple categories, we believe their individual experiences were enriched by making this a priority. Moving forward, the algorithm may require adjustments, but it fulfills the mission of higher education, particularly in the domain of international experiences. Particularly in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, international program directors will need to pay even more attention to student wants and needs. But they must also balance those expectations with programmatic goals, as well as health and safety concerns. Therefore, having a tool to help navigate the uncertain path ahead for work abroad programs maybe now more critical than ever. Next, we list the limitations of the study as well as outline proposed future research opportunities. Limitations and Future Research This study is limited to the students of one Midwestern university and has a relatively small sample size. Further, the success of the GCP program could be due to several factors not controlled for in our study (e.g., faculty, funding, friends on the trip, etc.). We also recognize that satisfaction rates may be high simply because students were traveling abroad, and therefore, the overall experience may be positively biased. However, these are all limitations that could be evaluated in future research. Scholars could also look into the role that diversity plays in site selection. In short, would students of one particular ethnic group prefer to go on a trip with other students from the same ethnic group, and if so, are we doing them a disservice by making sure those students are equally divided between the sites? Many moderating influences could also be studied in this context. Personality traits, as well as other demographic variables, could factor into both site selection and student success.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 115

International programmers would also benefit from longitudinal data that tracks each student years after the trip itself. We make presumptions about how the GCP program positively impacts the career trajectory through the stronger interview content, a CV differentiator, increased professionalism, and cultural intelligence. However, do these come to fruition on the job hunt or even later in one’s career? If the answer is ‘yes’, it provides even more rationale for investment in such programs and will make a promotion that much easier through a focus on long-term outcomes. Conclusion Globalization and international business practices help prepare students for success as employees and citizens (Gutierrez & Bhandari, 2009; Hovland, 2009), and the utilization of multi-disciplinary teams within a Global Consulting Program supports this by maximizing student learning, as well as experiential satisfaction. From an administrator’s perspective, an algorithm to help diversify student placement not only minimizes effort and time spent on organizational processes, but also aids in the fulfillment of programmatic goals, such as dispersing participant strengths and talents equally across multiple sites. This study measures student learning assessments, global citizenship metrics, and overall satisfaction between students who received their top location preference and those who did not. Results indicate that sending students to their top choice was not important to their overall satisfaction and quality of experience. Additionally, the use of an algorithm to place students based on criteria allows more students to be placed within a variety of locations, thus maximizing the impact of the Global Consulting Program. Practical implications post-graduation, utilizing an algorithm placing young professionals in multi-disciplinary teams, rather than only that of their first pick for opportunities such as internships and first-job location, strengthens the agility not only of the future young professionals, but also that of the managers assigning location-based tasks and living assignments. Therefore, the workforce is also strengthened when knowing that overall satisfaction of experience and learning capabilities is not based only on location, but can be enhanced through multi-disciplinary team interaction.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 116

Author Biographies Dr. Colin Gabler is an Associate Professor of Marketing in the College of Business at Ohio University. He is also the Director of the Center for International Business. He teaches professional selling, sustainability & marketing, and global consulting. His teaching and research investigate how organizations manage the competing demands of multiple stakeholders and how this impacts the triple bottom line. Andrew Goodnite is an Assistant Professor of Instruction in Business Analytics. He has dual master's degrees, one in Business Administration from Ohio University, and one in Meteorology from the Air Force Institute of Technology. His research interests relate to analytics and active learning. Dr. Andrew Pueschel is an Associate Professor of Instruction in the Management Department of the College of Business at Ohio University and Director of the Emerging Leaders Program in the Robert D. Walter Center for Strategic Leadership. He received his Ph.D. in Instructional Leadership and Management from Robert Morris University and his master’s in Public Policy and Management at the Carnegie Mellon’s Heinz School. His research interests include leading to wellness, positivity, leadership, organizational behavior, and culture change. Dr. William Young II is Charles G. O’Bleness Associate Professor of Business Analytics. Young earned his Ph.D. in Mechanical and Systems Engineering from Ohio University. His primary research interests relate to business analytics and operations management. In terms of his research, he has various peer-reviewed articles related to operation management, healthcare services, and environmental systems.

References Belloni, A., Lovett, M. J., Boulding, W., & Staelin, R. (2012). Optimal admission and scholarship decisions: Choosing customized marketing offers to attract a desirable mix of customers. Marketing Science, 621-636. Davis, B., & Coryell, J. (2020). Relationships, participation, and characteristics of a community of practice in short-term adult study abroad. Adult Learning, 17-26. Gullekson, N., & Tucker, M. (2012). An examination of the relationships between emotional

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 117

intelligence and intercultural growth for students studying abroad. Journal of the Academy of Business Education, 162-178. Gullekson, N. L., Tucker, M. L., Coombs, G., & Wright, S. (2011). Examining intercultural growth for business students in short-term study abroad programs: Too good to be true? Journal of Teaching International Business, 22, 91-106. Gutierrez, R., & Bhandari, R. (2009). The value of international education to U.S. business and industry leaders: Key findings from a survey of CEOs. An IEE Briefing Paper. New York, NY: Institute of International Education. http://www.iie.org/ResearchEvaluation Hovland, K. (2009, Fall). Global learning: What is it? Who is responsible for it? Association of American Colleges and Universities Peer Review, 11(4), 4-7. Knight, D. B., Davis, K. A., Kinoshita, T. J., Twyman, C., & Ogilvie, A. M. (2019). The rising sophomore abroad program: Early experiential learning in global engineering. Advances in Engineering Education. Loh, C.-P. A., Steagall, J. W., Gallo, A., & Michelman, J. E. (2011). Valuing short-term study abroad in business. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 73-90. Roberts, T., Raulerson, B., Telg, R., Harder, A., & Stedman, N. (2018). The impacts of a shortterm study abroad on critical thinking of agriculture students. NACTA Journal, 168174. Savicki, V. (2010). Implications of earlier sociocultural adaptation for study abroad students. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad Students, 19, 205-223. Tucker, M., Hartman, K., & Gabler, C. (2019). Global learning in short-term study abroad: Assessing business students after global consulting program. Journal of Scholastic Inquiry, 32. Varela, O. E., & Gatlin-Watts, R. (2014). The development of the global manager: An empirical study on the role of academic international sojourns. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13, 187-207. Wood, E.D. & St. Peters, H. Y. (2014). Short-term cross-cultural study tours: Impact on cultural intelligence. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25, 558-570.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 118

Figure 1 Student Assignment Based on Site Preference

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 119

APPENDIX A Decision Criteria Overview Decision Criteria

Indicates

Program Goal

Site Preference

Student’s site preference

To assign as many 1st choices as possible

Grade Point

Academic achievement and

To try to ensure that the average GPA

Average

ability.

across all sites was equivalent.

Essay Score

Students’ reasons for

To try to ensure that the communication

participating in the program

ability across all sites was equivalent.

A demographic value used to

To try to ensure that gender diversity

ensure diversity

across all sites was equivalent.

Breadth of knowledge and

To try to ensure that class standing

maturity and a track record.

across all sites was equivalent.

Depth of knowledge within a

To try to ensure that depth of knowledge

specific business discipline.

across all sites was equivalent.

Completion of a

Professional experience and

To try to ensure that experience level

Business

ability research, critically think,

across all sites was equivalent.

Consulting

and make recommendations to

Course

problems.

Gender Class Standing Major

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 120

APPENDIX B Indices Indices

Variables

Details

Students (i)

Number of students (x)

(i.e. 1 ≤I ≤ x)

Site

1 = Athens, Greece,

(i.e.

)

Location (j) 2 = Dijon, France, 3 = Bayreuth, Germany, 4 = Thessaloniki, Greece, 5 = Pécs, Hungry, 6 = Ancona, Italy, 7 = Barcelona, Spain Criteria (k)

1 = Student Site Preference, 2 = Student GPA, 3 = Student Essay Score, 4 = Student Gender, 5 = Student Class Standing, 6 = Student Major (Other) 7 = Student Major (Management), 8 = Student Major (Accounting or Finance) 9 = Student Major (Management Information Systems or Business Analytics) 10 = Student Major (Sports Management), 11 = Student Major (Marketing) 12 = Student Cluster Experience

(i.e.

)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 121

APPENDIX C Parameters Label

Parameter Explanation

F_j

The minimum capacity per site j

C_j

The maximum capacity per site j

N_ij

1 if student i should not be assigned to site j, otherwise 0

Y_ij

1 if student i should be assigned to site j, otherwise 0, where, Y_ij+N_ij≤1

T_jk

Target value for criteria k in site j

S_ijk

Score of assigning student i to site j for criterion k

P_jk^-

Under penalty weight for site j for criterion k

P_jk^+

Over penalty weight for site j for criterion k

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 122

APPENDIX D Formulate for Multi-Objective Optimization Item

Details

Decision Variables

x_ij: 1 if student i is assigned to site j, otherwise 0 u_jk: the amount under a specified target for a site j for criterion k o_jk: the amount over a specified target for a site j for criterion k

Constraints

Objective Function

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 123

The Shepherd Leader: Orienting, Harnessing, and Adapting the Collective Intelligence of the Team Philip L. Fioravante Walsh College

ABSTRACT As organizations look to its leadership to set the direction of the entity, there is a model by which the leader does not actually get out in front. Rather, in this leadership methodology, the leader looks at the organization “from the back” perspective and assesses threats and opportunities and helps to encourage, orient and direct the organization in a manner that optimizes performance outcomes. Akin to the servant leadership approach, the shepherd leadership methodology requires authenticity, mentoring, the communication of a shared vision and commitment to the greater good. Shepherd leaders are often not clearly seen as distinctive from the organization [the flock]; however, these action-oriented leaders are providing cohesiveness, clarity of direction, reassurance and a sense of belonging to all of employees [and other stakeholders]. The intentions are to ensure the team members and the organization, as a whole, are on course and atspeed in terms of achieving the mission and objectives. Keywords: shepherd leadership, adaptive, orienting, harnessing, observant, servant leadership, authentic

Introduction The notion of shepherd within organizations was popularized by the renowned South African leader, Nelson Mandela (1994), as proclaimed, “a leader…is like a shepherd. [The shepherd] stays behind the [team], letting the nimblest go out ahead, whereupon the others follow…being directed from behind” (p. 22). Similarly, Mandela purported that leading [the organization] from behind enables individuals to move forward with the guidance orientation of the leader. There is no denying that shepherd leadership is a fascinating and unexplored phenomenon in the realm of leadership models in business. Shepherd leaders must have

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 124

observant eyes, listening ears, open minds and be focused on emerging trends. Shepherd leaders make course adjustments at intervals through the journey and should not be reluctant to take [calculated] risks. However, they also might need to stand firm to achieve a greater outcome. In addition, pursuing and capturing new opportunities while working tirelessly to evoke team member ideas are unparalleled objectives and must be nurtured. Significant literature attention will be one of the focal points in this study and has been centered on a myriad of leadership approaches: authentic, dark side, positivist, servant, transformational and now, shepherd. Consequently, questions exist of whether room exists for a new approach and can it [shepherd leadership] contribute to the furthering of leadership studies in business application (Hoch, Bommer, Dulebohn and Wu, 2018). The second focal point of the study was open discussions with business CEOs and elements of the discoveries are presented throughout the paper. Shepherd leadership is fundamentally about bringing all of the constituencies into a cohesive orientation, with a common set of objectives and catapulting to greater success. A quote that seemingly fits the postulated description of the shepherd leader approach is: “Study while others are sleeping; work while others are loafing; prepare while others are playing; and dream while others are dreaming” – William A. Ward (1970). As stated in Brady and Woodward (2005), “Helping to guide others…is the secret to collective greatness and organizational victories” (p.xii). So, how does a shepherd leadership process model stimulate creative thinking, motivate as well as provide a disciplined process coexisting with humility and trust? A famous and well-known quote by Henry Ford that is corollary reads as, “Coming together is the beginning. Keeping together is progress. Working together is success”. Clearly impactful in the early 1900s, as it is in the 21st century, as a set of principles in the leadership imperative. This leadership process model is yet to be fully studied and as a result, this manuscript will educate and stimulate self-reflections for consideration among leaders. Fischer, Dietz and Antonakis (2017) used the term process in their research to describe the mechanism, which explains the inputs (i.e., the behavior of the leader) and outputs (i.e., resultant outcomes) in the causal relationship between the leader and team members. In their article, The Work of Leadership, Heifetz and Laurie (1997) put forth an idea in practice of, “get on the balcony”. In

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 125

this scenario, the leader doesn’t directly get in the “mix”, but rather views the situation from the “balcony” and can more readily view emerging opportunities and [adaptive] challenges alike – clearly correlating to shepherd leadership idealism. However, this is not always appropriate, due to context and instead lends itself to preferring a balance of the “balcony and the [accessible] mix” as required to lead most effectively. In support, Goffee and Jones (2006), suggested the leader will “rely heavily on intuition” in regards to the cadence and necessity of actions to ensure success. Leaders aim at identifying critical business imperatives based on their prior experiences, as they work to balance today’s tactics with tomorrow’s strategies.

Literature Review Let’s take a step back and observe several noted expert offerings on what leadership is. Several bodies of leadership seem to conjoin on the fact that leaders provide a shared picture of an envisioned, ideal future, and then motivate people to follow them based on the chosen and agreed to orientation. Similarly, Savage and Sales (2008), put forth the anticipatory leader theory which evokes the discussion of leaders being “futurists, strategists [as discussed earlier] and integrators”. Aligning with this theory, it is logical to see how each of these descriptors can be used within the shepherd leadership approach. Can the shepherd approach be interpreted as our people can see the picture, we are creating for them and then we point them in the direction that will provide the greatest amount of success? Shepherd leaders have the innate ability to see the envisioned path and can move the team to experience the journey, endure setbacks, and to herd together in times of trouble. An excerpt from Isaac Asimov adds some value here, a he professed that to succeed, simply planning as a standalone, is not adequate. Leaders must improvise as well. Continuing, Keith (2017), put forth, “Leadership is ultimately about creating a way for people to contribute to making something extraordinary happen” (p.2). Contributions in the shepherding approach mobilize and allow individuals to explore, test, and rationalize their own ideas – within the confines of the shepherd’s mental picture. This is not to say, there is strictness, but rather all activities, even if innovative-based, within an organization should be aligned with

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 126

the culture and mission. Maxwell (2003) proclaimed, “Leadership is influence – nothing more, nothing less” (p.64). Straying from the core of the business can bring distractions or even greater challenges that disallow high performance outcomes. Consistent and constant influence must remain true to the direction set and is paramount to achieve efficiencies and overall effectiveness. Keller and Meaney (2017) purported organizations should focus on and harness people talent who deliver to or above expectations as part of their reference to “timeless truths”. Not all team members will have superior intellect, a capacity for large amounts of data processing or the aptitude for calculating ROI or IRR. It takes a village to create an organization – the key is to have the collective expertise and shared experiences working in unison. In the shepherd leadership metaphor, there will be those who run faster, enjoying moving sideways more than forward and those that will move, stop, reflect and start moving again. It is incumbent of the shepherd to observe and orient, while harnessing intellect both at the individual as well at the organizational level. Furthermore, the leader is endowed to protect and nurture those who seemingly are in distress – educate, train and empower. If after all of these and one’s performance does not add value, it might be time to move on. In the end, the leader must make the right decisions for the organizational on a whole – while difficult to separate one of the team members, it takes courage and empathy to do so. Organizations that have consistency of direction, maintain people orientation and strategic execution have been recognized as best in class. For example, take Apple and its relentless pursuit of consumer loyalty in the way it designs and commercializes new products. Also, firms that uphold the adherence to their core business have endearment in the eyes of investors and consumers alike – Coke, Dyson, JPMorgan Chase, Middleby, Oracle and others. The [shepherd] leaders and others in these organizations remain steadfast in protecting and emulating the brand equity and possess an enduring dedication to the future. Under the four criteria conceptual framework developed by Wong & Page (2003), the one most relevant herein is: people-orientation. In this criterion, the query is, how does the leader relate to others? The key attributes are due care for team members, authenticity, empowerment and developing individual performance success metrics. There are a number of shepherd

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 127

leadership common traits or habits exhibited during team engagement: 1) encouragement 2) anticipatory [based on lessons learned] 3) seek cohesiveness and sharing 4) share experiences and teach and 5) trustworthy and loyal. Avolio and Gardner (2005) supported the notion of “authentic leadership” as centric to servant and transformational. Based on the research and the suggestions put forth, shepherd leadership gracefully correlates. Shown in Figure 2, authenticity is depicted as the common theme across the three chosen leadership approaches. Barna (2002), suggested, “Leadership is the process of motivating, mobilizing, resourcing and directing people to passionately and strategically pursue a vision…that [the organization] jointly embraces” (p.17). Along this theme, Wieand (2002), discussed the importance of [communication] authenticity and stated, “The authentic [leader] communicates trust by being genuine and nondefensive…leaders must be emotionally flexible, paradoxical, emphatic and values driven” (p.36). In this sense, shepherd leaders are seen as providing safe passage and knowledge-based perspectives in the pursuit of the trusted and optimal outcomes for the individual and the organization. Being authentic is a fundamental characteristic of a leader regardless of the style – transformational, servant or shepherd. Both Barna (2002) and Maxwell (2003) aligned with the concept of authentic influence as sine qua non to leadership strategy while Nonaka (2007) referred to knowledge creation in terms of ideals and ideas. In particular to the notion of shepherd leadership, the presence of influence and teaching knowledge is evident in the leading of the team from the back, seeing the “edges of the flock” in that outside threats and opportunities both can be rationalized, strategies and tactics developed – all to further the productive direction and knowledge of the organization. Understanding data, assessing possible changes required, institutionalizing analytics, and synthesizing innovation into the decision-taking process adds to the thought of science and its role in leadership methodology. Many researchers also suggest that there simultaneously exists the need for softer, more [artful] “left brained” thoughtfulness. There needs to be "focusing on organizations as communities of knowledge, practice and learning" (Cunliffe & Hatch, 2006, p.34). Thus, art can also find its way into shepherd-style leadership and rightfully manifests itself in terms of creativity, vision – seeing the whole picture and lastly on the supposition that art is created [by the leader] to represent and stimulate social psychology and elicit emotion.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 128

In support, Bennis (1989) proclaimed four themes within leadership as: trustworthiness, vision, inspiration, and empathy. Each of these can elicit a followership, artful, and emotional connection, in an organizational sense, and must be ethically measured and harnessed by the leader to benefit the organization. Establishment of ethical and moral boundaries and in some cases, unethical and immoral boundaries, as history has shown us, is within the rights, responsibility and in a sense, reciprocity of all leaders. These so-called “boundaries” or “rules of engagement”, ultimately frame the relationship with followers [the flock] as a means of defining style, character and expectations of one another in the relationship. [Reflection point: Think of historical leaders that people have heard/aware of such as Genghis Khan, George Washington, Madame C.J. Walker, Jack Welch and the famous explorer, Ernest Shackleton, to name a few]. Leadership by its parts – “Leader” and “ship” are, in perspective, analogous and deeply rooted in direction and the collective group on a journey (i.e., Endurance) towards an expectation and goal. Fundamentally, leadership is about consistency and remaining focused on continuous execution. Effective and efficient strategic communication [function and time] is paramount in sharing the importance of the moment throughout the organization and aligns with shepherd leadership. Utilizing varying approaches of communication (hand signals, verbal, and written) drives the best outcomes when selected and fit to the specific situational context. Not adhering to a “one size fits all” is crucial to meet the dynamics of the business challenge. Savage and Sales (2008) purported extraordinary leaders have compelling capacities and intuitive instincts that associate with the shepherd leader approach. Maximizing these two leader traits can have a profoundly positive effect on the organization in terms of repositioning, adaptation, and adoption of new technologies to win in the market. Methodology The two foci of the study were: 1) a qualitative approach provided the opportunity to interview fifteen CEOs from various industries – transportation, healthcare, financial services, packaging and building products and 2) a thorough literature review and applications in use today as identified during the interviews. The axiological philosophical assumption is evidenced

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 129

throughout the explanatory narrative and the open-ended interviews focused on values, while discussing the nuances of shepherd leadership. In addition, admittance of some bias was discovered, and the interpretations were a center of the participant interviews. Furthermore, a systematic computer-based and a manual search was also conducted based on the various leadership approaches as outlined in this research. The research brings currency and relevancy to some of the legacy descriptions and suppositions of shepherd leadership. As Brady and Woodward (2005) suggested, “Smart leaders never stop learning about their organization’s environment and ways to enhance it” (p.126). For example, look at the recent COVID-19 pandemic situation or what Bennis and Thomas (2002) referred to as “crucibles”. Leaders who have “been here and done that”, coupled with seeing the envisioned future, can more aptly and strategically guide the organization. Ensuring there is cohesiveness – playing to each other’s strengths and challenges (weaknesses) invariably creating a better organization was discovered to be thematic. Figure 1 depicts a relationship of three leadership inputs - pedagogy, behavioral sciences, and importantly, business practices have a role in how leaders think, socialize and put into action to guide and win. In a recent Bain & Co. article, Saenz and O’Keeffe (2020), suggest that CEOs must guide decisions that answer that most critical queries, in order to protect and position the organization - move toward asking higher order questions to achieve higher order thinking. Under this premise thirteen of the fifteen interviewees felt this resonated with their perspectives as well. In fact, it was stated, “this is why I am the CEO”. Again, with a look at the Heifetz and Laurie’s 1997 work, the various leader’s responsibilities have a distinctive fit to the nature of situation. Is it a pandemic? or perhaps, a competitive threat or an opportunity for new technology? The CEOs principally agreed they must be change agents – adaptive, adoptive and relevant. The crucibles defined as “severe tests” require leaders to reflect, make disciplined adaptations or adoptions of new approaches, construct shared meaning of the problem/opportunity and lastly, forge a sense of belonging with the team. Under this premise, shepherd leaders can also operate “in the trenches”, the “mix” or in a better description, as disciplined field commanders with their troops [picture George Patton or General Maximus Decimus Meridius of Gladiator lore]. They are ever-present to observe and direct as changes in conditions bring forth variables of the marketplace, changes in personnel and

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 130

the achievements or failures recognized. All of the CEOs interviewed felt compelled to be everpresent as they observe and react to contextual [financials, customers and personnel] demands. Collins (2001) talked about discipline as an essential aspect of leadership. He put forth subsets of leadership in relation to: people, thought and action and subsequently, Bennis and Thomas (2002) added, “The skills required to conquer adversity and emerge stronger and more committed than ever are the same ones that make for extraordinary leaders” (p.65). Shepherd leaders described herein nicely fit this description. Being in the so-called, “pasture or field”, the CEOs agreed when in the midst of the action they align with leading the team, “from behind”, while advancing the mission even in the face of competitive threats or industry head winds. As Fischer, Dietz and Antonakis (2017) stated, “Leadership is a social and goal-oriented influence process, unfolding in a temporal and spatial milieu” (p.1727). A central emphasis of shepherd leadership is fostering awareness of each other in the process of moving forward – organizationally and in performance. Cialdini (2001) discussed “harnessing the science of persuasion”. As such, the [shepherd] leader needs to take into consideration a myriad of interpersonal principles i.e., reciprocity and consistency, in terms of clarity and efficiency. Understanding how to persuade by showing value to others is quintessential. Having the vision, communicating the mission and providing authentic guidance, provides team members the opportunity to make commitments and the leadership to influence the outcome. The leaders interviewed all agreed on influence by listening, talking, doing, adapting, orienting, team building, learning, and trustworthiness. It goes without saying, emotional intelligence as a leadership input provides stability and consistency in the face of the “herd”. Charisma and character are also important foundations of shepherd leadership, as leaders must be steeped in both to endear those around them. Intellectual motivation, a healthy followership and self-awareness are also fitting to the shepherd leadership model. It’s seemingly about learning from our team and less about judging. Leaders can shape the development of the individuals, while leveraging the full set of internal and external resources available to the organization (Fischer, et. al, 2017). Acting as much as a facilitator as a leader, shepherd leaders broadly scan the environment and conceptualize through reflection and communication what is required to move forward with earnest and speed. Shamir (2011) referred to “leadership takes time” and the milieu in which the

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 131

organization resides will provide opportunities, challenges and reward. With any leadership approach, it is about the disciplined and stimulating journey together with one’s team. Results and Findings An emphasis within this discussion is two-fold as viewed through an “adaptive work” lens - defined as focused on adapting and orienting to the environment and also, keenly fixed towards protecting. First, “protection” in the sense of the [shepherd] leader tending to the team [herd/flock] and shielding from threats that may be presented along the journey or during the execution of the business plan. Secondly, Heifetz and Laurie (2001) put forth, “orientation” – the leader can and should challenge the team, while resisting the burden of ineffectiveness that may be a result of trial and error or customer demands. For instance, look at Creative Foam Corporation (Fenton, MI), which was included in the interviews, continually exploring new, accretive opportunities. The pivot from automotive supply to also manufacturing healthcare products has provided the leadership with many challenges – people, processes, and products necessary for sustained growth. The CEO, acting as a shepherd leader, has skillfully oriented the functional teams to challenge the status quo within each industry and empower people to take calculated risks and move forward with gamechanging, competitive new products. The CEO simultaneously leads from the balcony and in the trenches with authenticity, keen attention and discipline – allowing the teams to determine optimal ways to win. All fifteen CEOs wholly subscribed and reflected. One CEO suggested that “considering the shepherd model might create some increased harmony among the team”. A few others were centric on the notion of being behind the team or watching from the balcony and also unique situations that call for getting into the details to influence the decisions. Leading from behind does not equate to not actually leading the organization. It is about the self-confidence and approach to demonstrate capability to lead. Goleman (1998) introduced “social skill” in his emotional intelligence study on “what makes a leader?” and the bottom-line purpose of social skill is to move and orient people in a desired direction, regardless of the orientation or symbolic “position” of the leader. In relation to this shepherd leadership style, the approach or leader employed process is parallel to making sure the organization’s team members

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 132

stay on the intended course or put another way, the shepherd needs to anticipate and restrain the direction and tempo in which they may alter movement off the planned path [the mission] of the organization. For example, consider the case of the EVP in charge of a healthcare division within a larger business. It was recognized that the technology and innovation team was developing product with no commercialization plan or brand strategy for that matter. Utilizing social skills, especially persuasiveness, a [re-orientation] meeting was quickly called with the senior team. The outcome was a greater collaboration amongst the stakeholders, which also included extensive networking and enabling of other industry companies to form a technology alliance to fast-track the new product. As Drucker (2004) postulated, the belief that reputable executives must spend a good portion of their time with keen attention towards future opportunities, rather than yesterday or today’s snags, is exactly what the EVP did. Under the shepherd leadership approach, the leader can clearly look across the business milieu and identify the need to alter direction, pull the team together and make an impactful contribution to the outcome. Though all agreed, this point was filled with personal biases during the interviews as each CEO had a particular perspective based on social psychology influence and work experiences. Who in the “herd” is making an impact? Collins (1989) suggested the role of “catalytic mechanisms” as enablers to realizing the [performance] results of organizational goals [and objectives]. In a similar construct, mechanistic [organizational] systems are those that "operate like machines in that they consist of specialized parts that can be re-engineered into a highperformance system" (Hatch & Cunliffe, 2006, p.110). Typically, these organizations are centralized in nature and have a high degree of formalization and standardization relative to rules, procedures and strict behavioral norms. Over two-thirds of the interviewees shared this supposition. One comment was, “having protocols and consistency allows us to be nimbler and calculated at the same time.” Alternatively, organic systems are those that "need to adapt to their ever-changing circumstances" (Hatch & Cunliffe, 2006, p.110). This notion of adaptation leads to the necessity of an organization to have less specialization in terms of tasks and departments as well as being typified by having an organizational structure that is far less hierarchal as compared to the

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 133

mechanistic system. As seen earlier, over two-thirds of the CEOs also resonated with this statement, though not fully practiced. In shepherd leadership, it seemingly is a perfect setting for situational leadership methodology - an amalgam referred to as, mechanistic-organic. Relevant here is the opportunity for each team member within the organization to experience an “elevated level of empowerment” (Kantharia, 2012, p.7) by adding their knowledge, experiences and expertise to the greater good. A key point here is the emotional intelligence of the leader to create and promote these participation and contribution opportunities. Each of the selected traits provide the leader chances and in fact, an imperative or responsibility to “share the path”. Selecting the environment, building habits and providing a “call to action” to the team are seemingly inherent in establishing followership. The essence of principled shepherd leadership in most settings is to harness the power of the team members [followership] and to ascertain the richness of contributory potential. Strategically and thoughtfully assisting the team, and equally, the units of the team helping each other, is essential to collective high-performance of the organization. Rooke and Torbert (2005) developed seven types of “action logic”. They defined this as how the leaders interpret their environment and how they react to trials and [opportunities]. Of the seven types the one that closely resonates with the shepherd leader is strategist. All of the interviewees agreed with this idealism and in fact resoundingly supported. Let us look at this example - a new customer creates a demand for an innovative technology. The organization is not sure where to start – do we invent, adapt an existing product or do we establish a joint venture for swiftness to market? A [shepherd] leader should first look at the team, assess its strengths and challenges and then secondly, create cross-function working groups to drive enterprise-wide, collaborative performance. A dynamic here is the question of the leader’s ability to affect performance through developing resources, both internal and external (i.e., supplier partners) or leveraging them as earlier profiled. In 2019, GT Technologies, a powertrain precision products business recognized its automotive business was facing competitive and technology head winds. Underlying characteristics were collaboration, specific, measured, achievable, realizable and time-bound objectives (think of the acronym - SMART) and a willingness to thoughtfully challenge existing

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 134

protocols. The leadership scanned the situation and quickly set up SMART objectives for the company to diversify and have 15% of its business in the heavy-duty and agriculture market. The strategist-style leader constructed a vision enabling and orienting the technical team to develop new products that changed valvetrain efficiencies and low and behold, the company secured new customers and new revenues. An essential recognition that leaders must enact is the commitment to balancing today’s needs with tomorrow’s wants and desires. A keen understanding of today is responding to crisis or in a positive vein – securing new business, as well as sustaining the continuity and stability of the organization. Establishing prerequisites for acceleration and speed, while positioning the organization for a [possibly] different tomorrow is sine qua non. Tightly correlated is “relational transparency” and defined by Avolio and Gardner (2003) and Ilies, Morgenson, and Nahrgang (2005) subscribed to openness and transparency in which leaders share information about themselves in terms of personal values, weakness and limitations of their experiences and emotional intelligence. An essential fundamental here is the alignment of people. Kotter (1999) suggested this is defined as communicating direction and gaining alignment and commitment to the task at hand. Take the necessities of a recession and the need to ensure the team understands the bigger picture of the other end of the challenge. Invariably there will be barriers to the changes necessary, as all the CEOs agreed, and this is where and when the shepherd leader must drive for effectiveness and efficiency throughout the organization. As Brady and Woodward (2005) put forth, “True leadership can bring radically positive change…it can revitalize poorly performing organizations and under-achieving individuals” (p. 111). Looking at shepherd leadership, the leader can observe lackluster in the organization’s performance. Then taking measures to improve outcomes results may result in the cruel reality of a team member being separated from the organization resulting in the betterment of the whole – a unexpectedly, but conferred theme during the interviews. Shepherds [by definition], within the new American Standard Bible (2000) defines shepherd as, “a caretaker or tender of sheep and goats”. Understanding this is to be effective in shepherding, the leader must believe in himself/herself as providing a service, while having authority and influence over others. In fact, Michaelson & Michaelson (2010), offered the importance of leaders concentrating on their own strengths as a way to achieve superiority.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 135

Leadership is commonly thought of as a command and control situation and this was validated during the interviews. In this vein, the leader maintains control of the team and has ultimate authoritative role to command the decision-taking. The research shows social capital distinguishes top leaders from others with specific attention to mobilizing and influencing others. Discussion To better understand shepherd style leadership, we can also turn to servant leadership, more commonly known for decades in business circles. Appropriately, a compare and contrast of the two leadership styles is shown in Figure 3. [One quick reflection point: Seek to understand before you are understood]. It can be purported that both servant and shepherd leadership have values as their foundation and as such, the herd can be emotionally attached for mutual success (Russell, 2001). Additionally, Stone, Russell and Patterson (2003) purported, that there is a distinct and significant emphasis contrast between servant and transformational leadership approaches. Servant leaders are centric on themselves and transforming leaders are keen on organizational outcomes and team member inspiration. Along these focal points, shepherd leaders are right in between as they are keen on providing orientation and also know they need to be ever-present to best serve. One CEO mentioned, “I am here to support my team. I want to provide opportunities and encouragement and for them to listen, be engaged, invested and meet objectives.” It possibly can be reasoned that shepherds must begin as servants, since serving others is a first step recognition and importantly, an imperative. Shepherding begins with the leader’s self-efficacy, mindfulness and extends to abilities and skills to further an organization’s evolution. Based on captures during the interviews at least half of the CEO’s stated anticipation, observing and experiential were noted as key descriptors. In fact, ten of the fifteen CEOs agreed that leaders must take a look at their organizations and do a check on the culture and how would a shepherd approach improve performance. In the end, one CEO stated, “we must continually assess our organizations for opportunities to improve what we do and how we do it”. Let us now pivot to the descriptors of the shepherd characteristics as noted in Figure 4. Each characteristic that was identified throughout the research seemingly represents and are distinctive within shepherd leadership. These were discussed at length during the interviews. For

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 136

example, observing – the shepherd has the responsibility and the essential role to observe the team and be attentive to business environments. One CEO mentioned, “listening, being authentic and sharing past experiences is what I do best.” Closely affiliated is the importance of anticipation and how this characteristic defines how the shepherd leads by being a proactive, fact-based and a sound decision-taker through turbulent and prosperous times. Moving to examination of the qualities of shepherd leaders, there are eight identified in the Bible, John 10:1-18. MacDonald (2016) put forth these as such: 1) Boundaries 2) Example 3) Trustworthy 4) Provision 5) Sacrificial 6) Invested 7) Relational and 8) Visionary. I would straight off add to this extraordinary list and advocate for authenticity and communication – both which are vital to organizational growth. Alternatively, Maxwell (2003) and Barna (2002) would steadfastly purport, influence as a required quality. The ability of the [shepherd] leader to move others to be productive and aligned with the business imperatives manifests itself as a fundamental characteristic of leadership at all levels. An appropriate excerpt from a Theodore Roosevelt 1913 biography: “We need leaders of inspired idealism, leaders to whom are granted great visions, who dream greatly and strive to make their dreams come true; who can kindle the people with the fire from their burning souls – that is what it means to lead.” It can be concluded shepherd leadership is centered on the ability of the leader to use a disciplined process, with a hint of contingency planning, to influence, and empathetically orient others. As put forth by Lowney (2006), “greater love than fear” (p.37) as it pertains to creating an environment steeped in positivity and encouragement. Brown (2019) suggested we as organizations require braver leaders and also there is a rising requisite for companies to have “more courageous cultures”. In alignment with Fielder’s seminal Contingency Theory Model, leadership control and effectiveness…is “contingent upon the interaction of the leader’s orientation and the favorableness of the group [herd, flock] task situation” (Rice & Chemers, 1973, p. 281). Therefore, under this leadership model, the leader must enable the team to take calculated risk, develop contingencies and make an impact every day. Andersen (2006) offered a supporting supposition, “Human [bravery] behavior reflects continuous interaction of many forces both in the person and in the environment or situation” (p.1086).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 137

Bravery does not solely reside in the leader – it must be throughout the organization. Based on organizational theory research and discovered during CEO interviews, the relationship among the constituents, including the leadership, is fundamental to sustaining a healthy, vibrant and growing business. One CEO supposed, “an empathetic and authentic are clearly descriptors that resonate with shepherd style”. The environment in which the organization resides creates the opportunity to deploy leadership-learner approaches with intention and full consideration of necessary contingency plans to ensure achievement. According to Koehn (2003), one of the utmost challenges in leadership is the need to create strong followership and for the leader, as such the shepherd leader “to play to your stronger suit… and also play to others’ stronger suit” (p.1). In this leader approach there exists an assumption of bestowed power – an endowment. This is created by the reliance and importantly, the alliance created between the shepherd and the organization. In a sense, the shepherd must teach and train the organization to manifest distinct competencies. Hatch and Cunliffe (2006) purported in the modern theory, a focus on increasing efficacy, productivity, and other performance measures. Each participant develops contingencies and adjustments as they learn, and work together to achieve objectives – customer delight, operational excellence and marketplace presence, to name a few resulting in organizations must continually learn to adapt to environmental influences in order to have long-term sustainability. Concluding Remarks Shepherd leaders must lead with intent and are endowed to do so. Kouzes and Posner (2017) suggested in their discoveries that people are able to perform well and reach extraordinary heights by freeing up the leader in us all - this surely resonates with many of us. In specific, shepherd leaders act as the primary “pacesetters” while they work to instill and protect organizational norms and decorum. Organizations must become and support the belief of being a “learning organization” and in fact being able to diagnose issues as they arise. Galbraith and Lawler (1993) suggested that organizations essentially adapt learning as a first and foremost action. The concept of organizational life-cycle management is critical here, as organizations will ebb and flow with changing customer demands, marketplace relevancy and financial pressures. The recognition by the shepherd leader to adjust, change direction [re

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 138

orientation] and insist on synchronicity throughout the team is paramount. Brown (2019) also alleged the importance of lifelong learning and getting it correct – learning to ask thoughtprovoking questions, being curious and ensure recognition of organizational contributors. In today’s business settings, it is imperative to create and innovate all the business practices - the way we market and sell, the manner in which we monitor our fiscal metrics and also in how we foster individual growth for the betterment of the individual and the organization. Creating a shepherd leader-based ethos by which the organization perseveres is sin qua non to how a shepherd style is evoked and justified. As Kotter (1999) distinguished a difference between leading and managing, the latter is more about treatment of change in the relationship of the actors within the situational context. Leading is about direction and vision alignment. In the principle of reciprocation, the team members perform to greater levels as the shepherd leader, acting in an authentic consultancy manner, provides encouragement and praise. The ethos of a shepherd led organization is rooted in transparency, adaptability, flexibility, and a powerful sense of belonging. Brady and Woodward (2005) purported, “Leadership can also be recognized by the results it generates” (p.20). Setting clear and definable expectations is essential and can be viewed [metaphorically] from the “back of the pack” in an effective and efficient manner – seeing the big picture unfolding. Hamel and Prahalad (1994), stated, “Seeing the future first requires not only a wide-angle lens, it requires a multiplicity of lenses” (p.79). This theory closely aligns with the basis of shepherd leadership at its core and was discovered during the interviews. Objectives include providing the team members the occasion to trial and error different ideas, allow and empower them the opportunity to succeed and yes, to fail. One CEO stated, “we don’t fail until we stop trying”. Shepherds should assist the flock in viewing through interchangeable lenses (Kantharia, 2012), in order to mitigate biases, broaden scenario analyses and fine tune decision-taking processes. Avolio and Gardner (2003) suggested within the auspices of authentic leadership is balanced processing and relational transparency, both of which can be found intrinsically in shepherd leadership. Creating highly energized team member behavior under the shepherd leadership model is about 1) orienting: bringing the team close, 2) harnessing: empower and inspire the team, and 3) adapting: clear and articulate strategic explanations. A term put forth by Karl Wieck, the

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 139

noteworthy psychologist is “sensemaking”. It is incumbent upon the shepherd leader to strategically scan and reflect on the situational context and then take decisions including, clearing the field of the nonessentials, as the leader moves to harness the collective intellect of the organization. Shepherd leaders are often not clearly seen as distinctive from the organization. However, these action-oriented, adaptative and empathetic leaders provide cohesiveness, clarity of orientation [direction], and reassurance. Have patience – but move swiftly. Author Biography Philip L. Fioravante, Ph.D. is a well-rounded business executive and Professor of Marketing and Management. Dr. Fioravante sits on several corporate boards for both private and public companies. He also is a frequent guest speaker and participant on industry and academic panels. In addition, he has published several peer reviewed articles in the areas of corporate philanthropy, the value proposition of strategic philanthropy, shepherd leadership and dark side leadership and published a book on Philanthropy and its Role in an Organization’s Performance. Dr. Fioravante has a B.S. in Applied Engineering Sciences – Manufacturing Engineering from Michigan State University, MBA – International Business from Wayne State University (Detroit), an Advanced Executive Program Certificate – Strategy & Technology from MIT and his Ph.D. in Organizational Management & Strategy from the Business and Technology College - Capella University (Minneapolis). He also earned an Executive Scholar Certification – Growth & Innovation at Northwestern University – Kellogg School of Management.

References Andersen, J. (2006). Leadership, personality and effectiveness. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 35(6), 1078-1091. Avolio, B., & Gardner, W. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 140

Barna, G. (2002). A fish out of water: 9 strategies to maximize your God-given leadership potential. Integrity Publishers. Bennis, W. (1989). On becoming a leader. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Bennis, W. & Thomas, R. (2002, Sept). Crucibles of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 6269. Harvard Business Review Press. Brady, C. & Woodward, O. (2005). Launching a leadership revolution. Business Press. Brown, B. (2019, April 8). It’s not fear that gets in the way of daring leadership. It’s our armor. https://lionkedin.com/pulse/why-vulnerability-essential-becoming-great -leader Cialdini, R. (2001). Harnessing the science of persuasion. Harvard Business Review, 79(9), 7279. Collins, J. (1989, July-Aug). Turning goals into results: The power of catalytic mechanisms. Harvard Business Review. Collins, J. (2001). Level 5 leadership: The triumph of humility and fierce resolve. Harvard Business Review, 71-82. Harvard Business Review Press. Cunliffe, A. & Hatch, M. (2006). Organization theory (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. Drucker, P. (2004, June). What makes an effective executive. Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Review Press. Fischer, T., Dietz, J. & Antonakis, J. (2017). Leadership process models: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1726-1753. Galbraith, J. & Lawler, E. (1993). Organizing for the future: The new logic for managing complex organizations. Jossey-Bass.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 141

Goffee, R., & Jones, G. (2002, Sept/Oct). Why should anyone be led by you?: What it takes to be an authentic leader. Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Review Press. Goleman, D. (1998). What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Review Press. Hamel, G. & Prahalad, C.K. (1994). Competing for the future. Harvard Business School Press. Hatch, M. & Cunliffe, A. (2006). Organization theory: Modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. Heifretz, R. & Laurie, D. (2001, Dec). The work of leadership. Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Review Press, p. 131-140. Hoch, J., Bommer, W., Dulehon, J., & Wu, D. (2018). Do ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above and beyond transformational leadership? A MetaAnalysis. Journal of Management, 44(2), 501-529. Ilies, R., Morgenson, F., & Nahrgang, J. (2005). Authentic leadership and eudaemonic wellbeing: Understanding leader-follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly,16, 373394. Kantharia, B. (2012, January). Servant leadership: An imperative leadership style for leader managers. SSRN Electronic Journal,1-14. Keith, A. (2017, March 7). Effective leader essay. Keller, S. & Meaney, K. (2017). Leading organizations: Ten timeless truths. Bloomsbury Publishing, Plc. Koehn, N. (2003, August). Shackleton: An entrepreneur of survival. Harvard Business School. Working Knowledge.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 142

Kotter, J. (2001, December). What leaders really do. Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Review Press. Kouzes, J.M. & Posner, B.Z. (2017). The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations (6th ed.). John Wiley & Sons. Lowney, C. (2003). Heroic leadership. Loyola Press. MacDonald, J. (2016, December 10). 8 qualities of shepherd-leaders. https: www.biblicalleadershipcom Mandela, N. (1994). Long walk to freedom. Little Brown & Co. Maxwell, J. (1998). The 21 irrefutable laws of leadership. Follow them and people will follow you. Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 143

Michaelson, G.A. & Michaelson, S. (2010). Sun Tzu; The art of war for managers (2nd ed.). Adams Media. Rice, R. & Chemers, M. (1973). Predicting the emergence of leaders using Fielder’s contingency model of leadership effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 281-287. Rooke, D. & Torbert, W. (2005, April). Seven transformations of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 82-97. Harvard Business Review Press. Roosevelt, T. (1913). An autobiography. Da Capo Press. Russell, R. (2001). The role of values in servant leadership. Leadership & Organization Development, 22(2), 76-84. Saenz, H. & O’Keeffe, D. (2002). Covid-19: Protect, recover and retool. Bain and Company, Inc. Savage, A. & Sales, M. (2008). The anticipatory leader: Futurist, strategist and integrator. Strategy and Leadership, 36(6), 28-35. Shamir, B. (2011). Leadership takes time: Some implications of (not) taking time seriously in leadership research. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 307-315. Stone, A., Russell, R., & Patterson, K. (2003). Transformational versus servant leadership: A difference in leader focus. Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 25, 349-364. Ward, W. (1970). Fountains of faith. Droke House. Wieand, P. (2002). Drucker’s challenge: Communication and the emotional glass ceiling. Ivey Business Journal, 66(5), 32-37.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 144

Figure 1 Leadership Inputs Model

Figure 2 Servant

–

Transformational

–

Shepherd

–

Leadership

Authenticity Interrelationship

Source: pfioravante 2020

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Figure 3 Servant and Shepherd - Compare and Contrast

Volume 11 Page 145

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Figure 4 Characteristics and Associated Descriptors of Shepherd Leaders

Volume 11 Page 146

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 147

MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION GUIDE

GENERAL FORMATTING            

Maximum length: 10 pages American Psychological Association (APA) Sixth Edition Publication Guidelines Microsoft-Word or compatible format (Do not send your manuscript as a PDF or it will be declined) Letter-size (8.5 x 11 inches) format 1.50 spaced text Times New Roman, 12-point font One-inch margins Two spaces following end punctuation Left justification Single column Portrait orientation First-person

MANUSCRIPT ORDER (Please Note: Do not add a running head or page numbers.)

Cover Page: (This page will be removed prior to peer review.)  Manuscript Title o The first letter of each major word should be capitalized. o The title should be in font size 20 and bold.  Author(s) Name o First Name, Middle initial(s), and Last name (omit titles and degrees) o The names should be font size 12. No bold  Institutional Affiliation o Education affiliation – if no institutional affiliation, list city and state of author’s residence o This educational affiliation should be on the line directly under the author’s name. o If there are multiple authors, please place a space between them each set of information (name and affiliation).  Author Biography o If there are multiple authors, please label this section Author Biographies

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 148

o Please be sure to indent the paragraph before the biography begins. If there are multiple authors, please begin a new paragraph for each author. Manuscript: (From this point forward, please be sure your manuscript is FREE of any identifying information.) 



Abstract o The abstract (150-word maximum) should effectively summarize your completed research and findings. o The word “abstract” should be bold. Keywords o This line should be indented. The word “Keywords” should be italicized and followed by a colon and two spaces. o Following the two spaces, list 3 or 4 keywords or key phrases that you would use if you were searching for your article online. o Only the first key word should be capitalized. The actual keywords are not italicized. Body of Paper (sections) ALL of the following sections MUST be present or your manuscript WILL be rejected. o Introduction o Literature Review o Methodology o Results/Findings o Discussion References –this heading is NOT bolded within the manuscript o Manuscripts should be thoroughly cited and referenced using valid sources. o References should be arranged alphabetically and strictly follow American Psychological Association (APA) sixth edition formatting rules. o Only references cited in the manuscript are to be included. Tables and Figures o If tables and figures are deemed necessary for inclusion, they should be properly placed at the end of the text following the reference section. o All tables and figures should be numbered sequentially using Arabic numerals, titled, acknowledged, and cited according to APA guidelines. o If graphs or tables are too wide for portrait orientation, they must be resized or reoriented to be included. Appendices (if applicable) o Must be labeled alphabetically as they appear in the manuscript. o Title centered at the top.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 149

WHY READ OUR JOURNALS? Continuing Education: Each of the CSI's peer-reviewed journals focuses on contemporary issues, scholarly research, discovery, and evidence-based practices that will elevate readers' professional development. Germane Reference: The CSI's journals are a vital resource for students, practitioners, and professionals in the fields of education, business, and behavioral sciences interested in relevant, leading-edge, academic research. Diversity: The CSI’s peer-reviewed journals highlight a variety of study designs, scientific approaches, experimental strategies, methodologies, and analytical processes representing diverse philosophical frameworks and global perspectives Broad Applicability: The CSI's journals provide research in the fields of education, business and behavioral sciences specialties and dozens of related sub-specialties. Academic Advantage: The CSI's academically and scientifically meritorious journal content significantly benefits faculty and students. Scholarship: Subscribing to the CSI's journals provides a forum for and promotes faculty research, writing, and manuscript submission. Choice of Format: Institutions can choose to subscribe to our journals in digital or print format.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Volume 11 Page 150

Change is Happening at Hyper Speed: Is Management Education Keeping Up? Mary L. Tucker, Ohio University Andrew Pueschel, Ohio University Ikenna Uzuegbunam, Ohio University Kimberly Jordan, Ohio University Shawnee Meek, Ohio University Creating Significant Cross-Functional Leadership Development Opportunities: An “Ecological” Approach Andrew Pueschel, Ohio University David Bayless, Ohio University Katherine Hartman, Ohio University From Academia to Industry: C-Suite Perspectives on Neurodiversity in the Workplace Lisa J. Knowles, St. Thomas University Jason K. Styles, University of The Bahamas The Gender Effect on Millennials’ Perception of Corporate Social Irresponsibility and Consumer Behavior Marianne Marar Yacobian, Menlo College Frances Turner, Wilkes University Sidhu School of Business Janis K. Zaima, Menlo College Leader’s Personal Ethics Dilemma and Conflict with Organizational Ethics Farai Katsande, Regent University

Location, Location, Location? The Impact of Site Selection on Global Learning and Student Satisfaction in Short-Term Study Abroad Colin B. Gabler, Ohio University Andy Goodnite, Ohio University Andrew Pueschel, Ohio University William A. Young II, Ohio University

The Shepherd Leader: Orienting, Harnessing, and Adapting the Collective Intelligence of the Team Philip L. Fioravante, Walsh College

Published by: Center for Scholastic Inquiry, LLC 4857 Hwy 67, Suite #2 Granite Falls, MN 56241 855‐855‐8764

ISSN: 2330-6807 (online) ISSN: 2330-6815 (print)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Business

Articles inside

The Shepherd Leader: Orienting, Harnessing, and Adapting the Collective Intelligence of the Team Philip L. Fioravante, Walsh College

Manuscript Submission Guide

Why Read Our Journals

Leader’s Personal Ethics Dilemma and Conflict with Organizational Ethics Farai Katsande, Regent University

Creating Significant Cross-Functional Leadership Development Opportunities: An “Ecological” Approach Andrew Pueschel, Ohio University David Bayless, Ohio University Katherine Hartman, Ohio University

The Gender Effect on Millennials’ Perception of Corporate Social Irresponsibility and Consumer Behavior Marianne Marar Yacobian, Menlo College Frances Turner, Wilkes University Sidhu School of Business Janis K. Zaima, Menlo College

From Academia to Industry: C-Suite Perspectives on Neurodiversity in the Workplace Lisa J. Knowles, St. Thomas University Jason K. Styles, University of The Bahamas

TABLE OF CONTENTS Publication Agreement and Assurance of Integrity Ethical Standards in Publishing Disclaimer of Liability