Business Ethics and Intellectual Capital

Discuss about the Business Ethics and Intellectual Capital.

Introduction

Business ethics are the set of ethical principles and standard norms, which guide an organization towards right direction (Chell et al. 2016). The set of ethical principles create a sense of right or wrong among the organizational stakeholders, which guides them to perform as per the organizational code of conduct. This study will analyze the business ethics of Google as per the 10-pages memo written by one of the software engineer of the organization. The memo is mainly focused on gender discrimination at the workplace of Google.

The study will identify the stakeholders in the memo and reveal their interest in the case study. The study will clearly indentify the ethical issue of Google as per the memo written by the software engineer. Apart from that, the study will also discuss about the major environmental factors, which impacts or are impacted by the ethical issue of Google. Furthermore, the study will link various relevant theories, concepts and practices on ethics and corporate social responsibility with the ethical issue of Google. Furthermore, the study will also suggest some suitable recommendations to Google for overcoming the ethical issues.

Stakeholders in an ethical dilemma are defined as the persons, who are affected by the unethical decision (Michaelson et al. 2014). In case of Google, the memo written by an unnamed engineer regarding the gender differences at the workplace has sparked a controversy within and outside of the organization. As per the memo, Google has been claimed with under-representation of the women in the tech and leadership role. In this case study, the prime stakeholders identified as the management, employees, media and employees.

According to Su (2014), the interest of management in such unethical decision is to keep the women away from the leadership role because of their biological difference from the male employees. The management of Google is also in the midst of a Department of Labor investigation, which is checking that whether or not the organization is paying less to the women employees than the male employees are. Moreover, Giacalone and Promislo (2013) stated that the management intension over here is to minimize the overall cost of the organization by paying less to the women employees. Furthermore, the intension of management behind such discrimination is to utilizing the preferences of male employees in the coding areas and preferences of women employees in social and artistic areas. In the case study, the interest of the management is also heighted as protecting the company reputation in the market by firing the engineer, who has written the memo.

Women employees are also important stakeholders in this ethical dilemma of Google. As per Fernando and Moore (2015), the usual interest of women employees in this organization is to get fair and equal treatment in every aspect of their job role. They actually expect an environment, which is free from any political bias and discriminatory views regarding gender gaps. However, in case of the ethical dilemma of Google, the women employees are being undervalued in the technological and leadership role. Furthermore, the memo of the engineer has also highlighted the sexual harassment of the women employees at the workplace. Therefore, the interest of the women employees is actually being harmed by this unethical gender discrimination of Google. On the other hand, Floyd et al. (2013) opined that despite of the political bias in Google; some employees have supported the memo of written by the engineer. In this context, the interest of the employees has been found to protect the interest of the women employees to get equal value and treatment at their workplace.

Media is also an important stakeholder in the case study regarding the ethical dilemma of Google. The interest of Media in this case study is to highlight the unethical employment practice of Google to the public. Beets, Lewis and Brower (2016) opined that the interest of media in Google’s gender discrimination case is to make the people aware of its unethical employment practices. On the other hand, Kaptein (2017) stated the interest of the engineer, who has written the memo, is to express the concern for the women employees. Moreover, the interest of the engineer is to explore and leak out the unethical gender discrimination of Google so that the women employees can get their right value.

The 10-page memo written by the software engineer of Google has highlighted the ethical issues of the organization in terms of gender gaps at the workplace. According to BBC News (2017), Google has been alleged in the memo that it discriminates among the gender of the employees. Moreover, the organization underestimates the women employees in technological and leadership roles. Moreover, the organization discriminates among the males and female employees based on their preferences and abilities because of their biological causes. In this way, the organization is actually violating the anti-discrimination laws, which is causing ethical breach. On the other hand, Booth and Hern (2017) opined that Google also under the investigation of Department of Labor investigation, which is investigating over gender pay gaps the organization. Moreover, it has been claimed in the memo that the Google actually discriminates among the male and female employees by paying male employees quite more that the female employees. It is obviously sign of unethical employment practice in the organization.

As per the Equal Employment Opportunity Act, both male and female employees of an organization should be treated equally in regards to their payment, rewards, leadership position and others. However, Eandt.theiet.org (2017) opined that male employees have blocked 69% of the workforces and 80% of the technological and leadership roles of Google. It is clearly indicating that there is an obvious under-representation of female employees in the tech and leadership role of Google. Furthermore, the organization has also been alleged with underpaying the female employees. Therefore, it can be said that Google is obviously practicing unethical employment practices at the workplace. On the other hand, Phys.org (2017) opined that the memo of the software engineer has also sparked the inflamed tension over the sexual harassment of the female employees at the workplace of Google. Moreover, many of the female employees have also supported the memo, which has revealed their experience of sexual harassment at their workplace. Therefore, such practice at the workplace is actually against the organizational code of conduct. Therefore, this practice has created ethical breaches in the organization.

Flexible and effective organizational culture ensures free and open workplace condition, which is free from any political bias. Moreover, the employees should have the right to raise their voice against the issues faced by them at their workplace. However, in case of the Google, the employees are not provided with adequate right towards raising their voice against the issues. Stevens (2017) pointed out that the memo of software engineer has demonstrated a politically biased and left-leaning workplace culture. In such workplace culture of Google, the employees are always frightened about losing their jobs after raising any concern against the management. In this way, Google is unethically binding the employees from their raising their concerns. Moreover, there is lack of transparency among the management, while they deal with the employees.

No organization has the right to fire an employee without having ant proper reason. Raising any genuine concern against company’s unethical employment cannot be any proper reason for firing an employee. However, in case of Google case study, the organization has fired the software engineer, who has raised the unethical gender differences at the workplace. As an employee, the engineer had the right to raise the genuine concern of the employees faced by them at their workplace. However, the organization has unethically claimed against the engineer by misinterpreting his memo. Furthermore, the organization has even fired some other employees, who have supported the memo of the engineer. Such employment practice is obviously an ethical breach on ground of code of conduct.

The environmental factors related to an ethical issue in an organizational workplace are like organizational policies, principles, code of conduct, managerial behavior, employee behavior and others, which either impacts or are impacted by the ethical dilemma. In case of Google, the politically biased workplace environment makes the employee frightened about raising any of their concern to the management. Such biased workplace culture provided the scope to the management towards practicing unethical gender discrimination at the workplace. On the other hand, Wang and Calvano (2015) opined that the diversity policy of Google is actually ineffective, which does not ensure equal employment opportunity to both male and female employees. Moreover, ineffective diversity policy actually underestimates the female employees in the role of tech and leadership role. Furthermore, Wu et al. (2015) opined that the unethical behavior of the senior employees has also influenced the ethical issue of the Google. Moreover, the female employees have alleged that they are often sexually harassed by their seniors at their workplace. Apart from that, the workplace culture of the Google has also contributed in the ethical issue occurred at the workplace. Moreover, lack of transparency at the workplace always keeps the women employees away from important and significant roles of the organization. Therefore, such factors has wide impact on the ethical issue occurred at Google workplace.

Schwartz (2013) pointed out that that the work environment for the female employees is highly impacted by the ethical issues at Google. In such work environment, the female employees are being underestimated and undervalued, as they are not getting tech or leadership role at the workplace. On the other hand, Shin et al. (2015) opined that ethical issue in terms of gender gap has also influenced the code of conduct of the Google. Moreover, the ethical issue has affected the organizational code of conduct, where the seniors at their workplace are sexually harassing the female employees. Furthermore, the ethical issue of Google has also affected its work environment, where the work environment has become politically biased. In such work environment, the employees are not much allowed to raise their voice against any unethical employment practice at the workplace. Furthermore, the ethical issue has also fostered conflicting relation among the male and female employees in terms of getting the tech and leadership roles.

Utilitarianism ethical theory (Teleological theory) defines that the locus of right or wrong is completely dependent upon the consequences of a particular action. According to Kahane et al. (2015), Utilitarianism ethical theory suggests that the best and ethical action maximizes the utility. Utility is defined as the difference between the total amounts of pleasures minus the total amount of sufferings faced by the people through an action. Moreover, an ethical action spreads maximum amount of pleasure by minimizing the level of pain among the people. However, in case of Google, the organization has been alleged with having discrimination among the male and female employees. Moreover, Phys.org (2017) stated that Google is undervaluing the female employees in tech and leadership role. The organization is also underpaying the female employees in comparison with their male counterparts. On the other hand, the female employees are often being sexually harassed at their workplace by their seniors. In this way, the employment practice of Google is actually increasing the suffering of the female employees rather than increasing their pleasures. Therefore, the employment practice of Google is said to be unethical as per Utilitarianism ethical theory.

Sigurjonsson et al. (2015) pointed out that Utilitarianism ethical theory indicates an ethical action based on its ability towards spreading happiness among the people. Moreover, Utilitarianism ethical theory counts everyone’s happiness equally. It does not discriminate among the people and foster equal happiness among the people. However, Michaelson et al. (2014) opined the workplace of Google seems to have high level of gender discrimination among the male and female employees. Moreover, the organization gives more priority to the male employees over the female employees in getting the tech and leadership roles. Furthermore, the gender pay discrimination has also led to unequal distribution of happiness among the male and female employees. Therefore, such employment practice of Google is definitely an unethical practice.

Virtue theory of ethics always emphasizes on the virtues of mind and character before assessing the ethical perspective of an action. According to Donaldson (2015), Virtual theory emphasizes on the individual’s character as the key element of ethical thinking rather than the consequence of an action. As per this theory, the honest mind of a decision maker always leads to ethical action despite of its consequences. Moreover, the generous and honest tendency of decision maker leads to ethical action. In case of Google, there is a dishonest mind of the managers, which has created discrimination among the male and female employees. The managers have also created a gender pay gap by pay less to the female employees as compared to their male counterparts. Furthermore, De Cremer and Vandekerckhove (2017) opined that the managers Google have brought such gender pay gaps with a wrong intension to reduce overall business cost.

Zheng, Luo and Wang (2014) pointed out that the moral values of a decision maker always foster happiness among the people through their moral decision-making. Moreover, such theory suggests that instead of sticking to rules, the decision maker should develop good character traits like generosity and kindness. However, in case of Google, the managers of the organization do not adhere much to the moral values before making decisions about the promotion of female employees.  Moreover, Busse (2014) opined that with dishonest mind, the managers of Google give priority to the male employees over the female employee in regards to getting tech and leadership roles. Apart from that, the managers never show generosity and kindness for the employees and even underpay them with a dishonest mind of saving organizational cost. Moreover, such immoral and dishonest decision of the managers actually leads to unhappiness of the female employees. In this way, such employment practice of Google actually breaches the ethical principle of Virtue theory of Ethics.

Kantian ethical theory (deontological theory) is based on the view that intrinsically good thing is actually good will. As per this theory, an action can be good only if its maxim is the duty to the moral law. Moreover, the moral law is the categorical imperatives, which can be applied to all kind of people regardless of their interest and desires. Moreover, the decision makers cannot make any decision based on fulfillment of their own interest. They have to make decision based on the moral laws, which is based on humanity and well-being of others. However, Kumar (2017) opined that the managers of Google have not adhered to the moral maxim or principle in taking decisions about the promotion of the female employees. Moreover, having the same talent and skills like the male counterparts, the female employees are still not getting tech and leadership roles. It is actually undervaluing the female employees at their workplace. In this way, the managers of Google are actually practicing against the moral duty of the ethical theory.

On the other hand, Bruin (2016) opined that Kant theory of ethics claims against the action, which is performed with an intension of self-fulfillment. The ethical action should be some moral motivation behind it, which would ensure happiness and wellbeing of others. However, in case of Google, the managers of Google are underpaying the female employees as compared to their male counterparts. In this way, the managers are trying to save the overall organizational cost. Moreover, the intension of the managers is practicing such employment practice with an intension of self-fulfillment through saving overall organizational cost. In this way, they are actually avoiding their moral duty, which is being the reason of unhappiness for the female employees. Therefore, it can be said that Google is breaching the ethical principle of Kant theory.

While considering Carroll’s CSR model, it has four elements corporate social responsibilities, which characterizes the nature of business and established its image in the society. As per this CSR model, an organization has to incorporate four corporate and social responsibilities like economic responsibility, legal responsibility, ethical responsibility and philanthropic responsibility. According to Provis (2017), in economic responsibility, an organization must be financially sound enough and profitable. Such financially sound organizations can ensure that they can provide adequate return o investment to the shareholders. Therefore, fulfillment of such responsibility actually establishes trust with the shareholders. Likewise, Google is financially sound enough and provide adequate return on investment to the shareholders.  On the other hand, Vogel (2014) opined that an organization adheres to minimum rules of the laws and regulations. Moreover, organizations are expected to comply with related laws and regulations. However, in case of Google, the organization has not adhered to Equal Employment Laws. The organization undervalues the female employees in the tech and leadership roles. Furthermore, the organization has also breaches the laws by underpaying the female employees as compared to those of their male counterparts.

According to Demirtas and Akdogan (2015), ethical responsibilities ensure that organizations conduct their affair in fair and objective fashion. Moreover, an organization should adhere to standard rules, practices and norms for ensuring fair treatment of the stakeholders. However, as per the memo written by the software engineer of Google, the organization had failed to act as a good corporate citizen. Moreover, the organization has discriminated among the male and female employees by underestimating the female employees in the tech and leadership roles. Furthermore, the organization is also doing unfair to the female employees by underpaying the female employees. Apart from that, the organization is also breaching the ethical ground by undervaluing the organizational code of conduct, where their seniors are often sexually harassing the female employees.

Various philosophers can support the arguments over the business ethics. According to Wittmer and O’Brien (2014), business ethics is applied to all aspects of business conducts and even it is related to individual conduct of the organizational members in the workplace. Moreover, business ethics always care for the wellbeing of organizational stakeholders. However, the memo of written by the software engineer of Google has revealed unfair treatment of the organization with the female employees. The organization has discriminated among the male and female employees by undervaluing the female employees in the tech and leadership role. Therefore, it is evident that Google has breached the business ethics discriminating among employees. On the other hand, Biedenweg, Monroe and Oxarart (2013) opined that business ethics guide an organization towards right direction for conducting the business. It facilitates an organization to differentiate between right and wrong conducts. However, Diallo and Lambey-Checchin (2017) opined that Google has failed to differentiate between the right and wrong conduct. Moreover, the senior managers of Google have breached the business ethics by mistreating with the female employees in the workplace.

Viviers, Kru?ger and Venter (2014) pointed out that business ethics set the core values and standards of an organization, which helps it to become a good corporate citizen. Such ethics are drawn up in consultation with government, local communities, employees and other stakeholders. However, in case of Google, it can be found that the organization is not conducting its employment practice as per the core value and standards of business ethics. Moreover, the organization is breaching the ethical principles by discriminating among the employees as per their gender.

Conclusion

While concluding the study, it can be said that the memo written by the software engineer of Google has sparked controversy internally as well as among media. In this memo, the key stakeholders are like management, employees, software engineer himself and media. Google is facing a major controversial ethical issue of gender discrimination. The memo has revealed that Google undervalues the female employees in the tech and leadership roles. Furthermore, the organization has also been alleged with the allegation that it provides less payment to female employees as compared to those of their male counterparts. Furthermore, some of female employees have claimed that their seniors at their workplace have sexually harassed them. While assessing the ethical issues of Google through Utilitarianism ethic theory, it can be said that the employment practice of the organization has actually increased the sufferings of the female employees rather than increasing their happiness. The ethical issue can ruin the corporate image of Google in market. Therefore, the organization should immediately initiate equal employment opportunity and adhere to strict code of conduct for maintaining ethics at their workplace.

From the analysis of ethical issue at Google, it has been found that the main ethical issue of the organization is gender discrimination. Moreover, the organization has been alleged with under-representation of female employees in the tech and leadership roles. Furthermore, the memo written by the software engineer of Google can destroy its corporate image in the market, which has revealed the unethical employment gender discrimination at the workplace. Therefore, Google should immediately adhere to Equal Employment Act. Moreover, as per the Equal Employment Act, the organization should provide equal pay to the female employees as compared to those of their male counterparts. It will ultimately protect the corporate image of the organization in the market.

Google can also lose their corporate image by undervaluing the female employees in the tech and leadership roles. Therefore, Google should immediately incorporate fair employment practice for their workplace. Moreover, the organization should provide equal opportunity to both male and female employees in getting the tech and leadership roles. Moreover, the organization should assign the tech and leadership roles to the employees based on their talents and skills and not based on their gender. It can protect the corporate image of the organization and safeguard the interest of the female employees.

Google can face both legal and ethical complication due to breach of organizational code of conduct at the workplace. Moreover, the memo written by the software engineer has revealed that some female employees have been sexually harassed at their workplace by their seniors. Such unethical behavior of the senior employees can destroy the corporate image of the organization, which can even severely hamper the business of the organization. Therefore, Google should strictly adhere to the organizational code of conduct. Moreover, the organization should ensure safe workplace environment at their workplace. Furthermore, there should be strict punishment policy for the employees, who will breach the ethical code of conduct at the workplace. It will protect the value of female employees at the workplace and protect corporate image.

The memo of the software engineer has also revealed that Google has politically biased work environment. In such politically biased work environment, the employees are not much allowed to raise their voice against any unethical practice at the workplace. It can actually foster conflicting views among the employees, which can de-motivate them. In such situation, Google should foster transparent and diplomatic work environment at the workplace. In such situation, the employees will be allowed to raise their voice freely against any unethical business practice. It will ensure transparency at the workplace, which will also ensure higher value of the employees at their workplace.

The memo of the software engineer of Google has sparked controversy after being viral internally and leaked out to the media. Moreover, the unethical discrimination among the male and female employees has created different conflicting views among the employees. It can drive the outrage among the employees, which can even lead to legal complication after the employees leak out the unethical employment practice. In such situation, Google should be highly concerned about the conflicting views of the employees and try to fix the ethical issues by proving equal employment practices. It will ensure fair treatment of the female employees at the workplace.

Reflection on Learning Experience

After reading the case study, I came to understand that no matter whether it is a top-rated organization or not, gender discrimination is prevalent at any workplace. Privilege to women is not given at the top level and it is a widely accepted perception among management that women are not fit for leadership or any technical responsibilities. Therefore, such perception violates ethical principles as perpetual discrimination hampers employee motivation and performance outflow. While analyzing the case of Google, it is prominent enough that ethical principles are violated as women are not given technological and leadership responsibilities, they are under-represented and sexually harassed by senior employees. It has been identified that politically biased workplace culture violates ethical principles. While comparing with the teleological theory, I experienced that biasness occurs only when perception is created based on personal view rather than any particular action. This has been the same in Google where gender discrimination is prevalent irrespective of women performance.

While analyzing the Virtue theory of ethics, I understood that honest mindset determines an individual characteristic to be ethical while taking any decision. However, I experienced that when the managers of an organization are biased and dishonest, it creates pain among those who are discriminated. This has been quite common in Google workplace culture where payment related discrimination is quite prominent. After analyzing the deontological theory, I came across that managers must not decide based on their personal interest fulfillment. However, the activities of Google managers contradict with deontological theory. Therefore, overall, I experienced that gender discrimination is mostly created by top executives and those are supported by biased managers. Being an intangible asset, ethics is supposed to enhance employee motivation, satisfaction and transparency. However, the violation destroys workplace culture. I understood that ethics is one of the most important factors that help in boosting employee performance as it justifies an individual based on characteristic, performance and action.

As per me, if the managers of international organization support gender discrimination then morally sound individuals must act as the whistleblowers so eradicate the negative outcome. It might be that politically strong unions hinder the gender discrimination issue but morally driven individuals need to fight for justice. I also feel that such violation of ethics and principles does breach the code of conduct and therefore drafted document might act as the proof for supporting the gender discrimination concern. The higher-level management must be approached for getting proper justification. According to my thoughts, Google is surely losing some potential and skilled workforce who might have been quite better than those of the male counterparts might. I feel that perception is created by historically evident facts but workplace scenario has changed enough in the last decade. Therefore, if women are given better opportunity for supporting decision makers and technological aspects their skill will be sheer justified. Morally driven workplace culture will create more bonding among mates and peers that will absolutely enhance optimal performance outcome. Shared ideas and knowledge along with transparent communication will ensure organizational sustainability.

Reference List

BBC News. 2017. Anti-diversity memo causes row at Google. [online] Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-40845288 [Accessed 22 Oct. 2017].

Beets, S.D., Lewis, B.R. and Brower, H.H., 2016. The quality of business ethics journals: An assessment based on application. Business & Society, 55(2), pp.188-213.

Biedenweg, K., Monroe, M.C. and Oxarart, A., 2013. The importance of teaching ethics of sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 14(1), pp.6-14.

Booth, R. and Hern, A. 2017. Google employee fired over diversity row considers legal action. [online] the Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/08/google-employee-fired-diversity-row-considers-legal-action-james-damore [Accessed 22 Oct. 2017].

Busse, R., 2014. Corporate culture, organizational change and meaning at work-linking human resources with business ethics. Human Systems Management, 33(1-2), pp.47-50.

Chell, E., Spence, L.J., Perrini, F. and Harris, J.D., 2016. Social entrepreneurship and business ethics: does social equal ethical?. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(4), pp.619-625.

de Bruin, B., 2016. Pledging integrity: oaths as forms of business ethics management. Journal of Business Ethics, 136(1), pp.23-42.

De Cremer, D. and Vandekerckhove, W., 2017. Managing unethical behavior in organizations: The need for a behavioral business ethics approach. Journal of Management & Organization, 23(3), pp.437-455.

Demirtas, O. and Akdogan, A.A., 2015. The effect of ethical leadership behavior on ethical climate, turnover intention, and affective commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(1), pp.59-67.

Diallo, M.F. and Lambey-Checchin, C., 2017. Consumers’ Perceptions of Retail Business Ethics and Loyalty to the Retailer: The Moderating Role of Social Discount Practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 141(3), pp.435-449.

Donaldson, T., 2015. Where the facts end: Richard De George and the rise of business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(4), pp.783-787.

Eandt.theiet.org. 2017. Anti-diversity memo by Google engineer sparks gender row. [online] Available at: https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2017/08/anti-diversity-memo-by-google-engineer-sparks-gender-row/ [Accessed 22 Oct. 2017].

Fernando, M. and Moore, G., 2015. MacIntyrean virtue ethics in business: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(1), pp.185-202.

Floyd, L.A., Xu, F., Atkins, R. and Caldwell, C., 2013. Ethical outcomes and business ethics: Toward improving business ethics education. Journal of business ethics, 117(4), pp.753-776.

Giacalone, R.A. and Promislo, M.D., 2013. Broken when entering: The stigmatization of goodness and business ethics education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 12(1), pp.86-101.

Kahane, G., Everett, J.A., Earp, B.D., Farias, M. and Savulescu, J., 2015. ‘Utilitarian’judgments in sacrificial moral dilemmas do not reflect impartial concern for the greater good. Cognition, 134, pp.193-209.

Kaptein, M., 2017. The battle for business ethics: A struggle theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 144(2), pp.343-361.

Kumar, R., 2017. Ethics and its High Valued in Business World. Journal of Public Policy & Environmental Management, 1(1), pp.1-7.

Michaelson, C., Pratt, M.G., Grant, A.M. and Dunn, C.P., 2014. Meaningful work: Connecting business ethics and organization studies. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(1), pp.77-90.

Michaelson, C., Pratt, M.G., Grant, A.M. and Dunn, C.P., 2014. Meaningful work: Connecting business ethics and organization studies. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(1), pp.77-90.

Phys.org. 2017. Google firing fans flames of diversity debate in tech sector. [online] Available at: https://phys.org/news/2017-08-google-defender-tech-gender-gap.html [Accessed 22 Oct. 2017].

Provis, C., 2017. Intuition, analysis and reflection in business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(1), pp.5-15.

Schwartz, M.S., 2013. Developing and sustaining an ethical corporate culture: The core elements. Business Horizons, 56(1), pp.39-50.

Shin, Y., Sung, S.Y., Choi, J.N. and Kim, M.S., 2015. Top management ethical leadership and firm performance: Mediating role of ethical and procedural justice climate. Journal of Business Ethics, 129(1), pp.43-57.

Sigurjonsson, T.O., Arnardottir, A.A., Vaiman, V. and Rikhardsson, P., 2015. Managers’ views on ethics education in business schools: An empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(1), pp.1-13.

Stevens, S. 2017. The Google Memo: What Does the Research Say About Gender Differences?. [online] HeterodoxAcademy.org. Available at: https://heterodoxacademy.org/2017/08/10/the-google-memo-what-does-the-research-say-about-gender-differences/ [Accessed 22 Oct. 2017].

Su, H.Y., 2014. Business ethics and the development of intellectual capital. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(1), pp.87-98.

Viviers, S., Kru?ger, J. and Venter, D.J., 2014. The relative importance of ethics, environmental, social and governance criteria. African Journal of Business Ethics, 6(2).

Vogel, D., 2014. Global Corporate Responsibility and Business Ethics. Journal of Japan Society for Business Ethics Study, 21, pp.329-333.

Wang, L.C. and Calvano, L., 2015. Is business ethics education effective? An analysis of gender, personal ethical perspectives, and moral judgment. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(4), pp.591-602.

Wittmer, D. and O’Brien, K., 2014. The Virtue of “Virtue Ethics” in Business and Business Education. Journal of Business Ethics Education, 11, pp.261-278.

Wu, L.Z., Kwan, H.K., Yim, F.H.K., Chiu, R.K. and He, X., 2015. CEO ethical leadership and corporate social responsibility: A moderated mediation model. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(4), pp.819-831.

Zheng, Q., Luo, Y. and Wang, S.L., 2014. Moral degradation, business ethics, and corporate social responsibility in a transitional economy. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(3), pp.405-421.