work ethics research paper

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Relationships between work ethic and motivation to work from the point of view of the self-determination theory

Contributed equally to this work with: Damian Grabowski, Agata Chudzicka-Czupała, Katarzyna Stapor

Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Faculty of Psychology, Department of Social and Organizational Behavior, SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Katowice, Poland

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Project administration, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Roles Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Faculty of Automatic Control, Electronics and Computer Science, Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland

• Damian Grabowski, 
• Agata Chudzicka-Czupała, 
• Katarzyna Stapor

• Published: July 1, 2021
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253145
• Reader Comments

Most studies on motivation to work concentrate on its environmental and situational antecedents. Individual values are not the point of interest of empirical analyses. The aim of the research described in the paper was to seek possible relationships between work ethic and motivation to work. A hypothesis was put forward that work ethic, in the classical Weberian approach, is connected with motivation to work, from the point of view of Ryan’s and Deci’s self-determination theory. The study on a sample of 405 Polish employees was conducted with use of the Polish version of Multidimensional Work Ethic Profile MWEP-PL and Work Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation Scale , in the Polish adaptation WEIMS-PL. The Canonical Correlation Analysis was used to assess the simultaneous interrelationships between two sets of the variables measured. The results show that selected dimensions of work ethic, such as centrality of work, valuing hard work, perceiving work as an obligation, anti-leisure sentiment and delay of gratification are positively related to autonomous dimensions of motivation: intrinsic motivation, integration and identification, and non-autonomous introjection. Attributing a high value to hard work, including the conviction that it leads to success, aversion to wasting time and self-reliance correlate positively with taking up work for extrinsic rewards and with the desire to acquire a positive opinion about oneself as well as gain approval and recognition from others. Work ethic is connected on the one hand with autonomous motivation, including in particular intrinsic motivation, and on the other hand with extrinsic motivation, with the striving for success, which is the result of work. After empirical verification the findings could become a base for training programs and shape the way of influencing people’s motivation, morale, attitude towards work and job satisfaction. They can result in the way employees are managed and selected for different tasks.

Citation: Grabowski D, Chudzicka-Czupała A, Stapor K (2021) Relationships between work ethic and motivation to work from the point of view of the self-determination theory. PLoS ONE 16(7): e0253145. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253145

Editor: Godfred O. Boateng, University of Texas at Arlington, UNITED STATES

Received: October 31, 2020; Accepted: May 31, 2021; Published: July 1, 2021

Copyright: © 2021 Grabowski et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding: Authors AC, DG, and KS received funding for Open access from the Ministry of Science and Higher Education in Poland under the 2019-2022 program „Regional Initiative of Excellence", project number 012 / RID / 2018/19. Authors AC and DG received funding from the SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Warsaw, Poland, project No. 1571-BST/WZK/2018/A/06 entitled “Development of standards for the assessment of social and ethical aspects of employees’ way of functioning”, https://www.swps.pl/ . The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Most empirical studies on work motivation and occupational behavior focus on the importance of environmental and situational characteristics such as working conditions and pay, organizational structure, job characteristics, task characteristics, working time flexibility, role of the manager and being subject to the latter’s control, as well as organizational climate [ 1 – 4 ]. Research also relates motivation to stressful environmental factors [ 1 ]. Some researchers point out that the external context in which an individual performs a task influences the intrinsic motivation to perform it, which may contribute to creative achievements [ 5 ]. Research was also conducted on motivational potential of meaningful work [ 6 ]. Some studies show how work-related and individual factors are related to psychological work ability and job mobility motivation in specific age, e.g. in later adulthood [ 7 ]. The relationships between motivation to work on the one hand and satisfaction with its performance and occupational burnout on the other hand was subject of studies as well [ 8 ].

Our review shows that research is still lacking that would connect individual predisposition or values subscribed to with motivation to work. The few empirical analyses carried out in this area prove the existence of relationships between affective organizational attachment, interest in work, acceptance of risk connected with its performance, perceived own competences and motivation to work [ 9 ], as well as between locus of control and motivation [ 10 ], and between agreeableness, conscientiousness, commitment to work, including attributing a high value to work, and motivation to learn, supposed to improve the quality of work [ 11 ].

Although the number of studies linking beliefs and values to motivation is not large, many scholars clearly pointed to the existence of interrelationships. Rokeach [ 12 , 13 ] has already presented values and beliefs as an inseparable element of motivation. Similarly, Lewin [ 14 ] considered values to be an important “guides” of behavior, because they trigger the goals to which one aspires. The self-concordance model of motivation [ 15 ] suggests that people are more inclined to pursue goals consistent with their autonomous values. The authors of this model, which measures intrinsic motivation, are guided by the assumption that people are intrinsically motivated by goals that result from the values they hold in high regard.

Studying motivation to work in the context of work-related values and work-related beliefs is rare [ 11 ]. There is a particular lack of research on the relationships between work ethic, understood as a multidimensional attitude towards work, which is a value in itself, and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation described by the self-determination theory. Few analyses point to the existence of certain relationships between the components of work ethic and intrinsic motivation, although work ethic in this case was studied in an Islamic version. However, study by Hayati and Caniago [ 16 ] on the Islamic work ethic and its relation to intrinsic motivation treated work ethic and intrinsic motivation as single dimension. Many studies highlight the importance of work ethic in business and in the capitalist economy [ 17 – 19 ]. This study aimed to check for potential relationships between the motivation to work and the dimensions of work ethic, reflecting human beliefs concerning work, the attitude towards being rewarded for work, leisure time, or the ability to rely on oneself in various activities, was designed to fill the gap in research into the area. We believe it is important for both cognitive and practical reasons to find an answer to the question as to whether any relationships between the variables mentioned above exist. Finding out about the strength and direction of these relationships may help to make a more effective impact on employees, to increase their motivation enabling them to act effectively and to achieve self-satisfaction and job satisfaction. It may also make it possible to prepare professionals better for training interventions. Knowledge about the relationships between the different components of both variables makes it possible to obtain better insight into the meaning of an individual’s autonomous values, attitudes, beliefs and needs, as well as into the nature and sources of their motivation. The findings presented in this study are exploratory in nature and their effects may require the construction of a more extensive model of dependencies. In fact, we do not know if and how work ethic, understood as a syndrome of different attitudes and beliefs about work, is connected with motivation to work.

Work ethic as a system of attitudes and beliefs

Work ethic means attributing value to hard work and industriousness, stigmatizing idleness, fulfilling the obligations, and the belief that work should be done in the best possible way [ 20 ]. To fulfill the obligations means here a moral duty, while industriousness is considered a virtue, i.e. a desirable moral quality [ 21 ]. This term describes the cult of work, manifested in the respectful treatment of, or even reverence for work [ 22 ]. Work ethic involves perceiving and treating work as a duty or obligation and as a moral value. It consists of norms, prohibitions and orders, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors, both desirable and undesirable, connected with work valuation [ 20 , 23 ].

In the psychological sense, work ethic is a syndrome of attitudes and beliefs, with strongly outlined emotional-judgmental components. Miller [ 24 ] described seven dimensions of the syndrome, on the basis of analyses by Furnham [ 21 ]:

• Belief in the sense of hard work, the conviction that it leads to success and that it is a recipe for problems and difficulties in life;
• Centrality of work, the conviction that it is the basic activity in life–“but the most important thing was that even beyond that labor came to be considered in itself the end of life”;
• Distaste for wasting time, tendency to treat time as a valuable resource–“waste of time is thus the first and in principle the deadliest of sins”;
• Distaste for leisure, i.e. the conviction that free time activities are less valuable: “not leisure and enjoyment, but only activity serves to increase the glory of God”;
• Delay of gratification, recognizing the value of rewards one has to wait for “the idea of expectant waiting for the Spirit to descend”), with importance attached also to work without rewards–the assumption that work in itself is a reward;
• Independence, self-reliance at work, individualism;
• Morality and ethics, i.e. placing emphasis on honesty in relationships with others, the assumption that honest conduct should be the content of the work [ 20 ] (p. 96–105).

These components can be put in order and structured. The core of a high work ethic is the conviction that work is a central value in life, so it should be done in a perfect and honest manner. Doing work well means devoting a considerable amount of effort and sufficient time to it. Therefore, the components of work ethic are deemed to include the requirement to save time, reduce leisure time, as well as the precept not to consume rewards, as they change people’s attitude towards other values. Also, worth mentioning are new research results on studies regarding the relationship of ethical culture and leadership with employees’ innovation [ 25 , 26 ].

Work ethic and motivation to work. Self-determination theory

In the concept of work ethic, one can see descriptions of energy-related components, such as the requirement to increase effort and the high value given to it, i.e. emphasis on the importance of hard work. A job well done is also an efficient and effective action. The conceptualization and operationalization of work ethic performed by Mann [ 27 ] emphasize the importance of striving to improve oneself, looking after the quality of work and persistently pursuing of goals, i.e. factors which may be associated with motivation. Work ethic, by underscoring the importance and strengthening the training of independence, also triggers the motivation to achieve, conducive to economic development [ 21 ], and therefore these variables can be interrelated. Few studies also indicate the relationship between the work ethic syndrome and intrinsic motivation [ 16 ].

Cassidy and Lynn [ 28 ], in their conceptualization of achievement motivation, treat work ethic, defined as the performance of work for the sake of work itself, the desire to work hard and to derive satisfaction from such activity, as a component of motivation. Ethic understood in this way is placed here alongside other components of motivation, such as the desire to have and earn money, the need for dominance/power, the pursuit of perfection, the desire to achieve high standards, the tendency to compete and to perform better than others, as well as the desire to achieve a high status and prestige. Among the dimensions of motivation, the authors mentioned above also list the tendency to achieve mastery, which they understand as focusing on new challenges and situations that require one to master new skills.

Story and colleagues [ 29 ] suggested that work ethic, striving for perfection and mastery should be treated as components of the intrinsic motivation to achieve, while striving to have and to earn, the need for dominance, striving to compete and the desire to gain prestige should be treated as the extrinsic motivation to achieve. It should be noted, however, that in some samples an intrinsically motivating work ethic correlates with extrinsically motivating material needs, identified with earning money, the need for dominance and the need for prestige [ 28 ].

The division into intrinsic and extrinsic motivation has existed for a long time in the field of labor psychology, but only the emergence of a macro theory in the form of the self-determination theory [ 30 ] brought a new quality to research into work motivation. The self-determination theory, apart from the central division into autonomous and controlled motivation, postulates a multidimensional conceptualization of motivation. Ryan and Deci [ 30 ], assuming that each individual develops in relation to the actions he or she takes, and following many years of research, propose a macro theory which places emphasis mainly on the organic mechanisms of involving the internal resources of a human individual in his or her development, and more precisely in the development of personality and in self-regulation of behavior. According to these authors, the key process supporting the optimal functioning of people is their natural striving to improve and develop, manifested in the satisfaction of universal basic needs like social relationships and intimacy, competence and autonomy. They underline the role of behaviour in accordance with one’s own interests and values.

Autonomy understood in this way should not be confused with independence, although they may be interrelated. As a consequence, an individual satisfying such needs may feel pleasure and contentment. Research has shown that these needs are natural, but also that their properties are subject to situational influences that trigger intrinsic or extrinsic motivation, depending on the integrated orientation of the respective individual’s life goals [ 31 – 33 ].

The traditional conceptualization of intrinsic motivation assumes that this motivation refers to a situation in which behavior is triggered by different activities of the individual, interesting in themselves, causing spontaneous satisfaction and joy. At the same time, extrinsic motivation is clearly separated, as motivation triggering activities which are not interesting or satisfying in themselves for the individual, but which as a consequence lead to the valued effects. In this approach, extrinsic motivation is instrumental. In the context of work, however, extrinsic motivation has a dominant position and a wider range of types, contributing to the satisfaction of different needs, but according to Ryan and Deci [ 34 ], it is intrinsic, immanent motivation that represents the natural tendency an individual has to seek new challenges, learn and improve, based on enthusiasm, interests and passions. Intrinsic motivation understood in this way is a manifestation of a completely autonomous, self-determined, immanent motivation connected with the individual experiencing positive emotions [ 30 , 35 , 36 ]. The opposite of intrinsic motivation is extrinsic motivation in the form of external regulation, although in the self-determination theory there is also amotivation.

Amotivation is a state characteristic of non-autonomous behaviors, consisting in lack of regulation and reluctance to act. In the subject literature, it is compared to Seligman’s learned helplessness [ 37 ]. In the case of amotivation and external regulation, human behavior is completely independent of the individual, and it is controlled by external factors. Proper extrinsic motivation is a continuum of states regulated both extrinsically and intrinsically. It may vary in its intensity–from external regulation, through introjection and identification, to integration. Introjection is accompanied by involvement of the Ego, and behavior is partially controlled by the individual here, while in the case of identification and integration and of proper intrinsic motivation, the individual manifests fully autonomously regulated behavior. The differences in these three levels of motivation consist in the varying degree of internalization of values and goals underlying the behavior. Introjection is regulation consisting in taking action to gain self-approval and approval of those around the individual, for example by doing work to enhance one’s self-esteem, increase one’s prestige, and avoid shame. In the case of identification, the individual identifies with a set of values and meanings, accepting them as his or her own, while in the case of integration, the specific value or meaning becomes part of the system of definitions of the Self, creating the basis for autonomous regulation of behavior [ 38 , 39 ]. Therefore, identification and integration are still part of the system of extrinsic motivation, but one which is already regulated autonomously, and fully autonomous in the case of identification. The difference between autonomous regulation and integration, in the case of intrinsic motivation, boils down to activation of emotions, and in the case of integration–to cognitive activity [ 40 ].

Autonomous regulation, referring to intrinsic motivation, integration and identification, is associated with qualities such as resourcefulness and courage. Controlled regulation, i.e. introjection and external regulation mechanisms, provides the basis for industriousness, regularity, perseverance, strong will and prudence. Striving to improve oneself and implementing standards leading to an ideal image of the self represents the autonomous regulation perspective, while striving to achieve what should be achieved according to others is a manifestation of controlled regulation [ 33 ].

Work ethic involves both resourcefulness and industriousness, as well as prudence [ 21 ] and the realization of a perfect image of oneself [ 27 ]. Hence, it may be assumed that work ethic as a syndrome of beliefs which value work is associated both with autonomous motivation and with controlled, non-autonomous regulation. Traditionally, in line with the definition of work ethic, work means coercion and obligation. However, the definition of work ethic also implies the importance of individual independence, the need to rely on oneself and to strive to achieve [ 21 ]. Recent conceptualizations of work ethic also include the pursuit of excellence and mastery, which guarantee high-quality work [ 27 ].

The findings of the studies by Cassidy and Lynn [ 28 ] quoted above showed that intrinsically motivating work ethic correlates with extrinsically motivating needs, such as earning money and striving for dominance and prestige. These findings are also consistent with the research conducted by Wollack [ 41 ], in which it turned out that work ethic referred to the attitude towards pay, i.e. attributing a high value to earning money at work. The research also proved the existence of links between work ethic and social status, defining one’s position among the others and both self-perception of this status and the perception of that status by the social environment, friends, relatives and co-workers, which is associated with prestige. The work ethic conceptualization built by Wollack [ 41 ] also includes the pursuit of promotion. Status, prestige and pursuit of promotion are connected with introjection, and earning money is connected with external regulation.

Finally, some recent developments in SDT theory should be cited. In [ 42 ] the Authors studied public employee’s motivation for a public service career and developed a SDT-based measurement instrument that captures different motivations for it. A meta-analytic review [ 43 ] of almost 100 studies examining the antecedents and consequences of basic need satisfaction at work provides interesting and new contributions and challenges to the SDT literature. Through the lens of SDT in [ 44 ] the Authors tested the mediating effect of autonomy, how internal sources of innovations (i.e. emanating from an agency’s senior leadership/employee workgroups) affect employees’ job satisfaction.

Thus, if both work ethics and intrinsic motivation are associated with job satisfaction and innovation [ 21 , 25 , 44 ], it can be assumed that the work ethic and motivation also show significant relationships. The important question is which components of ethics are most strongly associated with intrinsic motivation and which are weaker.

Research questions and hypotheses.

We asked the research questions about the possible relationships between work ethic dimensions and the motivation to work, i.e. between autonomous and controlled regulation, and about the nature of them. Research questions were also put forward concerning the existence and strength of the relationship between work ethic dimensions and the individual methods of regulation, i.e. autonomous and non-autonomous regulation, as well as about whether and how work ethic dimensions correlate with amotivation.

On the basis of the considerations presented above, we hypothesize that:

H1. Positive relationships exist between the dimensions of work ethic (work as moral value and obligation, hard work, centrality of work, wasted time, anti-leisure sentiment, delay of gratification, self-reliance and morality/ethics) and autonomously regulated motivation (intrinsic motivation, integration, identification) as well as non-autonomous introjection.

H2. Positive relationships exist between the dimensions of work ethic that involve attributing value to success and to the ways of achieving it (work as moral value and obligation, wasted time and self-reliance) and non-autonomously regulated motivation (introjection and external regulation).

Materials and methods

Study sample and procedure.

A quota sampling [ 1 ] being a non-probabilistic version of stratified sampling was used to obtain a sample of participants for our study. A population was first segmented into 4 sub-groups according to the size of employment (micro-enterprises, small, medium and large businesses) based on the structure obtained from the Central Statistical Office in Poland. Samples of participants were then selected from each subgroup based on the specified proportion [ 45 ].

The sample consisted of 405 individuals working in various organizations in southern Poland. The sample included 227 women (56%) and 178 men (44%). The study covered a group of people aged 19 to 71. The average age of the respondents was over 35.23 ( SD = 12.05, Range = 19–71) years. The sample included people with different educational backgrounds. The largest number of respondents had secondary education (194 individuals, 48% of the sample), higher education (160 individuals, 39% of the sample) and vocational education (51 individuals, 13% of the sample). The study covered 90 individuals working in micro-enterprises (employing up to 9 people) (22% of the sample), 107 employees of small businesses, employing up to 49 people (26% of the sample), 84 employees of medium-sized businesses employing up to 249 people (21% of the sample), and 124 employees of large businesses (employing over 250 people) (31% of the sample).

The study subjects included individuals pursuing different professions (administrative support (105 individuals, 26% of the sample), accounting/financial (95 individuals, 23% of the sample), technology (105 individuals, 26% of the sample), health/safety (100 individuals, 25% of the sample)) and employed in various industries (manufacturing (150 individuals, 37% of the sample), services (130 individuals, 32% of the sample), retail (125 individuals, 31% of the sample)). The majority of the study subjects (283 individuals, 70% of the sample) worked under an employment contract, full-time, 57 individuals (14% of the sample) were self-employed, and 65 individuals (16% of the sample) worked under civil law contracts. The majority were employees of businesses with nationwide reach (302 individuals, 75% of the sample), while the remaining group of 103 individuals (25% of the sample) worked in companies with international reach. The average length of service being 12.94 ( SD = 11.64, Range = 0.5–45) years.

Efforts were made to examine people of different ages, both women and men, employees working for a given company for at least six months in various industries.

The research was conducted in 2018, from June to December. The respondents did not receive any remuneration for their participation in the survey and filled out a set of questionnaires using the paper and pencil form.

The research was conducted in compliance with the ethical standards in line with the provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki. The Departmental Research Ethics Committee of Faculty of Psychology at SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities (Katowice, Poland) (Ref. number: WKEB63/05/2020/Human participants, project title: Relationships between work ethic and motivation to work from the point of view of the self-determination theory) approved the research proposal and the consent procedure. The respondents agreed to participate voluntarily, they were informed about its purpose, assured about its complete anonymity, and obtained information about the possibility of withdrawing from it at any time.

To measure work ethic we used the Polish version of Multidimensional Work Ethic Profile (MWEP), an abridged version of the MWEP questionnaire created by Miller [ 24 ], adapted by Grabowski and Chudzicka-Czupała [ 23 , 46 ], and abridged by Grabowski [ 47 ]. The questionnaire is composed of 35 items and 7 scales (or 7 subscales) (with 5 items in each scale), which correspond with 7 dimensions of work ethic: belief in the sense of hard work (Hard work), Centrality of work, distaste for wasting time (Wasted time), distaste for leisure (Anti-leisure sentiment), Delay of gratification, Self-reliance and morality and ethics (Morality/Ethics). Five statements were added to the list of 35 items mentioned above, related to the conviction that work is a value and a moral obligation (Work as moral obligation—WMO scale).

Participants indicated their attitudes toward statements using a 1 (“I strongly disagree”) to 5 (“I strongly agree”) scale. Statistical analyses also used an index constituting the sum of all the seven subscales, i.e. MWEP-total, without the WMO scale.

To study motivation to work, the Work Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation Scale (WEIMS) was used, built by Canadian psychologists [ 48 ], in the Polish adaptation by Chrupała-Pniak and Grabowski [ 49 ]. Both the original tool and the Polish adaptation demonstrate satisfactory psychometric properties. The scale represents an operationalization of the individual regulations of motivation, taken into account in the self-determination theory, i.e. intrinsic motivation, integration, identification, introjection, external regulation and amotivation. The original tool consists of 18 items, with 3 scale items corresponding to each of the six regulations (six scales or subscales of WEIMS). A 24-item method was used in the study, with one statement added to each scale (subscale).

The respondents’ task was to take a position on the items using a seven-point scale from 1 to 7 (with 1 meaning “This statement doesn’t describe me at all”, 3 –“This statement describes me in rather moderately”, 7 –“This statement describes me absolutely accurately”).

The Work Self-Determination Index (WSDI) was also used in the calculations. This index is calculated using the following formula: -3*amotivation + -2* external regulation + -1*introjection + 1*identification + 2*integration + 3*intrinsic motivation; and it simply means the degree of self-determination of behavior at work [ 48 , 49 ].

Table 1 presents descriptive statistics and the reliability coefficients i.e. Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega of Multidimensional Work Ethic Profile (MWEP), Work Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation Scale (WEIMS) subscales and global indices (MWEP, the sum of 7 dimensions, Work Self-Determination Index WSDI).

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253145.t001

The amotivation scale obtained a lower Cronbach’s α value in these studies, just like in previous studies, by the way, both on Polish and on Canadian samples [ 48 ], and its revision should be considered in the future.

The validity of the modified WEIMS version, which includes 24 items, was also checked by means of confirmatory factor analysis. A confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that the WEIMS scale achieved satisfactory measures of fit of the six-factor model to the data (comprising four positions in each scale): χ2 (df) = 789.49 (237), RMSEA = 0.076, CFI = 0.96, sRMR = 0.071, NFI = 0.95 [ 49 , 50 ].

Data analysis.

Descriptive statistics, reliability coefficients and correlations were calculated with JASP (v0.12.2), a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) conducted using JASP (v0.12.2) and the Lisrel (v9.2) software, and Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) was conducted using STATISTICA (v12.0).

Canonical correlation analysis.

We used the multivariate statistical method, Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) [ 51 , 52 ] to verify the two hypothesis and to investigate the magnitude and sign of the relationships between two sets of variables, one comprising the dimensions of work ethic construct and referred to as independent variables, and the second composed of factors from work extrinsic and intrinsic motivation, considered here as dependent variables.

The main goal of CCA is an assessment of the simultaneous interrelationships between two sets of variables. CCA focuses on the correlation between two new synthetic variables, called canonical variates , one is a linear combination of variables from the first set and the other is a linear combination of the variables of the second set. CCA constructs a canonical function that maximizes the canonical correlation coefficient which measures the strength of the overall relationship (correlational) between the two canonical variates. CCA develops multiple canonical functions, each is independent from the other canonical functions so that they represent different relationships found among the sets of dependent and independent variables. Each canonical variate is interpreted with canonical loadings , the correlation of the individual variables and their respective variates. Redundancy index is an amount of variance in a canonical variate (dependent or independent) explained by the other/opposite canonical variate in the canonical function. These may be summed to reveal an overall redundancy index .

Preliminary analyses

Table 2 presents the correlation coefficients between individual dimensions of work ethic and motivation together with global indices (MWEP, the sum of 7 dimensions, Work Self-Determination Index WSDI).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253145.t002

It follows from the Table 2 , as expected, that dimensions of work ethic are positively correlated, weak (about 0.1), moderate (0.2 or 0.3) and average (0.4) with motivation that is regulated autonomously (identification, integration and intrinsic motivation) as well as the non-autonomous introjection. The strongest correlations of the mentioned regulations exist with the Centrality of work, the moderate—with the Work as moral obligation, Hard work and Anti-leisure. Amotivation is correlated with the dimensions of work ethic very weakly, rather negatively and not significant, except from Morality/ethics.

Results of Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA)

Table 3 presents the results of the CCA. The results of tests of significance prove that only the first two canonical functions ((U1, V1), (U2, V2)) were statistically significant with p -values < 0.001 of the testing procedure of the canonical correlations (as implemented in STATISTICA package). The independent canonical variates U1, U2 are linear combinations of variables from the first set of variables defining work ethic construct, while the canonical variates V1, V2 are linear combinations of variables from the second set of variables defining work motivation (see Table 3 ).

Results of CCA for two canonical functions: canonical correlations, loadings, shared variance and redundancy analysis of independent and dependent canonical variates.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253145.t003

To assess the contributions of the variables defining work ethic and motivation canonical variates in the canonical correlation, we used canonical loadings (assuming here that a loading greater than 0.4 proves that correlation between a corresponding variable and a variate is significant).

The first canonical correlation between the independent variate U1, being a linear combination of work ethic variables and V1, the dependent variate—a linear combination of work motivation variables is quite strong and equals to 0.585.

In the dependent variate V1, the highest and positive canonical loadings had intrinsic motivation (0.931), integration (0.858), introjection (0.782) and identification (0.620). According to the self-determination theory, the intrinsic motivation, integration and identification constitute the components of an autonomous motivation. This fact supports naming the canonical variate V1 as the “ high autonomous motivation ”. Moreover, it should be seen a strong positive correlation of variate V1 with introjection (0.782), which means that autonomous motivation is associated with striving after self and other approbations, thereby being a sense of duty. It caused to name the variate V1 of the first canonical function, the “ high autonomous motivation and duty ”. It should be noted that an amotivation variable had low negative correlation with the variate V1 and an external regulation is not correlated with it. The corresponding to V1, dependent variate U1 we call “ centrality of work in life ” because its highest canonical loading is that of Centrality of work (0.920). The remaining variables from the first set of work ethic construct, except for Hard work (0.585), show almost half the correlations, although still high: Anti-leisure (0.448), Work as moral obligation (0.412), Delay of gratification (0.405).

The canonical variate U1 in the first canonical function, explains 25.3% of the variance in the set of work ethic variables, and the associated variate V1–43.6% of the variance in the set of work motivation variables (see Table 2 for the shared variances).The independent canonical variate U1 for work ethic in the first canonical correlation “ centrality of work in life ”->“ high autonomous motivation and duty ” explains almost 15% (14.9%) of the variance in the dependent set of variables from work motivation (see Table 3 for redundancy index in dependent set).

In summary, the results of this study allow for the conclusion that people with high autonomous motivation and conviction that work is a duty, treat the work as a central value in their life more often, while the remaining activities could be less important.

In the second canonical function, the correlation between the independent variate U2, being a linear combination of work ethic variables and the dependent variate V2—a linear combination of work motivation variables is somewhat weaker and equals to 0.362.

We call the canonical variate U2 “ hard work ” as the canonical loading of the variable hard work is the highest (0.619). Simultaneously, we observe quite strong canonical loadings from the following variables defining work ethic: self-reliance and wasted time (0.532 and 0.531, respectively). This is equivalent to a conviction that hard, intensive work, self-reliance and saving time lead to a success, or ensure a prosperity in life. The highest canonical loading in the second, dependent variate V2 had external regulation (0.807), which is equivalent to a regulation controlled by awards and penalties. Simultaneously, the lowest canonical loadings in the variate V2 come from intrinsic motivation (0.122) which is an evidence of an autonomous regulation. This fact allows to name the canonical variate V2 as “ external control ”. At the same time, there is quite strong correlation with the variable introjection (0.451), which means that hard work motivated by a wish to gain approval from others is connected with obtaining through a work such awards like money.

The canonical variate U2 in the second canonical function, explains 15.6% of the variance in the set of work ethic variables, and the associated variate U1–18.3% of the variance in the set of work motivation variables (see Table 2 for the shared variances). The independent canonical variate U2 for work ethic in the second canonical correlation “ hard work ” -> “ external control ” explains only 2.4% of the variance in the dependent set of variables from work motivation (see Table 3 for redundancy index in dependent set).

The overall redundancy of dependent set of variables is equal to 18.2%. This means that 18.2% of variance in work motivation variables can be explained by the whole set of independent work ethic variables (i.e. predictors).

Discussion and conclusions

The main aim of this exploratory research was to determine whether any relationships could be found between work ethic dimensions and motivation to work described by the self-determination theory, i.e. relationships with autonomous and controlled regulation. These regulations characterize human activity during the performance of work.

The research findings show that there are positive relationships between work ethic on the one hand and autonomous motivation and striving for recognition (including recognition from other people and self-satisfaction) on the other hand. There is a significant positive correlation between the dimension of centrality of work on the one hand and autonomous motivation and duty on the other hand. In other words, individuals who insist on the centrality of work, who value it highly, also in the moral sense, and who are convinced of the value of hard work, are at the same time highly motivated to do work they find exciting, as a component of their identity. At the same time, these individuals are also convinced that work should be done well and accurately. On the one hand, they find work exciting, interesting and challenging, on the other hand they believe that one should strive towards mastery when performing it, and treat this as a duty.

Individuals displaying autonomous motivation at work may treat good performance of the latter as a duty. This is one of the possible interpretations of the relationship between autonomous motivation and non-autonomous introjection. It can also be noted that high scores on the introjection scale do not have to indicate only actions resulting from the desire to gain recognition. It may also be a result of the fact that individuals motivated to perform work autonomously satisfy their general need to have positive relationships with other people [ 29 ]. Striving to be recognized and respected by others is a way of satisfying this need, and at the same time achieving this proves that the duty has been performed well. In other words, high scores on the introjection scale can mean that the individual motivated to a large extent intrinsically wants to win interest and approval from the environment because of the good performance of tasks.

Research has also shown that high value given to hard work, the conviction that it leads to success, combined with the belief that one needs to rely on oneself and avoid being dependent on others, is at the same time associated with the will to work for material rewards and with the pursuit of approval. These are extrinsic factors that are important for the performance of work. Although surprising, this result is consistent with the classical Protestant work ethic approach, in which we find both encouragement to do work out of duty, because work is an obligation, and affirmation of the pursuit of success, positive valuation of extrinsic indicators of success, such as the desire to earn money [ 21 ]. This result is also consistent with the research by Cassidy and Lynn [ 26 ] and the earlier studies by Wollack [ 41 ]. On the basis of the results obtained, hypotheses 1 and 2 can be accepted. The results also show that amotivation correlates negatively and weakly with the dimensions of work ethic.

To recapitulate, individuals with high autonomous motivation, a high need for recognition, and high intensity of introjection treat work much more often as a central value in their lives, while other activities are less important for them. Performance of interesting work which they like most probably makes it easy for them to value it highly, which co-occurs with their intrinsic need to take up and do work and their desire to maintain a good opinion of themselves as an employee and at the same time gain a positive opinion of their environment. Autonomous motivation co-occurs with introjection. An individual with autonomous motivation, having a high intrinsic motivation, treats good performance of work as his or her duty. Secondly, interesting work can be a source of high status and prestige, which is associated with activity being driven by the motivation to gain approval. This is also in line with earlier research results [ 22 , 28 ].

High scores on the introjection scale may generally indicate the fact that individuals autonomously motivated to work satisfy the need for positive relationships with others and for gaining recognition from others. According to the self-determination theory, controlled regulation, including introjection and external regulation, means striving to satisfy the need for positive relationships with others and for competence. Autonomous regulation, apart from satisfying these two needs, also makes it possible to satisfy the need for autonomy [ 31 ]. Intrinsic motivation combines all these motives, including those assigned to the other types of motivation, i.e. striving for integration, identification, introjection and external regulation. Only amotivation, or impersonal regulation, points to a lack of desire to satisfy these three needs. Amotivation also demonstrates a relationship with extrinsic control, i.e. controlled regulation. The results of the study described here show that activity based on extrinsic rewards may lead to amotivation. In the results of canonical analysis, this is proven by the weak positive correlation between amotivation and external regulation, and more precisely with the extrinsic control factor [ 35 , 36 , 53 ].

The study has a few limitations. First is the Polish context of our research. Work is less valued in Poland than, for example, in the United States [ 46 ], but more than in other countries [ 21 , 22 ]. It can therefore be assumed that Poles may have a lower work ethic than the inhabitants of post-Protestant countries. That is why our findings may not be generalized to other cultural settings, particularly outside of the Eastern Europe.Only the cross-cultural study would make it possible to compare Polish employees’ responses with the attitudes of representatives from other countries. Another limitation is that the study was based on self-assessment questionnaires. Their use resulted from the lack of other tools for measuring the studied variables as well as from the nature and definition of these variables, based on subjective judgment. However, these were accurate and reliable tools. Only the operationalization of specific regulation styles may be considered questionable due to the high correlations of introjection with identification, integration and intrinsic motivation [ 43 ]. It should be recalled, however, that within the self-determination theory itself, intrinsic (autonomous) motivation is based on mechanisms reserved for controlled regulation. Autonomous motivation leads to the satisfaction of three basic needs, while controlled motivation leads to the satisfaction of two needs [ 31 ].

Although the respondents were assured of anonymity, the responses might also be falsified due to the effect of the study subjects responding in accordance with what they imagine to be the socially desirable content, which in turn may have affected the final results of the study. However, an attempt was made to counteract this phenomenon by providing appropriate instructions and by assuring the respondents about the complete confidentiality of the data.

The research methodology could be improved and broadened by adding qualitative methods such as interviews and analyses based on interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). This would provide a deeper insight into the respondents’ feelings and into their experiences, and could definitely expand knowledge about the relationships between work ethic and motivation. Further research should also focus on the importance of other variables. It is worth checking the level of selected variables that may be relevant here, such as e.g. temperamental and personality determinants, other psychological characteristics, or characteristics related to morality. It may also be significant to take into account simultaneously the characteristics of the working environment and the organizational climate. Another significant development might involve controlling for the level of the respondents’ satisfaction with their professional work. It would be worth comparing in the future the dependencies existing within the group of managers, entrepreneurs and non-managers, as one may expect that the relationships between work ethic, attitude towards work and motivation might be more distinct in individuals with considerable autonomy, and that senior-level managers or entrepreneurs with considerable freedom of action are less likely to be forced to act under coercion.

In future research, it would be worthwhile controlling also for employee behavior that may be related to work ethic and result from motivation, or be connected to amotivation, such as civic organizational behavior, counterproductive behavior, and unethical pro-organizational behavior. Additionally, it could be interesting to consider the importance of work ethic and motivation to perform work in ethical or strategic decision-making within the company, e.g. in the way of implementing the CSR strategy, with simultaneous control for dispositional and environmental variables.

Research implications suggest that the findings may be important for the practice. We imagine workshops on work ethic and motivation, participation in which would let the individuals obtain better insight into the meaning of their own values, needs, and attitudes connected with work and into sources of their own motivation. It would be advisable to train individuals by focusing on the strengthening of their motivation, basing on their specific beliefs about work.

On the basis of the research findings, it can be assumed that a high work ethic characterizes more often individuals who display high intrinsic motivation, are motivated to perform interesting work, and strive to achieve high standards in it. The results may also point to the satisfaction of the need to have a positive opinion about oneself, as well as to the need for recognition and prestige, by individuals autonomously motivated to work. Attributing high value to hard work, the belief that it leads to success, and self-reliance are also related to the willingness to work for external, material rewards, and may result from the pursuit of positive relationships with others.

Research into the relationships between work ethic and motivation to work is in the exploratory phase, so both theoretical models and potential causal models require further empirical research. We firmly believe that despite these limitations and the lack of final theoretical conclusions, the research presented here contributes to a more complete understanding of human attitude towards work and points to important sources of motivation to work, as well as constitutes an important step towards building a more complete model of the interrelationships between the two variables.

Supporting information

S1 table. descriptive statistics and reliability coefficients of work ethic dimensions (mwep) and components of motivation to work (weims)..

M = Mean value, SD = Standard deviation, MWEP–Multidimensional work ethic profile, α = Cronbach’s α , ω = McDonald’s ω —reliability coefficients.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253145.s001

S2 Table. Correlations between dimensions of work ethic and components of motivation to work.

MWEP–Multidimensional work ethic profile, *** p < .001; ** p < .01; * p < .05.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253145.s002

S3 Table. Work ethic and motivation.

Results of CCA for two canonical functions: canonical correlations, loadings, shared variance and redundancy analysis of independent and dependent canonical variates. *** p < .001.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253145.s003

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253145.s004

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the cooperation and efforts of different organizations who assisted in data gathering. We would like to express our gratitude to all of the participants of the study and to all the persons managing the institutions where the research took place for their help.

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• 3. Hackman JR, Oldham GR. Work redesign. Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley; 1980.
• PubMed/NCBI
• 9. Ch Bjorklund. Work Motivation—Studies of its Determinants and Outcomes. Stockholm: School of Economics. EFI, The Economic Research Institute; 2001.
• 12. Rokeach M. Beliefs, attitudes, and values: A theory of organization and change. San Francisco CA: Jossey-Bass Inc; 1972.
• 13. Rokeach M. The nature of human values. New York NY: The Free Press; 1973. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1973.9915585 pmid:28135165
• 14. Lewin K. Constructs in field theory [1944]. In: Cartwright D, editor. Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers by Kurt Lewin. London: Tavistock; 1952. pp. 30–42.
• 20. Weber M. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. London and New York: Routledge; 2005.
• 21. Furnham A. The Protestant work ethic: The psychology of work-related beliefs and behaviors. London: Routledge; 1990.
• 22. Grabowski D. Etyka pracy. Przekonania wartościujące pracę a zaangażowanie pracowników. [Work Ethic. Work Evaluating Convictions and the Commitment of Workers]. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego; 2015.
• 37. Vallerand RJ, Ratelle CF. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: A hierarchical model. In: Deci EL, Ryan RM, editors. Handbook of Self-Determination Theory New York: The University of Rochester Press; 2004. pp. 128–137.
• 45. VandenBos GR. (Ed.). APA Dictionary of Psychology. American Psychological Association, 2007.
• 52. Johnson R, Wichern D. Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall; 2007: 539–574.

Ethical Research in Business Ethics

• Editorial Essay
• Published: 29 November 2022
• Volume 182 , pages 1–5, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Gazi Islam 1 &
• Michelle Greenwood 2  

7102 Accesses

3 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

In this editorial essay, we argue that business ethics research should be aware of the ethical implications of its own methodological choices, and that these implications include, but go beyond, mere compliance with standardized ethical norms. Methodological choices should be made specifically with reference to their effects on the world, both within and outside the academy. Awareness of these effects takes researchers beyond assuring ethics in their methods to more fully consider the ethics of their methods as knowledge practices that have broader institutional consequences. Drawing from examples in published research, we examine five ways in which authors can formulate their methodological approaches with purpose, care and reflexivity.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Business ethicists are accustomed to confronting the “hard cases” of ethical choices in organizational life. We believe that business ethics scholarship must be equally sensitive to ethical nuances in the design and implementation of research methods in our own activities. In the complexities of research practice, ethical considerations around method and design exceed the standardized templates of methods textbooks. Where research designs begin and end and whom they implicate as protagonists, who receives voice, protection and authority, and what is rendered visible and invisible within the field of study. These are thorny questions that are not amenable to check-list style compliance guidelines, even where such guidelines also have an important role (cf., Greenwood, 2016 ).

In our exchanges with authors and within the editorial team, we have confronted a plethora of hard cases that highlight the challenges of research ethics beyond rule compliance. To what extent should the mode of data collection (such as crowdsourced data or social media platforms) answer to ethical quandaries around digital labour and online surveillance? When should organizations or individuals engaging in ethically problematic practices be named, and when must they be anonymized? To what extent should the relationships between researchers and participants be problematized within methods sections, including financial and power relationships between funders, researchers and participants? What are the respective roles of institutional ethics boards and journal editorial teams (along with other actors in the research ecosystem) in validating the ethical permissibility of a design? When should hard ethical questions lead a study to be rejected at the review stage, rather than passed along to the research community to make its own judgment? Such questions (and many, many more) have filled our days with deep reflection, and the current editorial aims to share some of these reflections with the Journal of Business Ethics community, albeit in necessarily schematic form. Specifically, we aim to both expand thinking about research ethics to include elements that are often considered outside of methods, and situate conventional methodological ethics in relation to this broader vision. The result will be a plea for a research ethics based on purpose, care and reflexivity.

Between Prescriptive and Evaluative Research Ethics

In a previous editorial essay (Islam & Greenwood, 2021 ), we borrowed a distinction by Williams ( 1985 ) between prescriptive and evaluative ethics; the former refers to what one should do, while the latter to what the world should look like. Mapped onto methods, this analytical distinction differentiates between specific methodological practices (e.g., one should design measures that fit the core constructs, one should gather informed consent) and the broader social and practical implications of research (e.g., the goals of science to innovate, educate or emancipate). We emphasize that this is an “analytical” distinction because, in practice, these aspects of ethics are deeply intertwined, and we distinguish them primarily to show how they spill into each other. Actions should be prescribed, at least in part, for the worlds they contribute to making, although in the fog of situated practice, we are often unaware of, or unable to, clearly link our actions to those future worlds.

From this distinction, it is easy to differentiate heuristically between ethics in research methods, that is, the ethical norms and practices internal to research design and execution, and the ethics of research methods, that is, whether those methods should be used in the broader evaluative sense. In many cases, these ethical levels align, with ethical practices working toward an evaluatively desirable world. Gathering informed consent is important because it is desirable to promote a world of autonomous choice (e.g., Hansson, 2006 ). Hypothesizing after the results are known is problematic because promoting false positive statistical results reduces replicability and thus scientific certainty about the world (Kerr, 1998 ). To take the previous example, however, some have argued that “HARK”ing is less ethically problematic when research is transparently exploratory (Hollenbeck & Wright, 2017 ); in this case, what is ethically problematic is not the practice per se, but the lack of transparency between a given practice and its exploratory (rather than confirmatory) intent. As for informed consent, in cases where a signed form substitutes for, rather than expresses, true participant autonomy (cf., Dubois et al, 2012 ), it can obscure rather than clarify the ethics of a research project. To begin with, the presentation of a priori formulated protocols for consent presumes that the identified participant is the only stakeholder in the research who is affected by the research in a manner that would require their consent. Moreover, this protocol may preclude collaborative models in which participants actively construct research protocols with researchers (Hansson, 2006 ). In both of these examples, a practice is justified on the basis of a deeper evaluative motive, but the mapping between the two is imperfect and situation-dependent.

Tensions may appear between prescriptive and evaluative dimensions of research methods, giving rise to ethical polemics or dilemmas. To give one example, we have had recent debates around the ethics of online data crowdsourcing from platforms such as Amazon MTurk (e.g., Newman et al., 2021 ). Much discussion has been given to best practice in terms of construct validity and similar “internal” considerations of research design as well as issues such as “bots” or fraudulent respondent activity that affect validity. However, broader considerations in terms of labour exploitation on online platforms (e.g., Shank, 2016 ) bridge internal and external research ethics, given internal norms for participant autonomy and external considerations of the public good. Less discussed are the systematic effects of widespread use of online data collection for disembodying researchers from participant communities, entrenching economies of digital labour and surveillance, and reifying a context-free individual as the object of social scientific study. These, we would argue, are methodological outcomes that may contribute to undesirable worlds, and thus are materially relevant for ethical consideration.

Other examples illustrate the opposite tension between prescriptive and evaluative research ethics. In a provocative article, Roulet et al. ( 2017 ) describe the potentials of “covert” research, where normally unacceptable practices of researcher concealment are weighed against laudable goals such as revealing workplace abuse or unethical organizational practices. In such cases, practices that are prescriptively problematic (e.g., collecting data without consent, concealing researcher identity) are defended on the grounds that the ethical goods, in terms of creating a better world, legitimate such practices. While the example of online platforms seems more defensible at the level of practice but questionable at the level of broad systemic implications, that of covert research seems more problematic at the level of practices while (possibly) defensible in terms of its ethical purposes.

More than simply a conflict between means and ends, however, such tensions reveal discrepancies between ends that are “localized” as specific practices (e.g., the goal of conducting a valid study according to current norms) and the more broad-based ends of research (e.g., creating a better world through socially reflexive knowledge production). Our challenge at the Journal of Business Ethics as editors, and our counsel to authors, reviewers and editors is to reflexively seek equilibrium between the practical ethics of research design and execution and the broader promotion of the public good that is the ultimate end of science.

Guiding Ethical Research in Business Ethics

Situating research ethics within the relationship between concrete ethical practices and evaluative goals of social improvement adds complexity to ethical decisions, forcing researchers, reviewers and editors to confront real ethical dilemmas that cannot be dissolved in mere compliance practices. We think the recognition of this complexity is salutary. It emphasizes that the review process is one moment in the broader network of evaluative practices that includes—but is not limited to—institutional ethics approval processes prior to submission, ethical and legal considerations of publishing houses and scholarly societies that administer academic production, and reception of research after publication. Each of these moments bring into light different ethical stakes, and we see our editorial role as an important but not exhaustive evaluative moment. From our perspective, our role is not to present a hurdle over which only the most flawless research can pass, but to curate a conversation with the greatest potential for scholarly generativity and progress. This makes our goal a collective one, and we judge research for its ability to promote the field, by being rigorous, by being interesting, by being reflexive, or by some combination of these epistemic virtues. From the research ethics we have outlined we derive certain guiding principles for evaluation.

Showing Links Between Methodological Design and the Broader Purpose of the Study

Business ethics scholarship should clarify its purpose through clearly articulated research questions and hypotheses, while explaining in its methods why specific research practices are important for a broader purpose, and why that purpose is itself ethically relevant. Specifically, the methods discussion should reflect how the ethics-related purpose of the study is consistent with the methodological approach adopted, both in terms of the broad design and specific practices. In short, integration of methods with the wider purpose of the study, and alignment between the two, is a mark of ethically sensitive research.

In their recent study of child labour in Indian cottonseed oil farms, D’Cruz et al. ( 2022 ) demonstrate an exemplary integration of methods and purpose to explore a topic that is notoriously difficult to study methodologically. Drawing on analyses of children’s drawings, together with detailed conversational extracts, the authors paint a powerful picture of the experience of violence in a population of working children. Rather than staying only at the level of lived experiences, however, the authors use those experiences to understand how processes of embedding and disembedding labour within society are manifested at the micro level. Thus, their visual and discursive methods become powerful tools to link everyday suffering with macro processes of economy and society.

Acknowledging the Web of Relationships Within Which Research Methods are Embedded

Each aspect of the research process, from protocol design to data collection to peer review, involves multiple actors who collectively construct the meaning of scholarship (Greenwood, 2016 ). While it may not be possible to make this network entirely visible, the ability to do so increases the transparency and value of a scholarly inquiry.

In his study of external funding on research freedom, Goduscheit ( 2022 ) uses qualitative interviews, program materials and observations to understand how funding bodies shape research outcomes. He shows how expectations from funding bodies can shape the types of topics studied, the ways in which research questions are answered and the forms of research output that are produced. Rather than simply deeming such influences to be unethical, he analyses the positive and negative features of the evolving relationships between researchers and funding bodies and their implications for developing scholarship.

Similarly acknowledging relationships but on a very different topic, Allen et al. ( 2019 ) describe the role of reflexivity in sustainability research, where ecological responsibility can result from acknowledging the multiple relationships between humans and the environment. Promoting an “ecocentric radical-reflexivity”, they point to how methods such as participatory action research and arts-based methods can help identify organizational actors as embedded in ecological relationships. In this example, as in the previous one, research is recognized as more than simply the execution of accepted standards. Rather, ethical research depends on developing sensibilities towards the complex economic and ecological relationships in which scholarship is situated.

Complementing Compliance with Purpose

Ethics should be explicitly discussed as an aspect of methodology, but this is best done when a focus on compliance with standards is complemented by a consideration of core ethical issues and a transparent discussion of how decisions were made in response to those issues. Doing so reveals those decisions as tailor-made for the case at hand and not imposed upon the case without regard for its specificities (Greenwood, 2016 ). In other words, compliance is not a sufficient criterion for ethical research methods, and a methodological approach focused exclusively on ethical compliance criteria may miss the “bigger picture” of the role of the methods in the broader scientific and social goals of the study.

Nielsen’s ( 2016 ) paper on ethical praxis and action research elaborates on how research involves ethical decision making and situated, pragmatic choices that go beyond simply ticking the correct ethical boxes. Describing these from an Aristotelian perspective, he elaborates how researcher-participant interactions give rise to emergent research concerns that are both knowledge-related problems and problems for practice. The ethics of action research in this context is about facing unique problems that cut across the researcher-practitioner divide and can draw upon but are not limited to pre-existing ethics templates.

Adopting an Explanatory Versus a Justificatory Orientation

Methodological descriptions of ethics often have the tone of justification claims legitimizing authorial choices in terms of sample, data collection or analysis. Such justifications are warranted, and are good practice, but we believe that value is added when authors are more forthright about their ethical difficulties and dilemmas. Specifically, we value their attempts to work out those dilemmas transparently for a scholarly audience, that is thereby given access into the workings of scientific decision-making process and not simply presented with a black box labeled “method”. There is more value in showing the path taken to an ethical judgement than simply defending that the end decision was a good one. This also implies that wrong turns, changes of track, and similar ethical revisions should be described and contribute to the value of a paper.

Litz’s and Turner’s ( 2013 ) study of unethical practices in inherited family firms provides an interesting case of how researchers can productively describe the dilemmas they face methodologically. Given the difficulty of gathering data about the unethical practices of family members, they candidly ask “how does one approach a question so laced with shame and stigma?”(p.303). Rather than presenting their method in terms of templates used to justify their choices, they recruit the readers directly into their dilemma and walk them through their choices, which involved confronting participants with dramatic scenarios that allowed them to disclose intimately held views more safely. Ultimately building this technique into a validation exercise and a quantitative analysis, the latter are given credibility by their grounding in the initial researcher dilemma that led to the methodological approach.

Transparency and Reflexivity in Writing and Link Between Methods and Results Sections

Because transparent and reflexive description of methods integrates theoretical considerations within the methods itself, such description allows the method to operate more organically within the broader argument of the paper. Doing so allows authors to establish links between the methods and discussion sections, to describe what went right or wrong, what the limitations and possibilities of the method were, and how future research could remedy possible shortcomings or harms of the given method.

For example, Bontempi et al. ( 2021 ) study of CSR reporting inspired by the case of the Ethiopian Gibe III dam is exemplary of how methods can be used to reflexively and transparently link methods and results. Engaging in a “counter reporting”, the study draws upon conceptual literature, archival and theoretical research, and activist on-the-ground engagement to build an alternative view of reported social engagement around hydroelectric dams. Alternating between inductive and deductive approaches, these authors were particularly reflexive and deeply transparent in their methodological description, including detailed and publicly available information from their codebook in the article’s supplementary materials. The result went beyond the standard critique of CSR discourses to actively create a counter-discourse that was both scholarly and activist in orientation. The resulting discursive struggle continued onto the blogosphere, with methodological debate between the authors and the company itself over methods. Footnote 1 We see such interaction and engagement as key to the social relevance of research.

Purpose, Care and Reflexivity

Research ethics have conventionally been concerned with the procedural aspects of scholarship, in particular the methods. Gold standard in this regard has been to not merely treat ethical standards as hurdles but as aspirations. In this sense an ethical researcher is one who does not only comply but who also cares. We suggest that care requires researcher to actively reflect on and take responsibility for their ethical practices and their research goals, and to situate their practices reflexively within a broader collective process of scholarly inquiry. Thus, we extend the notion of care to embrace the reflexivity of the researcher with regard to their own positionality (and privilege) and with regard to the purpose of research, treating ethics as central to the entire research endeavor. Complementing ethical theorizing that draws data from orthodox empirical methods, we encourage scholars to take up new forms of ethical empirical research in which connections between the conduct of the research and the motivation of the research are deeply and actively formed. The guiding principles we outline in this editorial are aimed at integrating organic, particularized and reflective narratives about the ethical conduct and goals of research in the methods section and throughout the manuscript. Editors, reviewers and authors can all contribute to treating research ethics more centrally in business ethics research.

https://www.business-humanrights.org/es/%C3%BAltimas-noticias/rejoinder-to-webuilds-response/

Allen, S., Cunliffe, A. L., & Easterby-Smith, M. (2019). Understanding sustainability through the lens of ecocentric radical-reflexivity: Implications for management education. Journal of Business Ethics, 154 (3), 781–795.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bontempi, A., Del Bene, D., & Di Felice, L. J. (2021). Counter-reporting sustainability from the bottom up: The case of the construction company WeBuild and dam-related conflicts. Journal of Business Ethics, 2021 , 1–26.

Google Scholar  

D’Cruz, P., Noronha, E., Banday, M. U. L., & Chakraborty, S. (2022). Place matters:(Dis) embeddedness and child labourers’ experiences of depersonalized bullying in Indian Bt cottonseed global production networks. Journal of Business Ethics, 176 (2), 241–263.

DuBois, J. M., Beskow, L., Campbell, J., Dugosh, K., Festinger, D., Hartz, S., & Lidz, C. (2012). Restoring balance: A consensus statement on the protection of vulnerable research participants. American Journal of Public Health, 102 (12), 2220–2225.

Goduscheit, R. C. (2022). No strings attached? Potential effects of external funding on freedom of research. Journal of Business Ethics, 176 (1), 1–15.

Greenwood, M. (2016). Approving or improving research ethics in management journals. Journal of Business Ethics, 137 (3), 507–520.

Islam, G., & Greenwood, M. (2021). Reconnecting to the social in business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 170 (1), 1–4.

Hansson, S. O. (2006). Informed consent out of context. Journal of Business Ethics, 63 (2), 149–154.

Hollenbeck, J. R., & Wright, P. M. (2017). Harking, sharking, and tharking: Making the case for post hoc analysis of scientific data. Journal of Management, 43 (1), 5–18.

Kerr, N. L. (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 2 , 196.

Litz, R. A., & Turner, N. (2013). Sins of the father’s firm: Exploring responses to inherited ethical dilemmas in family business. Journal of Business Ethics, 113 (2), 297–315.

Newman, A., Bavik, Y. L., Mount, M., & Shao, B. (2021). Data collection via online platforms: Challenges and recommendations for future research. Applied Psychology, 70 (3), 1380–1402.

Nielsen, R. P. (2016). Action research as an ethics praxis method. Journal of Business Ethics, 135 (3), 419–428.

Roulet, T. J., Gill, M. J., Stenger, S., & Gill, D. J. (2017). Reconsidering the value of covert research: The role of ambiguous consent in participant observation. Organizational Research Methods, 20 (3), 487–517.

Shank, D. B. (2016). Using crowdsourcing websites for sociological research: The case of Amazon Mechanical Turk. American Sociologist, 47 (1), 47–55.

Williams, B. (1985). Ethics and the limits of philosophy . Harvard University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Grenoble Ecole de Management and IREGE, Grenoble, France

Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Michelle Greenwood

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gazi Islam .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Islam, G., Greenwood, M. Ethical Research in Business Ethics. J Bus Ethics 182 , 1–5 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05301-z

Download citation

Published : 29 November 2022

Issue Date : January 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05301-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Research ethics
• Reflexivity
• Research purpose
• Methodology
• Research integrity
• Social impact
• Beyond compliance

Advertisement

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Work ethics and employees job performance

Related Papers

Mohammed T. Nuseir

Mohammed T Nuseir

The ethical issues in business management have always been co-existing, but their type and quantum have been changed in the present digital world. The globalisation and digitisation of business have not only altered the ethical issues but also their gravity, as evidenced by the widening of problems and complaints. In the 21st century, business management is becoming more complex while a multitude of ethical issues appears simultaneously. Thus, an in-depth understanding of ethical problems and identification of mitigating options is required, for which these review efforts have been undertaken. Highly relevant research studies were selected from the literature and presented in a critique style, elaborating both sides of the picture. Significant findings were documented logically with consequent conclusions. Biographical notes: Mohammed T. Nuseir is an Associate Professor in Business and Marketing with a cross-cultural background and possessing superior academic and training experience at multinational academic institutes and corporations. He holds academic degrees from American and Canadian universities along with his professional experience in training senior management levels in a wide variety of fields such as e-marketing strategies, marketing management, social media, international business, sales, and human resources management. In addition to his experience in teaching UG and graduate level students, and his experience in conducting specialised training programs, he has been supervising Master and PhD students. Moreover, his work extended to research papers, where he has published many papers in collaboration with some fellows in peer-reviewed regional and international business journals, with a focus of topics that aim at organisational development and international organisations operating in Jordan and the ME region. Ahmad Ghandour is a Researcher and an Associate Professor currently at the Al Ain University of Science and Technology in UAE. His pursuit of knowledge and excellence in learning is a passion for him demonstrated in a successful tertiary study completed in three different countries. His research focuses are business value of websites, the power of social media in business, management information systems and business continuity. Prior to being an Ethical issues in modern business management 593 academic, He has had experience working for the military and the private sector. The diversity of his career populated him with a different taste of experience. He actively research and publish papers in academic journals and present in international conferences within his research domains. He is also sitting in an editorial board and a reviewer in many well-known international journals.

JOSEPH OKOH

Although the concept of corporate information management or system (CIS) has been around for several years I am struggling to get a definitive definition of what corporate information system is. In this work, I will attempt to firstly define and present a framework for looking at the various dimensions of corporate information system. Corporate information management or system is a process of:-strategic sense making,-planning the supply for future information needs,-increasing the utility value of available information resources,-eliminating redundant information,-ensuring compliance to legislation,-and increasing the return on investment in information technologies, A Corporate Information System (CIS) is a fully integrated, company-wide system solution that aims to meet all organisational ICT requirements at all levels. Rather than being replicated across departments, data is held only once; it is " owned " by the organisation as a whole and used by different departments. In other words, all systems access and update the same data source. An example that illustrates the concept of CIS is the use of personnel data by different departments. Rather than have separate systems and file structures for personnel records, payroll processing and pension

Thomas G Pittz

In this chapter, we demonstrate that the movement of the field of organizational decision-making away from a purely rational, economic model to incorporate concepts such as bounded rationality, politics, and power has created a space for normative ethics to flourish. We also offer practical advice for those teaching business ethics in decision-making courses. We encourage teachers to challenge students’ current ethical conceptions to promote greater awareness, we provide a five-step framework for approaching ethical decisions, and we offer a case study example to employ the framework and promote a new way of ethical thinking.

International Journal of Value-Based Management

Andre NIjhof

Several theories exist on how managers think aboutethical responsibilities in a business environment. Some stress the economic way of thinking and explainwhy there is no space for moral reasoning in abusiness environment. Others claim that in a ...

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

JUSTIN GABRIEL

This paper reviewed the literature on ethics, ethical theories, ethical principles; as well as the implications of unethical practices in organizations. The study revealed that unethical business practices have devastating consequences on organizations; since they result in poor corporate image, financial losses; market failures and sometimes complete corporate collapse. It was further observed that corruption, bad leadership, poor corporate governance, conflict of interest, lack of accountability, inadequate CSR, abusive and intimating behaviors among others are common in most organizations. The paper concludes that it is beneficial and in the enlightened self -interest of organizations to adopt good ethical practices. The paper also recommends that managers’ should ensure that ethical standards are crafted in their business philosophy and strategic intents in order to build and maintain a good corporate image.

Access Journal - Access to Science, Business, Innovation in the digital economy

Zurab Mushkudiani

res publication

accounts ziraf

A focus on short-term profit as an exclusive measure of business success has led to an erosion of stakeholder trust and opened the door for ethical misconduct. This study identified the values, beliefs, and experiences in the background of business leaders and led to the development of a process for decision making in which stakeholder interest is considered. This phenomenological study, grounded in the institutional theory, addressed how an ethical interpretive framework becomes institutionalized. The research question explored the attributes of decision making when there are ethical implications affecting stakeholders. Data were collected by interviewing 20 middle-to senior-level corporate leaders in the eastern half of the United States. The data were coded to identify themes, which were then analyzed.Four themes emerged: (a) honesty and integrity in interactions that are internal and external to the company; (b) doing the right thing, the right way for both stakeholders and the company; (c) weighing the benefits and risks to stakeholders and the company; and (d) transparency when acting and communicating. This research study was designed to assist business leaderswith decision making when there are ethical implications affecting stakeholders that may result from their actions.

International Journal of Value-based Management

Harry Hummels

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

How to Develop a Strong Work Ethic

• Tutti Taygerly

Hiring managers want to see your motivation, can-do attitude, and dedication.

In our early career years, it can be challenging to figure out what behaviors are and are not acceptable in different professional environments. Employers are now expecting more of entry-level workers and they want to see that you have good work ethic. So what is work ethic?

• Work ethic refers to a set of moral principles, values, and attitudes around how to act at work. It often surrounds what behaviors are commonly acceptable and appropriate (or not).
• Qualities like reliability, productivity, ownership and team support all demonstrate professional integrity, or a strong commitment to ethical behavior at work. In contrast, low-quality work, tardiness, or lack of attention to details demonstrates bad work ethic.
• If you’re new to the workplace, a good way to start is by observing. Pay attention to how your coworkers behave in meetings to gain a better understanding of their “etiquette,” as well as the communication styles of different people and teams. Another essential part of building good work ethic is adopting a “do it like you own it” attitude. You can do this by being proactive in small, but powerful, ways.

Where your work meets your life. See more from Ascend here .

Have you ever wondered about how to behave appropriately at work? Throughout your career, and especially in the early years, it’s challenging to figure out what behaviors and attitudes are and are not acceptable in different professional environments. The more you traverse companies and industries, the clearer your understanding will become. When you’re just starting out, though, it can be hard to pin down these behaviors.

• Tutti Taygerly is an executive coach and speaker with 20+ years of product design experience in Silicon Valley. Her book Make Space to Lead: Break Patterns to Find Flow and Focus on What Matters Most (Taygerly Labs, 2021) shows high achievers how to reframe their relationship to work.

Partner Center

The Meaning and Importance of Work Ethic

This essay about the significance of work ethic in achieving success and fulfillment. It discusses how work ethic encompasses qualities like perseverance, dedication, and integrity, serving as a guiding principle in both personal and professional spheres. The essay emphasizes the importance of upholding work ethic not only for individual success but also for the betterment of organizations and society as a whole. It highlights how individuals with a strong work ethic contribute positively to productivity, morale, and team dynamics, while also shaping their reputation and character. Ultimately, the essay underscores the role of work ethic as a compass that steers individuals toward excellence and integrity in a competitive world.

How it works

In the fabric of professional success, one thread stands out prominently: work ethic. It’s not just about punching the clock or meeting deadlines; it’s a mindset, a philosophy that drives individuals toward excellence. Picture it as a compass guiding sailors through stormy seas, navigating the tumult of challenges with unwavering resolve and integrity. Understanding the essence and significance of work ethic is akin to unlocking the gates to a realm where perseverance meets purpose, and effort begets achievement.

At its essence, work ethic is the fuel that propels the engine of progress.

It’s the willingness to roll up one’s sleeves and dive headfirst into the task at hand, regardless of the obstacles that lie ahead. Think of it as the silent force behind every success story, the unseen hand that shapes destinies. Those who embody a strong work ethic are not just clock-watchers; they’re visionaries, sculptors of their own fate, chiseling away at the marble of potential to reveal the masterpiece within.

But the importance of work ethic transcends individual aspirations; it permeates the very fabric of society. In the bustling hive of industry, it’s the glue that holds teams together, the common language spoken by colleagues striving toward a shared vision. Businesses built on a foundation of strong work ethic are like sturdy ships navigating treacherous waters, weathering storms and emerging stronger on the other side. They understand that success is not just about talent or luck; it’s about consistency, dedication, and a relentless pursuit of excellence.

Moreover, work ethic is a reflection of character, a mirror that reveals the true essence of an individual. Those who possess it are not just employees; they’re beacons of integrity, shining examples of what it means to stand tall in the face of adversity. Their reputation precedes them, earning the respect and admiration of peers and leaders alike. They understand that integrity is not just a word; it’s a way of life, a compass that guides them through the moral maze of modern-day challenges.

In essence, work ethic is more than just a concept; it’s a way of being, a philosophy that shapes attitudes and actions. It’s about embracing challenges, honoring commitments, and striving for excellence in everything we do. In a world where shortcuts abound and quick fixes are the norm, those who uphold the principles of work ethic stand out like beacons in the night, guiding others toward a brighter future.

Cite this page

The Meaning And Importance Of Work Ethic. (2024, Apr 29). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-meaning-and-importance-of-work-ethic/

"The Meaning And Importance Of Work Ethic." PapersOwl.com , 29 Apr 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-meaning-and-importance-of-work-ethic/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Meaning And Importance Of Work Ethic . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-meaning-and-importance-of-work-ethic/ [Accessed: 1 May. 2024]

"The Meaning And Importance Of Work Ethic." PapersOwl.com, Apr 29, 2024. Accessed May 1, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-meaning-and-importance-of-work-ethic/

"The Meaning And Importance Of Work Ethic," PapersOwl.com , 29-Apr-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-meaning-and-importance-of-work-ethic/. [Accessed: 1-May-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Meaning And Importance Of Work Ethic . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-meaning-and-importance-of-work-ethic/ [Accessed: 1-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

--> AGU