The construct of Cognitive Moral Development (CMD) has drawn much attention in the study of business ethics for over two decades. The Defining Issues Test (DIT) has made a significant contribution to the literature as an easy-to-administer CMD instrument, and the Moral Judgment Test (MJT), an alternative scale, has also been used widely especially in Europe. The two scales differ in their approaches to measuring CMD, focusing on stage preference (DIT) and stage consistency (MJT), yet empirical comparisons have been scarce. (...) The present research empirically compares the two scales in terms of their correspondence with ethical ideology as a reference scale, and it demonstrates a clear distinction between the DIT and the MJT. Although they both aim to measure CMD, their dissimilar approaches lead to distinctly different implications. (shrink)

CEOs’ social and environmental activism attracts significant public and research interest. Positioned as an expression of personal morality, such activism is potentially highly influential because of CEOs’ public visibility and associated positional and resource-based power. This paper questions the assumption that CEO activism can only be explained in relation to individual moral action, and illuminates its wider social implications. We critically evaluate the recent upsurge in CEO activism by juxtaposing it against broader social activism, identifying its distinctive characteristics, and empirically (...) examining two recent ‘moral episodes’: the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program and the Fetal Heartbeat Acts. Our analysis demonstrates that CEO activism is more heterogeneous than research to date has shown. Building on this analysis, a refined understanding of the character and morality of CEO activism is developed by establishing a typology of its forms. We conclude that while CEO activism is an important and potent new phenomenon, it may not be universally appropriate to regard CEOs as moral leaders. Instead, it is paramount to question the motives and effects of what CEOs do in the name of morality. (shrink)

This article reports on the development of the managerial ethical profile (MEP) scale. The MEP scale is a multilevel, self-reporting scale measuring the perceived influence that different dimensions of common ethical frameworks have on managerial decision making. The MEP scale measures on eight subscales: economic egoism, reputational egoism, act utilitarianism, rule utilitarianism, self-virtue of self, virtue of others, act deontology, and rule deontology. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to provide evidence of scale validity. Future research needs and the value (...) of this measure for business ethics are discussed. (shrink)