Home  About us  Contact
 

High Ethical Standards (high + ethical_standards)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Business, Economics, Finance and Accounting60%
Medical Sciences40%

Selected Abstracts

Consortium of Otolaryngology,Head and Neck Surgery Journals to Collaborate in Maintenance of High Ethical Standards

THE LARYNGOSCOPE, Issue 5 2005
Michael S. Benninger
No abstract is available for this article. [source]

NONPROFIT EMPLOYEES' MACHIAVELLIAN PROPENSITIES

FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY & MANAGEMENT, Issue 3 2009
Pamela C. Smith
Nonprofit organizations are held to high ethical standards due to their charitable missions serving the common good. Incidents of fiscal mismanagement within the nonprofit sector make it relevant to assay the ethical principles of employees. This study examines the level of Machiavellian propensities of US nonprofit employees. Results indicate Machiavellian propensities do exist in certain nonprofit employees and these employees agree with questionable behavior. Policy makers and oversight agencies may find these results useful in developing corporate governance and accountability measures for nonprofit organizations. Furthermore, board of director members may use these results to monitor employee actions and address management training. [source]

Consortium of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery journals to collaborate in maintenance of high ethical standards

HEAD & NECK: JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENCES & SPECIALTIES OF THE HEAD AND NECK, Issue 5 2005
Article first published online: 18 APR 200
No abstract is available for this article. [source]

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, ETHICS, AND ORGANIZATIONAL ARCHITECTURE

JOURNAL OF APPLIED CORPORATE FINANCE, Issue 3 2003
James A. Brickley
Effective corporate leadership involves more than developing a good strategic plan and setting high ethical standards. It also means coming up with an organizational design that encourages the company's managers and employees to carry out its business plan and maintain its ethical standards. In this article, the authors use the term organizational architecture to refer to three key elements of a company's design: ,the assignment of decision-making authority,who gets to make what decisions; ,performance evaluation,the key measures of performance for evaluating business units and individual employees; and ,compensation structure,how employees are rewarded for meeting performance goals. In well-designed companies, each of these elements is mutually reinforcing and supportive of the company's overall business strategy. Decision-making authority is assigned to managers and employees who have the knowledge and experience needed to make the best investment and operating decisions. And to ensure that those decision makers have the incentive as well as the knowledge to make the best decisions, the corporate systems used to evaluate and reward their performance are based on measures that are linked as directly as possible to the corporate goal of creating value. Some of the most popular management techniques of the past two decades, such as reengineering, TQM, and the Balanced Scorecard, have often had disappointing results because they address only one or two elements of organizational architecture, leaving the overall structure out of balance. What's more, a flawed organizational design can lead to far worse than missed opportunities to create value. As the authors note, the recent corporate scandals involved not just improper behavior by senior executives, but corporate structures that, far from safeguarding against such behavior, in some ways encouraged it. In the case of Enron, for example, top management's near-total focus on boosting reported earnings (a questionable corporate goal to begin with) combined with decentralized decision making and loose oversight at all levels of the company to produce an enormously risky high-leverage strategy that ended up bringing down the firm. [source]

The influence of authentic leadership behaviors on trust and work outcomes of health care staff

JOURNAL OF LEADERSHIP STUDIES, Issue 2 2009
Carol A. Wong
A key element of a healthy work environment is trust: trust between staff and their leaders. Authentic leadership is proposed as the core of effective leadership needed to build trust because of its clear focus on the positive role modeling of honesty, integrity, and high ethical standards in the development of leader-follower relationships. A model linking authentic leadership behaviors with trust in management, perceptions of supportive groups and work outcomes (including voice or speaking-up behavior, self-rated job performance, and burnout) using secondary analysis procedures was examined. The hypothesized model was tested using structural equation modeling in two samples of health care employees from a western Canadian cancer care agency: clinical care providers including nurses, pharmacists, physicians, and other professionals (N = 147) and nonclinical employees including administrative, support, and research staff (N = 188). Findings suggest that supportive leader behavior and trust in management are necessary for staff to be willing to voice concerns and offer suggestions to improve the workplace and patient care. [source]