Ethical Problems of Marketing Researchers
Author(s): Shelby D. Hunt, Lawrence B. Chonko, James B. Wilcox
Source: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Aug., 1984), pp. 309-324
Published by: American Marketing Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3151607
Accessed: 03/03/2010 15:03
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ama.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
American Marketing Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Journal of Marketing Research.
http://www.jstor.org
D. HUNT,LAWRENCE
B. CHONKO,and JAMESB. WILCOX*
SHELBY
Almostall studieson ethics in marketingresearchhave focused on either delinand obligationsof researchersto respondentsand clients
eating the responsibilities
or exploringwhethervariousgroups perceivecertain marketingresearchpractices
to be ethicalor unethical.Theauthorsempiricallyexaminefour researchquestions:
What are the majorethical problemsof marketingresearchers?To what extent do
our professionalcodes of conductaddressthe majorethicalproblemsof marketing
researchers?Howextensiveare the ethicalproblemsof marketingresearchers?How
effectiveare the actions of top managementin reducingethical problemsof marketing researchers?
Ethical
Problems
of
Marketing Researchers
systematic"(p. 262). They identifyseveralareaswhere
more researchis critically needed, including "ranking
the variousareasof ethicalabuse
(in termsof importance)
in marketing"and "findingout whetherthe behaviorof
the chief marketingofficer is the crucialvariablein setting the moral tone of the marketingorganization"(p.
262). The purposeof our researchprojectwas to examinethese issues. Specifically,the studyaddressedfour
researchquestions.
Marketingactivities often pose significant ethical
problemsin business. In a classic studyof businessethics, Baumhart(1961) identifiedthe majorethical problems thatbusinesspeople wantedto eliminate:(1) gifts,
gratuities,bribes, and "call girls," (2) price discriminationand unfairpricing, (3) dishonestadvertising,(4)
miscellaneousunfaircompetitivepractices,(5) cheating
customers,unfaircredit practices, and overselling, (6)
pricecollusionby competitors,(7) dishonestyin making
or keeping a contract,and (8) unfairnessto employees
andprejudicein hiring.Note that five of the eight most
importantethical problemspertainto marketingactivities. BrennerandMolander(1977) conducteda followup
study and found the same set of undesirablepractices,
thoughthe orderof importance
changedfor severalitems.
such
as
these
led
Findings
Murphyand Laczniak(1981)
to concludethat"thefunctionwithinbusinessfirmsmost
often chargedwith ethicalabuseis marketing"(p. 251),
andpromptedus to exploreempiricallythe natureof the
ethicalproblemsof marketingresearchers.
Murphy and Laczniak (1981) comprehensivelyreviewed ethics researchand found thatresearch"related
to marketingethics has been less than innovativeand
1. What are the majorethical problemsof marketingresearchers?
2. To whatextentdo our professionalcodes of conductaddressthe majorethicalproblemsof marketingresearchers?
3. How extensiveare the ethicalproblemsof marketingresearchers?
4. How effective are the actionsof top managementin reducingthe ethicalproblemsof marketingresearchers?
We exploredthesequestionsusinga sampleof morethan
450 practicingmarketingresearchprofessionals.Before
we examinethe resultsof the study, a discussionof the
natureof ethical problemsin marketingresearchis appropriate.
THENATUREOF ETHICALPROBLEMSOF
MARKETING
RESEARCHERS
Ethicalproblemsare relationshipkinds of problems.
Thatis, ethicalproblemsoccuronly when an individual
interactswith otherpeople.The ethicalphilosopherBaier
(1958, p. 215) pointsout that"a worldof RobinsonCrusoes has no need for morality."Partof the value system
of each individualis a perceivedset of obligations,duties, andresponsibilitiestowardothergroupsof people.
*ShelbyD. Huntis Paul WhitfieldHornProfessorof Marketing,
LawrenceB. Chonkois AssociateProfessorof Marketing,andJames
B. Wilcox is Professorof Marketing,Texas Tech University.
The authorsexpresstheir sincereappreciationto the membersof
the AmericanMarketingAssociationwho participatedin the research
project.They also gratefullyacknowledgethe financialsupportof the
Officeof BusinessResearch,Collegeof BusinessAdministration,
Texas
TechUniversity.The timelyassistanceof PaulSurgiSpeckat various
stagesof the researchprojectis appreciated.
309
Journal of Marketing Research
Vol. XXI (August 1984), 309-24
AUGUST1984
JOURNALOF MARKETING
RESEARCH,
310
For example, a researcher has the responsibility to treat
respondents fairly in a research study. At the same time,
a researcher has a responsibility to the client to gather
accurate, reliable information.
Ethical conflict occurs when an individual perceives
that his/her duties and responsibilities toward one group
are inconsistent with his/her duties and responsibilities
toward some other group (including one's self). The individual then must attempt to resolve these opposing obligations. For example, a researcher might resolve an
ethical conflict as follows: "In order to gather accurate
and reliable data (satisfying my duty to my client), I shall
deceive the respondents in my study about the true nature of the study, but shall 'debrief the respondentsabout
the true purpose of the study upon its completion (thus
satisfying my obligation of fairness to my respondents)."
Other researchers might choose a different solution to
the ethical conflict, such as sacrificing the interests of
the client by gathering less reliable data. Bartels (1967,
p. 24) succinctly states the nature of ethical conflict.
In a pluralisticsocietynot one butmanyexpectationsmust
be met. Therefore,resolutionof what is rightto do produces a balanceof obligationsand satisfactions.Ideally,
full satisfactionof the expectationsof all partieswould
constitutethe most ethical behavior.This is impossible,
for expectationsare often contradictoryand sometimes
exceedsocialsanction.Therefore,skill andjudgmentmust
be used to guide one in determiningthe point at which
his own integritycan be best maintained.
As Murphy and Laczniak (1981) point out, the "most
longstanding thrust within marketing research ethics is
the delineation of the rights of all parties involved in the
research process" (p. 253). Most of the ethics research
pertains to the duties of researchers toward respondents
and clients. For example, Tybout and Zaltman (1974)
set forth a "bill of rights" for respondents: the right to
choose, the right to safety, and the right to be informed.
Similarly, Schneider (1977) examined ways in which respondents' rights can be abused, including deceptive
practices by researchers, invasion of privacy, and lack
of consideration for respondents. Crawford (1970) examined the responsibilities of researchers toward both
respondents and society in general. Using primarily
"scenario" techniques, Coney and Murphy (1976) and
McGown (1979) also examined responsibilities of researchers toward respondents and clients.
Almost all studies on ethics in marketingresearchhave
focused on either delineating the responsibilities and obligations of researchers toward respondents and clients
or exploring whether various groups perceive certain
marketing research practices to be ethical or unethical.
No research has been done to determine empiricially the
major issues that practicing researchersperceive to result
in ethical conflict. Furthermore, though it is well established that ethical conflict results from balancing the interests of various groups, no research has addressed the
frequency with which different groups are involved in
the relationships producing ethical conflict for marketing
researchers. Though Murphy and Laczniak (1981) conclude that "there appears to be a general dissatisfaction
with the ethical performance of marketing researchers,"
(p. 255), no research has documented empirically the
extent of ethical problems of marketing researchers. The
preceding discussion emphasizes the importance of two
of the research questions addressed in this study: "What
are the major ethical problems of marketing researchers?" and "How extensive are the ethical problems of
marketing researchers?"
Previous studies have suggested three things that top
management can do to help resolve employees' ethical
conflict: (1) serve as role models by conducting their own
activities impeccably, (2) encourage ethical behaviors by
promptly reprimanding unethical conduct, and (3) draft
and promote both corporate and industry codes of conduct. Ferrell and Weaver (1978) examined the ethical
beliefs of marketing managers and concluded that "these
findings suggest that top management must assume at
least part of the responsibility for the ethical conduct of
marketerswithin their organization. By establishing and
enforcing policy, the frame of reference for ethical behavior could be improved" (p. 73). Similarly, Kaikati
and Label (1980) examined American bribery legislation
and concluded that "no code of ethical behavior is likely
to be observed unless the chief executive officer declares
that violators will be punished. When a company fails
to take strict disciplinary actions, many employees may
assume that their unethical acts are accepted standards
of corporate behavior" (p. 42).
Corporatecodes of conduct are very common. A study
conducted by the Ethics Resource Center (1979) found
that approximately three-fourths of corporations had a
written code of ethics. Similarly, the American Marketing Association has both a general code of ethics for
marketers and a specific code for marketing research
(Twedt 1963). Apparently believing the national association's code of conduct to be deficient, the New York
Chapter of the American Marketing Association has endorsed its own code of ethics for marketing research
(MarketingNews 1980, p. 24). Despite the existence of
many corporate, industry, and professional codes, empirical evidence that these codes effectively help resolve
ethical conflict is lacking. Murphy and Laczniak (1981)
examined the evidence and concluded that "corporate
codes are somewhat controversial" (p. 259). Therefore
we investigated the effectiveness of top management actions and corporateethical codes in reducing ethical conflict, as well as the extent to which our professional ethical codes address the major ethical problems.
METHOD
from a larger study examining
are
The data we report
and attitudes toMachiavellianism,
marketing ethics,
ward the job by means of a self-administered questionnaire sent to 4282 marketing practitioners. These individuals represented a systematic sample of one of every
311
PROBLEMS
ETHICAL
four marketingpractitionersin the AmericanMarketing
Association.As our focus was on the ethical problems
of researchersemployedeitherby marketresearchagencies or by businessorganizationsas "in-house"researchers, educatorsandstudentswere excludedfromthe sample frame. The questionnairewas pretested with a
conveniencesampleof 200 marketers(also obtainedfrom
the AMA directory).The final set of mailings, sent in
the summerof 1982, consistedof the questionnaireitself, a cover letter, a stamped,pre-addressedreply envelope, a prenotificationpostcardsent one week before
and a followuppostcardsent one week
the questionnaire,
afterthe questionnaire.
A total of 1076 usable questionnaireswere returned,
for a responserateof 25.1%. Responseratesat this level
are used
arenot uncommonwhen marketingpractitioners
as a sample. For example, Myers, Massy, and Greyser
(1980) obtaineda responserateof 28.5% in theirsurvey
of the AmericanMarketingAssociationmembership,and
a straightforward
membershipsurvey of AMA practitionersconductedby the Associationproducedonly a
41% response rate (American MarketingAssociation
1982). These studies had the sponsorshipof either or
boththe AmericanMarketingAssociationand the MarketingScience Institutewhereasour studyhad no sponsorshipotherthanour universityaffiliation.This difference probablyaccountsfor our lower responserate.
Fromthe total of 1076 usable questionnaires,the responsesof the 460 individualswho identifiedthemselves
(in the questionnaire)as marketingresearchersconstitute
the database for our analysis.The characteristicsof the
sample(Table 1) indicatethat respondentshave varied
educational
but, as expected,almostall have
backgrounds
college degrees.The sampleincludesboth in-houseand
marketresearchagency researchersemployedby firms
rangingin size fromone to morethan 1000 employees.
Advertisingagency researchersare not in the sample.
Also, the respondentsspan a wide range of ages, incomes, andjob titles.
RESULTS
Ethical Problems
Our first researchquestion is, "Whatare the major
ethical problems of marketingresearchers?"The absence of previousresearchon this questionnecessitated
an exploratoryresearchprocedure.Marketingresearchers were asked to respondin an open-endedmannerto
the followingquestion.
In all professions(e.g., law, medicine, education, accounting,marketing,etc.), managersare exposed to at
least some situationsthat pose a moralor ethical problem. Wouldyou please brieflydescribethe job situation
thatposes the mostdifficultethicalor moralproblemfor
you?
Thesubjectof ethics is alwaysa sensitiveresearchtopic.
Pretestsindicatedthat many respondentsbelieved (mistakenly)that the purposeof the researchwas to single
Table 1
CHARACTERISTICS
OF SAMPLEa
Characteristic
Typeof organization
1. In-houseresearchers
2. Agencyresearchers
Job title
1. Junioranalyst
2. Analyst
3. Assistantmanager/director
4. Manager/director
5. Vice president
6. President,owner
Size of firm
1. 1
2. 2 to 9
3. 10 to 19
4. 20 to 49
5. 50 to 99
6. 100 to 249
7. 250 to 499
8. 500 to 999
9. 1000 or more
Educationlevel
1. No college degree
2. Bachelor's
3. Master's
4. Doctorate
Sex
1. Male
2. Female
Maritalstatus
1. Married
2. Single
Income
1. Less than$10,000
2. $10,000 to $19,999
3. $20,000 to $29,999
4. $30,000 to $39,999
5. $40,000 to $49,999
6. $50,000 to $59,999
7. $60,000 to $69,999
8. $70,000 to $79,999
9. $80,000 to $89,999
10. $90,000 to $99,999
11. $100,000 or more
Age
1. 20-29
2. 30-39
3. 40-49
4. 50-59
5. 60 or more
Majorfield of study
1. Generalbusiness
2. Business-marketing
3. Business-accounting
4. Business-management
5. Business-statistics
6. Business-finance
7. Engineering
8. Othertechnical
(e.g. physics)
9. Social studies
10. Humanities
11. Other(e.g., education)
%
75
25
6
29
12
33
13
7
1
5
5
7
4
10
9
10
49
4
34
58
4
59
41
65
35
1
9
28
25
17
9
4
3
1
1
3
24
38
19
15
4
19b
23
1
1
3
1
4
10
21
9
8
aN = 460.
bManyof these are probablymarketingmajorswho simply specified "Bachelor'sdegreein business."
312
JOURNALOF MARKETING
AUGUST1984
RESEARCH,
out marketingas uniquein havingethicalproblems.Respondentsseemedmuchmorewilling to answerthe ethics questionwhenit was precededby the "desensitizing"
firststatement.The responseratewas 55%on the openendedquestion.
As is consistentwith ethical theory, the ethical problems identifiedby respondentswere coded accordingto
the differentissues and conflicts involved. Two independentjudges coded all 254 responsesand, thoughthe
codingof open-endedquestionsinherentlyinvolves subjectivity, the interjudgereliabilitywas 95% for issues
and94%for conflicts. Categorieswere developedto be
as consistentas possible with the AmericanMarketing
Associationcode of ethics.
Tables2, 3, and4 displaythe resultsfor ethicalissues
and conflicts. The ethical issue most often indicatedby
bothmarketingresearchagencyandin-houseresearchers
involvesproblemswith researchintegrity(Table2). Note
that the questionposed to respondentsdid not restrict
them exclusively to ethical problemsin the practice of
marketingresearch.Therefore,thoughthe firstfour ethical issues relate directlyto respondents'activities qua
researchers,severalotherscould be ethicalproblemsfor
any manager.Issues such as personnelproblems,gifts,
bribes, and entertainment,and the misuse of funds are
not uniquelymarketingresearchethical issues.
The most often reportedethical conflict of in-house
researchersis attemptingto balancethe reseacher'sselfinterestagainstthe researcher'sresponsibilitiesto clients
withinone's own company(Table3). Similarly,the ethical conflictmost often indicatedby marketingresearch
agency respondentsis attemptingto balance one's reto a clientoutsidethe companyagainstone's
sponsibilities
companyresponsibilities(Table4). We discuss each of
the majorethical issues in turn.
Researchintegrity.The firstcategoryaccountsfor 33%
of all responsesand includessuch items as deliberately
withholdinginformation,falsifying figures, alteringresearchresults,misusingstatistics,ignoringpertinentdata,
compromisingthe design of a researchproject,and misthe resultsof a researchprojectwith the obinterpreting
of
jective supportinga predeterminedpersonalor corporatepoint of view. All of these practiceshave the
commonthemeof deliberateproductionof dishonestor
research.We label the catless-than-completely-honest
because
"research
egory
integrity,"
any dishonestyin re-
Table 2
ETHICAL
RESEARCHa
ISSUESIN MARKETING
Issue
In-house researchers'
frequencyb
No.
%
Agency researchers'
frequencyb
No.
%
Total
frequencyb
No.
%
AMA
coded
1. Researchintegrity
62
31
37
37
99
33
2. Treatingoutside
clientsfairly
15
8
16
16
31
11
3. Researchconfidentiality
4. Marketingmix
social issues
15
8
12
12
27
9
17
9
6
6
23
8
5. Personnel issues
14
7
6
6
20
7
6. Treatingrespondentsfairly
7. Treatingothersin
companyfairly
17
9
2
2
19
6
11
6
1
1
12
4
-A5,6
8. Interviewerdishonesty
9. Gifts, bribes,and
1
1
9
9
10
3
D1,2,3,4
entertainment
10. Treating suppliers fairly
11. Legal issues
6
8
8
3
4
4
2
8
8
8
3
3
3
5
17
3
9
6
24
2
8
12. Misuseof funds
13. Other
2
-
-
1
7
1
7
A1,Bl,
C1
B2,3
New York
AMA code'
A1,2,3,4
B1,2,3,4
A5,6
C1,3
C2
-
D4,E
A2
D1,2,3
-
C1,3
B3
C4
n = 99
n = 295
100
n = 196
102
99
"In
all
to
professions(e.g., law, medicine,education,accounting,marketing,etc.), managersare exposed to
aResponse open-endedquestion:
at least some situationsthat pose a moralor ethical problem.Would you please briefly describethe job situationthat poses the most difficult
ethicalor moralproblemfor you?"
bThoughrespondentswere asked to describeonly one ethical problem,38 respondentsdescribedtwo coequal problemsand one respondent
describedthreecoequalproblems.Therefore,n is the numberof problemsdescribedby all valid responses,i.e., 254 respondentsdescribed295
problems (n = 295).
cIssuesare rankedby total frequency.Spearmanrankordercorrelation= .09 n.s.
dSectionof AMA (national)code addressingthis issue (See AppendixA for key).
'Sectionof AMA (New YorkChapter)code addressingthis issue (See AppendixB for key).
ETHICAL
PROBLEMS
313
Table 3
ETHICAL
CONFLICTS
REPORTED
BYIN-HOUSE
RESEARCHERSa
%
No.
24
12
18
9
13
7
13
7
12
6
12
6
11
6
10
5
10
5
73
37
196 100
'Read: "Thenumberone ethical conflict reportedby in-houseresearcherswas attemptingto balanceone's self-interestswith the interestsof clients withinone's own company."
bOfthese otherconflicts, eight accountedfor 43 reportedinstances
(22%): company-customer(8 instances), company-respondent
(7),
company-co-worker(6), self-outside client (5), self-respondent(5),
(4), management-outsideclient (4), and cocompany-subordinate
worker-outsideclient (4). Eighteenotherconflictrelationshipsmade
up the remaining30 instances(15%).
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Party one
Self
Self
Company
Self
Company
Company
Company
Company
Self
Otherconflictsb
Party two
Clientwithin
Company
Society
Management
Management
Competitors
Suppliers
Outsideclients
Co-workers
must be very tactful and diplomatic-use finesse. Successful marketing researchers within a company are usually extensions of management. Firms should always use
independent research facilities if they want the straight
story. I could write a book on this subject. When a bad
decision is made by management, it becomes very difficult for the marketing personnel. You either support the
decision halfheartedly, support the decision and offer alternatives, or look for another job. It is tough to be in a
position where you criticize management. Much marketing research is only "eye wash" for the wholesale buyers
to convince them that the product is indeed needed and
will sell in volume-almost a "fraudulent" situation.
Another in-house researcher reported, "[I] refused to
alter research results and as a result I was eventually
fired for failure to think strategically." A sporting goods
marketing research manager described passing off "soft
data" as "hard."
Managers, wishing to provide backup for their proposals
and/or analyses of some situation, ask me to "estimate"
the dollars, percentage, etc. They then put these gross
estimates, guesses and sometimes completely fake figures into their reports with two decimal accuracy! They
do this ratherthan defend their opinions as "my best business judgment" and admit we can't afford or haven't had
the time to do an actual study. I generally comply [with
these requests] making clear how later reliance on these
numbers may cause poor decisions and warn that if it ever
comes to it, I will freely admit how the numbers were
derived! If the president of the company had any backbone and a better understandingof all the "guessing" that
goes into our reports to our corporate parent. But who is
going to tell him? The issue can easily be positioned as
just a matter of opinion as to these being educated estimates or a snow job to avoid having to put one's neck
on the line when there's little to go on but "seat of the
pants" judgment.
search compromises its fundamental integrity. This
interpretation is consistent with Blankenship's (1964)
description of integrity (p. 26).
Integrity is a voluntary, spontaneous, positive form of
honesty, where one takes initiative in being honest, being
almost aggressive about it. The person with integrity says
or stands up for what he thinks is right without waiting
for anyone to ask him how he feels.
For example, a consumer goods marketing services director reported a conflict between his own self-interests
for honest research and pressures from management for
research that would support a particular decision.
Market research is a treacherous business-one that puts
you in a position to second-guess top management. You
Table 4
ETHICAL
CONFLICTS
BYAGENCY
REPORTED
RESEARCHERSa
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
Party one
Outsideclient
Outsideclient
Outsideclient
Outsideclient
Outsideclient
Company
Other conflictsb
Party two
Company
Self
Society
Outsideclient
Competitor
Subordinate
As an example of a research integrity issue for an
agency researcher, one respondent reported a conflict
between self-interest for an honest project and the desires of the client: "when a client requests a methodology
or procedure that will guarantee the results he wants."
Finally, an agency executive vice president described a
research integrity problem involving errors in study design.
No.
35
24
8
7
6
5
%
35
24
8
7
6
5
The most difficult moral problem is how to handle a situation in which our company has made a mistake in study
design (or in study execution) which results in obtaining
results that are unreliable or invalid. We try to bury the
mistake and concentrate on the valid parts of the study
in those results.
14
99
14
99
Treating outside clientsfairly. The second-ranked ethical issue involves clients outside one's own company
and is labeled "treating outside clients fairly." One researcher reported that "hidden charges are often passed
on to the customer and reversed only if the customer
complains." An agency researcher reported a conflict
between company interests and outside client interests
'Read: "The numberone ethical conflict reportedby researchers
workingat a marketingresearchagencywas attemptingto balancethe
interestsof the client with the interestsof one's agency."
'Theseotherconflictrelationshipsincludedself-company(2), outside client-management(2), self-management(2), outside clientsupplier(2), and six otherconflictsnoted only once each.
314
when "requiring subcontractors to follow all specifications demanded by our clients, especially when costs are
running higher than estimated. Must decide to overlook
validation problems or require questionnaire replacement." Many of the conflicts involve pricing in some
way, as illustrated by the problem of an agency senior
consultant.
Our firm encouragesus to sell clients retainer-typeservices, ratherthan fixed-pricecontracts.Under the "retainer-type"situation,clients are chargedhowevermany
hoursit takes to completea study and more often than
not this turnsout to be more expensive(thancontracts).
or act in the best
Whatto do? Recommendthe "retainer"
interestsof the client and recommendthe contractapproach?
Confidentiality. Marketing researchers often have access to data that are in some sense confidential. The protection of these data sources is the third most often identified ethical issue. Sometimes a researcher must balance
what is fair to a competitor with what is best for one's
own company.
Competitiveintelligence;whatis an ethicalversusunethical sourceof information.Forexampleif I receivea confidential document from a competitorregardingtheir
pricingand exceptionschedules.It is informationgiven
by an unethicalemployee of anotherbank. Should one
supressthe informationor "publish"it to field management?
Other in-house researchers discussed balancing the interests of different clients in the same corporation. For
example, a research manager for an insurance company
reported, "Since the corporation has several related subsidiaries, occasionally the research I do for one subsidiary may be beneficial to another subsidiary or to the
field sales force. The proprietary nature of the findings
must be respected in most cases in spite of pressures
placed on us by the field or other subsidiaries."
Most of the confidentiality issues for agency researchers arise when they try to balance their obligations toward different outside clients. As one researcher put it,
"Wheredoes 'backgroundknowledge' stop and conflicts
exist [as a result of work with a previous client]?" Another agency researcher discussed the issue in more detail.
I get involved in a numberof proprietarystudies. The
problemthatoften arisesis thatsome studiesend up coveringsimilarsubjectmatteras previousstudies.Ourcode
of ethics statesthatyou cannotuse datafromone project
in a relatedprojectfor a competitor.However, since I
often know some informationabout an area, I end up
compromisingmy original client. Even though upper
managementformallystates that it should not be done,
they also expect it to be done to cut down on expenses.
This conflictof interestsituationis difficultto deal with.
At least in my firm, I don't see a resolutionto the issue.
It is not a one time situation,but rathera process that
perpetuatesitself. To make individualsredo portionsof
studieswhich have recentlybeen done, is ludicrous,and
JOURNALOF MARKETING
AUGUST1984
RESEARCH,
to forgopotentialnew businessis almostimpossiblefrom
a financialperspective.
Social issues and marketing mix. The fourth ethical
issue pertains to social issues related to various components of the marketing mix. Conflict most often involves balancing the interests of society with the interests of the company in the context of either product
decisions or advertising decisions. Several respondents
mentioned "advertising to children" as being the number
one ethical issue. Others simply responded "advertising
products I don't believe in." An agency account executive mentioned "conductingresearch for companies that
produce products which are hazardous to one's healthfor instance, certain chemicals, cigarettes, etc." One
agency directorcriticized trivial products in general: "My
company must aid the manufacturers who are flooding
the nation with useless (or worse) products, so my company can survive to perform our other more socially beneficial work (which is also profitable but not of great
volume)."
Personnel decisions form the fifth set of ethical issues.
Ethical issues in hiring and firing employees are most
troublesome. Researchers experienced conflict in their
attempts to balance their responsibilities to both employees and potential employees against their company
responsibilities. For example, one agency branch manager reported "telling a person who is over-qualified but
received improper training and can't be hired. The individual is usually an older person with set ideas and
ways." Another agency president reported that his most
difficult ethical problem is "firing/releasing older employees who have become very poor workers."
Treating respondents fairly is the sixth most important ethical issue. It often stems from temptations to conceal from the respondent the purpose or the sponsor of
the research. Protecting the anonymity of the respondent
also poses problems. The ethical conflict usually centers
on the researcher's attempts to balance the interests of
the respondent against the interests of the company. For
example, a research manager for a publishing company
indicated her major problem as "concealing my firm's
identity and involvement when doing research." Another
reported having "been asked to misrepresent myself for
the sake of unbiased information-which I have refused." Finally, an analyst for an industrial goods company reported:
Often in getting competitive data, such as unit sales,
productcharacteristics,etc., it is temptingto call the
competitor'sfunctionalpeople underfalse pretenses(engineers,sales-marketing
people, plantmanagement,etc.).
I have called for existing productinformation(not upcomingintroductions)using my own identity.I have also
called without giving my name (if the other party demandedto know who he was talkingto I've hung up or
somehowside-steppedthe question).
Other issues. The final six sets of issues, in order, are:
treating others in the company fairly, interviewer dis-
315
PROBLEMS
ETHICAL
honesty, gifts, bribes, and entertainment,treatingsuppliersfairly, legal issues, and the misuse of funds. The
"othersin the company"categoryincludesissues related
to peer relationshipsand conductingresearchto make
othersin the firm look bad. Interviewerdishonestyinvolves suchissues as falsifyingdataand interviewerbias.
Respondentsindicatedpressuresfrom customersto give
gifts to securebusinessand pressuresfrom suppliersto
accept gifts for additionalbusiness. Treatingsuppliers
fairly often centerson the problemof personalfriends
wantingto be given specialtreatment.Legal issues usually involve problemsof talkingwith competitorsabout
pricing. The misuse of funds includes "padding"expense accountsand questionable"slush"funds.
ProfessionalCodes of Ethics
Our secondresearchquestionis, "To what extent do
ourprofessionalcodes of conductaddressthe majorethical problemsof marketingresearchers?"
AppendicesA
and B reproducethe AmericanMarketingAssociation
nationalcode of conductfor marketingresearchand the
code of conductproposedby the New York Chapterof
the AmericanMarketingAssociation.The last two columns in Table 2 indicatethe sections of each code that
apply to each of the majorethical issues of marketing
researchers.
The nationalcode of the AMA has sections which in
some way addressthe issues of researchintegrity,confidentiality,treatingrespondentsfairly, and interviewer
dishonesty.However, it does not have sections governing the treatmentof outsideclients, marketingmix social
issues, personnelissues, the treatmentof others in the
company,gifts, bribes,andentertainment,the treatment
of suppliers,legal issues, and the misuseof funds. Reasonableargumentscan be advancedthatpersonnelissues
and the misuse of funds are topics that belong in corporatecodes of conduct, but not professionalcodes of
conduct.Nevertheless,there seems to be ample opportunityandjustificationfor addressingsome of the other
issues in our professionalcode of conduct.
Thecode of ethicsproposedby the New YorkChapter
of theAMAis muchlongerandconsequently
coversmany
more of the major issues delineatedin Table 2. The
treatmentof two issues is conspicuouslyabsent:gifts,
bribes, and entertainmentand legal issues. These two
issues might warrantinclusionin the code proposedby
the New YorkChapter.Note thatBrennarandMolander
(1977, p. 62) found "gifts, gratuities,'call girls,' and
bribes"to be the numberone ethical problemin business.
Extentof EthicalProblems
The precedingdiscussionfocuses on the most difficult
ethicalproblemsfacing marketingresearchersin terms
of issues and conflicts. Though many differentethical
issues areidentified,maintainingresearchintegrityis by
far the most often reported.Ourthirdresearchquestion
is, "Howextensivearethe ethicalproblemsof marketing
researchers?"
Table5 shows the resultsof 10 items specificallydirectedat assessingthe extentof ethicalproblems perceivedby marketingresearchers.The items are
groupedin termsof respondents'perceptionsof (1) the
frequencyof unethicalbehaviors(Al and A2), (2) the
opportunitiesfor unethicalbehaviors(B1 and B2), (3)
the relationshipbetweensuccess andgenerallyunethical
behavior(C1 and C2), and (4) the relationshipbetween
successandspecificunethicalbehaviors(Dl throughD4).
ItemsD3 and D4 are comparablewith two items found
to be unethicalby Ferrelland Weaver(1978). ItemsD1
and D2 were generatedin the exploratoryphase of the
project.
The descriptivestatisticsin Table5 revealthata large
proportion(almosthalf) of ourrespondentsbelieve managers in their respectivecompanieshave ample opportunitiesto engage in unethicalbehaviors.Nevertheless,
only a small percentage(18% of in-house researchers
and 15%of agency researchers)believe that managers
in theircompaniesfrequentlyengage in such behaviors.
The comparablefiguresare muchhigherwhen researchers refer to industrybehaviorratherthan companybehavior. Seventy-onepercentof our agency researchers
believe managersin theirindustryhave manyopportunities to engage in unethicalbehaviorsand 44% believe
that researchersin their industryoften engage in such
behaviors.Similarly, 58% of in-house researchersbelieve managersin theirindustryhave manyopportunities
to engage in unethicalbehaviorsand 27% believe that
managersin their industryoften engage in such behaviors.
Though the opportunityfor and the frequency of
unethicalbehaviorsare important,the relationshipbetween success and unethicalbehaviorsis probablycrucial. If researchersbelieve unethicalbehaviorsare necessaryfor successin marketingresearch,suchperceptions
would be powerful motivatorsfor unethicalbehavior.
Items C1 and C2 show only a small percentageof researchers(eitherin-house or agency) believe it is necessaryto compromiseone's ethics to succeedor believe
successfulmanagersin their companiesare less ethical
thanunsuccessfulmanagers.However, the findings are
somewhatdifferentwhen specificunethicalbehaviorsare
the stimuli.Items D1 throughD4 examinethe relationship between success and the specific unethicalbehaviors of (1) withholdinginformationdetrimentalto selfinterests,(2) makingrivals look bad in the eyes of others, (3) looking for "scapegoats"for a failure, and (4)
takingcreditfor the ideas and accomplishmentsof others. In comparisonwith the generalsuccess items, each
of these items shows a largerpercentageof researchers
believe successfulmanagersengage in these behaviors.
In-houseresearchersdiffer significantlyfrom agency
researcherson each of the specific unethicalbehaviors.
Higherproportionsof in-houseresearchersbelieve that
successfulmanagersin their companiesengage in such
behaviors.Almost half of all in-house researchersbelieve that successful managersin their companies (1)
316
JOURNALOF MARKETINGRESEARCH,AUGUST 1984
Table5
EXTENTOF ETHICALPROBLEMSIN MARKETINGRESEARCH
In-house researchersa
Agency researchersb
% agree
Mean
S.D.
% agreed
Mean'
S.D.
18
5.1
1.6
15
5.3
27
4.48
1.5
44
43
3.9
1.7
58
3.49
14
Totalc
% agree
Mean
S.D.
1.6
17
5.1
1.6
3.7g
1.5
31
4.2
1.5
44
3.8
1.7
43
3.9
1.7
1.5
71
2.98
1.6
61
3.3
1.5
4.7
1.4
13
5.0
1.7
13
4.8
1.5
15
5.38
1.5
12
5.8g
1.6
15
5.5
1.6
47
3.6g
1.5
21
4.7g
1.6
40
3.9
1.6
26
4.39
1.5
15
5.48
1.6
23
4.6
1.6
37
4.28
1.7
16
4.9g
1.7
32
4.3
1.7
50
3.68
1.5
26
4.68
1.6
44
3.8
1.6
58
3.2
1.8
64
3.2
2.2
60
3.2
1.9
66
2.8
1.4
72
2.7
1.7
68
2.8
1.5
49
3.3
1.5
65
3.1
1.9
53
3.3
1.6
A. Frequency of unethical behaviors
1. Marketingmanagersin my COMPANY
oftenengagein behaviorsthatI consider
to be unethical
2. Marketingmanagersin my INDUSTRY
oftenengagein behaviorsthatI consider
to be unethical
B. Opportunitiesfor unethical behaviors
1. There are many opportunitiesfor marketing managersin my COMPANYto
engagein unethicalbehaviors
2. Thereare many opportunitiesfor marketing managersin my INDUSTRYto
engagein unethicalbehaviors
C. Success and unethical behaviors
1. Successful marketingmanagersin my
COMPANYare generallymore unethical thanunsuccessfulmanagers
2. In orderto succeed in my COMPANY
it is oftennecessaryto compromiseone's
ethics
D. Success and specific unethical behaviors
1. Successful managersin my company
withholdinformationthatis detrimental
to theirself-interests
2. Successful managersin my company
makerivalslook bad in the eyes of importantpeople in my company
3. Successfulmanagersin my companylook
for a "scapegoat"when they feel they
may be associatedwith failure
4. Successfulmanagersin my companytake
creditfor the ideasandaccomplishments
of others
E. Top management actions and unethical behavic)rs
1. Topmanagementin my companyhas let
it be knownin no uncertainterms that
unethicalbehaviorswill not be tolerated
2. If a managerin my companyis discovered to have engaged in unethicalbehaviorthatresultsprimarilyin personal
gain (ratherthancorporategain) he will
be promptlyreprimanded
3. If a managerin my companyis discovered to have engaged in unethicalbehavior that results in primarilycorporate gain (ratherthanpersonalgain) he
will be promptlyreprimanded
'N = 343.
bN = 117.
CN= 460.
dPercentresponding"slightlyagree," "agree,"or "stronglyagree."
'On a 7-pointscale with 1 = "stronglyagree"and 7 = "stronglydisagree."
fThis item was reverse-phrased
in the questionnaire,i.e., "moreethical."
gDifferencessignificantat .01 level by t-tests.
withholdinformationthat would be detrimentalto their
self-interestsand (2) take credit for the ideas and accomplishmentsof others.
Top Management Actions
The fourth research question is, "How effective are
the actions of top management in reducing the ethical
problems of marketing researchers?" To examine this
question we needed measures of (1) the extent of ethical
problems and (2) the extent of top management actions.
As no scale existed for measuring the extent of ethical
problems of marketing researchers, a scale was developed. Table 6 shows the factor analysis of Items Al,
B1, C1, C2, D1, D2, D3, and D4 from Table 5, all of
317
ETHICAL
PROBLEMS
which relate to perceived ethical problems in the respondent's company. The factor analysis shows a onefactor solution with all eight items loading in excess of
0.3 on the single factor. Coefficient alpha for the eight
items is 0.82. Therefore, for exploratory purposes these
items can be treated as a single scale measuring the latent construct "ethical problems of marketing researchers."
Measuring the actions of top management also necessitated scale development. Items El, E2, and E3 in Table 5 address the kinds of behaviors that writers previously have suggested should be undertaken by top
management. That is, "unethical behaviors will not be
tolerated" and unethical behaviors will be "promptly
reprimanded."The factor analysis in Table 7 shows all
three items loading on a single factor in a one-factor solution. Coefficient alpha for the three items is 0.74, suggesting that the three items can be appropriatelyconsidered a scale measuring the latent construct "top
management actions."
Writershave suggested that top managementalso should
establish corporate codes of conduct to curb unethical
actions. Therefore, we asked whether the respondents'
companies and industries had established formal codes
of conduct. Twenty-four percent of in-house researchers
and 61% of agency researchers reported industry codes
of ethics. Similarly, 46% and 21%, respectively, indicated company codes of ethics. The smaller figure for
agency codes probably reflects the fact that most research agencies are smaller than the corporations that
employ in-house researchers and thus are less likely to
have company codes.
Table 8 shows the regression results with the factor
Table 6
FACTOR
ANALYSIS
OF ETHICAL
PROBLEMS
SCALEa
Factor 1
Item
loading
1. Marketingmanagersin my companyoftenengagein
behaviorsthatI considerto be unethical
0.58
2. There are many opportunitiesfor marketingmanagersin my companyto engage in unethicalbehaviors
0.33
3. Successfulmarketingmanagersin my companyare
generallymoreethicalthanunsuccessfulmanagersb 0.41
4. In orderto succeedin my companyit is often nec0.64
essaryto compromiseone's ethics
5. Successfulmanagersin my companywithholdinformationthatis detrimentalto theirself-interests
0.68
6. Successfulmanagersin my companymakerivalslook
bad in the eyes of importantpeople in my company 0.82
7. Successful managersin my company look for a
"scapegoat"when they feel they may be associated
with failure
0.77
8. Successfulmanagersin my companytake creditfor
the ideas and accomplishments
of others
0.65
Eigenvalue3.2
% varianceexplained40%
Coefficientalpha = 0.82
'Principalaxis.
bItemwas reverse-scored.
Table 7
FACTOR
ANALYSIS
OF TOPMANAGEMENT
ACTIONSSCALEa
Item
Factor 1
loading
1. Topmanagementin my companyhas let it be known
in no uncertaintermsthat unethicalbehaviorswill
not be tolerated
0.49
2. If a managerin my companyis discoveredto have
engagedin unethicalbehaviorthatresultsprimarily
in personalgain (ratherthancorporategain) he will
be promptlyreprimanded
0.70
3. If a managerin my companyis discoveredto have
engaged in unethicalbehaviorthat results in primarilycorporategain (ratherthanpersonalgain) he
will be promptlyreprimanded
0.99
Eigenvalue1.71
% varianceexplained57%
Coefficientalpha = 0.74
"Principalaxis.
scores on the ethical problems scale as the dependent
variable. Preliminary analyses indicated that both the respondent's title and industry were related significantly
to the extent of ethical problems. That is, presidents and
vice-presidents were less likely to see problems than analysts and junior analysts. Similarly, the agency researchers perceived fewer problems than in-house researchers. Therefore, both "title" and "industry" were
entered as control variables in the regression.
On the basis of other researchers' suggestions, we expected that specific actions by top management to encourage ethical behavior and discourage unethical behavior would decrease the extent of ethical problems
perceivedby marketingresearchers.The results show that,
of the variables we examined, the actions of top management are the single best predictor of perceived ethical
problems of marketing researchers, explaining 15% of
the total variance. (Obviously, with 75% unexplained
variance, there may be other factors which taken individually explain more than 15% of the variance.)
A corporate code of ethics made no difference in the
respondents' perceptions of ethical problems. The simple correlation between ethical problems and a corporate
code of ethics is not significant, nor is the beta coefficient in the regression. Similarly, though there is a significant negative simple correlation between an industry
code of ethics and the extent of ethical problems, the
fact that the relationship is nonsignificant in the regression equation suggests a spurious correlation.
DISCUSSION AND LIMITATIONS
Readers should be mindful that our research involved
an "insiders"ratherthan an "outsiders" research design.
Actual researchers were the respondents instead of other
potentially interested parties (e.g., consumers, consumer
advocates, corporate managers, interviewing agency
personnel, academic marketing researchers). Such outside parties might view the major problems differently.
AUGUST1984
JOURNALOF MARKETING
RESEARCH,
318
Table 8
DETERMINANTS
OF ETHICAL
PROBLEMSa
REGRESSION:
Independentvariable
Simple
correlation
Increment
to R2
Standardized
beta coefficient
t
Titleb
Industry'
-.259
-.249
.06
.03
-.10
-.16
2.2h
3.49
Top managementactionsd
-.429
.15
-.39
9.28
Industry code of ethics'
-.178
.00
-.07
1.6
Corporatecode of ethicsf
+.06
.00
+.05
1.0
Constant = 7.22
R2 = .25
F = 28.18
variableis factorscore on ethicalproblemsscale (see Table 6). Highernumbersindicatemore problems.
aDependent
bHighnumbersare highertitles thanlow numbers(see Table 1 for categories).
cResearchers
workingfor a marketingresearchagency are 1, othersare 0.
dFactorscoreson top managementactionsscale (see Table 7). Highernumbersindicatemore actionsby top management.
'Dummyvariablewith 1 as presenceof an industrycode of ethics.
fDummyvariablewith 1 as presenceof a corporatecode of ethics.
gSignificantat .01 level.
hSignificantat .05 level.
The finding that maintaining research integrity is by
farthe mostdifficultethicalissue of marketingresearchers shouldbe interpretedcarefully.Recall thatthe questionwas to "describethejob situationthatposes the most
difficultethical or moral problemfor you." The most
difficultethicalproblemis not the same as the problem
that occurs mostfrequently. Nor does "most difficult"
necessarilyimply that the problemoccurs regularlyor
withgreatfrequency.Nevertheless,given the tone of the
respondents'comments,the resultssuggestthatmarketing researchersperceive significantproblemsin maintainingthe integrityof theirmarketingresearch.
Agency researcherscited "treatingoutsideclients"as
a difficultethical issue more frequently(16% vs. 8%)
thanin-houseresearchers.In ourclassification,when an
in-houseresearcherdid a projectfor a separatedivision
of the companythe workwas classifiedas thoughit were
done for an outsideclient. As most agency researchinvolves a transferof services from one firm to another,
ourresultis not surprising.Similarly,in-houseresearchers seem moreconcernedabouttreatingrespondentsand
othersin the companyfairly. These researchersengage
in researchin whichorganizationpeersare respondents.
Questionsof anonymity,fairness,and the like are more
importantto them becausetheir respondentsare people
they are likely to know throughtheirwork experience.
The substantiveimportof the findingson ethicalconflicts (Tables3 and 4) lies as much in what we did not
find as what we did. Many writerson ethical problems
in marketingresearchhave focused almost exclusively
on conflictsinvolvingrespondents.Forexample,Tybout
andZaltman(1975) devoteall theirattentionto the rights
of subjectsin the researchprocessandcall for additional
researchon the "conflictsbetweenclient rightsand subject rightswith respectto ethical issues and their resolution"(p. 236). We did not find many researchersindicating fundamentalconflicts involving the rights of
respondentsor subjectsused in marketingresearch.Only
12 in-houseresearchersand one agency researcherreportedthese kinds of conflicts (see footnotes, Tables 3
and4).
Ourfindingsat least partiallysupportthe position of
Day (1975), who questionedthe usefulnessof restricting
discussionsof researchethics to conflicts involving respondents.He called for broaderstudies(alongthe lines
of our researchproject)by pointingout, "Whatis perhaps more interesting,and possibly of greatersignificance to the value of marketingresearch,is the ethics
or moralityof the researcherwith respect to the interpretationof data from survey work" (p. 233). He continuedby suggesting,"Thereare few fields of scientific
activitythat are as susceptibleto fraudas some aspects
of consumerresearch"(p. 233). Day's referencesto the
of data" and "fraud"are
problemsof "interpretation
consistentwith our findingthatmaintainingresearchintegrity is the most difficult ethical problemfacing researchers.
The resultsin Table 5, comparingcompanybehavior
with industrybehavior,are consistentwith researchon
marketers'perceptionsof the ethics of theirpeers in the
same company.Ferrelland Weaver(1978) investigated
the ethicalbeliefs of 280 marketingmanagersbelonging
to the AmericanMarketingAssociation.They concluded
that"respondentsbelieve thatthey makedecisionsin an
organizationalenvironmentwhere peers and top managementhavelowerethicalstandardsthantheirown" (p.
72). Similarly,we find that marketingresearchersbelieve they makedecisionsin an environmentwheretheir
peers in otherfirms have lower ethical standards.
In comparisonwith agency researchers,why do more
in-houseresearchersconsistentlyreport (Table 5) that
successfulmanagersin their companiesengage in specific unethicalpractices?The explanationmay lie in the
natureof the practicesand the size of the organization.
319
ETHICAL
PROBLEMS
These specific practices may be more prevalent in bureaucracies with many organizational levels. Marketing
research agencies are likely to be smaller and have fewer
organizational levels than the corporations where the inhouse researchers work. Thus, the specific unethical
practices are less likely to lead to success in the less
bureaucraticallyoriented agencies.
Several factors may explain the findings in Table 5
that researchers perceive success and unethical behavior
in general to be unrelated but perceive a relationship between success and specific unethical behaviors. Researchers may perceive that success and unethical behavior are related, but are unwilling to admit the
relationship (even to themselves). Another possible explanation is that the specific unethical behaviors selected
for our research were perceived to be only moderately
unethical. That is, when researchers were responding to
items C1 and C2, they were thinking of more serious
breaches of ethics than the kinds of unethical behaviors
specifically identified in items D1 through D4. Therefore, if the unethicalbehaviors had spanned a wider range
of severity, the results might have been different. Finally, the findings may be an artifact of the way the
questions were constructed. Items C1 and C2 had, respectively, the qualifiers "generally" and "often." Because items D1 through D4 had no such qualifiers, respondents may have interpreted them differently.
Nevertheless, the factor analysis showed all six items
loading on the same factor (Table 6) and therefore the
evidence suggests that respondents viewed all six items
similarly.
Why did corporate codes of ethics seem to make no
differencein the extent of ethical problems?Fulmer (1969)
reviewed problem areas in corporate codes of ethics and
identifiedseveral consistentweaknesses. Prominentamong
these weaknesses were (1) vagueness, (2) the assumption of automatic acceptance of provisions, (3) the assumption that codes, once drafted, need never be revised, and (4) incorrect assumptions about what are the
important ethical problems. Though corporate research
codes may have any or all of these problems, the last
weakness may be particularly relevant to marketing research. Perhaps corporate codes for research are simply
not addressing the salient issues.
CONCLUSIONSAND RECOMMENDATIONS
Our findings suggest nine conclusions. The first three
relate to our first research question. Conclusions four
throughsix pertainto our thirdquestion, conclusions seven
and eight to our fourth question, and conclusion nine to
our second question.
1. The most difficultethical problemfacing marketingresearchersis maintainingthe integrityof theirresearchefforts. Manyotherethicalproblemsare involved in marketingresearch,butthe issue of maintainingfundamental
researchintegritydominates.
2. The primaryethicalconflictsfor in-houseresearchersare
two: balancingthe interestsof self againstthe interests
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
of otherpartiesand balancingthe interestsof the company againstthe interestsof otherparties.
All of the primaryethicalconflictsof agencyresearchers
involve balancingthe interestsof their outside clients
againstthe interestsof variousother parties, including
company,self, society, competitors,and otherclients.
Thoughmarketingresearchersperceivemanyopportunities for engagingin unethicalbehavior,they perceive a
relativelylow frequencyof unethicalbehavior.
Marketingresearchersdo not believe that unethicalbehaviorsin generallead to success in marketingresearch.
A relativelylarge proportionof marketingresearchers
believes thatsuccessfulmanagersengage in certainspecific formsof unethicalbehavior.
The actionsof top managementin reprimandingunethical behaviorcan significantlyreduce the ethical problems of marketingresearchers.
The presenceof either corporateor industrycodes of
conductseems to be unrelatedto the extent of ethical
problemsin marketingresearch.
In comparisonwith the official AmericanMarketingAssociationcode of conductfor marketingresearch,the code
proposedby the New York Chaptercovers many more
of the most difficultethical issues facing marketingresearchers.
Managerial Issues
Marketingresearchershave long sought recognition of
their professional status. Coe and Coe (1976, p. 257)
identify "governance through a code of ethics and disciplinary procedures for violation of the code of ethics"
as one of the four criteriadistinguishingprofessions from
other occupations. Our findings imply significant deficiencies in the present official marketing research code
of conduct of the American Marketing Association. The
code does not address many of the important ethical issues confronting marketing researchers. In contrast, the
code proposed by the New York Chapter of the AMA
is much more comprehensive. We recommend that the
Marketing Research Division of the AMA revise the official code so that it addresses the major issues facing
marketing researchers. The code proposed by the New
York Chapter can serve as a useful starting point for
analysis.
Our findings suggest that top management actions do
make a difference. When top managementlets it be known
that unethical behavior will not be tolerated, marketing
researchers experience fewer ethical problems. However, the absence of a relationshipbetween corporatecodes
of conduct and ethical problems does not imply that corporate codes are useless. If members of top management
are going to reprimandunethical behavior, they have an
obligation to other members of their organization to state
clearly the guidelines for acceptable and unacceptable
behavior. Therefore, though corporate codes of conduct
alone do not appear effective, we believe they are useful
starting points for other actions by top management to
encourage ethical behavior.
The preceding discussion must be tempered with the
realization that many marketing research executives do
320
not realizethe extent of ethical problemsin their organizations.Recall our finding(Table 8) thattop research
executives perceivedfewer ethical problemsthan persons of lower rank. This finding is consistentwith the
conclusionsof Carroll(1975), who examinedthe ethical
problemsof a sampleof businessexecutivesfroma broad
spectrumof industriesand occupations.He found that
middleandlowermanagersexperiencemorepressurethan
top managersto compromisepersonal ethical beliefs.
Carrollconcludes that "top managementcan be inadvertentlyinsulatedfrom organizationalreality with respect to particular[ethical] issues" (p. 79). Top marketingresearchexecutivesseem to be similarlyisolated.
We recommendthat those in-house researchdepartmentsand agency companieshavingcodes of ethics review and updatethem. Departmentsand agencies lacking codesshouldinitiatetheirdevelopment.Fulmer(1969)
on developing
gives severalexcellentrecommendations
codes. First, he suggests avoiding the "temptationto
borrowsections from existing codes on the assumption
thattheseprovisionshave workedbefore"(p. 56). With
such a procedure,he points out, one assumes identical
problemsacrossorganizations.Second, he suggeststhat
draftersof codes seek outside professionalassistance,
though"thedraftingof a code shouldnot be left completelyto outsiders"(p. 56). Third,internalparticipation
in the draftingof the code shouldbe encouragedbecause
"thosewho are to be governedby the code are much
morelikely to supportthe provisionsit containsif they
have a choice in its formulation"(p. 56). Finally, as is
consistentwith our findings,he suggeststhattheremust
be "provisionfor enforcement"(p. 56).
ResearchIssues
Ourfindingsalso suggest potentiallyfruitfulavenues
for additionalresearchon ethicalproblemsin marketing
research.Furtherinquiryinto the relationshipbetween
successandspecificunethicalbehaviorsin marketingresearchseems important.Such researchmight startwith
the specific ethical problemswe identify and examine
the relationship,if any, betweenthese specificbehaviors
andsuccessin marketingresearch.Success mightbe defined by an individual'sincome, position in the organization,job performance,or variouskinds of satisfactions (e.g. job, career, life). Decision processes in situationsinvolvingethicalproblemsalso warrantsystematic investigation.How do marketingresearchers"solve"
theirethicalproblems?Are thesedecisionprocessesfundamentallydeontological(focusingon the intrinsicrightness or wrongnessof specific behaviors), teleological
(focusingon the goodnessor the badnessof the consequencesof behaviors),or both?
Furtherresearch on corporatecodes of conduct is
needed. Such researchshouldanalyzethe actualprovisions of such codes. To whatextentdo they addresssalient issues? Are they vague? Are they often revised?
How are they formulated?Comparingthe specific provisionsof codeswiththeextentof specificproblemswithin
firmswould be useful.
JOURNALOF MARKETING
AUGUST1984
RESEARCH,
The lack of empiricalwork on ethical problemsin
marketingresearchstems in part from the lack of theoreticalefforts. Most of the theorizingin ethics is normative. Such work is an attemptto provide normative
guidelinesfor ethicalbehavior.Notablylackingarepositive theoriesthat purportto explain and predictethical
behaviorand, thus, could guideempiricalresearch.What
is needed is a generaltheory focusing on the determinantsandconsequencesof ethicalbeliefs andbehaviors,
withspecificemphasison the role of organizational,personal, and culturalvariablesin the formationof ethical
beliefs.
We agree with Murphyand Laczniak(1981) that the
use of scenariosto exploreresearchethics has been unimaginative.Simply asking variouskinds of people to
judgethe degreeto whichthey believe certainbehaviors
are unethicalis raw empiricismin the extreme. At the
very least, the scenariosshouldbe manipulatedsystematically to explore why differentgroups hold different
views. The work of Kohlberg(1981) provides a good
model. He developeda series of moral dilemmas(sceto explorewhat
narios)thataremanipulated
systematically
he calls "stageof moraldevelopment."His primaryconclusion is that people seem to go throughsix distinct
stages of moral developmentand that these six stages
are not culture-bound.ThoughKohlberg'smoraldilemmas are not directlyapplicableto ethical issues in marketingresearch,his methodologyis. Kohlbergidentifies
"six stages of moraljudgment,"rangingfrom a completely egocentricpoint of view to a state that assumes
guidanceby universalprinciples.It-wouldbe interesting
to classifyresearchersby these categoriesandthenrelate
these perceptionsto the researchers'assessmentsof a
troublesomeethicalissue.
We were dismayedto learnthat so many of our marketingresearchcolleaguesexperiencegreatpressuresto
compromisethe fundamentalintegrity of their work.
Sometimesthe very exposureof an importantproblem
in a professionis a significantfirst step towardits solution. We sincerelyhope that our study providesthat
"firststep."
APPENDIXA
CODEOF MARKETING
RESEARCHETHICSFOR
THEAMERICAN
MARKETING
ASSOCIATION
A For Research Users, Practitioners and
Interviewers
1. No individualor organizationwill undertakeany
activitywhich is directlyor indirectlyrepresented
to be marketingresearch,but whichhas as its real
purposethe attemptedsale of merchandiseor services to some or all of the respondentsinterviewed
in the courseof the research.
2. If a respondenthas been led to believe, directlyor
indirectly,that he is participatingin a marketing
researchsurvey and that his anonymitywill be
protected,his name shall not be made known to
321
ETHICAL
PROBLEMS
anyone outside the researchorganizationor researchdepartment,or used for otherthanresearch
purposes.
B For Research Practitioners
1. Therewill be no intentionalor deliberatemisrepresentationof researchmethodsor results.An adequate descriptionof methodsemployed will be
madeavailableuponrequestto the sponsorof the
research.Evidencethatfield work has been completed accordingto specificationswill, upon request, be made availableto buyersof research.
2. The identityof the surveysponsorand/or the ultimateclient for whom a surveyis being done will
be held in confidenceat all times, unlessthis identity is to be revealedas partof the researchdesign.
Researchinformationshall be held in confidence
by the researchorganizationor departmentandnot
used for personalgain or made availableto any
outsidepartyunless the client specificallyauthorizes such release.
3. A researchorganizationshall not undertakemarketing studies for competitiveclients when such
studieswouldjeopardizethe confidentialnatureof
client-agencyrelationships.
C For Users of Marketing Research
1. A user of researchshall not knowingly disseminate conclusionsfrom a given researchprojector
servicethatare inconsistentwith or not warranted
by the data.
2. To the extent that there is involved in a research
projecta uniquedesign involvingtechniques,approachesor concepts not commonlyavailableto
researchpractitioners,the prospectiveuser of research shall not solicit such a design from one
practitionerand deliverit to anotherfor execution
withoutthe approvalof the design originator.
D For Field Interviewers
1. Researchassignmentsand materialsreceived, as
well as information
obtainedfromrespondents,
shall
be held in confidenceby the interviewerand revealed to no one except the researchorganization
conductingthe marketingstudy.
2. No informationgained througha marketingresearchactivityshall be used directlyor indirectly
for the personalgain or advantageof the interviewer.
3. Interviewsshall be conductedin strictaccordance
with specificationsand instructionsreceived.
4. An interviewershall not carry out two or more
interviewingassignments simultaneouslyunless
authorizedby all contractorsor employers concerned.
Membersof the AmericanMarketingAssociation
will be expectedto conductthemselvesin accordance with the provisionsof this Code in all of
theirmarketingresearchactivities.
Source: American Marketing Association.
APPENDIXB
"A PERSONALCODE FOR PRACTICINGMARKET
AND OPINION RESEARCH"BY THE NEW YORK
CHAPTER OF THE AMA
A My commitmentto scientific practice
1. I WILL follow the principlesanduse the methods
of scientificinvestigationin the researchI do. Research, as I define it, means seeking knowledge
throughscientificstudy.It can be practicedat many
levels of complexity and precision and through
manyapproaches,but to fit my definitionit must
have a seriouspurpose,use orderlyand objective
thinking,and show a respect for data. Whatever
researchI do will reflect,in these qualities,its scientific orientation.
2. I will do research in the framework of the scientific method
-Serious researchis a process that follows the
scientific method. It starts with defining the
problemand ends with challengingthe results
throughtesting and reanalysis.
3. I will use scientific techniques that fit the individual problem.
-In the collection and analysis of information,
researchmay use proceduresfrom a varietyof
scientificdisciplines.I cannotmasterall of the
availableapproaches,but I will understandand
use a range of techniques.I will put the best
tools I can againstthe problemat hand.
4. I will present each research study for what it is
and claim for it the precision and significance
it deserves to have.
-In the field of marketandopinionresearch,even
the best designs are imperfectand the best resultsapproximations.
The dataare estimates,the
methodsare affordablecompromises;thereusually are none of the externalchecks or the critical discussionthatmightcome with open publication.
-In these circumstancesthe burdenof objectivity
is on the researcherto provide a professional
to the way the research
explanationappropriate
was done and the way it will be used.
-I will put each study I do into perspective,assess its reliabilityand application,and say how
its technicalaspectsaffect its meaning.
5. I will encourage users to make independent
evaluations of my research.
-I will questionandcheckandchallengethe work
thatothersdo for me andhope thatthose I work
322
JOURNALOF MARKETING
AUGUST1984
RESEARCH,
for will follow the same practice.
-I will urgeusersto go beyondcheckingfor consistency and plausibility,since regularityover
time or betweensmall samplescan resultfrom
insensitive measurements or undisclosed
smoothingof the data and may say little or
nothingabouthow well the researchwas done.
-I see rigorousexaminationand ventilationas the
best tests of good researchand the best incentives for doing it.
6. I will give the users of my research the information they need to understand it.
-I respect the rights of those who pay for my
researchand, if the researchis published,of all
who use it, to be told how the researchwas concould
ducted,in suchdetailthata goodresearcher
redo the studywithoutfurtherinformation.
-Additionally, I will providesuch informationas
the rates of sample completion, the results of
field validations,the statisticalerrorlimits, and
possible sources of other errors, when this is
relevantand would help users understandthe
research.
-I will conceal or misrepresentnothing with a
seriousbearingon how the researchwas done,
how good it is, or what it means.
My commitmentto scientificpracticegives me the
approach,the tools, the point of view, and the
challengeI need for productivestudy. It is what
identifiesme, at least to myself, as a professional
in the practiceof research.
have seen how easily researchcan be corruptedby failuresto follow instructions,by inof how
ventedresponses,or by misrepresentation
or from whom the data were collected. I know
how often such problemsare linkedto unworkable questionnaires,and unfair time and productivity demandsfrom those conductingthe
survey.
-I will not exert or permitthe kind of pressures
that force such abuses.
-I will instead make a conscious effort to understandthe realitiesof field operations.I will
insist on the carefulselectionof field people. I
will providepositiveincentivesfor qualitywork,
and check the work I get with an objectiveand
rigoroussystem of validations.
4. I will resist temptations to shade results, to
overstate their significance, and to reach conclusions that go beyond the findings.
-I will not alterthe findingsof researchto protect
my income or my reputation.
-I believe it is my duty, as a researcher,to draw
as much meaning as I can from collected information. But I will not go beyond honest
analysisin an effort to give sponsorswhat they
wantto hear or whatthey thinkthey have paid
for.
I will personallyguaranteethe integrityof whatever data I report.I will acceptresponsibilityfor
the conclusionsI draw. If I cannot do research
honestly,I will not do it at all.
B My commitment to honest research
1. I AM committedto honestresearchand to honest
researchinformation.I see simple honesty as basic to the researchconceptand honest counts and
honest meaningas fundamentalto researchpractice. Most of the researchI do is used to make
money, or supporta point of view, or strengthen
an argument.I believe thathonestresearchcan be
done towardsuch objectives, but only if the research is objectively designed, impartiallyconducted, and deliveredfree of cosmetic alteration
or biased interpretation.
2. I will base research on honest plans, set up to
get germane and honest answers.
-Honest researchis not designed to mislead or
misrepresent,or to use measurementsmadeunder abnormalor manipulatedconditionsas representationsof the public's normalbehavior.
3. I will work insistently for sound field operations, for the collection, in the field, of honest
information.
-Whether or not a good design translatesinto
honestdata dependson how the data are gathered.
C My commitment to fair business dealings
1. I WILL protectthe interestsof those I serve and
deal fairly with people and organizationswho do
researchor performresearchfunctions.Thosewho
pay for research,andthose who do it, have a right
to seek a profitfromtheirresearchoperations.But
this has to accomplishedthroughbusinesslikeand
responsibleconduct. If the findings of my research are to be above suspicion, the business
practicesinvolved in the researchmust also be
above suspicion.
2. I will treat all of the informationinvolved in my
research as privileged.
-I will protectthe confidentialityof unpublished
researchandof anythingI learnfrom
proprietary
a sponsoraboutthe sponsor'sbusiness.
-I will expect that a researchplan or proposal
submittedin confidencewill be treatedas proprietaryand not used or disclosed withoutapprovaloutsidethe companyto whichit was submitted.
3. I will keep my relations with those I work for
professional and responsible.
-I will make it a point to discuss with sponsors
-I
ETHICAL
PROBLEMS
any problems in conducting research as the
problems are encountered.
-I will not add unrelated questions to a study
without the sponsor's consent.
-I will fit the scope of any research I do to the
importance of the insights and the need for precision in the information the research is designed to provide.
4. I will compete fairly against others who do research and deal fairly with those who do or sell
research services.
-I support active competition for research assignments and believe researchers should compete on terms or conditions as well as the quality of their skills and the excellence of their
thinking. But I will not buy or sell research at
terms or conditions or with specifications that
make honest work impossible or with commitments to do work or to produce results that cannot be honored.
-I will keep the agreements I make with interviewers and other researchworkers and pay them
promptly when their work is completed. I will
not contract for research work unless I can pay
for that work.
-I consider kickbacks and other illicit favors given
in return for research business to be incompatible with research and below the minimum levels of research ethics.
-I will get and give full value for the money spent
through me for research or research services.
In the practice of research, I will hold to the highest standards of legality and business ethics, and
beyond that, I will do whatever is necessary to insure the confidence of those I work for, and those
who provide me with help or information.
D My commitment to the public interest
1. I WILL protect the rights of respondents and the
general public to fair treatment from the research
I do. I recognize that my research may intrude on
the time and privacy of those who give me information. But I will make every effort to minimize
their discomfort, protect their identity, and make
sure their views are heard and reported.
2. I will do research without harming, embarrassing, or taking unfair advantage of respondents.
-I believe that, with care and imagination, participationin an honest and productivesurvey can
be made a positive experience for most respondents, and I believe this can be accomplished without compromising the interests of
the sponsor, or the scientific integrity of the research.
-I will not drain the public's goodwill and cooperation through unnecessarily long interviews
323
or poorly designed questioning procedures. And
I will not tolerate those who use the pretense of
conducting research to get money from, exploit,
propagandize, or otherwise take advantage of
people.
3. I will protect the right to privacy by guarding
the identity of individual respondents.
-I will not release the names of respondents to
anyone for any purpose other than legitimate
validation, because the guarantee of anonymity
is the respondent's only insurance against the
disclosure of personal matters.
4. I will encourage sponsors to do research that
seeks out and effectively represents the needs
and views of the public.
-It is my responsibility, as a researcher, to listen
for the voice of the people, and to make it heard.
-Research serves its highest purpose when it
speaks for the citizen or the consumer, when it
brings the wants and wishes and ideas of people
to light, not for manipulation or exploitation,
but for translationinto needed productsand laws
and services.
E
I stand, by my own election, as an honest broker between those who give their money for research and
those who give their information. I will assure a fair
exchange between the parties. I will practice research
to serve the public as well as the private interest.
REFERENCES
AmericanMarketingAssociation(1982), MembershipSurvey
(March),conductedby HiggenbothamAssociates,Houston.
Baier,Kurt(1958), MoralPoint of View:A RationalBasis of
Ethics. Ithaca,NY: CornellUniversityPress.
Bartels,Robert(1967), "A Model for Ethics in Marketing,"
Journalof Marketing,31 (January),20-6.
Baumhart,RaymondC. (1961), "How Ethicalare Businessmen?"HarvardBusinessReview, 39 (July-August),6-19,
156-76.
Blankenship,A. B. (1964), "SomeAspectsof Ethicsin MarketingResearch,"Journalof MarketingResearch, 1 (May),
26-31.
Brenner,StevenN. andEarlA. Molander(1977), "Isthe Ethics of Business Changing,"HarvardBusiness Review, 55
57-71.
(January-February),
Carroll,Archie B. (1975), "ManagerialEthics: A Post-WatergateView," BusinessHorizons, 18 (April), 75-80.
Coe, Ted L. and BarbaraCoe (1976), "MarketingResearch:
The Searchfor Professionalism,"in Marketing:1776-1976
andBeyond,KennethL. Berhardt, ed. Chicago,IL:American MarketingAssociation,257-9.
Coney, KennethA. and John H. Murphy(1976), "Attitudes
of MarketersTowardEthical and ProfessionalMarketing
ResearchPractices,"in Proceedings:SouthernMarketing
Association,HenryW. Naoh and Donald P. Robin, eds.,
172-4.
Crawford,Merle C. (1970), "Attitudesof MarketingExecu-
324
JOURNALOF MARKETING
AUGUST1984
RESEARCH,
tives TowardEthics in MarketingResearch,"Journal of
tionof MarketingResearchPractitioners
andRespondents,"
Marketing, 34 (April), 46-52.
Day, RobertL. (1975), "A Commenton Ethics in Marketing
Research-Their PracticalRelevance,"Journalof Marketing Research, 12 (May), 232-3.
Ethics Resource Center (1979), Codes of Ethics in Corporations and Trade Associations and the Teaching of Ethics in
Graduate Business Schools. Princeton, NJ: Opinion Re-
ences, J. F. Hair, ed., 195-7.
Murphy,PatrickE. andGeneR. Laczniak(1981), "Marketing
Ethics:A Review with Implicationsfor Managers,Educators and Researchers," in Review of Marketing, 1981, Ben
searchCorporation.
Ferrell,O. C. and K. MarkWeaver(1978), "EthicalBeliefs
of MarketingManagers,"Journalof Marketing,42 (July),
69-73.
Fulmer,RobertM. (1969), "EthicalCodesof Business,"Personnel Administration, 36 (May-June), 49-57.
Kaikati, Jack G. and Wayne A. Label (1980), "American
BriberyLegislation:An Obstacleto InternationalMarketing," Journal of Marketing, 44 (Fall), 38-43.
Kohlberg, Lawrence (1981), The Meaning and Measurement
of Moral Development. Worcester, MA: Clark University
in Proceedings of the American Institute of Decision Sci-
Press.
MarketingNews (1980), "A Pledge:A PersonalCodefor Practicing Marketand OpinionResearch"(September19), 24.
McGown,K. L. (1979), "EthicalIssues Involvingthe Protec-
M. Enis and KennethJ. Roering, eds. Chicago:American
MarketingAssociation,251-66.
Myers,JohnG., WilliamF. Massy, and StephenA. Greyser
(1980), Marketing Research and Knowledge Development:
An Assessmentfor MarketingManagement. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall,Inc.
Schneider,KennethC. (1977), "SubjectandRespondentAbuse
in MarketingResearch,"MSUBusinessTopics(Spring),1320.
Twedt,Dik Warren(1963), "Whya MarketingResearchCode
of Ethics," Journal of Marketing, 27 (October), 48-50.
Tybout,Alice M. andGeraldZaltman(1974), "Ethicsin Marketing Research:Their PracticalRelevance," Journal of
Marketing Research, 11 (November), 357-68.
and
(1975), "A Replyto 'Commentson Ethics
in MarketingResearch:Their PracticalRelevance,'"Journal of Marketing Research, 12 (May), 234-7.
EmergingPerspectives on Services Marketing
20
a proceedings edited by Leonard L. Berry,G. LynnShostack and
GregoryD. Upah
160pp. $11/AMAmembers $16/nonmembers
15
10
5
To help you develop more effective marketing strategies, here is a compilationof papers given at the 2nd
marketingservices conference held in West Palm Beach, Florida,in November1982. The meetings focused on the
need for and means of developing effective marketingstrategies for services industries.Materialon services
marketingresearchis also included.
mmm___mm__
___
__mm__
__mm__
_-__mm__-
To: AMAOrderDept.,250 SouthWackerDr.,Chicago,IL60606
Pleasesendme:
copiesof EmergingPerspectiveson ServicesMarketing.
Enclosedis mycheckfor$
l MasterCard
No.
Date:
Expiration
Nameand MailingAddress:
.
Orchargemy:
O Visa No.
a $2.00handling charge will be added.)
is requested,
(Ifbilling
O Billme
*
I
*
AE RICAN
U4RKETING
ASOCIA
TON