Gender and ethics: Ethical judgments, ethical intentions, and altruism among healthcare professionals

Abstract

Purpose

Previous research indicates that women often perform more ethically on the job than do men. However, the results have been mixed, suggesting that further inquiry is needed. The purpose of this paper is to explore this important topic in a large healthcare organization. A field study sought to identify gender differences in ethical judgment, ethical intention, and organization‐based altruism in a healthcare organization, thereby providing some insight into the individual differences that influence ethical reasoning in the healthcare industry.

Design/methodology/approach

The investigation was based on survey data returned from a large sample of faculty and staff employed by a multiple‐campus health science center. Multivariate and univariate statistical modeling was used to evaluate the relationship between gender and ethical reasoning/conduct.

Findings

The findings suggest that women are generally more ethical than men. Being a woman was related to increased ethical judgment, being a woman and older was associated with increased ethical intention, and being a woman and a supervisor was related to higher altruism.

Practical implications

The results suggest that women should play a key role in the ethical role modeling of newly hired employees, as well as the development and management of organizational ethical values and codes of conduct. Healthcare organizations might also consider encouraging women to accept supervisory roles and become opinion leaders to foster organizational ethicality.

Originality/value

The findings add weight to the evidence that women are indeed more ethical than men in a variety of work roles, but greater insight into the complexities of these gender differences is also provided.

Citation

Valentine, S., Godkin, L., Page, K. and Rittenburg, T. (2009), "Gender and ethics: Ethical judgments, ethical intentions, and altruism among healthcare professionals", Gender in Management, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 112-130. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542410910938808