E-Based Solutions to Support Intercultural Business Ethics Instruction: An Exploratory Approach in Course Design and Delivery

ABSTRACT. This paper reports on the experiencesof international MBA students following a hybriddesign for a business ethics course, which combinedclass-based lectures with “out-of-class” discussionsupported by asynchronous communication tools. Thee-learning component of the course was intended togenerate discussion on the ethical assumptions ofcourse participants, with each individual required topost a mini case study reflecting an ethical dilemma

which s/he had faced at work. Using questionnaireand interview data, we report on the learning expe-riences of participants following this experimentalcourse. The results reveal a high level of interculturaldialogue between participants, with adopters showinggreater awareness of their individual cultural biasesin their case writing, a direct consequence of theon-line feedback and case discussion. These findingsindicate that asynchronous tools have much to offerbusiness ethics students, supporting ideas sharing andthe exchange of cultural perspectives outside thephysical boundaries of the classroom.

KEY WORDS: asynchronous courseware, hybridcourse design, intercultural dialogue

Business ethics and multiculturalism

Issues of culture and internationalisation and theirimpact on learning and working have becomeincreasingly important to academics and businesspeople alike (Schneider and Barsoux, 1997). Thecontinuing trends towards the globalisation ofbusiness and cultural diversity within the work-place present challenges for the modern manager,as well as opportunities for educators to address.For the delivery of business education, themessage is clear: managers of the future need tounderstand these trends in order to cope effec-tively with the pressures of the global market-place.

As David Harrison has highlighted, three keytrends promise to change and shape theeconomic landscape well into the 21st century:

E-Based Solutions to SupportIntercultural Business EthicsInstruction: An ExploratoryApproach in Course

Richard WalkerDesign and Delivery Ronald Jeurissen

Journal of Business Ethics 48: 113–126, 2003.© 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

Dr Richard Walker has recently joined the University ofYork as Learning Technologist. Prior to this appoint-ment, he held the post of Pedagogue in VirtualEducation at Nyenrode University. His research focuseson the application of learning technologies within man-agement education. He is interested in the support thatvirtual technologies provide for the learner-centredparadigm of instruction, and has published on this themein the Indian Journal of Open Learning and pre-sented papers at a number of international conferences,including the European Conference on InformationSystems, Online Educa and the European Conferenceon Accounting Information Systems.

Dr Ronald Jeurissen is professor of business ethics atNyenrode University, The Netherlands. He studiedtheology, philosophy and social sciences at NijmegenUniversity, Tilburg University and the University ofAmsterdam. He was awarded a doctorate in practicaltheology from Nijmegen University in 1993, on the dis-sertation Peace and Religion. Dr Jeurissen has pub-lished widely on business ethics, including four books,and articles in the Journal of Business Ethics andBusiness Ethics Quarterly. His research interests arein the theoretical foundations of business ethics, mar-keting ethics, HRM and sustainable entrepreneurship.

(1) continued globalisation of business; (2)enhanced information technology; and (3)increasingly diverse workplaces (Harrison, 2000).While these trends are not new, their importancecontinues to grow. The challenge for modern daybusiness educators is to prepare their students forthe challenges and opportunities each of thesetrends represents.

Cultural plurality affects business ethics invarious ways. There is ample empirical evidenceto suggest that cultural factors have an effect onthe ethical beliefs and attitudes of managers.Hofstede’s well-known model of five basicdimensions of cultural values orientations(Hofstede, 1981) has successfully been applied inbusiness ethics many times over (Vitell,Nwachukwa and Barnes, 1993; Nyaw and Ng,1994; Armstrong 1996). Cross-national variancein the ethical attitudes of managers has beenexamined on the basis of Parson’s model of valueorientations (Trompenaars and Hampden Turner,1997) and Rokeach’s values scale (Rokeach,1973; Bigoness and Blakely, 1996). Internationalguidelines for multinationals have beencompared, with a view to establishing consensualinternational ethical values for business(Frederick, 1991; Getz, 1995; Webley, 1996). Anumber of cross-national studies have beenconducted on specific business ethics issues, suchas corporate social responsibility (O’Neil, 1986),the ethics of sales management (Dubinsky et al.,1991), drugs testing and equal opportunities(Mathison, 1993). Jeurissen and Van Luijk (1998)indeed have provided evidence to show thatcultural differences also influence cross-culturalpeer-perceptions among managers. In a surveyamong European managers, they observed thatItalian and French managers were consistentlyperceived as being “least ethical” by their peersfrom 9 EU-countries, whereas German andSwedish managers were perceived as being “mostethical”.

From the existence of cross-cultural differencesamong managers, one may infer that there willprobably be cross-cultural differences amongmanagement students as well. Indeed, suchdifferences have been found empirically. Nyawand Ng (1994) revealed the existence of severaldifferences in ethical attitudes among business

students from Canada, Japan, Hong Kong andTaiwan. They were able to corroborateHofstede’s theory on cultural dimensions, byshowing that Canadian business students standout in individualism and Japanese students inpower distance. They also found specific differ-ences in ethical attitudes. Their results revealed,for example, that Hong Kong students are lesslikely to react in an ethical manner toward theircustomers than students from the other threecountries.

In teaching business ethics to multiculturalgroups of students, we should therefore acknowl-edge that cultural factors will have an effect onstudent perceptions and the way they deal withethical problems. Indeed, we may go further insuggesting that an awareness of cultural percep-tions is a prerequisite for understanding andinterpreting ethical behaviour within the work-place. As Harrison argues: “. . . an understandingof, and respect for, alternative cultures must beinstilled into our students as a core value ofbusiness ethics. Cultural literacy is no longer aluxury, but a necessity, in our increasingly inte-grated and competitive global environment.”(Harrison, 2000, p. 45)

Integration through e-learning

Embracing information technology in the class-room may provide a way to realise this goal – anintegrated learning approach bringing togetherbusiness ethics and cultural literacy. Technologyprovides the scope for enriched learning oppor-tunities, facilitating the sharing of knowledge andunderstanding among members of a group,increasing interaction between students andsupporting higher order learning (Brandon andHollingshead, 1999; Harasim, 1989; Salmon,2000; Turoff, 1990). Bailey and Cotlar (1994)and Berger (1999) have suggested that from alearning environment or community standpoint,students have greater opportunities with elec-tronic collaboration tools to solicit and shareknowledge, while developing common groundor intersubjectivity with their peers and teachers.The virtual learning space may well then repre-sent a medium for ideas sharing and knowledge

114 Richard Walker and Ronald Jeurissen

building which can help bring users in contactwith a variety of cultural perspectives.

The e-learning approach which we advocatehere, represents a departure from traditionalapplications of technology. Indeed we shoulddistinguish it from conventional uses of the webin universities, which conform more to an“e-teaching” philosophy. E-teaching relates to anautomated vision of instruction, as described byLeidner and Jarvenpaa (1995). Here the focus oftechnology is aimed at knowledge disseminationrather than knowledge creation. This can involvethe placing of teaching materials on the web aswell as some ancillary (collaborative) web-basedactivities. A “closed” system allows learners toinput information, however the responses to thatinput are prescribed and predetermined. Acomputer aided instruction (CAI) environmentwould suit this type of approach. Instructionalinterventions using this type of tool would typ-ically aim at controlling the sequence and contentof instruction, and seek to map a particularmodel of thinking onto the learners, offeringfeedback and prompting to learners (Lin andHsieh, 2001).

Table I offers a representation of instructionalapproaches and relevant e-learning applications.The approaches on the left-hand side of the table– “instructional information processing” and“instructional behaviourism” are compatible withe-teaching methods in our estimation. Both ofthese approaches are based on an objectivistepistemology; knowledge has an objective andseparate existence whose attributes, relationships,and structure can be known. The process ofinstruction therefore focuses on presentingknowledge and modelling its structure in such away that it can be accurately acquired andreproduced. Learning involves the accurateacquisition and replication of this externalknowledge. The approaches on the right-handside of the table – “personal constructivism” and“social constructivism” are compatible withe-learning methods, according to our learner-centred definition of the term. Both of theseapproaches are based on a constructivist episte-mology – knowledge is not independent of thelearner but is internally constructed by thelearner as a way of making meaning of experi-ences. Constructivist instruction is not the

E-Based Solutions to Support Intercultural Business Ethics Instruction 115

TABLE I Instructional approaches and their consequences for e-learning

Instructional Instructional Personal Social information processing behaviourism constructivism constructivism

Philosophy Knowledge as Knowledge as Knowledge as Knowledge as reproduced modified personally con- socially constructed cognition behaviour structed meaning meaning

How to learn? Learning is processing Stimulus response Learning is Learning is information learning experiencing and experiencing, (computer metaphor) reflecting reflecting, relative to

autonomously a social context

Electronic E-teaching: E-teaching: E-learning: E-learning:support Classroom-based Web assisted Set of manageable Set of manageable,

learning environments instruction (CAI content-rich tools content-rich tools; and (virtual classrooms, environments) (e.g. microworlds) knowledge sharing andvideo conferencing) collaboration tools

Technologies used as (e.g. bulletin boards,

tools in support of chat boxes, computer

classroom activities conferences) contained

(e-mail) within VLE’s.

process of carefully arranged prescriptive strate-gies, but of coming to understand how peoplemake meaning, and then to create learningenvironments that promote this construction( Jonassen et al., 1995).

Our vision of e-learning is based on theapplication of technology in a such a way thatlearners are presented with an “open” environ-ment, matching the needs of individual learnersand complementing individual learning pathways.An open system fosters personal meaning-making, allowing individuals to construct theirown knowledge through exploration and dis-covery learning. It provides high levels of learnercontrol, allowing users to restructure the learningexperience in ways not feasible within closedenvironments. We may envisage students workingwith tools such as microworlds in this approach.Jonassen, Carr and Yueh (1998) define micro-worlds as exploratory learning environments ordiscovery spaces in which learners can navigate,manipulate or create objects, and test their effectson one another.

An open environment will also support dis-course among communities of learners, sup-porting the social negotiation of meaning. Thesecombined functions build on the social con-structivist philosophy of instructional design(Winn, 1993), which focuses on the use of tech-nology to support experiential learning, con-structed relative to a social context. There are awide variety of conversation tools available tosupport interpersonal exchanges among students,such as chat boxes, for synchronous discussionand bulletin boards and computer conferences forasynchronous discussion. These tools can be usedby groups of students to collect information andsolve problems ( Jonassen, Peck and Wilson,1998).

Wilson (1996) suggests that virtual learningenvironments (VLEs) best reflect the openapproach to e-based learning, combining acommunication dimension with tools for indi-vidualised learning. Piccoli, Ahmad and Ives(2001) indeed claim that VLEs provide highlevels of student control, support participantcontact and interaction throughout the learningprocess, and provide an opportunity to restruc-

ture the learning experience in ways not feasiblewith other instructional tools such as CAI.

With the open e-learning approach in mind,we have experimented at Nyenrode Universitywith a new type of hybrid course design, inwhich e-learning plays a key supporting role inthe teaching of business ethics and interculturalmanagement. In this paper we report on theexperiences of course participants, their recep-tion of the open e-learning approach and theintercultural focus to the revised course design.We begin with a description of the hybrid coursedesign, highlighting the role of e-learning forstudent learning. We describe the e-learningtools used in the course and the objectives behindtheir selection. Finally we report on the deliveryof the course, drawing on questionnaire andinterview data to illustrate the learning experi-ences of participants. The last two sections of thepaper deal with the lessons learned from thisexperiment and our conclusions on the contri-bution of e-learning to business ethics teachingand the development of intercultural awarenessamongst students.

Introducing a hybrid design to a businessethics course

The business ethics course described in thispaper, was delivered within the InternationalMBA programme (IMBA) at NyenrodeUniversity, a 13 month full-time study pro-gramme designed for international managers withan average of 5 years work experience. Thepurpose of the course is to communicate theo-retical and practical insights and developmentsin the fields of business ethics and sustainablebusiness. Students learn about general ethicaltheories of business ethics such as stakeholder-theory, theories of responsibility and normativeethical theory. The course also focuses on thecompetencies necessary to handle ethicaldilemmas in a systematic way.

For the IMBA 2002 course, we introduced anew target for student learning, based on thedevelopment of awareness of the interculturaldimension to business ethics. Students were


encouraged to identify their own cultural biasesand develop a more positive attitude towardsintercultural differences. This involved studentsparticipating in a discussion on interculturaldifferences, tackling the whole phenomenon ofsocial behaviour in business. Given the make-upof the 2002 IMBA class, this approach appearedparticularly relevant, with plenty of scope fordiscussion existing between the 18 Dutchparticipants and 17 international participantsdrawn from Asia, North and South America andEurope. We anticipated that the class woulddevelop understanding in this new area of thecourse via a process of discussion and socialnegotiation of meaning.

The design for this course followed a hybridor “mixed mode” approach (Hiltz, 1994),involving both face-to-face and virtual learningmethods. Participants would thus experience acombination of interactive lectures and groupdiscussions in class, as well as on-line learningactivities. By choosing this format we tried tocombine the advantages of e-learning with thebenefits of class-based learning from lecturers andfellow students.

The class-based learning dealt with the theoryof the course, including some general discussionon intercultural issues. The e-learning compo-nent of the course was intended to supportreflective and critical thinking on individualethical assumptions. Getting students to thinkmore deeply about how they communicate theiropinions and the cultural biases influencing theirthinking were key factors behind the selection ofa text-based communication medium. We alsorecognised the value of asynchronous tools whichwould enable participants to contribute theirthoughts at a moment of their choosing, openingup the possibility for multiple lines of discussionsoutside the classroom.

In order to generate this type of discussion,students were asked to contribute a mini case toa digital archive for the course, focusing on anethical dilemma in business which they hadexperienced or observed at work. Accompanyingthe case they were required to include an analysisof the problem and their own solution. It washoped that the range of case themes and contexts

presented by participants would help to supporta discussion on ethical behaviour, as well as adeeper level of discussion on the cultural per-spectives determining the way students interpretacceptable and unethical business practices.Students were asked to comment on at least threecases from the archive, focusing in particular onthe cultural assumptions underpinning theauthor’s case description and analysis. They werealso invited to consider to what extent theauthor’s case solution was transferable to othercultural contexts. Individuals were instructed toselect cases based on cultural contexts unfamiliarto them, so that a cross-cultural dimension wasintroduced to the activity.

The case-writing activity was designed to takeplace over the first three weeks of the course(March 4–25), giving participants sufficient timeto draft the case, receive feedback from theinstructor, before uploading it to the course envi-ronment. For the remainder of the course (March25–April 2), students were expected to engage inan on-line peer review of the cases, as part oftheir “out-of-class” learning for the course. Wescheduled the penultimate class session for thepresentation of the most interesting cases, withdiscussion focusing on the cultural dimension toethical problems in business.

Role of IT within the course design

Students were presented with a purpose-builtvirtual learning environment for this course,based on a Whizzdom1 platform. The environ-ment contained instructions for the case-baseddiscussion activity, along with suitable knowl-edge-sharing and communication tools. Wesummarise the functions of these tools and thetargeted learning behaviour in Table II (below).

The e-learning environment was designed tosupport student learning on two different levels.First and foremost, it was intended to encouragestudents to discuss and raise ethical issues withpeers. The environment contained a case direc-tory (digital archive), where each participantcould upload a case outlining an ethical dilemmaor problem. In addition to this, students were


encouraged to comment on the cases of otherindividuals, using a discussion forum (bulletinboard). The forum represented a place wherethey could post comments on the content of thecase – offering potential solutions to the case,critiques on its structure, or opinions on thecultural assumptions included within the text. Byreceiving these types of comments, it wasintended that individual students would experi-ence ethical discussion more intensively thanwould be possible within the classroom – giventhe traditional limitations of time and interaction.The use of the environment would therefore helpto increase discussion within the class – studentswould be able to see an exchange of views takingplace on-line.

On another level, we hoped that the use ofthe environment would help to stimulate discus-sion on intercultural assumptions and perspec-tives. Students would be receiving comments andviewpoints on business ethical issues from avariety of cultural perspectives. We hoped thatthey would engage in an intercultural peer reviewand exchange of views supported by the e-learning environment. Targeted outcomes fromthis approach would be greater awareness of theintercultural dimension to business ethics, as wellas greater awareness of individual cultural biases.We hoped that the course would help students

to improve their capability to handle/solve inter-cultural problems by trial and error.

Research design and focus

We selected an exploratory case study design(Robson, 1993; Yin, 1993) in order to researchthe experiences of the participants following thecourse. The study aimed at revealing studentattitudes towards the delivery methods (virtualenvironment and asynchronous tools). The inves-tigation also considered the contribution of thetools to student learning – to what extent thetools and resources added value to their learningexperiences, supporting an intercultural focus fordiscussion outside the classroom.

Student learning and assessment of thepreparatory phase of the course was recordedusing a combination of questionnaire and inter-view techniques. A pre-course questionnaire wasdesigned to gauge student expectations towardsthe hybrid course design. Students were alsoasked to consider the suitability of computertechnology for course delivery in managementeducation. Through the use of a post-coursequestionnaire, we aimed to revisit student atti-tudes to the course design and pedagogicalapproach. Participants were also invited to reflect


TABLE II Role of virtual tools in the course design

Virtual tools Functions Targeted learning behaviour

Case forum (individual Dedicated area for discussion on cases. Critical review of individual casesbulletin boards) Includes summary of each case and area (reflective thinking; reciprocal

where peers can post feedback on the case. teaching and learning). Ideas-sharing and interaction.

General forum Posting comments on course (general Ideas-sharing and interaction(bulletin board) discussion area for all course issues).

Plenary case directory Uploading and downloading individual cases. Knowledge sharing

Course outline Reviewing instructions, assignment timetable. Reference purposes

Assignment instructions Activities for individual case assignment. Reference purposes

Resources directory Uploading and downloading additional course Knowledge sharingresources (web-links, files, articles etc.)

again on the suitability of computer technologyfor course delivery in management education.Responses were measured using a five-pointLikert-type scale, adapted from Hiltz’s (1994)instrument designed to evaluate the effectivenessof an online course. In addition to these instru-ments, a selection of students were interviewedat different intervals during the course, in orderto provide further detailed feedback on theirlearning experiences. This input was combinedwith the quantitative evidence acquired from thepostings within the directory and bulletin boardsto give a rounded view of student learning forthe course.

As with all research the study results from thiscourse have certain limitations. The coursefocused on a small class population (35 students),with no control group included in the analysis.Scope for the measurement of the effectivenessof the course design in fostering interculturallearning was therefore quite limited. Con-sequently we may offer only general observationson the learning outcomes for this course. Indeed,the research for this experimental course shouldbe viewed as a pilot study, offering a first step inthe examination of student responses to alearner-centred course design using asynchronouscourseware.

The rationale for the hybrid course design andintroduction of e-learning was based though onthe feedback received from the previous year’sclass – IMBA 2001. This class followed a tradi-tional lecture-based approach. The post-coursequestionnaire feedback revealed a level of dissat-isfaction with the opportunities in class to shareand discuss work-based ethical problems. Thelimited use of student experiences in class andthe restricted opportunities for peer-based dis-cussion were viewed as the principal weaknessesof the course. Notably only 25% of respondentssupported the view that the classes providedopportunities for students to give each otherfeedback on their work. These findings may serveas a benchmark from which to interpret theexperiences of the 2002 IMBA class followingthe experimental hybrid course design.

Discussing of the course results: evaluation of the contribution of asynchronous communication tools tostudent learning

Pre-course results

The pre-course questionnaire attracted a lowresponse rate (12 respondents – 34% of the class),however those students who completed theinstrument were quite positive in terms of theirexpectations towards e-learning. 92% of respon-dents noted that e-learning increases opportuni-ties for students to give each other feedback ontheir work. Just under two-thirds of respondents(64%) supported the view that e-learning facili-tates individual learning outside the classroom,with 58% remarking that it supports ideas andexperience sharing and increases opportunitiesfor discussion. These results appear linked tostudent experiences of an e-learning moduleimmediately preceding the ethics course, inwhich participants experimented with asynchro-nous communication tools and a digital archivefor knowledge sharing. Students were thusfamiliar with the use of these tools and“adopters” no doubt took the opportunity toreflect their support for e-learning in the pre-course survey.

Post-course results

Of the 35 students who started and completedthe course, only 3 participants failed to upload acase and solution to the case directory. Two thirdsof the class (23 students) participated in the on-line discussion conducted between class sessions.Participating students posted the targeted numberof 3 messages per person (a mean average of 3.04per person). The destination of these messageswas not evenly distributed however – with somecases attracting considerable interest, whilst 3cases received no comments at all. Interestinglythe three top posters in the class were amongstthe most silent members of the face-to-face classdiscussions – a situation related possibly tolanguage problems in the case of the Chinesestudents or shyness in the case of the Ukrainian


student. Where the environment appeared tomake an impact was in providing these types ofstudents – often marginalised in the classroomdebates – with a channel to express their ownideas about the course and share their experi-ences.

The comments posted by students on thediscussion site were, on the whole, interculturalin nature – in line with our expectations for thecourse. Students used this opportunity to expresstheir own cultural perspectives on the casespresented by individuals – providing a showcaseof different interpretations on cultural dilemmas.In total 34 messages dealt explicitly with culturalaspects of cases: 12 messages featured the word“culture”, 22 featured the word “cultural” and5 messages also included the word “intercultural”in the posting.

Most of the cultural comments involved cross-cultural comparisons of situations and practices,where students commented on a culturallyspecific aspect of a case, by giving either similaror contrasting examples from their own culture.An example of this type of behaviour may bedrawn from the contribution of a Dutch student,commenting on the paper of a Japanese col-league, who had focused on promotion issues inhis case. The Japanese case highlighted theimportance for an employee in developing andmaintaining a good relationship with a superior,in order to get promotion. This extends to social-ising after work. This prompted the followingresponse from a Dutch perspective:

“When you talk about the promotion practices inJapan, I have to say that they are quite different inThe Netherlands. Of course a good relationshipbetween manager and employee is important, butnext to that as an employee I have to perform verywell too in order to be promoted. Only main-taining a good relationship is not enough to bepromoted. An employee who only has a good rela-tionship can never be promoted when he or she isnot showing results. At least not that I am awareof!”

Another example is drawn from a Chinesestudent’s comments, responding to a Peruvianstudent’s paper on bribery in the constructionindustry:

“Your case sounds very familiar to me since I wasengaged in construction and engineering projectsin my previous company. The company, as a con-tractor, always had to do something to please thepersons who represented the client, either givingpresents or inviting them to dinner, to entertain-ment places or let them reimburse some expenses,but maybe not as serious as what was described inyour case.”

Students often commented that they foundthis type of intercultural comparison interestingand pleasant. “What a nice job to compare thesedifferent cultures”, one student ended hismessage. From a pedagogical perspective, it is ofcourse pleasing when students find an assignmentinteresting and “fun”. But from a theoreticalperspective, the results are somewhat disap-pointing. We had hoped that students wouldwork the theoretical information on culture andintercultural dynamics, presented in class and inthe course reader into their comments. Theywere indeed explicitly asked to do so in theinstructions for the discussion site, which readas follows:

“Comment on at least three cases of your peers,from an intercultural perspective. Consider in par-ticular any cultural factors or assumptions in thecase description, as well as in the analysis. Questionto what extent the solution to the case is transfer-able to other cultural contexts. Select the cases youcomment on in such a way that they cover differentcultural contexts and industry sectors. Yourcomments should be constructively critical andtheoretically informed.”

Interestingly, some students did work theoret-ical information about ethics into theircomments, but not about intercultural ethics. Ethicsmainly involved the distinction between ethics ofprinciples and ethics of consequences, which wasthoroughly explained in class. In hindsight, wemay conclude that the quality of the informationon intercultural ethics offered in class and in thereader (based on Schneider and Barsoux, 1997)was not sufficient for student learning. Indeed werecognise that the study of intercultural businessethics is still in its infancy. There is well estab-lished and empirically corroborated theory on


intercultural value patterns, which can be foundin the work of Hofstede and Trompenaars, butthe transfer of these concepts to the realm ofbusiness ethics has, as yet, not produced a firmbody of general knowledge. Indeed we mayconsult ethical theory on international business(De George, 1993; Donaldson, 1989), but inter-national business ethics has still not been linkedin a convincing manner to the intercultural valuesstudy of the Hofstede type. Hence, there is littleestablished theory on how intercultural valuedifferences affect ethical judgements, and no suchtheory was presented in class. Therefore, weshould not be surprised to find little theoreticalinformation on intercultural ethics on thediscussion site.

Regarding the contribution of the e-learningdiscussion forum to student learning, weobserved that the level of interaction betweenusers on-line was quite low, with few studentsresponding to the comments of peers in the formof discussion threads. Table III summarises thecategories of messages recorded in the peerreview discussion of the cases.

Student reception of the e-learning phase ofthe course was recorded using both interview andquestionnaire techniques. The post-coursequestionnaire attracted a far higher response rate(27 respondents – 77% of the class) than the pre-course instrument, and reflected a wider spreadof opinions on the e-learning approach. Weobserved a division of opinion within the class,


TABLE IIICategories of messages posted – Totals

Category Definition Example Total of messages posted

Intercultural Messages offering a value “Is it morally admissible that the production 34messages judgement on the case manager does not interfere with this policy,

presented – what is the right although it is harmful for the company andor wrong course of action; the shareholders on the long run. Let me an illustration from a cultural comment on this from an Ukrainian perspective. perspective. In Ukraine it is common to “cook” the

records and “boost” the P/L or B/S.”

Ethical analysis Messages focusing on the “The pro-arguments seem to be all rational, 17messages ethical analysis within the case consequential. The counter argument(s) is

– the theoretical reasoning principle. According to the literature, you underpinning the case – the have to base your conclusion on the weighting merits of the argument of the arguments. If the principle arguments presented by the author, in lead to a different conclusion than the line with the theory presented. consequential arguments, the reader says we

have to follow the principle arguments.”

Presentation Messages focusing on the “I would advice you to stick more to the 13messages presentation of the case, the traditional seven-step-model structure in

way it is written, its structure analysing your dilemma. I couldn’t find step and the grammar used. 3. It would have been better if you would

have answered step 6 and 7 separately.”

Acknowledgement An acknowledgement or reply “Thanks for your comment. In my opinion, 0 6messages to messages received from other no matter in Dutch or European culture or

participants by the author of the Chinese culture, the moral issue is stood up.”case; feedback on the feedback.

with a third of the class convinced of the rele-vance and suitability of the hybrid design and theuse of e-learning, with a similar sized group of‘traditionalists’ disagreeing.

Adopters believed that the hybrid approachhelped to support a higher level of feedback forindividual learning through peer exchanges (45%of respondents), and felt that this method helpedto increase interaction levels between students(41% of respondents). 37% of respondentsbelieved that the delivery method supported agreater level of collaborative learning than thatafforded by the class-based approach, with 26%disagreeing. Less support was recorded for theview that the hybrid approach enhanced thelearning process and understanding of courseconcepts, with only 15% of respondents in agree-ment and 33% disagreeing.

We observed a far more positive reaction fromrespondents across the class however, when theywere invited in the post-course questionnaire toreflect again on the potential of computertechnology within management education. Twothirds of respondents viewed the use of computertechnology as a relevant and value-addingmedium for student learning. 59% of respondentsviewed the medium as ideal in supporting peerdiscussion and ideas-sharing, with only 19%disagreeing. A similar level of support wasrecorded in favour of computer technology sup-porting collaborative learning and providingflexibility in the learning process. These resultsare promising, indicating that class opinion isopen to innovation in course design and delivery– when technology is integrated effectively withclass-based instructional methods.

Feedback from the interviews

The feedback from interviews, conducted witha third of the class population (13 students),helped us to gain an insight into the strengthsand weaknesses of the e-learning approachemployed for this course. In particular, respon-dents highlighted the value of the feedback theyreceived from peers on their cases, suggesting thatthis input stimulated reflective thinking on theircase assumptions:

“E-learning can add value. When you are workingindividually, you think that you are right – yourviewpoint is the correct one. But after reading twoor three postings on your case, it gives a differentperspective on your case – it shows you that thereare different views . . . It draws attention to issuesthat you may have overlooked in your casewriting.”

“Based on the responses received for my case, Ireceived a number of different perspectives. TheInternet was instrumental in generating a numberof intercultural perspectives on the case, which wasenriching.”

Adopters confirmed the value of the discus-sion forum as a platform for interculturaldialogue between case writers and readers:

“I like the e-site and the opportunities to shareexperiences – and the opportunities to readthrough the cases. The technical set-up could havebeen improved. It did support interculturaldialogue – e.g. over the issue of bribery. The casesalso represent a stimulus for face-to-face feedback– responding to the comments posted on the site.Some comments are cultural in nature, others arenot. It is an enriching (learning) approach –although the responses for the cases are not evenlydistributed.”

“The on-line cases provide the dynamite for dis-cussion (not exploited in the class). They invitemultiple viewpoints. The (on-line) content is onlyas good as the contributions but – I am a believerin 1:1 talking – and I see value in this approach.The on-line cases also stimulate discussion face-to-face between students.”

Participants also underlined the value of themedium in giving a voice to the quieter membersof the class, who could further enrich theexchange of cultural perspectives with their owninput:

“The intercultural perspective does fit the e-learning approach. It gives Asians the time todiscuss, think and formulate answers on certainsubjects. The platform is not interactive though –there is no real-time interaction. It is good to react– you can see added value – but the platform isnot used in the right way yet.”


“Going on-line also does have value for theintroverts of the class to express their views. Inclass, there are always the same people discussing– about 10–12 people. The web-site allows othersto express their views. . . . On-line they canexpress themselves. Yoshi’s case provided a niceperspective. I want to listen and learn about thesedifferent approaches. I will probably work in aninternational environment, maybe with Asian orLatin American business representatives or team-mates. This is a kind of training. Where do youget this, apart from the MBA?”

However, as the comments above indicate,students also saw weaknesses in the learningexperience on-line. Participants noted the lackof interaction on-line, and the uneven distribu-tion of messages to cases recorded within theforum. Students also highlighted the difficultyof engaging users in voluntary interaction on-line. As one participant noted:

“E-learning has a role in full-time MBA courses –but participation – when it is not graded – is notguaranteed. How you promote it is also impor-tant.”

Student perceptions towards the e-learningexperiences are summarised in Table IV. We haveattempted to capture the key issues raised bystudents in the interviews. The findings are basedon a content analysis of the transcripts of inter-views, combining the feedback from a total of 13interviews. The table reflects the strengths andweaknesses of the course design under review.(Key themes are recorded in order of thefrequency in which students mentioned them.)The table also displays student attitudes towardsthe potential of the medium for future courses(opportunities and threats).

Lessons learned: student experiences with the e-learning component of thecourse

Based on the aggregate questionnaire and inter-view feedback, we draw the following conclu-sions on the contribution of the e-learning phaseof the course to student learning.

• The e-learning approach employed in thiscourse was deemed to be relevant andvalue-adding by a third of the class, with asimilar sized group questioning its value.Two-thirds of the class saw value however,in the potential of the hybrid deliveryapproach to enhance their own learning.The scope for e-learning, when integratedeffectively with class-based teaching, wastherefore recognised by the majority ofparticipants following the IMBA course.

• Adopters noted that the on-line feedbackprocedure helped to deliver cultural per-spectives on the cases – some of which wereused to rewrite the text of the originalcases. It therefore encouraged a reflectiveloop in the minds of authors/recipients ofthese comments.

• The cases encouraged both commentsposted on-line as well as discussion in thehallway – face-to-face discussions as aspin-off from the on-line contributions.The mixed-mode follow-up procedureillustrated the complementary nature ofvirtual and face-to-face learning methodsfor full-time students.

• The e-learning channel appeared toempower quieter members of the classsessions to express their own views – andcomment on the views of others. To somedegree it helped to bridge the culturaldivide – so apparent in the classroom whereAsian participants largely opted out ofplenary discussions. It also provided anantidote to the problem of having the samevocal minority of 10–12 voices dominatingthe class discussions.

• The forum exposed students to the viewsand insights of people outside their friend-ship circles. They felt less inhibited aboutcommenting on the work of others withinthe class. This helped to stimulate theexchange of intercultural perspectives in theclass discussion and comments deliveredon-line.

• The case directory and discussion forumsupported an observational learning processas well. Students could observe the learningand interactions of others from afar – a



Strengths

Feedback postings stimulate individuals to reviewtheir own work and improve on it (via multiple per-spectives recorded within discussion forum ) (

×11)

The environment presents a forum for feedback, ideassharing – extending class discussion – complementingclass-based learning. (×9)

Medium in which less articulate class members canexpress themselves – ideas/insights (×8)

Medium presents individuals with a wider exposureto the contributions of peers than would be possiblein class (via cases, summaries/overviews) (×8)

Excellent way of giving and receiving feedback –supporting 1:1 talking (×7)

Provides flexibility in learning process – over whenand which cases you comment on. (×7)

On-line interaction supports cross-cultural ideas-sharing (intercultural dialogue) (×5)

Postings stimulate follow-up face-to-face discussion/informal learning (×4)

Environment stimulates sharing of views/discussionoutside established friendship circles of physical class-room (×3)

Giving feedback helps you to assess critically the workof others (×3)

Opportunities

Opportunity to create an integrated learning andadministrative site across whole of MBA programme(supporting group-work/social activities/feedbacketc.). (×3)

Opportunity for professors to update site every coupleof days, to trigger students to visit site (via addedlinks, comments, articles etc.) (×2)

Weaknesses

Design of environment (login procedure/forum) isnot user-friendly (×6)

Quality of contributions on-line is not guaranteed –can suffer when quantity of responses is requested/expected (×4)

Not necessarily an interactive medium (×3)

Lack of clear guidelines/rules limits student partici-pation/discussion on-line (×3)

Intercultural perspective not exploited in on-linediscussion (×3)

Use of site is not essential for course (e-mail wouldwork) (×3)

Threats

Success of e-learning depends on degree to whichinstructor promotes use of site. Students won’t putthe effort in without grading to oblige them to doso. (×10)

Learning exclusively over the Internet is not a goodthing – you miss the face-to-face interaction (thereis a difference between what you say and what youwrite on-line) (×5)

Students face competing demands from other courses.High workloads discourage students from investingtoo much time in this way of learning (×4)

Cultural mix of class will influence success of e-learning. Cultural issues may affect quality ofcontributions and interaction on-line (e.g. Asianparticipants more reserved ; politeness – a barrier tocritical feedback) (×4)

TABLE IVStudent perceptions towards the e-learning component of the course

dynamic not afforded to them in thephysical environment of the classroom.

We observed a number of shortcomingshowever in this course experiment. Somestudents noted that the depth of the culturalissues raised on-line could have been developedfurther within the class sessions on campus.Greater use could have been made in class of thedifferent cultural perspectives expressed on-line.A learning point from this experience is thathybrid course design requires a precise plan,detailing not only how to introduce e-learning toclass sessions, but also how to integrate thee-learning results with the class-based learning.As Sproull and Klesler (1993) indicate, effectivee-learning requires the full integration of thislearning mode within the instructional design.

Students used the e-learning channel toexchange cross-cultural perspectives on cases, butas we have mentioned earlier, they failed to applytheoretical information on intercultural businessethics in the on-line case discussion. In hindsight,we may view this as a direct consequence of thelimited theory offered to students in class onintercultural business ethics. There is littleestablished theory that connects the fields ofintercultural values research and internationalbusiness ethics. For future classes, we will needto provide a stronger theoretical frameworkaddressing these two domains, in order to supportparticipants in the on-line discussion process andcritiquing of the cases.

In terms of the organisation and delivery ofthe e-learning component of this course, therealso appears to be scope for improvement. Therewere a number of criticisms directed towards thevoluntary framing of the e-learning activity – andthe loophole this provided for students to dropout – and not contribute their thoughts. A morerigorous approach was suggested by participants,whereby they would be compelled to participate.These criticisms suggest to us that a tightermanagement of the e-learning activities by thecourse instructor, with clearer instructions tostudents, might help to deliver wider participa-tion on-line – a learning point for future exper-iments in hybrid instructional design at NyenrodeUniversity.

Note

1 A learning platform designed with the latestMicrosoft Web-Technology, offering a flexible andopen architecture to course designers. Seewww.whizzdom.nl for further details.

References

Armstrong, R. W.: 1996, ‘The Relationship BetweenCulture and Perception of Ethical Problems inInternational Marketing’, Journal of Business Ethics15, 1199–1208.

Bailey, E. and M. Cotlar: 1994, ‘Teaching via theInternet’, Communication Education 43(2), 184–193.

Berger, N.: 1999, ‘Pioneering Experiences inDistance Learning: Lessons Learned’, Journal ofManagement Education 23, 684–690.

Bigoness, W. and G. Blakely: 1996, ‘A Cross-NationalStudy of Managerial Values’, Journal of InternationalBusiness Studies 27, 739–752.

Brandon, D. and A. Hollingshead: 1999,‘Collaborative Learning and Computer-supportedGroups’, Communication Education 48(2), 109–126.

De George, R.: 1993, Competing with Integrity inInternational Business (Oxford UP, New York).

Donaldson, T.: 1989, The Ethics of InternationalBusiness (Oxford University Press, Oxford).

Dubinsky, A. J., M. A. Jolson, M. Kotabe and C. U.Lim: 1991, ‘A Cross-National Investigation ofSalespeople’s Ethical Perceptions’, Journal ofInternational Business Studies 22, 651–670.

Frederick, W. C.: 1991, ‘The Moral Authority ofTransnational Corporate Codes’, Journal of BusinessEthics 10, 165–177.

Getz, K. A.: 1995, ‘Trans-ideological Business Valuesin International Codes of Conduct’, InternationalJournal of Values Based Management 8, 117–134.

Harasim, L.: 1989, ‘On-Line Education: A NewDomain’, in R. Mason and A. Kaye (eds.),Mindweave (Pergamon Press, Oxford), pp. 50–62.

Harrison, D. M.: 2000, ‘The Changing Face ofBusiness Education: Challenges for Tomorrow’,Review of Business 3(4) (Fall), 43–46.

Hiltz, S. R.: 1994, The Virtual Classroom: LearningWithout Limits Via Computer Networks (Ablex,Norwood, NJ).

Hofstede, G.: 1981, Cultures Consequences: InternationalDifferences in Work-Related Values (Sage, BeverlyHills, CA).

Jeurissen, R. and H. Van Luijk: 1998, ‘The EthicalReputations of Managers in Nine EU-Countries:


A Cross Referential Survey’, Journal of BusinessEthics 17, 995–1005.

Jonassen, D., C. Carr and H.Yueh: 1998, ‘Computersas Mindtools for Engaging Learners in CriticalThinking’, TechTrends 43(2), 24–32.

Jonassen, D., K. Peck and B. Wilson: 1998, LearningWITH Technology: A Constructivist Perspective(Prentice-Hall, Columbus, OH).

Jonassen, D., M. Davidson, M. Collins, J. Campbelland B. Haag: 1995, ‘Constructivism andComputer-Mediated Communication in DistanceEducation’, The American Journal of DistanceEducation 9(2), 7–25.

Leidner D. and S. Jarvenpaa: 1995, ‘The Use ofInformation Technology to Enhance ManagementSchool Education: A Theoretical View’, MISQuarterly 19, 265–292.

Lin, B. and C. Hsieh: 2001, ‘Web-Based Teaching andLearner Control: A Research Review’, Computersand Education 37, 377–386.

Mathison, D. L.: 1993, ‘European and AmericanExecutive Values’, Business Ethics A European Review2(2), 97–100.

Nyaw, M. K. and I. Ng: 1994, ‘A ComparativeAnalysis of Ethical Beliefs: A Four Country Study’,Journal of Business Ethics 13, 543–555.

O’Neil, R.: 1986, ‘Corporate Social Responsibilityand Business Ethics: A European Perspective’,International Journal of Social Economics 13(10),64–76.

Piccoli, G., R. Ahmad and B. Ives: 2001, ‘Web-BasedVirtual Learning Environments: A ResearchFramework and a Preliminary Assessment ofEffectiveness in Basic IT Skills Training’, MISQuarterly 24(4), 401–426.

Robson, C.: 1993, Real World Research: A Resourcefor Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers(Blackwell, London).

Rokeach, M.: 1973, The Nature of Human Values (FreePress, New York).

Salmon, G.: 2000, ‘Computer Mediated Conferencingfor Management Learning at the Open University’,Management Learning 31, 491–502.

Schneider S. C. and J.-L. Barsoux: 1997, Managingacross Cultures (Pearson Education, Harlow).

Sproull, L. and S. Klesler: 1993, ‘Computers,Networks, and Work’, in L. Harasim (ed.), GlobalNetworks: Computers and International Communication(MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).

Trompenaars, F. and C. Hampden-Turner: 1997,Riding the Waves of Culture, 2nd ed. (EconomistBooks, London).

Turoff, M.: 1990, ‘Computer-Mediated Communica-tion Requirements for Group Support’, Journal ofOrganizational Computing 1(1), 85–113.

Vitell, S. J., S. L. Nwachukwa and J. H. Barnes: 1993,‘The Effects of Culture on Ethical Decision-Making: An Application of Hofstede’s Typology’,Journal of Business Ethics 12, 753–760.

Webley, S.: 1996, ‘The Interfaith Declaration:Constructing a Code of Ethics for InternationalBusiness’, Business Ethics A European Review 5(1),52–57.

Wilson, B.: 1996, Constructivist Learning Environments:Case Studies in Instructional Design (EducationalTechnology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).

Winn, W.: 1993, ‘A Constructivist Critique of theAssumptions of Instructional Design’, in T. Duffy,J. Lowyck and D. Jonassen (eds.), DesigningEnvironments for Constructive Learning (Springer,New York), pp. 189–212.

Yin, R.: 1993, Applications of Case Study Research(Sage Publishing, Beverly Hills, CA).

Academic Support Office, Registrar’s Department,

University of York, England YO10 5DD

E-mail: [email protected]


Documents

E-Based Solutions to Support Intercultural Business Ethics Instruction: An Exploratory Approach in Course Design and Delivery