INDICACIÓN DE DECLARACIONES Y GARANTÍAS DADAS AL EMISOR EN RELACIÓN CON LOS ACTIVOS

Previous studies show that codes of ethics are now prevalent around the world and attract an increased usage in organisations (Chonko, Wotruba, & Loe, 2003; Oliver, Kearins & McGhee, 2005; Schlegelmilch & Houston, 1989; Weaver, Trevino, & Cochran, 1999). However, codes of ethics have typically been more likely to be developed and used in larger rather than smaller organisations (White & Montgomery, 1980). This situation seems to remain the case as indicated in the following paragraphs.

According to a survey conducted by Center for Business Ethics (1992), over ninety percent of American large corporations had a code of ethics. More recently, in Canada over eighty-five percent of them have a code (KPMG, 2000; Lindsay, Lindsay, & Irvine, 1996).

Even more recently, of the largest European corporations, sixty percent of U.K. companies have a code (Webley & Le Jeune, 2005), over fifty percent of German companies have a code, and in France thirty percent of companies have a code (Langlois & Schlegelmilch, 1990).

In New Zealand, very few studies have examined the use of codes of ethics by New Zealand organisations, how they are implemented and perceived, and what their effects are. A study by Pajo and McGhee (2003) on the institutionalisation of business ethics in the New Zealand organisations suggests that more and more companies are taking steps to incorporate ethical values into their daily operations. However, less than a quarter of the 192 New Zealand organisations surveyed indicated that resources were being set aside to accomplish the objective. Moreover, almost fifty percent of the surveyed New Zealand companies did not have a code of ethics, and the simple existence of an ethical code was not normally seen as sufficient to guarantee ethical behaviour. Within their survey, only one of the managers indicated that their organisation makes use of a code of ethics.

Similarly, a study on views from New Zealand middle and lower level managers as regards the state of business ethics in organisations (Alam, 1999) shows that New

38

Zealand organisations gave lower priorities to ethics than other values in the corporate culture (i.e. securing profits, for example). A large number of middle and lower level managers also believed that pressures from the top management to achieve results, the organisational climate and ruthless competition help create an unethical environment. Moreover, the majority of them believed that ethical standards in New Zealand organisations had declined from 1989 to 1999.

Internationally, several studies stress the importance of codes of ethics as a necessary tool for creating and establishing an ethical environment within organisations (Ferrell & Skinner, 1988; Hunt et al., 1984; Oliver, Kearins & McGhee, 2005; Schlegelmilch & Houston, 1989; Segal & Giacobbe, 2007; Ziegenfuss & Martinson, 2002).

Ziegenfuss and Martinson (2002) analyse the use of codes of ethics within the field of management accounting. This study examines whether members of the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA) use the institute‟s codes of ethics in recognising and resolving ethical dilemmas. The study indicates that a significant statistical relationship exists between members‟ rating of IMA code of ethics and their perception and judgement. However, the study found only weak associations among members‟ ethical perception and judgement, and personal ethical philosophy, corporate ethical values, age and certification.

Employees‟ perceptions about the usefulness of codes of ethics were also investigated by Wotruba, Chonko and Loe (2001). Their research findings suggest that the perceived usefulness of codes of ethics is positively related to the degree of familiarity with the code. Code familiarity is seen as a factor that influences the extent to which the code is used and, in turn, has an impact on the employee‟s behaviour.

Schlegelmilch and Houston (1989) examine British large organisations as regards corporate codes of ethics‟ use, content and attitudes. The study analyses the spread of corporate codes of ethics, popular titles used for corporate codes of ethics, circulation of codes of ethics, timing of the introduction of codes, formats, contents and some arguments for and against codes of ethics and their implementation. Providing a comparison between the U.S. (where three out of four organisations had a code of

39

ethics) and the U.K. (where codes were not so widely used), the study found that large U.K. companies were becoming increasingly interested in thinking formally about business ethics and designing an organisational code of ethics. Although attitudes and opinions in relation to the use and implementation of such codes of ethics are discussed, the employees‟ attitudes and behaviour generated by an understanding and implementation of the code of ethics are not examined. The authors conclude by saying that the limited value of codes of ethics as an isolated measure suggests that corporate codes of ethics need to be accompanied by ethical education and other processes that support their enforcement. In this respect, the findings of the study are inconclusive.

Fisher (2001) also analyses the use of codes of ethics by organisations from the U.K. The author explores how codes of ethics are understood and responded to by those whom the codes seek to influence. The employees‟ reaction to codes is analysed using interview material, with an attempt to interpret their attitudes. The study seeks to understand the dialogic tensions in people's understanding of ethical codes and suggests that managers' understandings and responses to codes are mediating factors between codes and their implementation. The general findings suggest that they were aware of the codes of ethics‟ existence but were hazy about their content.

Similarly, Oliver, Kearins and McGhee (2005) investigate the use of codes of ethics and its content. Different New Zealand professional bodies‟ codes are analysed here, providing a content analysis based on Cressey and Moore‟s (1983) three point typology, examining policy area, authority and compliance. Differences in the codes‟ content and the implications for the bodies are discussed, suggesting that codes do not appear to meet adequate professional standards for guiding ethical behaviour (Oliver, Kearins & McGhee, 2005).

Other studies focus explicitly on the content and functions of codes of ethics (Brinkmann & Ims, 2003; Schwartz, 2001). From an educational, regulatory and aspirational perspective, Brinkmann and Ims (2003) identify six main functions of ethical codes – to increase individual moral awareness and behaviour, to recognise moral conflicts and help with resolving them, to communicate ideals for individuals and collective conscience (moral climate), to assume and reinforce pre-/conventionalism,

40

cynicism, outer-directedness, to hinder necessary / possible learning of conflict handling by dialogue, and to conceal a disputable practice. The authors attempt to illustrate the code effects in general and the code dysfunctions in particular. It is suggested that most people have a positive attitude towards codes, but on the other hand, many of these people seem realistic about or sceptical towards code efficiency and code enforcement.

Use of Codes in the Marketing Research Industry

In the marketing research industry in particular, it is becoming clear that there is more and more pressure to recognise and apply specific standards and guidelines in an attempt to ensure ethical behaviour, to ensure industry consistency regarding acceptable and unacceptable practices, and to maintain credibility with the public upon whose goodwill the industry depends (Peterson, 1996). Marketing research associations have designed codes of ethics to be followed by their members (such as the American Marketing Association code of ethics, European Society of Marketing Research code of ethics, etc).

In New Zealand, the Market Research Society New Zealand (MRSNZ) is the association that develops the code of ethics for New Zealand marketing research organisations to use. The MRSNZ code was inspired by ESOMAR‟s (European Society Marketing Research) code of ethics. Most New Zealand marketing research organisations and practitioners refer to the MRSNZ code of ethics. This code clarifies expectations through specific description of acceptable practices in marketing research. The existence of a code highlights the accepted importance of business ethics in the marketing research industry and the fact that there is a perception of widespread ethical problems.

Studies investigating the use of codes of ethics in marketing research organisations are scarce. Few studies examine ethical codes – organisational and / or professional codes – and their role in creating an ethical environment in marketing research organisations (Ferrell & Skinner, 1988; Hunt et al., 1984; Segal & Giacobbe, 2007).

41

However, the majority of these studies treat only the theoretical utility of codes of ethics. One such study outlines the specific ethical problems faced by marketing researchers practitioners in their interactions with both respondents and clients, such as research integrity, treating outside clients fairly, and confidentiality (Hunt et al., 1984). The study attempts to examine the extent to which the professional codes of conduct address major ethical problems of marketing researchers. The approach applied is to analyse the content of the codes of ethics, to see if they include guidelines referring to the highlighted ethical issues. The limitation of this study is that it does not address how professional codes of conduct are applied and implemented in marketing research organisations, providing just a content analysis of codes.

Ferrell et al. (1998) analyse the existence, enforcement and awareness of codes of ethics within the three main types of participants involved in marketing research: research departments, marketing research firms, and data subcontractors. The study suggests that marketing research firms and data subcontractors tend to possess and enforce internal codes of ethics, and are aware of and enforce external codes to a greater extent than corporate research departments. In a more recent study, Segal and Giacobbe (2007) examine the Australian marketing research industry and propose to identify the key factors that contribute to unethical marketing research practices in Australia. Attitude and behaviour of senior management coupled with a lack of personal values seem to be top key factors contributing to unethical behaviour; in addition, the lack of recognition and enforcement of formal codes of ethics appears to be a key factor. The study, however, does not present ethical issues Australian marketing practitioners are facing and / or how they arrive at a resolution when encountering an ethical dilemma in creating and delivering marketing research services. As mentioned before, their study suggests that lack of recognition and enforcement of a formal code of marketing research ethics is perceived to be leading to unethical behaviour. A better understanding of the code of ethics‟ implementation process and other variables that would affect the researchers‟ behaviour thus becomes important (Segal and Giacobbe, 2007).

42