The shortened Corporate Ethical Virtues scale: Measurement invariance and mean differences across two occupational groups

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12184
• Author: Taru Feldt,Mari Huhtala,Maiju Kangas,Muel Kaptein
• Published date: 01 July 2018
• Date: 01 July 2018

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

The shortened Corporate Ethical Virtues scale: Measurement

invariance and mean differences across two occupational

groups

Mari Huhtala

1

|

Maiju Kangas

2

|

Muel Kaptein

3

|

Taru Feldt

1

1

Department of Psychology, University of

Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland

2

HRS Advisors Oy, Espoo, Finland

3

Department of Business-Society

Management, RSM—Rotterdam School of

Management, Erasmus University

Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Correspondence

Mari Huhtala, Department of Psychology,

University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35,

Jyväskylä FI-40014, Finland.

Email: mari.huhtala@jyu.fi

Funding information

Academy of Finland, Grant Number:

294428; The Finnish Work Environment

Fund, Grant Number: 110104

Abstract

So far, the field of business ethics lacks validated measures for assessing virtues at the organiza-

tional level. The aim of this study is to investigate the measurement invariance of a shortened

Corporate Ethical Virtues scale. In this manner, we contribute to validating an instrument that is

both psychometrically sound and efficient to use.We conducted two survey studies of two inde-

pendent groups (managers and school psychologists). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the

eight-factor model of the scale, and we found it to be invariant in two different occupational

groups. The managers gave higher appraisals of ethical culture than the psychologists did in seven

out of the eightdimensions. We found that despitethe contextual differences,the shortened scale

measures the eight dimensions of organizational ethical virtues, as intended. Thus, the use of this

more compact scale can be recommended for future studies, which will hopefully stimulate more

research on ethical culture in various work contexts.

1

|

INTRODUCTION

There has been a turn toward positive organizationalethics in business

ethics research, which has brought the role of virtues under growing

scientific attention (for a review, see Ferrero & Sison, 2014, and for a

special issue published earlier in this journal, see Beadle, Sison, &

Fontrodona, 2015).However, there is still a lack of validated measures

to carry out studies that use the virtue approach. For example,

Morales-S

anchez and Cabello-Medina (2015) recently pointed out that

there have been many theoretical attempts to understand virtues and

their applicability, but that few studies have proposed scales to assess

these virtues. Furthermore, the few scales that are available focus on

individual virtues (Libby & Thorne, 2007; Racelis, 2013; Riggio, Zhu,

Reina, & Maroosis,2010; Shanahan & Hyman, 2003),although it is also

important to investigate them at the organizational level (Moore,

2015). Moreover, the basis for all quantitative research should be the

ability to conceptualize relevant phenomena by using valid measures.

Thus, to be able to achieve reliable and applicable study results, we

need instrumentsthat are both psychometricallysound and efficient to

use (see Mayer, 2014).

Kaptein’s Corporate Ethical Virtues scale (CEV; Kaptein, 2008) is

one of the few scales that can assess and measure virtues at the

organizationallevel. The CEV model providesa theory-based conceptu-

alization of the content of virtues toward which organizations should

strive. The author also developed an evidence-based instrument to

measure these virtues. Thus, the model takes a step forward from the

gaps in previous research, and it has both practical and theoretical

advantages due to its normativity and multidimensionality. DeBode,

Armenakis, Feild, and Walker (2013) developed a shortened 32-item

version of the original, 58-item CEV scale, as the original one can be

laborious for respondents to completeand unappealing for researchers

to use as part of a longerquestionnaire. Both increase thelikelihood of

attrition, whichleads to problems of achieving sufficientresponse rates

and thus to lessreliable and less comprehensiveresults.

However, this shortened scale has not yet beentested for its mea-

surement equivalence between different populations except one study

that was carried out among U.S. employees (DeBode et al.,2013). This

is a significant shortcoming in terms of the scale’sfutureutilization,as

it is critical in organizational research to ensure that the respondents

from different contexts “interpret a given measure in a conceptually

similar manner”(Vandenberg & Lance, 2000, p. 5). Our contribution to

the field of business ethics, and especiallyto studies on ethical culture,

is to further validate the CEV-32 scale. We do this by testing themea-

surement invariance of the scale ontwo Finnish samples.

238

|

V

C2018 JohnWiley & Sons Ltd wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/beer BusinessEthics: A Eur Rev. 2018;27:2 38–247.

Received:18 April 2017

|

Revised: 19 February2018

|

Accepted:25 February 2018

DOI: 10.1111/beer.12184