Abstract

https://ssrn.com/abstract=2745062
 


 



Do Personal Ethics Influence Corporate Ethics?


John M. Griffin


University of Texas at Austin - Department of Finance

Samuel A. Kruger


University of Texas at Austin - Department of Finance

Gonzalo Maturana


Emory University - Goizueta Business School

August 18, 2016


Abstract:     
We introduce a new measure of personal ethics in the form of marital cheating to examine the relationship between personal ethics and corporate misconduct. Firms with CEOs and CFOs who use a marital infidelity website are more than twice as likely to engage in two forms of corporate misconduct. The relationship is not explained by a wide range of regional, firm, and executive characteristics or by the infidelity website usage of other executives. Additionally, white-collar SEC defendants also have elevated levels of infidelity website usage. Our findings suggest that personal and professional ethics are not as distinct as some believe.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 47

Keywords: CEOs, ethics, corporate misconduct, fraud

JEL Classification: G30, M14


Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: March 10, 2016 ; Last revised: August 19, 2016

Suggested Citation

Griffin, John M. and Kruger, Samuel A. and Maturana, Gonzalo, Do Personal Ethics Influence Corporate Ethics? (August 18, 2016). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2745062

Contact Information

John M. Griffin
University of Texas at Austin - Department of Finance ( email )
Red McCombs School of Business
Austin, TX 78712
United States
512-471-6621 (Phone)
HOME PAGE: http://www.jgriffin.info

Samuel A. Kruger (Contact Author)
University of Texas at Austin - Department of Finance ( email )
Red McCombs School of Business
Austin, TX 78712
United States

Gonzalo Maturana
Emory University - Goizueta Business School ( email )
1300 Clifton Road
Atlanta, GA 30322-2722
United States
HOME PAGE: http://www.gonzalomaturana.com/
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 3,410
Downloads: 812
Download Rank: 22,255
Paper comments
No comments have been made on this paper