Abstract

Many researchers claim that moral judgment is closely tied to the general moral principles, Graham, Sherman, et al.
(2011), which are accused by being selectively used by workers of dissimilar general moral principles, Skitka,
(2010). It is happening when they appealing to subjective preferences, dealing with moral claims seem to lack an
obvious set of objective criteria or with a tricky problem domains. However, it also because individuals are vary in
moral identity – that is, how much morally-relevant concerns define one’s self-concept, Aquino & Freeman
(2009).
Workers general moral principles may guide judgment across a wide variety of situations, serve as a first step
toward drawing a specific conclusion. In this paper, bankers respondents were presented with variations on a
traditional moral scenario that asked whether it was permissible to achieve a selected banking issues that have no
place in their banks codes of ethic. Workers moral judgment relies upon a suitable set of moral principles from
which a particular judgments need to exist, Dancy (2004). A problem arises when respondents show different
moral principles.
The main objective of this paper is to investigate the type of morality bankers practice at workplace when they
participate in achieving the common goals and objectives of their organization. The existence of workers with
different moral principles could be counterproductive for banking management. The better understanding of these
differences enabling to narrow its negative impact, and ensure integrity of ethical behavior to function effectively.
The data were obtained from a distributed questionnaire to randomly chosen banks in Jordan. The results generally
indicated that banking professionals are different in their moral philosophies. Some important managerial
implications based on these findings were discussed.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.