The effect of flexible work arrangements on ethical decision-making

Q4 Psychology
Pradita Sita Devi Normasari, B. Sjabadhyni
{"title":"The effect of flexible work arrangements on ethical decision-making","authors":"Pradita Sita Devi Normasari, B. Sjabadhyni","doi":"10.21580/PJPP.V5I2.4279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed to compare the impact of different types of flexible work arrangements (flextime and telecommuting) on ethical decision-making. Ethical decision-making is when individuals use their moral basis to determine what is right and wrong in a given situation. It involves an awareness of moral dilemmas and consideration of the consequences of decisions. Flexible work arrangements are offered to promote individuals’ ethical decision-making by balancing their needs at work and outside work, such as spending time with family. This research was conducted on 185 employees and used a quantitative approach that utilizes experimental methods with a post-test-only design. Employees’ ethical decision-making was measured using two vignettes. Data analysis was conducted using the independent sample t-test parametric statistical technique. The study results indicated a t-value of 4.21 and a significance level of 0.00 (p-value 0.05), which showed that this study's working hypothesis was acceptable. It concluded that there were differences in ethical decision-making between two types of flexible work arrangements: flextime and telecommuting groups.","PeriodicalId":31726,"journal":{"name":"Psikohumaniora Jurnal Penelitian Psikologi","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psikohumaniora Jurnal Penelitian Psikologi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21580/PJPP.V5I2.4279","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the impact of different types of flexible work arrangements (flextime and telecommuting) on ethical decision-making. Ethical decision-making is when individuals use their moral basis to determine what is right and wrong in a given situation. It involves an awareness of moral dilemmas and consideration of the consequences of decisions. Flexible work arrangements are offered to promote individuals’ ethical decision-making by balancing their needs at work and outside work, such as spending time with family. This research was conducted on 185 employees and used a quantitative approach that utilizes experimental methods with a post-test-only design. Employees’ ethical decision-making was measured using two vignettes. Data analysis was conducted using the independent sample t-test parametric statistical technique. The study results indicated a t-value of 4.21 and a significance level of 0.00 (p-value 0.05), which showed that this study's working hypothesis was acceptable. It concluded that there were differences in ethical decision-making between two types of flexible work arrangements: flextime and telecommuting groups.
弹性工作安排对道德决策的影响
本研究旨在比较不同类型的灵活工作安排(弹性工作时间和远程办公)对道德决策的影响。伦理决策是指个人利用自己的道德基础来确定在特定情况下什么是对的,什么是错的。它涉及到对道德困境的认识和对决策后果的考虑。提供灵活的工作安排,通过平衡个人在工作和外部工作中的需求,例如与家人共度时光,促进个人的道德决策。这项研究对185名员工进行了研究,并采用了定量方法,该方法利用了仅测试后设计的实验方法。员工的道德决策是通过两个小插曲来衡量的。数据分析采用独立样本t检验参数统计技术。研究结果表明,t值为4.21,显著性水平为0.00(p值为0.05),这表明本研究的工作假设是可接受的。它得出的结论是,弹性工作制和远程办公制这两种类型的灵活工作安排在道德决策方面存在差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信