Entry-level information systems personnel

A comparison of the ethical attitudes of South African undergraduate and Honours students, majoring in Information Systems (IS), and their American counterparts was undertaken in order to test the hypothesis: Compared to their American counterparts, South African entry-level IS personnel find a broader range of ethical dilemmas to be more “more acceptable”.Based upon original research by David Paradice of Texas A&M University (Paradice, 1990) using a scenario-based questionnaire, respondents were asked to assess a variety of actions according to a scale of: acceptable, questionable or unacceptable behaviour.A total of 175 completed questionnaires were received from students at three of South Africa's major universities (Cape Town, Pretoria and Witwatersrand), and these were compared to the sample of 125 American students. In 13 of the 19 instances South African students were “more accepting” or “ethically lenient” than the American sample.Similar demographic characteristics between the samples discounts their influence as a determining factor in these different ethical attitudes. Although religious conviction may be a determining factor the sample results showed no correlation, and socio-economic grouping similarly did not reveal any correlation to scenario responses.The importance of exposure to ethical issues at tertiary institutions is supported by prior literature and research, and is mooted as the factor that influences, with particular intensity, prospective employees' ethical attitudes.Many American students receive at least superficial ethical instruction, while in South Africa this is almost totally absent from IS curricula. Differences in the responses received could possibly be attributed to this factor.A conclusion drawn is that the inclusion of ethical instruction in IS curricula at academic institutions should be an urgent objective of the IS profession. By sensitizing prospective IS employees to ethical issues, it is expected that they will be more ethically responsible in their decision-making.