· Required Resources· Recommended ResourcesAssignment Materi.docx

· Required Resources
· Recommended Resources
Assignment Materials
· Employee Data
· PLEASE NOTE: the data set will be used for multiple
assignment within this course. Please return here to refer to this
file when required.
· Weekly Assignment Sheet
· PLEASE NOTE: the tabs at the bottom of the sheet indicate
the different weeks, click on the associated tab for the week you
are working on.
Multimedia
· AnalystSoft Inc. StatPlus:mac LE. Retrieved from
http://www.analystsoft.com/en/products/statplusmacle
· Forbes Insights. (2015, April 9). The role of data & analytics
today [Video file]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxroi4beKhE
Web Pages
· Microsoft. (2007). Copy an Excel chart to another Office
program . Retrieved from http://office.microsoft.com/en-
us/word-help/copy-excel-data-or-charts-to-word-
HP010198874.aspx
· Microsoft. (2010). Use the Analysis ToolPak to perform
complex data analysis. Retrieved from
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/excel-help/use-the-analysis-
toolpak-to-perform-complex-data-analysis-
HP010342762.aspx?CTT=1 Learning Outcomes
This week students will:
1. Distinguish between descriptive and inferential statistical
analyses.
2. Identify nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio data scales.
3. Calculate basic descriptive statistics.
4. Utilize Excel to perform statistical tests. Introduction

For Week One, the focus will be on the introduction of
measures and numbers in day-to-day decision-making. Statistics
is the science of collecting, organizing, presenting, analyzing,
and interpreting data to assist in making more effective
decisions. Probability (the measure of the likelihood of an event
that is more than just chance) is studied as a very important tool
to be used within statistics to make decisions. To prepare for
the course, you are encouraged to install the free Analysis
Toolpak add-in for Excel, or for Mac users, you are encouraged
to install the free StatPlus:mac LE software. Refer to the
Required Assignment Materials (under Course Materials) for
links to sources that provide installation instructions and
information about how to use the Analysis Toolpak. Note that
calculations will be conducted using Excel, and weekly problem
set assignments throughout the course should be submitted in
Excel format. Post Your Introduction
Week 1 - Discussion 1
Data Characteristics / Descriptive Statistics / Probability
Note that all of your discussions for this course are due on Day
5. Although the initial post is due on Day 5, you are encouraged
to start working on it early, as it is a four-part discussion that
should be completed in sequential order.
Part One – Analysis Tookpak
Add the “Analysis Toolpak” to Excel. Be sure you are you able
to copy, sort, and find averages and sums in Excel. Use the
Load the Analysis ToolPak article for information on how to
load this in Excel. (This should be completed on Day 1.)
Part Two – Data Characteristics
Read Lecture One on descriptive data and review the Employee
Data . Be sure to familiarize yourself with the different
variables shown on the Data tab. In this course, we will be
using the Employee Data and statistical tools to answer a single
research question: In our BUS308 company, are the males and
females paid equally for equal work?

Lecture One discusses different ways data values can be
classified. In our data set for the equal pay for equal work
assignment, students in the past have correctly identify the
variable gender (coded M and F for male and female
respectively) as nominal level data, but they often see gender1
(coded 0 and 1 for male and female respectively) as interval or
ratio level data. Why? What could cause this wrong
classification? What data do you use in your personal or
professional lives that might suffer from not being correctly
labeled/understood? (This should be started on Day 1.)
Part Three –Descriptive Statistics
Read Lecture Two on describing data sets and view The Role of
Data & Analytics Today video. Lecture Two discusses several
different ways of summarizing a data set--central location,
variability, etc. Often, business reports provide a mean or
average value for some measure (such as average number of
defects per production run). Why is the average alone not
enough information to make informed judgements about the
result? What other descriptive statistic should be included?
Why? Can you illustrate this with an example from your
personal or professional lives? (This should be started on Day
3.)
Part Four – Probability
Read Lecture Three on probability. Lecture Three introduces the
idea of probability—a measure of how likely it is to get a
particular outcome. Looking at outcomes as resulting from
probabilities (somewhat random outcomes/selections) rather
than fixed constants often changes the way we see things. How
does considering the salary outcomes in our sample the result of
a probabilistic sample rather than a completely accurate and
precise reflection of the population change how we interpret the
sample statistic outcomes? What results in your personal or
professional lives could be viewed this way? What differences
would this cause? Why? (This should be completed by Day 5.)
Your responses should be separated in the initial post,
addressing each part individually, similar to what you see here.

Guided Response: Review several of your classmates’ posts,
and respond to at least two of your peers by 11:59 p.m. on Day
7 of the week. You are encouraged to post your required replies
early during the week to promote more meaningful interactive
discourse in the discussion.
In your responses, point out additional insight to why it is
important to know and understand data types. Provide an
example of descriptive statistics that you could use to answer
business-related questions. Respond to at least one classmate
that selected a different type of probability (empirical,
theoretical, or subjective), and provide an example of how you
could use it in your personal or professional life.
Carefully review the Discussion Forum Grading Rubric for the
criteria that will be used to evaluate this Discussion Thread.
Webliography
Post one question that you had related to the material this week.
Conduct research and provide the answer to the question you
posted. Be sure to provide the source.
Carefully review the Discussion Forum Grading Rubric for the
criteria that will be used to evaluate this Discussion Thread.
Discussion 2
Post one question that you had related to the material this week.
Conduct research and provide the answer to the question you
posted. Be sure to provide the source.
Lesson Eight: Moral Development and Moral Intensity
Lesson Seven discussed the different codifications of moral
precepts over the course of human history which have attempted
to simplify moral prescriptions. Lesson Eight will introduce the
various stages of moral development within individuals, as well
as the way moral intensity is rationalized on a case-by-case

basis.
Moral Development
As we have discussed in previous lessons, ethics rely on
morality and a reasoned analysis of the factors that affect
human well-being (Kohlberg & Hersh, 1977). However, at this
juncture it is important to note that not all individuals are
capable of the same level of moral reasoning. Some of the
differences in reasoning ability are attributable to age; the more
mature that one is, the more likely they are to reach the higher
levels of moral development. However, adulthood is not a
guarantee that an individual will achieve the most sophisticated
levels of moral reasoning. Some will never get there, and this is
a significant obstacle to any hope of universally accepted
objective morality.
1. Preconventional Reasoning: The preconventional level of
moral reasoning is the most primitive. At the preconventional
level, choices are assessed based only on personal
consequences. In other words, the actor makes choices that
render rewards, and refrains from choices that render
punishments (Graham, 1995). Preconventional reasoning is as
much as non-human animal reasoning typically allows. Granted,
it is not uncommon for some mammals to act self-sacrificially
to preserve their offspring, and there have been reports of pets
putting themselves in harm’s way to protect their human
owners, but these are limited contexts. In almost every other
situation, animals are driven first and foremost by self-
preservation, and secondly, self-optimization. Preconventional
reasoning is also the first strategy learned in the sequence of
human development. Children typically think about their own
consequences when deciding upon behavior. If doing chores is
rewarded with an allowance, and coloring on the walls will
result in grounding, children are likely to embrace the former
and avoid the latter, all other things being equal. Although the

vast majority of humans graduate from this level, it is important
to note that many adults still regularly make choices that are
based predominantly on preconventional reasoning. This is to
say, selfish acts are frighteningly common.
2. Conventional Reasoning: The second level of moral
reasoning is that of conventional reasoning. One step removed
from pure selfishness, the conventional level of reasoning looks
not simply to personal consequences (although this is still a
factor), but also to social expectations in a societal context
(Logsdon & Yuthas, 1997). Instances of conventional moral
reasoning can be found almost anywhere one looks. For
example, it is generally considered rude to cut other people in a
line, so although one’s assessment of personal consequences
might suggest that one should do so (cutting would get us to our
goal faster), most of us would decline to cut because we’d
rather not bare the shame and social indignation that would
accompany such an act. Likewise, laws also function as a social
expectation as well. In a similar example, we know that
ignoring traffic rules like speed limits would probably allow us
to get to our destination more quickly, but then we must weigh
that interest against several deterrents: one is that we might
cause an accident that would result in injuries and damages (to
us and/or others), another is the risk that we might be caught
and punished with a traffic ticket (or worse), and a third is the
social expectation from others on the road that we drive safely
and not put other drivers in danger with our behavior,
notwithstanding the law. So in this instance, the combination of
potential consequences and social dissonance is what keeps us
in conformance with the law (most of the time). To be fair, a
valid argument could be made that concern about social
implications is just an individual’s assessment of a different
kind of personal consequence; but this is tangential to the
bigger point that in a conventional reasoning context these
factors are held in higher priority than some others. Many---if
not, most---humans never ascend any higher on the ladder of
reasoning development than conventional reasoning. Indeed,

most people look to others in their lives (family, friends, and
society in general) to set standards for their own conduct.
3. Principled Reasoning: The final level of moral reasoning
development is that of principled reasoning. Preconventional
motives of personal consequences and conventional motives of
societal conformance are never completely removed from moral
assessment, but principled reasoning subordinates those
elements to a more important virtue: an objective assessment of
right and wrong (Leming, 1978). In other words, individuals
capable of principled reasoning are inclined to do the right
thing in a given situation notwithstanding personal
consequences or the popularity of such actions. The ability to
reason at the principled level is far too rare (our history books
would almost certainly be far less bloody and obscene of such
abilities were common), but a few demonstrative examples
stand out. Perhaps the most obvious is that of Abraham Lincoln.
Lincoln was of course responsible for the end of slavery in the
United States, but at the time this was not a political position
that reaped many rewards or made many friends. Lincoln fought
cunningly (and, some would say, underhandedly) to garner the
necessary support for the 13th Amendment and the
emancipation proclamation, and as a man who had already been
elected to the highest office in the land, Lincoln had little to
gain personally from such a move. Additionally, a majority of
the nation’s legislature opposed the abolition of slavery, so the
move was not in harmony with the zeitgeist of the time.
Regardless, Lincoln was of such strong moral character that he
found the idea of slavery to be fundamentally abhorrent
regardless of its context, and he fought for its defeat with
everything he had, ultimately giving in his life as an unexpected
but not altogether unimaginable cost of his work in this regard.
Another similar character in human history is that of Dr. Martin
Luther King, Jr., about whom we’ve already discussed supra
insofar as his transformational leadership style contributed to
his notoriety. MLK Jr. was another principled moral thinker
who made the ultimate sacrifice in furtherance of his reasoned

assessment that color segregation was wrong, and that
discrimination against anyone based on immutable
characteristics offends the conscience. Imagine what the world
might be like if everyone were as morally sophisticated as
Lincoln or King.
Moral Intensity
Having discussed moral reasoning development, it is also
important to review a number of different metrics by which
individuals measure the “intensity” of the impact of their
actions, in order to rationalize the most appropriate response
(Barnett, 2001).
· Consensus: One factor is the consensus of opinion, or what
percentage of the constituents involved perceive a particular
choice to be wrong. If there is significant disagreement on this
point, then the actor might not feel as much pressure to make
one choice over the other. Suppose, as a simple example, that
we are deciding on whether or not to support new climate
change legislation. Given that there is a fair amount of
disconsensus among the general public regarding the concern of
climate change (despite overwhelming scientific evidence), we
might not feel much pressure toward either option.
· Probability of Harm: Another factor is the probability of harm
associated with a particular choice. If harm is possible but not
certain, and in fact very unlikely, then we might rationalize
making a choice based on a low probability of harm. Using our
climate change example, if even climate deniers concede that
there might be a chance that climate change could be a real
threat, then the probability of that chance will determine---in
part---how likely we are to support the law.
· Imminence of Harm: Yet another factor lies in how
immediately any possible harm might be experienced. If harm is
possible---or even probable---but the effects are a great length
of time away (as opposed to tomorrow), then we are less likely

to feel any urgency to act righteously from this element. This is
the classic ‘frog in the boiling water’ phenomenon of
procrastination. In the climate change scenario, because even
the most dramatic estimates don’t project the most harmful
effects for years, we are unlikely to be swayed by this factor.
· Proximity to Harm: Proximity to victims is a rather heartless
but very real rationale for human moral reasoning. The old
adage that many people have no problem “eating the burger” but
don’t want to “meet the cow” speaks directly to this point. If we
have no personal risk of harm, and if we have no relationships
with anyone else who does, then we are less likely to be
concerned about the harm, regardless of its probability or
imminence. In our climate change example, so long as we and
the people we care about live in areas of the world that are
unlikely to be dramatically affected, this is a non-sequitur.
· Concentration of Harm: Concentration of harm is concerned
with how focused the harmful effects of a particular choice will
be on those affected. If the effect is spread over a large number
of people (or a large area), then even if the absolute value of the
effect is large, it may only a result in a minor inconvenience for
those affected, and this may help us to justify our action. In our
climate change scenario, despite millions of tons of carbon
emissions every year, the effects of climate change will likely
only be a few degrees change in temperature and some elevation
in sea level, so we might reason that the harm will be diluted
over the global population as a whole.
· Greatness of Harm: A final factor is the greatness of the harm
involved. This element deals not with the concentration of
effect on victims, but instead on the total number of affected
persons. In our climate change example, given that every single
person on the planet would have to endure the effects of global
warming, this is perhaps the biggest obstacle to hurdle in
rationalizing an immoral choice.
Conclusion

In this lesson, we discussed the various stages of moral
development within individuals, as well as the way moral
intensity is rationalized on a case-by-case basis.
References
Barnett, T. (2001). Dimensions of moral intensity and ethical
decision making: An empirical study. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 31(5), 1038-1057.
Graham, J. W. (1995). Leadership, moral development, and
citizenship behavior. Business Ethics Quarterly, 5(01), 43-54.
Kohlberg, L., & Hersh, R. H. (1977). Moral development: A
review of the theory. Theory into Practice, 16(2), 53-59.
Leming, J. S. (1978). Cheating behavior, situational influence,
and moral development. The Journal of Educational Research,
71(4), 214-217.
Logsdon, J. M., & Yuthas, K. (1997). Corporate social
performance, stakeholder orientation, and organizational moral
development. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(12-13), 1213-1226.
Lesson Seven discussed the different cod
ifications of moral precepts over the course of human
history which have attempted to simplify moral prescriptions.
Lesson Eight will introduce the
as the way moral intensity is
rationalized o

n a case
-
by
-
case basis.
Moral Development
morality and a reasoned analysis of the
factors that affect human well
-
being (Kohlberg & Hersh, 1977). However, at this juncture it is
important to note
that not all individuals are capable of the same level of moral
reasoning. Some
of the differences in reasoning ability are attributable to age;
the more mature that one is, the
more likely they are to reach the higher levels of moral
development. However,
adulthood is not
a guarantee that an individual will achieve the most
sophisticated levels of moral reasoning.
Some will never get there, and this is a significant obstacle to
any hope of universally accepted
objective morality.
1.

Preconventional Reasoning:
The preconventional level of moral reasoning is the
most primitive. At the preconventional level, choices are
assessed based only on
personal consequences. In other words, the actor makes choices
that render rewards,
and refrains
from choices that render punishments (Graham, 1995).
Preconventional
reasoning is as much as non
-
human animal reasoning typically allows. Granted, it is
not uncommon for some mammals to act self
-
sacrificially to preserve their offspring,
and there have be
en reports of pets putting themselves in harm’s way to protect
their human owners, but these are limited contexts. In almost
every other situation,
animals are driven first and foremost by self
-
preservation, and secondly, self
-
optimization. Preconventional
reasoning is also the first strategy learned in the
sequence of human development. Children typically think about
their own
rewarded with an
allowance, and coloring on the walls will result in g
rounding, children are likely to
embrace the former and avoid the latter, all other things being
equal. Although the

to note that many
adults still regularly make choices that are based pred
ominantly on preconventional
reasoning. This is to say,
selfish
acts are frighteningly common.
2.
Conventional Reasoning:
The second level of moral reasoning is that of
conventional reasoning. One step removed from pure
selfishness, the conventional
level of
reasoning looks not simply to personal consequences (although
this is still a
(Logsdon & Yuthas,
1997). Instances of conventional moral reasoning can be found
almost anywhere one
looks. For exa
mple, it is generally considered rude to cut other people in a
line, so
although one’s assessment of personal consequences might
suggest that one should
do so (cutting would get us to our goal faster), most of us would
decline to cut
because we’d rather no
t bare the shame and social indignation that would
expectation as well.
In a similar example, we know that ignoring traffic rules like
speed limits would

probably
allow us to get to our destin
ation more quickly, but then we must weigh
cause an accident that
would result in injuries and damages (to us and/or others),
another is the risk that
we might be caught and punished with a tra
ffic ticket (or worse), and a third is the
social
expectation from others on the road that we drive safely and not
put other
Lesson Seven discussed the different codifications of moral
precepts over the course of human
history which have attempted to simplify moral prescriptions.
Lesson Eight will introduce the
as the way moral intensity is
rationalized on a case-by-case basis.
Moral Development
morality and a reasoned analysis of the
factors that affect human well-being (Kohlberg & Hersh, 1977).
However, at this juncture it is
important to note that not all individuals are capable of the
same level of moral reasoning. Some
of the differences in reasoning ability are attributable to age;
the more mature that one is, the
more likely they are to reach the higher levels of moral
development. However, adulthood is not

a guarantee that an individual will achieve the most
sophisticated levels of moral reasoning.
Some will never get there, and this is a significant obstacle to
any hope of universally accepted
objective morality.
1. Preconventional Reasoning: The preconventional level of
moral reasoning is the
most primitive. At the preconventional level, choices are
assessed based only on
personal consequences. In other words, the actor makes choices
that render rewards,
and refrains from choices that render punishments (Graham,
1995). Preconventional
reasoning is as much as non-human animal reasoning typically
allows. Granted, it is
not uncommon for some mammals to act self-sacrificially to
preserve their offspring,
and there have been reports of pets putting themselves in harm’s
way to protect
their human owners, but these are limited contexts. In almost
every other situation,
animals are driven first and foremost by self-preservation, and
secondly, self-
optimization. Preconventional reasoning is also the first
strategy learned in the
sequence of human development. Children typically think about
their own
rewarded with an
allowance, and coloring on the walls will result in grounding,
children are likely to
embrace the former and avoid the latter, all other things being
equal. Although the
to note that many

adults still regularly make choices that are based predominantly
on preconventional
reasoning. This is to say, selfish acts are frighteningly common.
2. Conventional Reasoning: The second level of moral
reasoning is that of
conventional reasoning. One step removed from pure
selfishness, the conventional
level of reasoning looks not simply to personal consequences
(although this is still a
(Logsdon & Yuthas,
1997). Instances of conventional moral reasoning can be found
almost anywhere one
looks. For example, it is generally considered rude to cut other
people in a line, so
although one’s assessment of personal consequences might
suggest that one should
do so (cutting would get us to our goal faster), most of us would
decline to cut
because we’d rather not bare the shame and social indignation
that would
expectation as well.
In a similar example, we know that ignoring traffic rules like
speed limits would
probably allow us to get to our destination more quickly, but
then we must weigh
cause an accident that
would result in injuries and damages (to us and/or others),
another is the risk that
we might be caught and punished with a traffic ticket (or
worse), and a third is the
social expectation from others on the road that we drive safely
and not put other

Lesson Seven: Moral Codes
Lesson Six discussed some of the types of power wielded by
leaders, as well as the dichotomy between transactional and
transformational leadership. Lesson Seven will introduce the
different codifications of moral precepts over the course of
human history which have attempted to simplify moral
prescriptions.
Codification of Moral Precepts
Early on in this course, we defined the concept of ethics as
determined by the morality of maximizing well-being for all
individuals involved. However, it should be quite clear at this
point that determining what is right and what is wrong, and
identifying the course of action that maximizes well-being for
all individuals involved, is rarely simple or easy. Thus, in an
effort to demystify this problem for laypersons, great
philosophers over the centuries have made considerable efforts
to try to codify certain moral rules of thumb (think of them as
guidelines for moral conduct) that can be applied universally to
different situations and always yield the best choice). The long
and short of this now-millennia-old work is that there aren’t any
such rules which always render the best result. Too much of the
mechanics of morality relies on the circumstances of each
unique situation. However, acquiring a basic understanding of
the competing philosophies for moral codes will help anyone
deliberating about the ethics of their own behavior---or the
behavior of others---to reason about the alternatives in a more
informed way. With that said, below as a brief summary of
these different “rules”. To assist the reader with further reading
in this area, the great astronomer and public educator Carl
Sagan wrote at length about these rules in his book Billions and
Billions (2011).
· The ‘Iron’ Rule: The iron rule is perhaps the crudest of all the

rules, and rests on a premise of blind self-interest. The iron rule
is generally written as “do unto others as you please before they
do unto you.” In this sense, the iron rule embraces something of
a ‘Theory X’ philosophy about the nature of human beings, and
the inevitable threat that we pose to one another. To put each of
these rules into context, we can use the relatable example of
World War II and the actions taken therein. With an iron rule
lens, we could actually justify the actions of both Nazi Germany
and imperial Japan. Assuming that competitors cannot be
trusted to respect the sovereignty of others, the iron rule would
clearly suggest that Germany and Japan were justified in
attacking first, lest they become the victims of their own
procrastination when they are inevitably attacked by their
enemies at some later point in time. One thing to notice is that
while the iron rule might appease selfish motives, it is neither a
mutually-compatible nor a sustainable moral prescription. In
other words, any two (or more) individuals that co-exist and
adopt an iron rule philosophy will inevitably find themselves in
conflict with one another until one or both (or all) are
destroyed. The end game of the iron rule would be the survival
of one human being who, after slaying his last fellow man, has
no one left to pre-emptively conquer. For these reasons, the iron
rule is rarely a moral precept that has any practical value in 21st
century human affairs.
· The ‘Brass’ Rule: Next in our list of precepts comes the brass
rule. The brass rule is usually stated as “do unto others as they
do unto you.” The main premise of the brass rule was perhaps
most famously enshrined in The Hammurabi Code, the justice
philosophy of the ancient Babylonian people of Mesopotamia
(Mar, 2000). The Hammurabi Code was one of the first legal
doctrines in recorded history, and it consisted of hundreds of
different tenets, but one of its most essential was the principle
that people should be made to pay in-kind for their debts and
misdeeds. The Hammurabi Code is in fact the source from
which the Christian Bible derived the notion of “an eye for an
eye, a tooth for a tooth” (King Hammurabi predated the story of

Jesus Christ by almost 1,800 years). On it’s face, the brass rule
sounds fair and equitable, but when followed to its logical
conclusion, serious flaws arise. Consider our example of World
War II. If we can agree that Germany and Japan executed
unprovoked attacks, then the brass rule would support the right
of the Allied forces to respond with force in-kind, and that
should theoretically rebalance the scales and conclude the
execution of justice. However, to assume all parties would agree
that these attacks were truly unprovoked is to seriously err in
one’s assessment of human psychology and world history, and
to completely ignore documented evidence to the contrary.
Neither Adolf Hitler nor Emperor Hirohito truly believed that
their military attacks were unprovoked; there were long strings
of historical events that (in their own view) compelled these
two men to take the military actions that they did (defeat in
WWI and the humiliation of Germany for Hitler, and western
imperialism for Hirohito). However, this yields a problem. If
the attacks by Germany and Japan were in fact retaliatory, and
justifiable under the brass rule as a means of rectifying past
indiscretions, then the Allied responses to those attacks were in
fact additional, separate offensive acts, against which Germany
and Japan should respond (per the brass rule) again. From the
differing perspective of the Allied powers, they are simply
correcting their own perceived balances. So each side sees their
own actions as justice, and the exchange of justice (in this case
violence) never ends until there is nothing and no one left to
suffer in retribution. As Gandhi famously said, “an eye for an
eye ends up making the whole world blind.”
· The ‘Golden’ and ‘Silver’ Rules: The next two rules are
discussed together, as they are in fact one in the same. First, the
golden rule is perhaps the best-known “rule” of all those we
will discuss in this lesson. Some interpretation of the golden
rule can be found in almost every major religion on the planet,
although, like the brass rule, there is historical evidence of the
golden rule’s inception nearly 4,000 years ago...much earlier
than the establishment of any of the world’s main religions

today (Singer, 1963). The golden rule is typically written as “do
unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Now, the
silver rule is actually an implied derivative of the golden rule
(i.e. it could be said that the silver rule is just the golden rule
written another way). The only actual distinction between the
golden rule and the silver rule is the negation of the active
verbs; the silver rule is written “do not do unto others as you
would not have them do unto you”. For many who read the
golden rule and silver rule in sequence for the first time, it may
be difficult to see any meaningful distinction (i.e. why bother
with this separation at all?). However, it is important to note
that the main philosophy of the silver rule is simply to prohibit
conduct which the subscriber would not wish done to him or her
(i.e. it is about the omission of action). By contrast, the golden
rule implies an affirmative duty to perform positive acts in
service to others, so long as those acts are consistent with the
type of behavior that the actor would want others to do to him
or her. Now, we may be tempted to think that the golden rule is
flawless...especially because of its widespread teaching in faith
systems (most notably, Christianity). However, closer
examination in context reveals obvious weaknesses. Let us look
to our World War II example yet again. Suppose that we are
members of the Allied forces who have just witnessed attacks
by Germany and Japan. If violence is not the sort of conduct
that we desire from others, then both the silver and golden rules
demand that we refrain from any type of military response; the
golden and silver rules do not admit of exceptions for revenge,
retaliation, or even self-defense. If we were to maintain rigid
compliance with these rules, we would be left with no option
but to “turn the other cheek” and stand idly by as Nazi Germany
and imperial Japan slaughtered their way around the globe.
Gandhi was quoted earlier in this lesson, and as a pacifist this
absurd silver/golden rule conclusion was something with which
Gandhi struggled intensely, in terms of reconciling value and
discerning the most-right response. As a pacifist, Gandhi
admonished any type of violence, even in self-defense.

However, Gandhi eventually revealed some serious flaws in his
own reasoning when he was asked about what Jews in holocaust
concentration camps should do, and he responded that they
should commit mass suicide in a celebration of martyrdom.
Clearly, no one is perfect, and in fairness to Gandhi, he was
very humble and honest about the fact that this was a point of
conflict and difficulty for him.
· The ‘Tin’ Rule: One special conglomeration of two of the
above-described rules is called the tin rule. The tin rule
suggests that individuals should behave with brute callousness
toward those who are inferior to the actor, and behave with
careful consideration and compassion toward those who are
superior (Kizza, 2010). In this sense, the tin rule is a sort of
melding of the iron rule (toward those below) with the golden
rule (toward those above). This is commonplace behavior for
individuals who are commonly referred to as bullies (toward the
inferior) or suck-ups (toward the superior). Using our World
War II example, historians might justifiably argue that
Mussolini’s Italy adopted a tin rule policy, whereby they
respected and allied themselves with the militarily-superior
Nazi Germany, but used their power to help conquer smaller and
weaker European and North African countries. Although we
obviously frown upon this type of behavior in civilized
societies, it’s worth noting that most of the animal kingdom,
including the rest of our primate brethren, practice the tin rule
with regularity. As unjust as it may be, it holds significant
survival value.
· The Nepotism Rule: This final rule is actually a caveat on the
rest of the rules discussed previously in our lesson. The
nepotism rule is simply a condition by which priority in
treatment and consideration is given to those who are close to
the actor personally (people, groups, etc.) at the expense of
those who are not. This is also called favoritism, and it
obviously violates the objectivity that should underpin sound
moral reasoning.

Conclusion
In this lesson, we discussed the different codifications of moral
precepts over the course of human history which have attempted
to simplify moral prescriptions. Lesson Eight will discuss the
as the way moral intensity is rationalized on a case-by-case
basis.
References
Dunhua, Z. (2002). Reconstruction and the modern significance
of the value classification in Chinese ancientry. Philosophical
Researche, 1.
Kizza, J. M. (2010). Morality and the Law. Ethical and Social
Issues in the Information Age, 15-30.
Mar, G. (2000). Evolutionary game theory, morality, and
Darwinism. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 7(1-2), 322-326.
Sagan, C. (2011). Billions & Billions: Thoughts on Life and
Death at the Brink of the Millennium. Ballantine books.
Singer, M. G. (1963). The golden rule. Philosophy, 38(146),
293-314.
leaders, as well as the dichotomy
between transactional and transformational leadership. Lesson
Seven will introduce the different

codifications of moral precepts over the course of human
history w
hich have attempted to
simplify moral prescriptions.
determined by the morality of
maximizing well
-
being for all individuals involved. However, it should be qui
te clear at this
identifying the course of action that
maximizes well
-
being for all individuals involved, is rarely simple or easy.
Thus, in an effort to
demystify this problem for laypersons, gre
at philosophers over the centuries have made
considerable efforts to try to codify certain moral rules of
thumb (think of them as guidelines for
moral conduct) that can be applied universally to different
situations and always yield the best
choice). The l
ong and short of this now
-
millennia
-
old work is that there aren’t any such rules
which

always
render the best result. Too much of the mechanics of morality
relies on the
circumstances of each unique situation. However, acquiring a
basic understanding of th
e
competing philosophies for moral codes will help anyone
deliberating about the ethics of their
own behavior
---
or the behavior of others
---
to reason about the alternatives in a more informed
way. With that said, below as a brief summary of these different
“rules”. To assist the reader
with further reading in this area, the great astronomer and
public educator Carl Sagan wrote at
length about these rules in his book
Billions and Billions
(2011).
·
The ‘Iron’ Rule:
The iron rule is perhaps the crudest of all
the rules, and rests on a
premise of blind self
-
interest. The iron rule is generally written as “do unto others as
you please

before
they do unto you.” In this sense, the iron rule embraces
something of a ‘Theory X’ philosophy about the nature of
human be
ings, and the
inevitable threat that we pose to one another. To put each of
these rules into context,
we can use the relatable example of World War II and the
actions taken therein.
With an iron rule lens, we could actually justify the actions of
both Nazi
Germany and
imperial Japan. Assuming that competitors cannot be trusted to
respect the
sovereignty of others, the iron rule would clearly suggest that
Germany and Japan
were justified in attacking first, lest they become the victims of
their own
procrasti
nation when they are inevitably attacked by their enemies at
some later
point in time. One thing to notice is that while the iron rule
might appease selfish
motives, it is neither a mutually
-
compatible nor a sustainable moral prescription. In
other words,
any two (or more) individuals that co
-
exist and adopt an iron rule
philosophy will inevitably find themselves in conflict with one
another until one or
both (or all) are destroyed. The end game of the iron rule would
be the survival of

one human being who,
after slaying his last fellow man, has no one left to pre
-
emptively conquer. For these reasons, the iron rule is rarely a
moral precept that has
any practical value in 21st century human affairs.
·
The ‘Brass’ Rule:
Next in our list of precepts comes the br
ass rule. The brass rule is
usually stated as “do unto others as they do unto you.” The main
premise of the
brass rule was perhaps most famously enshrined in The
Hammurabi Code, the justice
(Mar, 2
000). The
Hammurabi Code was one of the first legal doctrines in
recorded history, and it
consisted of hundreds of different tenets, but one of its most
essential was the
leaders, as well as the dichotomy
between transactional and transformational leadership. Lesson
Seven will introduce the different
codifications of moral precepts over the course of human
history which have attempted to
simplify moral prescriptions.

determined by the morality of
maximizing well-being for all individuals involved. However, it
should be quite clear at this
identifying the course of action that
maximizes well-being for all individuals involved, is rarely
simple or easy. Thus, in an effort to
demystify this problem for laypersons, great philosophers over
the centuries have made
considerable efforts to try to codify certain moral rules of
thumb (think of them as guidelines for
moral conduct) that can be applied universally to different
situations and always yield the best
choice). The long and short of this now-millennia-old work is
that there aren’t any such rules
which always render the best result. Too much of the mechanics
of morality relies on the
circumstances of each unique situation. However, acquiring a
basic understanding of the
competing philosophies for moral codes will help anyone
deliberating about the ethics of their
own behavior---or the behavior of others---to reason about the
alternatives in a more informed
way. With that said, below as a brief summary of these different
“rules”. To assist the reader
with further reading in this area, the great astronomer and
public educator Carl Sagan wrote at
length about these rules in his book Billions and Billions
(2011).
the rules, and rests on a
premise of blind self-interest. The iron rule is generally written
as “do unto others as
you please before they do unto you.” In this sense, the iron rule

embraces
something of a ‘Theory X’ philosophy about the nature of
human beings, and the
inevitable threat that we pose to one another. To put each of
these rules into context,
we can use the relatable example of World War II and the
actions taken therein.
With an iron rule lens, we could actually justify the actions of
both Nazi Germany and
imperial Japan. Assuming that competitors cannot be trusted to
respect the
sovereignty of others, the iron rule would clearly suggest that
Germany and Japan
were justified in attacking first, lest they become the victims of
their own
procrastination when they are inevitably attacked by their
enemies at some later
point in time. One thing to notice is that while the iron rule
might appease selfish
motives, it is neither a mutually-compatible nor a sustainable
moral prescription. In
other words, any two (or more) individuals that co-exist and
adopt an iron rule
philosophy will inevitably find themselves in conflict with one
another until one or
both (or all) are destroyed. The end game of the iron rule would
be the survival of
one human being who, after slaying his last fellow man, has no
one left to pre-
emptively conquer. For these reasons, the iron rule is rarely a
moral precept that has
any practical value in 21st century human affairs.
rule. The brass rule is
usually stated as “do unto others as they do unto you.” The main
premise of the

brass rule was perhaps most famously enshrined in The
Hammurabi Code, the justice
(Mar, 2000). The
Hammurabi Code was one of the first legal doctrines in
recorded history, and it
consisted of hundreds of different tenets, but one of its most
essential was the
Lesson Six: Power and Leadership Styles
Lesson Five discussed some modern concepts of ethics for
businesses, including socially responsible investing, corporate
social responsibility, and environmentalism. Lesson Six will
introduce some of the types of power wielded by leaders, as
well as the dichotomy between transactional and
transformational leadership.
Various Types of Power
So far we’ve discussed some qualities loosely associated with
successful leaders (Lesson Two supra) and some behavioral
theories that attempt to explain leadership success (Lesson Four
supra). However, another very important concept with respect to
leadership is that of power derivation. Although leaders
obviously vary in the degree of power that they wield,
researchers in the field of management have codified a
taxonomy of different types of power which may be employed
by different leaders and under different circumstances. As with
most academic theories, there are many different versions of
this taxonomy, and scholars don’t agree perfectly as to the
details. The original postulate by French, Raven, and Cartwright
(1959) included five types of power. Since then, the list has
been expanded by others to six, seven, or even more, depending
on who one talks to. For the purposes of our discussion,
however, we will discuss just three of the most prominent types

from the original model. It is worth noting beforehand that there
is no tangible evidence to suggest that any one of these types of
power is significantly more effective or valuable to a leader
than any other. Instead, they each may be utilized with
constructive finesse or destructive clumsiness, depending on the
individual leader and the circumstances surrounding his or her
leadership.
· Legitimate Power: Legitimate power is the kind of power that
is derived by virtue of the authority vested in one’s title within
an organization. Perhaps the most intuitive example of a setting
in which legitimate power is highly emphasized is the military.
In the military, the degree of influence, command, and respect
that an individual possesses is a direct reflection of that
individual’s rank. Because military institutions (in the United
States and elsewhere) commonly develop cultures where
organizational hierarchy is placed front and center, ranks beget
authority, and extraneous factors that might otherwise be
involved are less relevant. As an example, a colonel is a
colonel, and whether or not a colonel is popular, or attractive,
or a likeable person, is far less relevant to the authority of a
colonel. This isn’t to say that these other factors don’t matter at
all. However, they take a distant backseat to the title that one
carries.
· Referent Power: Perhaps most juxtaposed to the idea of formal
power is that of referent power. Referent power is the kind of
power that a leader derives from the quality of the relationships
that he or she develops with followers. Thus, this power is
largely dependent on the personability of the leader. How well-
liked is he? How supportive is he? When followers are in need,
does he express concern and act caringly? Do followers respect
him because of his character as a person, rather than the
authority of his title? (Male pronoun used only out of
convenience and conciseness). In this sense, the fact that a
leader has a high degree of referent power says a lot more about
the quality of such a leader’s character, than does a high degree

of legitimate power.
· Expert Power: A third type of power is that of expert power.
This power is derived by virtue of the expertise that one
possesses in the field within which one works. Classic examples
of expert power can be found in places such as law firms and
hospitals. Attorneys wield a heavy degree of power and
influence over paralegals and support staff, because when it
comes to the nature of the work being done (legal), they are
presumed to know most and best. Likewise, doctors typically
perform only the most complex and difficult tasks in the scope
of patient care because their knowledge, skills, and training
typically far exceed those of nurses and assistants. As with
some of the general leader qualities discussed in Lesson One
supra, expert power is something that can be faked, so long as a
leader can convincingly mask ignorance.
French, Raven, and Cartwright also included reward and
coercive power---the ability to manipulate follower behavior
through offering rewards or threatening punishments,
respectively---in their original taxonomy. However, in addition
to being types of power themselves, these concepts are also
strategies that leaders of any type may use as a means to
influence followers through adoption of a transactional
leadership paradigm, discussed below.
Transactional v. Transformational Leadership
Behaviors aside, one of the most important dynamics affecting
leadership success is the difference between transactional and
transformational leaders. Transactional leaders rely on a
strategy of give and take in order to induce support and
cooperation from their followers, and this comes in two
varieties: reward leadership and coercive leadership. In reward
leadership, leaders use positive reinforcement to motivate
followers. This is the proverbial “carrot” that is dangled, and
can include such incentives as additional pay (commissions,

bonuses, etc.), extra time off, prestige rewards, and others. The
other type of transactional leader is the coercive leader, who
uses not positive but negative reinforcementto drive behavior.
Instead of offering rewards in exchange for desired behavior,
these leaders threaten punishments for undesired behavior. This
might take the form of strict disciplinary policies for conduct
violations (Ingram, n.d.).
Transformational leaders don’t rely on reward or punishment.
Instead, they look to inspire followers through belief in a
common vision of the outcome of a group’s efforts (Bass &
Riggio, 2006). One classic example of a transformational leader
is Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Dr. King never offered any
tangible incentives to the freedom riders and their followers,
nor was there any real punishment for abstention from
participation in such activism. In fact, the only certainty about
involvement in the civil rights movement during the 1960s was
a very real threat of harm, at least in some parts of the country.
However, people followed Dr. King nonetheless, because his
charisma and passionate vision inspired them to struggle for a
better future for their children.
Ethical Implications
Just as leadership qualities and behavioral theories raise
questions of leadership ethics, so too do the concepts of power
and leadership style. The following sections review ethical
considerations of these types.
Power Taxonomy
Lord Acton famously said: “Power tends to corrupt, and
absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost
always bad men" (Acton Institute, n.d.). Indeed, power has a
way of distorting the judgment of leaders, and typically not for
the better. Legitimate power can be an effective tool to maintain

order in a rigid system of authority such as the military, but a
drawback is that this kind of power does not require the leader
to make any effort to earn the authority he or she wields. Aside
from the effort required to acquire a title, there is no incentive
for legitimate power leaders to worry about respect or voluntary
support from followers, because it makes no difference in these
contexts, and thus, these paradigms can lead to abuse of power.
Referent power, on the other hand, requires the exact opposite:
a focus on relationships. And as such, leaders relying on
referent power are much more powerfully motivated to act in
the best interests of followers at all times. Finally, concerning
expert power, this can be an ethically-neutral source of power,
but as discussed in Lesson Four supra, it is important that
leaders not exploit their intellectual superiority over followers
for personal gain at the expense of others.
Transactional v. Transformational Leadership
With respect to transactional leadership models, a very common
ethical criticism is that they tend to cause followers to ignore
the ethical implications of their actions. For example, reward-
based leadership, or incentivizing behavior with “carrots”, soils
an otherwise clean conscience because such practices are, in
effect, bribing followers to perform acts, not because they are
ethically sound, but instead because of the reward offered. In
this sense, followers in a reward paradigm could be looked at as
hollow shells of human effort without any incentive to consider
their own moral compasses. Likewise, coercive leadership is
criticized in the same way, except that instead of bribing
followers to induce desired behavior, “sticks” essentially arm-
twist followers into pursuing courses of action that avoid
punishments, and not because they are interested in doing the
right things (Kanungo, 2001).
In terms of transformational leadership, it is considered by most
researchers to be ethically superior to transactional models.

Again, as discussed above, MLK Jr. didn’t have to rely on
rewards or punishments to induce action from followers, and
therefore followers are more thoughtfully invested in their
actions. However, it is important to note that not all
transformational leaders are righteous figures. Adolf Hitler is
another textbook example of a transformational leader; he used
his incredible charisma, his unmatched talents as an orator, and
his passion for nationalism to bring the world to one of its
darkest hours ever. So it is in any leadership context; talents for
leadership may be used in both positive and negative ways.
Conclusion
In this lesson, we discussed some of the types of power wielded
by leaders, as well as the dichotomy between transactional and
transformational leadership. In Lesson Seven, we will discuss
the various stages of moral development within individuals, as
well as the way moral intensity is rationalized on a case-by-case
basis.
References
Acton Institute (n.d.). Lord Acton Quote Archive. Retrieved
from http://www.acton.org/research/lord-acton-quote-archive
Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational
leadership. Psychology Press.
French, J. R., Raven, B., & Cartwright, D. (1959). The bases of
social power. Classics of organization theory, 311-320.
Ingram, D. (n.d.). Transformational leadership vs. transactional
leadership definition. Chron. Retrieved from
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/transformational-leadership-vs-
transactional-leadership-definition-13834.html

Kanungo, R. N. (2001). Ethical values of transactional and
transformational leaders. Canadian Journal of Administrative
Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration,
18(4), 257-265.
businesses, including socially
responsible investing, corporate social responsibility, and
environmentalism. Lesson Six will
introduce some of the types of
power wielded by leaders, as well as the dichotomy between
transactional and transformational leadership.
successful leaders (Lesson Two
supra
) and some behavioral the
ories that attempt to explain leadership success (Lesson Four
supra
). However, another very important concept with respect to
leadership is that of power
derivation. Although leaders obviously vary in the degree of
power that they wield, researchers
in the

field of management have codified a taxonomy of different
types of power which may be
employed by different leaders and under different
circumstances. As with most academic
theories, there are many different versions of this taxonomy,
and scholars don’t a
gree perfectly
as to the details. The original postulate by French, Raven, and
Cartwright (1959) included five
types of power. Since then, the list has been expanded by others
to six, seven, or even more,
depending on who one talks to. For the purposes of
our discussion, however, we will discuss just
three of the most prominent types from the original model. It is
worth noting beforehand that
there is no tangible evidence to suggest that any one of these
types of power is significantly more
effective or val
uable to a leader than any other. Instead, they each may be
utilized with
individual leader and the
circumstances surrounding his or her leadership.
·
Legitimate Power:
Legitimate power is th
e kind of power that is derived by virtue
of the authority vested in one’s title within an organization.
Perhaps the most
intuitive example of a setting in which legitimate power is
highly emphasized is the

military. In the military, the degree of influenc
e, command, and respect that an
individual possesses is a direct reflection of that individual’s
rank. Because military
institutions (in the United States and elsewhere) commonly
develop cultures where
organizational hierarchy is placed front and center, r
anks beget authority, and
extraneous factors that might otherwise be involved are less
relevant. As an example,
a colonel is a colonel, and whether or not a colonel is popular,
or attractive, or a
likeable person, is far less relevant to the authority of a
colonel. This isn’t to say that
these other factors don’t matter
at all
. However, they take a distant backseat to the
title that one carries.
·
Referent Power:
Perhaps most juxtaposed to the idea of formal power is that of
referent power. Referent power is
the kind of power that a leader derives from the
quality of the relationships that he or she develops with
followers. Thus, this power is
largely dependent on the personability of the leader. How well
-
liked is he? How
supportive is he? When followers are i
n need, does he express concern and act
caringly? Do followers respect him because of his character as a
person, rather than

the authority of his title? (Male pronoun used only out of
convenience and
conciseness).
In this sense, the fact that a leader has
a high degree of referent
power says a lot more about the quality of such a leader’s
character, than does a
high degree of legitimate power.
·
Expert Power:
A third type of power is that of expert power. This power is
derived
by virtue of the expertise that
one possesses in the field within which one works.
Classic examples of expert power can be found in places such as
law firms and
businesses, including socially
responsible investing, corporate social responsibility, and
environmentalism. Lesson Six will
introduce some of the types of power wielded by leaders, as
well as the dichotomy between
transactional and transformational leadership.
successful leaders (Lesson Two
supra) and some behavioral theories that attempt to explain
leadership success (Lesson Four
supra). However, another very important concept with respect to

leadership is that of power
derivation. Although leaders obviously vary in the degree of
power that they wield, researchers
in the field of management have codified a taxonomy of
different types of power which may be
employed by different leaders and under different
circumstances. As with most academic
theories, there are many different versions of this taxonomy,
and scholars don’t agree perfectly
as to the details. The original postulate by French, Raven, and
Cartwright (1959) included five
types of power. Since then, the list has been expanded by others
to six, seven, or even more,
depending on who one talks to. For the purposes of our
discussion, however, we will discuss just
three of the most prominent types from the original model. It is
worth noting beforehand that
there is no tangible evidence to suggest that any one of these
types of power is significantly more
effective or valuable to a leader than any other. Instead, they
each may be utilized with
individual leader and the
circumstances surrounding his or her leadership.
is derived by virtue
of the authority vested in one’s title within an organization.
Perhaps the most
intuitive example of a setting in which legitimate power is
highly emphasized is the
military. In the military, the degree of influence, command, and
respect that an
individual possesses is a direct reflection of that individual’s
rank. Because military
institutions (in the United States and elsewhere) commonly

develop cultures where
organizational hierarchy is placed front and center, ranks beget
authority, and
extraneous factors that might otherwise be involved are less
relevant. As an example,
a colonel is a colonel, and whether or not a colonel is popular,
or attractive, or a
likeable person, is far less relevant to the authority of a colonel.
This isn’t to say that
these other factors don’t matter at all. However, they take a
distant backseat to the
title that one carries.
to the idea of
formal power is that of
referent power. Referent power is the kind of power that a
leader derives from the
quality of the relationships that he or she develops with
followers. Thus, this power is
largely dependent on the personability of the leader. How well-
liked is he? How
supportive is he? When followers are in need, does he express
concern and act
caringly? Do followers respect him because of his character as a
person, rather than
the authority of his title? (Male pronoun used only out of
convenience and
conciseness). In this sense, the fact that a leader has a high
degree of referent
power says a lot more about the quality of such a leader’s
character, than does a
high degree of legitimate power.
power is that of expert power.
This power is derived
by virtue of the expertise that one possesses in the field within
which one works.
Classic examples of expert power can be found in places such as

law firms and
Lesson Five: Corporate Ethics in the 21st Century
Lesson Four discussed some of the most prominent behavioral
theories concerning leadership as well as their ethical
implications. Lesson Six will introduce some modern concepts
of ethics for businesses, including socially responsible
investing, corporate social responsibility, and
environmentalism.
With changes in public perception over time, the expectations
of businesses operating within American society has changed
considerably throughout the history of our nation. The classical
view on the ethical role of businesses was predicated on the
principle of profit maximization: the idea that the only purpose
of a business is to maximize the amount of money generated for
its owners. Furthermore, anything that runs counter to or
distracts from this prerogative is antithetical to the essence of a
business. The obligation to obey the law is implied based on the
fact that businesses which violate laws typically suffer losses in
the form of fines or even forced closure; so compliance with the
law is a behavior that is compatible with, and in fact necessary
to, the principle of profit maximization.
However, things have changed. Businesses have grown to sizes
and degrees of influence that present substantial threats to the
welfare of communities, families, the natural environment, etc.
and society no longer sees businesses as being responsible only
to shareholders (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001). This lesson will
discuss the ways in which changes in public perception have
reshaped the ethical obligations of businesses in the 21st
century.
Socially Responsible Investing (SRI)

One of the biggest ways in which public perception has changed
business and industry is through socially responsible investment
(SRI) funds. In the business startup world, some investors with
strong ethical compasses have chosen to restrict the types of
businesses in which they are willing to invest with their capital
(Sparkes & Cowton, 2004). Some of these restricted categories
are more or less unanimously seen as immoral industries.
Others, however, are more controversial.
· Alcohol: Obviously not all people abuse alcohol, and not all
people view producers of alcohol as immoral. However, many
SRI funds exclude alcohol companies because of the tragic
effects that alcohol has in contexts such as drunk driving, etc.
· Tobacco: Virtually the same arguments that apply to alcohol
apply to tobacco, except that tobacco is vilified for its
unmistakable role in cancers, emphysema, and early mortality.
Thus, SRI funds typically avoid tobacco companies as well.
· Gambling: Like alcohol, not all people have gambling
problems or see any ethical issue with the gambling industry.
However, we do know that gambling is another addictive
behavior, and for this reason casinos are typically excluded
from SRI funds.
· Weapons: Firearms are a heated subject with all of the current
political debate surrounding Second Amendment rights and the
best ways to address gun violence in America. However,
because of the enormously large rates of violent gun-related
crime in the United States (compared to other civilized nations),
weapons are a non-sequitur for SRI funds.
· Nuclear Power: This is perhaps the most controversial
category of all. The intentions of nuclear energy companies
don’t inevitably entail harm to anyone, and in fact these
companies only seek to provide sustainable, environmentally-
friendly power to the societies they serve. However, given the
tremendous risk that nuclear power plants carry---realized in
places such as Chernobyl and Fukushima---SRI funds have
generally blacklisted these companies.

· Illegalities and Ill-Repute: Above and beyond those categories
already discussed, it goes without saying that any companies
which are found guilty of illegal conduct such as collusion,
price fixing, fraud, etc., or disreputable behavior such poor
product safety, unfair labor practices, environmental pollution,
etc. will be excluded from SRI fund eligibility, notwithstanding
the industries in which they operate.
Evolution of Corporate Social Responsibility
Aside from business investors, businesses themselves have also
seen an evolution of the expectations that societies have for
their own conduct, and more recent views pressure businesses to
consider more than just their shareholders in making decisions.
· Classical View: As discussed supra, the historical view of
businesses was that their only obligation was to make as much
as much money as possible, pursuant to the principle of profit
maximization. Arguments in favor of the classical view include
that social responsibility dilutes a business’s purpose, that it is
unreasonably expensive, and that businesses lack the skills and
accountability to address societal concerns (Davis, 1973).
· Modern View: The more modern view of businesses is that,
because they benefit from the societies in which they operate,
they have an affirmative obligation to avoid any behaviors
which would degrade the quality of those communities or the
people that comprise them. Arguments in favor of the modern
view include the importance of public expectations, the benefit
of long-term profits if businesses help to sustain the
communities from which they profit, the public image value of
businesses that act in socially responsible ways, and the fact
that self-regulation of social maintenance would mitigate the
need for burdensome governmental oversight.
There a variety of ways in which businesses may pursue a
course of social responsibility. Philanthropy, donation of money

or resources, volunteering, sponsorships for public benefit, and
other strategies may be adopted. Additionally, a business may
seek to measure its level of social responsibility by a number of
different metrics. For example, a business might look to
industry standards and try to meet or exceed the efforts of its
competitors. Another way would be to look to public opinion
and try to address the most urgent concerns of the community in
a responsive fashion. Finally, a business might decide to be
proactive, and seek out new and uncharted ways of contributing
to societal welfare, blazing a trail and going above and beyond
the scope of current precedent.
Environmentalism
In addition to social welfare, another subject that has been
heavily on the radar in terms of business responsibility is
environmental consciousness. Over 95% of scientists today
agree that human activity and the burning of fossil fuels is
affecting the global climate, and that these effects will be the
biggest challenges of the new millennia. Public perception is
slowly shifting away from the charlatans who denounced global
warming as a hoax for years, and in the direction of reasoned
assessment of our actual circumstances. With that in mind, there
has been an increased pressure on businesses to do their part in
conserving natural resources and reducing carbon footprint, in
the interest of fighting back against this runaway greenhouse
problem (Dummett, 2006). From this, several different positions
in terms of commitment to environmentalism have emerged,
ranging in their degree of sensitivity.
· The Legal Approach: The legal approach is the least-sensitive
environmental approach for businesses, and as the name
implies, this is a paradigm under which business obey the laws
pertaining to environmental preservation (e.g. the Clear Air Act,
the Clean Water Act, EPA regulations, etc.) and nothing more.
· Market Approach: The market approach is when businesses

base their degree of environmental sensitivity on the level of
concern of their customers. If a business’s client base has little
regard for environmental concerns, then the business will follow
suit. However, as a contrasting example, a significant portion of
hotel guests have been found to be moderately concerned about
man’s impact on the environment, and so many hotels are
actively looking for ways to augment their environmental
conservation programs in hopes of appeasing their markets
(Wahba, 2008).
· Stakeholder Approach: The stakeholder approach goes a step
further than the market approach. In addition to considering the
views of customers, businesses adopting the stakeholder
approach will also look to the concern of other parties involved
in their operations, including employees, suppliers, and the
community at large.
· Activist Approach: The final and most-sensitive environmental
position is called the activist approach, and this is where
businesses actively look for ways to conserve resources, reduce
carbon emission, and improve the environment notwithstanding
the views of stakeholders or impacts on the bottom line, but
instead because it is the right thing to do.
Conclusion
In this lesson, we discussed some modern concepts of ethics for
social responsibility, and environmentalism. In Lesson Six, we
will discuss some of the types of power wielded by leaders, as
well as the dichotomy between transactional and
transformational leadership.
References
Davis, K. (1973). The case for and against business assumption
of social responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal,
16(2), 312-322.

Dummett, K. (2006). Drivers for corporate environmental
responsibility (CER).Environment, Development and
Sustainability, 8(3), 375-389.
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social
responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of
Management Review, 26(1), 117-127.
Sparkes, R., & Cowton, C. J. (2004). The maturing of socially
responsible investment: A review of the developing link with
corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics,
52(1), 45-57.
Wahba, H. (2008). Does the market value corporate
environmental responsibility? An empirical examination.
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, 15(2), 89-99.
theories concerning leadership as
well as their ethical implications. Lesson Six will introduce
some modern concepts of ethics for
businesse
s, including socially responsible investing, corporate social
responsibility, and
environmentalism.

of businesses operating within
American society has changed considerably throughout the hist
ory of our nation. The classical
principle of profit maximization: the
idea that the
only
purpose of a business is to maximize the amount of money
generated for its
owners. Furthermore, anything
that runs counter to or distracts from this prerogative is
antithetical to the essence of a business. The obligation to obey
the law is implied based on the
the form of fines or even forced
closure; so compliance with the law is a behavior that is
compatible with, and in fact necessary to,
the principle of profit maximization.
and degrees of influence that
present substantial thr
eats to the welfare of communities, families, the natural
environment, etc.
to shareholders (McWilliams &
Siegel, 2001). This lesson will discuss the ways in which
changes in public perception
have
century.

business and industry is through
socially responsible investment (SRI) funds.
In the business startup world, some investors with
businesses in which they are willing
to invest with their capital (Sparkes & Cowton, 2004). Some of
these restricted categories are
more or le
ss unanimously seen as immoral industries. Others, however,
are more controversial.
·
Alcohol:
Obviously not all people abuse alcohol, and not all people view
producers of
alcohol as immoral. However, many SRI funds exclude alcohol
companies because of
the
tragic effects that alcohol has in contexts such as drunk driving,
etc.
·

Tobacco:
Virtually the same arguments that apply to alcohol apply to
tobacco,
except that tobacco is vilified for its unmistakable role in
cancers, emphysema, and
early mortality. Th
us, SRI funds typically avoid tobacco companies as well.
·
Gambling:
Like alcohol, not all people have gambling problems or see any
ethical
issue with the gambling industry. However, we do know that
gambling is another
addictive behavior, and for this reason
casinos are typically excluded from SRI funds.
·
Weapons:
Firearms are a heated subject with all of the current political
debate
surrounding Second Amendment rights and the best ways to
address gun violence in
America. However, because of the enormously large rates of
violent gun
-
related
crime in the United State
s (compared to other civilized nations), weapons are a non

-
sequitur for SRI funds.
·
Nuclear Power:
This is perhaps the most controversial category of all. The
intentions of nuclear energy companies don’t inevitably entail
harm to anyone, and
in fact these companies only seek to provide sustainable,
environmentally
-
friendly
power to the societies they se
rve. However, given the tremendous risk that nuclear
theories concerning leadership as
well as their ethical implications. Lesson Six will introduce
some modern concepts of ethics for
social responsibility, and
environmentalism.
of businesses operating within
American society has changed considerably throughout the
history of our nation. The classical
principle of profit maximization: the
idea that the only purpose of a business is to maximize the
amount of money generated for its
owners. Furthermore, anything that runs counter to or distracts
from this prerogative is

antithetical to the essence of a business. The obligation to obey
the law is implied based on the
the form of fines or even forced
closure; so compliance with the law is a behavior that is
compatible with, and in fact necessary to,
the principle of profit maximization.
and degrees of influence that
present substantial threats to the welfare of communities,
families, the natural environment, etc.
to shareholders (McWilliams &
Siegel, 2001). This lesson will discuss the ways in which
changes in public perception have
century.
business and industry is through
socially responsible investment (SRI) funds. In the business
startup world, some investors with
businesses in which they are willing
to invest with their capital (Sparkes & Cowton, 2004). Some of
these restricted categories are
more or less unanimously seen as immoral industries. Others,
however, are more controversial.
people view producers of
alcohol as immoral. However, many SRI funds exclude alcohol
companies because of

the tragic effects that alcohol has in contexts such as drunk
driving, etc.
apply to tobacco,
except that tobacco is vilified for its unmistakable role in
cancers, emphysema, and
early mortality. Thus, SRI funds typically avoid tobacco
companies as well.
problems or see any ethical
issue with the gambling industry. However, we do know that
gambling is another
addictive behavior, and for this reason casinos are typically
excluded from SRI funds.
eapons: Firearms are a heated subject with all of the
current political debate
surrounding Second Amendment rights and the best ways to
address gun violence in
America. However, because of the enormously large rates of
violent gun-related
crime in the United States (compared to other civilized nations),
weapons are a non-
sequitur for SRI funds.
category of all. The
intentions of nuclear energy companies don’t inevitably entail
harm to anyone, and
in fact these companies only seek to provide sustainable,
environmentally-friendly
power to the societies they serve. However, given the
tremendous risk that nuclear
Week 1 Lecture 1

Class Approach to Statistics
Statistics is basically a set of tools that allow us to get
information out of data sets (we
will get to the more formal definition below). As such, it can
be taught as a math class (focusing
on formulas), a logic class (If this, then that), or as a case study
(here is the problem, what are we
going to do). We have chosen the later – we will be examining
statistical tools and approaches
as they help us answer a business question.
The question we will focus on involves the Equal Pay Act,
specifically the requirement
that males and females be paid the same if they are performing
equal or equivalent work. So, our
business research question is: are males and females paid the
same for equal work?
In starting out with our case, we will have a data set that
provides a number of variables
(measures that can assume different values with different
subjects) for each of 50 employees
selected randomly from our company. (The company and
employee data are fictitious, of
course).
For each employee (labeled 1 thru 50 in the ID column), we will
have:
• Salary, the annual salary, rounded to the nearest hundred
dollars; for example, a
salary of 32, 650 would be rounded to 32.7.
• Compa (short for compa-ratio or Comparative ratio) – a
measure of how a salary

relates to the midpoint of a pay range, found by dividing the
salary by the pay range
midpoint.
• Midpoint – the middle of the salary range assigned to each
grade.
• Age – the employee’s age (rounded to the nearest birthday)
• Performance rating – a value between 1 and 100 showing the
manager’s rating how
good the employee performs their job
• Service – the years the employee has been with the company
(rounded to the nearest
hiring anniversary
• Gender – a numerical code indicating the employee’s gender
(1 = female, 0 = male)
• Raise – the percent increase in pay of the last performance
based increase in salary
• Degree – the educational achievement of the employee (0 =
BA/BS, 1 = Master’s or
more)
• Gender1 – a letter code indicating the employee’s gender (F =
female, M = male)
• Grade – the employee’s pay level – grade A is the lowest
(entry level) and grade E is
the highest.
During each week, we will examine some of these variables to
see if they help us
answer the question of males and females receiving equal pay
for equal work. In the
weekly lectures, we will work with the variable salary. In the
homework assignments for

weeks 2, 3, and 4; you will have the same questions but work
with the variable compa,
which – by definition – is an alternate method of looking at pay.
If you have any questions about this description of our course
case, please ask
them in either Ask Your Instructor or in one of the class posts.
Introduction to Statistics
Formally, we can define statistics as “the science of collecting,
organizing, presenting,
analyzing, and interpreting data to assist in making more
effective decisions” (Lind, Marchel, &
Wathen, 2008, p. 4). This makes statistics and statistical
analysis a subset of both critical
thinking and quantitative thinking, both skills that Ashford
University has identified as critical
abilities for any student graduating with a degree. H. G. Wells,
the author, once said that “one
day quantitative reasoning will be as necessary for effective
citizenship as the ability to read.”
In this class, we will focus mostly on the analyzing and
interpreting of data that we will
assume has been correctly collected to allow us to use it to
make decisions with. In doing this,
there is a fairly well agreed upon approach to understanding
what the data is trying to tell us.
This approach will be followed in this class, and involves:
• Identifying what kinds of data we are working with, then
• Developing summary statistics for the data
• Developing appropriate statistical tests to make decisions

about the population the
data came from.
• Drawing conclusions from the test results to answer the initial
research question(s).
Data Characteristics
We all recognized that not all data is the same. Saying we
“like” something is quite a bit
different than saying, the part weighs 3.7 ounces. We treat
these two kinds of data in very
different ways.
The first distinction we make in data types involves identifying
our data as either
qualitative or quantitative. Qualitative data identifies
characteristics or attributes of something
being studied. They are non-numeric and can often be used for
grouping purposes. Some
examples include nationality, gender, type of car, etc.
Quantitative data, on the other hand, tend to measure how much
of what is being
examined exists. Examples of these kinds of variables include,
money, temperature, number of
drawers in a desk, etc.
Within quantitative data, we can identify continuous and
discrete data types. Continuous
data variables can assume any value with limits. For example,
depending upon how accurate our
measuring instrument is, the temperature, in degrees Fahrenheit,
could be 75, 75.3 75.32,
75.3287468…. There are no natural “breaks” in temperature
even though we typically only

report it in whole numbers and ignore the decimal portion.
Height would be another continuous
data variable. Discrete data, on the other hand, has only certain
values, and shows breaks
between these values. The number of drawers in a desk could
be 3 or 4, but not 3.56, for
example.
The second important approach in defining data is the “level” of
the data. There exist
four distinct levels:
• Nominal – these serve as names or labels, and could be
considered qualitative. The
basic use for this level is to identify distinctions between and
among subjects, such as
ID numbers, gender identification (Male or Female), car type
(Ford, Nissan, etc.).
We can basically only count how many exist within each group
of a nominal data
variable.
• Ordinal – these data have the same characteristics as nominal
with the addition of
being rankable – that is, we can place them in a descending or
ascending order. One
example is rating something using good, better, best (even if
coded 1 = good, 2 =
better, and 3 = best). We can rank this preference, but cannot
say the difference
between each data point is the same for everyone.
• Interval – this level of data adds the element of constant
differences between

sequential data points – while we did not know the difference
between good and
better or better and best; we do know the difference between 57
degrees and 58
degrees – and it is the same as the difference between 67 and 68
degrees.
• Ratio – this level adds a “meaningful” 0 – which means the
absence of any
characteristic. Temperature (at least for the Celsius and
Fahrenheit scales)) does not
have a 0 point meaning no heat at all. A scale with a
meaningful 0, such as length,
has equal ratios – the ratio of 4 feet to 2 feet has the same value
as that of 8 feet to 4
feet – both are 2. This cannot be said of temperatures, for
example (Tanner &
Youssef-Morgan, 2013).
These are often recalled by the acronym NOIR.
Knowing what kinds of data we have is important, as it
identifies what kinds of statistical
analysis we can do.
Equal Pay Question
At the end of each lecture, we will apply the topics discussed to
our research question of
do males and females receive equal pay for equal work. In this
section, we will look at
identifying the data characteristics for each of our data
variables.
In looking at our first classification of qualitative versus
quantitative, we have

Qualitative Quantitative
Continuous Discrete
ID Compa Salary
Gender Age Midpoint
Gender1 Raise
Performance
Rating
Degree Service
Grade
Most of these are fairly clear – the variables in the qualitative
column merely identify
different groups. The continuous variable lists can all –
theoretically – be carried out to many
decimal points, while those in the discrete list all have distinct
values within their range of
available values.
The identification for the NOIR classification are shown below.
Nominal Ordinal Interval Ratio
ID Degree
Performance
Rating Salary
Gender Grade Midpoint
Gender1 Service
Compa

Age
Raise
While an argument can be made that Performance Ratings,
being basically opinions, are really
ordinal data; for this class let us assume that they are interval
level as many organizations treat
them as such.
An important reason for always knowing the data level for each
variable is that we are
limited to what can be done with different levels. With nominal
scales, we can count the
differences. With ordinal scales, we can do some limited
analysis of differences using certain
tests that are not covered in this course. Both interval and ratio
scales allow us to do both
inferential and descriptive analysis (Tanner & Youssef-Morgan,
2013). Most of the statistical
tools we will cover in this class require data scales that are at
least interval in nature. During our
last two weeks, we will look at some techniques for nominal and
ordinal data measures.
In Lecture 2, we will start to see what kinds of things we can do
with each level of the
NOIR characteristics.
If you have any questions about this material, please ask
questions in either Ask Your
Instructor or in the discussion area.

References
Lind, D. A., Marchel, W. G., & Wathen, S. A. (2008).
Statistical Techniques in Business &
Finance. (13th Ed.) Boston: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Tanner, D. E. & Youssef-Morgan, C. M. (2013). Statistics for
Managers. San Diego, CA:
Bridgeport Education.
Week 1 Lecture 2
In Lecture 1, we focused on identifying the characteristics –
quantitative, qualitative,
discrete, continuous, NOIR – of the data. In this section, we
will take a look at how we can
summarize a data set with descriptive statistics, and how we can
ensure that these descriptive
statistics can be used as inferential statistics to make inferences
and judgments about a larger
population. We are moving into the second step of the analysis
approach mentioned in Lecture
1.
Descriptive Statistics
Once we understand the kinds of data we have, the natural
reaction is want to summarize
it – reduce what may be a lot of data into a few measures to
make sense of what we have. We

start with summary descriptions, the principle types focus on
location, variability, and
likelihood. (Note, we will deal with likelihood, AKA
probability, in Lecture 3 for this week.)
For nominal data, our analysis is limited to counting how many
exist in each group, such
as how many cars by car company (Ford, Nissan, etc.) are in the
company parking lot. However,
we can also use nominal data as a group name to form different
groups to examine, in this case
we do nothing with the actual data label, but do some analysis
with the data in each group. An
example related to our class case: we can group the salary data
values into two groups using the
nominal variable gender (or gender1).
With ordinal scales, we can do some limited analysis of
differences using certain tests;
most of which are not covered in this course. We can also use
ordinal data as grouping labels,
for example we could do some analysis of salary by educational
degree.
Both interval and ratio scales allow us to do both inferential and
descriptive analysis
(Tanner & Youssef-Morgan, 2013). Most of the statistical tools
we will cover in this class
require data scales that are at least interval in nature.
Location measures. When working with interval or ratio level
variables, the first
measure most researchers look are indications of location –
mean, median, mode. The mean is
the numerical average of the data – simply add the values and
divide by the total count. The

median is the middle of the data set; rank order the values form
low to high or high to low, and
pick the value that is in the middle. This is easy if we have an
odd number of values, we can find
the middle exactly. If we have an even number of variables, the
middle is the average of the
middle two values. For example, in this data set: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
we have five values and the
median is 4. However, in this data set: 2, 3, 4, 5, we have only
four values and the median is the
average of the middle 2 numbers = (3 + 4)/2 = 7/2 = 3.5.
Finally, the mode is the most
frequently occurring value; as such, it may or may not occur.
And, there may be more than one
mode in any data set.
Generally, the mean is the most useful measure for a data set, as
it contains information
regarding all the values. It is the location measure that is used
in many statistical tests. The
symbol for the mean of a population is μ – called mu – while we
use �� – sometimes typed as x-
bar – for the sample mean.
Variation measures. After finding our mean (or other center
measure), we generally
want to know how consistent the data is – that is, is the data
bunched around the center, or is it
spread out. The more spread out a data is, the less any single
measure accurately describes all of
the data. Looking at the consistency (or lack of consistency) in
a data set will often give us a
different understanding of what is going on. A simple example,
if we have two departments in a

company that each averaged 3.0 on a question in a company
morale survey, we might be tempted
to say they were the same. However, if we looked at the actual
scores and saw that one
department had individual scores of 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, and 3 while
the other department’s scores were
5, 5, 5, 1, 1, and1 we can now see that the groups are quite a bit
different. The mean alone did
not provide enough information to interpret what was going on
in each group.
We have 3 general measures of variation – range, standard
deviation, and
variance. Range is simply the difference between the largest
and smallest value (largest –
smallest = range).
Standard deviation and variance are related values. The
variance is a somewhat
awkward measure to initially understand. To calculate it, we
first take the difference between
each value and mean of the entire group. This outcome will
have both positive and negative
values, and if we add them together we would get a result of 0.
So, to eliminate the negative
values, we square each outcome. Then we get the sum these
squared values and divide it by the
count. (Note: this is the same as the mean of the squared
differences.) For example, the
variance of this data set (2, 3, 4) would be:
• Mean = (2 + 3 + 4)/3 = 9/3 = 3
• Variance = ((2 - 3)^2 + (3 – 3)^2 + (4 – 3)^2)/3 = ((-1)^2 +
(0)^2 + (1)^2))/3 = (1 + 0
+ 1)/3 = 2/3 = 0.667.

This gives us an awkward measure – the variance of something
measured in inches, for
example, would be measured in inches squared – not a measure
we all use on a daily basis.
The standard deviation changes this awkward measure to one
that makes more intuitive
sense. It does so by taking the positive square root of the
variance. This would give us, for our
inches measure a result that is expressed in inches. The
standard deviation is always expressed
in the same units as the initial measure. For our example above
with the variance of 0.667, the
standard deviation would be the square root of 0.667 or 0.817.
Both the variance and standard
deviation require data that is at least interval in nature. The
standard deviation is about 1/6 of the
range, and is considered the average difference from the mean
for all of the data values in the set
(Tanner & Youssef-Morgan, 2013).
Technical point – both the variance and the standard deviation
have two different
formulas, one for populations and one for samples. The
difference is that with the sample
formula, the average is found with the (count -1) rather than the
full count. This serves to
increase the estimate, since the data in a sample will not be as
spread out as in the population
(unlikely to have the extreme largest and smallest value). The
symbol for the population
standard deviation is σ, while the sample standard deviation
symbol is s. In statistics, since we
deal with samples, we use the sample formulas – to be discussed
below.

The nice thing about descriptive statistics is that Excel will do
all of the math calculations
for us, we just need to know how to interpret our results.
For a video discussion of descriptive statistics take a look at
Descriptive statistics from
the Kahn Academy -
https://www.khanacademy.org/math/probability/descriptive-
statistics.
Research Question Example
Now that we have identified the data types for each of our
variables, we need to develop
some descriptive statistics – particularly for those at the
interval and ratio level. In our
discussion and example of salary, we will be using a salary
sample of 50 that does not exactly
match the data that is available in your data set. It is not
significantly different, and should be
considered to come from a different sample of the same
population. The results will be accurate
enough to consider them in answering our equal pay for equal
work question for the sample
results provided to the class.
Equal Pay Question. The obvious first question to ask is what
is the overall average
salary, and what is the average for the males and females
separately? This descriptive statistic
should also be accompanied with the standard deviation of each
group to examine group

diversity. (Reminder: the salary results presented each week
will not exactly match the results
from this class’ data set if you choose to duplicate the results
presented in this lecture. The
results are statistically close enough to use to answer our
assignment question on equal pay.)
The related question concerns the standard deviation of each of
the three groups (entire
sample, males, and females) – what is the standard deviation for
each group.
In setting up the data for this, copy the salary data column
(B1:B51) and paste it on a new
sheet. This is a recommend practice – never do analysis on the
raw data set so that relationships
between various columns are not compromised. Then copy the
Gender column (M and F) and
paste it beside the salary data. Using Excel’s sort function, sort
the two columns (at the same
time) using Gender as the sort key. This will give you the
salary data grouped by males and
females.
The screen shot below displays the results using both the
Descriptive Statistics option
found in the Data Analysis list and the =Average and = Stdev.s
functions found in the fx or
Formulas – statistics section.
Note a couple of things about the Descriptive Statistics output.
First, since for both the
overall and female groups, the input range included the label
Sal, this was shown at the top. The
male range did not have a label, so Column 1 was automatically
used. We can use Descriptive

Statistics for any number of contiguous columns in the input
range box. For reporting purposes,
we should change the Sal and Column 1 labels to Overall,
Female, and Male.
https://www.khanacademy.org/math/probability/descriptive-
statistics
The second issue about the descriptive statistics output is that it
contains much more
information than we were looking for. This is a good tool for
an overall look at a data set.
Looking at the fx values and those from the Descriptive
Statistics output, we can see that
the means and standard deviations are identical for each group –
so, it does not matter which
approach you use.
Now, looking at the actual statistical values, we see that the
overall all salary mean (45)
lies in the middle between the lower female mean (38) and the
upper male mean (52) – overall
means will always be flanked by sub-group means, but the
differences will not also be
equidistant.
The standard deviations, on the other hand are much closer
together with the overall
(19.2) being somewhat larger than either the female (18.3) or
male (17.8). This is also somewhat
common – the variation in the entire group is generally a bit

· Required Resources· Recommended ResourcesAssignment Materi.docx

· Required Resources· Recommended ResourcesAssignment Materi.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to · Required Resources· Recommended ResourcesAssignment Materi.docx

Similar to · Required Resources· Recommended ResourcesAssignment Materi.docx (20)

More from oswald1horne84988

More from oswald1horne84988 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

· Required Resources· Recommended ResourcesAssignment Materi.docx