BazermanMoore

Bounded Ethicality 129
people. Instead, it could be that you feel favorably toward both white and black people,
butthatyouhaveslightlymorepositivefeelingstowardwhitepeople;conversely,it
could be that you hate both white and black people, but that you hate white people
slightly less than black people.
Psychologists have found that implicit attitudes predict certain forms of behavior.
Rudman and Borgida (1995) have found that implicit stereotypes predicted discrimination
against female job applicants. Rudman and Glick (2001) found that study participants
who held strong implicit attitudes connecting women with communal traits (e.g.,
helpful) and men with ‘‘agentic,’’ or individualistic, traits (e.g., ambitious) were more
likely to view a female exhibiting ambition as having poor social skills than were participants
with weaker implicit attitudes on this dimension. McConnell and Leibold (2001)
found that implicit attitudes were highly predictive of nonverbal behaviors toward different
groups of people. Finally, Asendorpf, Banse, and Muecke (2002) demonstrated
that implicit attitudes are more predictive of spontaneous behaviors and that explicit
attitudes are more predictive of thoughtful behaviors. This effect implies that implicit
attitudes are more likely to occur when decision makers are using System 1 than System
2 thinking.
Along these lines, some researchers have noted a societal shift over the last few decades
from ‘‘old-fashioned racism’’ to ‘‘modern racism’’ (Brief, Dietz, Cohen, Pugh, &
Vaslow, 2000; Chugh, 2004). Old-fashioned racism is explicit and accompanied by hostility.
Modern racism is more subtle, but affects managers’ professional judgments nonetheless.
In 2004, Morgan Stanley paid $54 million to settle a sex discrimination lawsuit
filed on behalf of some of its female executives by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission. The EEOC argued that much of the problem at Morgan Stanley, and at
other investment banks, is that the mostly white men who are in charge do not seem to
recognize the existence of gender inequities in their operations (New York Times,
July 14, 2004, p. C1). Hydie Summer, who was a plaintiff in a separate sex discrimination
lawsuit at Merrill Lynch, commented, ‘‘[The brokerage managers] really don’t believe
they are discriminating. If you come in and you look like they want you to look—probably
a white male profile—they’ll project success for you. They have a specific view of
what a successful broker or manager will look like, and it is not usually a woman or a black
or Hispanic.’’ We all need to be aware that racial attitudes can affect our judgment without
our conscious awareness and in ways that are at odds with our intentions and values.
The Psychology of Conflict of Interest
Financial advisors often earn fees based on the transactions they recommend to their
clients. Surgeons typically earn more when they operate than when they don’t operate,
and doctors often receive payment for recommending patients for clinical trials.
Commission-paid lawyers are more likely to recommend settling a case than are lawyers
paid by the hour. Real-estate agents earn their living from housing transactions.
Merger-and-acquisition experts typically are paid only when a transaction occurs, and
sometimes Supreme Court justices rule on cases involving their friends.
Most members of these professions would agree that a conflict of interest exists in
many of these examples between receiving personal benefits (such as money or a