Unit2 - An Employment Reference For Arthur Bitton

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton
For the most optimal reading experience we recommend using our website.
A free-to-view version of this content is available by clicking on this link, which
includes an easy-to-navigate-and-search-entry, and may also include videos,
embedded datasets, downloadable datasets, interactive questions, audio
content, and downloadable tables and resources.
Author: James D. Slack

Pub. Date: 2024
Product: Sage Business Cases
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071924624
Keywords: employment references, references for employment, students
Disciplines: Business Ethics (general), Business Ethics & Corporate Social Responsibility, Business &
Management, Corporate Social Responsibility, Coaching & Mentoring, Human Resource Management,
Recruitment & Retention
Access Date: February 8, 2024
Publishing Company: SAGE Publications: SAGE Business Cases Originals
City: London
Online ISBN: 9781071924624
© 2024 SAGE Publications: SAGE Business Cases Originals All Rights Reserved.
Sage Sage Business Cases
© 2024 James D. Slack
This case was prepared for inclusion in SAGE Business Cases primarily as a basis for classroom dis-
cussion or self-study, and is not meant to illustrate either effective or ineffective management styles.
Nothing herein shall be deemed to be an endorsement of any kind. This case is for scholarly, educa-
tional, or personal use only within your university, and cannot be forwarded outside the university or
used for other commercial purposes.
The case studies on SAGE Business Cases are designed and optimized for online learning. Please re-
fer to the online version of this case to fully experience any video, data embeds, spreadsheets, slides,
or other resources that may be included.
This content may only be distributed for use within GALGOTIA'S UNIVERSITY.
2024 Sage Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Abstract
The chair of the Hospitality Management department in the School of Business at Wellington State
University (WSU) convinces a colleague with hotel/motel management experience to resign voluntarily
rather than face a tenure denial. The department chair remains a mentor to the colleague and writes
excellent letters of recommendation. The colleague accepts a position at another college, but rumors
develop about inappropriate behavior with students and again the colleague resigns. With the help of
his mentor at WSU, the colleague accepts a position at another academic institution. This time there is
a complaint filed against him on behalf of an anonymous student who claims inappropriate behavior.
The colleague is immediately discharged and seeks another academic appointment. The mentor does
not know whether to support the former colleague with another employment reference.
Case
Learning Outcomes
By the end of this case, students should understand the following:

Page 2 of 15
• The ethics of employment references.

• The responsibility of honesty on the part of the person requesting the letter.
• The impact of fraudulent employment references on the writer’s integrity and that of the university.
The Email
Scrolling his inbox, Professor James Douglas noticed an email from Saint Amherst University, a highly ac-
claimed Roman Catholic institution. It read: “Dear Dr. Douglas: Your contact information has been provided to
us as an employment reference for Dr. Arthur Bitton who has applied for the position of Assistant Provost for
Academic Quality at our university.”
“Oh no,” Douglas thought to himself.
The email continued: “The Assistant Provost duties entail assessing the academic quality of all courses at
Saint Amherst University. In addition to meeting regularly with department chairs and school deans, s/he will
engage regularly with students in discussion forums and one-on-one conversations to gain in-depth perspec-
tive on student concerns regarding the quality of education at Saint Amherst University.”
“Oh my,” Douglas murmured aloud.
Meet Arthur Bitton
James Douglas met Arthur Bitton at a “new faculty” orientation the year they both joined Wellington State
University (WSU). Douglas was a full professor and the new chair of the Department of Hospitality Manage-
ment in the School of Business. Bitton was an entry-level assistant professor in the area of hotel/motel man-
agement. Significantly older than most new assistant professors, Bitton had spent his prior years pursuing a
career in the motel industry.
Academia Simplified
As in most professions, academia has developed common norms. Each academic institution, however, fol-

Page 3 of 15
lows these norms within the confines of its own history, goals, strengths, and limitations. Just as in any corpo-
ration, the internal dynamics can be uniquely complex and this is why new faculty, regardless of rank, typically
attend an orientation.
It was at the new faculty orientation that Arthur Bitton was introduced to the productivity measures, processes,
and structure at WSU. Productivity measures included (1) publication, (2) teaching, and (3) service to the uni-
versity and its external stakeholders. All three are common academic norms, but the degree to which these
measurements are weighted depends upon each university’s mission. Because WSU’s mission placed higher
value on research, the publication of that research carried the greater weight. At other universities, however,
the mission may be more student-oriented and therefore teaching carries the greater weight. Service is al-
ways a factor, but in most settings it is ranked third.
Arthur Bitton also learned about faculty rankings (see Table 1). Like at most academic institutions, WSU
ranks faculty as assistant professor, associate professor, and full professor. Arthur Bitton was hired at the low
end—assistant professor—and James Douglas was hired at the high end—full professor.
Table 1. Common Hierarchy in Faculty Rank, United States and United Kingdom1
Equivalent Faculty Rank United States United Kingdom
Top tier Full Professor Professor
Middle tier Associate Professor2 Reader/Senior Lecturer
Lower tier Assistant Professor Lecturer
Notes:1 Does not include upper rankings, such as Distinguished Professor, instructor, or adjunct.
2 Most typically, tenure is required to rise to the rank of Associate Professor.
Arthur Bitton also learned about the tenure process at WSU (see Table 2). Tenure is an employment state
similar to being a partner in a law firm. During a probationary period, typically six years, assistant professors

Page 4 of 15
are reviewed annually by department chairs and biannually by department tenure committees. In the sixth
year, if sufficient progress is made in publication, teaching, and service, the assistant professor undergoes
one last review by a department tenure committee that recommends granting or denying tenure to the dean
(or appointed committee), who recommends supporting or opposing the department’s decision to the Vice
President of Academic Affairs, who recommends supporting or opposing the dean’s decision to the President,
who recommends either granting or denying tenure to the governing board. If approved, tenure can only be
rescinded for specific reasons: the faculty member violated university ethics rules, committed a crime, is a
faculty member in a discontinued program, or if the university declares financial exigency.
Table 2. Simplified View of Tenure Process at U.S. Colleges and Universities
Dept Chair
Year Dept. Tenure Committee Dean Level Review V. P. Review President Approval Board Approval
Review
1 X
2 X X
3 X
4 X X
5 X
6 X X X X X X
The Relationship between Douglas and Bitton
Douglas and Bitton started to bond at that new faculty orientation. Douglas realized Bitton was now in a differ-
ent organizational culture than the one he had found in the world of motel corporations. Because the six-year
time clock for tenure would not wait, Douglas started to mentor Bitton immediately. He found Arthur Bitton to
Page 5 of 15
be bright and eager to emerge in academia. He brought the experience of a seasoned practitioner in the mo-
tel management business. From the start, he did exceptionally well in the classroom and in the service activity
of linking his students with hotel/motel corporations. However, when it came to publications—considered the
“coin of the realm” at research institutions like WSU—Bitton remained unsatisfactory.
The Talk
The talk between the department chair and the unsuccessful tenure candidate hopefully is polite and encour-
aging, but it must be blunt. It confirms unsurmountable weakness in one or more of the tenure standards. It
usually does not pertain to “for cause” termination, which includes inappropriate sexual advancement toward
students, theft, lying, falsifying documents, threats, and workplace violence (FAR, 2022).
Douglas was a good department chair and believed the talk was part of his mentorship responsibilities. So
after a dismal third-year assessment, Douglas had the talk with Bitton and got to the point: “You’re not going
to make it here despite being a good instructor who is also well-connected with the hotel/motel industry. Let
me help you find another position at an institution with less publication expectations.” Douglas continued: “But
you need to leave by the end of this, your third year, to avoid speculation about a possible negative tenure
decision.”
Douglas promised to continue mentoring Bitton and volunteered to provide excellent reference letters. Bitton
took his department chair’s advice. He landed a job at Birmingham Teaching College (BTC), which held the
expectations Bitton needed for success.
Since leaving WSU, Bitton remained in close contact with his mentor, Douglas. They routinely discussed
teaching issues, student grading, as well as issues about fitting in with Bitton’s new colleagues and acclimat-
ing to a new institutional culture.
Douglas believed everything was going well for Bitton at BTC.

Page 6 of 15
The Rumor
Yet three years into his time at BTC, Bitton called Douglas late one night and said he needed to get back
on the market. “Rumors are flying about me having inappropriate relations with students on an overnight trip
when we visited a hotel corporate headquarters.”
Douglas paused, “Like what kind of inappropriateness?”
Bitton replied “Sexual, but they’re wrong! And besides, no student actually filed a complaint!”
This made Douglas a bit uncomfortable. “Well,” he asked, “why would you leave if no complaints were filed?”
Bitton had no answer.
Now Douglas grew more concerned.
After more ambivalence, Bitton said “I just want to leave and start afresh elsewhere—I really want out of here.
Will you help me?”
Douglas was worried. Yet he never heard any rumor of inappropriate behavior while Bitton was in his depart-
ment at WSU. Students liked him and were drawn to him.
So Douglas wrote another excellent employment reference for Bitton—this time, for the position of chair of
the business department at a small but prestigious institution, Brownhelm Liberal Arts College (BLAC). The
position came tenure-track, and Bitton had to wait three years to gain tenure. In his letter, Douglas mentioned
nothing about difficulties in the tenure process at WSU. Why? Because Bitton left WSU, as encouraged by
Douglas, well before the tenure decision.
Bitton accepted the position.
Life at BLAC
Douglas continued to mentor Bitton, now about the intricacies of being a good department chair. Bitton
seemed to be a quick learner and even did well with the awkward spot of being a department chair over col-

Page 7 of 15
leagues who would vote on his tenure.
In his second year at BLAC, Bitton invited Douglas to campus to speak about Douglas’ latest publication. (Bit-
ton had good research questions at BLAC but, as he did at WSU, he had not yet collected data nor put ink to
paper.) After Douglas’ presentation, he sat in Bitton’s class on hotel/motel management. He noticed how the
students seemed to like Bitton. They were clearly enjoying the nurturing classroom atmosphere Bitton creat-
ed.
Bitton could not dine with Douglas that evening as Bitton had to drive (in his car) four BLAC students to a
two-day student hotel/motel management conference in Cleveland, Ohio. The college paid for hotel accom-
modations at the conference as well as rooms at a motel en route.
The Complaint
Within a month after the trip to Cleveland, Bitton made another frantic late-night call to Douglas. At first, Bitton
was so hysterical, words were inaudible. Finally, he calmed somewhat. “The dean just terminated me … im-
mediately.” Bitton continued: “A colleague on my tenure committee, who was also a candidate for the chair’s
position when I got it, submitted a complaint on behalf of an anonymous male student.”
The complaint stated the anonymous male was one of the four students on the trip to Cleveland. It claimed
Bitton made inappropriate advances on him. The rumor was spreading like wildfire throughout BLAC.
Douglas reacted: “If the dean is removing you immediately without any kind of hearing, is she claiming ‘for
cause’ in the termination?”
Bitton was quiet.
Douglas paused and asked “Arthur, did you do anything wrong at the hotel/motel conference?”
Bitton replied “Nothing.”
Then Douglas asked about the overnight stay at a motel en route to the conference. “Arthur? What happened
at that motel?”
Bitton avoided a direct answer. “The four were all upper-class students on that trip. All were adults in their

Page 8 of 15
20s.”
Douglas said “You didn’t answer my question.”
He heard Bitton whimpering.
Douglas continued: “If the words inappropriate advancement were used, then you are being accused of forc-
ing yourself on a student in some manner … what happened?”
Bitton said “James, you’ve known me for about a decade. Were there ever any rumors at WSU? Did any stu-
dent complain? And why were my student evaluations always the highest in your department?”
Bitton continued: “Did you see how my students in that hotel/motel management class love me?” He conclud-
ed: “I did nothing at that motel. And you know I’m not like that!”
Now Bitton started to cry aloud, repeatedly saying “I just want to get out of here.” Finally, “Please help me!”
Now it was Douglas who was a bit evasive. He wanted neither to assure nor deny a letter at this point. Instead,
he tried to calm Bitton and get him thinking about filing a grievance against the dean and the colleague who
submitted the anonymous complaint at BLAC.
But What If?
For the rest of the night, Douglas lay awake and reasoned with himself. “Arthur Bitton is now in his mid-50s,
and he’s single.” He continued thinking “I’ve never seen him with a date at any social function. With the ex-
ception of once bringing his visiting mother to our home to meet me and my wife, he always came to our
dinner parties alone. And he never talked about being in a relationship. Are rumors floating because he just
happens to be a single man who keeps his personal life private?”
Douglas thought further. Arthur is African-American. “Is he being targeted because of his race?” Douglas
knew Bitton was one of very few Black faculty members at BLAC. He was the only minority male in the de-
partment at BTC. Douglas now wondered if Bitton was a victim of a bigoted stereotype about Black men on
campuses with primarily white students.
He thought further: “So what if Arthur is a Black gay guy? Who really cares? But what if one of his students

Page 9 of 15
(at BTC or BLAC) was gay and closeted?” Could it be that consensual behavior between two adults in the
middle of the night becomes something different when one of them is afraid of the consequences in the light
of day?
Douglas reasoned again: “Or perhaps it has nothing to do with race or sex.” He wondered what grades the
anonymous student earned from Bitton. “Perhaps the student fabricated the situation, just like some students
do, when unfavorable grades are earned.” Douglas remembered one time he received as department chair
a grade-appeal from a student who included: “By the look on the instructor’s face on the first day of class, I
knew he would give me a C!” He also remembered another grade-appeal making more implicit suggestions
of unwelcome sexual advances of the faculty member. However, that student confessed the truth when con-
fronted directly by the student-faculty appeals committee. Could this all be about a grade of C or less?
However, he still did not understand Bitton’s reluctance to contest actions against him—first at BTC and now
at BLAC. Was Bitton hiding anything? Was he protecting someone? Was Bitton really acting inappropriately
toward anyone?
Douglas wondered further. “Are my reference letters helping a faculty member with integrity or are they en-
abling someone to make inappropriate and unwelcomed advances on unsuspecting students?”
And now, Saint Amherst University is seeking an employment reference for someone whom Douglas thinks
he knows well but perhaps not well enough. The person holding this position could help students or hinder a
few in the worst way.
Amidst all these concerns, Douglas turned to worry about another major issue in writing reference letters:
Does the letter contain unintended bias based on background attributes such as race, gender, or sexual being
(Go & Sachdev, 2021; Madera et al. 2018)? Douglas fully understood that biases—in the content and struc-
ture of the letter—may be interpreted in ways undesigned by the writer. He lay awake worrying about the ill-
effects of even mentioning the smoke of something irregular with the behavior between students and Bitton.
“Would I be sending ‘code’ that, because Arthur is Black or because he may be gay, he should not be hired?”
Integrity and the Ethics of Employment References
For those who write letters of recommendation, there is always one ethical anchor: integrity. Many people

Page 10 of 15
mistake integrity for honesty. Fact is, you can be honest without being integral. Having integrity requires (1)
a deep understanding of right and wrong, and (2) the courage to point out right from wrong (Carter, 1996:
10–14).
In the case of employment references, each letter does not simply contain attributes of the requesting person.
Nor does it make spreading of erroneous rumors acceptable. The righteousness of the words used in the let-
ter represent the author’s integrity, and they are a symbol of the institution on the letterhead.
Business students taking an ethics course know that integrity counts (CFI Team, 2022). Business enterprises
receiving employment references want to know the job-related truth about the applicant. They are concerned
not just with the necessary trade skills to do the job. Deep down they seek an understanding that the job ap-
plicant is able to discern right from wrong in doing the job (Kouchaki, 2019).
Consequently, the ethical context for writing recommendation letters requires excluding what Stephen L.
Carter calls “puffery”—hyperbole involving what one knows about the person (Carter, 1996). The ethics of
employment references also excludes falsifying information and carelessness in what is written (Dutton, n.d.)
In fact, most universities—hence, schools of business—have policies concerning doing wrong of any kind
(McCombs School of Business, n.d.). Faculty members writing employment references are warned that “[a]s
scholars and educational officers, they should remember that the public may judge their profession and their
institution by their utterances” (AAUP, 1940 and updates). To be ethical, utterances must separate and state
right from wrong and be issued (verbally or in writing) with neither the intent to damage the applicant’s effort
to get a job nor the intent to spew puffery so that the applicant gets the job.
Douglas knew this all too well. His experience with university policies and professional codes of ethics was
supplemented by what he learned first-hand over the years by visits from special agents of the U.S. Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI) concerning his students seeking federal jobs requiring security clearance. Dig-
itally recorded, each FBI interview commenced with a warning: omissions of fact or false representations to
any question or inquiry constitute a felony. In each case, the FBI special agent bypassed questions about
grades and class activities. Instead s/he asked such questions like “Do you think this job applicant ever lied
to you?” (Douglas always thought about the countless reasons students give about assignments submitted
late!) Other questions: “Do you think this job applicant is capable of cheating?” Or “Have you seen any indi-
cation that this job applicant could become compromised by a U.S. corporation or a foreign entity?”
Douglas now imagined Arthur Bitton as a job applicant requiring a visit from an FBI special agent. “What

Page 11 of 15
would my integral—non-felonious—answers be?
Douglas also remembered what Carter presented to his Yale University law students in a course “Law, Se-
crets, and Lying” (Carter, 1996: 69–82). He asked his students a simple question: “Do you want letters of
recommendation from me filled with truth or puffery?” His students were uncomfortable with such bluntness,
but most admitted they desired puffery. In other words, they argued the “ethics” of their law professor should
dismiss integrity!
Carter called such insistence on puffery “America’s integrity dilemma: we are all full of fine talk about how
desperately our society needs it, but, when push comes to shove, we would just as soon be on the winning
side … [this is] what is wrong about America today: we care far more about winning than about playing by the
rules” (Carter, 1996: 4; brackets mine).
Yes, Douglas knew the rules about letters of recommendation—the major rule being integrity. If you cannot
write with integrity, do not write at all.
But Douglas also understood the complexity of truth. The writings of Dietrich Bonhoeffer taught him that, while
truth may have varying layers, truth still demands that it be based on (1) the reality of fact and (2) a moral
compass to discern right from wrong in assessing that reality (Bonhoeffer, 1995: 358–367).
Douglas now pondered: “I know my academic moral compass is one of telling the truth without puffery.” But
did he know all the facts that comprised the truth about Arthur Bitton?
What to Do
Douglas delayed his response to Saint Amherst University. Three days later, he received a reminder email.
He feared a phone call might come today from Saint Amherst University to acquire his recommendation.
Douglas hoped Arthur Bitton would call him and talk about the situation. In that conversation, Douglas would
decide about the letter. No phone call came. “This time around, I bet he’s afraid to ask me for one.”
Douglas was upset on many levels: Bitton’s apparent assumption that the letter would somehow be sent au-
tomatically; Douglas now having to make a less than informed decision; the possibility that Bitton misled him
throughout the mentorship; the possibility that Douglas is wrong about his darkest suspicions regarding the

Page 12 of 15
actual truth in Bitton’s situation.
Douglas had to decide whether to:
1. write the letter and ignore what he really did not know;
2. include the rumors, stated as simply fears told to him by Bitton, in the letter to Saint Amherst Univer-
sity because those fears—accurate or not—are part of the reality;
3. call Bitton to glean more of the reality; or
4. inform Saint Amherst University that he is no longer able to write employment references for Arthur
Bitton and omit an explanation.
Still Douglas ponders: “Is there another path I might take?”
Discussion Questions
1. Given Douglas’ experience with the FBI, what did you learn about every interaction you have with
faculty members?
2. Given what you read about the “ethics of employment references,” will you want your professor to
write recommendations anchored in integrity or puffery? Explain.
3. If you were Douglas, how would you handle the situation with Arthur Bitton?
4. What are the ethical impacts—for the individual, for the academic organization, and for society—of
damaging a reputation without cause?
Further Reading
Indeed. (2022). All you need to know about termination for cause. Indeed. https://www.indeed.com/career-ad-
vice/career-development/termination-for-cause. Retrieved: 2/4/2023.
Sarmiento, K. (2014). How to write a successful letter of recommendation. Atlantic Publishing Group.
UCSF. (n.d.). Avoiding bias in letters of recommendation. School of Medicine, Medical Education.https://med-
ed.ucsf.edu/md-program/current-students/student-services/residency-application-matching-resources/avoid-
ing-bias-letters-recommendation. Retrieved: 3/5/2023.

Page 13 of 15
Weybrecht, G. (2016). How to teach students to be “ethical.”AACSB. https://www.aacsb.edu/insights/articles/

2016/12/how-to-teach-students-to-be-ethical. Retrieved: 2/2/2023.
References
AAUP. (1940 (and updates). 1940 Statement of principles on academic freedom and tenure.American Asso-
ciation of University Professors. https://www.aaup.org/report/1940-statement-principles-academic-freedom-
and-tenure. Retrieved: 2/2/2023.
Bonhoeffer, D. (1995). Ethics. Touchstone. (Translated from German by Neville Horton Smith, Munich, 1949).
Carter, S. L. (1996). Integrity. HarperPerennial.
CFI Team. (2022). Moral principles that govern the conduct of businesses. Business Ethics (November 28).
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/esg/business-ethics/. Retrieved: 2/2/2023.
Dutton, J. A. (n.d.). Ethical context for writing recommendation letters.College of Earth and Mineral Sciences,
Penn State. https://www.e-education.psu.edu/writingrecommendationlettersonline/node/114. Retrieved: 2/2/
2023.
FAR. (2022). 8.406-4 Termination for cause. Federal Acquisitions Regulation (December 30). https://www.ac-
quisition.gov/far/8.406-4. Retrieved: 2/4/2023
Go, C., & Sachdev, U. (2021). Letters of recommendation: Nuanced bias or useful information?Journal of
Vascular Surgery, 74(2), 29s–32s.
Kouchaki, M. (2019). Why authentic workplaces are more ethical. Harvard Business Review (June 19).
https://hbr.org/2019/06/why-authentic-workplaces-are-more-ethical. Retrieved: 2/2/2023.
Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., Dial, H., Martin, R., & Valian, V. (2018). Raising doubt in letters of recommendation
for academia: Gender differences and their impact. Journal of Business and Psychology, Springer Sci-
ence+Business Media. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/618995fc3966f458386a1ae7/t/
6317dadff614e1152e08b2c5/1662507744039/maderaetal.18+letters+of+recommendation.pdf?clickid=xrHXf-
sTMxxyNWl5V3Sz9P1sNUkAUO2R1TUMQ2w0&irgwc=1&utm_medium=pp&utm_source=Yield-
Kit%20GmbH&utm_campaign=YieldKit%20GmbH&channel=pp⊂channel=357605&source=Yield-

Page 14 of 15
Kit%20GmbH. Retrieved: 3/3/2023.
McCombs School of Business. (n.d.). Code of ethics.The University of Texas. http://my.mccombs.utexas.edu/

bba/about-us/code-of-ethics/. Retrieved: 2/2/2023.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071924624

Page 15 of 15

Unit2 - An Employment Reference For Arthur Bitton

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Unit2 - An Employment Reference For Arthur Bitton

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Unit2 - An Employment Reference For Arthur Bitton

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

Author: James D. Slack

2024 Sage Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved

By the end of this case, students should understand the following:

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

• The ethics of employment references.

“Oh no,” Douglas thought to himself.

“Oh my,” Douglas murmured aloud.

Meet Arthur Bitton

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

Equivalent Faculty Rank United States United Kingdom

Top tier Full Professor Professor

Middle tier Associate Professor2 Reader/Senior Lecturer

Lower tier Assistant Professor Lecturer

2 Most typically, tenure is required to rise to the rank of Associate Professor.

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

Table 2. Simplified View of Tenure Process at U.S. Colleges and Universities

The Relationship between Douglas and Bitton

Douglas believed everything was going well for Bitton at BTC.

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

Douglas paused, “Like what kind of inappropriateness?”

Bitton had no answer.

Now Douglas grew more concerned.

Bitton accepted the position.

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

leagues who would vote on his tenure.

Bitton was quiet.

Bitton replied “Nothing.”

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

Douglas said “You didn’t answer my question.”

He heard Bitton whimpering.

But What If?

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

Integrity and the Ethics of Employment References

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

would my integral—non-felonious—answers be?

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

actual truth in Bitton’s situation.

Douglas had to decide whether to:

Still Douglas ponders: “Is there another path I might take?”

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

Weybrecht, G. (2016). How to teach students to be “ethical.”AACSB. https://www.aacsb.edu/insights/articles/

Carter, S. L. (1996). Integrity. HarperPerennial.

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

Kit%20GmbH. Retrieved: 3/3/2023.

McCombs School of Business. (n.d.). Code of ethics.The University of Texas. http://my.mccombs.utexas.edu/

An Employment Reference for Arthur Bitton

You might also like