Business ethics is a much debated issue in contemporary America. As many ethical improprieties gained widespread attention, organizations tried to control the damage by institutionalizing ethics through a variety of structures, policies, and procedures. Although the institutionalization of ethics has become popular in corporate America, there is a lack of research in this area. The relationship between the cultural dimensions of individualism/collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity/femininity and the perceptions of managers regarding the institutionalization of ethics is investigated in this study. This research also examined whether managers' level of cognitive moral development and locus of control influenced their perceptions. Data collection was performed through a mail survey of managers in the U.S. and India. Out of the 174 managers of American multinationals who responded to the survey, 86 were Americans and 88 were Indians. Results revealed that managers' perceptions were influenced by the four cultural dimensions. Managerial perceptions regarding the effectiveness of codes of ethics and the influence of referent groups varied according to their nationality. But, managers from both countries found implicit forms of institutionalizing ethics, such as organizational systems, culture, and leadership to be more effective in raising the ethical climate of organizations than explicit forms …

India's nonalignment policy attracted the attention of many newly independent countries for it provided an alternative to the existing American and Russian views of the world. This dissertation is an examination of both India's nonalignment policy and the official American reaction to it during the Truman-Eisenhower years. Indian nonalignment should be defined as a policy of noncommitment towards rival power blocs adopted with a view of retaining freedom of action in international affairs and thereby influencing the issue of war and peace to India's advantage. India maintained that the Cold War was essentially a European problem. Adherence to military allliances , it believed, would increase domestic tensions and add to chances of involvement in international war, thus destroying hopes of socio-economic reconstruction of India. The official American reaction was not consistent. It varied from president to president, from issue to issue, and from time to time. India's stand on various issues of international import and interest to the United States such as recognition of the People's Republic of China, the Korean War, the Japanese peace treaty of 1951, and the Hungarian revolt of 1956, increased American concern about and dislike of nonalignment. Many Americans in high places regraded India's nonalignment …

This study presents an overview of Indo-Soviet relations in light of the U.S.-U.S.S.R. competition for a favorable position in relations with India. Both superpowers consider better relations with India to be crucial to the furtherance of their interests in the Indian Ocean region. The study provides background information on Indo-Soviet diplomacy, with emphasis on the period 1968-1976m during which the Soviets gained their greatest influence in the region. This period also represents the nadir of Indo-American relations, although India formally maintained a policy of non-alignment with either of the two superpowers. Conclusions are drawn about India's role as a non-aligned nation, its relations with the superpowers, and its quest for regional influence.