Leaders act as mediators between an organization and its employees. They are agents of the organization and have a role model function for their followers. Since leaders play a significant role in motivating ethical behaviour of their subordinates, most scholars have focused on the consequences of leader behaviour on their followers. However, it is more complex and therefore ethical behaviour should be determined in a first step.
Imagine a situation in which someone detects a colleague hiding information about the environmental pollution of a new production process. Is it ethically right to collaborate and be loyal to the colleagues and protect the entire organization? Or is it ethically right to tell the truth to supervisors or the public to protect the environment and a larger society? What about a situation in which someone observes a co-worker manipulating sales numbers that are necessary to achieve group targets? Is it ethically right to collaborate and maintain silence? Or is it ethically right to tell the truth even though group objectives cannot be achieved by being honest? What, if jobs are related to achievement of objects and are possibly cut in case of not obtaining these targets? Imagine a situation in which someone withholds relevant information about a customer to other members of the organization who do not work on the same team. Is it ethically right to deprive these information in order to give an edge to the in-group? Or is it ethically right to share those details across all colleagues who hold a stake in order to improve the overall performance?
What is perceived as ethically right, wrong or desirable differs across cultures, organizations, individuals and situations. In contrast to the leader perspective of previous scholars and considering those differences Fehr, Yam and Dang took a follower-centric perspective on ethical leadership. Within their novel conceptualization of ethical leader perception moralized leader behaviour can entail value consistent behaviour, depending on what is morally relevant to an individual and the organizational culture. If ethical leader behaviour is subject to moral values of an individual or of the organization, it depends on either the organization and the leader’s behaviour or the moral identity of a follower and the leader’s behaviour, if this behaviour is perceived as ethically right or desirable.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. ETHICAL LEADERSHIP IN LITERATURE
3. MORALITY AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF ETHICAL LEADER PERCEPTION
3.1 The conceptualisation of a moral identity
3.2 The process of moralization
4. PRO-ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR AS A RESULT OF MORALIZED LEADER BEHAVIOUR
4.1 The Sanctity/Degradation moral foundation
4.2 The Loyalty/Betrayal moral foundation
4.3 The role of loyalty
4.3.1 Loyalty in leadership
4.3.2 Loyalty in organizations
4.3.3 Loyalty in teams
4.4 Pro-organizational behaviour
5. DEFINITION AND ANTECEDENTS OF UNETHICAL PRO-ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
5.1. Definition of unethical pro-organizational behaviour
5.2. Antecedents of unethical pro-organizational behaviour
5.2.1 Organization
5.2.2 Leader
5.2.3 Team
6. CONSEQUENCES OF UNETHICAL PRO-ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
6.1 Consequences for an organization
6.2 Consequences for a leader
6.3 Consequences for a team
7. IMPLICATIONS FOR ETHICAL LEADERSHIP
8. CONCLUSION
Objectives and Topics
This paper examines how loyalty, as a moral foundation within organizations, influences the occurrence of unethical pro-organizational behaviour. It explores the complex interplay between leadership, organizational culture, and individual moral identity, specifically addressing how employees may engage in unethical conduct to benefit their in-group, organization, or leader.
- The role of moralized leader behaviour in motivating pro-organizational conduct.
- Antecedents of unethical pro-organizational behaviour at the organizational, leadership, and team levels.
- The impact of loyalty as a double-edged sword in professional settings.
- Empirical findings on collaborative corruption and dishonest behaviour in teams.
- Practical implications and ethical leadership strategies to mitigate organizational harm.
Excerpt from the Book
4.3.3 Loyalty in teams
On a team level, individuals are in direct social and economic interaction. Cooperative behaviour, which includes loyalty, is essential for building meaningful (Kameda, et al., 2005; Baumeister & Leary, 1995) and trustful relationships (Rempel, et al., 2001; Kramer, 1999), achieving mutual goals (Rusbult & Van Lange, 2003; Bazerman, et al., 2000; Murnighan, 1992) and strengthening the bonds of the in-group (De Dreu, et al., 2010; Efferson, et al., 2008). With regard to the social exchange theory individuals reciprocate cooperative behaviour of others. This reciprocity is necessary to build up long-term relationships (Rand, et al., 2009; Axelrod & Hamilton, 1981; Dawes, 1980) which are common and necessary in an organizational context. Within a loyal work environment, individuals might hold the belief that they will not be harmed by other in-group members, even if there is an opportunity to take an advantage in doing so (Dooley & Fryxell, 1999). They safeguard the interests of the in-group and maintain a positive outward image (Fehr, et al., 2015).
Within this cooperative environment loyalty strengthens team members’ trustworthiness and encourages both open communication and shared information (Dooley & Fryxell, 1999). Considering asymmetric information in teams there are risks related to relying and dealing with information prepared by other team members, especially in case of dissent opinions. In an environment that is perceived as loyal (and competent) those risks are lower because all in-group members work for a common goal which is ranked higher than an individual’s goals. Simultaneously, transaction costs associated with asymmetric information decrease (Chiles & McMackin, 1996) and team efficiency increases.
Summary of Chapters
1. INTRODUCTION: Introduces the role of leaders as mediators and sets the stage for exploring how moral values and loyalty influence ethical behaviour within organizations.
2. ETHICAL LEADERSHIP IN LITERATURE: Provides a literature review of traditional ethical leadership theories and shifts toward a follower-centric perspective on moralized behaviour.
3. MORALITY AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF ETHICAL LEADER PERCEPTION: Discusses how individual moral identity and the process of moralization shape what followers perceive as ethically desirable leader behaviour.
4. PRO-ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR AS A RESULT OF MORALIZED LEADER BEHAVIOUR: Analyzes the Sanctity/Degradation and Loyalty/Betrayal moral foundations, detailing how loyalty influences behaviour in leadership, organizations, and teams.
5. DEFINITION AND ANTECEDENTS OF UNETHICAL PRO-ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR: Defines unethical pro-organizational behaviour (UPB) and examines how organizational culture, leaders, and team dynamics can foster such conduct.
6. CONSEQUENCES OF UNETHICAL PRO-ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR: Investigates the long-term negative effects of unethical conduct on the organization, the reputation of leaders, and team relationships.
7. IMPLICATIONS FOR ETHICAL LEADERSHIP: Offers practical strategies for management to create an ethical climate and mitigate the risks of unethical behaviour through reward systems and policies.
8. CONCLUSION: Synthesizes the findings and highlights the need for further research on the antecedents of unethical behaviour in collaborative, high-loyalty environments.
Keywords
Ethical leadership, Unethical pro-organizational behaviour, Loyalty, Moral identity, Social identity theory, Moralization, Collaborative corruption, Whistleblowing, Organizational commitment, Leader-Member Exchange, Social exchange theory, Ethical climate, Social exclusion, Pro-group behaviour, Moral foundations.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research paper?
The paper examines the phenomenon of unethical pro-organizational behaviour (UPB), specifically how a culture of loyalty within an organization can inadvertently encourage employees to engage in unethical actions to benefit their group or leader.
What are the central themes explored in the work?
Key themes include the role of ethical leadership, the influence of moral foundations (like Loyalty/Betrayal), the dynamics of team collaboration, and the tension between being loyal to one's group and adhering to broader ethical norms.
What is the core research question?
The research investigates whether a work environment characterized by high loyalty through the organization and leadership actions creates a leeway that encourages unethical conduct performed in the name of the company.
Which scientific methods are utilized in this paper?
The paper relies on a comprehensive literature review of organizational behaviour theories and considers empirical findings from social psychology, specifically the collaborative die-rolling paradigms developed by Weisel and Shalvi to study corruption.
What topics are covered in the main body of the work?
The main body covers the conceptualization of moral identity, the antecedents of UPB across organizational levels, the specific influence of loyalty on decision-making, and the long-term consequences of such unethical behaviour for organizations, leaders, and teams.
Which keywords best characterize this study?
The study is best described by keywords such as Ethical leadership, Unethical pro-organizational behaviour, Loyalty, Moral identity, and Collaborative corruption.
How does the "Self-Focused Pathway" contribute to unethical behaviour?
The self-focused pathway describes how individuals act to maintain their own moral self-regard. If their moral identity is not strongly tied to universal fairness, they may justify unethical acts as consistent with their identity if those acts demonstrate loyalty to their group.
What role does the "Leader-Member Exchange" (LMX) play in this context?
High-quality LMX relationships foster trust and loyalty. While beneficial for performance, this closeness can also increase a follower's willingness to engage in unethical behaviour if they perceive that such behaviour is supported by the leader or serves the leader's goals.
Why might employees choose to whistle-blow despite the potential social cost?
Whistle-blowing is often presented as a conflict between loyalty to peers and fairness to the broader society. The paper notes that whistle-blowing remains a difficult choice because it risks social exclusion from the immediate in-group.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Ilka Büker (Autor:in), 2016, Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior. The Role of Loyalty in Ethical Leadership, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/337490
