The Role of Human Resource Development in Ethical Leadership Development: A Path–
Goal Theory of Leadership Approach
Emmanuel Osafo
Organizational Leadership Policy and Development Department
University of Minnesota–Twin Cities
osafo004@umn.edu
Full Manuscript
Copyright © 2014 Emmanuel Osafo
Abstract
Purpose
This paper seeks to postulate the need for HRD researchers and practitioners to pay more
attention to ethical leadership development as a resource for curbing workplace deviant
behaviors. Emphasis on ethical leadership development is hypothesized to help create an
ethically charged work environment where organizational members appraise involvement in
ethical behavior as a conviction rather than a prescribed rule to follow. The Path–Goal
Theory of Leadership is presented as an indisputable guide to enhance the development of
programs for ethical leadership development. Effective application of this theory is projected
to achieve the much needed outcome of reducing workplace deviant behaviors and further
strengthen HRD’s presence and relevance in organizations.
Method
The method for this conceptual paper was a review of literature from multiple databases from
the University of Minnesota Electronic Library.
Implications
Utilizing ideas presented by the Path–Goal Theory of Leadership in conjunction with
Sternberg’s eight step ethical guide is suggested as one best way to develop programs aimed
at achieving ethical leadership development goals.
Implications for HRD Research
Future HRD research should conduct a case study into the possibility of using ideas from the
Path–Goal Theory of Leadership to identify ways to improve ethical leadership development
programs.
Implications for HRD Practice
To maintain a leadership role in ensuring organizational effectiveness, HRD professionals are
encouraged to focus on the Path–Goal Theory of Leadership to enhance organizational ethical
leadership development efforts.
Keywords: ethical leadership development, HRD, Path–Goal Theory of Leadership
There is a history of interest in promoting organizational citizenship behavior (OCB)
within organizations. Early researchers studied organizational citizenship behavior in the
realms of willingness to cooperate (Bernard, 1968); helping co–workers with job related
problems and promoting a tolerable work climate (Bateman & Organ, 1983); and, altruism
and compliance (Smith, Organ, & Near, 1983), among other things. Organ (1988) defined
organizational citizenship behavior as, "individual behavior that is discretionary, not directed
or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promote the
effective functioning of the organization" (p. 4). Many researchers have used the OCB
concept to examine leadership and other work related behaviors including, transformational
leadership (Cho & Dansereau, 2010), charismatic leadership and work engagement
(Babcock–Roberson & Strickland, 2010), and perceptions of organizational virtuousness and
happiness (Rego, Ribeiro, & Cunha, 2010). According to Organ (1997), in aggregate, OCBs
should contribute to organizational effectiveness.
Nonetheless, in spite of numerous efforts to promote positive work behaviors,
organizations continuously suffer losses resulting from employees' involvement in conducts
that in aggregate contribute negatively to overall organizational effectiveness. Minor offences
such as employee theft which is difficult to detect is widely estimated to cost organizations
about $50 billion annually from US businesses, and involves three of four employees
(Mather, 2004). The cost of employee misconduct is even more impactful when it involves
character failures of people in executive ranks with notable examples of scandals that
astounded popular organizations such as Enron, WorldCom, and Mudoff's Wall Street
investment firms. For example, the Brookings Institute estimated that the Enron and
WorldCom scandals alone cost the U.S. economy between $37 and $42 billion (Graham,
Litan, & Sukhtankar, 2002). Other examples include unethical conduct of sexual harassment
and racial discrimination incidences that resulted in corporations such as Mitsubishi Motor
Manufacturing of America, Ford Motor Company, and Coca Cola paying over 230 million
dollars in lawsuit settlements (Odom, Ferguson, Golightly-Jenkins, & Alacon, 2003).
In other instances, it is more difficult to put pecuniary value on costs associated with
occurrences of felonious conduct in organization, for example, the prisoner abuse at Abu
Ghraib, and the slaying of civilians in Haditha and Mahmoudiya, (Entman, 2006). Other
issues regarding character failure in civilian branches of government, including the sexual
misconduct of a president, or the perjury conviction of a vice president’s Chief–of–Staff
(Harriger, 2008) are worth noting. Regardless of the costs associated with employee
misconduct, the frequency of these events stoke interest in the ethics and integrity or the lack
thereof, that underlie these behaviors and ways in which this knowledge can be used to
manage the related risks to organizations (Lucas & Friedrich, 2005; Hollenbeck, 2009).
Some previous studies on unethical conduct (for e.g. Wulfson, 1998) found that
between 1995 and 1997, business owners comprised about 30 percent of criminal character
shown on television. Another study by the Society of Chartered Life Underwriters &
Chartered Financial Consultants indicated that, about 48 percent of managers and business
executives admitted to making decisions of unethical or illegal dimensions (Wulfson, 1998).
In addition, about 57 percent of managers expressed concern about the increasing pressures to
participate in activities that they consider unethical as the years go by (Wulfson, 1998). It is
even more disquieting to know, as indicated by Odom et al. (2003), that almost 30 percent of
employees are certain of their organizations’ deliberate disregard for ethics and engagement
in activities that violate the law.
Surprisingly, the people who involve in these unethical behaviors have previously
presented themselves as good and honest people, at least during the recruitment process into
their current positions. This reminds me of popular Lewin’s equation of B=f(P+E), thus,
behavior is a function of an individual's personality and the environment. This leads to the
question, were these negative behaviors influenced by the individual's personality or the
environment in which they function? This question can be answered appropriately by
conducting an empirical research into the issues. However, this work is a theoretical paper
that focuses on how an ethically charged environment can provide the impetus for leadership
development that seeks to espouse ethical values and practices even when the prevailing
conditions require otherwise. Exhibiting behaviors related to high morality and integrity,
leaders are likely to arouse followers desire to be deeply commitment and consciousness
about how increased effort lead to goal achievement (Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner,
Wernsing, & Peterson, 2008). Over time, followers discover themselves with regards to the
leaders’ internalized values and perspectives, and convict themselves to the related guiding
principles to facilitate their development and consequent ethical performance outcomes
(Walumbwa, et al, 2008).
Purpose
The purpose of this work is to identify ways by which human resource development
(HRD) professionals can apply theory to enhance ethical leadership development and help to
promote positive behaviors at the workplace. In my view, putting theories such as the Path–
Goal–Theory of Leadership into practice to help promote ethics as the core of leadership
development is critical in ensuring an upsurge in employee involvement in OCBs and a
reduction in character failure at the executive level. To be more effective than previous
ethical leadership development approaches, HRD professionals should position themselves as
leaders in the ethical leadership development drive by setting challenging ethical goals,
providing clear directives and the needed support in achieving these goals, and active
participation in ethical leadership development goal achievement through their demonstration
behaviors that are inherently virtuous.
Ardichvili and Mandescheid (2008) did a comprehensive examination of emerging
practices in leadership development and asserted that, “HRD professionals will best serve the
community of scholars and the ‘world of work’ by challenging current practices in leadership
development and by looking at new approaches that are not always aligned with what we
perceive as ‘common’ to leadership development practices” (p. 628). In congruence with this
assumption, ideas from Robert House's Path Goal Theory of Leadership will be utilized to
discuss new ways by which HRD can play a leadership role in ethical leadership
development, and promote workplace ethics to help solve some of the contemporary perilous
problems that characterize many organizations today and to inspire palpable ethical conduct.
Literature Review
Ethical Leadership Defined
Many attempts have been made in the leadership community of scholars to define
ethical leadership. However, the complexity surrounding the construct, “ethical leadership”,
has inspired diversity of thoughts in formulating a definition. For example, drawing from
philosophy and empirical research, Bass and Steidlmeier (1999) asserted that, the ethics of
leadership involves three main characteristics; “the moral character of the leader; the ethical
legitimacy of the values embedded in the leaders vision, articulation, and program which
followers either embrace or reject; and the morality of the processes of social ethical choice
and action that leaders and followers engage in and collectively pursue” (p. 182). These
scholars further asserted that, ethical analysis depends on the leadership modalities used in
defining ethical leadership (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999).
Brown, Treviño, and Harrison (2005) employed a more descriptive approach to define
ethical leadership as “the demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct through personal
actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct to followers
through two–way communication, reinforcement, and decision–making” (Brown et al., 2005,
p. 120). These researchers posited that, normatively appropriate suggests that people who are
observed as ethical leaders conduct themselves in a manner considered by their followers as
honest, trustworthy, fair, caring, and are seen as authentic and dependable role models
(Brown et al., 2005). Ethical leadership inspires followers to expend extra effort to achieve
task performance goals and exhibit positive work behaviors through enhanced job autonomy
and task significance (Piccolo, Greenbaum, Hartog, & Folger, 2010).
Cuilla (2013) did a comprehensive analysis of ethical leadership by drawing from
philosophy, history, religion, and the social sciences, and argued that, ascribing ethical
qualities to a leaders is not adequate in describing a leader as ethical. According to Cuilla
(2013), “a complete picture of what constitute ethical leadership requires both descriptive
studies and analysis of leaders based on a broader set of moral norms and philosophical
questions concerning the nature of morality in leadership” (p. xxx). In discussing complex
concepts such as ethical leadership, it is important to understand the two fundamental
components of the concept, ethics and leadership. Ethics in organizations and leadership
development will be discussed separately next.
Ethics in organizations
Since Hatcher and Aragon (2000) work on HRD and ethics, great interest has been
shown by HRD scholars in ethics research. A good amount of space in major HRD journals
have been used for publications in the ethics topical area. This can be measured by the
amount of ethics related publications that have featured in major HRD journals, such as
Human Resource Development Quarterly, Human Resource Development International,
Human Resource Development Review, and Advances in Developing Human Resources. In
spite of the enormous attention directed at ethics research, literatures that directly pontificate
ethics as the foundation for leadership development is scarce.
Foote and Ruona (2008) noted that, “although some ethics initiatives are better that
none, some scholars forward the notion that organizations should think beyond just
compliance–based ethics and adopt a strategy that focuses on sustaining ethics in the
organization” (p. 292). Thus, even though institutionalizing ethics is good, further strategies
to ensure that organizational members are ingrained in ethical conduct beyond merely
complying with ethical codes is imperative. Foote and Ruona (2008) concluded that among
other things, leadership is key to institutionalization of ethics in HRD. Garavan and McGuire
(2010) identified strategic partnership, one of four leadership roles performed by HRD
professionals, as focusing more on ethics. According to Garavan and McGuire (2010), HRD
can initiate and ensure that issues related to ethics, corporate social responsibility (CSR), and
corporate sustainability gain grounds within the organization through policies and practices
that seeks to develop the capabilities of the organization’s leadership to achieve such goals.
Earlier researchers such as, Fudge and Schlacter (1999) created a three–step
expectancy based method to help foster a motivational environment for ethical conduct.
According to Fudge and Schlacter (1999), defining and communicating behavior
expectations, determining the performance rewards employees value most, and linking the
organization’s desired behaviors to employees’ desired rewards will help an ethically charged
work environment. Fudge and Schlacter (1999) suggested ethics training as the means to
implement their method within the organization.
In spite of efforts to inspire ethical conduct in employees, some research have
indicated that, more often, employees view ethics training with cynicism because, ethics is
learned as part of the individual’s developmental process rather than by instruction (Odom,
Ferguson, Golightly-Jenkins, & Alarcon, 2003). Odom et al. (2003) have reiterated the
scarcity of ethics educational methods, designs, and curriculum, in academic institutions.
Odom et al. (2003) have suggested continuous assessment of organizational structure and
leadership in relation to ethical climate and the willingness to establish change that support
ethical workplace behavior as one way to ensure the effectiveness of ethics programs.
Leadership development
Leadership has been defined as “a process whereby an individual influences a group
of individuals to achieve a common goal” (Northouse, 2012, p. 5). McCauley and his
colleagues at the Center for Creative Leadership distinguished between leadership
development and leader development. According to McCauley, Moxley, and Van Velsor
(1998), leadership development entails expanding the collective capacity of organizational
members to engage effectively in leadership roles and processes. "Leader development on the
other hand is the extension of a person capacity to be effective in leadership roles and
processes" (McCauley, & Van Velsor, 2004, p. 2). These researchers defined leadership roles
as those that help in establishing guidelines, creating alignment, and ensuring continuous
commitment among a group of people who share a common work goal (McCauley, & Van
Velsor, 2004). Leadership development emphasizes relationship building related to trust and
commitment, broadening social systems, and directing efforts to ensure teams and
organizational effectiveness (McCauley &Van Velsor, 2004). This work will focus on
leadership development.
Scholars and researchers interested in leadership studies have focused on developing
good and effective leadership skills. But there is an exigent question that needs to be
answered, thus, is good and effective leadership synonymous with ethical leadership? In an
attempt to answer the question "what is good leadership”, Ciulla (2013) made an interesting
argument which was referred to as the Hitler Problem (p. xxvi). According to Ciulla (2013)
Hitler can be said to have executed good leadership skills under some circumstances for his
effectiveness, and in other instances bad leadership skills for his involvement in some acts
that are grossly regarded as unethical. The numerous instances of scandalous acts involving
people in leadership positions call for a critical look at the ethical dimension of leadership
development.
HRD, Ethics, and Leadership
Human resource development emphasis on leading responsible organizations can be
accomplished if HRD scholars and practitioners position themselves as leaders seeking to
inspire ethical behavior among their subordinates. Auspiciously, there is agreement among
HRD scholars regarding the importance of ethics to HRD research and practice. Thus, some
HRD scholars have called for a critical look at various dimensions of ethics in the field (e.g.
Hatcher, 2002). The need for ethics in HRD was expressed passionately by Hatcher (2002) in
his book, Ethics and HRD. According to Hatcher (2002), “being ethical, moral, and caring
about people and the environment is daunting in a world filled with conflict and hatred on a
global scale” (p. 3).
Other HRD scholars have made a clarion call for a code of ethics for HRD research and
practice (Hatcher & Aragon, 2000), institutionalization of ethics in HRD (Foote & Reouna,
2008), and the need for ethical business cultures (Ardichvili & Jondle, 2009). To this effect, a
drive for moral, ethical, and socially responsible leadership development is inevitable. Also,
research has indicated that ethical leadership has a positive relationship with employee job
performance (Bello, 2012). Hatcher (2002) stated that, “companies without a moral compass
will be left adrift in a sea of organizations charting an ethical course” (p. 3).
Accepting ethics as an inherent conviction can be more challenging than merely
following rules and codes that are established to guide behavior in organizations. Thus,
ethical behavior as an implicit value requires extensive education and commitment that go
beyond conventional knowledge of ethics. Because of the complexity of ethical behavior,
many work on ethical leadership appear more speculative than realistic. Therefore, those
involved in HRD will be well served if they are able to develop a model that presents a
measurable step by step guide to ethical leadership development.
Contributing to the ethical leadership literature, Sternberg (2009) asserted that, it requires
a manifold of progressive steps for individuals to behave ethically. Sternberg (2009)
developed an eight step model to guide researchers and practitioners interested in ethical
leadership behaviors. According to Sternberg (2009), ethical behavior requires:
•
recognizing an event to which to react
•
defining the event as having an ethical dimension
•
deciding the significance of the ethical dimension
•
taking responsibility for generating an ethical solution to the problem
•
imagining what abstract ethical rule(s) might apply to the problem
•
deciding how these abstract ethical rules actually apply to the problem so as to
suggest a concrete solution
•
enacting the ethical solution, meanwhile possibly counteracting contextual forces that
might lead one not to act in an ethical manner
•
deal with possible repercussions of having acted in what one considers an ethical
manner. (p. 21).
Even though these steps seems very easy to follow, it requires more than ordinary
training and development effort to bring it to fruition. Human resource development
professionals can capture this opportunity to fortify their relevance in organizations by
developing strategies to ensure organizational members understand, are committed to, and
conduct themselves ethically beyond what is outlined in their organization’s ethical codes. In
conjunction with Sternberg’s Eight Step Guide, the Path–Goal Theory of Leadership is
presented in this paper to guide HRD professionals’ desire to develop a more constructive
model for ethical leadership development.
Method
This is a conceptual paper based on the review of literature in the topical area of
ethical leadership development, human resource development, leadership, and other closely
related concepts. The literature review covers a broad range of perspectives on the concepts
of interest. Relevant literature was reviewed from human resource development journals,
business scholarly journals, and other materials that provide significant information on the
topic. Literatures were identified by searching through multiple online databases from the
electronic library of a large size Midwestern research university in the United States.
Significant amounts of literatures were reviewed from the Human Resource Development
Review, Human Resource International, Human Resource Quarterly, Advances in Human
Resource Development, and other HRD, business and social science scholarly works.
In addition, some literatures were identified from the Journal of Business Ethics, The
Leadership Quarterly, International Journal of Training and Development, Performance
Improvement Quarterly, and Asia Pacific Human Resources. Other related materials and
online books identified from the database were reviewed. Key words such as ethics,
leadership, organizational citizenship behaviors, and human resource development were used
in the literature search. In this literature review, each of the concepts of interest as, thus,
ethics, ethical leadership, and leadership development, were defined, and ideas from the
Path–Goal Theory of Leadership were used to discuss the role of HRD in ethics and
leadership development.
Theoretical Framework
The Path–Goal Theory of Leadership
The Path–Goal Theory was developed by House (1971) to explain the effect of
leadership behavior on subordinates’ motivation, satisfaction, and performance. One major
goal of the theory was to explain the extent to which leadership behaviors are instrumental in
subordinates performance enhancement and job satisfaction. The theory was advanced by
House and Mitchell (1974), who identified in specific terms four types of behaviors that
define leadership effectiveness. These are, directive, supportive, participative, and
achievement oriented leadership behaviors. The basic assumptions underlying the Path–Goal
Theory of Leadership is, acceptability of the leader’s behavior by subordinates, and the
leader’s ability to motivate subordinates (House & Mitchell, 1974). Thus, it is incumbent on
leadership to show the way and inspire subordinates to performance on the job. Leadership
removes roadblocks and pitfalls, clarifies the path along which subordinates' performance
goals are achieved, and the reward systems that are attached to good performance. Thus,
leadership has foresight into the right ways by which organizational performance goals can
be achieved, and expend effort to direct and support subordinates along a specified path to
achieve such goals.
One important objective of the Path–Goal Theory of Leadership is to clarify how
leadership behaviors aggregate to inspire subordinates to exert extra effort to accomplish their
assigned performance goals. Thus, leadership have a duty to, direct, support, and motivate
subordinates to be more effective and achieve their performance goals. In the proceeding
sections, each of the four assumptions of the theory will be examined and a relationship with
HRD’s leadership role in organizations established. Furthermore, the potency of the Path–
Goal Theory of Leadership to enhance ethical leadership development efforts within
organizations will be ascertained.
Achievement Orientation Behaviors
Under achievement orientation leadership style, the leader sets challenging goals for
subordinates with the expectation that they will perform at the highest level of their ability
because, the leader has confidence in subordinates’ competence to achieve these performance
goals (House & Mitchell, 1974). More often, effort is directed at achieving work goals or
self–improvement, when the targeted task is complex. Under the achievement orientation
leadership style, the leader encourages subordinates to perform to the best of their abilities
even under challenging circumstances.
Directive Leadership Behaviors
As indicated by House and Mitchell (1974), directive path–goal leadership is that
aspect of leadership that provides psychological support for subordinates. Thus, directive
leaders assign work and provide information to guide employees regarding how their
assigned duties will be completed. Directive leadership clarify rules and procedures, and
provide detailed instructions to guide subordinates work. Another important attribute of
directive leadership is, demonstrating indulgent and non–punitive behaviors that help to
reduce role ambiguity, clarifying the relationship between increased effort and goal
attainment, and rewarding for good performance (House & Mitchell, 1974). Directive
leadership has been found to correlate positively with complex ambiguous task and
negatively with subordinates’ engagement in clear tasks (House & Mitchell, 1974).
Supportive Leadership Behaviors
This form of leadership behaviors consider subordinates' needs by showing concern for
their welfare and creating a friendly work environment (House & Mitchell, 1974). According
to House and Mitchell (1974), supportive leadership behaviors are directed at creating a
psychologically charged work environment that helps to improve subordinates' self-esteem,
reduce stress, and ensure cordial relationship among subordinates. House (1971) asserted
that, supportive leadership behaviors increase the valence associated with goal–directed effort
that is exerted towards work and improves job performance. In congruence with the views
expressed by some researchers regarding authentic leadership, ethical leadership should seek
to influence their followers’ behaviors by providing support aimed at inspiring followers’
self–determination of what behaviors are of ethical magnitude and serve the best interest of
their organization (e.g. Ilies, Morgeson, & Nahrgang, 2005).
Participative Leadership Behaviors
Participative leadership behaviors are behaviors that allow subordinates to contribute to
decision making. Thus, participative leadership seek the views of subordinates and consider
them when making decisions (House & Mitchell, 1974). As indicated in House (1996),
participative leadership behaviors generate four outcomes, thus, clarify path–goal
relationships between effort and work–goal attainment, and work–goal attainment and
extrinsic rewards; increases the congruence between subordinate goals and organizational
goals; allows subordinates to make contributions to decision making regarding their assigned
goals, and gives subordinates greater autonomy and ability to pursue their intended
performance objectives, and are therefore inspired to exert greater effort in attaining
performance goals (House & Mitchell, 1974).
Overall, participative leadership behaviors help to increase the amount of pressure
needed to achieve organizational performance goals through increased subordinate
involvement, increasing social pressure from peers, and commitment. Under this leadership
style, subordinates are more likely to choose goals with the highest valence since they have a
say in decision making regarding their task goal choices (House & Mitchell, 1974). Active
participation can potentially help leaders to identify the causes of behavioral outcomes of
employees and help employees to understand what choices are essential to ethical goal
achievement.
Applying the Path–Goal Theory of Leadership to HRD
To be leaders in ethics education and practice, HRD scholars and practitioners need to
expend time and resources into developing a programs that seek to help organizational
members to inculcate ethical thinking into their everyday living. These programs should be
built on research aimed at identifying the universal set of behaviors that constitute ethical
conduct and how these sets of behaviors align with context specific demands. This will
provide the impetus for HRD scholars and practitioners to set ethical goals that are
challenging but achievable under specified conditions.
Human resource development professionals can maintain their relevance in
organizations by taking the lead in developing a model that seeks to inspire organizational
members to accept ethical behavior as an inherent responsibility rather than a mere explicit
rule that needs to be observed for continuous stay in the organization. It should however be
noted that, this task requires cutting–edge thinking that goes beyond the conventional
characteristics that define HRD; training and development, career development, and
organizational development. Adopting and utilizing the ideas presented by the Path–Goal
Theory of Leadership is one best way for HRD to accomplish this goal. If applied
appropriately to training and development, organizational members will be inclined to
incorporate ethics as an inherent conviction and a responsibility that require them to behave
ethically even where the prevailing conditions demand otherwise.
Setting Challenging But Achievable Ethical Goals
To be able to motivate organizational members to behave ethically, HRD
professionals have the duty to set ethical goals that are challenging but achievable. Ethical
goals should spell out the behavioral requirements of the organization and give clear reasons
why organizational members should uphold ethical principles as their personal conviction
rather than a set of prescribed rules that guide their behavior. Thus, organizational members
should be made to accept ethics as a way of life rather than as rules that need to be followed.
Challenging goals have been identified as having strong relation with behavior that increase
performance (Locke & Latham, 2006).
Even though setting challenging goals have been found to inspire behaviors that
increase performance, Locke and Latham (2006) indicated that, “focusing on reaching a
specific performance outcome on a new, complex task can lead to tunnel vision” (p. 266).
Therefore, care need to be taken not to set task that have the potential to direct more attention
towards ethical goals that focus on overt behaviors and denigrate intrinsic attitude to behave
ethically to the background. Also, ethical goals should be seen as a means to success rather
than a threat to organizational members. Locke and Latham (2006) have indicated that,
complex goals that are viewed as a threat rather than a useful effort to achieve success may
result in poor performance.
Giving Clear and Detailed Directives for Ethical Goals
Achieving ethical leadership development goals require those involved in HRD
research and practice to give clear directives to organizational members regarding the need to
accept ethics as their personal values and observe them under all circumstances. Bang,
Fuglesang, Ovesen, and Eilertsen, (2010) defined goal clarity as “the degree to which each
group member understands why the issue is important or relevant to discuss in the
management meeting, what the issue presenter wants to achieve by bringing up the issue, and
what he or she wants the group to focus on” (p. 254). Clarity of instruction in a directive
manner will more likely result in greater understanding of the relevance and focus of ethical
goals.
Seidel, Rimmele, and Prenzel (2005) conducted a study of goal clarity and coherence
on student learning outcomes and found a positive relationship between goal clarity and
coherence on students’ perception of supportive learning conditions. Furthermore, positive
effect of goal clarity and coherence on self–directed learning, intense organization of learning
content, and competence development were identified (Seidel et al., 2005).
HRD professionals should direct the path by providing the needed information and
clarifying the path to ethical goal achievement. Some researchers have identified goal clarity
and focused communication as having a positive relationship with team member relationship
quality (Bang et al., 2010). Directive leadership help to remove roadblocks and pitfalls that
can potentially hinder organizational members’ ability to identify certain situations as having
ethical dimensions that require action. To be more effective, this action should be driven by
an implicit desire to promote behaviors that seek the general good of the organization under
various circumstances. Directive leaders are effective when they position themselves in a way
that inspire organizational members to trust their ability and follow their directions with
passion. Trust in leadership has been found to affect various subordinate behaviors including
commitment to leader decisions, set goals and belief that information provided by a leader is
accurate (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002).
Providing Support for Ethical Goal Achievement
In addition to setting challenging goals and giving clear directions, providing support
in the form of creating a positive psychologically charged work environment enhances the
self–esteem, of those involved in ethical leadership development activities. Organizational–
Based Self–Esteem has been found to relate positively with work engagement and its
consequent performance outcomes (e.g. Pierce & Gardner, 2004; Mauno, Kinnunen, &
Ruokolainen, 2007). In addition, perceived leader support in the form of appropriate goal
setting, recognition of individual contribution, and providing constructive feedback among
other things have been identified as contributing to enhanced employee engagement, and
creativity (Oldham & Cummings, 1996; Amabile, Schatzel, Moneta, & Kramer, 2004). Also,
providing support in terms of reading materials and case studies of empirically examined
workplace ethical behaviors will help to increase participants’ understanding of ethics beyond
ethical guidelines or codes that are required for academic success or compliance at the work
place.
Stone (2006) did an overview of the New Zealand’s Target Zero (TZ) demonstration
project and the evaluation methods. The result indicated that, leadership support
communicates top–level commitment to organizational goal achievement more effectively to
organizational members than policy statements (Stone, 2006). HRD professionals involved in
ethical leadership development activities are more likely to be perceived as supportive leaders
who inspire organizational members to exert more effort to achieve ethical goals when they
set ethical goals that seeks to achieve the general good, allow organizational members to
participate in ethical decision making, recognize their contribution, and provide constructive
feedback.
Participating in Ethical Goal Achievement
Furthermore, HRD professionals should lead the way by participating in ethical
conducts, thus, conducts that seek to do good rather than evil. When leaders uphold in high
esteem the principles of honesty, integrity, and accountability, organizational members are
more likely to express no doubt emulating them as dependable role models. Honesty,
integrity, and accountability have been found to relate positively with ethical organizational
climate (Beu & Buckley, 2004). HRD professionals can help achieve leadership ethical
development goals when they make organizational members understand and participate in
ethical decision making and inspire them to align organizational ethical goals to their
personal values and beliefs. Understanding and participating in ethical decision making has
been found to influence students’ future ethical stance in their future work roles (Ferrell &
Fraedrich, 2014). This helps organizational members to understand the consequences for
engaging in ethical behaviors or otherwise. Certainly, organizational members are more
likely to accept ethics as a responsibility rather than an imposition when they are implicitly
inclined to place a higher value on the positive outcomes of ethical conduct and abhor
unethical behaviors. This goal can be more effective through shared participation in ethical
decision making.
Implications for HRD Research and Practice and Limitations
The importance of ethical leadership development to HRD research and practice is
undoubtable. This can be ascertained by the quantum of resources invested in measures
aimed at increasing leadership and employees’ involvement in organizational citizenship
behaviors. However, deviant behaviors continue to threaten the workplace at multiple levels;
from top management to lower level employees.
In the past organizations resorted to the use of personality tests for selection and
placement with the hope that people with questionable characters would be prevented from
pervading the workplace. However, some research (for e.g. Guion & Gottier, 1965) disputed
the validity of some of these personality tests for selection purposes long ago. Other more
contemporary researchers (for e.g. Morgeson, Campion, Dipboye, Hollenbeck, Murphy, &
Schmitt, 2007) have raised concerns about faking in personality tests. In other contexts,
organizations have used ethics training to inspire organizational members to refrain from
engaging in counterproductive work behaviors. However, some researchers, (e.g. McKendall,
DeMarr, & Jones–Rikkers, 2002) have expressed concern about the manner in which ethics
training focus on compliance–based ethics, rather than training people to be inherently
inspired to behave ethically.
The shortfalls identified with the previously used methods for ethics training in
organizations provide an opportunity for HRD professionals to step in and develop a more
effective method to enhance ethical leadership development. In conjunction with Sternberg’s
Eight Step Ethical Model, HRD professionals should utilize the ideas presented by the Path–
Goal Theory of Leadership to develop a more comprehensive model to enhance the ethical
leadership development process. Recognizing an event as having significant ethical
dimensions, and taking responsibility to generate solutions that is solid enough to sustain
ethical behavior requires knowledge beyond merely following rules. The proposed model will
comprise of four main dimensions in congruence with the dimensions outlined in the Path–
Goal Theory of Leadership, combined with two of the Eight Steps Guide at each stage.
Implications for Research
Considering the weaknesses identified with models previously used for ethical
leadership development, HRD professionals interested in the ethical leadership development
topical area should use research methods such as a case studies to help answer questions
related to what alternative models are available to enhance ethical leadership development.
For example, future HRD research can look into answering questions such as; how does the
Path–Goal Theory of Leadership applied to ethical leadership development? Future HRD
research should conduct a case study into the possibility of using ideas from the Path–Goal
Theory of Leadership to identify ways to improve ethical leadership development programs.
Questions such as; how does leadership support motivate you to behave ethically, or, what is
the effect of leadership participation on your desire to behave ethically, can be used to obtain
valuable information from organizational members regarding the usefulness of the Path–Goal
Theory of Leadership in ethical leadership development. The information gathered can be
used to develop a framework to guide the usage of the Path–Goal Theory of Leadership to
enhance programs geared towards ethical leadership development.
Implication for HRD Practice
Based on research findings and other experiences, HRD practitioners can present
scenarios related to ethical decision making and allow employees to discuss and present their
views. This will help HRD practitioners to ascertain the degree of congruence between
employees’ ethical stance and organizational ethical goals. The information obtained will
help direct their path in developing ethical leadership programs that focus on utilizing the
dimensions of the Path–Goal Theory of Leadership to ensure effectiveness. For example,
challenging but achievable goals will then be set to find ethical solutions to the problem.
HRD professionals should strive to establish the significance of the problem and take
responsibility to provide clear directives to arrive at a solution. Also, the level of support
needed to find concrete solutions to the ethical problem must be determined and made
available for use by participants. Furthermore, possible counteracting contextual forces that
might sway the individual’s attention from indulging in ethical conduct should be identified
and neutralized to prevent contamination. Steps should then be taken to remove these pitfalls
and roadblocks through collaboration and active participation in ethical decision making.
If executed carefully, organizational members involved in ethical leadership
development activities will be inspired to participate in these activities with greater self–
interest and put more effort into achieving the required ethical goals than if they are asked to
follow prescribed ethical rules. To maintain a leadership role in ensuring organizational
effectiveness, HRD professionals are encouraged to adopt approaches that seek to enhance
ethical leadership development among other things. HRD professionals should expend more
effort to ensure continuous modification of their ethical development programs to suit
specific contexts, whilst relentlessly making sure that the underlying tenets of the Path–Goal
Theory of leadership are not ignored.
Limitations
One major limitation of this paper is that, it is strictly a conceptual paper based on
reviewed literature on the topic. It should therefore be noted that there might be some
suggestions that seem more abstract than concrete, however, any research designed in line
with the suggestions made in this paper will achieve the needed ethical leadership
developmental outcomes. It is the hope of the researcher that funding will be secured for the
conduct of empirical research to confirm this claims made in this paper sooner than later.
Conclusion
In an epoch of increasing competition and continuous change, HRD professionals have
a duty to help organizations to be efficient and resilient. One way to ensure efficiency is to
design programs that aim at reducing counterproductive work behaviors and increasing
organizational citizenship behaviors. Enhancing ethical leadership development programs to
achieve the needed results is critical in HRDs to ensure organizational efficiency. These
programs should aim at inspiring organizational members involved in ethical leadership
development programs to inherently view behaving ethically as a responsibility rather than
merely going through ethics training. One way to achieve this goal is to create an ethically
charged work environment defined by trust, accountability, integrity, and respect. Directing
more resources into ethics research, developing comprehensive programs that embrace and
explain the importance of ethics to individual and group work roles, and leading the way as
ethical role models will more likely motivate and increase organizational members’ desire to
engage in ethical conduct, irrespective of the demands presented by change and competition
that may require them to behave otherwise under certain circumstances.
Utilizing the ideas presented by the Path–Goal Theory of Leadership is one best way to
achieve success in this bid. HRD professionals are therefore encouraged to focus on this
theory in their ethical leadership development endeavors. Effective application of the Path–
Goal Theory of Leadership in conjunction with Sternberg’s Eight Step approach to ethical
leadership development programs will help announce and maintain the inexorable relevance
of HRD in organizational life. Thus, recognizing an event to which to react to and defining
the event as having an ethical dimension will be followed by setting challenging but
achievable goals to ensure inspire employees to expend more effort to achieve such ethical
goals. Further examination of the significance of the problem and generation of solutions will
require leadership support. Setting rules that might apply to the problem solving strategies
and deciding how these rules will apply to ensure lasting solution calls for collaboration and
active participation of both leadership and employees at the other levels. Finally, enacting
solution to the problem and sanctioning the consequences for unethical conduct, whilst
making sure that contextual forces that might inspire people to violate ethical behavior
standards require direction from leadership.
References
Amabile, T. M., Schatzel, E. A., Moneta, G. B., & Kramer, S. J. (2004). Leader behaviors
and the
work environment for creativity: Perceived leader support. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1),
pp. 5-32.
Ardichvili, A., & Jondle, D. (2009). Integrative literature review: ethical business cultures: a
literature review and implications for HRD. Human Resource Development Review, 8(2), pp.
223-244.
Ardichvili, A., & Manderscheid, S. V. (2008). Emerging Practices in Leadership
Development An Introduction. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10(5), pp. 619631.
Babcock-Roberson, M. E., & Strickland, O. J. (2010). The relationship between charismatic
leadership, work engagement, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Journal of
Psychology, 144(3), pp. 313-326.
Bang, H., Fuglesang, S. L., Ovesen, M. R., & Eilertsen, D. E. (2010). Effectiveness in top
management group meetings: The role of goal clarity, focused communication, and learning
behavior. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 51(3), pp. 253-261.
Barnard, C. I. (1968). The functions of the executive. (11), Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Bass, B. M., & Bass, R. (2009). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and
managerial applications. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Bateman, T. S., & Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The
relationship between affect and employee “citizenship”. Academy of Management
Journal, 26(4), pp. 587-595.
Bello, S. M. (2012). Impact of ethical leadership on employee job performance. International
Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(11), pp. 228-236.
Beu, D. S., & Buckley, M. R. (2004). Using accountability to create a more ethical
climate. Human Resource Management Review, 14(1), pp. 67-83.
Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning
perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 97(2), pp. 117–134. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.03.002
Cho, J., & Dansereau, F. (2010). Are transformational leaders fair? A multi-level study of
transformational leadership, justice perceptions, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The
Leadership Quarterly, 21(3), 409-421.
Ciulla, J. B. (2013). Leadership Ethics. Oxford UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: meta-analytic findings and
implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), pp. 611-628.
Entman, R. M. (2006). Punctuating the homogeneity of institutionalized news: Abusing
prisoners at Abu Ghraib versus killing civilians at Fallujah. Political Communication, 23(2),
pp. 215-224.
Ferrell, O. C., & Fraedrich, J. (2014). Business ethics: Ethical decision making & cases.
Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Foote, M. F., & Ruona, W. E. (2008). Institutionalizing ethics: A synthesis of frameworks
and the implications for HRD. Human Resource Development Review, 7(3), pp. 292-308.
Fudge, R. S., & Schlacter, J. L. (1999). Motivating employees to act ethically: An expectancy
theory approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 18(3), pp. 295-304.
Garavan, T. N., & McGuire, D. (2010). Human resource development and society: Human
resource development’s role in embedding corporate social responsibility, sustainability, and
ethics in organizations. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 12(5), pp. 487-507.
Graham, C., Litan, R. E., & Sukhtankar, S. (2002). The bigger they are, the harder they fall:
An estimate of the costs of the crisis in corporate governance. Washington, DC: Brookings
Institution.
Guion R. M., Gottier R. F. (1965). Validity of personality measures in personnel selection.
Personnel Psychology, 18(2), pp. 135-164.
Harriger, K. J. (2008). The Law: Executive Power and Prosecution: Lessons from the Libby
Trial and the US Attorney Firings. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 38(3), pp. 491-505.
Hatcher, T. G. (2002). Ethics and HRD: A new approach to leading responsible
organizations. Basic Books.
Hatcher, T., & Aragon, S. R. (2000). A code of ethics and integrity for HRD research and
practice. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11(2), pp. 179-185.
Hollenbeck, G. P. (2009). Executive selection–What's right… and what's wrong? Industrial
and Organizational Psychology, 2(2), pp. 130-143.
House, R. J. (1971). A path goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science
Quarterly, pp. 321-339.
House, R. J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated
theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), pp. 323-352.
House, R. J. Mitchell (1974). Path goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary
Business, 3, pp. 81-97.
Ilies, R., Morgeson, F. P., & Nahrgang, J. D. (2005). Authentic leadership and eudaemonic
well-being: Understanding leader-follower outcomes. Leadership Quarterly, 16, pp. 373-394.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal-setting theory. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 15(5), pp. 265-268.
Lucas, G. M., & Friedrich, J. (2005). Individual differences in workplace deviance and
integrity as predictors of academic dishonesty. Ethics & Behavior, 15(1), pp. 15-35.
Mather, B. (2004). Employee theft: how to prevent instead of apprehend. Business KnowHow. Retrieved from http://www.businessknowhow.com/manage/employeetheft.htm
[Dowmloaded: 30 September 2014].
Mauno, S., Kinnunen, U., & Ruokolainen, M. (2007). Job demands and resources as
antecedents of work engagement: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 70,
pp. 149-171.
McCauley, C. D., Moxley, R. S., & Van Velsor, E. (1998). The center for creative leadership
handbook of leadership development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
McCauley, C. D., & Van Velsor, E. (2004). The center for creative leadership handbook of
leadership development (29). Hoboken NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
McKendall, M., DeMarr, B., & Jones-Rikkers, C. (2002). Ethical compliance programs and
corporate illegality: Testing the assumptions of the corporate sentencing guidelines. Journal
of Business Ethics, 37(4), pp. 367-383.
Morgeson, F. P., Campion, M. A., Dipboye, R. L., Hollenbeck, J. R., Murphy, K., & Schmitt,
N. (2007). Reconsidering the use of personality tests in personnel selection
contexts. Personnel Psychology, 60(3), pp. 683-729.
Northouse, P. G. (2012). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Odom, L., Ferguson, R., Golightly-Jenkins, C., & Alacon, R. (2003). Ethics Training: Impact
on Corporate Liability. Leadership Review.
Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual
factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), pp. 607-634.
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome.
Lexington, MA: Heath and Com.
Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It's construct clean-up
time. Human Performance, 10(2), pp. 85-97.
Piccolo, R. F., Greenbaum, R., Hartog, D. N. D., & Folger, R. (2010). The relationship
between ethical leadership and core job characteristics. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 31(23), pp. 259-278.
Pierce, J. L., & Gardner, D. G. (2004). Self-esteem within the work and organizational
context: A review of the organization-based self-esteem literature. Journal of
Management, 30(5), 591-622.
Rego, A., Ribeiro, N., & Cunha, M. P. (2010). Perceptions of organizational virtuousness and
happiness as predictors of organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Business
Ethics, 93(2), 215-235.
Seidel, T., Rimmele, R., & Prenzel, M. (2005). Clarity and coherence of lesson goals as a
scaffold for student learning. Learning and Instruction, 15(6), pp. 539-556.
Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its
nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), pp. 653-663.
Sternberg, R. J. (2009). Reflections on ethical leadership. In Morality, ethics, and gifted
minds. Springer US, pp. 19-28.
Stone, L. J. (2006). Limitations of cleaner production programmes as organisational change
agents. II. Leadership, support, communication, involvement and programme design. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 14(1), pp. 15-30.
Wulfson, M. (1998). Rules of the game: Do corporate codes of ethics work? Review of
Business, 20(1), pp. 12-17.
Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008).
Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of
Management, 34(1), 89-126.