Running head: EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
Conceptualizing Employee Unethical Behavior in Organizations:
How HRD Interventions Can Help
Naphat Wuttaphan
Pibulsongkram Rajabhat University
Supavanee Thimthong
Atthaphol Seriwat
National Institute of Development Administration
Gary N. McLean
McLean Global Consulting, Inc.
Corresponding Author:
Naphat Wuttaphan
Pibulsongkram Rajabhat University,
haichumpol, Meaung District
Phisanulok Thailand.
Naphat.wut@hotmail.com
Words: 5,997
Refereed Paper
Stream: Strategic HRD and Performance
1
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
2
Abstract
This literature review identifies the definition of unethical behavior in organizations, factors
that influence unethical behaviors, and unethical behaviors that are likely to be found in
organizations. It then discusses how HRD interventions can be used to reshape unethical
behavior or as a means to prevent violations within organizations. The proposed conceptual
framework was developed on the basis of several ethical theories. The level of exposure to
unethical behavior and moral intensity of HRD interventions must be considered when
choosing appropriate interventions. HRD interventions play a key role in generating several
activities that enhance ethical behavior: rule-based programs (i.e., establishing a code of
conduct, an ethics manual, and a compliance team), values-based programs (i.e., establishing
ethical values and an ethical culture), and dynamic ethics-related training programs.
Keywords: ethics, unethical, behavior, integrity, HRD, interventions
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
3
Conceptualizing Employee Unethical Behavior in Organizations:
How HRD Interventions Can Help
In today’s business world, most organizations prefer to be known in public with
having a good reputation. Establishing a good reputation is easier said than done. Promoting a
company’s reputation usually involves a focus on ethics. The incidences of corporate
scandals, together with the global financial and economic crisis of 2008-2009, brought out
violations of ethics and morals facing large business organizations (Ardichvili & Jondle
2012). These violations are generally derived from people’s wrongdoing. Unethical
employees do something that is against the rules and regulations of the organization or
society intentionally or unintentionally. It could harm people or organizations in financial and
non-financial terms, such as reputation and emotional costs of unethical behavior (Den
Nieuwenboer 2008; Trevino, Weaver & Reynolds 2006).
Researchers have found many ways people behave unethically, e.g., sexual
harassment, discrimination, theft, falsification of expense claims, covering up misbehavior,
industrial espionage, and many others. These behaviors can be found in large, medium-sized,
and small organizations across the world (The Compliance and Ethics Leadership Council
2008). Unethical behaviors expose people, organizations, and society to harm. HRD can play
a key role in people development and can be an important element in promoting ethics
through various interventions. When it comes to promoting ethical practices, most
organizations focus on training programs to increase ethics and moral awareness and create
procedural frameworks in business conduct (Schminke, Arnaud, & Kuenzi 2007).
Statement of the Problem
This paper is a literature review. It explains concepts of unethical behavior and factors
influencing such behaviors in organizations. We also explored possible HRD interventions
that could be applied as preventative measures against unethical behavior in an organization
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
4
by enhancing ethical performance. The proposed conceptual HRD intervention framework
was developed based on several ethical theories, such as social contract theory, virtue ethics
theory, and deontology In order to identify the most appropriate HRD interventions, the level
of exposure to unethical behavior and the moral intensity of HRD interventions were
considered. Possible HRD interventions were considered to differ among low, medium, and
high exposure levels of unethical behavior.
Methods
In this literature review, we searched the following databases: GoogleScholar,
ResearchGate, Emerald Management, ScienceDirect, and SpringerLink. We used the key
words ethical, unethical, and integrity in conjunction with HRD and established a date
inclusion criterion of ten years, except for standard references or references necessary to
support a point. In this process, we identified 160 articles. We first reviewed the title and
eliminated those that were outside of our interest area, resulting in 50 articles remaining. We
then read the abstracts of all remaining articles, and, again, we eliminated those that were not
relevant, providing us with a final pool of 45 articles.
Unethical Behavior
Several ethical perspectives, such as virtue, egotism, deontology, teleology,
situationalism, utilitarianism, and relativism, are used with respect to ethics, especially when
seeking criteria of judging ethics based on employees’ perspectives (Colle & Werhane 2008).
To understand ethics clearly and prevent possible violations, the study of unethical behavior
is critical.
Definition of Unethical Behavior
Unethical behavior means violation of rules, norms, and morals and implies actions
that are morally unacceptable to the larger community (Jones 1991; Kaptein 2008). Unethical
behavior in the organization can be described as misbehavior of an employee, rule breaking,
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
5
committing criminal damage, and noncompliance, such as corruption, within the workplace
(Ashforth & Anand 2003; Neill, Stovall & Jinkerson 2005; Sutherland 1940; Tyler & Blader
2005; Vardi & Weitz 2004). It is seen as a threat to human relations and the organization,
causing harm in both financial and non-financial terms and can result in bankruptcy,
reputation damage, and emotional costs (Den Nieuwenboer 2008; Trevino 2006).
Factors Influencing Unethical Behavior
There are several factors that influence unethical behavior, such as attitude towards
the situation, personal values, professional environment, legal environment, and business
environment (Leonard, Cronan & Kreie 2004). Further, many researchers have found that
money is one of the root causes of unethical behavior; for instance, employees consider
possible losses and gains and weigh the costs and benefits of committing unethical actions,
like cheating, lying, or stealing (Croson 2005; Greenberg 2002; Mazar, Amir, & Ariely
2008). Self-interest drives unethical behavior. However, Tenbrunsel and Messick (2004)
reported that the root of unethical behavior is self-deception. They identified four enablers of
self-deception: “language euphemism, the slippery slope of decision making, errors in
perpetual causation, and constrains induced by representations of self” (p. 223). However,
Greenbaum, Hil, Mawritz, and Quade (2014) found that the role of an abusive supervision
was a “trait activator” (p. 1). They pointed out that employees with high Machiavellian traits
(distrust in others, desire for control, desire for status, and amoral manipulation) were more
likely to act unethically in the organization; however, the connection of aspiration for control
and abusive supervision is fundamental to unethical behavior.
Ferrell, Fraedrich, and Ferrell (2011) stated, “The more likely individuals are to
perceive an ethical issue as important, the less likely they are to engage in questionable or
unethical behavior” (p. 130) They stated that individual factors that influence ethical or
unethical behavior are gender (men tend to be more unethical than women), education
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
6
(people with higher education are more likely to behave ethically), nationality (the root
reason is difficult to interpret), age (adults are more ethical than young people), and locus of
control. Bandura’s (1986) theory of moral disengagement is an extension of social cognitive
theory, stating that an individual’s propensity to disengage morally was an important factor;
thus, the more morally disengaged a person is, the more that person behaves unethically
(Moore, Detert, Baker & Mayer 2012)
In an organizational context, organizational culture and climate are factors that affect
whether people act ethically or unethically. Trevino, Butterfield and McCabe (1998) said that
either ethical culture or climate influence unethical behavior. However, Suar and Khuntia
(2004) argued that ethical climate may influence managers’ unethical practices and work
behaviors. They included eight variables as measures of ethical climate: manipulation,
cheating, violation of norms, performance, job involvement, affective commitment,
continuance commitment, intrinsic satisfaction, extrinsic satisfaction, and taking initiative.
They observed that ethical climate is a picture of ethical behavior and includes individual and
organizational factors. According to Ferrell, Fraedrich, and Ferrell (2011), determining
whether an action is ethical and one’s intentions behind what they do are seen as the main
criteria of judgment, whether people behave ethically or not. They also added several causes
of unethical behavior in the organization, including ethical issue intensity, individual factors,
organizational factors, and opportunity to behave unethically.
Furthermore, people are likely to behave either ethically or unethically based on the
imitative of their supervisor, who is considered as a role model (Kaptein 1998; Mayer et al.,
2009; Schminke, Ambrose & Neubaum 2005). Ferrell et al. (2011) called this phenomenon
the “obedience to authority” (p. 133). Trevino (1986) showed that people tend to behave
unethically when they are under great pressure; during high-pressure times, people tend not to
pay attention to ethical standards compared with people who have enough time to perform
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
7
their tasks. Strain theory states that “people resort to unethical behavior when they are unable
to achieve their goals through legitimate means” (Merton 1938, as cited in Kaptein 2011, p.
849). Thus, lack of time is considered to be a factor that influences people to behave
unethically. Limited time and resources appear to lead to unethical behavior.
In the social bond theory, Hirschi (1969) suggested that people will behave in good or
bad ways, ethically or unethically, based on the level of their commitment to the
organization. When employees feel that they are treated unfairly or are mistrusted, they tend
to behave unethically (Boy & Jones 1997; Greenberg 1997; Skarlicki, Folger & Tesluk
1999). Further, employees are more likely to behave unethically when their supervisor
commands them to do so based on his or her power. In this sense, employees engage in
unethical conduct because of insufficient power to reject a supervisor’s direction, even
though they do not agree with the unethical behavior (Sabini, Siepmann, & Stein 2001).
Rewarding ethical behavior and punishing unethical behavior can also be influencers.
Ball et al. (1994) stated that, if employees are not punished for wrong behavior or not
punished when they commit unethical actions, such actions are seen as acceptable and
desirable. Also, absence of rewards or recognition for ethical behavior reduces people’s
willingness to behave ethically and may even promote the possibility of people committing
unethical acts (Kaptein 2011; Roman & Munuera 2005). The factors influencing unethical
behavior are summarized in Table 1.
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
8
Table 1
Summary of Causes of Unethical Behavior
Individual Factors
- Self-interest (Croson 2005; Greenberg
2002; Mazar, Amir & Ariely 2008)
- loss and gain
- weighing cost and benefit
- Employee Machiavellianism (Greenbaum
et al 2014)
- distrust of others
- desire for control
- desire for status
- amoral manipulation
- Individual factors (Ferrell, Fraedrich &
Ferrell, 2011)
- gender
- education
- nationality
- age
- locus of control
- Self-deception (Tenbrunsel & Messick
2004)
- language euphemism
- the slippery slope of decision making
- errors in perpetual causation
- constraints induced by representations
of self
- Individual’s propensity to morally
disengage (Moore et al 2012)
Organizational Factors
- Organizational factors (Ferrell, Fraedrich
& Ferrell 2011)
- corporate culture
- ethical culture
- significant others
- obedience to authority
- Ethical climate (Suar & Khuntia 2004),
- manipulation
- cheating
- violation of norms - performance
- job involvement
- affective commitment
- continuance commitment
- intrinsic satisfaction
- extrinsic satisfaction
- initiative
- Ethical culture (Kaptein 2011)
- clarity of ethical standard
- ethical role modeling of management
and supervisors
- capability to behave ethically
- communication to behave ethically
- visibility of (un)ethical behavior
- reinforcement of ethical behavior
- Ethical leadership (Brown & Trevino
2006)
- Employee commitment (Boy & Jones
1997; Greenberg 1997; Skarlicki et al
1999).
Many types of unethical behaviors can be found in the workplace. Sexual harassment,
discrimination, theft, and falsification of expense claims can be found in organizations across
the world (The Compliance and Ethics Leadership Council 2008). According to Ferrell et al.
(2011), the phrase, “white-collar crime,” means “the crime of the suit” (p.168) or people in
power positions. White-collar crime includes denial of responsibility, denial of injury, denial
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
9
of the victim, condemnation of accusers, appeal to higher authority, claiming that everyone
else is doing it, and entitlement (Curran & Renzetti 1994).
Fraud is one type of white-collar misconduct. According to the report from IC3 or the
Internet Crime Complaint Center (in partnership with the FBI and the National White Collar
Crime Center 2008) in Ferrell et al. (2011), several types of misconduct can be found in
organizations; for example, financial fraud, Internet fraud, credit/debit card fraud, auction
fraud, antitrust violations, tax evasion, violating environmental laws, insider trading, and
industrial theft of secrets. Vadera and Pratt (2013) argued that workplace crimes consist of
three types: pro-organization (organizational illegality and unethical behavior supporting the
organization), nonaligned-organization (organizational corruption), and anti-organizational
(deviance and unethical behavior that hurts the organization). Organizational illegality,
according to Szwajkowski (1985), means “legally prohibited action of organization members
that is taken primarily on behalf of the organization” (p. 175).
Corruption is considered as one of the most serious unethical conduct. According to
Aguilera and Vadera (2008), corruption is “the crime that is committed by the use of
authority within organizations for personal gain” (p. 175). It is also seen as an action that
violates company values and standards, as it harms the well-being of the company and its
members, or individuals outside of the organization (Robinson & Bennett 1995). Suar and
Khuntia (2004) revealed that “the middle-level managers in public sector violated the
organization’s norm more than in the private sector in terms of manipulation and cheating in
their performance and misused of finance to the same extent” (p. 16). Public managers are
less ethical than managers in private companies.
Kaptein (2008) developed a measurement of unethical behavior in the workplace from
a stakeholder perspective using factor analysis; 37 items of unethical behavior were found
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
10
affecting financiers, customers, employees, suppliers, and society. In terms of employees,
five items were found:
(a) discrimination against employee on the basis of age, race, gender, religious belief,
sexual orientation, (b) engaging in sexual harassment or creating a hostile work
environment such as intimidation, racism, pestering, verbal abuse, and physical
violence, (c) violating workplace health and safety rules or principles (d) violating
employee wage, overtime, or benefits rules of management and (e) breaching
employee privacy. (p. 989)
The top three unethical behaviors of financiers were trading securities based on inside
information, falsifying or manipulating financial reporting information, and engaging in
conflict of interest, such as sideline activities, favoritism, using working hours for private
purposes, and executing conflict of interest tasks.
The top three unethical behaviors of suppliers were fabricating product quality or
safety test results; entering into customer contract relationships with improper terms,
conditions, or lack of approval; and engaging in anti-competitive practices, such as market
rigging, quid-pro-quo deals, and offering bribes or other improper gifts, favors, and
entertainment to influence customers (Kaptein 2008).
Ethics and HRD Interventions
In today’s business world, most organizations need to have a good reputation with the
public. Establishing a good reputation is easier said than done. In order to promote a
corporation’s good reputation, it usually involves ethics. According to the Ethics Resource
Centre (ERC 2011), ethical reputation is seen as one of the key determinants of a firm’s
ability to attract and retain employees, especially the talented ones. Building and maintaining
a good reputation requires constant attention from every part of the organization to prevent
reputational loss from possible ethical failures. HRD professionals are considered to play a
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
11
key role in establishing an ethical culture in an organization (Thite 2012). The number of
researchers and studies associated with ethical or unethical behavior in business organizations
has increased in HRD (Ardichvili & Jondle 2009). Hatcher (2002) emphasized the need to
embed ethics in HRD through appropriate interventions as a means to develop a more
humane way of working in becoming a responsible organization that is not looking only for
outcomes and profits.
There are many HRD interventions available to an organization. The use of each
intervention depends upon the areas of desired improvement. The following discussion is
based on preventing unethical behaviors through the use of HRD interventions to manage and
prevent harm from such behaviors.
Establishing and Embedding Ethical Cultures
Some scholars, such as Russ-Eft (2003, as cited in Ardichvili & Jondle 2009), have
pointed to the focus on creating an ethical culture within an organization through the use of
effective learning and development programs. Ardichvili and Jondle (2009) believed that
organizations that have been operated under a strong ethical culture should help shape and
reframe employees’ behaviors. They studied the characteristics of ethical cultures and factors
in order to create and develop sustainable ethical cultures by implementing HRD activities
and interventions. They argued that, in order to create successful ethical corporate cultures,
organizations must combine elements, such as corporate formal structures, corporate policies
and processes, ethics-related training programs, encouraging values-based ethical behavior of
executives, and providing a well-established communication portal that stimulates people to
behave ethically.
Establishing Ethical Codes, Procedures, and Control Processes
Codes of conduct and codes of ethics are widely implemented in many organizations.
Stevens (2008) concluded that codes of conduct are seen as effective for promoting ethical
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
12
behavior in organizations. However, the organization cannot rely on written codes alone;
codes need to be used along with a set of other factors and activities, such as a corporate
ethical culture and effective communication, for better success. One good example to
illustrate this concept is through the Enron scandal, in which Gabler (2006, as cited in
Ardichvili & Jondle, 2009) pointed out that Enron basically had implemented codes of ethics
together with solid compliance programs, as well as an established reporting system for
possible violations. However, Enron failed to embed these elements in its culture, which
finally brought Enron to the edge of risk for compromising integrity. Thus, codes of ethics,
even though they can provide good guidelines to shape ethical behaviors of employees, mean
nothing without a proof of actions in response to such codes (Weaver, Trevino, & Cochran
1999). Moreover, Weaver et al. (1999) suggested that some common interventions of
corporate ethical programs include “ethics training, formalized procedure for auditing and
evaluating ethical behavior, disciplinary process for failures to meet ethical expectations, set
up formal ethics departments and officers, and cross-functional committees for setting and
evaluating ethics policies and procedures” (p. 539).
Establishing Compliance Programs
Thomas, Schermerhorn, and Dienhart (2004) proposed that there is a contradiction
between two corporate ethics programs: integrity and compliance programs. Whereas
compliance programs are about laws, regulations, and organizational rules, integrity
programs are based on self-governance (Thomas et al 2004). Even though integrity programs
help with sustaining corporate ethics, the importance of compliance programs should not be
overlooked.
According to Schminke et al. (2007), a rules-based or compliance program is
concerned with a law, regulations, and corporate rule issues that require everyone in the
organization to comply. It results in good conduct for the sake of preventing, detecting, and
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
13
punishing violations of rules. Having compliance programs in place provides a good
agreement and guidelines for all employees, but it is less likely to create an ethical culture, as
with integrity programs.
Establishing Values-based Programs
Schminke et al. (2007) argued that external regulations (i.e., Sarbanes-Oxley
Act/SOX–a federal U.S. regulation of financial practices and corporate governance; see A
Guide to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 2006) play a great role in improving corporate
accountability and ethics; however, such formal regulations are insufficient to promote
ethical behavior. Schminke et al. (2007) provided a contrast between rules-based and valuesbased programs. Whereas rules-based perspectives emphasize motivating people to avoid
punishment from wrongdoing, a values-based approach aims at creating organizational values
and motivating employees to perform their duties ethically. The rules-based approach is
concerned with compliance to provide ethical discipline for employees. It provides formal
internal control; however, rules-based or compliance-based programs alone cannot create a
sustainable ethical climate within the organization. So it needs to be carried out in
conjunction with values-based programs. Weaver and Trevino (1999) also put an emphasis
on values orientation as it significantly contributes to ethical awareness, establishes employee
commitment, and engaged employees in corporate ethical values. They believed that creating
values-oriented programs directly influences employees’ attitudes and behaviors, which, in
turn, limit and reduce unethical behaviors that are likely to occur within organizations.
Establishing Ethics Grounded Leadership Programs
Thomas et al. (2004) stated that, “for business executives the strategic leadership
responsibility for initiating changes has to include the goals of creating and sustaining ethical
climates within which employees act ethically as a matter of routine” (p. 57). In response to
this notion, executives who propose an ethics vision and hold onto ethical values can
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
14
significantly drive themselves and the organization forward. Thomas et al. (2004) shared a
good example to describe the need for ethical leadership development programs by using the
case of Paul O’Neill, CEO of Alcoa in 1987. O’Neill believed that his employees had the
right to a safe workplace. Even though workplace safety was not mandated by law at that
time, he pursued the goal for zero loss in the workplace. He stated that the reason behind his
goal was not for money saving purposes, but it was all about values.
Hatcher (2002) argued that, in order to create a lasting impact on ethics, leadership
development programs are considered to be an HRD intervention. Appropriate leadership
training that encourages ethical values and behaviors may help leaders understand better their
own values with relation to corporate ethical values. Moreover, leadership ethics and values
should be visible, because they need to be embedded in a leader’s actions every day.
Conducting Ethics Training Programs
Ethics training programs are becoming more important in all organizations as ethical
dilemmas are not bounded by type or size of firm (Hatcher 2002). Some small organizations
with limited budgets combine ethics training as part of employees’ orientation and add this
focus into other training courses. According to Hatcher (2002), good orientation to ethics is
important for novice employees, as they need to know up what is considered right and
acceptable and what is not.
Hatcher (2002) added that ethics should not be limited to orientation training but
should also be applied in other training. The course should outline ethically related issues
with the support of case studies and scenarios that encourage and develop ethical behaviors.
As for skills training, including realistic ethical components provide opportunities for
employees to realize the impact that unethical behaviors can have on organizational
productivity and production outcomes. When business is operating in multinational
environments where people hold different norms, values, and beliefs, what is considered as
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
15
ethical in one culture might be unethical in other cultures. Thus, it is important to establish
appropriate content for cross-cultural or diversity management training programs in order to
share understanding of each culture in the domain of manners, and dos and don’ts among
employees (Pruetipibultham 2011).
Mentoring and Coaching Programs
Another effective way for managers to learn about ethics is through mentoring or
coaching. Hatcher (2002) believed that formal and informal well-designed mentoring
programs have the potential to teach a novice leader about a corporation’s culture, values, and
ethics by mentoring with a senior manager, with the condition that the senior leader should be
characterized as an ethical mentor. It is impossible to shape ethical and values-based leaders
by placing them with an executive who views ethics as unimportant. HRD professionals can
reduce this problem by assessing potential mentors’ behaviors and values prior to their
assignment. Mentors and mentees sometimes face ethical dilemmas together that neither has
experienced. Having a code of ethics can provide guidance during times of uncertainty.
Conceptual HRD Interventions Model and Discussion
We constructed a theory-based HRD intervention model as a preventive measure
against unethical behavior in organizations (see Figure 1). At the foundation of the model are
three pillars: corporate governance, corporate social responsibility (influenced by the
stakeholder model), and sustainability (focused on healthy organizations). All HRD
interventions in the model are collectively designed to achieve performance. Upon the three
pillars, we designed rules-based interventions; namely, corporate codes of conduct, ethics
manuals, an ethics hotline, and an ethics compliance department. The interventions under the
rules-based approach were influenced by Hobbes’s (1588-1679) social contract theory, in
which people in the organization base their morals on a contract, agreement, and a set of
standards, rules, and regulations (Friend 2006). These social contract theory-based
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
16
interventions are expected to serve as concrete ethics guidelines for all employees, thus
helping to reduce the ambiguity of ethical dilemma behaviors.
Figure 1. Theory-based HRD intervention model as a preventive measures against
unethical behavior in organizations
Built upon organizational regulations are values-based interventions designed for each
employee. According to Schminke et al. (2007), a values-based approach aims at creating
organizational values and motivating employees to perform their duty ethically. The
interventions under the values-based approach were influenced by two ethics concepts: virtue
ethics and deontology ethics (Ferrell, Fraedrich & Ferrell 2011). Virtue ethics can be used to
promote ethical behaviors, such as integrity, loyalty, and honesty. Deontology is also very
important for setting up and creating rules and duty, taking responsibility, and accepting
accountability as rules-based values.
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
17
According to the model, the horizontal axis represents the individual employee’s
exposure to unethical behavior, while the vertical axis represents the moral intensity of HRD
interventions provided to a particular employee. The two variables are positively correlated.
The number of HRD interventions provided to each individual depends on the level of
exposure to unethical behavior, which can be measured through an exposure assessment
form. Job descriptions play a major role in determining such exposure. For example, an
analyst with no approval authority is seen as less exposed to unethical behavior when
compared with a financial controller who is also serving as a director for the company. Thus,
the number of HRD interventions provided to the financial controller should be higher.
The interventions for those with low exposure are primarily designed to promote
virtue ethics within an organization-wide ethics culture. Possible interventions include annual
instructor-led ethics training, a semi-annual ethics festival (organized to review employees’
ethics performance), quarterly on-line ethics training, and a personal credo contest (based on
employees’ do’s and don’ts statements).
Incrementally, those employees with medium exposure require intensive training to
adopt a deontology-based consequentialism philosophy (as a manager/executive, it is his/her
duty to weigh the benefits and costs of every decision). Preventive and corrective measures in
the forms of personal mentoring and coaching and ethics compliance audits are also designed
for them.
Those with high exposure should be provided with the greatest number of HRD
interventions (10 in the model). The ultimate objective is to develop post-conventional ethics
(Kohlberg 1969). In addition, both preventive and corrective measures, namely, outsourced
forensic services (using an outsourced service provided by audit firms) and 360-degree
feedback dashboard (the IT system provides regular feedback in the form of a diagram so the
recipient can understand the information easily) are designed for them.
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
18
Limitations and Future Study
This paper is primarily based on a literature review. Accordingly, the practical utility
of the proposed model remains untested, and, as with all theories, it needs to be tested.
Further, future research on the practical application of the proposed model is recommended.
Detail on each element in the model needs to be clarified so that all elements are collectively
directed towards a common goal -- to promote ethical behavior in the organization.
Conclusion
Whatever the size of the organization or whatever the purpose for which it exists,
unethical behaviors are always possible. There are some gray areas and overlapping areas as
to whether a particular conduct is considered ethical or unethical. People tend to stick with
their own values and perspectives prior to confronting actions that are ambiguous. For
example, they might end up doing something unethically in terms of a deontology
perspective; however, they may decide that, in a particular situation, some other action would
be more ethical. Their judgment depends on the values and standards of each organization.
Moreover, this model is a summary designed to advance knowledge gained in this review. In
order to identify what is ethical or unethical, one must depend on each organization’s
perceptions, norms, and values. Some might not think that paying for entertainment for a
customer by using company money or stealing a pen from the company is unethical; they
might think that it is only a strategy for running the business and that other competitors are
doing the same. At this point, the theories of ethics can explain the phenomenon under
investigation.
Summary
It is everybody’s obligation to help prevent unethical behaviors. As HRD
professionals, we must equip ourselves with several dimensions of ethics knowledge,
including ethics theories, HRD interventions, corporate governance, social responsibility,
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
19
sustainability, and so on. Thus, it is our commitment to help eliminate unethical behaviors in
our society. In this paper, we investigated several forms of unethical behaviors in
organizations, as well as factors influencing such behavior. We also reviewed several forms
of HRD interventions that help prevent unethical behaviors and then related those
interventions to relevant ethics theories. Two major approaches of HRD interventions used
for model construction were rules-based and values-based interventions. We proposed a
theory-based HRD intervention model to prevent unethical behavior in the organization.
References
Ardichvili, A, & Jondle, D 2009, ‘Integrative literature review: Ethical business cultures: A
literature review and implications for HRD’, Human Resource Development Review,
vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 223-244. doi: 10.1177/1534484309334098.
Arguilera, V, & Vadera, K 2008, ‘The dark side of authority: Antecedents, mechanisms, and
outcomes of organizational corruption’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 77, no. 4,
pp.431-449.
Ashforth, E, & Anand, V 2003, ‘The normalization of corruption in organizations’, Research
in Organizational Behavior, vol. 25, pp. 1-52.
Ball, A, Trevino, K, & Sims, P 1994, ‘Just and unjust punishment: Influences on subordinate
performance and citizenship’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 37, no. 2, pp.
299-322.
Boy, W, & Jones, W 1997, ‘Organizational culture and employee productivity’, In R. A.
Ginacalone, A & Greenberg, J 2009, Antisocial behavior in organizations, edn,
SAGE, CA.
Brown, E, & Trevino, K 2006, ‘Ethical leadership: A review and future directions’, The
Leadership Quarterly, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 595-616.
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
20
Colle, S, & Werhane, H 2008, ‘Moral motivation across ethical theories: What can we learn
for designing corporate ethics program’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 81, pp. 751764.
Croson, A 2005, ‘Deception in economic experiments’. In Gerschlager, C (Ed), Deception in
markets: An economic analysis, Palgrave MacMillam, NY, USA.
Curran, J, & Renzetti, M 1994, Theories of crime, Needham Height, Allyn & Bacon, MA
Den Nieuwenboer, A 2008, ‘Seeing the shadow of the self: Studies on organizational
deviance’, Phd thesis, Erasmus Research Institute of Management Rotterdam,
Netherlands.
Ethics Resource Center 2011, Building a corporate reputation of integrity, ERC Website,
accessed 22/8/2014, http://www.ethics.org/resource/building-corporate-reputationintegrity
Ferrell, C, Fraedrich, J, & Ferrell, L 2011. Business ethics: Ethical decision making and
cases, South-Western Cengage Learning. Mason, OH
Friend, C. (2006). Social contract theory, accessed 12/8/2014, http://
www.iep.utm.edu/s/soc-cont.htm http://www.scribd.com/doc/148135625/SocialContract-Theory-Friend
Gabler, D 2006, ‘Is your culture a risk factor?’ Business and Society Review, vol. 111, pp.
337-362.
Greenbaum, L, Hil, A, Mawritz, B, & Quade, M 2014, ‘Employee Machiavellianism to
unethical behavior: The role of abusive supervision as a trait activator’, Journal of
Management, vol. 27 (Published before print), pp. 1-25. doi: 10.
1177/0149206314535434.
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
21
Greenberg, J 2002 ‘Who stole the money, and when? Individual and situational determinants
of employee theft’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, vol. 89,
pp. 985-1003.
‘A guide to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act” 2006 Retried on March 31, 2015, from:
http://www.soxlaw.com
Hatcher, T 2002, Ethics and HRD: A new approach to leading responsible organizations.
Basic Books, Cambridge, MA.
Hirschi, T 1969, Causes of delinquency. University of California Press Berkeley, CA.
Jones, M. 1991, ‘Ethical decision making by individuals in organization: An issue-contingent
model’, Academy of Management Review, vol 16, pp. 366-395.
Kaptein, M 1998, Ethics management: Auditing and developing the ethical content of
organizations. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands.
Kaptein, M 2008, ‘Developing a measure of unethical behavior in the workplace: A
stakeholder perspective’, Journal of Management, vol. 34, pp. 978-1008.
Kaptein, M 2008a, ‘Developing and testing of a measure for the ethical culture of
organizations: The corporate ethical virtues model’, Journal of Organizational
Behavior, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 923-947.
Kaptein, M 2011, ’Understanding unethical behavior by unraveling ethical culture’, Human
Relations, vol. 64, pp. 843-869.
Leonard, K, Cronan, P, & Kreie, J 2004, ‘What influences IT ethical behavior intentionplanned behavior, reasoned action, perceived importance, or individual
characteristics’, Information & Management, vol. 42, pp. 143-158.
Mazar, N, Amir, O, & Ariely, D 2008, ‘The dishonesty of honest people: A theory of selfconcept maintenance’, Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 45, pp. 633-644.
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
22
Mayer, M, Kuenzi, M, Greenbaum, R, Bardes, M, & Salvador, R 2009, ‘How low does
ethical leadership flow? Test of a trickle-down model’, Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Process, vol. 108, no. 1, pp. 1-13.
Moore, C, Detert, R, Baker, L, & Mayer, M 2012, ‘Why employees do bad things: Moral
disengagement and unethical organizational behavior. Personnel Psychology, vol. 65,
pp. 1-48.
Neill, J, Stovall, S, & Jinkerson, D 2005, ‘A critical analysis of accounting industry’s
voluntary code of conduct’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 59, pp. 101-108.
Pruetipibultham, O 2011, ‘Developing human resource development interventions to aid
expatriate’s cultural adaptation: Insights to the Japanese culture’, Human Resource
Development International, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 109-117. doi
10.1080/13678868.2011.604958.
Russ-Eft, D 2003, ‘Corporate ethics: Learning and performance problem for leaders?’ Human
Resource Development Quarterly, vol. 14, pp. 1-3. In Ardichvili, A., & Jondle, D
2009, ‘Integrative literature review: Ethical business cultures: A literature review and
implications for HRD’, Human Resource Development Review, vol. 8 no. 2, pp. 223244. doi: 10.1177/1534484309334098.
Roman, S, & Munuera, L 2005, ‘Determinants and consequences of ethical behavior: An
empirical study of salespeople’, European Journal of Marketing, vol. 39, no. 1, pp.
473-495.
Sabini, J, Siepmann, M, & Stein, J 2001, ‘The really fundamental attribution error in social
psychological research’, Psychological Inquiry, vol. 12, pp. 1-25.
Schminke, M, Ambrose, L, & Neubaum, O 2005, ‘The effect of leader moral development on
ethical climate and employee attitudes’, Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Process, vol. 97, no. 2, pp. 135-151.
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
23
Schminke, M, Arnaud, A, & Kuenzi, M 2007, ‘The power of ethical climates’,
Organizational Dynamics, vol. 35, pp. 171-186.
Skarlicki, P, Folger, R, & Tesluk, P 1999, ‘Personality as a moderator in the relationship
between fairness and retaliation’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 42, pp. 100108.
Stevens, B 2008, ‘Corporate ethical codes: Effective instruments for influencing behavior’,
Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 78, pp. 601-609.
Suar, D, & Khuntia, R 2004, ‘Does ethical climate influence unethical practices and work
behavior?’, Journal of Human Values, vol. 10, pp. 11- 21.
Sutherland, H 1940, ‘White collar criminality’, American Sociological Review, vol. 5, pp. 112.
Tenbrunsel, E, & Messick, M 2004, ‘Ethical fading: The role of self-deception in unethical
behavior’, Social Justice Research, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 223-236.
Thite, M 2013, ‘Ethics and human resource management and development in a global
context: case study of an Indian multinational’, Human Resource Development
International, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 106-115. doi 10.1080/13678868.2012.737691.
Thomas, T, Schermerhorn, R, & Dienhart, W 2004, ‘Strategic leadership of ethical behavior
in business’, Academy of Management Executive, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 56-66.
Trevino, K 1986, ‘Ethical decision making in organizations: A person-situation interactionist
model’, Academy of Management Review, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 601-617.
Trevino, K, Butterfield, D, & McCabe, L 1998, ‘The ethical context in organization:
Influences on employee attitudes and behaviors’, Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 8,
no. 3, pp. 447-476.
EMPLOYEE UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
24
Trevino, K, & Youngblood, A 1990, ‘Bad apple in bad barrels: A causal analysis of ethical
decision-making behavior’, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 75, no. 4, pp. 378385.
Trevino, K, Weaver, R, &Reynolds, J 2006, ‘Behavioral ethics in organizations: A review’,
Journal of Management, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 951-990.
Tyler, R, & Blader, L 2005, ‘Can business effectively regulate employee conduct? The
antecedents of rule following in work setting’, Academy of Management Journal, vol.
6, pp. 1143-1158.
Vadi, M, & Vissak, T 2013, ‘The nature of (dis)honesty, its impact factors and
consequences’, Advance Series in Management, vol. 10, pp. 3-18.
Vardi, Y, & Weitz, E 2004, Misbehavior in organizations: Theories, research, and
management, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Weaver, R, & Trevino, K 1999, ‘Compliance and values-oriented programs: Influences on
employees’ attitudes and behavior’, Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 9, pp. 315-335.
Weaver, R, Trevino, K, & Cochran, L 1999, ‘Integrated and decoupled corporate social
performance: Management commitments, external pressures and corporate ethics
practices’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 42, pp. 539-552.