We examined the relationship between organizational identification and unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB)-unethical behaviors conducted by employees to potentially benefit the organization. We predicted that organizational identification would be positively related to UPB and that positive reciprocity beliefs would moderate and strengthen this relationship. The results from 2 field studies support the interaction effect and show that individuals who strongly identify with their organization are more likely to engage in UPB when they hold strong positive reciprocity beliefs. Given the nature of reciprocity, our findings may suggest that highly identified employees who hold strong reciprocity beliefs may conduct UPB with an anticipation of a future reward from their organization. Theoretical and managerial implications of our results for understanding unethical behaviors are discussed.

W e propose that employees sometimes engage in unethical acts with the intent to benefit their organization, its members, or both-a construct we term unethical pro-organizational behavior. We suggest that positive social exchange relationships and organizational identification may lead to unethical pro-organizational behavior indirectly via neutralization, the process by which the moral content of unethical actions is overlooked. We incorporate situational and individual-level constructs as moderators of these relationships and consider managerial implications and future research.Key words: unethical behavior; social exchange; organizational identification; ethics; moral disengagement; neutralization; guilt; shame; amoral culture; severity History: Published online in Articles in Advance September 15, 2010.When there's a slow-down I may lie to protect the company image by telling the passengers that we're waiting on bags rather than that the mechanic is taking his own sweet time.I would make excuses to protect the company, like if the cabin was filthy, I'd say, "I'm sorry it's dirty. We contracted out our services." I did that more times than I can remember, to protect the company's image (Scott 2003, p. 332, anonymous accounts from two flight attendants)In a survey of more than 2,000 executive assistants and secretaries in Canada and the United States, researchers found that 10% destroyed or removed damaging information, 6.5% wrote documents with misleading or false information, and 5.1% falsified vouchers or expense accounts. All of this unethical activity was performed by employees to benefit their bosses, their organizations, or both (Kleiman 1996). A more recent study on organizational ethics found that more than onethird of U.S. adults surveyed had witnessed unethical activities at their workplace. Of those questioned, 19% observed lying to employees, customers, vendors, or the public (Gurchiek 2006).Clearly, unethical activity is present within organizations. As illustrated by the opening examples of the flight attendants, employees may engage in unethical actions, such as lying, to benefit the organization. In this work, we consider the potential motivations for unethical behaviors conducted to benefit the organization or its agents, a construct we call "unethical pro-organizational behavior." Existing research acknowledges that employees may conduct unethical behaviors on behalf of the organization (Ashforth and Anand 2003, Brief et al. 2001, Pinto et al. 2008), but a construct and theoretically grounded framework for understanding the underlying mechanisms of such behavior has not been thoroughly developed.Our work contributes to the organizational literature in four ways. First, our work is unique in its focus on how positive social exchange and organizational identification can encourage unethical behavior intended to benefit the organization. Although generally thought to elicit favorable and ethical behavior for the organization (Ashforth and Mael 1989, Blau 1964, Gouldner 1960, Tajfel and Turner 1...

Abstract. Bats of the genus Pteropus have been identified as the reservoir hosts for the henipaviruses Hendra virus (HeV) and Nipah virus (NiV). The aim of these studies was to assess likely mechanisms for henipaviruses transmission from bats. In a series of experiments, Pteropus bats from Malaysia and Australia were inoculated with NiV and HeV, respectively, by natural routes of infection. Despite an intensive sampling strategy, no NiV was recovered from the Malaysian bats and HeV was reisolated from only one Australian bat; no disease was seen. These experiments suggest that opportunities for henipavirus transmission may be limited; therefore, the probability of a spillover event is low. For spillover to occur, a range of conditions and events must coincide. An alternate assessment framework is required if we are to fully understand how this reservoir host maintains and transmits not only these but all viruses with which it has been associated.

Nipah virus is a broadly tropic and highly pathogenic zoonotic paramyxovirus in the genus Henipavirus whose natural reservoirs are several species of Pteropus fruit bats. Nipah virus has repeatedly caused outbreaks over the past decade associated with a severe and often fatal disease in humans and animals. Here, a new ferret model of Nipah virus pathogenesis is described where both respiratory and neurological disease are present in infected animals. Severe disease occurs with viral doses as low as 500 TCID50 within 6 to 10 days following infection. The underlying pathology seen in the ferret closely resembles that seen in Nipah virus infected humans, characterized as a widespread multisystemic vasculitis, with virus replicating in highly vascular tissues including lung, spleen and brain, with recoverable virus from a variety of tissues. Using this ferret model a cross-reactive neutralizing human monoclonal antibody, m102.4, targeting the henipavirus G glycoprotein was evaluated in vivo as a potential therapeutic agent. All ferrets that received m102.4 ten hours following a high dose oral-nasal Nipah virus challenge were protected from disease while all controls died. This study is the first successful post-exposure passive antibody therapy for Nipah virus using a human monoclonal antibody.