This study meta-analytically examined theoretically derived antecedents of both directions of work-family enrichment (sometimes labeled facilitation or positive spillover), namely, workfamily enrichment and family-work enrichment. Contextual and personal characteristics specific to each domain were examined. Resource-providing (e.g., social support and work autonomy) and resource-depleting (e.g., role overload) contextual characteristics were considered. Domain-specific personal characteristics included the individuals' psychological involvement in each domain, the centrality of each domain, and work engagement. Results based on 767 correlations from 171 independent studies published between 1990 and 2016 indicate that several contextual and personal characteristics have significant relationships with enrichment. Although those associated with work tend to have stronger relationships with workfamily enrichment and those associated with family tend to have stronger relationships with family-work enrichment, several antecedent variables have significant relationships with both directions of enrichment. Resource-providing contextual characteristics tend to have stronger relationships with enrichment than do resource-depleting characteristics. There was very little evidence of gender being a moderator of relationships between contextual characteristics and enrichment. Lastly, meta-analytic structural equation modeling provided evidence that a theoretical path model wherein work engagement mediates between several contextual characteristics and enrichment is largely generalizable across populations.
The current study examines the role of ethical cognition as a psychological mechanism linking ethical leadership to employee engagement in specific discretionary workplace behaviors. Hypotheses are developed proposing that ethical leadership is associated with employees’ negative moral equity judgments of workplace deviance (a discretionary antisocial behavior) and positive moral equity judgments of organizational citizenship (a discretionary prosocial behavior). In addition, hypotheses propose that moral equity judgments are a key type of ethical cognition linking ethical leadership with employee behaviors. Hypotheses are tested in a cross-organizational sample of 190 supervisor–employee dyads. Results indicate that employees who work for ethical leaders tended to judge acts of workplace deviance as morally inequitable and acts of organizational citizenship as morally equitable. In turn, these judgments guided employee regulation of behavior, and mediated the relationships between ethical leadership and employee avoidance of antisocial conduct and engagement in prosocial behavior.
Do some employees engage in unethical behavior because they actually believe it is the right thing to do? We explore this question in this article. Unlike other forms of unethical behavior, unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB) is aimed at benefiting the perpetrator’s organization. We propose that employees are increasingly likely to engage in UPB when they believe these acts are ethically appropriate, and that these ethicality beliefs are strongest among employees who work in departments with egoistic norms. Such norms lack guidance on the importance of protecting outside stakeholders’ interest, and provide limited moral knowledge about the broader implications of UPB. We further propose that organizational identification strengthens these effects. Across three field studies, we find support for the hypothesized effects. Ethical judgments of UPB were positively related to both self (Studies 1 and 3) and supervisor (Study 2) ratings of employee UPB. In turn, acts of UPB were judged more ethically appropriate in departments with egoistic norms, and these positive ethical judgments mediated the relationships between egoistic norms and employee UPB (Study 2). Finally, the indirect effects of egoistic norms were strongest among employees with high levels of organizational identification (Study 3). Implications for theory and research are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.