Ethical climate and deviant behavior among employees of selected public and private universities: The case of the emerging country

Abstract

The study was borne out of the need to assess the effect of ethical climate on deviant behavior among employees in the educational institutions and the need to ascertain whether workplace deviant behavior has a force to bear with institutional ownership. Questionnaires (375) were distributed among the academic and administrative staff of Ekiti State University (EKSU), Afe Babalola University Ado-Ekiti (ABUAD), the Federal University of Technology Akure (FUTA) and Elizade University, Ilara-Mokin (EU); selected using multistage sampling technique. Descriptive statistics (table, percentage) and inferential statistics (simple regression) were employed to analyse the data. Simple regression was used to analyse the data. Based on the test of the hypothesis, the study found that deviant behavior among employees of selected public and private universities can be significantly determined by ethical climate factors. Ethical climate contributed significantly to deviant behaviors in the public and private universities showing probability of t-statistic (.012 &.022) lesser than 5%. Hence, it is concluded that the ethical climate or wrong ethical system is the major determinant of deviant behaviors in selected public and private universities.

Examining Socio-Demographic Factors in Workplace Deviance among Selected University Workers

“…The study found that workers who are in the private universities have higher organisational, interpersonal and overall workplace deviance than staff in the public universities. The study finding was not in line with the study done by Obalade and Arogundade (2019) who found that employees in the public universities exhibit higher deviant behaviour than those in private universities. Also, the study's finding did not agree with that of Andreoli and Lefkowitz (2008) who found that ethical climate influence deviant behaviour in government institution.…”

“…Also in the United States of America, nearly $6 to $300 billion was lost annually to absenteeism, theft and reduced productivity (Brown & Mitchell, 2010). Research evidence has also established that workplace deviance has been prevalent among the staff of Nigerian universities (Ukertor, 2011;Caroline, 2015;Igbe, Okpa, & Aniah, 2017;Obalade & Arogundade, 2019); it involves behaviour not limited to extortion of money, tardiness, abuse of office, sexual harassment, gross insubordination, age falsification, bribery, distortion of staff records and manipulation of students' grades for financial gain (Igbe, Okpa, & Aniah, 2017). These behaviours undermine the integrity of the university globally and in an emerging country like Nigeria.…”

“…In recent time, Fagbenro and Olasupo (2020) investigated the role of quality of family life and workplace deviant behaviour with perceived competence as a mediator among university staff. Even the scanty studies (Adeoye, 2014;Lawal, Babalola & Ordu, 2019;Obalade & Arogundade, 2019) done on university employees have focused on non-academic staff ignoring academic staff as well as the role of socio-demographic factors on the dimensions and overall deviant behaviour. This gap in the literature is hoped to be filled by this present study through investigating important socio-demographic factors such as gender, university staff and university type influencing workplace deviance including its dimensions in Southwest, Nigeria.…”

“…Also, scanty studies have been done on how the type of university could influence workplace deviance. For instance, Obalade and Arogundade (2019) found that employees in public universities exhibit higher deviant behaviour than those in private universities. Also, Andreoli and Lefkowitz (2008) found that ethical climate has influence on deviant behaviour in government institution.…”

Determinants of Workplace Deviant Behaviours among Non-academic Staff in Universities in South-South Nigeria

“…Researchers that focus on the constructive view believe that these behaviours will lead to an increase in productivity and also improve the workplace environment. However, the destructive perspective perceives negative consequences caused by these behaviours and thus, prescribes these destructive behaviours at the workplace to mean WDB [1]. Robinson and Bennett [2] labeled WDB as those acts of staff at the workplace that are not in conformity with the norms and rules of the organization and, as such, cause harm to the staff, clients or customers within the organization.…”