Impact of relational leadership on employees’ unethical pro-organizational behavior: A survey based on tourism companies in four countries

Abstract

Based on the theory of social construction and self-consistency, this study aims to investigate the mechanism of relational leadership’s role in employees’ unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB) from the perspective of moral identity and ethical climate. We found that relational leadership negatively correlates with the instrumental ethical climate, positively correlates with caring ethical climate, and exerts no significant impact on the rule ethical climate. Instrumental ethical climate and caring ethical climate mediate the relationship between relational leadership and employees’ unethical pro-organizational behavior. In addition, moral identity negatively moderates the relationship between instrumental ethical climate and employees’ unethical pro-organizational behavior, and between caring ethical climate and employees’ unethical pro-organizational behavior. Furthermore, moral identity positively moderates the relationship between a rule ethical climate and employees’ unethical, pro-organizational behavior.

Association of Organizational Behavior with Work Engagement and Work-Home Conflicts of Physician in China

“…The first potential explanation involves the nature of these two types of organizational behavior. While organizational fairness and leadership attention are top-down relationships, organizational fairness focuses on institutionalism, whereas leadership attention is based on subjectivity (individual leaders) [ 12 , 15 , 17 , 39 , 40 ]. We argue that this relationship has similarities to the nature of football matches, with organizational fairness being similar to competition rules, and leadership attention being similar to the behavior of the referee.…”

The relationship between benevolent leadership and affective commitment from an employee perspective

“…This approach to the evaluation of leaders is used by many researchers, e.g. Mostafa; Zhang X, Yao Id Z; and Engelbrecht, Heine, Mahembe [29][30][31]. Jaramillo, Carrillat and Locander argue that when individuals evaluate themselves or their performance they are likely to rely on inner thoughts, feelings and personal attributes [32].…”

Leadership, religiousness, state ownership of an enterprise and unethical pro-organizational behavior: The mediating role of organizational identification

“…Earlier research often brought about results that demonstrated the influence of leadership on intensified UPB among the followers [ 13 , 14 , 18 ]. This sometimes happens directly, but more commonly takes place through the agency of other phenomena, including organizational identification [ 23 , 24 ].…”

“…Some studies suggest that leadership can decrease employees’ engagement in UPB [ 15 , 16 ], while others indicate that it contributes to its increase [ 13 , 17 ]. Moreover, numerous studies have concluded that leadership causes employee engagement in UPB to increase through the moderating influence of various factors, such as the ethical climate [ 18 ], continuance commitment [ 19 ], work engagement [ 20 ], moral disengagement [ 21 ], reflective moral attentiveness [ 22 ], and organizational identification [ 23 , 24 ].…”