Unethical behavior in organizations: empirical findings that challenge CSR and egoism theory

Abstract

In the egoism philosophical framework, it is contended that when organizations focus on their long‐term interests, they, without knowing it, advance the interests of society as a whole, which is perceived as ethical. In this research, this premise is challenged using data collected from the social media outlets of 29 randomly selected companies from the 2013 Fortune 500 list. Through qualitative comparative analysis, the exact opposite was found. In fact, the organizations that focused on striving for their long‐term success are perceived as unethical. It was also found that socially responsible organizations are perceived as ethical whereas those that misrepresent their positions and attempt to influence the decisions of others are perceived as unethical. Implications for managers are discussed, and future directions are suggested.

The impact of CSR on corporate reputation perceptions of the public—A configurational multi‐time, multi‐source perspective

“…Hence, this study may provide a theoretical basis for both generating hypotheses and explaining previous findings. For example, the configurations associated with perceived unethicality in the study by Overall () are consistent with the category diagnosticity approach, although the author did not make use of it. Interestingly, the category diagnosticity lens also has implications for the so‐called “halo effect” of reputations; that is, the supposed buffering effect of preexisting positive reputations in the face of potentially detrimental events.…”

“…Some first empirical research supports such notions. Following applications to stakeholder orientations (Crilly, ) and corporate governance (Bell, Filatotchev, & Aguilera, ), fsQCA has recently also been successfully employed to study perceived unethicality (Overall, ) and has revealed more complex associations regarding CSR skepticism than prior linear analyses (Skarmeas & Leonidou, ; Skarmeas et al, ). To avoid the common “lack of congruence between the nature of the CSR construct […] and data analytic tools” (Aguinis & Glavas, , p. 953), this study thus utilizes fsQCA.…”

“…Likewise, consumers disregard information about product performance once informed about unethical hiring practices (Folkes & Kamins, ). Moreover, experimental findings by Overall () showed that a company may be perceived as unethical when either lacking CSR or attempting to influence stakeholders or misrepresenting information. Due to suspicions of hypocrisy, negative CSR‐related information can even flip the effect of positive information as shown by Janney and Gove ().…”

“…For example, Crilly et al () reported that evaluations of a multinational corporation differed depending on whether the company actively did good or successfully avoided doing harm, presumably due to framing effects. Moreover, in the experiment by Overall (), a company that “misbehaved” in any way was deemed unethical regardless of its performance on other dimensions.…”

Greening the hospitality industry in the developing world: Analysis of the drivers and barriers

“…On the other hand, large and medium‐sized firms were more selective in the types of environmental initiatives and only considered the actions that were thought to be associated with a strong business case. However, such a simplistic and unreflective view that engagement in sustainability should be driven by a win–win situation may be counterproductive, especially when certain sustainability practices that do not offer a strong business case are ignored (see Overall, ; William et al, ).…”