Skip to main content
Log in

Should Managers Provide General or Specific Ethical Guidelines to Employees: Insights from a Mixed Methods Study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article contributes to our understanding of how communication of ethical guidelines by managers may reduce the likelihood of employee unethical behavior. We conduct two vignette experiments to assess the impact of communicating two types of ethical guidelines—general and specific. The second study employs mixed methods experimental design, collecting qualitative data during the experiment. We find that communicating ethical guidelines by managers reduces the likelihood of unethical behavior, but contrary to our hypothesis and prior literature, we observe that general ethical guidelines are more effective than specific ethical guidelines. We conduct thematic coding of open-ended qualitative responses and integrate the findings of qualitative analysis with the quantitative analyses to provide insights into the counter-hypothetical finding. With specific guidelines, we observe that participants use specific details to negate or rationalize ethical concerns, and with general guidelines, participants recognize ethical concerns and are less likely to downplay them. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for research on ethical leadership.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ashkanasy, N. M., Falkus, V. S., & Callan, V. J. (2001). Predictors of ethical code use and ethical tolerance in the public sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 25, 237–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 193–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 364–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bedi, A., Alpaslan, C. M., & Green, S. (2016). A meta-analytic review of ethical leadership outcomes and moderators. Journal of Business Ethics, 139, 517–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berson, Y., Halevy, N., Shamir, B., & Erez, M. (2015). Leading from different psychological distances: A construal-level perspective on vision communication, goal setting, and follower motivation. The Leadership Quarterly, 26, 143–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A Social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97, 117–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bums, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, A., & Rimal, R. N. (2016). Social norms: A review. Review of Communication Research, 4, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1015–1026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciulla, J. B. (1995). Leadership ethics: Mapping the territory. The Business Ethics Quarterly, 5(1), 5–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collett, J. L., & Childs, E. (2011). Minding the gap: Meaning, affect, and the potential shortcomings of vignettes. Social Science Research, 40(2), 513–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Detert, J. R., Treviño, L. K., & Sweitzer, V. L. (2008). Moral disengagement in ethical decision making: A study of antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 374–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downe, J., Cowell, R., & Morgan, K. (2016). What determines ethical behavior in public organizations: Is it rules and/or leadership. Public Administration Review, 76, 898–909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, R., Yam, K.C., & Dang, C. (2015). Moralized leadership: The construction and consequences of ethical leader perceptions. Academy of Management Review, 40(2), 182–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, D. C. (1984). The development and enforcement of group norms. Academy of Management Review, 9, 47–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gino, F., & Margolis, J. D. (2011). Bringing ethics into focus: How regulatory focus and risk preferences influence (un)ethical behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115, 145–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graen, G. B. (1976). Role making processes within complex organizations. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1201–1245). Chicago: Rand-McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives use different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029–1046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York: Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haslam, N., Loughnan, S., & Perry, G. (2014). Meta-Milgram: an empirical synthesis of the obedience experiments. PloS One, 9(4), e93927. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0093927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hassan, S., Wright, B. E., & Yukl, G. (2014). Does ethical leadership matter in government? Effects on organizational commitment, absenteeism, and willingness to report ethical problems. Public Administration Review, 74, 333–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoch, J. E., Bommer, W. H., Dulebohn, J. H., & Wu, D. (2018). Do ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 44, 501–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalshoven, K., Den Hartog, D. N., & De Hoogh, A. H. B. (2012). Ethical leadership at work questionnaire (ELW): Development and validation of a multidimensional measure. Leadership Quarterly, 22, 51–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, M., Muotka, J., Huhtala, M., Mäkikangas, A., & Feldt, T. (2017). Is the ethical culture of the organization associated with sickness absence? A multilevel analysis in a public sector organization. Journal of Business Ethics, 140, 131–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latane, B., & Darley, J. (1969). Bystander Apathy. American Scientist, 57, 244–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazar, N., Amir, O., & Ariely, D. (2008). The dishonesty of honest people: A theory of self-concept maintenance. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(6), 633–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCampbell, A. S., & Rood, T. L. (1997). Ethics in government: A survey of misuse of position for personal gain and its implication for developing acquisition strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 11, 1107–1116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer-Sahling, J., Mikkelsen, K. S., & Schuster, C. (2019). The causal effect of public service motivation on ethical behavior in the public sector: Evidence from a large-scale survey experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29, 445–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. London: Tavistock Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1973). The nature of managerial work. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulder, L. B., Jordan, J., & Rink, F. (2015). The effect of specific and general rules on ethical decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 126, 115–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2015). Ethical leadership: Meta-analytic evidence of criterion-related and incremental validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 948–965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, A. L., Hjorth, F., Harmon, N., & Barfort, S. (2019). Behavioral dishonesty in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29, 572–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pandey, S., & Amezcua, A. S. (2018). Women’s business ownership and women’s entrepreneurship through the lens of U.S. federal policies. Small Business Economics, 25, 256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0122-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paterson, T. A., & Huang, L. (2018). Am I expected to be ethical? A role-definition perspective of ethical leadership and unethical behavior. Journal of Management, 25, 256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318771166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandelowski, M. (1996). Using qualitative methods in intervention studies. Research in Nursing and Health, 19, 359–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treviño, L. K., Brown, M., & Hartman, L. P. (2003). A qualitative investigation of perceived executive ethical leadership: Perceptions from inside and outside the executive suite. Human Relations, 56, 5–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, B. E., Hassan, S., & Park, J. (2016). Does a public service ethic encourage ethical behavior? Public service motivation, ethical leadership and the willingness to report ethical concerns. Public Administration, 94, 647–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G. (2012). Effective leadership behavior: What we know and what questions need more attention. Academy of Management Executive, 26, 66–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in organizations. New York: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G., Mahsud, R., Hassan, S., & Prussia, G. (2013). An improved measure of ethical leadership. Journal of Leadership and Organization Studies, 20, 38–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shahidul Hassan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in our studies were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee of The Ohio State University (Phone: 614-292-6950) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.”

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Survey Experiment Design for Study 1

figure a

Survey Experiment Design for Study 2

figure b

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hassan, S., Pandey, S. & Pandey, S.K. Should Managers Provide General or Specific Ethical Guidelines to Employees: Insights from a Mixed Methods Study. J Bus Ethics 172, 563–580 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04442-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04442-3

Keywords

Navigation