The relation between ethical leadership, followers’
organizational citizenship behavior, and the perceived
ethical work climate
Master thesis, MSc HRM
University of Groningen, Faculty Economics and Business
June 29, 2012 Karina Frijling Bachstraat 23 8916 ER Leeuwarden 06-50817685 k.d.frijling@student.rug.nl s2051419 Supervisor: Dr. F. Walter Second assessor: Dr. F.A. Rink
2 ABSTRACT
This study examines the relation between ethical leadership, followers’ organizational
citizenship behaviour (OCB), and the perceived ethical work climate. The study was conducted
within 25 teams in the Netherlands, through a questionnaire with a total number of 138
participants. It was hypothesized that ethical leadership is positively related with followers’
OCB. Results reveal that there was no significant relation. However, results did show a positive
relation between ethical leadership and OCBI. Moreover, ethical work climate was significantly
related to followers’ OCB. Contrary to my expectations, however, no moderating effect of the
perceived ethical work climate on the relation between ethical leadership and followers’ OCB
was found.
Keywords:
3 INTRODUCTION
It has been widely acknowledged that leadership plays an important role in various
aspects of life (Rubin, Dierdoff & Brown, 2010). A large quantity of literature states,
accordingly, that various forms of leadership are associated with a wide range of individual and
organizational outcomes (Rubin et al., 2010). According to Mills (2005), leadership can have
various functions in organizations; it can help visualize what organizations want to achieve and
set directions for this way. Furthermore, leaders can encourage and inspire employees of the
organization to achieve this goal. Leadership can be seen as a process whereby one person
influences the thoughts, attitudes and behaviours of others (Mills, 2005). Complementary,
Brown, Treviño, and Harrison (2005, p. 117) add to this research: ”leaders should be a key
source of ethical guidance for employees”. Thereby, the importance of corporate social
responsibility has been widely acknowledged (Fisher & Lovell, 2009). Organizations have the
ability to do harm or to do well. Within this choice, organizations and leaders within the
organization must make ethical decisions about what to do.
In line with Brown et al.’s (2005) ideas, Avey, Palanski and Walumbwa (2010) have
shown the importance of ethical leadership and the effects it can have on the behaviour of
employees. Ethical leadership can be defined as ‘the demonstration of normatively appropriate
conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such
conduct to followers through two-way communication, reinforcement and decision making’
(Brown et al, 2005: 120). Research indicates that within the concept of ethical leadership, it is
important to view ethical leadership through employees’ perspective (Mayer, Kuenzi,
Greenbaum, Bardes & Salvador, 2009). Avey et al. (2010), for example, showed a positive
4 (OCB). According to Lee and Allen (2002), OCB is behaviour of employees that, although it is
not critical to the task of the employee, can contribute to the functioning of the organization. This
research also indicates that when employees are treated fairly, they are likely to engage in OCB
and those who have been treated unfairly will withhold OCB behaviour (Lee & Allen, 2002).
It can be seen that research has generally indicated a clear relationship between ethical
leadership and OCB. However, it is not clear in what kind of organizations, cultures,
relationships, teams and tasks ethical leadership matters most (Avey et al., 2010). These
contextual factors are of great practical significance, because these factors are more controllable
from a management perspective than, for example, individuals’ norms and values (Treviño,
Butterfield & McCabe, 1998).
The ethical dimension of the organizational climate plays an important role in the
research of Treviño et al. (1998). According to Victor and Cullen (1988), an ‘ethical work
climate’ can be defined as the perception of an individual of how ethical issues should be
approached and what ethically correct behaviour is within the organization. Ethical work climate
consists of the “prevailing perceptions of typical organizational practices and procedures that
have ethical content” (Victor & Cullen, 1988: 101). This climate is affected by policies,
procedures, reward and control systems which are part of the organizational normative system.
According to Wyld and Jones (1997) ethical climate is a macro-level concept. However, the
perception of the ethical climate is relevant for individuals’ behaviour. Therefore, the focus in
this research is on followers’ perception of the ethical climate in the organization and thus on the
micro-level.
Ethical leaders are attractive role models for followers. Thus, it is likely that followers
5 is more likely that a leader’s ethical behaviour influences followers’ behaviour when the context
of the organization supports the respective actions. In an ethical work climate, in particular,
ethical behaviour is positively rewarded and stimulated (Victor & Cullen, 1988).Therefore, it
could be implied that the ethical work climate could have a positive, moderating role within the
relation between ethical leadership and followers’ OCB.
In this paper, a theoretical contribution is made by examining this potential moderating
role of perceived ethical work climate. Moreover, whereas ethical leadership is an important
aspect in organizations, this research will shed light on what specific influence it can have. In
particular, an important practical contribution of this research is that managers get insight
whether and when ethical leadership contributes to followers’ OCB. Thereby, this research will
focus on the role of the context of the organization in determining whether ethical leadership
influences followers’ behaviour. Practitioners can gain advantage of this, because this research
will show whether a perceived positive ethical work climate contributes in the relationship
between ethical leadership and OCB. Moreover, this research will also show whether the
contextual factor (the ethical work climate) has a positive influence on followers’ OCB. As said
before, managers do have resources to change this contextual factor easier, instead of changing
individual norms and values (Treviño et al., 1998). This is an important contribution for
practitioners due to the increased importance of acting ethically as an organization (Fisher &
Lovell, 2009).
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
The influence of ethical leadership on followers’ organizational citizenship behaviour Ethical leaders are characterized as being honest, caring and principled individuals who
6 and are proactive role models for ethical conduct (Brown & Treviño, 2006). There is frequent
communication with followers about ethics and clear ethical standards are set. In line with these
standards, rewards and punishments are used to see that those standards are followed.
Ethical leadership is believed to guide the members of the organization towards goals and
objectives which benefit the whole organization and its members (Kanungo, 2001).
Research by Treviño, Hartman, and Brown (2000) points out that ethical leadership has
two dimensions: the perceptions of the leader as a ‘moral person’ and as a ‘moral manager’. The
first dimension, ‘moral person’, can be seen as the essential basis of ethical leadership. Being
viewed as a ‘moral person’ means that people think of you as having certain traits (integrity,
honesty and trustworthiness), engaging in certain kinds of behaviours (do the right thing, concern
for people, being open and personal morality), and making decisions upon ethical principles
(hold to values, objective/fair, concern for society and follow ethical decision rules) (Treviño et
al., 2000). The other dimension of ethical leadership is being a ‘moral manager’. This dimension
represents the leaders’ proactive efforts to influence followers’ ethical and unethical behaviour
(Treviño et al., 2000). A ‘moral manager’ serves as a role model for ethical conduct in a way that
is visible to employees.
Leaders are often in a position to control outcomes that can affect employees. Leaders
can stimulate followers’ behaviour with their own norms and values in a way that follower’s will
act similar to their leader (Brown & Mitchell, 2010). Complementary, Schminke, Wells,
Peyreffite, and Sebora (2002) argue that employees often conform to the ethical behaviour of
their leaders.
So, multiple studies point out the influence ethical leadership can have on followers’
7 OCB. This is a type of behaviour that is not prescribed in a formal job description, but does
increases the efficiency and effectiveness of the organization (Avey et al., 2010).
The relationship between ethical leadership and followers’ organizational citizenship
behavior can be explained through two different theories: the social learning theory (Bandura,
1986) and the social exchange theory (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005).
The social learning theory is in line with the second dimension (‘moral manager’) of
ethical leadership (Brown et al., 2005). A social learning perspective on ethical leadership
proposes that leaders influence the ethical conduct of followers through modeling. According to
Bandura (1986), virtually anything can be learned through direct experience and can also be
learned by indirect experience, through observing others’ behavior and its consequences.
Employees can learn what kind of behavior is expected, rewarded, and punished through role
modeling. Leaders are an important source of such modeling (Bandura, 1986). Through role
modeling, ethical leaders may promote ethical behavior among organizational members
(Bandura, 1986). As a result, followers are expected to become mutually dependent, more
focused on cooperation than competition, and more committed to the organization (Kanungo &
Conger, 1993). In addition, Mayer et al. (2009) proposes a trickle-down effect of ethical
leadership. Within this effect, top-management influences the ethical leadership of supervisors
who, in turn, influence their followers’ behavior. To conclude, the social learning theory
suggests that employees will tend to model the behavior of their supervisor to ensure that their
behavior is in line with accepted behavioral norms (Mayer et al., 2009).
The second theory is the social exchange theory. Social exchanges are based on the norm
of reciprocity (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005; Gouldner, 1960). This norm is based upon the fact
8 to reciprocate such beneficial behavior (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). Additionally, Blau
(1964) makes a distinction between two types of social exchange: transactional and
socioemotional. Transactional exchange is based on economic exchanges such as money and
resources. Socioemotional, on the other hand, is based on the exchange of interpersonal
treatment such as trust and fairness. According to Mayer et al. (2009) it is expected that ethical
leadership affects followers’ behavior through socioemotional exchange. Followers know that
they can rely on their ethical leader, and due to the received fair treatment, followers are more
likely to reciprocate such treatment by behaving in a beneficial manner (Mayer et al., 2009).
Research has shown, accordingly, that leaders who are perceived as acting and behaving
ethically, have a positive influence on productive employee work behavior (Mayer et al., 2009).
Taken the influence of ethical leadership and the two theories described above into
account, it can be proposed that ethical leadership has a positive influence on followers’
organizational citizenship behavior. OCBs can be viewed as an important moral principle
(Deckop, Carol & Andersson, 2003). Individuals choose to perform this kind of behavior that
can be characterized as extra-role and beneficial to others (Deckop et al., 2003). Therefore, OCB
can be viewed as a kind of ethical behavior. Therefore, the above argumentation leads to the
following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1: Ethical leadership is positively related to followers’ organizational citizenship behavior.
9 Besides the influence of ethical leadership on followers’ OCB, the ethical climate can
also influence followers’ behaviour (Sinclair, 1993). The ethical climate of an organization is
part of the organizational culture (Appelbaum, Deguire, & Lay, 2005). In this study, I focus on
individual employees’ perceptions of their organization’s ethical climate. The organization’s
ethical climate consists of the evaluation of how ethical issues should be addressed within the
organization and what ethically correct behaviour is (Deshpande, 1996). Schneider (1975) adds
to this, that these perceptions of employees are concerned with what kinds of ethical procedures
and policies exist in their organization. The perceptions of employees are based on observations,
not feelings or attitudes, which employees of the organization have about how the organization
approaches ethical dilemmas (Wimbush & Shepard, 1994). Victor and Cullen (1987) state that
certain organizational values deal with ethical issues. These issues form the ethical climate of the
organization.
Treviño et al. (1998) argues that there is an association between the ethical climate of an
organization and employees’ attitudes and behaviours. Complementary, Schneider (1975) argues
that ethical climate may be a significant factor in shaping employees’ behaviour. Fleishman
(1953) illustrates this statement with an example where foremen adapt their behaviour to the
dominant climate in a factory by behaving not as they were taught during a formal socialization
process, but in a style consistent with their work climate. Individuals adapt to or try to adapt to
the climate of their surroundings (Schneider, 1975).
As stated above, organizational citizenship behaviour is not written in a job description
(Avey et al., 2010). Nevertheless, followers are not only expected to be productive on an
10 (Organ, 1988). Therefore, this type of behaviour is often influenced by informal forces within the
organization, such as an ethical work climate (Leung, 2008).
The organization’s ethical climate consists of what correct behaviour is and how ethical
issues will be handled. This climate sets the tone for the organization’s decision made at all
levels during all circumstances (Sims, 1992). As described above, the social learning theory
suggests that when there are role models in the work environment, followers will strive to
emulate these models (Mayer et al. 2009). Therefore, followers will show similar behaviour of
what is seen in the work environment.
People within the organization perceive the ethical climate differently. This difference in
perception may result in people behaving similarly or differently (Schneider, 1975). However,
when followers’ perceive the work climate as ethical, this can lead to two important aspects of
OCB. First, in a perceived ethical work climate, individuals have a concern for the well-being of
others. This can lead to a desire to help colleagues, which is an important underlying motive of
OCB. Secondly, in a perceived ethical climate individuals make decisions based on rules and are
concerned whether any laws are broken. This can lead to more concern for the organization,
which is another important underlying motive of OCB (Leung, 2008).
Followers’ perception is of significant importance, due to the fact that it is their
perception that will influence their behaviour and attitude (Barnett & Schubert, 2002). Therefore,
it can be suggested that when followers perceive the work climate as ethically, this would have a
positive influence on their organizational citizenship behaviour. Based on the above
argumentation, the following hypothesis can be made:
11 The moderating role of the perceived ethical work climate
Besides directly relating with followers’ OCB, I suggest an ethical work climate will
moderate the relationship between ethical leadership and followers’ respective behaviour. In line
with this notion, the research of Avey et al. (2010) examined under what conditions ethical
leadership could have a positive influence on followers’ organizational citizenship behaviour.
However, the focus of Avey et al. (2010) was on characteristics of individuals, such as followers’
self-esteem, instead of the context of the organization. According to Treviño et al. (1998) the
organization’s context can have a significant influence on the role of ethical leadership. The
ethical climate of an organization is an important aspect that can affect the relationship between
followers and their leader (Barnett & Schubert, 2002).
A theory that can be related to the influence of a strong perceived ethical work climate on
the relationship of ethical leadership with followers’ organizational citizenship behaviour is the
leader prototypicality theory (Van Knippenberg, 2011). A leader is perceived as group prototype
to the extent that he or she expresses the identity of the team. Another factor that creates the
perspective of being prototypical is the inherent perception of followers that the leader represents
what the standards are for the team (Hogg, 2001, Hogg & van Knippenberg, 2003; & van
Knippenberg & Hogg, 2003). If leaders are seen as prototypical, they are capable of mobilizing
and influencing their followers (Hogg, 2001).
Followers are more motivated if they view their leader as prototypical, who pursues the
group’s best interest. An ethical work climate provides a context where it is stimulated to follow
the policies and procedures of the organization (Schneider, 1975). An ethical leader will be
perceived as more group prototypical if the organization’s climate is more ethical. The
12 behaving ethically. If leaders serve as a role model, this will have a positive influence on
followers’ behaviour.
Based on the above argumentation, it can be proposed that the perceived ethical work
climate has a significant influence on the linkage between ethical leadership and employees’
work behaviours. Taking into account the expected positive relationship of ethical leadership on
followers’ organizational citizenship behaviour, it seems reasonable that a positive perceived
ethical work climate has a positive influence on this relationship. Based on this expectation, the
following hypothesis is made:
Hypothesis 3: A positive perceived ethical work climate strengthens the positive relationship of ethical leadership on followers’ organizational citizenship behaviour
METHODOLOGY Sample and procedures
The above mentioned hypotheses were tested with data collected through a questionnaire
in the Netherlands. Data was collected from 22 organizations operating in 17 different sectors
(e.g. healthcare, energy and hospitality). The response rate was 50.5%, for an overall sample size
of 138 employees from 25 teams.The smallest team consisted of 4 members and the largest team
consisted of 11 members. The respondents were 68.8% female and 31.2% male. The participants
had an average age of 31.7 years (SD =10.47) and had an average organizational tenure of 66.5
months (SD = 89.38). About 34% of the participants completed an intermediate vocational
training, and about 30% completed a higher vocational education.
The surveys were distributed and collected during working hours. The participants were
13 their responses would be kept confidential. Multiple regression was used to explore the
relationship between the independent variables/moderators (ethical leadership and the perceived
ethical work climate) and the dependent variable (organizational citizenship behaviour).
Measures
Ethical leadership. This variable was measured by asking individual followers to rate their perception of their leader’s ethical behaviour using Brown et al.’s (2005) 10-item scale.
Participants rated these items on a scale from 1 ‘highly unlikely’ to 7 ‘highly likely’. Sample
items included: ‘My leader makes fair and balanced decisions’ and ‘My leader can be trusted’.
The scale for ethical leadership achieved an acceptable reliability level with a Cronbach’s alpha
of .93.
Organizational citizenship behaviour. Organizational citizenship behaviour was measured with items drawn from Lee and Allen (2002) and Schneider, Goff, Anderson &
Borman (2003). A distinction within the 12 questions was made between OCB directed towards
the organization (OCBO), also called compliance, and directed towards colleagues (OCBI), also
called altruism. OCBO refers to behaviour that benefits the organization in general. OCBI, on the
other hand, is aimed at helping colleagues, which indirectly contributes to the organization
(Williams & Andersen, 1991). Followers self-rated these items on a 7-point scale, from 1 ‘never’
to 7 ‘always’. OCBI items included questions like: ‘helps others who have been absent’; and
‘assist others with their duties‘. OCBO items included questions like: ‘keep up with development
in the organization’; and ‘defend the organization when other employees criticize it’. Based on a
14 scales into one common OCB score. This variable reached an acceptable reliability level with a
Cronbach’s alpha of .86.
Ethical work climate. Ethical work climate was measured with an adjusted version of Victor and Cullen’s (1987, 1988) 26-item measure. These items were developed to capture
individual followers’ perceived ethical work climate of the organization. Followers’ rated the
ethical work climate on a 7-point scale, from 1 ‘completely false’ to 7 ‘completely true’. Sample
items included: ‘In this company, people are expected to follow their own personal and moral
beliefs’ and ‘In this company, the first consideration is whether a decision violates any law’. The
ethical work climate scale achieved an acceptable reliability level with a Cronbach’s alpha of
.69.
Control variables. The control variables gender, tenure, and age could all have an influence on the dependent variable, organizational citizenship behaviour. According to Allen
and Rush (2001), for example, it is expected that women are more likely to be viewed as ‘good
soldiers’, than men. Therefore, it is more likely that women are more engaged in OCBs than
men.
Organizational tenure could also have an influence on OCB. According to Ng (2010)
employees with a longer tenure, are more likely to be engaged in OCBs. If tenure increases,
employees become more knowledgeable and adapt more to their responsibilities (Morrison,
1994).
Age can have an influence on followers’ OCB in a way that older and younger
employees’ orientation towards others and towards work may differ (Wagner & Rush, 2000). For
example, younger employees may be more influenced by the norm of reciprocity than older
15 Accordingly, gender (1=male, 2=female), organizational tenure (months of service in the
organization), and age (in years) were considered as potential control variables.
RESULTS
Correlations and descriptive statistics
Means, standard deviations and Pearson correlations of the independent, dependent and
control variables are presented in Table 1. As can be seen, age and tenure are both significantly
related with OCB. However, based on Becker (2005), only age is included in the regression
analysis. Furthermore, ethical work climate shows a positive correlation to OCB (r = .37, p <
.01). Positive correlations also apply for ethical leadership and OCB (r = .21, p < .05), and
ethical leadership and ethical work climate (r = .23, p < .01).
--- Insert Table 1 about here ---
Hypothesis testing
To further investigate the relationship between ethical leadership, ethical work climate,
and followers’ OCB, a moderated linear regression was conducted. The results of this analysis
are summarized in Table 2.
It was anticipated that ethical leadership would be positively related to followers’
organizational citizenship behaviour, as was hypothesized in Hypothesis 1. Results in Table 2
show no significant relation between these variables (B = .11, p = .19). Hence, there was no
16 Hypothesis 2 proposed that the perceived ethical work climate would be positively
related to followers’ organizational citizenship behaviour. Results of the regression analysis in
Table 2 support this prediction (B = .28, p = .00).
The last hypothesis proposed that the relationship between ethical leadership and
followers’ OCB was moderated by the perceived ethical work climate. It was expected that a
perceived ethical work climate, should have a positive influence on the relationship between
ethical leadership and followers’ OCB. Results of the regression analysis reveal that there was no
significant interaction effect, however (B = .04, p = .55). Hence, Hypothesis 3 was rejected.
--- Insert Table 2 about here ---
Additional analyses
Despite the high correlation between OCBI and OCBO (r = .53, p < .01), an additional
analyses was conducted to get a complete view of the data. The results of this analysis are
presented in Tables 3 and 4. As can be seen in Table 3, ethical leadership shows no relationship
to OCBO (B = .06, p = .54). The ethical work climate, on the other hand does show a
relationship with OCBO (B = .23, p = .02). The interaction effect is also not significant in
relation to OCBO (B = .08, p = .43). Hence, findings for OCBO largely mirrored the results for
overall OCB, supporting Hypothesis 2, but refuting Hypotheses 1 and 3.
--- Insert Table 3 about here ---
Table 4 presents the results of the analysis for OCBI. As can be seen, ethical leadership
shows a significant relationship to OCBI (B = .15. p = .02). Ethical work climate is also
17 show any significant relation with OCBI (B =.00, p = .96). Hence, in slight contrast to the results
for overall OCB, both Hypotheses 1 and 2 were supported for OCBI. Hypothesis 3 was also
rejected in this analysis, however.
--- Insert Table 4 about here ---
DISCUSSION Findings
The purpose of this research was to examine the relation between ethical leadership,
followers’ organizational citizenship behaviour, and the perceived ethical work climate.
First of all, results showed no significant relationship between ethical leadership and
followers’ OCB. However, although earlier research (Avey et al., 2011) shows a positive
relationship between ethical leadership and OCB, the present research shows no significant
relationship. This could be explained by distinguishing OCB into OCBI and OCBO. Results in
the additional analyses show a strong relation of ethical leadership with OCBI, OCBO on the
other hand shows no significant relation. It may be that employees are more sensitive to the
approach of the ethical leader towards their colleagues than to the organization as a whole
(Allen, 2006). Another possible explanation could be that OCBI is more responsive to the norm
of reciprocity (Farh, Podsakoff, & Organ, 1990). So, individuals are more likely to reciprocate to
colleagues than to the organization.
Secondly, as expected, the perceived ethical work climate showed a significant relation
with followers’ OCB. This is in line with research of Weeks & Nantel (1992) who suggests that
an environment with high ethical standards could lead to an employee’s increased job
18 Contrary to the expectations of this research, the moderating role of the perceived ethical
work climate was not supported. The perceived ethical work climate did not significantly interact
with ethical leadership in shaping OCB. Since the importance of contextual factors has been
widely acknowledged (Treviño et al., 1998), this could be explained by the fact that the ethical
climate of an organization is only a small aspect of the whole work climate (Wyld & Jones,
1997). Since the work climate consists of more dimensions than the ethical climate, other
dimensions could have more influence on the relation between ethical leadership and followers’
OCB.
Theoretical implications
This research has some theoretical implications for the existing literature. First of all, due
to the increased importance of ethical leadership in organizations (Brown & Treviño, 2006), this
study contributes to the existing literature with regard to ethical leadership and the way it can
influence followers’ behaviour.
Secondly, results of this research show no significant relationship between ethical
leadership and followers’ OCB. However, in the additional analyses a distinction is made
between OCBI and OCBO. These results show that ethical leadership is significant related with
OCBI, but is not significant related with OCBO. These findings thus suggest that although there
is a high correlation between OCBI and OCBO, a distinction between the two main forms of
OCB can be helpful, because these results show a difference in outcome.
Finally, results of this study contribute to new ways of thinking about the role of the
perceived ethical work climate. Existing literature already showed the importance of the ethical
19 climate can be on the behaviour of followers. This is also due to the results showing a significant
relation between the perceived ethical work climate and followers’ OCB, but no significant
relation as the perceived ethical work climate as a moderator. Future research could elaborate
more on the specific role of the ethical climate and the influence it can have.
Strengths and limitations
This research has several strong points. One of them is the relatively high sample size.
There were 25 teams involved in this research, with 138 employees. Secondly, there was a high
variability in these teams. Teams came from different sectors and different fields of
specialization, which could increase the generalizability of the results of this research.
However, this last point could also be a limitation. The fact that the different teams are
not working in the same sector could affect the results of the research. All employees who
participated in this research have a different educational background, which could lead to a
different perception of the questions.
Another limitation of this research is the generalizability of the data toward different
cultures. All the data was collected in the Netherlands, which could have an influence on the
results. The response rate (50.5%) could be another limitation. This could reduce the
confidentiality in the data and could influence the generalizability of the results (Pinsonneault &
Kraemer, 1993).
Thirdly, there are common method variance issues in this research (Podsakoff,
MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). The questionnaire which was used to measure the
20 inflated the observed relationships in a way that people have a tendency to over-estimate
themselves and respond in a socially acceptable manner (Podsakoff et al., 2003).
Fourth, a cross-sectional study was conducted. This type of study can say that two
variables are related somehow, but they cannot positively determine if one caused the other. It
limits the possibility to draw conclusions on the causality of the observed relationships (Pearl,
2003).
Practical implications
Next to the theoretical implications, the results of this study also have some important
practical implications. First of all, this study has shown that ethical leaders can have a positive
influence on followers’ OCBI. As OCB is considered as a contribution to the organization’s
objectives (Organ, 1988), ethical leadership can play an important role achieving these objectives
by influencing followers’ OCB. Managers need to be aware what they can achieve, serving as a
role model. This influence could be a positive contribution to followers’ behaviour.
Additionally, this study has also shown that the perceived ethical work climate can have
an important positive influence on OCB. Since managers are capable of influencing and
changing the contextual factor of the organization (Treviño et al., 1988), the results of this study
could be an important finding for managers to invest in the ethical work climate of the
organization. Managers have the ability to change aspects in the context, like setting clear
standards for behavioural norms. In this way, managers can positively contribute to the perceived
21 Future research
As mentioned above, results in this research show different outcomes by distinguishing
the two main forms of OCB. Future research could focus more on the distinction of these two
forms of OCB and their antecedents. Moreover, a distinction could be made according to the
seven different dimensions of OCB (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000). These
seven dimensions (helping behaviour, sportsmanship, organizational loyalty, organizational
compliance, individual compliance, individual initiative, civic virtue, and self-development)
could all have different antecedents and/or consequences (Podsakoff et al. 2000). Future research
could elaborate more on the relation between ethical leadership and these seven dimensions of
OCB.
Other outcome variables could also be taken into account. Since this study focuses on
individual outcomes (OCB), future research may also want to investigate the relation with
organization level outcomes or firm reputation.
The questionnaire of this research was based on self-report. Future research could let leaders
rating followers’ OCB.
Since there was no moderating influence of the perceived ethical work climate on the relation
between ethical leadership and followers’ OCB, future research could consider other moderators
as well. Other moderators could be more specific, such as the five factors of ethical work climate
described by Victor and Cullen (1988). The five factors of ethical work climate (law and code,
caring, instrumentalism, independence, and rules) each represent a particular dimension of the
ethical work climate (Victor & Cullen 1988). Focusing independently on these factors, could
give more insight on the particular ethical work climate of an organization. This could result in a
22 more on job type and type of workers. Research shows that type of work and workers could
affect the influence a leader can have on followers (Detert, Treviño, Burris, & Andiappan, 2007).
Next to other possible moderators, some mediators also could be taken into account for
future research. Research has shown that personality and attitudinal factors, such as
agreeableness and conscientiousness, have an influence on OCB (Podsakoff et al., 2000). Future
research could focus on these personality and/or attitudinal factors as possible mediators.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between ethical leadership, the
perceived ethical work climate, and followers’ OCB. No support was found for the relation
between ethical leadership and followers’ OCB, and the moderating role of the perceived ethical
work climate. However, support was found for the positive relation between the perceived
ethical work climate and followers’ OCB. The present study shows what influence ethical
leadership, and a perceived ethical climate can have in these turbulent times, where ethics plays
23
REFERENCES
Allen, T.D. 2006. Citizenship behavior and organizational rewards. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 36(1): 120-143
Allen, T.D., & Rush, M.C. 2001. The influence of ratee gender on ratings of OCB. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 31: 2561-2587
Appelbaum, S.H., Kyle, J.D., & Lay, M. 2005. The relationship of ethical climate to deviant
workplace behaviour. Corporate Governance, 5(4):43-55
Aslam, R. 2012. Investigating the relationship of OCB with job satisfaction, organizational
commitment and turnover intentions. International Journal of Economic and
Management Sciences, 1(9): 90-100
Avey, J.B, Palanski, M.E., & Walumbwa, F.O. 2010. When Leadership Goes Unnoticed: The
Moderating Role of Follower Self-Esteem on the Relationship between Ethical
Leadership and Follower Behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(4): 573-582
Bandura, A. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PresenticeHall
Barnett, T., & Schubert, E. 2002. Perception of the ethical work climate and convental
relationships. Journal of Business Ethics, 36: 279-290
Becker, T.E. 2005. Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational
research: a qualitative analysis with recommendations. Organizational Research
Methods, 8: 274-289
Blau, P. 1964. Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley.
Brown, M. E., & Mitchell, M.S. 2010. Ethical and Unethical Leadership: Exploring New
24 Brown, M.E., & Treviño, L.K. 2006. Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The
Leadership Quarterly, 17: 595-616.
Brown, M. E., Treviño, L.K., & D. A. Harrison. 2005. Ethical Leadership: A Social Learning
Perspective for Construct Development and Testing, Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 97: 117–134.
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M.S. 2005. Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review.
Journal of Management, 3: 874- 900
Deckop, J.R., Carol, C.C. & Andersson, L.M. 2003. Doing unto others: The reciprocity of
helping behaviour in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(2): 101-113
Deshpandé, S. 1996. Ethical climate and the link between success and ethical behaviour: an
empirical investigation of a non-profit organization. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(3):
315-320
Detert, J.R., Treviño, L.K., Burris, E.R., & Andiappan, M. 2007. Managerial modes of
influence and counterproductivity in organizations: a longitudinal business-unit-level
investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92: 993-1005
Fahr, J., Podsakoff, P.M., & Organ, D.W. 1990. Accounting for organizational citizenship
behaviour: Leader fairness and task scope versus satisfaction. Journal of Management.
16: 705-722
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. 1975. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to
theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
Fisher, C., & Lovell, A., 2009. Business ethics and values: individual, corporate and
international perspectives. Harlow, Pearson Education Limited.
25 Personnel psychology, 6: 205-222.
Gouldner, A.W. 1960. The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological
Review, 25: 161-178
Hogg, M.A. 2001. A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 5: 184-200
Hogg, M.A., & van Knippenberg, D. 2003. Social identity and leadership processes in groups.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 35: 1-52
Kanungo, R. N. 2001. Ethical values of transactional and transformational leaders. Canadian
Journal of Administrative Sciences, 18: 257−265.
Kanungo, R. N., & Conger, J. A. 1993. Promoting altruism as a corporate goal. The Academy of
Management Executive, 7: 37−48.
Lee, K., & N. J. Allen: 2002. ‘Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Workplace Deviance:
The Role of Affect and Cognitions’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 131–142.
Leung, A.S.M. 2008. Matching ethical work climate to in-role and extra-role behaviors win a
collectivist work setting. Journal of Business ethics, 79: 43-55
Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., Greenbaum, R., Bardes, M., & Salvador, R. 2009. How low does
ethical leadership now? Test of a trickle-down model. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 108: 1-13.
Mills, D. Q. 2005. Leadership How to Lead, How to Live. Waltham, Mass.: MindEdge Press
Morrison, E.W. 1994. Role definitions and organizational citizenship behaviour: the importance
of the employees’ perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1543-1567
26 1220-1250
Organ, D.W. 1988. Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome.
Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Pearl, J. 2003. Causality: models, reasoning, and inference. Economic Theory, 19: 675-685
Pinsonneault, A. & Kraemer, K.L. 1993. Survey research in management information systems:
an assessment. Journal of Management Information Systems, 10(2): 75-205
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N.P. 2003. Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5): 879-903
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Paine, J.B., & Bachrach, D.G. 2000. Organizational
citizenship behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and
suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26(3): 513-563
Rubin, R., Dierdorff, E.C., & Brown, M.E. 2010. Do Ethical Leaders Get Ahead? Exploring
Ethical Leadership and Promotability. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20: 215-236
Schminke, M., Wells, D., Peyreffite, J., & Sebora, T. C. 2002. Leadership and ethics in
work groups: A longitudinal assessment. Group and Organization Management,
27: 272-93.
Schneider, B. 1975. Organizational climates: An essay. Personnel Psychology, 28: 447-479
Schneider, R.J., Goff, M., Anderson, S., & Borman, W.C. 2003. Computerized adaptive rating
scales for measuring managerial performance. International Journal of Selection and
Assessment, 11: 237-246
Sims, R.R. 1992. The challenge of ethical behavior in organizations. Journal of Business
27 Sinclair, A. 1993. Approaches to organizational culture and ethics. Journal of Business Ethics,
12: 63-73
Treviño, L.K, Butterfield, K.D., McCabe, D.L. 1998. The ethical context in organizations:
influences on employee attitudes and behaviours. Business Ethics Quarterly, vol.8 no.3
Treviño, L.K., Hartman, L.P., & Brown, M. 2000. Moral person and Moral manager: how
exectuives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review,
42, 128-142
Van Knippenberg, 2011. Embodying who we are: leader group prototypicality and leadership
effectiveness. The Leadership Quaterly. 22(6): 1078-1091
Van Knippenberg, D., & Hogg, M.A. 2003. A social identity model of leadership effectiveness
in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25: 243-295
Vardi, Y. 2001. The effects of organizational and ethical climates on misconduct at work.
Journal of Business Research, 29(4): 325-337
Victor, B., & J.B. Cullen, 1987. A theory and measure of ethical climate in organizatons in
Frederick, W.C. and Preston, L. (Eds), Research in Corporate Social Performance and
Policy, 9: 51-71
Victor, B., & J.B. Cullen, 1988. The organizational bases of ethical work climate.
Administrative Science Quaterly, 33, 101-125
Wagner, S.L., & Rush, M.C. 2010, Altruistic organizational citizenship behavior: context,
disposition, and age. The Journal of Social Psychology, 140 (3): 379-391
28 as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers’
performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal.
8(3) 420-432
Weeks, W.W., & Nantel, J. 1992. Corporate codes of ethics and sales force behavior: a case
study. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(10): 753-760
Williams, L.J., & Anderson, S.E. 1991. Job satisfaction and Organizational Commitment as
Predictors of Organizational Citizenship and In-Role Behaviors. Journal of Management
17(3): 601
Wimbush, J.C. & Shepard, J.M. 1994. Toward an understanding of ethical climate: its
relationship to ethical behavior and supervisory influence. Journal of Business Ethics,
13: 637-647
Wyld, D.C., & Jones, C.A. 1997. The importance of context: the ethical work climate construct
and models of ethical decision making – an agenda for research. Journal of Business
29 Table 1: Descriptive statistics and correlations
Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 1. OCB 5.17 .85
2. Gender 1.70 .47 .05
3. Organizational tenure 66.54 89.40 .19* -.06
4. Age 31.70 10.47 .23** -.18* .70** 5. Ethical work climate 4.40 .58 .37** .17* .13 .07
6. Ethical leadership 5.00 1.05 .21* .28** .07 .04 .23**
** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05, N = 138
Table 2: Regression results for OCB
Model Variables B. S.E. Sig. R-square
Controls Age .17 .07 .01
Main effects
Ethical leadership .11 .07 .19 .20 Ethical work climate .28 .07 .00
Interaction
Effect Ethical leadership x .04 .07 .55 .20 ethical work climate
30 Table 3: Regression results for OCBO
Model Variables B. S.E. Sig. R-square
Controls Age .21 .09 .03
Main effects
Ethical leadership .06 .09 .54 .09 Ethical work climate .23 .09 .02
Interaction
Effect Ethical leadership x .08 .10 .43 .10 ethical work climate
N = 138
Table 4: Regression results for OCBI
Model Variables B. S.E. Sig. R-square
Controls Age .14 .06 .02
Main effects
Ethical leadership .15 .06 .02 .27 Ethical work climate .32 .06 .00
Interaction
Effect Ethical leadership x .00 .06 .96 .27 ethical work climate
