IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijicbm/v4y2011i4p357-376.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organisational correlates of peer reporting: the mediating role of ethical ambiguity

Author

Listed:
  • Priya Nair Rajeev
  • T.J. Kamalanabhan

Abstract

The primary aim of this study is to investigate the organisational predictors of peer reporting. This study provides evidence from a mediation model linking organisational factors with ethical ambiguity as a hypothesised mediator in willingness to report ethical infractions. The study was conducted with a sample (n = 302) selected from the organisations in private sector, public sector and select multinational companies in India that have a declared ethical code of conduct. Findings indicate low levels of ethical empowerment and an unwillingness among managers to report peer infractions. The study suggests that organisations may want to educate employees in understanding and implementing ethical codes and empowering them to make ethical decisions when faced with a dilemma and to report unethical behaviour. Top management may also need to reinforce ethical codes by applauding ethical behaviour and by reprimanding unethical conduct, so as to reduce ambiguity and nurture a supportive ethical climate.

Suggested Citation

  • Priya Nair Rajeev & T.J. Kamalanabhan, 2011. "Organisational correlates of peer reporting: the mediating role of ethical ambiguity," International Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 4(4), pages 357-376.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijicbm:v:4:y:2011:i:4:p:357-376
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=40956
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijicbm:v:4:y:2011:i:4:p:357-376. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=235 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.