IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/hztuy.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Independently Measure the Organizational and (Un)ethical Dimensions of Unethical Pro-organizational Behavior using the Process Dissociation Paradigm

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Chuanjun

    (Sichuan University)

  • LIU, Luyao
  • Abbas, Syed Zain
  • Zou, Lemei

Abstract

Previous studies have revealed the paradoxical nature of unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB) and have developed measures for investigating this phenomenon. However, it was not possible to ascertain whether the employees exhibited a low level of ethicality or a high degree of pro-organizational inclination when they made a UPB decision due to the limitations of the binary continuum. This study addresses the aforementioned gap by employing the process dissociation paradigm in three studies. The scenarios for process dissociation were carefully compiled and validated based on previous work (Study 1), and the reliability and validity of the new approach were tested (Study 2). The application of the new approach to independently measure the organizationality and ethicality dimensions of UPB facilitated the clarification of some mainstream theoretical explanations for UPB (Study 3). The phenomenon of moral disengagement, moral justification, and moral decoupling among employees engaged in UPB is associated with a reduced emphasis on ethical considerations and an enhanced pro-organizational disposition. Conversely, social exchange and organizational identification of employees involved in UPB are linked to a minorly diminished pro-organizational inclination and enhanced ethical considerations. The new measure offers a resolution to numerous theoretical controversies on UPB and is recommended for future studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Chuanjun & LIU, Luyao & Abbas, Syed Zain & Zou, Lemei, 2024. "Independently Measure the Organizational and (Un)ethical Dimensions of Unethical Pro-organizational Behavior using the Process Dissociation Paradigm," OSF Preprints hztuy, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:hztuy
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/hztuy
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6731ce5ff9bf09dc3462fc17/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/hztuy?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fehr, Ryan & Welsh, David & Yam, Kai Chi & Baer, Michael & Wei, Wu & Vaulont, Manuel, 2019. "The role of moral decoupling in the causes and consequences of unethical pro-organizational behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 27-40.
    2. Amit Bhattacharjee & Jonathan Z. Berman & Americus Reed II, 2013. "Tip of the Hat, Wag of the Finger: How Moral Decoupling Enables Consumers to Admire and Admonish," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(6), pages 1167-1184.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:osf:osfxxx:hztuy_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Chris Hydock & Neeru Paharia & T. J. Weber, 2019. "The Consumer Response to Corporate Political Advocacy: a Review and Future Directions," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 6(3), pages 76-83, December.
    3. Joon Sung Lee & Dae Hee Kwak, 2016. "Consumers’ Responses to Public Figures’ Transgression: Moral Reasoning Strategies and Implications for Endorsed Brands," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 101-113, August.
    4. Tang, Pok Man & Yam, Kai Chi & Koopman, Joel, 2020. "Feeling proud but guilty? Unpacking the paradoxical nature of unethical pro-organizational behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 68-86.
    5. Jones, Scott & Cronin, James & Piacentini, Maria G., 2022. "Celebrity brand break-up: Fan experiences of para-loveshock," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 720-731.
    6. Jie Chen & Lefa Teng & Yonghai Liao, 2018. "Counterfeit Luxuries: Does Moral Reasoning Strategy Influence Consumers’ Pursuit of Counterfeits?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 249-264, August.
    7. Austin, Chelsea Rae & Bobek, Donna D. & Jackson, Scott, 2021. "Does prospect theory explain ethical decision making? Evidence from tax compliance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    8. Magali Muraro & Karine Cissé -Depardon, 2015. "Proposition d'une échelle de mesure de l'état de désorientation du consommateur dans le domaine de la santé alimentaire," Post-Print hal-02587231, HAL.
    9. Lee, Joon Sung & Kwak, Dae Hee, 2017. "Can winning take care of everything? A longitudinal assessment of post-transgression actions on repairing trust in an athlete endorser," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 261-272.
    10. Pallant, Jason I. & Pallant, Jessica L. & Sands, Sean J. & Ferraro, Carla R. & Afifi, Eslam, 2022. "When and how consumers are willing to exchange data with retailers: An exploratory segmentation," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    11. Mukherjee, Sourjo & Althuizen, Niek, 2020. "Brand activism: Does courting controversy help or hurt a brand?," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 772-788.
    12. Kristina Haberstroh & Ulrich R. Orth & Stefan Hoffmann & Berit Brunk, 2017. "Consumer Response to Unethical Corporate Behavior: A Re-Examination and Extension of the Moral Decoupling Model," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 161-173, January.
    13. Boman, Laura & Lefebvre, Sarah & Urumutta Hewage, Ganga S., 2023. "When push comes to shove: How coach versus student athlete misconduct affects event attendance intentions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    14. Moritz Loock & Diane M. Phillips, 2020. "A Firm’s Financial Reputation vs. Sustainability Reputation: Do Consumers Really Care?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-17, December.
    15. Alqhaiwi, Zaid Oqla, 2024. "A bright side to unethical pro-organizational behavior: Improving work performance by satisfying psychological needs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    16. Sourjo Mukherjee & Niek Althuizen, 2020. "Brand Activism: Does Courting Controversy Help or Hurt a Brand?," Post-Print hal-03095886, HAL.
    17. Sharma, Isha & Jain, Kokil & Behl, Abhishek, 2020. "Effect of service transgressions on distant third-party customers: The role of moral identity and moral judgment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 696-712.
    18. Jorge Matute & José Luis Sánchez-Torelló & Ramon Palau-Saumell, 2021. "The Influence of Organizations’ Tax Avoidance Practices on Consumers’ Behavior: The Role of Moral Reasoning Strategies, Political Ideology, and Brand Identification," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 174(2), pages 369-386, November.
    19. Junghyun Lee & Se-Hyung Oh & Sanghee Park, 2022. "Effects of Organizational Embeddedness on Unethical Pro-organizational Behavior: Roles of Perceived Status and Ethical Leadership," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 111-125, February.
    20. Paolo Antonetti & Benedetta Crisafulli & Aybars Tuncdogan, 2021. "“Just Look the Other Way”: Job Seekers’ Reactions to the Irresponsibility of Market-Dominant Employers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 174(2), pages 403-422, November.
    21. Stefano Pace & Matteo Corciolani & Giacomo Gistri, 2017. "Consumers? responses to ethical brand crises on social media platforms," MERCATI & COMPETITIVIT?, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2017(1), pages 141-157.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:osf:osfxxx:hztuy. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.