The Ethical Climate and Context of Organizations: A Comprehensive Model

Abstract

Traditional approaches to understanding the ethical context of organizations often focus on ethical work climate, which reflects the collective moral reasoning of organization members. However, such approaches overlook other components of the ethical environment that may influence how ethical judgments translate to ethical behavior. This study extends our understanding of the ethical context of organizations by considering how three distinct aspects of that context—collective moral reasoning (ethical climate), collective moral emotion, and collective ethical efficacy—interact to influence ethical behavior. Results from 117 work units support our hypotheses. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Internally Reporting Risk in Financial Services: An Empirical Analysis

“…Given the importance of, and requirement for, communication in a high-error management climate in which latent errors are prevalent, it is reassuring to see a positive INT scale average of 5.828, stronger than previous studies in a similar environment (Bryce et al 2013). Interestingly, the strongest correlation is PBC with INT (r = 0.627), which, whilst not conclusive, provides some evidence of the assertion of Arnaud and Schminke (2012) that confidence of achieving a desired outcome affects behaviour. In line with the work of Bryce et al (2016), uncertainty is negatively associated with both INT and ATT, thus confirming the robustness of our variable selections.…”

“…Arnaud and Schminke (2012) refer to a 'collective moral emotion' and a 'collective ethical efficacy', which Brown et al (2005) argue are further influenced by the actions and relationships that managers have with their staff via their day-to-day conduct, personal actions and relationships-referred to in much of the ethics literature as situational factors (Trevino 1986;Church et al 2005).…”

“…This variable is again linked to interactions within the work climate in which employees find themselves. Venkatesh and Brown (2001) and Pavlou and Fygenson (2006) indicate that 'ease of use affects the control an employee believes he or she has over reporting an event, whilst Arnaud andSchminke (2012, p. 1768) note:…”

Clima ético nas organizações: evidências de validade de uma escala de medida

“…Esse estudo indicou que a congruência entre o nível de desenvolvimento moral de empregados e a percepção do clima ético na organização foi um importante preditor de comprometimento e satisfação no trabalho, sendo negativamente relacionado à intenção de deixar a empresa. Outros autores ainda relacionam o tipo de clima ético com atitudes e comportamentos individuais (Kish-Gephart, Harrison, & Treviño, 2010;Martin & Cullen, 2006), incluindo os efeitos do clima ético na redução de comportamentos não éticos no trabalho (Arnaud & Schminke, 2012) e na tomada de decisão ética (Fritzsche, 2000). Um estudo investigou ainda o efeito do clima ético no comprometimento organizacional (Cullen, Parboteeah, & Victor, 2003), encontrando que o clima ético de benevolência está associado positivamente à variável critério e o clima egoísta está negativamente relacionado ao comprometimento.…”

“…Em relação aos instrumentos adotados para a mensuração do clima ético, teóricos deste campo referenciam, além da escala de Victor e Cullen (1987), uma medida bifatorial (foco em si próprio e foco no outro) a partir da qual foi demonstrada a relevância do papel do clima ético em nível meso organizacional (Arnaud & Schminke, 2012).…”