Shaping leaders, driving results.

There is little controversy regarding the value and importance of reducing unethical behavior and increasing prosocial behavior in organizations. Interestingly, the layperson tends to attribute the actions of organizational actors to dispositional factors, believing that unethical behaviors in organizations are due to “bad apples” who are simply unethical people, and that some organizational members act in a prosocial manner because they are just “good eggs.” This research takes an alternative lens to understand unethical and prosocial behavior in organizations. Although individual differences do matter, this research demonstrates the underestimated power of the social context as a potent influence on unethical and prosocial behaviors in organizations. I briefly report on the findings from four papers (including seven field studies) that examine the role of the social context (e.g., top management, supervisors, and peers) on employees’ unethical and prosocial behavior. Each paper draws on established theories of social influence (e.g., social learning, social exchange, social information processing) to address a different question regarding the role of the social context. • The first paper asks: “Does ethical leadership matter and what types of leaders are ethical?” Results from two group-level field studies demonstrate relationships between supervisor ethical leadership and employees’ unethical behavior and conflict, and leader moral identity is found to be an antecedent of supervisory ethical leadership. • The second paper asks: “Does ethical tone at the top matter most?” Contrary to prevailing conventional wisdom, this group-level field study finds that the effects of top management ethical leadership on employee deviance and prosocial behavior is fully mediated through supervisor ethical leadership; suggesting that the effects of the ethical tone set by top management is only realized through supervisor ethical leadership. • The third paper asks: “When does ethical tone at the top matter and through what mechanisms?” The results of two large group-level field studies find that, consistent with social learning theory, the relationship between top management ethical leadership employees’ deviant and prosocial behavior is moderated by the amount of interaction employees have with top management; and this moderated relationship is mediated by coworker modeling of ethical behavior. • The fourth paper asks: “Do coworkers influence whether the ethical messages from management affect employees’ ethical behavior?” The results from two field studies demonstrate that the effects of top management and supervisor ethical leadership on whistle-blowing are stronger when coworkers support ethical behavior. As a set, these findings highlight the important role of the social context in organizations as an antecedent to employees’ unethical and prosocial behavior. Thus, although individual differences such as values and personality matter, these studies suggest that doing right or wrong in organizations is more than just a result of bad apples and good eggs.