Advertisement

Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 125, Issue 3, pp 401–432 | Cite as

Painting with the Same Brush? Surveying Unethical Behavior in the Workplace Using Self-Reports and Observer-Reports

  • Franziska Zuber
  • Muel Kaptein
Article

Abstract

Research by academics, professional organizations, and businesses on ethics in the workplace often relies on surveys that ask employees to report how frequently they have observed others engaging in unethical behavior. But what do these frequencies in observer-reports say about the frequencies of committed unethical behavior? This paper is the first to address this question by empirically exploring the relationship between observer- and self-reports. Our survey research among the Swiss working population shows that for all 37 different forms of unethical behavior investigated, observer-reports show higher frequencies than self-reports. Ratios of observer- to self-reports vary substantially among these forms, ranging from 1.46 for improperly gathering competitor’s confidential information to 6.4 for engaging in (sexual) harassment or creating a hostile work environment. The results indicate that researchers should not assume that the frequency in self-reports can generally be approximated by the frequency in observer-reports. Four possible explanations are presented for the differences in ratios, with recommendations for future research.

Keywords

Unethical behavior Observer-report Other-report Self-report Survey 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank James Weber for his very useful comments on an earlier version of this paper. This research was financially supported by KPMG AG, Switzerland.

References

  1. Akaah, I. P. (1992). Social inclusion as a marketing ethics correlate. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(8), 599–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andreoli, N., & Lefkowitz, J. (2009). Individual and organizational antecedents of misconduct in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(3), 309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashforth, B. E., & Anand, V. (2003). The normalization of corruption in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 1–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baguley, T. (2012). Serious Stats: A Guide to Advanced Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  5. Bailey, D. E., Leonardi, P. M., & Barley, S. R. (2012). The lure of the virtual. Organization Science, 23(5), 1485–1504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Human Relations, 61(8), 1139–1160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bautista, R. (2012). An overlooked approach in survey research: Total survey error. In L. Gideon (Ed.), Handbook of survey methodology for the social sciences (pp. 37–49). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 349–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berry, C. M., Carpenter, N. C., & Barratt, C. L. (2012). Do other-reports of counterproductive work behavior provide an incremental contribution over self-reports? A meta-analytic comparison. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(3), 613–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bonett, D. G., & Seier, E. (2003). Statistical inference for a ratio of dispersions using paired samples. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 28(1), 21–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brass, D. J., Butterfield, K. D., & Skaggs, B. C. (1998). Relationships and unethical behavior: A social network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 14–31.Google Scholar
  12. Bundesamt für Statistik (BfS). (2012). Haushalte Und Bevölkerung. Internetnutzung. Set 301, Indikator 30106. Bundesamt für Statistik (BfS), Neuchâtel.Google Scholar
  13. Champely, S. (2013, April 19). Package ‘PairedData’ (Version 1.0.1). Accessible at http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/PairedData/index.html.
  14. Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct. Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cohen, T. R., Panter, A. T., & Turan, N. (2013). Predicting counterproductive work behavior from guilt proneness. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(1), 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cressey, D. R. (1950). The criminal violation of financial trust. American Sociological Review, 15(6), 738–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ethics Resource Center. (2013). National Business Ethics Survey of Social Networkers. New Risks and Opportunities at Work. Ethics Resource Center.Google Scholar
  18. Ethics Resource Center. (2012). 2011 National Business Ethics Survey. Workplace Ethics in Transition. Ethics Resource Center.Google Scholar
  19. Ethics Resource Center. (2011). Detailed Survey Methodology and Technical Information for the 2011 National Business Ethics Survey. Retrieved September 3, 2013 from http://www.ethics.org/nbes/files/2011nbes-methodology.pdf.
  20. Ferguson, M., & Barry, B. (2011). I know what you did: The effects of interpersonal deviance on bystanders. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(1), 80–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fox, S., Spector, P. E., Goh, A., & Bruursema, K. (2007). Does your coworker know what you’re doing? Convergence of self- and peer-reports of counterproductive work behavior. International Journal of Stress Management, 14(1), 41–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fox, S., Spector, P. E., Goh, A., Bruursema, K., & Kessler, S. (2012). The deviant citizen: Measuring potential positive relations between counterproductive work behaviour and organizational citizenship behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85(1), 199–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gideon, L. (2012). The Art of Question Phrasing. In L. Gideon (Ed.), Handbook of survey methodology in social sciences (pp. 91–107). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Holtgraves, T. (2004). Social desirability and self-reports: Testing models of socially desirable responding. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(2), 161–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366–395.Google Scholar
  26. Kaptein, M. (2008a). Developing a measure of unethical behavior in the workplace: A stakeholder perspective. Journal of Management, 34(5), 978–1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kaptein, M. (2008b). Developing and testing a measure for the ethical culture of organizations: The corporate ethical virtues model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(7), 923–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kaptein, M. (2010). The ethics of organizations: A longitudinal study of the U.S. working population. Journal of Business Ethics, 92(4), 601–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kaptein, M. (2011a). From inaction to external whistleblowing: The influence of ethical culture of organizations on employee responses to observed wrongdoing. Journal of Business Ethics, 98, 513–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaptein, M. (2011b). Understanding unethical behavior by unraveling ethical culture. Human Relations, 64(6), 843–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kasuya, E. (2010). Wilcoxon signed-ranks test: Symmetry should be confirmed before the test. Animal Behaviour, 79(3), 765–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kish-Gephart, J., Harrison, D. A., & Treviño, L. K. (2010). Bad apples, bad cases, and bad barrels: Meta-analytic evidence about sources of unethical decisions at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kleck, G., & Roberts, K. (2012). What survey methods are most effective in eliciting self-reports of criminal or delinquent behavior? In L. Gideon (Ed.), Handbook of survey methodology in social sciences (pp. 417–439). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. KPMG. (2013). Integrity Survey 2013. KPMG LLP.Google Scholar
  35. Mayer, D. M., Aquino, K., Greenbaum, R. L., & Kuenzi, M. (2012). Who displays ethical leadership, and why does it matter? An examination of antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 151–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Newstrom, J. W., & Ruch, W. A. (1975). The ethics of management and the management of ethics. MSU Business Topics, 23, 29–37.Google Scholar
  37. O’Fallon, M. J., & Butterfield, K. D. (2011). Moral differentiation: Exploring boundaries of the “Monkey see, monkey do” perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(3), 379–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. O’Fallon, M. J., & Butterfield, K. D. (2012). The influence of unethical peer behavior on observers’ unethical behavior: A social cognitive perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(2), 117–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(3), 598–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pitesa, M., & Thau, S. (2013). Compliant sinners, obstinate saints: How power and self-focus determine the effectiveness of social influences in ethical decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 56(3), 635–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. R Development Core Team. (2012). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. (Version 2.15.1). Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Accessible at http://www.R-project.org/.
  42. Randall, D. M., & Gibson, A. M. (1990). Methodology in business ethics research: A review and critical assessment. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(6), 457–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Reynolds, S. J. (2008). Moral attentiveness: Who pays attention to the moral aspects of life? The Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(5), 1027–1041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Robinson, S. L., & O’Leary-Kelly, A. M. (1998). Monkey see, monkey do: The influence of work groups on the antisocial behavior of employees. Academy of Management Journal, 41(6), 658–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Siegel, S., & Castellan, N. J, Jr. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  46. Spector, P. E., Fox, S., Penney, L. M., Bruursema, K., Goh, A., & Kessler, S. (2006). The dimensionality of counterproductivity: Are all counterproductive behaviors created equal? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(3), 446–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stewart, S. M., Bing, M. N., Davison, H. K., Woehr, D. J., & McIntyre, M. D. (2009). In the eyes of the beholder: A non-self-report measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 207–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Messick, D. M. (2004). Ethical fading: The role of self-deception in unethical behavior. Social Justice Research, 17(2), 223–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Smith-Crowe, K. (2008). Ethical decision making: Where we’ve been and where we’re going. Academy of Management Annals, 2, 545–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tourangeau, R., & Smith, T. W. (1996). Asking sensitive questions: The impact of data collection mode, question format, and question context. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 60(2), 275–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tourangeau, R., & Yan, T. (2007). Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychological Bulletin, 133(5), 859–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Treviño, L. K., Butterfield, K. D., & McCabe, D. L. (1998). The ethical context in organizations: Influences on employee attitudes and behaviors. Business Ethics Quarterly, 8(3), 447–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Treviño, L. K., & Weaver, G. R. (2001). Organizational justice and ethics program “follow-through”: Influences on employees’ harmful and helpful behavior. Business Ethics Quarterly, 11(4), 651–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Treviño, L. K., & Weaver, G. R. (2003). Managing ethics in business organizations. Social scientific perspectives. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Treviño, L. K., Weaver, G. R., & Reynolds, S. J. (2006). Behavioral ethics in organizations: A review. Journal of Management, 32(6), 951–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tsang, J. (2002). Moral rationalization and the integration of situational factors and psychological processes in immoral behavior. Review of General Psychology, 6(1), 25–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Weaver, G. R., & Treviño, L. K. (1999). Compliance and values oriented ethics programs: Influences on employees’ attitudes and behavior. Business Ethics Quarterly, 9(2), 315–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wellman, B., Salaff, J., Dimitrova, D., Garton, L., Gulia, M., & Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). Computer networks as social networks: Collaborative work, telework, and virtual community. Annual Review of Sociology, 22(1), 213–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wiedermann, W., & Alexandrowicz, R. (2011). A modified normal scores test for paired data. Methodology, 7(1), 25–38.Google Scholar
  60. Wilcox, R. R., & Keselman, H. J. (2003). Modern robust data analysis methods: Measures of central tendency. Psychological Methods, 8(3), 254–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wouters, K., Maesschalck, J., Peeters, C. W., & Roosen, M. (2013). Methodological issues in the design of online surveys for measuring unethical work behavior: Recommendations on the basis of a split-ballot experiment. Journal of Business Ethics, 1–15. doi: 10.1007/s10551-013-1659-5.
  62. Yoo, Y., Boland, R. J., Lyytinen, K., & Majchrzak, A. (2012). Organizing for innovation in the digitized world. Organization Science, 23(5), 1398–1408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zey-Ferrell, M., & Ferrell, O. C. (1982). Role-set configuration and opportunity as predictors of unethical behavior in organizations. Human Relations, 35(7), 587–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business-Society Management, Rotterdam School of ManagementErasmus University RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations