Bad Cases, Bad Apples
Journal of Applied Psychology 2010, Vol. 95, No. 1, 1–31
© 2010 American Psychological Association 0021-9010/10/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0017103
Bad Apples, Bad Cases, and Bad Barrels: Meta-Analytic Evidence About Sources of Unethical Decisions at Work
Jennifer J. Kish-Gephart, David A. Harrison, and Linda Klebe Trevino ˜
Pennsylvania State University, University Park Campus
As corporate scandals proliferate, practitioners and researchers alike need a cumulative, quantitative understanding of the antecedents associated with unethical decisions in organizations. In this metaanalysis, the authors draw from over 30 years of research and multiple literatures to examine individual (“bad apple”), moral issue (“bad case”), and organizational environment (“bad barrel”) antecedents of unethical choice. Findings provide empirical support for several foundational theories and paint a clearer picture of relationships characterized by mixed results. Structural equation modeling revealed the complexity (multidetermined nature) of unethical choice, as well as a need for research that simultaneously examines different sets of antecedents. Moderator analyses unexpectedly uncovered better prediction of unethical behavior than of intention for several variables. This suggests a need to more strongly consider a new “ethical impulse” perspective in addition to the traditional “ethical calculus” perspective. Results serve as a data-based foundation and guide for future theoretical and empirical development in the domain of behavioral ethics. Keywords: unethical behavior, intuition, decision making, intention
For over 30 years, researchers have attempted to determine why individuals behave unethically in the workplace. Once viewed as the province of philosophers—a “‘Sunday school’ subject not worthy of serious investigation”— behavioral ethics has become a legitimate and necessary field of social scientific inquiry (Trevino, ˜ 1986, p. 601). Indeed, as ethical scandals have garnered
© 2010 American Psychological Association 0021-9010/10/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0017103
Bad Apples, Bad Cases, and Bad Barrels: Meta-Analytic Evidence About Sources of Unethical Decisions at Work
Jennifer J. Kish-Gephart, David A. Harrison, and Linda Klebe Trevino ˜
Pennsylvania State University, University Park Campus
As corporate scandals proliferate, practitioners and researchers alike need a cumulative, quantitative understanding of the antecedents associated with unethical decisions in organizations. In this metaanalysis, the authors draw from over 30 years of research and multiple literatures to examine individual (“bad apple”), moral issue (“bad case”), and organizational environment (“bad barrel”) antecedents of unethical choice. Findings provide empirical support for several foundational theories and paint a clearer picture of relationships characterized by mixed results. Structural equation modeling revealed the complexity (multidetermined nature) of unethical choice, as well as a need for research that simultaneously examines different sets of antecedents. Moderator analyses unexpectedly uncovered better prediction of unethical behavior than of intention for several variables. This suggests a need to more strongly consider a new “ethical impulse” perspective in addition to the traditional “ethical calculus” perspective. Results serve as a data-based foundation and guide for future theoretical and empirical development in the domain of behavioral ethics. Keywords: unethical behavior, intuition, decision making, intention
For over 30 years, researchers have attempted to determine why individuals behave unethically in the workplace. Once viewed as the province of philosophers—a “‘Sunday school’ subject not worthy of serious investigation”— behavioral ethics has become a legitimate and necessary field of social scientific inquiry (Trevino, ˜ 1986, p. 601). Indeed, as ethical scandals have garnered