IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/buseth/v31y2022i2p562-576.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do bad apples do good deeds? The role of morality

Author

Listed:
  • Jinqiang Zhu
  • Shiyong Xu

Abstract

Research on counterproductive work behaviours (CWBs) has predominantly adopted a victim‐centric approach to focus on deleterious effects on organisations while overlooking how displaying CWBs affects the employees themselves and their subsequent behaviours. Drawing on moral cleansing and moral licencing theories, we tested how and when employees’ CWBs influenced their subsequent organisational citizenship behaviours (OCBs) and whether OCBs affect CWBs. The results from an experimental study and a field study showed that CWBs were associated with guilt which, in turn, motivated employees to engage in more OCBs. In addition, employees with low moral relativism and high guilt‐repair proneness strengthened the link between CWBs, guilt and OCBs. We extend research on CWBs by switching focus from a victim‐centric perspective to a perpetrator‐centric perspective. In addition, we elucidate a specific mechanism and boundary conditions of moral cleansing theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Jinqiang Zhu & Shiyong Xu, 2022. "Do bad apples do good deeds? The role of morality," Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 562-576, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:buseth:v:31:y:2022:i:2:p:562-576
    DOI: 10.1111/beer.12419
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12419
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/beer.12419?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
    ---><---

    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:wly:buseth:v:31:y:2022:i:2:p:562-576. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/26946424 .

    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.