Correlates of Ethical Intentions: A Critical Review of Empirical Literature and Suggestions for Future Research

IntroductionResearch efforts have continually been focused on the triggers behind (un)/ethical conduct and the cognitive processes individuals use while evaluating dilemmas in order to ascertain why individuals behave unethically in workplaces. These efforts have mainly focused on examining individual characteristics ("bad apples"), moral issues ("bad cases"), and the organizational environment ("bad barrel") as antecedents of unethical choices (Kish-Gephart et al., 2010). In an attempt to comprehend the complexities of ethical decision-making, this paper reviews literature on a few key constructs used in explaining ethical decision-making, its various antecedents and consequents. Three categories of factors are looked at: individual antecedents, organizational context and the influence of the external environment on ethical intentions for the purpose of developing a coherent and integrated portrait of work done and identifying directions for further research.Individual FactorsIndividual characteristics are of central importance in understanding the level of ethical sensitivity, method of evaluation, ethical intention and finally the action of an individual. Among the several individual variables identified are age, religious beliefs, and gender (Hegarty & Simms, 1978). The level of an individual's moral maturity has also been found to be important (Kohlberg, 1969; Rest, 1986) as has been an individual's ego strength (Trevino, 1986). Another significant personal attribute is field dependence or the extent to an individual relies on referent others for direction and guidance when faced with an ethical dilemma (Trevino, 1986). Additional factors that have been studied are:Internal or External Locus of ControlInternal or external locus of control has been studied as a contributor to decision-making (Forte, 2004). Individuals with an external locus of control believe ethical dilemmas are beyond their control, while those with an internal locus believe that they can control the things around them and hence are willing to take responsibility for their behavior (Trevino, 1986). Research shows that those with an internal locus of control will take action to settle ethical dilemmas and resist social pressure to perform unethical acts (Singhapakdi & Vitell, 1991; Trevino & Youngblood, 1990). Individuals with an internal locus of control have been seen as choosing an ethical alternative more often than those who have an external locus of control who succumb to external pressures (Hegarty & Simms, 1978, 1979). MachiavellianismMachiavellianism has an interesting relationship with ethical decision-making. Machiavellians are pragmatic, egoistic, and emotionally isolated. As people with this personality trait are hard to persuade and as they favor achievements regardless of means, it is predicted that persons with higher level of Machiavellianism tend to ground moral judgment on efficiency and value, overall utility over ethics (Giacalone & Knouse, 1990; Hegarty & Sims, 1978, 1979). Singhapakdi and Vitell (1999) found that more Machiavellian managers tended to perceive ethical problems as less serious and were less likely to take corrective action, thus relating Machiavellianism to both low ethical sensitivity and unethical behavior.Achievement-orientationAchievement- orientation influenced ethical intentions and behavior as it has been observed that people with a high sense of achievement tended to care more about their job position, designation and power at work. An achievement orientated personality will place his/her interest ahead of ethics when a conflict arises. Aronson and Metee (1968) in their cognitive consistency theory have suggested that ethical behavior is more consistent with a self-perception of high worth. Individuals with confidence in their personal competence exhibited by high self-efficacy would believe they can succeed without using unethical means. …