This is the version of the article accepted for publication in Journal of Business Ethics published online by Springer:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-017-3456-z
Accepted version downloaded from SOAS Research Online: http://eprints.soas.ac.uk/23838/
Investigating When and Why Psychological Entitlement Predicts Unethical Pro-
Organizational Behavior
(Allan Lee, Gary Schwarz*, Alexander Newman, & Alison Legood)
Abstract
In this research, we examine the relationship between employee psychological entitlement
(PE) and employee willingness to engage in unethical pro-organizational behavior
(UPB). We hypothesize that a high level of PE–the belief that one should receive desirable
treatment irrespective of whether it is deserved–will increase the prevalence of this particular
type of unethical behavior. We argue that, driven by self-interest and the desire to look good
in the eyes of others, highly entitled employees may be more willing to engage in UPB when
their personal goals are aligned with those of their organizations. Support for this proposition
was found in Study 1, which demonstrates that organizational identification accentuates the
link between PE and the willingness to engage in UPB. Study 2 builds on these findings by
examining a number of mediating variables that shed light on why PE leads to a greater
willingness among employees to engage in UPB. Furthermore, we explored the differential
effects of PE on UPB compared to counterproductive work behavior (CWB). We found
support for our moderated mediation model, which shows that status striving and moral
disengagement fully mediate the link between PE and UPB. PE was also linked to CWB, and
was fully mediated by perceptions of organizational justice and moral disengagement.
* Corresponding author: Gary Schwarz, Senior Lecturer in Public Policy and Management,
SOAS University of London, gary.schwarz@soas.ac.uk.
Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior and Psychological Entitlement
2
Keywords: Unethical pro-organizational behavior, psychological entitlement, organizational
identification, counterproductive work behavior, status striving, organizational justice, moral
disengagement.
Growing research has demonstrated that employees commonly engage in unethical behaviors
that are intended to serve the interests of their organization (e.g., destroying incriminating
files to protect an organization’s reputation; disclosing exaggerated information to the public;
Umphress and Bingham 2011). This type of behavior has been referred to as unethical pro-
organizational behavior (UPB) (Umphress et al. 2010), and it is carried out consciously, in a
discretionary manner (i.e., it is neither ordered by a supervisor nor part of a formal job
description), and in violation of moral hypernorms (Warren 2003). The intention to benefit an
organization distinguishes UPB from many other forms of unethical work behavior, such as
counterproductive or deviant behavior, which are performed with the intention of harming
one’s organization and/or its members (e.g., Spector and Fox 2005).
UPB is an important phenomenon for companies to consider because, in the long
term, it may hurt their reputations and expose them to lawsuits (Umphress and Bingham
2011). Due to the seemingly increasing number of high-profile events occuring in the public
domain whereby ethical standards have been violated in the interest of organizational benefit,
scholars have emphasized the need for a more comprehensive understanding of the
antecedents of UPB (Pierce and Aguinis 2015). Research has begun to systematically
investigate and theorize about UPB with a particular focus on employee motivations to
engage in such behaviors (e.g., Chen et al. 2016; Graham et al. 2015; Kong 2016). However,
the research to date has largely focused on the examination of situational and attitudinal
antecedents of UPB such as leadership (e.g., Effelsberg et al. 2014; Miao et al. 2013),
Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior and Psychological Entitlement
3
affective commitment, and organizational identification (e.g., Chen et al. 2016; Matherne and
Litchfield 2012). As noted by Castille and colleagues (2016), such studies have largely
neglected the potential role that dispositional variables play in predicting UPB. Examining
the role of individual differences as an antecedent to UPB can provide us with greater insight
into why people engage in UPB.
To help address this lacuna, the current research explores whether psychological
entitlement (PE), which refers to a relatively stable belief that one should receive desirable
treatment irrespective of whether it is deserved (Harvey and Martinko 2009), leads
individuals to exhibit a greater willingness to engage in UPB. We argue that individuals who
are high in PE are more willing to engage in UPB than individuals showing lower levels of
PE because the former are more likely to adopt a cognitive style that allows them to
reinterpret their unethical actions as being moral (e.g., De Cremer et al. 2009) and that they
have a strong desire to maintain their inflated self-esteem by achieving a high status in their
organizations (e.g., Rose and Anastasio 2014). Across two studies, we examine the
relationship between PE and UPB to advance knowledge of how individual dispositions
influence an individual’s willingness to engage in UPB. In doing so, we answer the calls from
researchers to explore the antecedents of UPB (Umphress et al. 2010) and to extend its
nomological network, which is a crucial development in the evolution of the construct.
Furthermore, by controlling for the effects of several situational and leadership predictors, we
investigate the incremental predictive validity of PE as an antecedent of UPB over and above
the variables that have previously been found to influence UPB.
By focusing on PE as a predictor, we also seek to contribute to a small but growing
body of literature on the effects of PE in the workplace. By exploring mediating and
moderating mechanisms linking PE with UPB, our study advances this literature by providing
a more granular understanding of how PE functions in the workplace. Additionally, in the
Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior and Psychological Entitlement
4
current research we aim to investigate whether the mechanisms linking PE to UPB differ
from those that link PE to other forms of unethical behavior, specifically counterproductive
work behavior (CWB). While there is some evidence that UPB is empirically distinct from
CWB (Umphress et al. 2010), researchers have paid little attention to empirically testing
whether the underlying motives for these forms of unethical behavior are distinct. In the
current research we argue that UPB is performed with the intention to benefit an
organization, whereas CWB is performed with the intention of harming the organization or
the individuals within it. We specifically examine three theoretically derived mediating
variables: status striving, organizational justice perceptions and moral disengagement.
Furthermore, across both of our studies, we test for the potential role of organizational
identification as a boundary condition that accentuates the link between PE and UPB.
Literature Review and Hypotheses Development
Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior
UPB is defined as “actions that are intended to promote the effective functioning of the
organization or its members and violate core societal values, mores, laws, or standards of
proper conduct” (Umphress and Bingham 2011, p. 622). This definition incorporates two
components. First, UPB is unethical and violates widely shared norms of ethical behavior and
not only the rules established by a particular group. The second component focuses on the
intentions of an unethical action. Unlike CWB, which is carried out with the intention of
harming one’s organization, its members, or both, UPB is conducted with the purpose of
benefiting one’s organization, its members, or both (Umphress and Bingham 2011). UPB can
involve acts of commission (e.g., exaggerating the employing company’s achievements) and
omission (e.g., not providing relevant information to external stakeholders).
Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior and Psychological Entitlement
5
UPB can have serious consequences because its occurrence may hurt a company’s
reputation and expose it to lawsuits. For example, the German engineering firm Siemens was
required to pay €2.5bn in fines because its employees had used bribes to secure large-scale
contracts (Dietz and Gillespie 2012). The scandal cost the jobs of its CEO, Chairman and all
but one of its managing board members. In this case, employees engaged in unethical
behavior with the intention of helping the company, as illustrated by the following
justification for paying bribes provided by an Italian Siemens manager: “The alternative
would have been to turn down the project, which would have denied Siemens not only the
business but also a foot in the door in the Italian market” (Dougherty 2007).
UPB is an inherently paradoxical construct. While the behavior is considered to be
"unethical" by society, it may be conducted with the best intentions (e.g., for the benefit of
the organization) and with moral justifications (e.g., the end justifies the means). This
behavior parallels that described in Hannah Arendt’s (1945) essay ‘Organized Guilt and
Universal Responsibility,’ in which she analyzes why individuals act irresponsibly and
abandon their broader community for the benefit of their in-group. Employees may develop a
rigid framing that disregards their distal context (Palazzo et al. 2012) and develop “a moral
microcosm that likely could not survive outside the organization” (Brief et al. 2000, p. 484).
Hence, morality becomes subordinate to instrumental rationality serving organizational
purposes (Bauman 1991).
The empirical investigation of UPB remains in its infancy, with studies beginning to
analyze potential antecedents, mediators and boundary conditions (e.g., Effelsberg et al.
2014; Graham et al. 2015). However, such research has largely focused on situational and
attitudinal predictors, and there is currently limited evidence of the role of individual
characteristics in predicting UPB. Recently, Castille and colleagues (2016) demonstrated that
individuals who are high in the “dark” trait of Machiavellianism are more willing to engage
