Journal of Business Ethics

[Link]

ORIGINAL PAPER

Rational Counterattack: The Impact of Workplace Bullying

on Unethical Pro‑organizational and Pro‑family Behaviors
Zhu Yao1,2,3 · Jinlian Luo2 · Na Fu3 · Xianchun Zhang4 · Qunchao Wan1

Received: 17 October 2020 / Accepted: 11 August 2021

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2021

Abstract
In business ethics research, little is known about why and how employees engage in unethical behavior, especially unethi-
cal pro-organizational behavior (UPB) and unethical pro-family behavior (UPFB). Based on cognitive-affective personality
system theory and conservation of resources theory, this study aims to explore the mechanisms underlying the effects of
workplace bullying, as a negative event, on UPB (Study 1) and UPFB (Study 2). In Study 1, workplace bullying negatively
correlated with UPB where emotional exhaustion and organization-oriented moral disengagement played chain-mediating
roles in this relationship. In Study 2, workplace bullying positively correlated with UPFB where emotional exhaustion and
family-oriented moral disengagement played chain-mediating roles in the relationship. In both studies, perceived forgiveness
climate, as a conditional factor, was found to weaken the positive impact of workplace bullying on both emotional exhaustion
and the chain-mediating effect of emotional exhaustion and moral disengagement in the relationship between workplace bul-
lying and UPB/UPFB. Overall, this study explains why, how, and when employees exhibit UPB and UPFB. The implications
for theory and practices that could enable organizations to reduce employees’ unethical behavior are discussed.

Keywords Workplace bullying · Emotional exhaustion · Moral disengagement · Unethical pro-organizational behavior ·
Unethical pro-family behavior

Introduction

Employee unethical behavior is a great challenge for indi-

viduals, organizations and society (Gino et al., 2011; Lu
Zhu Yao and Jinlian Luo contributed equally to this article.
et al., 2018; Umphress et al., 2010; Zhang, 2020a), and has
* Zhu Yao received increasing attention in research and practice (Birtch
18373162594@[Link] & Chiang, 2014; Jacobs et al., 2014; Paterson & Huang,
Jinlian Luo 2019; Umphress et al., 2010; Umphress & Bingham, 2011;
luojl@[Link] Zaal et al., 2019). Though undesirable, unethical behavior
Na Fu is quite common. About 60 million people witness some
funa@[Link] form of unethical behavior every day in the United States
Xianchun Zhang (Schwartz, 2015). In the UK, three former executives at Bar-
zxc@[Link] clays Bank were charged with conspiracy to commit fraud
Qunchao Wan during the 2008 financial crisis (Serious Fraud Office, 2020).
wanqunchao_phd@[Link] In Germany, Volkswagen employees deliberately developed
1 software that could distinguish between typical driving
Business School, Hunan University, Changsha, China
conditions and laboratory test conditions in order to evade
2
School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, environmental authorities (Castille et al., 2018). The same
Shanghai, China
is true in the Eastern context. According to the Chinese gov-
3
Trinity Business School, Trinity College Dublin, The ernment’s official media, 33 of 200 officials in the Tianjin
University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
Justice Bureau helped 440 of their relatives secure employ-
4
Maritime Silk Road Tourism Economic Research Center, ment (Jiang, 2017). Two types of unethical behaviors were
Guilin Tourism University, Guilin, China

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 Z. Yao et al.

identified in the existing research on the cases above, i.e., in response to different situations” (Mischel & Shoda, 1995,
unethical pro-organization behavior (UPB, Umphress et al., p. 254). Our research proposes that when individuals experi-
2010; Umphress & Bingham, 2011) and unethical pro-family ence bullying, they will encode this situation by influencing
behavior (UPFB, Cheng et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2020). UPB their affective unit (e.g., emotion-related factor), which in
refers to the type of unethical behavior employees engage turn influences their cognitive unit (e.g., beliefs), and ulti-
in to safeguard the interests of the organization, e.g., delib- mately affects their behavior (e.g., UPB and UPFB). We
erately exaggerating product performance to help increase adopt emotional exhaustion as an emotion-related factor to
sales (Umphress et al., 2010; Umphress & Bingham, 2011). represent the affective unit and we adopt moral disengage-
UPFB refers to the type of unethical behaviors employees ment, i.e., an individual’s cognitive tendency about their
engage in to safeguard the interests of the family, e.g., appro- moral beliefs, to represent the cognitive unit (Bandura, 1999;
priating company assets or supplies for family use (Cheng Liu et al., 2020). Thus, we propose a model linking situation/
et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2020). As an emerging type of unethi- event (workplace bullying), affective pathway (emotional
cal behavior, research is warranted to better understanding exhaustion), cognitive pathway (moral disengagement),
UPFB in the workplace (Cheng et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2020). and behavior (UPB/UPFB) to unlock employee unethical
Both UPB and UPFB are examined in this study. behavior. This model is also supported by the conservation
Given its importance to people and organizations, schol- of resources theory (COR, Buchwald & Hobfoll, 2004; Hal-
ars in business ethics have investigated how to reduce besleben et al., 2014; Hobfoll, 1989).
employees’ engagement with unethical behaviors (Dang COR suggests that negative events would consume indi-
et al., 2017; Gino et al., 2011; Paterson & Huang, 2019; vidual resources. Applying COR to the context of workplace
Zhang, 2020a). Extensive research has mainly focused on bullying, we suggest that workplace bullying consumes emo-
the role played by individuals (Johnson & Umphress, 2019; tional resources (leads to emotional exhaustion) and cogni-
Lee et al., 2017; Liu et al., 2020). For example, individual tive resources (leads to moral disengagement) of employees.
employees receive moral education, training and influence These resources consumed will further affect individuals’
from their families, organizations, and society, which leads unethical behaviors (Liu et al., 2020; McDowell et al., 2019;
to less unethical behaviors (Kouchaki & Wareham, 2015; Liu Qi et al., 2020; Yao et al., 2020a). Existing studies have
et al., 2019, 2020). However, workplace-related factors may found that following workplace bullying, individuals will
also influence employee unethical behavior (Qi et al., 2020; consume emotional resources extensively, leading to emo-
Zhang, 2020b). Recently, Qi et al. (2020) and Zhang (2020b) tional exhaustion and individual behavior such as demis-
found that workplace exclusion can significantly incentivize sion or knowledge hiding (Srivastava & Agarwal, 2020; Yao
employees to exhibit unethical behavior. Drawing on exist- et al., 2020a). In this study, we propose that workplace bul-
ing research, this study proposes workplace bullying as a key lying consumes individual resources, leading to emotional
driver for employee unethical behavior. Workplace bullying exhaustion which in turn influences employee unethical
refers to the aggressive behavior that employees experience behavior, i.e., the mediating role of emotional exhaustion
in the workplace, such as being humiliated and threatened in workplace bullying and employee unethical behaviors
by colleagues or supervisors (Einarsen et al., 2009). Similar link. Consumed resources by the negative event—work-
to workplace ostracism, workplace bullying, as a negative place bullying also leads to the change in a specific cogni-
event, has become common and exerts a highly negative tive orientation of moral disengagement (Bandura, 1999;
impact on employees’ emotions and cognition, ultimately Liu et al., 2020), which leads to unethical behaviors, i.e.,
yielding inappropriate behavior such as absenteeism and the mediating role of moral disengagement in the workplace
knowledge hiding (Magee et al., 2017; Yao et al., 2020a). In bullying and employee unethical behaviors link. Moreover,
this regard, we expect that workplace bullying has an impact following consumption of emotional resources (e.g., emo-
on employee unethical behavior. Following an event such as tional exhaustion), individuals could develop rational cogni-
workplace bullying, employees may experience emotions, tion (e.g., moral disengagement). In other words, emotional
thoughts or cognitive changes, which in turn lead to unethi- exhaustion affects moral disengagement (Huang et al., 2019;
cal behavior as a rational counterattack to the event (Yao Striler et al., 2020). Overall, this study constructs a chain-
et al., 2020a, 2020b). mediating pathway to elucidate the entire process linking
To better understand why and how workplace bullying workplace bullying to employee unethical behavior via the
influences employee unethical behavior, this study draws chain-mediating role of emotional exhaustion and moral
upon cognitive-affective personality system theory (CAPS, disengagement.
Mischel & Shoda, 1995). CAPS claims that individual Furthermore, this study extends our understanding of
behavior is influenced by situations as well as “a mediat- employee unethical behavior (UPB/UPFB) by exploring
ing unit which activates specific subsets of other mediating the boundary condition under which workplace bullying
units, generating distinctive cognition, affect, and behavior increases employee emotional exhaustion. Drawing on the

13
Rational Counterattack: The Impact of Workplace Bullying on Unethical Pro-organizational…

Workplace bullying consumes Reduces emotional resources (emotional exhaustion) UPB/UPFB of employees to
resources of employees protect or invest their resources
Reduce/increase cognitive resources (moral disengagement)

Conservation of resource theory was used to explain the internal mechanism between variables

PFC Study 1
Moral disengagement

OMD UPB
Workplace bullying Emotional exhaustion

FMD UPFB

Study 2

Event Affective Cognitive Behavior

Situational
characteristics

The whole logic of the model is explained by the cognitive-affective personality system theory

Fig. 1  Theoretical model

existing research on forgiveness (Guchait et al., 2016, 2019; standards/beliefs for the interests of either organizations
Yao et al., 2020a, 2020b), this study proposes that employee (i.e., organization-oriented moral disengagement, OMD) or
perceived forgiveness climate (PFC), e.g., the extent to families (i.e., family-oriented moral disengagement, FMD).
which organizations forgive employees for mistakes and Two studies are conducted to test separately for organization
misconduct, act as a moderator between workplace bullying and family-related unethical behavior and moral disengage-
and emotional exhaustion. Some studies demonstrate that ment. Study 1 examines the impact of workplace bullying
when a strong PFC exists in an organization, even if employ- on UPB via emotional exhaustion and OMD, moderated by
ees experience workplace bullying, they would be more PFC. Study 2 examines the impact of workplace bullying
likely to regulate their emotions and behave in a manner on UPFB via emotional exhaustion and FMD, moderated
that is beneficial to the organization (Guchait et al., 2019; by PFC. An additional reason for these two studies is that
Yao et al., 2020a). When the level of PFC in the organization the model focusing on organizations and families is compli-
is low, employees who experience workplace bullying tend cated. Although the model is tested separately via organiza-
to consume more of their emotional resources and exhibit tion and family-related pathways, both studies fully address
behaviors that are more beneficial to themselves (Guchait the overall theoretical moderated chain-mediation model
et al., 2016, 2019; Yao et al., 2020a, 2020b). Thus, we pro- linking workplace bullying, emotional exhaustion, moral
pose that PFC moderates the chain-mediation model link- disengagement and unethical behaviors, moderated by PFC.
ing workplace bullying to unethical behavior (UPB/UPFB) Figure 1 shows our research model.
via the chain-mediators of emotional exhaustion and moral Our research primarily provides three major contributions
disengagement. to existing research on ethics. First, previous research on
Overall, this study aims to unlock what, why, how, and antecedents of unethical behavior mainly focuses on individ-
when employees engage in unethical behaviors. Based on ual factors and lacks a discussion on organizational factors
CAPS and COR theories, this study proposes a moderated (Graham et al., 2015; Liu et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2019).
chain-mediation model where workplace bullying increases Existing research also has been focusing on only one type of
emotional exhaustion, which in turn influences moral dis- unethical behavior—mainly UPB (Chen et al., 2016; Effels-
engagement, and ultimately employee unethical behavior berg & Solga, 2015; Zhang, 2020b). This study extends cur-
(UPB/UPFB), moderated by employee PFC. This study rent research on employee unethical behaviors by identifying
focuses on two types of unethical behaviors (UPB/UPFB) the under-appreciated organizational factor—workplace bul-
and therefore, it adopts two corresponding types of moral lying as the antecedent of employee unethical behavior. In
disengagement where individuals compromise their ethical addition, this study extends existing research by examining

13
 Z. Yao et al.

the other type of unethical behavior (i.e., UPFB) which is members (Einarsen et al., 2009). An as extremely harm-
an important topic and has received increased attention to. ful practice, workplace bullying has a negative impact on
Second, by examining the indirect relationships between employee behaviors, such as job satisfaction (Giorgi et al.,
workplace bullying and UPB/UPFB, this study furthers our 2015; Vukelic et al., 2019), job performance (Devonish,
understanding of the mechanisms through which workplace 2013; Olsen et al., 2017), and organizational citizenship
bullying affects unethical behavior. Drawing upon COR and behavior (Goodboy et al., 2015; Ozturk & Ascigil, 2017).
CAPS, we theorize that UPB/UPFB is a rational behavior The rationale is that workplace bullying leads to withdraw-
as a result of workplace bullying and such behavior takes ing behavior by employees (Magee et al., 2017; Nielsen &
places after employees experience changes in emotion (e.g., Einarsen, 2012; Tynes et al., 2013; Yao et al., 2020a, 2020b).
emotional exhaustion) and cognition (e.g., moral disengage- Similarly, we expect that workplace bullying would influ-
ment) (Halbesleben et al., 2014; Hobfoll, 1989; Mischel & ence employee unethical behavior. In this study, we draw
Shoda, 1995; Yao et al., 2020a). The chain-mediation model on existing research on the impact of workplace bullying
of workplace bullying, emotional exhaustion, moral disen- on employee behavior and focus on both UPB and UPFB.
gagement and unethical behaviors (UPB/UFB) leads to a According to COR, resources are important in predict-
better understanding of why and how employees who suffer ing employee behavior and negative events (e.g., workplace
from workplace bullying display unethical behaviors. It also bullying) would consume an individual’s resources (Buch-
directs managers and scholars curb these unethical behav- wald & Hobfoll, 2004; Halbesleben et al., 2014; Hobfoll,
iors from an emotional and cognitive standpoint. Finally, 1989). When faced with threat or resource loss, individu-
this study introduces a moderator (i.e., PFC) in studying the als tend to protect themselves in two ways. One way is to
outcomes of workplace bullying. Doing so answers the ques- conserve the remaining resources to avoid falling into a
tion of when workplace bullying leads to employee unethical “loss spiral”. The other way is to invest existing resources
behaviors and it also extends CAPS model which has been to help them acquire additional resources in order to resist
focusing on the mediating process by identifying the bound- the harm incurred by resource consumption, the so-called
ary condition in an individual’s system of events, affective, “gain spiral” (Halbesleben et al., 2014; Hobfoll, 1989; Jin
cognitive and behavioral outcomes (Fehr & Gelfand, 2012; et al., 2018). Applying COR in the workplace bullying con-
Guchait et al., 2016, 2019; Yao et al., 2020a, 2020b). text, when employees experience workplace bullying, their
resources are consumed (Halbesleben et al., 2014; Nielsen
& Einarsen, 2012; Yao et al., 2020b). To prevent the con-
Literature Review and Hypotheses sumption of resources, employees have to save the remaining
Development resources, and are unlikely to consume further resources for
the benefit of the organization and so avoid falling into the
Workplace Bullying and UPB/UPFB “loss spiral” (Halbesleben et al., 2014; Hunter et al., 2017).
In this regard, employees will be less likely to engage with
Two types of employee unethical behaviors have been iden- UPB where they engage in unethical behavior to protect or
tified in the literature, i.e., UPB and UPFB. UPB implies benefit their organizations as doing so will consume more
the behavior that employees deliberately violate moral rules, of their resources (Graham et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2019).
laws, and norms of the society or the organization to pro- The alternative means for employees to cope with workplace
tect or amplify the interests of the organization in actual bullying is through the “gain spiral” where they invest their
work (Umphress & Bingham, 2011; Umphress et al., 2010). surviving resources (Einarsen et al., 2009). When employ-
UPFB implies the behavior that an employee deliberately ees experience workplace bullying, they are dubious about
violates moral rules, laws, and norms of an organization at acquiring new resources from the organization to supple-
work to benefit the entire family or a specific family member ment the previously consumed resources, but they still need
(Cheng et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2020). Both behaviors have support. One possible resource would be family support
the following two core components: (i) employees exhibit where families offer unconditional support and help them
this behavior to protect the interests of the organization or replenish their consumed resources (Carlson et al., 2019;
family; and (ii) both behaviors are unethical, indicating that Ghislieri et al., 2017). In exchange for support by families
they violate social and organizational ethics, as well as exert during these challenging times, employees are more likely
a negative impact on the long-term healthy development of to undertake actions that benefit their family but which may
the organization (Graham et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2020). violate societal and organizational moral norms, i.e., UPFB
Workplace bullying implies that employees are psycho- (Leana & Meuris, 2015; Liu et al., 2020).
logically and/or physically subjected to aggressive behaviors Based on the above review, we argue that when employ-
in the workplace, such as being excluded, mortified, intimi- ees experience workplace bullying, their resources are
dated, accused, and unfairly treated by other organizational consumed. To prevent further consumption of resources,

13
Rational Counterattack: The Impact of Workplace Bullying on Unethical Pro-organizational…

employees are less likely to take unethical actions to protect “pro-organizational” behavior tendencies including UPB
the interests of their organizations (i.e., UPB) as not taking (Lawrence & Kacmar, 2017; Umphress & Bingham, 2011).
this type of action could help them conserve their resources For example, emotionally exhausted employees would not
and avoid falling into a “loss spiral”. Instead, employees misrepresent the truth to make their organizations look good.
actively invest resources in their families to attain additional Thus, we expect a negative relationship between emotional
resources in order to achieve the “gain spiral”. So they are exhaustion and UPB.
more likely to exhibit unethical behavior for the benefit In addition to conserving remaining resources, individu-
of their families, i.e., UPFB. Accordingly, the following als can protect themselves from threats to these by invest-
hypotheses are proposed: ing resources elsewhere (Halbesleben et al., 2014; Hobfoll,
1989). When faced with resource shortages such as emo-
Hypothesis 1a Workplace bullying negatively correlates tional exhaustion, employees actively invest a part of their
with UPB. remaining resources in acquiring additional resources from
sources such as their families (Jin et al., 2018). Families
Hypothesis 1b Workplace bullying positively correlates can often efficiently supplement employees’ emotional
with UPFB. resources. If employees invest resources in their families,
they could easily attain the emotional resources they need
The Mediating Effect of Emotional Exhaustion (Deery et al., 2017; Tang et al., 2016). Employees often
aspire to contribute more resources to their families (Deery
COR emphasizes the important role of resources, especially et al., 2017; Halbesleben et al., 2012; Tang et al., 2016).
when individuals are facing negative events. Similarly, When emotional resources are exhausted at work, employ-
CAPS argues that when individuals experience negative ees tend to display the “pro-family” behavioral tendency
events, this will first result in affective changes. Applying (Halbesleben et al., 2012, 2014). To supplement their con-
both theories to this study, when employees are subjected to sumed resources, employees might engage in “pro-family
workplace bullying, they are more likely to consume their behavior”, including taking indecorous measures to relieve
emotional resources and may feel emotionally exhausted. the family’s financial pressure (Leana & Meuris, 2015; Liu
Emotional exhaustion implies a state of fatigue in which et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2019). In this regard, emotion-
employees consume significant emotional resources at work ally exhausted employees would be more likely to compro-
(Lam et al., 2010; McDowell et al., 2019). Existing research mise their internal moral codes to undertake actions that
has found that employees are more likely to experience emo- benefit their families, i.e., exhibit UPFB. One example is
tional exhaustion after being bullied by their colleagues that employees take company assets/supplies home to help
or superiors (Yao et al., 2020a). For example, employees their families. Such behavior can help employees efficiently
experience bullying by their co-workers, e.g., being asked enhance the quality of their marriage or family relationship
to finish overloaded work in a short time frame (Attell et al., (Liu et al., 2020). Therefore, we expect a positive relation-
2017; Halbesleben et al., 2014). In this scenario, they are ship between emotional exhaustion and UPFB.
more likely to consume their emotional resources, feeling Based on the above analysis, we argue that workplace
emotionally drained and leading to emotional exhaustion bullying is linked to a higher level of emotional exhaustion.
(Halbesleben et al., 2014; Hobfoll, 1989; Jin et al., 2018; Emotional exhaustion leads to less UPB and more UPFB.
Xu et al., 2018; Yao et al., 2020a). Therefore, we expect a Therefore, we expect a mediation model where workplace
positive relationship between workplace bullying and emo- bullying decreases UPB and increases UPFB via emotional
tional exhaustion. exhaustion, hypothesized as below.
Emotional exhaustion has been found to affect employ-
ees’ behaviors (Qi et al., 2020; Tang et al., 2016; Yao et al., Hypothesis 2a Emotional exhaustion mediates the negative
2020a). Emotional exhaustion is a manifestation of an relationship between workplace bullying and UPB.
employee’s extreme lack of emotional resources. According
to COR (Halbesleben et al., 2014; Hobfoll, 1989), employees Hypothesis 2b Emotional exhaustion mediates the positive
need to save or protect any remaining resources and invest in relationship between workplace bullying and UPFB.
new ones when facing threats or negative situations. Emo-
tional exhaustion can be regarded as a threat to employees in The Mediating Effect of Moral Disengagement
the workplace. When employees are emotionally exhausted,
they attempt to maintain their resource level or prevent fur- CAPS claims that individual behaviors are influenced by
ther loss of resources and consequently would be less likely situations with cognition being a mediating unit (Kell,
to engage in any behavior that continues to consume these 2018; Lee & Pee, 2015; Mischel & Shoda, 1995; Yao
resources. In this regard, employees are less likely to exhibit et al., 2020a). In this study focusing on employee unethical

13
 Z. Yao et al.

behavior, we adopt the concept of moral disengagement as a families. Workplace bullying can then be considered to
cognitive unit of individuals. Moral disengagement refers to increase employee FMD.
an individual’s cognitive tendency to redefine whether his/ When employees have moral disengagement, they are
her behavior is morally correct or to decrease his/her psycho- more likely to engage in unethical behavior (Bandura,
logical distress after committing an immoral act (Bandura, 1999; Dang et al., 2017; Schaefer & Bouwmeester, 2020).
1999, 2002). It describes an individual’s desire to protect According to COR, when employees are morally disengaged
the interests of a specific group as a moral justification for against their moral standards, they feel guilty and endure
immoral standards and unethical behaviors (Chen et al., psychological agony, which would consume many of their
2016). Two types of moral disengagement are proposed in resources (Bandura, 1999, 2002; Yang et al., 2020). Hence,
this study. One is the (OMD) where employees disengage to replenish the consumed resources, employees are more
themselves from self-sanctioning their moral violations in likely to engage in unethical behavior (Bandura, 1999; Dang
order to benefit their organizations. For example, employees et al., 2017; Schaefer & Bouwmeester, 2020). Fida et al.
feel that they cannot be blamed for misbehaving for the sake (2015) find that moral disengagement significantly posi-
of their companies and that telling small lies to someone to tively correlates with unethical behavior. Based on recent
help their organization does not really hurt them. The other research (Schaefer & Bouwmeester, 2020; Yang et al.,
type of moral disengagement is FMD (Liu et al., 2020). It 2020), moral disengagement mitigates the guilt of violat-
is similar to OMD except that FMD involves family as the ing moral norms, thereby encouraging individuals to exhibit
main beneficiary. FMD claims that employees disengage unethical behavior.
themselves from self-sanctioning their moral violations in Moral disengagement could have diverse consequences
order to benefit their families. For example, employees with depending on its orientation. Notably, OMD can make
FMD would consider that abusing their power for family employees feel less guilt and less psychological agony due
gain is not a major wrong. to moral constraints when safeguarding the interests of
Workplace bullying is argued to have a varying impact the organization. Employees with OMD are more likely to
on different orientations of moral disengagement. It is exhibit UPB in order to safeguard the interests of the organi-
a negative event, which causes great stress to employees zation (Dang et al., 2017; Hsieh et al., 2020). For instance,
and consumes considerable resources (Halbesleben et al., organizations often provide various types of support to
2014; Nielsen & Einarsen, 2012; Yao et al., 2020a). It employees. To repay the organization, employees actively
could also lead to individuals consuming large amounts of enhance their organization’s competitive advantage through
resources in order to support their adherence to the moral various means, some of which may be unethical. Employees
code, and this would affect their level of moral disengage- attempt to assuage their guilt by passing on the accountabil-
ment (Caravita et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2017, 2020). As the ity for these unethical behaviors to the organization (Hsieh
resource consumption of employees is due to the actions of et al., 2020; Umphress & Bingham, 2011). A positive rela-
organizational members via bullying, it is unlikely that the tionship between OMD and UPB is expected. FMD could
victims would break their internal moral code to help the cognitively obscure the obligation of employees to attribute
organization (Emerson, 1976; Gouldner, 1960). According their unethical behaviors to their families, thereby mak-
to COR, to cope with the pressure from workplace bully- ing them more likely to exhibit UPFB (Chen et al., 2016;
ing, employees need to save resources. They will be less Liu et al., 2020). Some studies report that when families
likely to compromise their moral standards or morally dis- experience immense financial pressure, employees tend to
engage themselves to benefit their organizations. In other consider it a fundamental social value to help them resolve
words, workplace bullying leads to employees being less this pressure (Schwartz et al., 2012; Stein, 1992), leading
likely to engage in OMD. Meanwhile, individuals actively to UPFB (Cheng et al., 2021). Regarding moral cognition
seek new ways to acquire resources to uphold the stability such as FMD, employees prioritize the families’ interest, and
of their resources, e.g., turning to families. Families often show cognitive awareness of being responsible for the fam-
act as a charging station for employees, complementing ily. In such cases, it is easier for employees to take whatever
the resources consumed in the organization (Carlson et al., measures deemed fit to benefit their families, even if they are
2019; Zhou & Buehler, 2016). Employees often work to unethical. We expect a positive relationship between FMD
support their family expenses (Schwartz et al., 2012; Stein, and UPFB.
1992). Employees who experience workplace bullying often Based on the above analysis, when employees experi-
need to be “healed” by their families (Nielsen & Einarsen, ence workplace bullying, they are less likely to morally dis-
2012; Yao et al., 2020a, 2020b). In this scenario, employees engage themselves from organizations (i.e., OMD), which
may have more FMD where they compromise their moral decreases their engagement in unethical behaviors that ben-
standards or morally disengage themselves to benefit their efit their organizations (i.e., UPB). Meanwhile, employees
who are bullied in the workplace are more likely to morally

13
Rational Counterattack: The Impact of Workplace Bullying on Unethical Pro-organizational…

disengage themselves from families (i.e., FMD), which in influences moral disengagement (cognition), ultimately lead-
turn increases their engagement in unethical behaviors that ing to employee unethical behavior. Therefore, we hypoth-
benefit their families (i.e., UPFB). Thus we propose two esize a chain-mediation model where emotional exhaustion
mediation hypotheses as below. and moral disengagement chain-mediate the relationships
between workplace bullying and UPB/UPFB.
Hypothesis 3a OMD mediates the negative relationship
between workplace bullying and UPB. Hypothesis 4a Workplace bullying decreases UPB through
the chain-mediating role of emotional exhaustion and OMD
Hypothesis 3b FMD mediates the positive relationship
between workplace bullying and UPFB. Hypothesis 4b Workplace bullying increases UPFB through
the chain-mediating role of emotional exhaustion and FMD.
The Chain‑Mediating Effect of Emotional Exhaustion
and Moral Disengagement The Moderating Effect of PFC

We have postulated an indirect effect of workplace bullying According to COR, exposure to threats or negative events
on employee unethical behavior mediated by its effect on results in the loss of resources by employees. The negative
emotional exhaustion (affective unit) and moral disengage- impact of such events can be mitigated if they have access
ment (cognitive unit). Two main theoretical frameworks sup- to resources that can replace those that are lost. Workplace
port these mediating mechanisms, namely COR (Halbesle- bullying is a harmful practice. To what extent employees
ben et al., 2014; Hobfoll, 1989) and CAPS (Kell, 2018; Lee perceive such practice to be tolerable or forgivable is a key
& Pee, 2015; Mischel & Shoda, 1995; Yao et al., 2020a). To factor influencing the level of resource loss. In this study, we
further explore how workplace bullying influences employee propose PFC, as an extra resource to moderate the relation-
unethical behavior, we now turn to the combined effects of ship between workplace bullying and emotional exhaustion.
emotional exhaustion and moral disengagement. PFC is the degree of tolerance an organization expects indi-
According to COR, resources are important to predict viduals to display after experiencing a negative event (Fehr
individual behavior when facing threats or negative events & Gelfand, 2012; Guchait et al., 2019). If the organization
(Halbesleben et al., 2014; Hobfoll, 1989). The emotional strongly supports and rewards employees for exhibiting such
resources of employees who encounter workplace bullying tolerance, it suggests a high level of forgiveness climate in
will be significantly consumed. They are less likely to mor- the organization. In these organizations, employees are more
ally disengage themselves from their own moral standards to tolerant and more likely to forgive each other’s offenses.
protect or to benefit their organizations (i.e., OMD). Doing PFC helps employees to adjust their emotions and avoid con-
so will help them conserve their resources, and not fall into suming too many emotional resources (Guchait et al., 2016,
a “loss spiral” of resources. With increased moral disen- 2019; Yao et al., 2020a). It can also, to some extent, resolve
gagement, employees will be less likely to engage in any the trust crisis created by negative workplace events suffered
unethical behaviors to protect or benefit their organizations by employees, such as workplace bullying (Guchait et al.,
(i.e., UPB). Conversely, when subjected to workplace bully- 2016, 2019; Yao et al., 2020b). Employees who perceive
ing, employees who feel emotionally exhausted will invest in a higher level of forgiveness climate in their organizations
new resources to achieve a “gain spiral” of resources which are more likely to forgive others’ offenses, leading to less
help them to cope with the pressure and threat caused by consumption of their resources, i.e., lower level of emotional
workplace bullying. In this study, we propose that families exhaustion (Yao et al., 2020a). Thus we propose that PFC
are the main parties that individuals could turn to for these will weaken the positive relationship between workplace
new resources. Workplace bullying leads to a higher level of bullying and emotional exhaustion.
emotional exhaustion which in turn leads to additional moral When perceiving a high level of forgiveness climate in
disengagement for the benefit of the family (i.e., FMD). So their organizations, employees who have been bullied at the
FMD will lead employees to undertake unethical behavior workplace will show a lower level of emotional exhaustion.
that benefits their families (i.e., UPFB). Similarly, we argue that PFC would weaken the chain-medi-
CAPS provides further support for the above arguments. ating effect of emotional exhaustion and moral disengage-
When individuals face an event or a situation, their affective- ment in the relationship between workplace bullying and
cognitive units can influence each other, leading to changes employee unethical behavior, because it is regarded as an
in their behavior (Lee & Pee, 2015; Mischel & Shoda, extra resource for employees to gain following the experi-
1995). Applying this to the context of workplace bullying ence of negative events. The existing literature has demon-
and employee unethical behavior, we propose that workplace strated that individuals with a higher level of perceived car-
bullying leads to emotional exhaustion (affect), which in turn ing and forgiveness climate, tend to attain more resources.

13
 Z. Yao et al.

This is because they can rely on the care and comfort of distinct parties, we conduct two studies to test this model via
organizational members which helps to replenish the emo- organizational and family pathways respectively. Given that
tional resources consumed by the negative events (Guchait this study focuses on employees’ experience, particularly
et al., 2019; Halbesleben et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2019; Yao with regard to workplace bullying, emotional exhaustion,
et al., 2020a). According to COR, employees who have OMD, UPB and PFC, we chose individual employees as
more emotional resources in the workplace, will actively our study subject.
contribute to the organization and acquire more resources Study 1 uses a sample of insurance employees and exam-
from the organization to realize the “gain spiral” (Emerson, ines the impact of workplace bullying on UPB via emotional
1976; Gouldner, 1960; Halbesleben et al., 2014). With extra exhaustion and OMD, moderated by PFC (Hypotheses 1a,
resources such as PFC in place, employees with a high level 2a, 3a, 4a, and 5a). Study 2 uses a sample of real estate
of exhaustion tend to break their moral code for the benefit agents and examines the impact of workplace bullying on
of the organization (OMD), thereby committing some uneth- UPFB via emotional exhaustion and FMD, moderated by
ical behaviors such as UPB (Hsieh et al., 2020; Umphress PFC (Hypotheses 1b, 2b, 3b, 4b, and 5b). Both studies adopt
& Bingham, 2011). In this regard, PFC will weaken the time-lagged research design where data were collected cross
chain-mediating effect of emotional exhaustion and OMD three time points with 1-month time lag. Although the model
in the negative relationship between workplace bullying and is tested separately via organizations and family-related
UPB. Conversely, employees consume excessive emotional pathways, both studies fully address the overall theoretical
resources in the workplace such as emotional exhaustion moderated chain-mediation model where workplace bully-
caused by workplace bullying. Any extra resources (e.g., ing increases emotional exhaustion, which in turn influences
PFC) acquired by employees in the organization will help moral disengagement, and ultimately employee unethical
them to recharge their resources, leading to less moral disen- behavior (UPB/UPFB), moderated by employee PFC. More
gagement which is more beneficial for the organization but details are reported as below.
not for their families (FMD), and less unethical behavior that
benefit their families (UPFB). Therefore, PFC is expected to Study 1: Organizational Pathway
weaken the chain-mediating effect of emotional exhaustion
and FMD in the positive relationship between workplace Sample and Procedure
bullying and UPFB.
Based on the above review, we propose the following The research sample was obtained from three large insurance
hypotheses. companies in the southern part of China. All three insurance
companies were established more than 10 years ago and had
Hypothesis 5a PFC weakens the positive impact of work- more than 1000 employees. The choice of these three sample
place bullying on emotional exhaustion, and then moder- organizations was based on the research team’s network.
ates the chain-mediating effect of emotional exhaustion and We promised to share our research findings with them to
OMD in the negative relationship between workplace bul- better enlist their support. In order to be competitive in the
lying and UPB. market, these companies often encouraged their employees
to promote their products and services using various means
Hypothesis 5b PFC weakens the positive impact of work- (e.g., using some excellent marketing skills). Their employ-
place bullying on emotional exhaustion, and then weakens ees had greater autonomy and could give certain discounts
the chain-mediating effect of emotional exhaustion and FMD on products purchased by customers. A total of 400 frontline
in the positive relationship between workplace bullying and employees from the sales positions in the three companies
UPFB. were invited to participate in the survey. Hard copies of sur-
veys were used and researchers visited the company sites to
collect data. All participants completed the survey at three
Methods and Results time points. At Time 1, they completed the section dealing
with basic information and scales of workplace bullying and
Study Overview PFC. A month later, at Time 2, they completed a scale of
emotional exhaustion and OMD. Another month later, at
This research proposed a moderated chain-mediation model Time 3, they completed the UPB scale.
linking workplace bullying, emotional exhaustion, moral In order to enable participants to complete the question-
disengagement and unethical behaviors, moderated by PFC. naire correctly, we took the following four measures. First,
This model consists of unethical behaviors and moral dis- before distributing the questionnaire, we explained to all
engagement toward two parties, organizations and families. participants that the data was being collected for academic
Due to the complexity of the model, as well as these two research only and not for any other purpose. Second, we

13
Rational Counterattack: The Impact of Workplace Bullying on Unethical Pro-organizational…

promised to pay 66 yuan (~ 10 US dollars) upon correct Two sample items were “I feel emotionally drained from my
completion of the three surveys. Third, during the process of work” and “I feel like I’m at the end of my rope”. The reli-
completing the questionnaire, one of our members remained ability alpha coefficient was 0.90.
close to participants in order to address any queries they had.
Finally, after participants completed the questionnaire, we Organization‑Oriented Moral Disengagement (OMD) We
checked the questionnaire to ensure that no data was miss- measured OMD by adapting the 24-item moral disengage-
ing. Then we immediately collected, sealed, and coded the ment scale developed by Bandura et al. (1996). This scale
questionnaires. was originally used in the education context and we adapted
After eliminating invalid questionnaires, such as consist- it for the work context of this study. A similar approach has
ent answers and three investigation mismatches (some par- been adopted by studies in other contexts (e.g., Chowd-
ticipants could not be reached because of business trips), we hury & Fernando, 2014; Detert et al., 2008). Sample items
collected 366 valid questionnaires at Time 1, 331 at Time included “It is ok to attack someone who threatens your
2, and 306 at Time 3. After matching respondents across organizational honor” and “A person cannot be blamed if he/
three time points, the final valid sample size was 306 with she misbehaves for the benefit of the organization”. Overall,
a response rate of 76.50%. Among the final sample, males the scale showed high reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.84).
accounted for 57.12% and females 42.88%. The average age
was 27.22 years old (SD 5.76). Regarding education, 42.48% Unethical Pro‑organizational Behavior (UPB) We adopted
of participants did not have a bachelor’s degree, and 57.52% the UPB scale from Umphress et al. (2010) who developed
had received a bachelor’s degree or above. The average ten- it in the Western context. Based on the cultural difference
ure of employees was 3.71 years (SD 3.43). between the East and West, some original items were not
applicable in the Chinese context. For example, one orig-
Measures inal item was “If my organization needed me to, I would
give a good recommendation on behalf of an incompetent
All items (except for control variables) were measured on a employee in the hope that the person will become another
5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 organization’s problem instead of my own”. In China,
(strongly agree). As this study was conducted in China, we organizations recruit new employees through public recruit-
translated all scales strictly in compliance with the transla- ment and internal recommendation, and rarely through rec-
tion and translator-back procedure suggested by Behr (2017). ommendations from employees of other organizations. We
retained five items in this study. Two sample items were “If
Workplace Bullying Nine items were adopted from the Neg- it would help my organization, I would misrepresent the
ative Acts Questionnaire-Revised (NAQ-R, Einarsen et al., truth to make my organization look good” and “If it would
2009). The original NAQ-R scale includes 22 items and help my organization, I would exaggerate the truth about my
covers three types of bullying, i.e., work-related, personal- company’s products or services to customers and clients”.
related and physical bullying. This study focuses on the The Cronbach’s α coefficient was 0.92.
bullying at workplace and adopts the nine items on work-
related bullying. Such nine-item measure of workplace bul- Control Variables When employees are exposed to negative
lying has been widely used in the Chinese context (e.g., Yao events in the workplace, their gender, age, educational back-
et al., 2020a, 2020b). Respondents were asked to indicate ground, and tenure might influence their behaviors (Yao
the extent to which they had been bullied in the workplace et al., 2020a, 2020b). These control variables have been used
during the past 6 months. Example items included “exces- in existing studies on UPB (Chen et al., 2016; Graham et al.,
sive monitoring of my work” and “being humiliated or ridi- 2020; Umphress & Bingham, 2011; Zhang, 2020a). Gender
culed in connection with my work”. The Cronbach’s α was was measured by a binary variable (male = 0, female = 1).
0.86. Age was measured as a continuous variable. Educational
background was measured by a binary variable (Leaving
Perceived Forgiveness Climate (PFC) Four items were certificate and below = 0, bachelor and above = 1). Tenure
adopted from Cox (2011) to measure PFC. Two sample was measured as the years of work in the current organiza-
items were “We are forgiving of each other’s offenses” and tion.
“Regarding offenses from other colleagues, members of the As all data were collected from one single source, the
organization are tolerant of each other”. In this study, Cron- concern may exist about the common method variance
bach’s α was 0.87. (CMV). To address this potential concern, we followed a
number of recommendations during the research design
Emotional Exhaustion We measured emotional exhaustion and analysis phases (Podsakoff et al., 2003). In the research
with the four-item scale developed by Maslach et al. (2001). design phase, we provided assurances about the anonymity

13
 Z. Yao et al.

Table 1  Descriptive statistics Variables Gender Age Edu Tenure WB PFC EE OMD UPB
and correlation analysis in
Study 1 Gender –
Age − 0.04 –
Edu − 0.05 0.15* –
Tenure 0.02 0.70** − 0.08 –
WB − 0.10 0.13* 0.01 0.07 0.86
PFC 0.04 0.00 0.16** 0.03 − 0.17** 0.87
EE 0.03 − 0.01 0.06 − 0.03 0.15* − 0.06 0.90
OMD 0.01 − 0.08 0.05 − 0.05 − 0.38** 0.16** − 0.59** 0.84
UPB − 0.00 − 0.08 − 0.02 − 0.05 − 0.22** 0.19** − 0.54** 0.44** 0.92
Mean 0.43 27.22 0.58 3.71 3.93 2.49 3.38 2.68 2.58
SD 0.50 5.76 0.50 3.43 0.64 0.57 0.77 0.31 0.42

Gender (male = 0, female = 1); Education background (below bachelor = 0, bachelor or above = 1)
EE emotional exhaustion
**p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, two-tailed test
Bold and slanted data on diagonal is Cronbach’s alpha for key variables in this study

Table 2  Results of confirmatory Models χ2/df IFI TLI CFI RMSEA SRMR
factor analysis in Study 1
Full measurement WB, PFC, EE, OMD, UPB 1.73 0.92 0.91 0.92 0.05 0.05
model (five fac-
tors)
Four factors WB + PFC, EE, OMD, UPB 2.28 0.86 0.84 0.86 0.07 0.08
Three factors WB + PFC, EE + OMD, UPB 3.05 0.77 0.75 0.77 0.08 0.10
Two factors WB + PFC, EE + OMD + UPB 4.11 0.65 0.62 0.65 0.10 0.13
Single factor WB + PFC + EE + OMD + UPB 5.08 0.54 0.50 0.54 0.12 0.14

+ represents the combination of two factors into one factor

of the survey and the confidentiality of the data. Prior to dis- [IFI] = 0.92; Tucker–Lewis index [TLI] = 0.91; com-
tribution, we tested, revised, and retested the survey among parative fit index [CFI] = 0.92; root mean square error of
a group of participants in the case organization. In addi- approximation [RMSEA] = 0.05; the standardized root
tion, we collected data at three different time points. Finally, mean square residual [SRMR] = 0.05. We then conducted
during the analysis phase, a series of confirmatory factor a series of CFA for alternative models and compared them
analyses were carried out and the results are presented in with the full measurement model. The results in Table 2
the results subsection. show that the full measurement model was evidently bet-
ter than that of all other models, indicating that the vari-
Results ables in this study had good discriminative validity and
that CMV was not a serious concern.
Descriptive Statistical Analysis
Structural Model for Testing Hypotheses
Table 1 presents the mean, standard deviation, and reliability
values of each variable. In addition, we tested the correlation Main Effect and Mediating Effect We used the structural
between all variables. equation model (SEM) and Bootstrap mediation test in
Mplus 7.0 software to test our research hypotheses 1a to 4a.
Measurement Model Figure 2 and Table 3 present the results obtained after con-
trolling for gender, age, educational background and tenure.
Table 2 presents the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) Hypothesis 1a proposed a negative correlation between
results of all variables. The five-factor model showed workplace bullying and UPB. As shown in Fig. 2, the path
a very good model fit (χ 2/df = 1.73; increased fit index coefficient of workplace bullying on UPB was − 0.14

13
Rational Counterattack: The Impact of Workplace Bullying on Unethical Pro-organizational…

PFC Emotional
-0.24*** OMD
-0.14* exhaustion

0.15* -0.19*** -0.29***

0.59***

Workplace bullying -0.14*** UPB

Fig. 2  Model estimation in Study 1. Note Control variables were moral disengagement, and UPB unethical pro-organizational behav-
included in the model but not shown here for ease of presentation. ior. ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05
PFC perceived forgiveness climate, OMD organization-oriented

(p < 0.001), suggesting that workplace bullying was nega- chain-mediation was the significant impact of the first medi-
tively correlated with UPB. Hence, Hypothesis 1a was ator on the second mediator (Hayes, 2013). The path coef-
supported. ficient between emotional exhaustion and OMD was − 0.24
Hypothesis 2a proposed that emotional exhaustion would (p < 0.001), satisfying the additional condition. The indirect
mediate the negative relationship between workplace bully- effect of workplace bullying and UPB via emotional exhaus-
ing and UPB. To test for mediating effect, three conditions tion and OMD was − 0.10, with a 95% CI of [− 0.22, − 0.02].
need to be met (Hayes, 2013). To streamline the presenta- Therefore, Hypothesis 4a was supported.
tion of the results and to avoid repetition in the reporting In addition, after removing the control variables, we
of the results, one detailed example of the findings for the retested our model and found that the model was still stable,
meditational model (Hypothesis 2a) is presented and the and only the value of the regression coefficient changed.
results for the additional mediational models are reported in
a short section. The first condition is the significant relation- Moderating Effect Hypothesis 5a proposed that the PFC
ship between the independent variable and the mediator. The would weaken the impact of workplace bullying on emo-
second condition refers to a significant relationship between tional exhaustion. Figure 2 shows that PFC significantly
the mediator and the dependent variable. The third condi- moderated the relationship between workplace bullying
tion requires the indirect effect of the dependent variable on and emotional exhaustion (b = − 0.14, p < 0.05). In order to
the independent variable via the mediator to be significant. illustrate the moderating impact of PFC and overcome the
Figure 2 showed that the path coefficient of workplace bully- limitations of the traditional simple slope test with random
ing on emotional exhaustion was 0.15 (p < 0.05), suggesting pick a point, we decided to use Johnson–Neyman technique
a significant positive correlation between workplace bully- (Carden et al., 2017; Johnson & Neyman, 1936). As shown
ing and emotional exhaustion, meeting the first condition. in Fig. 3, when the level of PFC in the organization was high
The path coefficient of emotional exhaustion on UPB was (above 3.66), the CI for the impact of workplace bullying
− 0.29 (p < 0.001), suggesting a significant negative relation- on emotional exhaustion contained 0, demonstrating that
ship between emotional exhaustion and UPB, satisfying the workplace bullying had no significant impact on emotional
second condition. Together with Hypothesis 1a, the indi- exhaustion under high levels of PFC. When the level of PFC
rect effect was − 0.17 (Bootstrapping = 20,000), with a 95% in the organization was low (below 3.66), the CI of this rela-
confidence interval [CI] of [− 0.27, − 0.03] which excluded tionship was all below 0, suggesting that workplace bullying
0, meeting the third condition. Thereby Hypothesis 2a was exerted a significant positive impact on emotional exhaus-
supported.
Hypothesis 3a proposed that OMD would mediate the Table 3  Bootstrapping mediation effect test in Study 1
negative relationship between workplace bullying and UPB. Path Indirect effect Confidence
Figure 2 shows that workplace bullying was negatively estimation interval of bias-
linked with OMD (b = − 0.19, p < 0.001), and OMD was corrected 95%
positively linked with UPB (b = 0.59, p < 0.001). The indi- Lower Upper
rect effect of workplace bullying and UPB via OMD was
Total indirect effect − 0.44 − 0.42 − 0.12
− 0.17, with 95% CI of [− 0.26, − 0.03]. All three conditions
Specific indirect effect decomposition
were met. Therefore, Hypothesis 3a was supported.
WB → EE → UPB − 0.17 − 0.27 − 0.03
Hypothesis 4a proposed that emotional exhaustion and
WB → OMD → UPB − 0.17 − 0.26 − 0.03
OMD would chain-mediate the relationship between work-
WB → EE → OMD → UPB − 0.10 − 0.22 − 0.02
place bullying and UPB. Support for Hypotheses 2a and 3a
satisfied the first two conditions. An additional condition for n = 306; Bootstrapping randomly sampled 20,000 times

13
 Z. Yao et al.

1.00 Table 4  Analysis of the moderated chain-mediating effects in Study 1

Moderator Path: WB → EE → OMD → UPB
Simple Slope of workplace bullying (X) predicting

0.50 Indirect effect LLCI ULCI

emotional exhaustion (Y)

High PFC − 0.10 − 0.11 − 0.05

Low PFC − 0.19 − 0.25 − 0.09
0.00
Discrepancy 0.09 0.08 0.14
2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00
-0.50

Study 2: Family Pathway

-1.00
Sample and Procedure
Value of PFC(M)

In this study, we targeted employees in the real estate sector

Fig. 3  The moderating effect of PFC in Study 1
in Shenzhen. Due to the increased demands and investment,
the housing market in Shenzhen has been placed among the
tion at low levels of PFC. Hence, the findings suggested that top 3 in China in terms of the number of transactions in
PFC moderated the relationship between workplace bully- 2020. Employees in the real estate sector often had to sac-
ing and emotional exhaustion such that the relationship was rifice time with their families to get excessive work com-
stronger when PFC was low rather than high, partially sup- pleted. The intensive competition and work pressure had
porting Hypothesis 5a. encouraged employees to engage in unethical behaviors at
work. Based on the research team’s network, three compa-
Moderated Mediating Effect Moderation SEM was con- nies participated in this study. The research design and data
ducted to test for the moderated mediation model where collection procedure were similar to Study 1. For example,
PFC was proposed to weaken the chain-mediating impact of as in Study 1, we promised to share our findings with them.
emotional exhaustion and OMD in the relationship between We distributed hard copies of questionnaires among par-
workplace bullying and UPB (Hypothesis 5a). As a princi- ticipants on site, at three time points with the same time
pal advantage of moderation SEM, the latent variable can lag of 1-month apart. At Time 1, data on control variables,
effectively regulate the measurement error and precisely workplace bullying and PFC were collected. At Time 2, we
estimate the mediating and moderating effect simultane- collected data on emotional exhaustion and FMD. At Time
ously (Maslowsky et al., 2015; Yao et al., 2020a, 2020b). 3, participants completed the UPFB scale.
We used the algorithm in Mplus developed by Stride et al. Of 382 questionnaires distributed, after eliminating inva-
(2015) to analyze the chain-mediating effect between emo- lid questionnaires, we obtained 369 valid questionnaires at
tional exhaustion and OMD from workplace bullying and Time 1, 342 at Time 2, and 328 at Time 3. After matching
UPB under varying levels of PFC (Edwards & Lambert, respondents cross three time points, the final valid sam-
2007; Hayes, 2013, 2018). Table 4 presents the results. ple size was 328 with a response rate of 85.86%. Among
At the high level of PFC (one SD above the mean), the the final sample, males accounted for 59.15% and females
chain-mediating effect of emotional exhaustion and OMD in accounted for 40.85%. The average age was 30.17 years old
the relationship between workplace bullying and UPB was (SD 4.43). Regarding the educational background, 39.94%
− 0.10, with a 95% CI of [− 0.11, − 0.05], suggesting a sig- had received a leaving certificate or below, and 60.06% had
nificant chain-mediating effect. At the low level of PFC (one received a bachelor’s degree or above. The average tenure
SD below the mean), the chain-mediating effect of emotional was 4.79 years (SD 3.41). Regarding marital status, 33.84%
exhaustion and OMD between workplace bullying and UPB were unmarried, while 66.16% were married. Regarding the
was − 0.19, with a 95% of CI [− 0.25, − 0.09], suggesting number of children, 58.84% had no children, 30.79% had 1
a significant chain-mediating effect. The difference in the child, 9.76% had 2 children, and 0.61% had 3 children.
indirect effect across high and low levels of PFC was signifi-
cant (b = 0.09, [0.08, 0.14]). The chain-mediating effect of Measures
emotional exhaustion and OMD in the relationship between
workplace bullying and UPB was stronger when PFC was As in Study 1, all items used were measured on a 5-point
low rather than high. Hence, Hypothesis 5a was supported. Likert subscale (except for control variables), ranging from
1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). In addition,
we also translated all scales in strict compliance with the

13
Rational Counterattack: The Impact of Workplace Bullying on Unethical Pro-organizational…

translator-back translation procedures suggested by Behr TLI = 0.91; CFI = 0.91; RMSEA = 0.06; SRMR = 0.06). We
(2017). then conducted a series of CFA for alternative models and
Three main variables, i.e., workplace bullying, PFC, and found that the full measurement model was better than all
emotional exhaustion, were measured using the same scales the alternative models. These findings suggested that CMV
as in Study 1. To avoid repetition, we do not report the full was not a serious concern in this study.
measurements in this section. All three scales showed good
reliability with high Cronbach’s αs (0.91 for workplace bul- Structural Model for Testing Hypotheses
lying, 0.88 for PFC, and 0.85 for emotional exhaustion).
Main Effect and Mediating Effect As in Study 1, we used the
Family‑Oriented Moral Disengagement (FMD) Similar to SEM and Bootstrap mediation test to test our study hypoth-
OMD in Study 1, we adapted the 24-item moral disengage- eses. Figure 4 and Table 7 present the results obtained by
ment scale developed by Bandura et al. (1996) into our using SEM and Bootstrap mediation after controlling for
research context. A similar approach has been adopted by gender, age, education, tenure, marital status and the number
other studies (e.g., Liu et al., 2020). Two sample items were of children. We found that marital status (b = 0.10, p < 0.05;
“It is alright to fight to protect your family interests” and b = 0.18, p < 0.05; b = 0.11, p < 0.1) and number of children
“It is OK to steal to take care of your family’s needs”. The (b = 0.15, p < 0.1; b = 0.14, p < 0.05; b = 0.20, p < 0.01) sig-
Cronbach’s α was 0.84. nificantly affected emotional exhaustion, FMD, and UPFB.
Hypothesis 1b which proposed a positive relationship
Unethical Pro‑family Behavior (UPFB) To measure UPFB, between workplace bullying and UPFB was supported
seven items were adopted from Liu et al. (2020). Two sam- by finding the significant path between them (b = 0.28,
ple items were “To help my family, I took company assets/ p < 0.001). Hypothesis 2b proposed that emotional exhaus-
supplies home for family use” and “To help my family, I tion would mediate the positive relationship between work-
submitted my family’s household receipts (e.g., gas) to my place bullying and UPFB. Figure 4 showed that workplace
company for the reimbursement”. This scale had good con- bullying was significantly linked to emotional exhaustion
sistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.84). (b = 0.39, p < 0.001), and emotional exhaustion was posi-
tively linked to UPFB (b = 0.24, p < 0.001). The indirect
Control Variables As in Study 1, we controlled for gender, effect of workplace bullying and UPFB via emotional
age, educational background and tenure which have been exhaustion was 0.22, with a 95% CI of [0.08, 0.27]. There-
found to influence employee unethical behavior (Allen & fore, Hypothesis 2b was supported.
Finkelstein, 2014; Warren & Catherine, 1999). In addition, Hypothesis 3b proposed that FMD would mediate the
in order to capture the impact of family factors as they may positive relationship between workplace bullying and UPFB.
influence family-based experience and behaviors, we con- Figure 4 showed that workplace bullying was positively
trolled marital status, and the number of children as sug- linked with FMD (b = 0.27, p < 0.001) and FMD was posi-
gested by Liu et al. (2020) in studying UPFB as they may tively linked with UPFB (b = 0.34, p < 0.001). The indirect
influence employees’ decisions on family-related issues. effect of workplace bullying and UPFB via FMD was 0.20,
Data were collected from a single source and CMV may with 95% CI of [0.05, 0.25]. All three conditions were met.
exist. As in Study 1, we followed the recommendations by Therefore, Hypothesis 3b was supported.
Podsakoff and his colleagues during the research design and Hypothesis 4b proposed that emotional exhaustion and
analysis phases (Podsakoff et al., 2003). To avoid repetition, FMD would chain-mediate the relationship between work-
please refer to “Measures” section in Study 1. place bullying and UPFB. Support for Hypotheses 2b and
3b satisfied the first two conditions. Emotional exhaustion
Results was found to be significantly associated with FMD (b = 0.29,
p < 0.001). The indirect effect of workplace bullying and
Descriptive Statistical Analysis UPFB via emotional exhaustion and FMD was 0.12, with
a 95% CI of [0.05, 0.22]. Therefore, Hypothesis 4b was
Table 5 presents the mean, standard deviation, and reliability supported.
values of each variable. In addition, we tested the correlation In addition, after removing the control variables, we
between these variables. retested our model and found that the model was still sta-
ble; however, the value and significance of some regression
Measurement Model coefficients were enhanced to some extent.

CFA was performed on all five variables (Table 6) which Moderating Effect Hypothesis 5a proposed PFC would
showed a very good model fit (χ 2/df = 2.84; IFI = 0.92; weaken the impact of workplace bullying on emotional

13
 Z. Yao et al.

Table 5  Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis in Study 2

Variables Gender Age Edu Tenure Marital status Children WB PFC EE FMD UPFB

Gender –
Age 0.03 –
Edu − 0.03 0.07 –
Tenure − 0.01 0.43** − 0.11 –
Marital status − 0.04 0.54** − 0.00 0.18** –
Children 0.01 0.65** 0.01 0.21** 0.547** –
WB − 0.10 0.03 − 0.08 − 0.02 0.08 0.09 0.91
PFC 0.06 − 0.12* 0.00 − 0.07 − 0.15** − 0.15** − 0.32** 0.88
EE 0.02 0.10 − 0.02 0.06 0.08 0.14** 0.36** − 0.53** 0.85
FMD − 0.07 0.06 − 0.09 0.08 0.10 0.02 0.47** − 0.24** 0.14** 0.84
UPFB − 0.05 0.04 − 0.12* 0.05 0.12* 0.05 0.22** − 0.36** 0.44** 0.33** 0.84
Mean 0.41 30.17 0.60 4.79 0.66 0.52 3.08 2.39 4.00 3.11 3.66
SD 0.49 4.43 0.49 3.41 0.47 0.70 0.46 0.82 0.75 0.36 0.41

Gender (male = 0, female = 1); Education background (below bachelor = 0, bachelor or above = 1); Marital status (unmarried = 0, married = 1);
Number of children (no children = 0, 1 child = 1, 2 children = 2, 3 children = 3)
**p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, two-tailed test
Bold and slanted data on diagonal is Cronbach’s alpha for key variables in this study

Table 6  Results of confirmatory Models χ2/df IFI TLI CFI RMSEA SRMR
factor analysis in Study 2
Full measurement WB, PFC, EE, FMD, UPFB 2.84 0.92 0.91 0.91 0.06 0.06
model (five fac-
tors)
Four factors WB + PFC, EE, FMD, UPFB 3.51 0.85 0.82 0.85 0.07 0.08
Three factors WB + PFC, EE + FMD, UPFB 3.83 0.81 0.79 0.81 0.07 0.08
Two factors WB + PFC, EE + FMD + UPFB 4.43 0.75 0.72 0.75 0.08 0.10
Single factor WB + PFC + EE + FMD + UPFB 4.52 0.74 0.71 0.74 0.08 0.12

+ represents the combination of two factors into one factor

PFC Emotional
0.29*** FMD
-0.16* exhaustion

0.39*** 0.27*** 0.24***

0.34***

Workplace bullying 0.28*** UPFB

Fig. 4  Model estimation in Study 2. Note Control variables were engagement, and UPFB unethical pro-family behavior. ***p < 0.001,
included in the model but not shown here for ease of presentation. **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05
PFC perceived forgiveness climate, FMD family-oriented moral dis-

exhaustion. Figure 4 shows that PFC significantly moderated lying on emotional exhaustion was not significant under high
the correlation between workplace bullying and emotional levels of PFC. Conversely, when PFC was low (below 4.14),
exhaustion (b = 0.16, p < 0.05). We adopted the Johnson–Ney- the 95% CI of the impact effect was always above 0. This sug-
man technique for testing the moderation effect. As shown in gests that workplace bullying exerted a significant and posi-
Fig. 5, when PFC was high (above 4.14), the 95% CI of the tive impact on emotional exhaustion under low levels of PFC.
impact of workplace bullying on emotional exhaustion con- The results suggested that PFC moderated the relationship
tained 0. This suggests that the influence of workplace bul- between workplace bullying and emotional exhaustion such

13
Rational Counterattack: The Impact of Workplace Bullying on Unethical Pro-organizational…

Table 7  Bootstrapping mediation effect test in Study 2 Table 8  Analysis of the moderated chain-mediating effects in Study 2
Path Indirect effect Confidence Moderator Path: WB → EE → FMD → UPFB
estimation interval of bias-
corrected 95% Indirect effect LLCI ULCI

Lower Upper High PFC 0.16 0.16 0.34

Low PFC 0.31 0.23 0.49
Total indirect effect 0.54 0.15 0.49
Discrepancy − 0.15 0.10 0.28
Specific indirect effect decomposition
WB → EE → UPFB 0.22 0.08 0.27
WB → FMD → UPFB 0.20 0.050 0.25 and FMD in the relationship between workplace bullying
WB → EE → FMD → UPFB 0.12 0.050 0.22 and UPFB was stronger when PFC was low rather than high.
Hence, Hypothesis 5b is supported.
n = 328; Bootstrapping randomly sampled 20,000 times

Discussion
0.50
This study set out to unlock what, why, how, and when
employees engage in unethical behavior. Based on two
Simple slope of workplace bullying (X) predicting

main theoretical frameworks concerning negative events

0.00 and resources, i.e., CAPS and COR, this study proposed a
moderated chain-mediation model where workplace bul-
emotional exhaustion (Y)

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

lying increases emotional exhaustion, which in turn influ-

ences moral disengagement, and ultimately employee
-0.50 unethical behavior (UPB/UPFB), moderated by employee
perceived forgiveness climate. Results from two studies
across three time points provided support for the above
model. This study generates valuable implications for
-1.00 business ethical theory and practices. Overall, workplace
Value of PFC (M) bullying decreases UPB and increases UPFB via increased
emotional exhaustion and changes in moral disengage-
Fig. 5  The moderating effect of PFC in Study 2 ment. Emotional exhaustion decreases OMD, leading to
less UPB; and increases FMD leading to more UPFB.
PFC weakens the positive impact of workplace bullying
that the relationship was stronger when PFC was low rather
on emotional exhaustion and the mediating effect of work-
than high.
place bullying on UPB/UPFB via emotional exhaustion
and moral disengagement. Implications for theory and
Moderated Mediating Effect Moderation SEM was con-
practice are discussed below.
ducted to test the moderated chain-mediation model where
PFC was proposed to weaken the chain-mediating impact of
emotional exhaustion and FMD in the relationship between
workplace bullying and UPFB (Hypothesis 5b). Table 8 pre-
Theoretical Implications
sents the results.
Firstly, we extend our understanding of why employees
At the high level of PFC (one SD above the mean), the
exhibit unethical behavior by examining the role of an
chain-mediating effect of emotional exhaustion and FMD in
organizational factor—workplace bullying—in predicting
the relationship between workplace bullying and UPFB was
two types of unethical behaviors, i.e., UPB and UPFB. Pre-
0.16, with a 95% CI of [0.16, 0.34], suggesting a significant
vious research on employee unethical behavior explained it
chain-mediating effect. At the low level of PFC (one SD below
mainly from individual factors such as job insecurity, self-
the mean), the chain-mediating effect of emotional exhaustion
compassion, and self-control depletion (Gini et al., 2020;
and FMD between workplace bullying and UPFB was 0.31,
Lawrence & Kacmar, 2017; Yang et al., 2020). Recent
with a 95% of CI [0.23, 0.49], suggesting a significant chain-
research looked at external factors such as leadership (Gra-
mediating effect. The difference in the indirect effect across
ham et al., 2015; Hsieh et al., 2020), and family financial
high and low levels of PFC was significant (b = − 0.15, [0.10,
pressure (Liu et al., 2020). In this study, we extend our
0.28]). The chain-mediating effect of emotional exhaustion
understanding of why employees exhibit UPB and UPFB

13
 Z. Yao et al.

by examining a common negative event experienced by cognitive and affective units, as well as the internal con-
employees in the workplace, i.e., workplace bullying. nection between gains and losses of individual resources.
Owing to their pro-organizational and pro-family charac- Thus, we could elucidate the intermediating mechanisms
teristics, UPB and UPFB are often overlooked by organi- between workplace bullying and UPB/UPFB in terms of
zations, families, and many scholars (Arasli & Tumer, internal mechanism and overall logic. Hence, this study not
2008; Chen et al., 2016; Umphress et al., 2010). Existing only broadens the scope of CAPS in management but also
limited research on unethical behavior mainly focuses on complements the mediating variable between workplace bul-
UPB, while UPFB has not been studied until recently. As lying and UPB/UPFB. Drawing on the COR, we proposed
the first scholar to propose the concept of UPFB, Liu et al. and found support for the impact of workplace bullying on
(2020) focused on the perspective of family financial pres- moral disengagement. In particular, when employees experi-
sure as the main driver for UPFB. Indeed, UPFB was not ence workplace bullying as a negative event, they are more
necessarily caused only by family factors, and could be likely to have a lower level of OMD to save their resources
attributable to organizational factors. In this regard, Cheng and a high level of FMD to gain more resources. Moral dis-
et al. (2021) found that a supervisor’s family-supportive engagement was found to lead to unethical behaviors such
behaviors could reduce UPFB. In this study, we extend as UPB and UPFB. We acknowledge that there may be other
such research by identifying the negative event, i.e., work- unethical behaviors such as bullying others which moral dis-
place bullying, as a key driver for both UPB and UPFB. engagement leads to. Such research indicates the impact of
In addition to the new variables, this research draws on moral disengagement on bullying (Gini et al., 2020; Wang
the resources-based view and introduces COR and CAPS et al., 2017, 2020). As commonly said, what goes around
to employee unethical behavior research, providing addi- comes around. Thus, we call for future research to more
tional insights to the existing research which mainly used systematically examine the casualty of bullying and moral
social exchange and leadership theories. By doing so, this disengagement.
research extends the theoretical base and research scope Finally, we increase the understanding for research on
on why employees exhibit unethical behavior. employee unethical behaviors by examining the bound-
Secondly, this study contributes to our understanding ary condition when employees exhibit UPB/UPFB. Previ-
of how and why workplace bullying influences employees’ ous studies on boundary conditions of unethical behavior
unethical behavior (UPB/UPFB). Many previous studies often selected variables associated with employee morals,
considered that a certain factor (e.g., leadership style or including organizational identification and moral identifi-
family financial pressure) would affect employees’ cognition cation (Chen et al., 2016; Chowdhury & Fernando, 2014;
(e.g., organizational identification and moral disengagement) Effelsberg & Solga, 2015; Graham et al., 2020; Johnson &
and ultimately affect employees’ behavior (Chen et al., 2016; Umphress, 2019; Umphress et al., 2010; Wang et al., 2019).
Dang et al., 2017; Effelsberg & Solga, 2015; Hsieh et al., Nevertheless, individuals often ignore their moral standards
2020; Liu et al., 2020; Miao et al., 2013; Wang et al., 2019). because of the interaction between events and situational
Nevertheless, previous studies ignored the fact that humans characteristics (Mischel & Shoda, 1995; Yao et al., 2020a,
are particularly emotional animals, and that their emotional 2020b). It has been claimed by many scholars that PFC, as a
units are often influenced before their cognitive development distinct situational characteristic, could effectively enhance
(Kell, 2018; Mischel & Shoda, 1995; Yao et al., 2020a). In the individual’s emotional control ability and cognitive regu-
this study, we used COR to examine the entire process of lation ability (Fehr & Gelfand, 2012; Guchait et al., 2016,
resource gains and losses between workplace bullying and 2019; Yao et al., 2020a, 2020b). Theoretically, by finding the
UPB/UPFB, as well as using CAPS to connect all variables, moderating effect of PFC on the chain-mediation model, we
thereby elucidating the impact mechanism of workplace bul- demonstrated that the interaction between events and situ-
lying on UPB/UPFB. First, we validated the separate mediat- ational characteristics can effectively affect an individual’s
ing effect of emotional exhaustion and moral disengagement cognitive-affective personality system. By doing so, this
between workplace bullying and UPB/UPFB using COR. research enriches the research results of CAPS, which has
Among them, emotional exhaustion represented the deple- been focusing on the mediating mechanisms between events
tion of employees’ emotional resources, while moral disen- and behaviors. In ethics research, this finding unlocks how
gagement represented the gains and losses of employees’ organizations could reduce the indirect impact of workplace
cognitive resources, which, to some extent, confirms part bullying on employee unethical behavior. Both UPB and
of the research conclusions of Liu et al. (2020). Second, we UPFB are unethical and they would cause significant losses
used CAPS to test the efficiency of the event–affective–cog- to the organization in the long run. This study contributes to
nitive-behavior process in describing the chain-mediating solving this puzzle by proposing and finding that PFC weak-
effect between workplace bullying and UPB/UPFB, ena- ens the indirect impact of workplace bullying on employee
bling us to better discover the alteration between individual unethical behavior.

13
Rational Counterattack: The Impact of Workplace Bullying on Unethical Pro-organizational…

Practical Implications recruitment index to ensure that new employees have a high
level of moral quality. For existing organizational members,
Several lessons can be learned by practitioners from this the organization should frequently invite ethics professors
study. Overall, both UPB and UPFB are unethical behaviors. to provide training to help them enhance their moral quality.
Organizations should invest more in organizational policies Moreover, the organization must articulate some punishment
and practices to prevent UPB/UPFB as they ultimately dam- measures against UPB and UPFB so that employees cannot
age the interests of organizations. Thus, organizations must find excuses for moral disengagement (Chen et al., 2016;
also take some measures to eliminate UPB and UPFB. Detert et al., 2008; Liu et al., 2020). In addition, the organi-
Firstly, employees who experience workplace bully- zation should also supplement the emotional resources con-
ing tend to morally rationalize their unethical behaviors to sumed by employees in a timely manner which will prevent
protect the interests of their families and are more likely them from resorting to unethical behavior. Leaders should
to exhibit UPFB. In addition, employees who experience always focus on and care for employees. When employees
workplace bullying are even more reluctant to consume their are depressed, leaders should extend them timely comfort
resources to protect the interests of the organization, thereby (Xu et al., 2018). Organizations should also create places
inhibiting UPB. Such negative events should not be tolerated for employees to vent their emotions and a mechanism to
by the organization. Organizations need to actively monitor, supplement emotional resources, which can not only assist
effectively manage and prevent bullying at the workplace. them to vent their negative emotions but also help them
For example, organizations could create an anonymous supplement emotional resources when emotional resources
reporting mechanism (e.g., anonymous phone lines and let- begin to be consumed. This can efficiently prevent employ-
ter boxes). At the same time, if organizations receive reports ees from falling into a state of emotional exhaustion (Yao
or complaints about workplace bullying, timely investigation et al., 2020a).
needs to be organized along with professional psychological
counselors to comfort and guide victims (Einarsen et al., Limitations and Future Research
2009; Escartin et al., 2011; Yao et al., 2020a). Moreover,
the organization also should provide the essential skills of This study on the moderated chain-mediation model of
conflict management training to its members, e.g., emotional workplace bullying to employee unethical behavior via emo-
regulation skills to help them manage their emotions; inter- tional exhaustion and moral disengagement, moderated by
personal communication skills to promote mutual under- PFC, provides valuable insights into why, how and when
standing; as well as problem-solving skills to attain mutual employee unethical behavior occurs. Despite the contribu-
understanding and mutually beneficial solutions (Leon-Perez tion it has made, some limitations exist.
et al, 2016; Tjosvold et al., 2014). First, this research is limited to a single source data col-
Organizations should enhance the level of forgiveness lection, a small sample size, and the research context is one
climate. Based on our findings, the positive impact of country. Data were collected from employees who know
workplace bullying on emotional exhaustion is mitigated at their own experience of workplace bullying, emotional
higher levels of PFC. Thus, organizations should incorporate exhaustion, moral disengagement, and PFC. The single
mutual assistance, tolerance, and forgiveness among their source data collection may cause CMV. Even though this
members into the organizational culture. Meanwhile, in case study used varied methods (e.g., multiple time points data
of conflicts among organizational members, if employees collection and a series of CFA), and ruled out the concerns
can be inclusive, forgive and tolerate each other’s behaviors, about such bias, future research would benefit from adopting
the organization should provide them with timely encour- a more rigorous research design to avoid CMV (e.g., mul-
agement or reward (Guchait et al., 2019; Salvador, 2020; tiple subject evaluations and experience sampling method).
Yao et al., 2020a). In addition, managers must use these The sample sizes in both studies were very small and the
results cautiously, as a high-level PFC can result in more data were collected from one country—China. The gener-
UPBs among employees. Thus, managers must take diffi- alizability could be limited. In addition, Eastern and West-
cult decisions between suppressing UPB and UPFB (Guchait ern countries have cultural differences. Chinese employees
et al., 2019; Salvador, 2020); however, we believe that it (including those in Japan and South Korea) are profoundly
is more appropriate for managers to suppress one of these influenced by Confucian culture. For instance, in an enter-
two immoral behaviors by other measures, and then decide prise, must be loyal to the organization, and all actions must
whether to enhance the level of PFC in organizations. prioritize the interests of the organization. At the same time,
Finally, the organization should enhance the moral qual- Chinese people are accountable to their families and actively
ity of its members and timely supplement the emotional fulfill family obligations of supporting their children and
resources consumed by its employees. For new employees, parents. Examining UPB and UPFB in the Chinese con-
the organization can integrate their moral code into the text was appropriate (Cheng et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2020).

13
 Z. Yao et al.

Nonetheless, challenges exist in generalizing the findings to other predictors or constructs influencing the outcome vari-
other countries. We call for future research to test the model ables of UPB and UPFB. Future research needs to consider
in other countries. In addition, the measurement of work- the use of instrumental variables to eliminate the threat of
place bullying needs more attention. This study adopted a endogeneity. Our research has addressed the measurement
more commonly used measurement and asked respondents error issue at both the design (e.g., using valid scales) and
to recall their experience during the past 6 months. Attention analysis (e.g., addressing the CMV and using SEM) stages
is needed to more precisely capture and measure experience (see Online Appendix A for more details). The time-lagged
with workplace bullying (Notelaers et al., 2019). For exam- research design also helps to reduce the simultaneity issue.
ple, future research may consider use event-trigger method. Despite with our great efforts, endogeneity still exists and is
Once employees experience workplace bullying, they are a threat in management research We call for future research
invited to evaluate their emotional, cognitive and behavioral to pay more attention to the endogeneity issue by following
outcomes. the recommendations and solutions proposed by existing
In addition, we found the mediating effects of emotional studies (e.g., Hill et al., 2020; Ketokivi & McIntosh, 2017;
and cognitive resources in the relationship between work- Larcker & Rusticus, 2010; Wooldridge, 2010).
place bullying and UPB/UPFB by using CAPS. Neverthe-
less, both resources contain multiple variables, such as job
security and moral disengagement; employees try their best
Conclusion
to exhibit UPB for fear of losing their jobs or to gain recog-
nition and affirmation from the organization through short-
This study found a moderated chain-mediation model where
cuts. Otherwise, employees can feel intense job insecurity
workplace bullying led to more emotional exhaustion,
and, consequently, may unscrupulously engage in UPFB
which influences moral disengagement, ultimately affect-
for the benefit of their families (Jiang & Lavaysse, 2018;
ing employee unethical behavior (UPB/UPFB), moderated
Lin & Ding, 2003; Liu et al., 2020). In addition to these
by PFC. Our findings thus extend the knowledge of why,
two variables, some emotional resources (e.g., relationship
how, and when employees engage in unethical behaviors by
identification and organizational identification) and cogni-
focusing on the resource perspective. Several suggestions
tive resources (e.g., interpersonal trust and psychological
are provided for managers and organizations to follow in
distress) warrant verification through investigation in future
order to prevent and reduce unethical behavior, and to build
studies (Shen et al., 2019; Yao et al, 2020a, 2020b). Further-
an ethical place to work.
more, we investigated the underlying mechanism between
workplace bullying and UPB/UPFB primarily on a personal Supplementary Information The online version contains supplemen-
level. Indeed, many other factors at the team or organiza- tary material available at [Link] oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 007/s​ 10551-0​ 21-0​ 4918-w.
tional level affect unethical behavior among organizational
members. Thus, future research could expand to the team or Acknowledgements We would like to thank the Organizational Behav-
ior and Business Ethics section editor Professor Frank D. Belschak
organizational level. For instance, the existing studies have
and two anonymous reviewers for their very constructive comments
demonstrated that leadership style exerts a significant impact and suggestions throughout the review process. We also thank Tomoki
on organizational members’ unethical behavior (Chen et al., Sekiguchi, Rea Woods, Neil Lowndes, and Zhengde Xiong for their
2016; Dang et al., 2017; Effelsberg & Solga, 2015; Hsieh very helpful comments on the earlier versions, and all participants in
this research.
et al., 2020; Miao et al., 2013; Wang et al., 2019). The ques-
tion could be asked if leaders themselves are exhibiting
Funding This study is supported by the National Natural Science
UPB/UFPB. As leaders have greater power and freedom Foundation of China (72072128; 71772138), National Social Science
(Liu et al., 2020), they might focus more on the interests Foundation of China (17BJY150) and China Scholarship Council
of the organization; but they might also be better placed to (202006260311).
obtain benefits from the organization for their families. All
Declarations
of these factors warrant further investigation.
This paper and all authors compliance with ethical standards of the
The above limitations on the possibility of other vari-
institutional and/or national research committee.
ables influencing workplace bullying, and employee ethi-
cal behaviors, portray the endogeneity issue in management Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
research.1 According to Hill et al. (2020) and Wooldridge interest.
(2010) four sources cause endogeneity. They are the omit-
ted variables, simultaneity, measurement error and selection.
This research has addressed endogeneity to some extent. For
example, we used the control variables in the analysis to 1
Thanks are given to one of the reviewers who raised this important
address omitted variable bias. Nonetheless, there might be issue.

13
Rational Counterattack: The Impact of Workplace Bullying on Unethical Pro-organizational…

References Dang, C. T., Umphress, E. E., & Mitchell, M. S. (2017). Leader

social accounts of subordinates’ unethical behavior: Examining
observer reactions to leader social accounts with moral disen-
Allen, T. D., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2014). Work–family conflict among
gagement language. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(10),
members of full-time dual-earner couples: An examination of
1448–1461.
family life stage, gender, and age. Journal of Occupational
Deery, S., Rayton, B., Walsh, J., & Kinnie, N. (2017). The costs of
Health Psychology, 19(3), 376–384.
exhibiting organizational citizenship behavior. Human Resource
Arasli, H., & Tumer, M. (2008). Nepotism, favoritism and cronyism:
Management, 56(6), 1039–1049.
A study of their effects on job stress and job satisfaction in the
Detert, J. R., Trevino, L. K., & Sweitzer, V. L. (2008). Moral disen-
banking industry of north Cyprus. Social Behavior and Personal-
gagement in ethical decision making: A study of antecedents
ity, 36(9), 1237–1250.
and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 374–391.
Attell, B. K., Brown, K. K., & Treiber, L. A. (2017). Workplace
Devonish, D. (2013). Workplace bullying, employee performance
bullying, bullying, perceived job stressors, and psychologi-
and behaviors: The mediating role of psychological well-being.
cal distress: Gender and race differences in the stress process.
Employee Relations, 35(6), 630–647.
Social Science Research, 65, 210–221.
Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2007). Methods for integrating
Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of
moderation and mediation: A general analytic framework using
inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3),
moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(1), 1–22.
193–209.
Effelsberg, D., & Solga, M. (2015). Transformational leaders’ in-group
Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise
versus out-group orientation: Testing the link between leaders’
of moral agency. Journal of Moral Education, 31(2), 101–119.
organizational identification, their willingness to engage in
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C.
unethical pro-organizational behavior, and follower-perceived
(1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise
transformational leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(4),
of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
581–590.
ogy, 71(2), 364–374.
Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., & Notelaers, G. (2009). Measuring exposure
Behr, D. (2017). Assessing the use of back translation: The short-
to bullying and harassment at work: Validity, factor structure
comings of back translation as a quality testing method. Inter-
and psychometric properties of the Negative Acts Questionnaire-
national Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20(6),
Revised. Work and Stress, 23(1), 24–44.
573–584.
Emerson, R. M. (1976). Social exchange theory. Annual Review of
Birtch, T. A., & Chiang, F. F. T. (2014). The influence of business
Sociology, 2, 335–362.
school’s ethical climate on students’ unethical behavior. Journal
Escartin, J., Zapf, D., Arrieta, C., & Rodriguez-Carballeira, A. (2011).
of Business Ethics, 123(2), 283–294.
Workers’ perception of workplace bullying: A cross-cultural
Buchwald, P., & Hobfoll, S. E. (2004). Burnout in the conservation
study. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychol-
of resources theory. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht,
ogy, 20(2), 178–205.
51(4), 247–257.
Fehr, R., & Gelfand, M. J. (2012). The forgiving organization: A mul-
Caravita, S. C. S., Strohmeier, D., Salmivalli, C., & Di Blasio, P.
tilevel model of forgiveness at work. Academy of Management
(2019). Bullying immigrant versus non-immigrant peers: Moral
Review, 37(4), 664–688.
disengagement and participant roles. Journal of School Psychol-
Fida, R., Paciello, M., Tramontano, C., Fontaine, R. G., Barbaranelli,
ogy, 75, 119–133.
C., & Farnese, M. L. (2015). An integrative approach to under-
Carden, S. W., Holtzman, N. S., & Strube, M. J. (2017). CAHOST:
standing counterproductive work behavior: The roles of stressors,
An excel workbook for facilitating the Johnson–Neyman tech-
negative emotions, and moral disengagement. Journal of Busi-
nique for two-way interactions in multiple regression. Frontiers
ness Ethics, 130(1), 131–144.
in Psychology, 8, 1293.
Ghislieri, C., Gatti, P., Molino, M., & Cortese, C. G. (2017). Work-
Carlson, D. S., Thompson, M. J., Crawford, W. S., & Kacmar, K. M.
family conflict and enrichment in nurses: Between job demands,
(2019). Spillover and crossover of work resources: A test of the
perceived organisational support and work-family backlash.
positive flow of resources through work-family enrichment. Jour-
Journal of Nursing Management, 25(1), 65–75.
nal of Organizational Behavior, 40(6), 709–722.
Gini, G., Thornberg, R., & Pozzoli, T. (2020). Individual moral disen-
Castille, C. M., Buckner, J. E. V., & Thoroughgood, C. N. (2018).
gagement and bystander behavior in bullying: The role of moral
Prosocial citizens without a moral compass? Examining the rela-
distress and collective moral disengagement. Psychology of Vio-
tionship between machiavellianism and unethical pro-organiza-
lence, 10(1), 38–47.
tional behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 149(4), 919–930.
Gino, F., Schweitzer, M. E., Mead, N. L., & Ariely, D. (2011). Unable
Chen, M., Chen, C. C., & Sheldon, O. J. (2016). Relaxing moral rea-
to resist temptation: How self-control depletion promotes unethi-
soning to win: How organizational identification relates to uneth-
cal behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Pro-
ical pro-organizational behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology,
cesses, 115(2), 191–203.
101(8), 1082–1096.
Giorgi, G., Leon-Perez, J. M., & Arenas, A. (2015). Are bullying
Cheng, K., Zhu, Q. L., & Lin, Y. H. (2021). Family-supportive supervi-
behaviors tolerated in some cultures? Evidence for a curvilin-
sor behavior, felt obligation, and unethical pro-family behavior:
ear relationship between workplace bullying and job satisfac-
The moderating role of positive reciprocity beliefs. Journal of
tion among Italian workers. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(1),
Business Ethics. [Link]
227–237.
Chowdhury, R. M. M. I., & Fernando, M. (2014). The relationships of
Goodboy, A., Martin, M., & Johnson, Z. (2015). The relationships
empathy, moral identity and cynicism with consumers’ ethical
between workplace bullying by graduate faculty with graduate
beliefs: The mediating role of moral disengagement. Journal of
students’ burnout and organizational citizenship behaviors. Com-
Business Ethics, 124(4), 677–694.
munication Research Reports, 32(3), 272–280.
Cox, S. S. (2011). A forgiving workplace: An investigation of forgive-
Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary state-
ness climate and workplace outcomes. Academy of Management
ment. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161–178.
Annual Meeting Proceedings.
Graham, K. A., Ziegert, J. C., & Capitano, J. (2015). The effect of
leadership style, framing, and promotion regulatory focus on

13
 Z. Yao et al.

unethical pro-organizational behavior. Journal of Business Eth- Johnson, P. O., & Neyman, J. (1936). Tests of certain linear hypotheses
ics, 126(3), 423–436. and their application to some educational problems. Statistical
Graham, K. A., Resick, C. J., Margolis, J. A., Shao, P., Hargis, M. B., Research Memoirs, 1, 57–93.
& Kiker, J. D. (2020). Egoistic norms, organizational identifica- Johnson, H. H., & Umphress, E. E. (2019). To help my supervisor:
tion, and the perceived ethicality of unethical pro-organizational Identification, moral identity, and unethical pro-supervisor
behavior: A moral maturation perspective. Human Relations, behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2), 519–534.
73(9), 1249–1277. Kell, H. J. (2018). Unifying vocational psychology’s trait and social-
Guchait, P., Lanza-Abbott, J., Madera, J. M., & Dawson, M. (2016). cognitive approaches through the cognitive-affective personality
Should organizations be forgiving or unforgiving? A two-study system. Review of General Psychology, 22(3), 343–354.
replication of how forgiveness climate in hospitality organiza- Ketokivi, M., & McIntosh, C. N. (2017). Addressing the endogene-
tions drives employee attitudes and behaviors. Cornell Hospital- ity dilemma in operations management research: Theoretical,
ity Quarterly, 57(4), 379–395. empirical, and pragmatic considerations. Journal of Operations
Guchait, P., Abbott, J. L., Lee, C. K., Back, K. J., & Manoharan, A. Management, 52, 1–14.
(2019). The influence of perceived forgiveness climate on ser- Kouchaki, M., & Wareham, J. (2015). Excluded and behaving unethi-
vice recovery performance: The mediating effect of psychologi- cally: Social exclusion, physiological responses, and unethical
cal safety and organizational fairness. Journal of Hospitality and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(2), 547–556.
Tourism Management, 40, 94–102. Lam, C. K., Huang, X., & Janssen, O. (2010). Contextualizing emo-
Halbesleben, J. R. B., Neveu, J. P., Paustian-Underdahl, S. C., & West- tional exhaustion and positive emotional display: The signaling
man, M. (2014). Getting to the “COR”: Understanding the role of effects of supervisors’ emotional exhaustion and service climate.
resources in conservation of resources theory. Journal of Man- Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(2), 368–376.
agement, 40(5), 1334–1364. Larcker, D. F., & Rusticus, T. O. (2010). On the use of instrumental
Halbesleben, J. R. B., Wheeler, A. R., & Rossi, A. M. (2012). The costs variables in accounting research. Journal of Accounting and Eco-
and benefits of working with one’s spouse: A two-sample exami- nomics, 49(3), 186–205.
nation of spousal support, work-family conflict, and emotional Lawrence, E. R., & Kacmar, K. M. (2017). Exploring the impact of
exhaustion in work-linked relationships. Journal of Organiza- job insecurity on employees’ unethical behavior. Business Ethics
tional Behavior, 33(5), 597–615. Quarterly, 27(1), 39–70.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). A simple test of moderated mediation, manuscript Leana, C. R., & Meuris, J. (2015). Living to work and working to
submitted for publication. [Link] live: Income as a driver of organizational behavior. Academy of
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Partial, conditional, and moderated moderated Management Annals, 9(1), 55–95.
mediation: Quantification, inference, and interpretation. Com- Lee, J., & Pee, L. G. (2015). The relationship between online trust and
munication Monographs, 85(1), 4–40. distrust in business: Testing mutual causality from a cognitive-
Hill, A. D., Johnson, S. G., Greco, L. M., O’Boyle, E. H., & Walter, S. affective personality system theory. Asia Pacific Journal of Infor-
L. (2020). Endogeneity: A review and agenda for the methodol- mation Systems, 25(3), 500–518.
ogy-practice divide affecting micro and macro research. Journal Lee, M., Pitesa, M., Pillutla, M. M., & Thau, S. (2017). Male immo-
of Management, 47(1), 105–143. rality: An evolutionary account of sex differences in unethical
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at negotiation behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 60(5),
conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524. 2014–2044.
Hsieh, H. H., Hsu, H. H., Kao, K. Y., & Wang, C. C. (2020). Ethical Leon-Perez, J. M., Notelaers, G., & Leon-Rubio, J. M. (2016). Assess-
leadership and employee unethical pro-organizational behavior: ing the effectiveness of conflict management training in a health
A moderated mediation model of moral disengagement and cow- sector organization: Evidence from subjective and objective indi-
orker ethical behavior. Leadership & Organization Development cators. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychol-
Journal, 41(6), 799–812. ogy, 25(1), 1–12.
Huang, Y. S., Greenbaum, R. L., Bonner, J. M., & Wang, C. S. (2019). Lin, C. P., & Ding, C. G. (2003). Modeling information ethics: The
Why sabotage customers who mistreat you? Activated hostility joint moderating role of locus of control and job insecurity. Jour-
and subsequent devaluation of targets as a moral disengagement nal of Business Ethics, 48(4), 335–346.
mechanism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(4), 495–510. Liu, S. B., Zhu, Q. L., & Wei, F. (2019). How abusive supervision
Hunter, S. T., Cushenbery, L. D., & Jayne, B. (2017). Why dual leaders affects employees’ unethical behaviors: A moderated mediation
will drive innovation: Resolving the exploration and exploitation examination of turnover intentions and caring climate. Interna-
dilemma with a conservation of resources solution. Journal of tional Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,
Organizational Behavior, 38(8), 1183–1195. 16(21), 4187.
Jacobs, G., Belschak, F. D., & den Hartog, D. N. (2014). (Un)ethical Liu, Z., Liao, H., & Liu, Y. (2020). For the sake of my family: Under-
behavior and performance appraisal: The role of affect, support, standing unethical pro-family behavior in the workplace. Journal
and organizational justice. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(1), of Organizational Behavior, 41(7), 638–662.
63–76. Lu, J. G., Lee, J. J., Gino, F., & Galinsky, A. D. (2018). Polluted moral-
Jiang, J. (2017, April 25). Solve the circle culture and unprincipled ity: Air pollution predicts criminal activity and unethical behav-
nice-guyism. The People’s Daily, Retrieved from [Link] ior. Psychological Science, 29(3), 340–355.
rmlt.​com.​cn/​2017/​0425/​471083.​shtml?​from=​singl​emess​age Magee, C., Gordon, R., Robinson, L., Caputi, P., & Oades, L. (2017).
Jiang, L., & Lavaysse, L. M. (2018). Cognitive and affective job inse- Workplace bullying and absenteeism: The mediating roles of
curity: A meta-analysis and a primary study. Journal of Manage- poor health and work engagement. Human Resource Manage-
ment, 44(6), 2307–2342. ment Journal, 27(3), 319–334.
Jin, M. H., McDonald, B., & Park, J. (2018). Person-organization fit Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job Burnout.
and turnover intention: Exploring the mediating role of employee Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 397–422.
followership and job satisfaction through conservation of Maslowsky, J., Jager, J., & Hemken, D. (2015). Estimating and inter-
resources theory. Review of Public Personnel Administration, preting latent variable interactions: A tutorial for applying the
38(2), 167–192. latent moderated structural equations method. International
Journal of Behavioral Development, 39(1), 87–96.

13
Rational Counterattack: The Impact of Workplace Bullying on Unethical Pro-organizational…

McDowell, W. C., Matthews, L. M., Matthews, R. L., Aaron, J. R., Srivastava, S., & Agarwal, S. (2020). Workplace bullying and intention
Edmondson, D. R., & Ward, C. B. (2019). The price of suc- to leave: A moderated mediation model of emotional exhaustion
cess: Balancing the effects of entrepreneurial commitment, and supervisory support. Employee Relations, 42(6), 1547–1563.
work-family conflict and emotional exhaustion on job satisfac- Stein, C. H. (1992). Ties that bind: Three studies of obligation in adult
tion. International Entrepreneurship and Management Jour- relationships with family. Journal of Social & Personal Relation-
nal, 15(4), 1179–1192. ships, 9(4), 525–547.
Miao, Q., Newman, A., Yu, J., & Xu, L. (2013). The relationship Stride, C. B., Gardner, S., Catley, N., & Thomas, F. (2015). Mplus code
between ethical leadership and unethical pro-organizational for the mediation, moderation, and moderated mediation model
behavior: Linear or curvilinear effects? Journal of Business templates from Andrew Hayes’ PROCESS analysis examples.
Ethics, 116(3), 641–653. [Link]
Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system the- Striler, J., Shoss, M., & Jex, S. (2020). The relationship between stress-
ory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, ors of temporary work and counterproductive work behavior.
dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychologi- Stress and Health. [Link]
cal Review, 102(2), 246–268. Tang, G. Y., Kwan, H. K., Zhang, D. Y., & Zhu, Z. (2016). Work-
Nielsen, M. B., & Einarsen, S. (2012). Outcomes of exposure to Family effects of servant leadership: The roles of emotional
workplace bullying: A meta-analytic review. Work and Stress, exhaustion and personal learning. Journal of Business Ethics,
26(4), 309–332. 137(2), 285–297.
Notelaers, G., Van der Heijden, B., Hoel, H., & Einarsen, S. (2019). Tjosvold, D., Wong, A. S., & Feng Chen, N. Y. (2014). Constructively
Measuring bullying at work with the short-negative acts ques- managing conflicts in organizations. Annual Review of Organiza-
tionnaire: identification of targets and criterion validity. Work & tional Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 545–568.
Stress, 33(1), 58–75. Tynes, T., Johannessen, H., & Sterud, T. (2013). Work-related psy-
Olsen, E., Bjaalid, G., & Mikkelsen, A. (2017). Work climate and chosocial and organizational risk factors for headache: A 3-year
the mediating role of workplace bullying related to job perfor- follow-up study of the general working population in Norway.
mance, job satisfaction, and work ability: A study among hos- Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 55(12),
pital nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 73(11), 2709–2719. 1436–1442.
Ozturk, D., & Ascigil, S. F. (2017). Workplace bullying among pub- Umphress, E. E., & Bingham, J. B. (2011). When employees do bad
lic sector employees: Reflections upon organizational justice things for good reasons: Examining unethical pro-organizational
perceptions and organizational citizenship behavior. Business behaviors. Organization Science, 22(3), 621–640.
& Professional Ethics Journal, 36(1), 103–126. Umphress, E. E., Bingham, J. B., & Mitchell, M. S. (2010). Unethical
Paterson, T. A., & Huang, L. (2019). Am I expected to be ethical? A behavior in the name of the company: The moderating effect of
role-definition perspective of ethical leadership and unethical organizational identification and positive reciprocity beliefs on
behavior. Journal of Management, 45(7), 2837–2860. unethical pro-organizational behavior. Journal of Applied Psy-
Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. chology, 95(4), 769–780.
(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A Vukelic, M., Cizmic, S., & Petrovic, I. B. (2019). Acceptance of work-
critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. place bullying behaviors and job satisfaction: Moderated media-
Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. tion analysis with coping self-efficacy and exposure to bullying.
Qi, L., Cai, D., Liu, B., & Feng, T. W. (2020). Effect of workplace Psychological Reports, 122(5), 1883–1906.
ostracism on emotional exhaustion and unethical behaviour Wang, C. X., Ryoo, J. H., Swearer, S. M., Turner, R., & Goldberg,
among Chinese nurses: A time-lagged three-wave survey. Jour- T. S. (2017). Longitudinal relationships between bullying and
nal of Advanced Nursing, 76(8), 2094–2103. moral disengagement among adolescents. Journal of Youth and
Salvador, R. (2020). Perceived forgiveness climate and punishment Adolescence, 46(6), 1304–1317.
of ethical misconduct. Management Decision, 58(5), 797–811. Wang, T. L., Long, L. R., Zhang, Y., & He, W. (2019). A social
Schaefer, U., & Bouwmeester, O. (2020). Reconceptualizing moral exchange perspective of employee–organization relationships and
disengagement as a process: Transcending overly liberal and employee unethical pro-organizational behavior: The moderat-
overly conservative practice in the field. Journal of Business ing role of individual moral identity. Journal of Business Ethics,
Ethics. [Link] 159(2), 473–489.
Schwartz, A. (2015). The 5 most common unethical behaviors in the Wang, X. C., Yang, J. P., Wang, P. C., Zhang, Y. X., Li, B., Xie, X. C.,
workplace. American City business journals. Retrieved from & Lei, L. (2020). Deviant peer affiliation and bullying perpetra-
[Link] tion in adolescents: The mediating role of moral disengagement
nt/​2015/​01/​most-​common-​uneth​ical-​behav​iors-​in-​the.​html and the moderating role of moral identity. Journal of Psychology,
Schwartz, S. H., Cieciuch, J., Vecchione, M., Davidov, E., Fischer, 154(3), 199–213.
R., Beierlein, C., Ramos, A., Verkasalo, M., Lönnqvist, J.-E., Warren, C. K. C., & Catherine, W. N. (1999). Women-friendly HRM
Demirutku, K., Dirilen-Gumus, O., & Konty, M. (2012). Refin- and organizational commitment: A study among women and men
ing the theory of basic individual values. Journal of Personal- of organizations in Hong Kong. Journal of Occupational and
ity and Social Psychology, 103(4), 663–688. Organizational Psychology, 72(4), 485–502.
Serious Fraud Office. (2020). Former Barclays executives acquit- Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and
ted of conspiracy to commit fraud. [Link] panel data. MIT Press Books, 1(2), 206–209.
2020/​0 2/​2 8/​former-​b arcl​ays-​execu​t ives-​a cqui​t ted-​o f-​c onsp​ Xu, S., Martinez, L. R., Van Hoof, H., Duran, M. E., Perez, G. M., &
iracy-​to-​commit-​fraud/ Gavilanes, J. (2018). Emotional exhaustion among hotel employ-
Shen, Y., Chou, W. J., & Schaubroeck, J. M. (2019). The roles of ees: The interactive effects of affective dispositions and positive
relational identification and workgroup cultural values in link- work reflection. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 59(3), 285–295.
ing authoritarian leadership to employee performance. Euro- Yang, Y., Guo, Z., Wu, J. H., & Kou, Y. (2020). Self-compassion
pean Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(4), relates to reduced unethical behavior through lower moral dis-
498–509. engagement. Mindfulness, 11(6), 1424–1432.

13
 Z. Yao et al.

Yao, Z., Zhang, X. C., Luo, J. L., & Huang, H. (2020a). Offense is the Zhang, X. A., Liao, H., Li, N., & Colbert, A. (2019). Playing it safe
best defense: The impact of workplace bullying on knowledge for my family: Exploring the dual effects of family motivation on
hiding. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(3), 675–695. employee productivity and creativity. Academy of Management
Yao, Z., Luo, J. L., & Zhang, X. C. (2020b). Gossip is a fearful thing: Journal. [Link]
The impact of negative workplace gossip on knowledge hiding. Zhou, N., & Buehler, C. (2016). Family, employment, and individual
Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(7), 1755–1775. resource-based antecedents of maternal work-family enrichment
Zaal, R. O. S., Jeurissen, R. J. M., & Groenland, E. A. G. (2019). from infancy through middle childhood. Journal of Occupational
Organizational architecture, ethical culture, and perceived unethi- Health Psychology, 21(3), 309–321.
cal behavior towards customers: Evidence from wholesale bank-
ing. Journal of Business Ethics, 158(3), 825–848. Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
Zhang, S. C. (2020a). Workplace spirituality and unethical pro-organi- jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
zational behavior: The mediating effect of job satisfaction. Jour-
nal of Business Ethics, 161(3), 687–705.
Zhang, S. C. (2020b). Impact of workplace ostracism on unethical pro-
organizational behaviors. Personnel Review, 49(8), 1537–1551.

13