Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does the Ethical Leadership of Supervisors Generate Internal Social Capital?

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ethics has recently gained prominence in debates surrounding social capital creation. Despite the significant theoretical progress in this field, it still lacks empirical research. The goal of this study is to empirically explore the ethical leadership of supervisors as an antecedent of the firm’s social capital. We build on social learning theory to argue that employees can learn standards of appropriate behavior by observing the behavior of role models. By displaying and enforcing ethical behavior, supervisors can facilitate the process through which employees learn to feel empathy toward others and establish profound affective relationships with them. Data were collected from 408 Spanish, French, and Portuguese part-time MBA students. Using structural equation modeling techniques, we show that the ethical leadership of supervisors exerts a significant influence on the structural, relational, and cognitive dimensions of social capital.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We assessed the fit of the partial models using three fit indexes: the goodness-of-fit index (GFI), the normed fit index (NFI), and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). The NFI assesses the correspondence between the observed and the hypothesized covariances. A GFI should be 0.90 or higher. The NFI is a comparison of a proposed model to the null model (in which no relationships among the variables are posited). Values greater than 0.80 are considered indicative of good fit. The RMSEA measure is based on the non-centrality parameter. Models whose RMSEA is 0.10 or more have poor fit. In addition to these three fit indexes, we used the Chi-squared test (χ 2) to assess the fit of the overall final model. The χ 2 provides a measure of the inappropriateness of a model if the model is not truly representative of the observed data. A small (non-significant) Chi-squared indicates a good fit.

  2. To reduce concerns about single-respondent bias, we used an alternative measure similar to ethical leadership: the integrity of supervisors. When we correlated the measure ethical leadership of supervisors with the integrity of supervisors, we got a correlation coefficient of 0.90 (p < 0.01), indicating that respondents are rating very similarly two alternative measures.

  3. See Footnote 2

References

  • Adler, P. S., & Borys, B. (1996). Two types of bureaucracy: Enabling and coercive. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 61–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, R. (2010). Organizational social capital, structure and performance. Human Relations, 63(5), 583–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avey, J., Palanski, M., & Walumbwa, F. (2011). When leadership goes unnoticed: The moderating role of follower self-esteem on the relationship between ethical leadership and follower behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(4), 573–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive view. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2000). Multifactor leadership questionnaire. Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhal, K., & Dadhich, A. (2011). Impact of ethical leadership and leader–member exchange on whistle blowing: The moderating impact of the moral intensity. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(3), 485–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolino, M. C., Turnley, W. H., & Bloodgood, J. M. (2002). Citizenship behavior and the creation of social capital in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 27(4), 505–522.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brass, D. J., & Labianca, G. (1999). Social capital of organizations: Conceptualization, level of analysis, and performance implications. In R. A. J. Leenders & S. M. Gabbay (Eds.), Corporate social capital and liability (pp. 43–67). Norwell: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. E., & Mitchell, M. S. (2010). Ethical and unethical leadership: Exploring new avenues for future research. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(4), 583–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97(2), 117–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, J. K., & Cantrell, R. S. (1984). A behavioral decision theory approach to modeling dyadic trust in superiors and subordinates. Psychological Reports, 55(1), 19–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(1), 95–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, C. J., & Smith, K. G. (2006). Knowledge exchange and combination: The role of human resource practices in the performance of high-technology firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 544–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, A., & Rothstein, H. (2006). The effects of the perceived behavioral integrity of managers on employee attitudes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(4), 407–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Hoogh, A. H. B., & Den Artog, D. (2008). Ethical and despotic leadership, relationships with leader’s social responsibility, top management team effectiveness and subordinates’ optimism: A multilevel study. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(3), 297–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, L. F., Bresnen, M., Newell, S., Scarbrough, H., & Swan, J. (2004). The benefits and pitfalls of social capital: Empirical evidence from two organizations in the United Kingdom. British Journal of Management, 15(1), 59–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elangovan, A. R., & Shapiro, D. L. (1998). Betrayal of trust in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 547–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 32(1), 115–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., & Moran, P. (1996). Bad for practice: A critique of the transaction cost theory. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 13–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gini, A. (1998). Work, identity and self: How we are formed by the work we do. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(7), 707–714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, J. Z., & Sanzgiri, J. (1996). Towards an ethical dimension of decision making in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(12), 1275–1285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, R. (2005). Management behavior as social capital: A systematic analysis of organizational ethnographies. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 43(1), 41–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, D. A. (1997). An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. Journal of Management, 23(1), 723–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer, L. T. (1995). Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 379–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khuntia, R., & Suar, D. (2004). A scale to assess ethical leadership of Indian private and public sector managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 49(1), 13–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koh, W. L., Steers, R. M., & Terborg, J. R. (1995). The effects of transformational leadership on teacher attitudes and student performance in Singapore. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(4), 319–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konovsky, M. A., & Douglas, P. S. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 656–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leana, C. R., & Buren, V. (1999). Organizational social capital and employment practices. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 538–555.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leana, C. R., & Pil, F. K. (2006). Social capital and organizational performance: Evidence from urban public schools. Organization Science, 17(3), 353–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki, R., & Bunker, B. B. (1996). Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki, R. J., Mcallister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 438–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., & Greenbaum, R. (2010). Examining the link between ethical leadership and employee misconduct: The mediating role of ethical climate. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(1), 7–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., Greenbaum, R., Bardes, M., & Salvador, R. (2009). How low does ethical leadership flow? Test of a trickle down model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 108(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melé, D. (2003). Organizational humanizing cultures: Do they generate social capital? Journal of Business Ethics, 45(1), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishira, A. K. (1996). Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In R. M. Kramer & T. Thomas (Eds.), Trust in organizations (pp. 261–287). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moran, P. (2005). Structural vs. relational embeddedness: Social capital and managerial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(12), 1129–1151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, E. W., & Robinson, S. L. (1997). When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 226–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pastoriza, D., Ariño, M. A., & Ricart, J. E. (2008). Ethical managerial behavior as antecedent of organizational social capital. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(3), 329–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pastoriza, D., Ariño, M. A., & Ricart, J. E. (2009). Creating an ethical work context: A pathway to generate social capital in the firm. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(3), 489–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez López, J. A. (1993). Fundamentos de la Dirección de Empresa. Madrid: Rialp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, R. W. (2004). The relationship of affective organizational commitment with supervisory trust. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 24(2), 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piccolo, R. F., Hartog, D. N., & Folger, R. (2010). The relationship between ethical leadership and core job characteristics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(2/3), 259–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podolny, J. M. (2001). Networks as the pipes and prisms of the market. American Journal of Sociology, 107(1), 33–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Scott, W. H. (1996). Transformational leader behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction, commitment, trust, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Management, 22(2), 259–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resick, C., Hanges, P., Dickson, M., & Mitchelson, J. (2006). A cross-cultural examination of the endorsement of ethical leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 63(1), 345–3359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocha, H. O., & Ghoshal, S. (2006). Beyond self-interest revisited. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 585–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosanas, J. (2008). Beyond economic criteria: A humanistic approach to organizational survival. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(3), 447–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosanas, J. M., & Velilla, M. (2003). Loyalty and trust as the ethical bases of organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(1), 49–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz, P., Ruiz, C., & Martínez, R. (2011). Improving the ‘leader–follower’ relationship: Top manager or supervisor? The ethical leadership trickle-down effect on follower job response. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(4), 587–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard, B., & Tuchinsky, M. (1996). Micro-OB and network organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R. R. (1992). The challenge of ethical behavior in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(7), 505–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R. L. (2002). Ethical rule breaking by employees: A test of social bonding theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 40(2), 101–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R. R., & Brinkmann, J. (2002). Leaders as moral role models: The case of John Gutfreund at Salomon Brothers. Journal of Business Ethics, 35(4), 327–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. W., & Kilman, R. H. (1975). The social desirability variable in organizational research: An alternative explanation for reported findings. Academy of Management Journal, 18(1), 741–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toor, S., & Ofori, G. (2009). Ethical leadership: Examining the relationships with full range leadership model, employee outcomes, and organizational culture. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(4), 533–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treviño, L. K., Brown, M. E., & Hartman, L. P. (2003). A qualitative investigation in the executive suite. Human Relations, 56(1), 5–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treviño, L. K., Hartman, L. P., & Brown, M. (2007). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review, 42(4), 128–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treviño, L. K., Weaver, G. R., & Reynolds, S. J. (2006). Behavioral ethics in organizations: A review. Journal of Management, 32(6), 951–990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 37–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walumbwa, F. O., Mayer, D. M., Wang, P., Wang, H., Workman, K., & Christensen, A. L. (2011). Linking ethical leadership to employee performance: The roles of leader–member exchange, self-efficacy, and organizational identification. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 204–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walumbwa, F. O., & Schaubroeck, J. (2009). Leader personality traits and employee voice behavior: Mediating roles of ethical leadership and work group psychological safety. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1275–1286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wayne, S. J., & Green, S. A. (1993). The effects of leader–member exchange on employee citizenship and impression management behavior. Human Relations, 46(12), 1431–1440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitener, E. M., Brodt, S. E., Susan, M. A., Korsgaard, M. A., & Werner, J. M. (1998). Managers as initiators of trust: An exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 513–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies, analysis and antitrust implications: A study in the economics of internal organization. NY: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, W. (2008). Dimensions of social capital and firm competitiveness improvement: The mediating role of information sharing. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), 122–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (2010). Harvesting family firms’ organizational social capital: A relational perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 345–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the FQRSC for the financial support. We also want to thank Miguel Canela and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. HEC Montreal, Chemin de la Cote-Sainte-Catherine 3000, Montreal, QC, H3T 2AT, Canada

    David Pastoriza

  2. IESE Business School, Avda. Pearson 21, 08034, Barcelona, Spain

    Miguel A. Ariño

Authors
  1. David Pastoriza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Miguel A. Ariño
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Pastoriza.

Appendix

Appendix

Scales and Items of Ethical Managerial Behavior and Internal Social Capital

(*We note item “factor loadings” in square brackets)

Ethical Managerial Behavior (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.95)

  1. (1)

    “My supervisor listens to what employees have to say” [0.81].

  2. (2)

    “My supervisor disciplines employees who violate ethical standards” [0.71].

  3. (3)

    “My supervisor conducts his/her personal life in an ethical manner” [0.90].

  4. (4)

    “My supervisor has the best interests of employees in mind” [0.90].

  5. (5)

    “My supervisor makes fair and balanced decisions” [0.89].

  6. (6)

    “My supervisor can be trusted” [0.78].

  7. (7)

    “My supervisor discusses business ethics or values with employees” [0.90].

  8. (8)

    “My supervisor sets an example of how to do things the right way in terms of ethics” [0.86].

  9. (9)

    “My supervisor defines success not just by results but also the way that they are obtained” [0.71].

  10. (10)

    “My supervisor, when making decisions, asks ‘what is the right thing to do?’” [0.83].

Internal Social Capital

Structural Dimension (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.88)

  1. (1)

    “In my organization employees engage in open and honest communication with one another” [0.82].

  2. (2)

    “In my organization employees share and accept constructive criticisms without making it personal” [0.86].

  3. (3)

    “In my organization employees willingly share information with one another” [0.88].

  4. (4)

    “Employees at this organization keep each other informed at all times” [0.86].

Relational Dimension (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.92)

  1. (1)

    “I can rely on the employees I work with in this organization” [0.88].

  2. (2)

    “Employees in this organization are usually considerate of one another’s feelings” [0.83].

  3. (3)

    “Employees have confidence in one another in this organization” [0.89].

  4. (4)

    “Employees in this organization show a great deal of integrity” [0.86].

  5. (5)

    “There is no ‘team spirit’ among employees in this organization” [0.86].

  6. (6)

    “Overall, employees at this organization are trustworthy” [0.78].

Cognitive Dimension (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.93)

  1. (1)

    “Employees share the same ambitions and vision for the organization” [0.89].

  2. (2)

    “Employees enthusiastically pursue collective goals and mission” [0.81].

  3. (3)

    “There is a commonality of purpose among employees at this organization” [0.89].

  4. (4)

    “Employees at this organization are committed to the goals of the organization” [0.82].

  5. (5)

    “Employees view themselves as partners in charting the organization direction” [0.83].

  6. (6)

    “Everyone is in total agreement on our organization’s vision” [0.73].

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pastoriza, D., Ariño, M.A. Does the Ethical Leadership of Supervisors Generate Internal Social Capital?. J Bus Ethics 118, 1–12 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1536-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1536-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation