Role-Set Configuration and Opportunity as Predictors of Unethical Behavior in Organizations

Abstract

Role-set configuration is examined as a predictor of ethical/unethical behavior among two random samples of advertisers [corporate clients and ad agency account executives]. The specific reported behaviors analyzed are intraorganizational behaviors available to most employees. The conceptual framework is based on differential association theory and role set configuration analysis. The three dimensions of role-set configuration used to predict ethical/unethical behavior are organizational location, relative authority and referent others' beliefs and behaviors as perceived by the focal person. The focal person's opportunity to participate in unethical behavior is also a predictor variable. Eighty-nine corporate clients and 136 agency advertisers responded to a questionnaire [a 33% return rate] consisting of a slightly revised version of Newstrom and Ruch's ethics scale. Seven types of predictors of ethical/unethical behavior, "What I do," are developed through principal component factor analysis. These seven variables include the beliefs and behaviors of referent others in various locations and authority positions which affect the focal person: [1] the focal person's beliefs, "What I believe"; 12] what the focal person thinks his/her peers believe, "Peer beliefs"; [31 what the focal person thinks his/her top management believes, "What top management believes"; [4] what the focal person thinks his/her peers do, "What my peers do"; [5] the opportunity the focal person thinks he/she has to become involved in ethical/unethical behavior, 'My opportunity"; [6] and [7] what the corporate client thinks the advertising agency believes, "What the agency believes" and what the ad agency thinks the corporate client believes, "What the corporate client believes. " Focal persons were asked to respond to either variable [6] or [7] depending on which was a referent. This research demonstrates the influence of role-set proximity in predicting the ethical/unethical behaviors of both the corporate clients and the ad agency account executives with intraorganizational relationships being more important than interorganizational relationships. Interorganizational role-set of corporate clients for ad agency account executives and vice versa is not a predictor of ethical/unethical behavior. Opportunity is a predictor of ethical/unethical behavior for both respondent types. The relative authority and attitude/behavior dimensions influence ethical/unethical behavior of both respondent types, although corporate advertiser's ethical/unethical behavior is predicted by top management's beliefs and the ad agency account executives' ethical/unethical behavior is predicted by the behaviors of peers.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

ADAMS, J. S. The structure and dynamics of behavior in organizational boundary roles. In M. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1976.

BOWMAN, J. S. Managerial ethics in business and government. Business Horizons, 1976, 19, 48-54.

CARROLL, A. B. Managerial ethics: A post Watergate view. Business Horizons, 1975, 28, 75-80.

CLOWARD, R. A. , & OHLIN, L. E. Delinquency and opportunity. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press, 1960.

CORWIN, R. G. Patterns of organizational conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1969, 14, 507-520.

DeFLEUR, M. L. , & QUINNCY, R. A reformulation of Sutherland's differential association theory and strategy for empirical verification. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1966, III (1), 1-22.

FRAZIER, C. Advertising ethics: The role of the educator. Journal of Advertising, 1978, 8, 44-44.

GREYSER, S. A. , & REECE, B. Businessmen look hard at advertising. Harvard Business Review, 1971, 49, 18-36.

JEFFERY, C. R. Crime prevention through environmental design. Beverly Hills, Cal.: Sage Publications, 1971.

10.

KAHN, R. L. , WOLFE, D. M. , QUINN, R. P. , SNOEK, J. D. , & ROSENTHAL, R. A. Organizational Stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York: Wiley, 1964.

11.

KANNER, B. Client audits of agencies becoming more common. Advertising Age, 1979, 10.

12.

MERTON, R. K. The role-set. british Journal of Sociology, 1957, 8, 106-120.

13.

MILES, R. H. Role-set configuration as a predictor of role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Sociometry, 1977, 40 (1), 21-34.

14.

NEWSTROM, J. W. , & RUCH, W. A. The ethics of management and the management of ethics. MSU Business Topics, 1975, 23.

15.

Standard Directory of Advertisers. Skokie, Illinois: National Register Publishing Company, 1978.

16.

Standard Directory of Advertising Agencies. Skokie, Illinois: National Register Publishing Company, 1978.

17.

SUTHERLAND, E. , & CRESSEY, D. R. Principles of criminology (8th ed.). Chicago:J. B. Lippincott, 1970.

18.

THOMPSON, J. D. Organizational management of conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1960, 14, 522-541.

19.

ZEY-FERRELL, M. , WEAVER, K. M. , & FERRELL, O. C. Predicting unethical behavior among marketing practitioners. Human Relations, 1979, 32, 557-561.