Words: 1000
Moderating Impact of the Moral Intensity of the Issue” and was written by Kina T. Ball and Unbar Dacha (2011). Article three was entitled “When Leadership Goes Unnoticed: The Moderating Role of Follower Self-Esteem on the Relationship Between Ethical Leadership and Follower Behavior” and was written by James B. Avery, Michael E. Paladins, and Fred O. Wallaby. The purpose of the three articles was similar. The three articles were concerned with ethical leadership and the effects on followers’ behavior and performance.
Article one focused on ethical leadership effects on task and citizenship reference mediated by task significance, autonomy and effort through testing a model. The focus of article two was on exploring the impact of leader-member exchange (ELM) and ethical leadership on whistle blowing. Article three examined the effect of ethical leadership to find out if the influence on follower’s behavior is more or less effective. Article one’s importance is to find the relationship between core job characteristics and ethical leadership.
The importance of article two is to find the impact of leader-member exchange and ethical leadership on whistle blowing. Finally, article three’s importance is to find the relationship between ethical leadership and follower behavior and the moderating role of follower self- esteem. Research questions The focus of the research questions was different for the three articles. Finding out the relationships between job autonomy, job performance, effort, task significance and ethical leadership was the focus on article one.
The researchers’ hypothesized that task significance and job autonomy are positively associated with ethical leadership. They also hypothesized that job autonomy and job significance was positively related effort and mediated the link between effort and ethical leadership. Research questions for article two are concerned with the issue of the role of moral intensity on the relationship between leader-member exchange and ethical leadership. It was the researchers’ belief that ethical leadership, leader- member exchange was positively related to whistle blowing.
They also hypothesized that there was a positive relationship between whistle blowing and leader-member exchange. Finally the researchers sought to find out if whistle blowing would be higher for ethical leaders with high magnitudes of uniqueness for situations. In article three Avery, Paladins, and Wallaby (2011) hypothesized that follower organizational citizenship behaviors would be positively related to follower self-esteem. The researchers also believed that follower deviance work behaviors would be related negatively to follower self- esteem.
Finally article three sought to prove that the relationship between follower organizational citizenship behaviors, follower deviance work behaviors and ethical leadership was moderated by self-esteem. Sample populations There were some similarities amongst the three articles. The sample population for articles one and two was similar. Undergraduate and graduate students served as participants for the two articles had. Articles one and two were similar in that the participants were from universities.
Article three was different in that it used working adults. Article one participants were 1 74 junior and senior level undergraduate students and 1 07 masters of business education students from a large southeastern university in the United States. Article two consisted on 81 students from different postgraduate programs of a top engineering institute in India. Article three consisted of 191 working adults with a large university. Results of study The results of the articles were different.
Article one result showed that ethical leadership had a positive effect on follower effort and was mediated by task significance. The results also showed the relationship between subordinates’ job performance and ethical leadership was mediated by effort and task significance. The results of article two showed that whistle blowing is impacted strongly by ethical leadership behavior. Results showed that moral intensity of issues was moderated by the relationship between leader-member exchange (ELM) and ethical leadership as related to whistle blowing.
Article three results found that deviance was negatively related to ethical leadership while follower organizational behaviors (COB) were positively related to ethical leadership and were moderated by follower self- esteem. The results also found that ethical leadership should be used as a method to enhance citizenship and promote follower citizenship behaviors. The result also showed that the relationship between COB, deviant behavior and ethical leadership were weaker when the follower self-esteem was high. Conclusion Each studies limitation was different.
In article one and three a common limitation was found. The common method bias was a limitation stated in both articles one and three. Article one’s limitation was that the participants selected which co-workers got the opportunity to rate their work behaviors. This practice could possibly lead to positive bias. Article two was the use of the same method of data collection. To avoid this they separated the data collection procedures into to Time sections. The limitation of article one was the possibility of causality among the primary concepts by the cross-sectional design.
One limitation for article two was the use of only on type of respondents which were engineers. Perceptions of the target group may reflect results. Another is that the use of vignettes. Other methodologies should be used such as videotapes, photographs, and live enactments. In article three the lack of additional variables and relatively small effect sizes was a limitation. Another limitation was the lack of an experimental research design. Finally, external validity was a limitation. The researchers recruited heterogeneous participant populations to enhance generalization. The three articles had different conclusions.
An article one conclusion is that effort and task significance mediated relationships between subordinates’ job performance and ethical leadership. An article two conclusion is that the relationship between leader-member exchange (ELM) and ethical leadership on whistle blowing is moderated by the moral intensity of the issue. The article also concludes. Finally the conclusion of article three is that follower self-esteem is important when follower citizenship and deviant behaviors is related to ethical behavior from leaders. It also suggests that ethical leadership should be considered as a citizenship enhancing force.