Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T20:49:28.341Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

What’s ethics got to do with it? Manager behavioral modeling in virtual environments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2021

Emory Serviss*
Affiliation:
Auburn University, Auburn, AL, USA, 36849
*
Corresponding author. Email: ers0003@auburn.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Commentaries
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology

In their focal article, Hu et al. (Reference Hu, Barber, Park and Day2021) discuss two subthemes that have emerged in the information and communication technology (ICT) literature: “(a) an emphasis on using technology to do work away from the physical work location” and “(b) using technology to move away from face-to-face interactions and toward alternative forms of media for work communication purposes” (p. 371). In this commentary, I propose one critical missing element related to both subthemes: accounting for ethical behavior.

Several ethical perspectives must be considered in a remote work environment. For example, pace and high demands can sometimes drive remote employees to take part in unethical behaviors, especially if they are fearful of losing their jobs (Schwepker & Good, Reference Schwepker and Good1999). Ethical behavior is important in maintaining long-term customer relationships (Gundlach & Murphy, Reference Gundlach and Murphy1993), and it has a positive effect on customer satisfaction and trust (Roman & Ruiz, Reference Roman and Ruiz2005). It is the responsibility of the manager to form the operational and cultural foundations of ethical team performance in the pursuit of company and personal goals.

A manager’s ethical leadership influences an employee’s emulation intentions, which in turn, influences both employee behavior and performance (Badrinarayanan et al., Reference Badrinarayanan, Ramachandran and Madhavaram2019). Social learning theory is used as a theoretical foundation in the study of ethical leadership, and it is useful in understanding an employee’s reaction to ethical leader behavior. According to Brown & Treviño (2005), a subordinate emulates the ethical behavior of the manager through observational learning, imitation, and identification.

When managers use an ethical leadership style, they are perceived as worthy targets for emulation by employees. In turn, their perceived worthiness of being followed serves as a motivational force for influencing outcomes and behavioral performance (Badrinarayanan & Ramachandran, Reference Badrinarayanan, Ramachandran and Madhavaram2019). Managers who provide an example of what they want to see will facilitate improvements in the adoption of ethical practices by those on their team. However, if the manager is remote, how will subordinates observe a proper example of ethical behavior? Without proper reinforcement, employees can lapse and start to behave unethically.

Can a remote manager coach ethical behaviors virtually?

The role of a manager is one of leadership. An ethical leader builds people. Managers are important in fostering employee ethical behavior because they are keepers of acceptable standards and practices. A manager needs to spend time coaching each member of their team on topics like ethical behavior (Singh et al., Reference Singh, Manrai and Manrai2015). Coaching is a formal process that uses one-on-one meetings to help employees discern hidden issues that impede performance so that higher levels of success can be achieved (Hawes & Rich, Reference Hawes and Rich1998). Good coaching is all about helping the individual employee overcome bad habits, find motivation, and unlock potential (Dahling et al., Reference Dahling, Taylor, Chau and Dwight2016).

Both managers and their teams agree that coaching skills are among the most important characteristics that effective managers must have (Deeter-Schmelz et al., Reference Deeter-Schmelz, Goebel and Kennedy2008) because coaching directly affects an employee’s belief that they have the necessary skills to do the job well, which will ultimately increase job performance (Farrell, & Hakstian, Reference Farrell and Hakstian2001). However, the dynamics of one-on-one coaching are changing due to technological advances that are increasingly digitizing business practices. With a geographically dispersed workforce, face-to-face meetings are being significantly curtailed. Such meetings are being replaced by virtual communication. However, it is yet to be determined whether managers can effectively coach ethical behaviors virtually via technology like Zoom or Microsoft Teams.

An effective leader of a virtual team must be nimble, flexible, and able to understand the challenges of manging employees remotely. Managers must be clear and consistent when coaching their employees, even more so when doing so virtually. Employees suffer when they are deprived of routine feedback. Video conferencing technology like Zoom or Microsoft Teams allows for face-to-face communication when employees are working remotely, so managers can provide positive or constructive feedback on a regular basis. However, both managers and employees need to be trained on the use of the software to ensure that the technology does not serve as an obstacle to effective communication.

Conclusion

Though this would seem to be an important topic because many professionals have shifted toward working remotely, the focal article by Hu et al. (Reference Hu, Barber, Park and Day2021) does not discuss how ethical behaviors can be conveyed by using technology like Zoom or Microsoft Teams in a remote working environment. Ethical leadership must be transmitted during virtual coaching sessions to empower ethical behavior among employees.

References

Badrinarayanan, V., & Ramachandran, I. (2019). Ethical sales leadership and salesperson performance: The intervening influence of worthiness of being followed: An abstract. In P. Rossi & N. Krey (Eds.), Finding new ways to engage and satisfy global customers. AMSWMC 2018. Developments in marketing science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science. Springer.Google Scholar
Badrinarayanan, V., Ramachandran, I., & Madhavaram, S. (2019). Mirroring the boss: Ethical leadership, emulation intentions, and salesperson performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(3), 897912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahling, J. J., Taylor, S. R., Chau, S. L., & Dwight, S. A. (2016). Does coaching matter? A multilevel model linking managerial coaching skill and frequency to sales goal attainment. Personnel Psychology, 69(4), 863894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deeter-Schmelz, D., Goebel, D., & Kennedy, K. (2008). What are the characteristics of an effective sales manager? An exploratory study comparing salesperson and sales manager perspectives. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 28(1), 720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrell, S., & Hakstian, A. (2001). Improving salesforce performance: A meta-analytic investigation of the effectiveness and utility of personnel selection procedures and training interventions. Psychology & Marketing, 18(3), 281316.3.0.CO;2-Z>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gundlach, G. T., & Murphy, P. E. (1993). Ethical and legal foundations of relational marketing exchanges. Journal of Marketing, 57(4), 3546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, X., Barber, L., Park, Y., & Day, A. (2021). Defrag and reboot? Consolidating information and communication technology research in I-O psychology. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 14(3), 371396.Google Scholar
Hawes, J. M., & Rich, G. A. (1998). Selling and sales management in action: The constructs of sales coaching: Supervisory feedback, role modeling and trust. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 18(1), 5363.Google Scholar
Roman, S., & Ruiz, S. (2005). Relationship outcomes of perceived ethical sales behavior: The customer’s perspective. Journal of Business Research, 58(4), 439445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwepker, C. H., & Good, D. J. (1999). The impact of sales quotas on moral judgment in the financial services industry. Journal of Services Marketing, 13(1), 3858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, V. L., Manrai, A. K., & Manrai, L. A. (2015). Sales training: A state of the art and contemporary review. Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science, 20(38), 5471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar