Team level antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership: A review and future directions

Mohamed Ahmed Ali Nemr; Liu, Yuhuan Article Team level antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership: A review and future directions International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences (IJMESS) Provided in Cooperation with: International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences (IJMESS) Suggested Citation: Mohamed Ahmed Ali Nemr; Liu, Yuhuan (2024) : Team level antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership: A review and future directions, International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences (IJMESS), ISSN 2304-1366, IJMESS International Publishers, Jersey City, NJ, Vol. 13, Iss. 1/2, pp. 68-90, https://doi.org/10.32327/IJMESS/13.1-2.2024.4 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/300599 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ 68 International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 2024, Vol. 13(1-2), pp. 68 – 90. ISSN 2304 – 1366 https://www.ijmess.com Team Level Antecedents and Consequences of Ethical Leadership: A Review and Future Directions *Mohamed Ahmed Ali Nemr1.2 Yuhuan Liu1 1 School of Economic & Management, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, China 2 Faculty of Commerce, Sohag University, New Sohag City, Egypt The current study conducted a comprehensive review of previous studies that have examined the antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership at the team level. The methodology focused on elucidating theories pertaining to the concept of ethical leadership, with the aim of proposing new theories that can be used to explain relationships related to ethical leadership, specifically the theories of signaling and attribution. The current paper also emphasizes the importance, in future studies, of utilizing modern theories to expand the concept of moral leadership and achieve a more comprehensive understanding of its dynamics. The incorporation of theories such as signaling theory and attribution theory can provide valuable insights into the mechanisms and processes underlying ethical leadership. The analysis results revealed that ethical leadership at the group level has predominantly been unexplored, presenting researchers with opportunities to uncover novel findings and leaders with prospects to enhance their effectiveness. The study presented new variables regarding the antecedents leading to ethical leadership, including internal factors such as leader ethical voice and external factors such as a cynicism climate. It also presented new variables regarding the consequences of ethical leadership at the group level, such as group sanctioning, group cooperation, and group social undermining. Keywords: Ethical leadership, antecedents, consequences, signaling theory, attribution theory, team level JEL: M12, M19, M51, M54 William C. Powers, Dean of the Texas School of Law and leader of the Enron investigation team, testified before the United States Congress and presented reasons of the Enron’s collapse. He attributed responsibility for the significant aftermath of the Enron collapse to a range of factors, with unethical leadership being highlighted as the primary factor (Treviño and Brown, 2004). Powers’ testimony serves as a clear example of the expected ethical behavior from leaders and their role in maintaining an ethical atmosphere within their organizations (Frazier and Jacezko, 2021; Gok et al ., 2023; Peng and Kim, 2020). Research on the concept of ethical leadership has seen a surge in interest due to a rise in notable ethics-related controversies (Banks et al ., 2021). Previous research has addressed ethical leadership from various perspectives, examining how leaders’ behavior adheres to ethical standards and benefits stakeholders (Yukl et al ., 2013). DOI:10.32327/IJMESS . 1 3 . 1 - 2 .202 4 . 4 Manuscript received January 31, 2024; revised May 24, 2024; accepted June 2 , 2024. © The Author(s); CC BY-NC; Licensee IJMESS Publisher: UCHPRO & National D.B.A Society, USA *Corresponding author: [email protected] International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 69 However, despite recognizing the significance of ethical leadership, several notable issues persist, carrying implications for both theory and practice (Banks et al ., 2021). Specifically, prior studies have predominantly focused on exploring the outcomes associated with ethical leadership. These studies have demonstrated that ethical leadership positively influences organizational citizenship behaviors, organizational commitment, and innovative work behaviors (Javed et al ., 2018; Musenze and Mayende, 2023; Neubert et al ., 2013), while reducing counterproductive work behaviors (Zhang, 2012). Regrettably, there has been limited interest in understanding the reasons behind leaders engaging in ethical behaviors and followers perceiving some leaders as ethical while perceiving others differently (Banks et al ., 2021; Bedi et al ., 2016). Despite the crucial role of understanding the antecedents of ethical leadership in comprehending the factors contributing to its development and practice within organizations, our current understanding in this area remains relatively constrained (Rahaman et al ., 2019). Additionally, exploring the antecedents provides a deeper understanding of ethical leadership (Frazier and Jacezko, 2021) and facilitates the establishment of an ethical culture. Consequently, the paper aims to address this gap by expanding the existing research on the antecedents of ethical leadership. To achieve this, it conducts a comprehensive review of previous studies examining the antecedents of ethical leadership and proposing additional antecedents that warrant investigation in future research. Secondly, what sets previous studies apart is their predominant focus on examining ethical leadership primarily at the individual level (e.g., Rahaman et al ., 2022). However, there is a noticeable scarcity of research adopting a group-level perspective, despite the potential theoretical and practical benefits it offers. By deepening the understanding and facilitating the implementation of ethical leadership in organizational contexts, leaders can concentrate on fostering a positive ethical climate within teams (Mansur et al ., 2020). This emphasis on the team level which enhances team dynamics, collaboration, and cohesion, ultimately leading to improved overall team performance. Notably, Banks et al . (2021) and Bedi et al . (2016) highlight the need for future research to explore the antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership specifically at the team level. Therefore, the present study aims to address this gap by reviewing previous studies that have examined the consequences of ethical leadership at the team level and proposing additional consequences that should be investigated in future research. Thirdly, A noteworthy observation in prior studies is their predominant reliance on social exchange and social learning theories (e.g., Frazier and Jacezko, 2021), which somewhat restricts the perspective on ethical leadership. Considering the comprehensive and multifaceted nature of ethical leadership, there is a need to broaden the range of theories employed to gain a more comprehensive understanding (Banks et al ., 2021). Thus, the current study aims to address this limitation by proposing other modern Nemr & Liu 70 theories that should be explored in future research. Based on the previous explanations, the current study aims to conduct a comprehensive review of the antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership specifically at the team level. By examining existing research, the paper seeks to identify any gaps or areas that have not been adequately explored within this context. This analysis will provide valuable insights into the research landscape and highlight specific areas that require further investigation in future studies. By addressing these research gaps, it can contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of ethical leadership at the team level. Following the aforementioned introduction, the literature review section delves into an overview of the concept of ethical leadership. It expounds on the dimensions of ethical leadership. Moving forward, it presents the significance of studying ethical leadership. This literature review serves as a foundation before delving into the concepts of antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership at the team level. Moving forward to the third section, the paper will review the methodology of conducting review type research to explore the gaps. Firstly, the study will elucidate theories related to the concept of ethical leadership in an attempt to propose new theories that can expand its understanding and application. By exploring existing theories, this section aims to propose new theories that can be used to explain relationships related to ethical leadership and enhance our comprehension of ethical leadership. Next, it will examine the antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership at the group level in an attempt to identify research gaps that need to be addressed by future researchers. This section aims to shed light on the factors that contribute to ethical leadership and the outcomes it produces within groups. Then, the paper proceeded to the fourth section, which presents the study’s results. These results were derived from the paper’s methodology and encompass a clear identification of gaps, as well as future recommendations. Then, it proceeded to the fifth section, which discusses the implications of the research. Subsequently, the sixth section encapsulates the conclusion of the paper. Finally, the limitations and future directions of the study are presented. LITERATURE REVIEW The current section reviews the literature on ethical leadership, encompassing its concept, dimensions, and importance, with the aim of providing a broader understanding of ethical leadership. This literature review serves as a foundation before delving into the concepts of antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership at the team level. Ethical Leadership Concept Ethical leadership (EL) is defined as follows: “the demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct to followers International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 71 through two-way communication, reinforcement, and decision-making” (Brown et al ., 2005: 121). Khuong and Nhu (2015) argue that ethical leadership is characterized by a leader who is honest, loyal, focused on purpose, goodness, social justice, personal strength, humility, integrity, decision-making based on virtue, and influences their staff to act ethically. The following section provides a summary of definitions of ethical leadership from previous studies, as presented in Table 1. The definition Study It is a leadership style that acknowledges followers' needs, values, and ethics while also assuming a greater responsibility for helping workers address conflicts by understanding their motivations. Burns (1978) It expresses leaders' support for workers in managing conflicts and implementing changes by emphasizing values within an environment characterized by stability, trust, and care. This style of leadership also involves assisting followers in their journey through change. Heifetz (1994) He defined it as encompassing a set of characteristics present in leaders, such as honesty and trustworthiness. However, it goes beyond these traits to encompass a deep understanding of the fundamental aspects of altruism, including the ability to make sound moral choices and to comprehend and analyze ethical dilemmas for more effective res olution of ethical issues. Treviño & Brown (2004) It involves influencing ethical values by clearly articulating the organizational values that employees should embrace, spreading these values throughout the organization, adhering to them in daily behavior, and fostering a high level of respect. Daft (2004) It reflects the capacity of administrative leaders to demonstrate appropriate standard ethical behaviors through their actions and interpersonal relationships and to encourage subordinates to exhibit these behaviors. Brown et al. (2005) It represents a type of leadership that upholds the rights of others and is characterized by four dimensions, integrity, altruism, and motivation. Resick et al. (2006) It involves the act of demonstrating empathy for the appropriate standards that govern the actions of others and their personal interactions. This process aims to enhance the guidance and communication processes in provid ing support for others. Segon (2007) It is the practical manifestation of normatively appropriate behavior through personal actions, interpersonal relationships, and the reinforcement of this behavior among workers via two - way communication. Ponnu and Tennakoon (2009) It reflects the capacity of administrative leaders to demonstrate appropriate standard ethical behaviors through their actions and interpersonal relationships and to encourage subordinates to exhibit these behaviors through two-way communication and in decision-making. Brown and Mitchell (2010) The leader's ability to influence their followers is determined by their awareness of seven dimensions: fairness, integrity, ethical direction, people orientation, power sharing, clarity of roles, and continuous attention. Kalshoven et al. (2011) To promote normatively acceptable behavior among subordinates, leaders should engage in (a) living by the ethical standards they preach and having a belief in justice, (b) demonstrating normatively acceptable behavior through personal actions and interpersonal interactions, and (c) providing relevant information through communication, reinforcement, and two-way decision-making. Javed et al. (2018) Source: Authors’ presentation Table 1. Definitions of Ethical Leadership The definitions of ethical leadership emphasize the importance of leader’s ethical behavior and serving Nemr & Liu 72 as role models for followers (Banks et al., 2021). Brown et al .’s (2005) study is considered one of the first to develop a procedural scale and definition of ethical leadership, due to a lack of accuracy in prior definitions. The definition of ethical leadership has evolved beyond just modeling ethics to include reinforcing subordinates’ ethical behaviors through clarification, highlighting, and two-way communication (Mansur et al. , 2020; Yukl et al. , 2013). Ethical leaders pay attention to workers, grant them the right to express opinions, and establish moral standards (Banks et al., 2021), as well as reward ethical behavior and penalize deviations (Ciulla, 2004). They also make just decisions that serve as examples and discuss these with followers (Bedi et al. , 2016; Mansur et al. , 2020). The researchers agree that ethical leadership includes: 1) ethical leaders’ behavior being based on standards that subordinates must accept (Bedi et al., 2016); 2) ethical leaders justifying their behavior to followers and maintaining open communication (Segon and Booth, 2007); 3) ethical leaders adhering to ethical rules, establishing ethical standards, rewarding ethical behavior, and penalizing unethical behavior while considering the moral implications of their decisions and striving for fair choices (Banks et al., 2021; Yukl, 2002); 4) the definition categorizes ethical leadership as a positive form of leadership (Musenze and Mayende, 2023); 5) followers perceiving ethical leadership as leaders embodying appropriate standard behavior through their actions, behaviors, interpersonal relationships, and developing these behaviors in subordinates through communication, reinforcement, and decisionmaking (Segon and Booth, 2007; Musenze and Mayende, 2023); and 6) ethical leadership transcending individual concerns and being a matter of principles governing human effectiveness, with effective leaders valuing themselves while committing to higher purposes and principles (Banks et al., 2021; Yukl, 2002). Figure 1 delineates some characteristic behaviors of ethical and unethical leaders. Source: Authors’ Presentation Figure 1. The Difference Between Ethical and Unethical Leaders International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 73 Ethical Leadership at Team Level The authors endeavor to formulate a definition of ethical leadership applicable to the collective or group level. Ethical leadership at the group level entails leaders directing and influencing their teams in a way that places emphasis on ethical conduct, integrity, and social responsibility. The authors outline key elements of ethical leadership at the group level. Firstly, setting a positive example: ethical leaders act as role models for their team members by consistently demonstrating ethical behavior in their actions, decisions, and interactions (Mansur et al. , 2020). Secondly, creating a values-based culture: ethical leaders actively strive to instill a culture within the group that places a high regard on integrity, honesty, and ethical conduct (Bedi et al. , 2016). Thirdly, promoting transparency: leaders at the group level ought to prioritize transparency in both communication and decision-making processes, which serves to cultivate trust among team members and facilitates a comprehensive understanding of the reasoning behind decisions (Banks et al. , 2021). Fourthly, encouraging ethical decision-making: ethical leaders actively promote and encourage group members to participate in ethical decision-making (Mansur et al., 2020). Fifthly, addressing unethical behavior: ethical leaders take a proactive stance in addressing any instances of unethical behavior within the group (Banks et al., 2021). Sixthly, fostering inclusivity and diversity: ethical leadership actively promotes inclusivity and diversity within the group (Mansur et al ., 2020). Leaders achieve this by appreciating and respecting differences among team members, fostering an environment where everyone feels supported and included (Peng and Kim, 2020). Seventhly, encouraging open communication: ethical leaders actively foster an environment where team members feel at ease expressing their concerns and opinions. By promoting open communication channels, leaders create a space where potential ethical issues can be identified early on (Peng and Kim, 2020). By prioritizing these principles, leaders play a pivotal role in shaping a positive ethical climate within the organization, fostering an environment where ethical values are upheld and practiced by the entire group (Mansur et al ., 2020). Dimensions of Ethical Leadership Through a comprehensive review of studies in the field of ethical leadership, researchers have identified various dimensions within organizations. Resick et al . (2011) identify six key themes of ethical leadership: 1) Accountability, which encompasses compliance with laws and regulations, personal accountability, and holding others accountable; 2) Consideration and respect for others, involving treating others with dignity and respect, being approachable, and exhibiting empathy and understanding (Bellingham, 2003); 3) Fairness and non-discriminatory treatment, including making fair, just, and objective judgments, as well as avoiding discrimination against others; 4) Character, comprising honesty, trustworthiness, Nemr & Liu 74 integrity, having a moral code, and practicing self-discipline; 5) Collective orientation (organization and social), focusing on leaders prioritizing the organization’s interests over personal interests, assessing the long-term consequences of choices, safeguarding the firm’s and society’s interests, and acting responsibly rather than solely for profitability; and 6) Openness and flexibility, encompassing being a good communicator and listener, as well as being open to other viewpoints and diversity. Building on the work of Brown et al . (2005) and motivated by previous efforts in measuring ethical leadership, Kalshoven et al . (2011) develop a comprehensive, multi-dimensional measure of ethical leadership, known as the Ethical Leadership at Work Questionnaire (ELW), designed to assess ethical leadership in the workplace. The questionnaire identifies seven distinct ethical leadership behaviors, as illustrated in Table 2. Fairness Treating others in a way that is right and equal, making principled and fair choices, and not practicing favoritism . People Orientation Caring about, respecting and, supporting followers . Role Clarification Clarification of responsibilities, expectations, and performance goals. Ethical Guidance Communication about ethics involves explaining ethical rules, promoting ethical conduct, and rewarding it. Concern for the Environment (Environmental Orientation) Whether the leader cares for the environment and stimulates acts to conserve it, such as recycling . Power Sharing Allowing followers a say in decision-making and listening to their ideas and concerns. Integrity Consistency of words and deeds. Following through with the promises that one has made . Source: Kalshoven et al. (2011) Table 2. Dimensions of Ethical Leadership According to Eisenbeiss et al . (2015), there exists a perception in some businesses that ethical firm leadership and firm performance are considered mutually exclusive. Drawing on the upper echelon theory, which suggests that organizational outcomes mirror CEO values, characteristics, and leadership behaviors (Bellingham, 2003), the authors propose that the influence of CEO ethical leadership is mediated by organizational ethical culture and moderated by corporate ethics programs within companies. Eisenbeiss et al . (2015) conceptualize ethical leadership as a higher-level construct with sub-components, as outlined in Table 3. In the upcoming section, the researchers conduct a detailed analysis and discussion of the five dimensions of ethical leadership: morality, compassion, ethical envisioning, ethical empowerment, and managing ethics. Morality : The first dimension focuses on the leader’s moral character, as defined by Treviño et International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 75 People Orientation Caring about, respecting and supporting followers. Integrity Consistency of words and deeds Following through with the promises that one has made. Fairness Treating others in a way that is right and equal, making principled and fair choices, and not practicing favoritism. Responsibility Having a long-term focus on organizational success, valuing responsibility, maintaining sustainable relationships with business partners, being concerned about the community, and protecting the environment . Moderation Being temperate and considerate, not always occupying the focus of attention, and finding a balance between extreme ideas, behaviors, decisions, and goals . Source: Eisenbeiss et al. (2015) Table 3. Sub-Components of Ethical Leadership al . (2000). Ethical leaders often integrate moral principles into their ideas, values, and behavior (Khuntia and Suar, 2004). Elements of the leader’s moral persona are measured through various dimensions, including “concern for morality and fairness” (De Hoogh and Den Hartog, 2008), “morality” (Zheng et al. , 2011), “integrity” (Eisenbeiss et al. , 2015), and “fairness” (Kalshoven et al. , 2011). This component incorporates Spangenberg and Theron’s (2005) emphasis on trust and role modeling in ethical leadership. Compassion : Several studies, including “People Orientation,” emphasize a communityand peopleoriented aspect of ethical leadership (Eisenbeiss et al. , 2015; Kalshoven et al. , 2011; Resick et al. , 2011). Leaders characterized as empathic, caring, sensitive, and thoughtful are considered ethical, underscoring the importance of being considerate of their followers (De Hoogh and Den Hartog, 2008; Eisenbeiss et al. , 2015; Spangenberg and Theron, 2005). Ethical Envisioning : Pioneered by Spangenberg and Theron (2005), this dimension places emphasis on “creating and sharing ethical vision” and “stimulating across boundaries” by taking into account the organization’s ethical image and fostering enduring relationships with stakeholders. Ethical Empowerment : Spangenberg and Theron (2005) underscore the significance of education and competent management in employee empowerment, giving emphasis to autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. This approach aligns with contemporary perspectives on ethical leaders who empower their followers, incorporating concepts like “power sharing” and “empowerment.” Managing Ethics : Expanding on Trevino et al . (2000), this dimension entails establishing ethical systems to promote ethical behavior, support personnel, and ensure accountability. Recognizing the significance of ethical structures and systems, leaders contribute to clarifying ethical expectations and are perceived as ethics coaches and mentors. Importance of Ethical Leadership Nemr & Liu 82 (2004) proposed that such leaders served as personal exemplars of ethical standards and integrity. Consistent with the research of Craig and Gustafson (1998), positive responses from followers encompassed perceptions of the leader’s selflessness, along with feelings of confidence and trust in the leader (Gottlieb and Sanzgiri, 1996). Therefore, leader values and ethics significantly influenced group behavior. Walumbwa et al . (2012) also supported the existence of a positive relationship between ethical leadership and work group performance. Peng and Lin (2017) confirmed the positive relationship between ethical leadership, group in-role performance, and group helping behavior. Furthermore, Huang and Paterson (2017) established that ethical leadership positively influenced group ethical voice, contributing to ethical performance. However, Eissa and Wyland (2018) demonstrated that ethical leadership could moderate the relationship between work-family conflict (WFC), employee hindrance stress, and group social undermining, with the relationship being weaker in high levels of ethical leadership. Additionally, Zaim et al . (2021) identified a positive correlation between ethical leadership and team performance, with justice, wisdom, and temperance emerging as the most influential virtues. Most studies (e.g., Mansur et al ., 2020) focused on the connection between ethical leadership and certain group behaviors, such as group organizational citizenship behaviors (Group OCBs) and group helping behaviors. Finally, Martin et al . (2022) found that ethical leadership moderated the relationship between team performance, team efficacy beliefs, and social integration. Table 7 illustrated a summary of the consequences of ethical leadership at the group level. Consequences of Ethical Leadership Author Task and Contextual performance Avey et al . (2010) Work Group Performance. Walumbwa et al , (2012) Group In - role Performance, and Group Helping Behavior Peng & Lin (2017) Group Ethical Voice. Huang & Paterson (2017) Group Social Undermining Eissa & Wyland (2018) Group organizational citizenship behaviors (Group OCBs) and Group helping behaviors Mansur et al. (2020) Team performance Zaim et al . (2021) Team performance and Team efficacy beliefs Martin et al . (2022) Source: Authors’ Presentation Table 7. Consequences of Ethical Leadership Ethical Leadership: Signaling and Attribution Theories As explained previously, most previous studies focused on social exchange theory and social learning theory. Therefore, the current study suggests that future research needs to expand the use of theories for a more in-depth understanding of ethical leadership. Specifically, it advocates for signaling theory International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 83 to take center stage as a novel theory for understanding the concept of ethical leadership and explaining the relationships related to it. Additionally, the research suggests adopting an attribution theory perspective in organizational sciences (Harvey et al ., 2014). Despite limited research on attributions within HR (Hewett et al ., 2019), this approach offers new insights into ethical leadership. The current study recommended future research contribute to the growing body of knowledge by extending the application of signaling theory and attribution theory to Ethical Leadership, addressing an area with limited prior research (Banks et al ., 2021). The following provides a brief explanation of signaling and attribution theories. - Signaling Theory Signaling, rooted in fields like evolutionary biology and economics (Spence, 1978), extended its influence to areas such as entrepreneurship, strategic management, leadership, and human resources (Banks et al ., 2021). The primary function of signals was to mitigate information imbalances (Bergh et al ., 2019). In the context of ethical leadership, signaling theory suggested that leaders could transmit ethical signals through their actions to various stakeholders, including followers. Ethical leadership behaviors (ELBs) served as these signals, requiring perceptibility to initiate the social influence process inherent in leadership. Signals could manifest in various forms, such as a leader’s participation in charitable events or volunteer initiatives. While some ethical behaviors, like private donations, didn’t rely on signaling, they didn’t constitute leadership behaviors because leadership involved a social influence process that requires others to take notice. The effectiveness of signals depended on factors like signal visibility (e.g., intensity, strength, clarity) and variables such as the recipient's attention and interpretation (Connelly et al. , 2011). - Attribution Theory Attribution theory, as outlined by Kelley and Michela (1980), identified two categories of factors that influenced attributions: information concerning the stimulus and the general beliefs of perceivers regarding causes and consequences. In the context of ethical leadership, we emphasized the behaviors of leaders as a crucial source of information. Leaders’ ethical signals were notable in the human resources context, forming the foundation for attributions. The second group of factors included general beliefs shaped by past and ongoing experiences. Therefore, both a leader’s behaviors and the beliefs of followers were considered antecedents of followers’ perception of ethical leadership. Analysis of previous studies that dealt with the determinants of ethical leadership illustrated that numerous studies (Brown and Treviño, 2014; Frazier and Jacezko, 2021; Mansur et al., 2020; Mayer et al. , 2012; Sharma et al. , 2019; Walumbwa and Schaubroeck, 2009) have explored some of the factors Nemr & Liu 84 contributing to followers’ perceptions of ethical leadership, namely moral identity, role models, leader Machiavellianism, personality characteristics, leader agreeableness, leader conscientiousness, leader neuroticism, and leader’s moral courage. Consequently, it is evident that the characteristics and behaviors exhibited by leaders in the work environment serve as fundamental precursors shaping followers’ perception of ethical leadership (Banks et al. , 2021). This paper recommends future research to expand the exploration of the antecedents of ethical leadership by investigating factors influencing followers’ understanding of their leaders’ ethical behaviors, such as the leader’s ethical voice and cynicism climate. The establishment of ethical leadership significantly relied on a leader’s ethical voice, involving continuous communication with followers and the embodiment of moral values. This ethical voice was expressed through behaviors directed at both lower and higher organizational levels (Huang and Paterson, 2017). Such communication strengthened followers’ perception of their leader’s authentic commitment to ethical conduct, solidifying its crucial role in how followers perceived ethical leadership. This aspect deserved further exploration and research. In contrast, a cynicism climate reflected a prevalent perception within the organization lacking integrity and authenticity (Hewett et al ., 2019). Originating from employees’ overall impressions, this belief influenced their expectations regarding HR practices (Dean et al ., 1998) and undermined the credibility of initiatives aimed at promoting ethical leadership. After reviewing previous studies that addressed the outcomes of ethical leadership at the group level, the researchers identified a set of research gaps. The study recommended that future research should aim to address these gaps. Studies exploring the relationship between ethical leadership and group performance (e.g., Zaim et al ., 2021; Peng and Lin, 2017) had predominantly focused on assessing group performance through individual evaluations. However, the current study suggested a different approach for future investigations. Instead of relying on individual assessments, we advocated for senior leadership and officials to evaluate group performance. The evaluation of group performance should be conducted by senior leaders, as it involved the comprehensive assessment of work quality, quantity, and overall performance. It’s worth noting that prior research had highlighted a relative scarcity of studies focusing on the relationship between ethical leadership and outcomes at the group level compared to the individual level. Many studies (e.g., Peng and Lin, 2017; Mansur et al ., 2020) exploring the connection between ethical leadership and group behavior had predominantly concentrated on topics like group organizational citizenship behaviors or group helping behaviors. There had been a noticeable shortage of studies examining the relationship between ethical leadership and other group behaviors, such as group cooperation, group sanctioning, and group social undermining. Additionally, some studies (e.g., Eissa and Wyland, 2018; Mostafa et al ., 2021) had not directly addressed the relationship between ethical International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 85 leadership and group social undermining. Therefore, the current study recommended that future research should contribute to the field of ethical leadership by investigating the impact of followers’ perceptions of ethical leadership on group cooperation, group sanctioning, and group social undermining. Furthermore, it suggested exploring the impact of followers’ perceptions of ethical leadership via group cooperation, group sanctioning, and group social undermining on group performance. CONCLUSION The current study begins by delving into the pertinent social scientific literature that explores the concept of ethical leadership. The paper’s focus includes elucidating theories that shed light on ethical leadership, and we introduce the theories of signaling and attribution to broaden the understanding of this concept. It investigates the antecedents and outcomes of ethical leadership at the group level. The heightened interest in ethical leadership, fueled by prominent failures, prompts organizations to seek insights into selecting, developing, and retaining ethical leaders. Likewise, business schools aim to optimize methods for teaching students to embody ethical leadership qualities. Recent advancements in construct and measure development enable leadership scholars to swiftly integrate ethical leadership into their research agendas. Beyond academic considerations, there is a moral imperative for researchers to contribute to improving the ethical performance of leaders. Additionally, given the intrinsic link between ethical leadership and effective leadership, scholars with diverse motivations and interests are likely to find the topic of ethical leadership compelling. This study contributes to the understanding of ethical leadership by exploring its antecedents and outcomes at the group level. By incorporating theories of signaling and attribution, we provide a broader perspective on ethical leadership and its implications. The findings of this study have practical implications for organizations seeking to cultivate ethical leadership and improve ethical performance among their leaders. Furthermore, the research highlights the importance of integrating ethical leadership into leadership development programs in business schools. Overall, the study underscores the significance of ethical leadership in promoting organizational ethics and offers insights for future research in this area. IMPLICATIONS The research on team-level antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership has significant implications for both theory and practice. Theoretical implications involve advancing our understanding of leadership by highlighting the importance of team-level dynamics in the ethical leadership process. It also emphasizes the importance, in future studies, of utilizing modern theories to expand the concept Nemr & Liu 86 of moral leadership and achieve a more comprehensive understanding of its dynamics. The incorporation of theories such as signaling theory and attribution theory can provide valuable insights into the mechanisms and processes underlying ethical leadership. The analysis results revealed that ethical leadership at the group level has predominantly been unexplored, presenting researchers with opportunities to uncover novel findings and leaders with prospects to enhance their effectiveness. The study presented new variables regarding the antecedents leading to ethical leadership, including internal factors such as leader ethical voice, and external factors such as a cynicism climate. It also presented new variables regarding the consequences of ethical leadership at the group level, such as group sanctioning, group cooperation, and group social undermining. A limited number of studies have explored how ethical leadership influences the attitudes and actions of followers within a group context (Hannah et al ., 2011). This research paves the way for numerous future studies that can delve into the influence of ethical leadership on group outcomes. This study significantly deepens our comprehension of these dynamics and fills critical knowledge gaps. Practically, organizations can benefit from the findings by developing and implementing ethical leadership training programs that focus on team-level dynamics. Such programs can foster a culture of integrity and promote positive ethical conduct within teams. Leadership development programs should address team-level dynamics and include training modules on ethical leadership to equip leaders with the necessary skills to effectively promote and uphold ethical standards within their teams. Organizations should also prioritize the selection and composition of teams based on ethical values and behaviors, enhancing the likelihood of ethical leadership emergence and positive team ethical outcomes. Aligning performance management and reward systems with ethical leadership behaviors and team ethical conduct can further reinforce the importance of ethical behavior and create a positive ethical climate within teams. Transparent and participative decision-making processes within teams, involving team members in ethical decision-making and encouraging discussions about ethical dilemmas, can also contribute to a positive ethical climate. In summary, the research on team-level antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership has theoretical implications for advancing leadership theories and practical implications for guiding organizational practices. It also highlights various future research directions that can further enhance our understanding of ethical leadership in teams. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS The majority of studies included in the review have utilized cross-sectional designs, which present a limitation in establishing causal relationships between team-level antecedents, ethical leadership, and team outcomes. To overcome this limitation, future research should employ longitudinal designs that International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 87 allow for the examination of these relationships over time. Longitudinal studies would provide more robust evidence of causality and enhance our understanding of the temporal dynamics involved. Another limitation is the reliance on self-reported data in many of the studies. This introduces the potential for common method bias and social desirability effects. Solely relying on self-report measures may compromise the objectivity of the findings and introduce response biases. To address this limitation, future research should consider incorporating multiple sources of data, such as objective performance measures or independent observer ratings, to provide a more comprehensive and accurate assessment of ethical leadership and team outcomes. It is important to acknowledge these limitations and exercise caution when interpreting the findings and implications of the reviewed studies. Understanding their potential impact on the results can help researchers and practitioners make informed decisions and interpretations. To further advance the understanding of team-level dynamics of ethical leadership, future research should address the following directions: First, conducting longitudinal studies will allow for the examination of the causal relationships between team-level antecedents, ethical leadership, and team outcomes over time. This will provide more robust evidence and deeper insights into the temporal dynamics involved in ethical leadership processes within teams. Second, incorporating multiple sources of data, such as objective performance measures, peer ratings, or supervisor assessments, can help overcome the limitations of self-reported data. This approach will provide a more comprehensive and accurate assessment of ethical leadership and its impact on team outcomes. Third, conducting experimental studies can offer valuable insights into the causal mechanisms underlying ethical leadership in teams. By manipulating team-level antecedents and examining their effects on ethical leadership and team outcomes, researchers can gain a clearer understanding of the dynamics at play. Fourth, investigating additional contextual factors that may influence ethical leadership at the team level, such as organizational culture, industry characteristics, or team composition, can enhance our understanding of the boundary conditions and contingencies of ethical leadership. By pursuing these future directions, researchers can build upon the existing knowledge and further advance our understanding of team-level dynamics of ethical leadership. This will provide practical implications for organizations and guide leadership development efforts. REFERENCES Avey, J. B., Luthans, F., Smith, R. M., & Palmer, N. F. (2010). Impact of positive psychological capital on employee well-being over time. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 15(1): 17-28. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016998 Avolio, B. J., W. L. Gardner, F. O. Walumbwa, F. Luthans, D. R. (2004). Unlocking the mask: A look at the process by which authentic leaders impact follower attitudes and behavior. The Leadership Quarterly . 15(6): 801-823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.09.003 Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall. Nemr & Liu 88 Banks, G. C., Fischer, T., Gooty, J., & Stock, G. (2021). Ethical leadership: Mapping the terrain for concept cleanup and a future research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly , 32(2): 101471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101471 Bedi, A., Alpaslan, C. M., & Green, S. (2016). A meta-analytic review of ethical leadership outcomes and moderators. Journal of Business Ethics , 139, 517–536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2625-1 Bellingham, R. (2003). Ethical leadership: Rebuilding trust in corporations. Human Resource Development. Bergh, D. D., Ketchen, D. J., Orlandi, I., Heugens, P. P. M. A. R., & Boyd, B. K. (2019). Information asymmetry in management research: Past accomplishments and future opportunities. Journal of Management , 45(1): 122–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0149206318798026. Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Routledge. Bommer, W. H., Dierdorff, E. C., & Rubin, R. S. (2007). Does prevalence mitigate relevance? The moderating effect of grouplevel OCB on employee performance. Academy of Management Journal , 50(6): 1481-1494. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.28226149 Brewer, M., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this “we”? Levels of collective identity and self-representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 71(1): 83-93. https:// doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.83. Brown, M E. & Treviño, L. K. (2006): "Socialized charismatic leadership, values congruence, and deviance in work groups". Journal of Applied Psychology , 91(4): 954-962. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.954 Brown, M. E. & Trevino, L. K. (2014). Do role models matter? An investigation of role modeling as an antecedent of perceived ethical leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(4): 587-598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1769-0. Brown, M. E., Trevino, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97, 117–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.03.002 Brown, M.E. & Mitchell, M. S (2010): "Ethical and Unethical Leadership: Exploring New Avenues for Future Research". Business Ethics Quarterly , 20 (4): 583-616. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq201020439 Burns, J. M. (1978): "Leadership". New York: Harper & Row. Ciulla, J. B. (2004). Ethics, the heart of leadership (2nd Ed.). Westport, CT: Praeger. Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011). Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management , 37(1): 39–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310388419 Craig, S. B., & Gustafson, S. B. (1998). Perceived leader integrity scale: An instrument for assessing employee perceptions of leader integrity. The Leadership Quarterly, 9(2): 127-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(98)90001-7 Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management , 31(6): 874-900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279602 Daft, R. L. (2004). Theory Z: Opening the corporate door for participative management. Academy of Management Perspectives , 18(4): 117-121. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2004.15268709 De Hoogh, A. H. & Den Hartog, D. N. (2008). Ethical and despotic leadership, relationships with leader's social responsibility, top management team effectiveness and subordinates' optimism: A multi-method study. The Leadership Quarterly , 19(3): 297311. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.03.002. Dean, J. W., Brandes, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (1998). Organizational cynicism. Academy of Management Review, 23(2): 341–352. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1998.533230. Den Hartog, D. N. & Belschak, F. D. (2012). Work engagement and Machiavellianism in the ethical leadership process. Journal of Business Ethics , 107, 35-47. https://doi: 10.1007/s10551-012-1296-4. Den Hartog, D. N. & De Hoogh, A. H. B. (2009). Empowering behavior and leader fairness and integrity: Studying perceptions of ethical leader behavior from a levels-of-analysis perspective. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology , 18, 199-230. https://doi: 10.1080/13594320802362688. Eisenbeiss, S. A., Van Knippenberg, D., & Fahrbach, C. M. (2015). Doing well by doing good? Analyzing the relationship between CEO ethical leadership and firm performance. Journal of Business Ethics , 128(3): 635-651. Eissa, G. & Wyland, R. (2018). Work‐family conflict and hindrance stress as antecedents of social undermining: Does ethical leadership matter? Applied Psychology , 67(4): 645-654. https://doi: 10.1111/APPS.12149. Frazier, M. L. & Jacezko, M. C. (2021). Leader Machiavellianism as an antecedent to ethical leadership: The impact on follower psychological empowerment and work outcomes. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies , 28(2): 154-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051820971293 Gok, K., Babalola, M. T., Lakshman, C., Sumanth, J. J., Vo, L. C., Decoster, S., ... & Coşkun, A. (2023). Enhancing employees' duty orientation and moral potency: Dual mechanisms linking ethical psychological climate to ethically focused proactive behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 44(1): 157-175. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2667 Gottlieb, J. Z. & Sanzgiri, J. (1996). Towards an ethical dimension of decision making in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics , 15, 1275-1285. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00411813. Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B. J., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2011). Relationships between authentic leadership, moral courage, and ethical and pro-social behaviors. Business Ethics Quarterly , 21, 555–578. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq201121436. Harrison, J. S., Bosse, D. A., & Phillips, R. A. (2010). Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal , 31(1): 58-74. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.801. Harvey, P., Madison, K., Martinko, M. J., Crook, T. R., & Crook, T. (2014). Attribution theory in the organizational sciences: The road traveled and the path ahead. Academy of Management Perspectives , 28(2): 128-146. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0175. Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Harvard University Press. International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 89 Hewett, R., Shantz, A., & Mundy, J. (2019). Information, beliefs, and motivation: The antecedents to human resource attributions. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 40(5): 570-586. https://doi: 10.1002/job.2353. Huang, L. & Paterson, T. A. (2017). Group ethical voice: Influence of ethical leadership and impact on ethical performance. Journal of Management , 43(4): 1157-1184. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314546195 Javed, B., Rawwas M.Y.A., Khandai, S., Shahid,K.,& Tayyeb, H. H. (2018): Ethical leadership, trust in leader and creativity: The mediated mechanism and an interacting effect. Journal of Management & Organization , 24(3): 388-405. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2017.56 Kalshoven, K., Den Hartog, D. N., & De Hoogh, A. H. B. (2011). Ethical leader behavior and Big Five factors of personality. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(2): 349-366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0685-9. Kanungo, R. N. & Conger, J. A. (1993). Promoting altruism as a corporate goal. The Academy of Management Executive , 7, 3748. https://doi.org/10.5465/AME.1993.9411302345. Kelley, H. H. & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology , 31(1): 457-501. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.31.020180. 002325. 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. https://doi.org/ 10.1023/ b:busi.0000013853.80287.da. Khuong, M. N. & Nhu, N. V. Q. (2015). The effects of ethical leadership and organizational culture towards employees’ sociability and commitment–a study of tourism sector in Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam. Journal of Advanced Management Science , 3(4): 329-336. Kozlowski, S. W. & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest , 7(3): 77-124. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x Mansur, J., Sobral, F., & Islam, G. (2020). Leading with moral courage: The interplay of guilt and courage on perceived ethical leadership and group organizational citizenship behaviors. Business Ethics: A European Review , 29(3): 587-601. https://doi: 10.1111/beer.12270 Martin, S. R., Emich, K. J., McClean, E. J., & Woodruff, C. (2022). Keeping teams together: How ethical leadership moderates the effects of performance on team efficacy and social integration. Journal of Business Ethics , 176(1): 127-139 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04685-0 Mayer, D. M., Aquino, K., Greenbaum, R. L., & Kuenzi, M. (2012). Who displays ethical leadership, and why does it matter? An examination of antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership. Academy of Management Journal , 55(1): 151-171. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2008.0276 Meyer, J. P. & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review , 1, 61-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z. Mostafa, A. M. S., Farley, S., & Zaharie, M. (2021). Examining the boundaries of ethical leadership: The harmful effect of coworker social undermining on disengagement and employee attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics , 174, 355-368. https:// doi: 10.1007/S10551-020-04586-2. Musenze, I. A. & Mayende, T. S. (2023). Ethical leadership (EL) and innovative work behavior (IWB) in public universities: examining the moderating role of perceived organizational support (POS). Management Research Review , 46(5): 682-701. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-12-2021-0858. Neubert, M. J., Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K. M., Roberts, J. A., & Chonko, L. B. (2009). The virtuous influence of ethical leadership behaviour: Evidence from the field. Journal of Business Ethics, 90, 157-170. https://doi:10.1007/s10551-009-0037-9. Neves, P. & Story, J. (2015). Ethical leadership and reputation: Combined indirect effects on organizational deviance. Journal of Business Ethics , 127, 165-176. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10551-013-1997-3. Peng, A. C. & Kim, D. (2020). A meta-analytic test of the differential pathways linking ethical leadership to normative conduct. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 41, 348-368. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2427 Ponnu, C. H. & Tennakoon, G. (2009). The association between ethical leadership and employee outcomes - the Malaysian case. EJBO-Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies ,14(1): 2132. Rahaman, H. S., Stouten, J., & Guo, L. (2019). Antecedents of ethical leadership: the theory of planned behavior. Leadership and Organization Development Journal , 40(6): 735-746. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-11-2018-0417 Rahaman, H. S., Stouten, J., Decoster, S., & Camps, J. (2022). Antecedents of employee thriving at work: The roles of formalization, ethical leadership, and interpersonal justice. Applied Psychology , 71(1): 3-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12308. Resick, J.C., Hanges, J. P., Dickson, M.W., & Mitchelson, K. J. (2006). A cross-cultural examination of the endorsement of ethical leadership. Journal Of Business Ethics , 63, 345-359. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-3242-1 Resick, C. J., Martin, G. S., Keating, M. A., Dickson, M. W., Kwan, H. K., & Peng, C. (2011). What ethical leadership means to me: Asian, American, and European perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics , 101(3): 435-457. Ritter, B. A. & Yoder, J. D. (2004). Gender differences in leader emergence persist even for dominant women: An updated confirmation of role congruity theory. Psychology of Women Quarterly , 28(3): 187-193. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14716402.2004.00135.x Segon, M. & Booth, C. (2007). The concept of ethical leadership in organizations. International Review of Business Research Papers , 3(5): 362-381. Sharma, A., Agrawal, R., & Khandelwal, U. (2019). Developing ethical leadership for business organizations: A conceptual model of its antecedents and consequences. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 40(6): 712-734. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-10-2018-0367 Spangenberg, H. & Theron, C. C. (2005). Promoting ethical follower behaviour through leadership of ethics: The development of the ethical leadership inventory (ELI). South African Journal of Business Management , 36(2): 1-18. Nemr & Liu 90 Spence, M. (1978). Job market signaling. Uncertainty in economics (281-306). Elsevier. Tajfel, H., Turner, J. C., Austin, W. G., & Worchel, S. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. Organizational Identity , 56-65. Treviño, L. K. & Brown, M. E. (2004). Managing to be ethical: Debunking five business ethics myths. Academy of Management Perspectives, 18(2): 69-81. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2004.13837400. Treviño, L. K., Hartman, L. P., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review , 42(4): 128-142. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166057. Varella, P., Javidan, M., & Waldman, D. A. (2012). A model of instrumental networks: The roles of socialized charismatic leadership and group behavior. Organization Science , 23(2): 582-595. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0604. Waldman, D. A., Wang, D., Hannah, S. T., & Balthazard, P. A. (2017). A neurological and ideological perspective of ethical leadership. Academy of Management Journal , 60(4): 1285-1306. 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. doi:10.1037/a0015848 Walumbwa, F. O., Morrison, E. W., & Christensen, A. L. (2012). Ethical leadership and group in-role performance: The mediating roles of group conscientiousness and group voice. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(5): 953-964. https://doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.06.004. Yukl, G., Mahsud, R., Hassan, S., & Prussia, G. E. (2013). An Improved Measure of Ethical Leadership. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies , 20(1): 38-48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051811429352. Zaccaro, S. J., A. L. Rittman, M. A. Marks. (2001). Team leadership. Leadership Quarterly . 12(4): 451-483. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(01)00093-5 Zaim, H., Demir, A., & Budur, T. (2021). Ethical leadership, effectiveness and team performance: An Islamic perspective. Middle East Journal of Management , 8(1): 42-66. https://doi.org/10.1504/MEJM.2021.111991 Zhang, Y. J. (2012). The influence of ethical leadership on employees’ CWB: From social learning and social exchange perspective. Journal of Business Economics , 12, 23-32. Zheng, X., Zhu, W., Yu, H., Zhang, X., & Zhang, L. (2011). Ethical leadership in Chinese organizations: Developing a scale. Frontiers of Business Research in China , 5(2): 179-198.