We analyze business behavioral ethics in terms of bounded autonomy, namely the result of tensions between the countervailing motivations of reactance (tendencies that involve the freedom of behaving in certain ways as a right) versus deonance (tendencies that involve the appropriateness of behaving in certain ways as an obligation). We focus in particular on how the resolution of such tensions (i.e. establishment of a boundary between rights and duties—“free” behaviors versus “non-free” behaviors—in a state of dynamic equilibrium) can cause behavior to be seen as ethical by the person performing the behavior (the actor), but seen as unethical by impartial observers. That discrepancy comes from the actor’s assessment of the behavior in question as having either an inherent status (the type of behavior it is) or an instrumental status (what it does). This analysis leads us to a discussion of the following four types of situations involving unethical behavior: freedom expansion based on a behavior’s inherent status or on its instrumental status; and freedom contraction based on a behavior’s inherent status or on its instrumental status. We outline propositions consistent with those distinctions and conclude with theoretical implications.
BellerS (2010) Deontic reasoning reviewed: Psychological questions, empirical findings, and current theories. Cognitive Processing11(2): 123–132.
4.
BinerPM (1988) Effects of cover letter appeal and monetary incentives on survey response: A reactance theory application. Basic and Applied Social Psychology9(2): 99–106.
5.
BrabeckMM (1984) Ethical characteristics of whistle-blowers. Journal of Research in Personality18(1): 41–53.
6.
BrehmJW (1966) A Theory of Psychological Reactance. New York: Academic Press.
7.
CropanzanoRGoldmanBFolgerR (2003) Deontic justice: The role of moral principles in workplace fairness. Journal of Organizational Behavior24(8): 1019–1024.
8.
DahlingJJChauSLMayerDMGregoryJB (2010) Breaking the rules for the right reason? An investigation of pro-social rule-breaking. Journal of Organizational Behavior33(1): 21–42.
9.
DetertJRTrevinoLKSweitzerVL (2008) Moral disengagement in ethical decision making: A study of antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology93(2): 374–391.
10.
DozierJBMiceliMP (1985) Potential predictors of whistle-blowing: A prosocial behavior perspective. Academy of Management Review10(4): 823–836.
11.
DruckerP (1974) Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
12.
EngelenPJVan LiedekerkeL (2007) The ethics of insider trading revisited. Journal of Business Ethics74(4): 497–507.
13.
FolgerR (1998) Fairness as a moral virtue. In: SchminkeM (ed.) Managerial Ethics: Moral Management of People and Processes. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 12–34.
14.
FolgerR (2001) Fairness as deonance. In: GillilandSWSteinerDDSkarlickiDP (eds) Research in Social Issues in Management. Greenwich CT: Information Age Publishers, 3–33.
15.
FolgerR (2012) Deonance: Behavioral ethics and moral obligation. In: De CremerDTenbrunselA (eds) Behavioral Business Ethics: Shaping an Emerging Field. London: Taylor & Francis, 123–142.
16.
FolgerRCropanzanoR (2010) Social hierarchies and the evolution of moral emotions. In: SchminkeM (ed.) Managerial Ethics: Managing the Psychology of Morality. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 207–234.
17.
FolgerRSkarlickiDP (2008) The evolutionary basis of deontic justice. In: GillilandSWSteinerDDSkarlickiDP (eds) Research in Social Issues in Management: Justice, Morality, and Social Responsibility. Greenwich CT: Information Age Publishing, 29–62.
18.
FriedmanM (1962) Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
19.
GalperinBL (2002) Determinants of deviance in the workplace: An empirical examination of Canada and Mexico. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada.
20.
GalperinBLBurkeRJ (2006) Uncovering the relationship between workaholism and workplace destructive and constructive deviance: An exploratory study. International Journal of Human Resource Management17(2): 331–347.
21.
GilsonRJRoeMJ (1999) Lifetime employment: Labor peace and the evolution of Japanese corporate governance. Columbia Law Review99(2): 508–540.
22.
GundlachMJDouglasSCMartinkoMJ (2003) The decision to blow the whistle: A social information processing framework. Academy of Management Journal28(1): 107–123.
23.
HaidtJ (2008) Morality. Perspectives on Psychological Science3(1): 65–72.
24.
JonasEGraupmannVKayserDNZannaMTraut-MattauschEFreyD (2009) Culture, self, and the emergence of reactance: Is there a “universal” freedom?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology45(6): 1068–1080.
25.
KahnemanDTverskyA (1979) Prospect theory: Analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica47(2): 263–291.
26.
LekkasP (1998) Insider trading and the Greek stock market. Business Ethics: A European Review7(4): 193–199.
27.
LewinK (1951) Field Theory in Social Science. New York, NY: Harper.
28.
McGeeRW (2009) Insider trading in developing economies. In: McGeeRW (ed.) Corporate Governance in Developing Economies. New York, NY: Springer, 57–65.
29.
MalhotraDGinoF (2011) The pursuit of power corrupts: How investing in outside options motivates opportunism in relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly56(4): 559–592.
30.
ManneHG (1966) Insider Trading and the Stock Market. New York, NY.Free Press.
31.
ManneHG (1985) Insider trading and property rights in new information. Cato Journal4(3): 933–943.
32.
MazisMB (1975) Antipollution measures and psychological reactance theory: A field experiment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology31(4): 654–666.
33.
MeyerJWRowanB (1977) Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology83(2): 340–363.
34.
MilgramS (1965) Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority. In: SteinerIDFishbeinM (eds) Current Studies in Social Psychology. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
35.
MironAMBrehmJW (2006) Reactance theory—40 years later. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie37(1): 9–18.
36.
MooreC (2008) Moral disengagement in processes of organizational corruption. Journal of Business Ethics80(1): 129–139.
37.
MorrisonEW (2006) Doing the job well: An investigation of pro-social rule breaking. Journal of Management32(5): 5–28.
38.
MorrisonEWMillikenFJ (2000) Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review25(4): 706–725.
39.
NarayananMP (1985) Managerial incentives for short-term results. Journal of Finance40(5): 1469–1484.
40.
PerryJE (2011) Managing moral distress: A strategy for resolving ethical dilemmas. Business Horizons54(5): 393–397.
41.
QuickBLFieseBHAndersonBKoesterBDMarlinDW (2011) A formative evaluation of shared family mealtime for parents of toddlers and young children. Health Communication26(7): 656–666.
42.
RobinsonSBennettR (1995) A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal38(2): 555–572.
43.
RossWD (1930) The Right and the Good. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44.
RuppDEBellCM (2010) Extending the deontic model of justice: Moral self-regulation in third-party responses to injustice. Business Ethics Quarterly20(1): 89–106.
45.
ShawJISkolnickP (1995) Effects of prohibitive and informative judicial instructions on jury decision making. Social Behavior and Personality23(4): 319–326.
46.
ShuLLGinoFBazermanMH (2011) Dishonest deed, clear conscience: When cheating leads to moral disengagement and motivated forgetting. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin37(3): 330–349.
47.
TennenHRohrbaughMPressSWhiteL (1981) Reactance theory and therapeutic paradox: A compliance—defiance model. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice18(1): 14–22.
48.
TurilloCJFolgerRLavelleJJUmphressEEGeeJO (2002) Is virtue its own reward? Self-sacrificial decisions for the sake of fairness. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes89(1): 839–865.
49.
WarrenDE (2003) Constructive and destructive deviance in organizations. Academy of Management Review28(4): 622–632.
