The impact of ethical leadership on organizational citizenship behaviors: Moderating role of organizational cynicism

Abstract

The aim of this study was to test the relationship between ethical leadership (EL) and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB) and to test the moderating role of organizational cynicism (OC) in this relationship. This study was conducted on a stratified random sample consisting of 400 faculty members and their assistants at the Sohag University in Egypt. We relied on the survey for data collection and were analyzed using simple regression, hierarchical regression moderated analysis (HRMA) and simple slope analysis. Results indicate that ethical leadership has a direct and indirect effect on organizational citizenship behaviors and Organizational cynicism modifies the relationship between ethical leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors so that the relationship is weaker among employees with a high level of cynicism in contrast to those with a low level of cynicism. Finally, we offer several conclusions concerning EL, OCB and OC.

Keywords:

• ethical leadership
• organizational citizenship behaviors
• organizational cynicism

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

Human resources represent one of the most important elements of modern organizations, one of the best factors influencing their construction, and defining the future features of these organizations. Since human behavior is directly influenced by ethics, which is one of the most important components of a good society. The interest in ethical leadership has increased recently, Ethical leadership is the main focus for raising the performance levels and behaviors within organizations. By applying ethical leadership within organizations, it helps to create the atmosphere for creativity and innovation, raises the morale of employees, increases their ability to work, and raises their levels of enthusiasm.

The results of the paper attributed to the necessity of the interest of university officials, knowing the real reasons that led to the weakness of those behaviors, and develop appropriate recommendations and suggestions to address that deficiency, and develop those behaviors among university staff, and motivate employees to perform those additional roles, and work to strengthen their affiliation and loyalty to the university.

1. Introduction

Effective organizations think about methods and means by which to optimize and retain human resources in order to achieve their goals. Ethical leadership is one of those keys that helps in developing and improving HR. Whereas applying ethical leadership (EL) within an organization helps to create an atmosphere for creativity and innovation, to raise employee morale, to increase employee ability, and to raise levels of enthusiasm for the work (Rehman et al., 2018).

Prior studies have reviewed the consequences resulting from staff management of EL (Khuntia & Suar, 2004; Neubert et al., 2009; Ogunfowora, 2009; Sutherland, 2010; Toor & Ofori, 2009; Treviño et al., 2003) have focused their attention on the positive directional returns resulting from employees’ perceptions of this type of leadership. These perceptions include satisfaction with the leader, job satisfaction, emotional commitment, and integration in the workplace. Conclusions from these studies are consistent in showing that there is a positive correlation between employee perception of EL and the above mentioned positive directional consequences.

Additionally, previous studies (Akar, 2019; Bello, 2012; Lu, 2014; Malik et al., 2016; Shafique et al., 2018; Yang & Wei, 2018) have dealt with behavioral outcomes resulting from employee perception of EL and the findings reveal an intrinsic correlation between worker perception of EL and OCBs as well as between EL and in-role work behaviors while a negative correlation between EL and CWBs was found (Avey et al., 2011; Mayer et al., 2009). In other words, the more employees perceive EL, the greater the involvement with OCBs and in-role work behaviors and the lesser the engagement with CWBs. However, There are many organizational and behavioral constraints that hinder EL from playing an effective role within an organization (Chen, 2011). Thus, we cannot ignore these constraints where they often reflect reality and affect the actual results of research (Treviño et al., 2003).

Organizational cynicism (OC) is one potential constraint as it affects and modifies EL’s impact on business behaviors, which expected to have a negative impact on EL’s role in developing and increasing positive behaviors (Barnes, 2010). Also, prior studies (Barnes, 2010; Fitzgerald, 2002; Kalshoven et al., 2011; Khan, 2014; Newson, 2002) have confirmed that OC has many negative directional and behavioral returns within an organization; these include low job satisfaction, deteriorating organizational commitment, reduced OCBs, reduced in-role work behaviors, and the development of CWBs.

Findings of previous studies (Liu et al., 2013; Lu, 2014; Yang & Wei, 2018) illustrate the roles of some mediator and moderator variables such as subordinate workplace friendships and traditions, workplace ostracism, as well as cognitive and affective trust in the relationship between EL and OCBs. This reflects the importance of those variables in practice and highlights how ignoring them affects the actual results of research.

Notably, this study shows how few previous studies have addressed the moderator factors of the relationship between EL and OCBs and, more specifically, within higher education institutions. Therefore, the aim of this study was to bridge this gap and to make that knowledge available by testing the moderating role of OC in the relationship between EL and OCBs and try to make recommendations to help in reducing the negative effects of organizational cynicism within business institutions and maximize the positive role of ethical leadership in raising positive behaviors in general and organizational citizenship behaviors in particular.

This study also contributes to the literature in several aspects. First, the study sheds light on leadership as an important source of organizational citizenship behaviors. In particular, the theoretical model presents pathways that show how the organizational cynicism effects of the role of ethical leadership and reduces its role in raising positive behaviors and reducing negative behaviors. Second, the mediator model offers concrete guidance for organizations in their attempt to mitigate organizational cynicism and deal with problems that occur within universities and higher education institutions. This is achieved by adding a new seminar, in continuation of the research efforts, that addresses this vital area of organizational behavior in order to answer the following questions: What is the level of ethical leadership at Sohag University?, What is the level of OCBs among Sohag University’s faculty members and their assistants?, What is the level of organizational cynicism among Sohag University’s faculty members and their assistants?, What is the nature of the relationship between ethical leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors among Sohag University’s faculty members? And Does organizational cynicism play a moderator role in the relationship between ethical leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors among Sohag University’s faculty members and their assistants?

2. Literature review and hypotheses

2.1. Ethical leadership (EL)

Ethical leadership is seen as the behavior agreed upon between the leader and members of the group towards the achievement of common goals based on directing and nurturing the leader to his subordinates, and unleashing their energies and ambitions with vigor and determination to create an atmosphere of happiness and good performance in the workplace (Chonko, 2009). There are many definitions about EL. Khuong and Nhu (2015) illustrate that Ethical leadership is one in which a leader is honest, loyal, focused on purpose, goodness, social justice, personal strength, humility, patience, integrity, decision-making based on virtue and influencing his staff to make them do the right thing.

Also, Brown and Treviño (2006) also provided a specific definition of ethical leadership as the demonstration of appropriate normative behavior and scientific proof through interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such behavior among followers through two-way communication and promote this behavior and decision-making process, and the researchers agree with this Identification which includes the following: The behavior of moral leaders is a normative behavior that must be accepted by subordinates, as the situation requires, ethical leaders must communicate with their followers and provide them with justifications for their behavior. And Ethical leaders behave consistently in accordance with ethical rules. We agreed with this definition because they set ethical standards in their organizations, reward ethical behavior and punish immoral behavior, taking into account the ethical consequences of their decisions and, above all, strive to make fair choices.

3. Organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs)

Among the earliest definitions, Podsakoff et al. (2000) defined OCB as “work behaviors that exceed official job requirements, are not directly assessed or rewarded by the formal remuneration system and contribute to organizational effectiveness”. This definition is appropriate to the subject of this study. OCBs involve two types of behaviors, (1) positive behaviors, and (2) abstinence behaviors (Organ, 1988). Positive behaviors reflect the individual’s voluntary positive contributions such as provided by assisting an immediate supervisor or work colleagues. The quality of abstinence relates to the individual voluntarily refraining from behaviors that may harm the organization or management even if he/she is entitled to exercise certain rights. Abstaining from these behaviors reflects the individual’s ability to tolerate and openly accept less than ideal working conditions.

Dimensions of organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs)—Many researchers (Organ, 1988; Podsakoff et al., 2000) have pointed out that OCBs consist of the following five dimensions; (1) Altruism—which can be described as voluntary support behaviors directed toward helping co-workers who may encounter problems during work and to preventing the emergence of such problems, (2) Conscientiousness—which is an individual’s desire to perform behaviors that go beyond the formal requirements of the job including initiative, volunteering, and showing perseverance and enthusiasm while at work, (3) Sportsmanship—which is a behavior that demonstrates how well, without complaining, an individual is willing to accept the current situation and address and endure inconveniences and/or burdens of a job, (4) Courtesy—which means showing respect and appreciation to all colleagues and superiors within the workplace and accepting their decisions and actions, and finally (5) Civic virtue—which refers to the individual’s desire to contribute positively to organizational life by integration and by offering advice and/or suggestions with the intent of problem resolution while being keen to express opinions.

The researchers note that some of the dimensions of OCBs, such as altruism and civic virtue are directed towards individuals (OCB-I) and aim to assist colleagues in the workplace. Other dimensions, such as sportsmanship, conscientiousness and civilized behavior are directed toward increasing the effectiveness of the organization itself.

4. The relationship between EL and OCBs

A study by Neubert et al. (2013) is one of the earliest attempts to report on the impact of EL on OCBs and organizational commitment among employees, explored the mechanism by which an ethical leader affects employee behaviors. The findings of their study affirm that there is a substantially positive correlation between EL and OCBs. The findings also stress the need to pay attention to ethics in the field of work. Also, Previous studies (Brandon, 2013; Liu et al., 2013; Philipp & Lopez, 2013; Weng, 2014) focused on how EL behaviors affect employee OCBs proposed a theory about the relationship between EL behaviors and employee OCBs which suggests that when a manager has a high level of EL the employees are more affiliated with the organization and consequently generate OCBs.

In the same text, the study of Ali et al. (2018) found that are a positive correlation has been recorded between EL and individual OCBs. This result agreed with Khan et al. (2016)’s study which found a positive correlation between ethical leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors, moreover, the results of this study have Practical effects on the process for public sector leaders as demonstrating ethical leadership behavior can lead to the development of organizational citizenship behaviors.

In the same context, the relationships between EL, jealousy in the workplace, and OCB-oriented OCB-I were explored by Wang and Sung (2016) and Yang and Wei (2018) and the findings demonstrated the positive impact of EL on the generation of employee OCBs. Also, the results of other studies (Brandon, 2013; Neubert et al., 2013) show a substantially positive correlation between EL and OCBs.

Social learning theory (Bandura & Walters, 1977) illustrates that workers learn social behavior through repeated observation of ethical leadership behaviors and by reinforcing that leadership to worker behaviors by using various forms of reward and punishment to correct behavior and redirect it to the desired and desired ethical direction. Hence, as workers become more aware of ethical leadership, they demonstrate more Organizational citizenship behaviors. Also Workers view ethical leaders as honest and acceptable role models that respect ethical values in their behaviors and thinking and who have the authority to direct and redirect ethically. Hence, from an ethical point of view, they regard OCBs as a positive behavioral option and they try to increase it within the university. Therefore, we propose the first hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1 (H1)

There is a positive correlation between ethical leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors among faculty members and their assistants at the Sohag University.

5. Organizational cynicism (OC) as moderator variable between EL and in-role work behaviors

OC has emerged as an obstacle to organizations wherein long-term effects reduce organizational efficiency and put at risk the effectiveness and feasibility of an enterprise (Erarslan et al., 2018; Naus, 2007; Zhang et al., 2019). Numerous previous studies have addressed the determinants of OC. For example, O’Leary (2003) explained that OC stems from an organization’s lack of integrity, individuals feeling ignored, disrespect for the dignity of employees, self-interest with no regard for the workers or individuals, work that lacks meaning, a lack of credibility, and employees excluded from the process of organizational decision-making. Together these factors generate negative attitudes towards the organization and promote negative behaviors towards it.

There have been several key approaches in relation to the concept of OC (Abraham, 2000; Nafei, 2013). The first approach, satire, includes personal traits based on the assumption that most employees are unreliable because it is understood that most individuals are selfish. The second trend, irony, is called occupational cynicism in which it is limited to certain professions such as, the medical profession and the police. In view of differing idealistic expectations, an individual’s cynicism means that they consider certain professions unworthy and that the individuals are unscrupulous. The third trend is called cynicism towards organizational change whereby individuals view organizational change as offering no benefit to the organization but rather the individuals who support it have a special interest in achieving specific changes. Finally, the fourth trend is identified as cynicism toward the organization. This reflects the fixed negative attitudes of employees towards the organization itself and their sense that the organization lacks integrity and is characterized by false promises. The fourth trend, related to cynicism as a result of the individual’s negative perception of the organization, which is the subject of the current research study.

OC reduces the presence of OCBs and weakens in-role behaviors (Abraham, 2000; Chiaburu et al., 2013; Dean et al., 1998). Consequently, it may also lead to counterproductive work behaviors. An imbalance in the social exchange relationship that results can subsequently prompt individuals to engage in CWBs and employee psychological alienation (Abraham, 2000).

In the same context, the theoretical model of Hartog (2014)’s study assures that individual personality traits and the surrounding factors such as organizational culture represent the determinants that build and generate ethical behaviors among leaders which improve positive behaviors such OCBs and reduce negative behaviors such CWBs within organizations, improve performance and affect the attitudes of employees, increase their organizational commitment and reduce their sense of organizational cynicism.

Moreover, there are valid presumptions that EL strengthens OCBs. However, as a directional circumstance surrounding that relationship, OC’s presence can limit its release. The level of OC may prompt some workers either to assume or refrain from these behaviors. It can be said that OC may modify the relationship between EL and OCBs. Workers with a high level of cynicism demonstrate a state of imbalance in their social exchanges and with the organization. This is due to their belief that the organization lacks integrity and is seeking to exploit and falsify reality. This belief may make them consider their contributions as outweighing their returns.

Social exchange theory and the criterion of exchange (Blau, 1964; Eisenberger et al., 1986; Gouldner, 1960) proposes that social behavior is the result of an exchange process. The purpose of this exchange is to maximize benefits and minimize costs. In other word, Social exchange theory suggests that we essentially take the benefits and subtract the costs in order to determine how much a relationship is worth and psychological contract theory (Robinson et al., 1994). Which consider an unwritten set of expectations between the employee and the employer. It includes informal arrangements, mutual beliefs, common ground and perceptions between the two parties. It represents a concept that refers to an employee’s perceived expectations of what they can gain from an organization, such as job security and advancement opportunities, in exchange for providing something like loyalty or hard Therefore, based on theories, workers who believe that the organization lacks integrity and seek to exploit them and juggle their reality; they will unleash feelings of frustration, loss of hope, and distrust, which may be so strong that workers push away from OCBs, as a response, behavior consistent with organizational cynicism as a negative trend they have toward the organization, as a response.

Furthermore, previous studies (Abraham, 2000; Barnes, 2010; Byrne & Hochwarter, 2008; Dean et al., 1998; Evans et al., 2010; Fitzgerald, 2002; Hatfield et al., 2013; Nair & Kamalanabhan, 2010; Spector & Fox, 2002; Wilkerson et al., 2008) have also confirmed a significantly negative correlation between OC and OCBs and, as reported in the findings of Newson’s (2002) study, the most affected element is conscientiousness. Thus, we propose the second hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2 (H2)

Organizational cynicism modifies the positive relationship between ethical leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors so that the relationship is weaker among employees with a high level of cynicism in contrast to those with a low level of cynicism.

6. Methods

6.1. Study population and sample

We collected data from staff of the university of Sohag in Egypt. To increase the generalizability of our theoretical model across job types, we collected from all faculty members with different degrees and their assistants in all faculties. The participants completed the survey on a voluntary basis in their workplace, took a packet back home for their spouse to complete the relevant section, and handed both sets of responses in at their workplace after 5 days.

We obtained 407 matched questionnaires from employees and their spouses (response rate = 86.46%). After eliminating 7 incomplete pairs of questionnaires, we had 400 matched forms for analysis. The average age of the participants was 42 years (SD = 1.33, range = 21–60 years); 61%, % were men and 39% were women. In regard to experience level, from 5—less than 10 years, as it reached 42.5% of the sample size, and 25.25% represents the size of their experiences less than 5 years, and 32.25% of the size the sample prepares their experiences from 10 years or more. In terms of job type, 20.25% worked as demonstrators, 23.26%, worked as Teaching assistants, 24%, worked as teachers, 15.5%, worked as assistant professors and 17% worked as professors, which indicates the representation of the sample for all groups within the university.

7. Measures

Responses were made on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). We used scales with established reliability and validity. Hypotheses for this study include the following three types of variables:

Ethical leadership (EL)—we used a scale developed by Brown et al. (2006) to measure EL, which consists of 14 Items. It points out that it includes six dimensions; namely (1) justice, (2) role clarification, (3) power sharing, (4) integrity, (5) moral orientation, and (6) heading toward subordinates. Cronbach’s Alpha was .90 for this study. Sample items is: “Listening to what workers should say is setting an example and acting in an ethical manner“.

Organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs)- we used a scale developed by Podsakoff et al. (2000), consists of 14 statements. It relied on measuring OC based on five main dimensions, as follows: Altruism, Courtesy, Conscientiousness, Civic virtue and Sportsmanship. Cronbach’s Alpha was .659. Sample item “encouraging colleagues when they are enthusiastic about work”.

Organizational cynicism (OC)—we used a scale developed by (Brandes et al., 1999). It consists of eight Items. It relied on measuring OC based on three main dimensions, as follows: belief, passion, and behavior Cronbach’s Alpha was .82 for this study. Sample item “I feel anxiety, distress, tension and discomfort when I think of the university”.

Control variables. -We controlled for individual demographic variables, including age, gender, experience level, and job type, to reduce their potential impact on OCBs.

8. Statistical analysis of data

The researcher used SPSS.20/PC statistical software to tabulate and analyze the data. In order to test the hypotheses, the researchers used simple regression, hierarchical regression moderated analysis (HRMA) and simple slope analysis.

9. Results of study

9.1. Confirmatory factor analyses

Confirmatory factor analysis results (see Table 1) indicate that the single-factor model had a significantly poorer fit than the other two models, especially compared with the three-factor model. Thus, common method variance was not a concern in this study, and all three factors had acceptable discriminant and convergent validity.

Table 1. Results of confirmatory factor analysis

		X^2	df	X^2/df	RM SEA	CFI	TLI	SRMR	∆ X^2	∆ df
Baseline Model	Three Factors	254.4	138	1.84	.07	.93	.92	.06
Model 1	Two Factors: Ethical leader ship and OCB were combi ned into one factor	424.18	144	2.94	.14	.87	.85	.13	169. 78***	6
Model 2	one Factors: All vari ables were combi ned into one factor	1465.07	153	9.57	.20	.73	.62	.18	1040. 89***	9

Note. N = 400. RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation, CFI = comparative fit index, TLI = Tucker–Lewis index, SRMR = standardized root mean square residual, OCB = Organizational citizenship behaviors.

*** p <.001.

10. Characterization of study variables

Table 2 shows the means, standard deviations, Cronbach’s alphas, and correlation matrix for the variables. Ethical leadership was positively correlated with organizational citizenship behaviors, organizational cynicism was negatively correlated with organizational citizenship behaviors, and Ethical leadership.

Table 2. Meta-data of the variables, simple linear correlation coefficients, and stability coefficients

Variables	Mean	Standard Deviation	Correlation coefficients
			1	2	3
Ethical Leadership	2.321	.649	.90
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors	2.90	1.14	.863	.695
Organizational Cynicism	3.412	1.245	−.487	−.846	.82

Note. N = 400. Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency reliability coefficients appear on the diagonal in parentheses ***p <.001

11. Results of testing H1

In order to test H1, we used simple regression analysis and the results are presented in Table 3

Table 3. The results of simple regression analysis of OCB on EL

Predictor	Beta	B	R	R^2	T.Value	F
Ethical Leadership	.863	.869	.863	.745	1.667	0.00*
Constant			.075
The coefficient of determination (Adj.R^2)			.745
F value			4595.93
Sig.F			0.00*

Note. N = 400, OCB = Organizational Citizenship Behaviors and EL = Ethical Leadership

*** p <.001

Table 3 shows that the parameter signals confirm the intrinsic positive correlation (R = .869) between EL and OCBs. The modified determining coefficient refers to Adj. R² which indicates that EL interprets 74.5% of the variation in OCBs. The coefficient of the model intensity (Sig. F) shows the intensity of the model in its entirety at p < 0.001. This supported H1.

12. Results of testing H2

As seen in Table 4, after subtracting the moderator variable, the two variables together explain 84.3% of the variance. This indicates that the moderator variable alone contributes about 9.8% of the variance. Therefore, the results of the regression showed that OC had a moderating effect on the relationship between EL and CWBs, supporting Hypothesis 2. Also the coefficient of the model intensity (Sig. F) refers to the intensity of the model in its entirety at p < 0.001

Table 4. Results of HRM analysis to show the relationship between EL, OC and organizational citizenship behaviors

Predictors Variables	The dependent variable (Organizational citizenship behaviors)
	R2	∆R^2	F
Ethical Leadership (EL)	.745	000	4595.92*
Organizational Cynicism (OC)	.843	.098	8.620*
The interaction of Ethical leadership with organizational cynicism	.893	.05	2.388*
Sig F	23.988*

Note. N = 400. *** p <.001

In order to further validate H2, we examined simple slopes at low and high levels of OC with regard to Organizational citizenship behaviors (see Figure 1), the results found that the relationship between Ethical Leadership and Organizational citizenship behaviors is weaker (R = .325, p < .001) for workers, who recognize a higher level of cynicism, than for workers who perceive a low level of cynicism (R = R = .674, p < .001). Finally, the (Z) test to determine the significance of the differences between the correlation coefficients of the two moderator variable groups (high level of organizational cynicism & low level of organizational cynicism) was used. The results of (Z = 14.65) indicate significant differences between the correlation coefficients of the moderator variable groups. Thus, previous results supported H2.

Figure 1. The moderating effect of OC on the relationship between EL and OCB

13. Discussion

Results from testing H1 demonstrate that there is a positive correlation between EL and OCBs. This positive relationship between EL and OCBs.This result can be explained within the framework of social learning theory (Bandura & Walters, 1977; Treviño et al., 2003) which illustrate that Workers learn social behavior through repeated observation of ethical leadership behaviors and by reinforcing that leadership to worker behaviors by using various forms of reward and punishment to correct behavior and redirect it to the desired and desired ethical direction. Thus, the ethical Leadership effect on the dimensions of OCB. This effect encourages altruism, conscientiousness, and peer-to-peer cooperation, and helps workmates to respect and appreciate one another. Therefore, by creating an atmosphere of civility, employees contribute to organizational effectiveness and their increasing positive contributions represent civilized behavior. EL influences and helps to develop every element of OCBs (Cheng, 2009)

Our findings agree with Ali et al. (2018) regarding the existence of a positive correlation between the use of ethical models of work in organizations, such as equity, justice, integrity, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The greater the presence of these individual elements, the greater the presence of OCBs among the employees. with respect to the positive relationship between EL and OCBs, the results of this study are consistent with the findings of other studies (Brandon, 2013; Khan et al., 2016; Wang & Sung, 2016), which showed the positive correlation between EL and OCBs. However, the results of our study differ from those of Kott’s (2012) study which indicated that there was no correlation between ethics in general or any kind of behaviors within work (OCBs and CWBs). Although, they disagree partially with Leung’s (2008) findings which show that ethics do have an impact on altruism (one dimension of OCBs). Researchers refer these differences to the differences in the measures used and the different fields of application.

We can illustrate the results from testing H2 in the light of the theory of social exchange and the criterion of exchange (Blau, 1964; Eisenberger et al., 1986; Gouldner, 1960) and psychological contract theory (Rousseau, 2004). Whereas workers who have a high level of cynicism have the belief that the organization lacks integrity and seeks to exploit them and falsify their reality (Dean et al., 1998). This leads to the delegation of the relationship of social exchange between them and gives an indication of the breach of the psychological contract held by them. This contributes to the release of frustration, loss of hope and mistrust which may be strong enough to push workers to reduce OCBs as a behavioral response consistent with organizational cynicism as a negative trend towards them to the organization. Despite the existence of Ethical leadership, which lacks the impact you seek and vice versa in the case of workers who have a low level of cynicism.

In the same context, we can also explain the result as follows: OC weakens altruism and conscientiousness in that a cynical individual believes that his colleagues and the university lack integrity, and that the university seeks only to advance and achieve its own interests. OC is more conducive to the emergence of negative behaviors among workers than it is to promoting positive behaviors (Evans et al. 2010).

14. Implications

The results of our study emphasize the role of EL in the formation and development of positive behaviors among employees, specially organizational citizenship behaviors. Also, the results strongly demonstrate the emergence of OC under EL weakens the positive relationship between the variables. This finding is a modest addition to previous studies regarding the behavioral consequences of ethical leadership and confirms the literature’s predictions on the relationship of social exchange, psychological contract and behavioral integrity for leaders.

Within the context of the Sohag University, our study reveals a low level of ethical leadership and level of OCBs. Results also affirm the positive correlation between EL and OCBs. Consequently, based on the positive outcomes of ethical leadership it would be advantageous for university officials to pay greater attention to the development of EL and apply it in all faculties and levels of the Sohag University. In addition, it would be beneficial for university officials to dedicate attention to ethical training courses and seminars on the importance of ethics and the role of ethical leadership. Also, faculty members and their assistants should be encouraged to uphold the moral values considered significant. Additionally, incorporating EL as a way of motivating employees to perform additional roles and working to strengthen their affiliation and loyalty to the university in which they work would be advantageous.

The existence of a somewhat low level of presence of organizational citizenship behaviors among the faculty members and their assistants at Sohag university, which is attributed to the necessity of the interest of university officials, knowing the real reasons that led to the weakness of those behaviors, and develop appropriate recommendations and suggestions to address that deficiency, and develop those behaviors among university staff, and motivate employees to perform those additional roles, and work to strengthen their affiliation and loyalty to the university in which they work.

Moreover, the results of this study show a fairly high level of OC among Sohag University faculty members. Therefore, measures must be taken to reduce and minimize OC among the members. This would be accomplished by their observing manifestations of organizational justice where psychological violations are not permitted as well as by establishing regulations that include the members’ participation in decision-making.

15. Limitation of the study and future research prospects

The present study operates within a set of limits, namely: The present study is classified as cross-Sectional Studies, in which data are collected once; it is not possible to trace the cause-and-effect relationships between the variables contained therein, which can be carried out through studies at long intervals. The present study is limited to faculty members and their assistants in the faculties of Sohag University under study, without mentioning the administrative staff at the university. The similarities and agreement between them go beyond the differences, but the results cannot be generalized to faculty members and their assistants in private universities whereas sohag university is a public university. Finally, the researchers included in the current study Sohag University to be a field of study, because of the poverty of research studies, especially in this area.

The results, implications, and limitations of this study can be used to serve as a nucleus for future research studies. We noted the low level of employee perception of EL, we recommend that further studies be undertaken in an attempt to characterize this phenomenon in specific terms and, more specifically, after the verification of its positive returns (Brown & Treviño, 2006; Mayer et al., 2009; Piccolo et al., 2010). The researchers also noted from the results of this study the level of OC that employees had towards organizations’ affiliates, we recommend that those interested in the aspect of reducing negative trends should conduct studies to identify the causes (Aryee et al., 2007; Tepper et al., 2004).

If organizational cynicism acts as a moderator variable of the relationship between EL and OCBs, it may be useful to test the researcher’s recommendations that the same role is tested for negative work behaviors, such as CWBs, and that this important area of research is extended to OCBs. In this context, we also recommend that other moderators be introduced into the relationship between EL and work behaviors such as self-esteem established in the organization (Pierce & Gardner, 2004), abusive supervision and control center (Ng et al., 2006).

Additional information

Funding

The authors received no direct funding for this research.

Notes on contributors

Mohamed Ahmed Ali Nemr

Mohamed Ahmed Ali Nemr PhD student at the School of Economic and Management, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, China & Teaching Assistant at Faculty of Commerce, Sohag university, having Master Degree in Business Administration, from Business Administration Department, Faculty of Commerce, Sohag University, Egypt“.

Yuhuan liu

Yuhuan Liu Assistant professor at the School of Economic and Management, Southwest Jiaotong Unversity, Chengdu, China , she participated in many researches such as; Stakeholder Influences and Organization Responses, Coping with Multiple Institutional Logics, Corporate social responsibility,

Note about research: This type of research helps to deal more broadly with the problems that exist within universities and education and opens the door to many researches related to the dark issues within universities