Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal

The impact of coaches’ ethical leadership behaviour on athletes’ voice and

performance: The role of accountability
Stephanie White, Davar Rezania,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Stephanie White, Davar Rezania, (2019) "The impact of coaches’ ethical leadership behaviour on
athletes’ voice and performance: The role of accountability", Sport, Business and Management: An
International Journal, https://doi.org/10.1108/SBM-11-2017-0079
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/SBM-11-2017-0079
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

Downloaded on: 19 June 2019, At: 03:48 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 95 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1 times since 2019*
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:485088 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2042-678X.htm

Coaches’
The impact of coaches’ ethical ethical
leadership behaviour on athletes’ leadership
behaviour
voice and performance
The role of accountability
Stephanie White Received 23 November 2017
Revised 18 February 2018
Vancouver Island University, Nanaimo, Canada, and 15 June 2018
31 October 2018
Davar Rezania 10 December 2018
University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada Accepted 14 January 2019
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

Abstract
Purpose – Ethics and leadership are ongoing topics in high performance sports. The purpose of this paper is
to provide an insight into the relationship between coaches’ ethical leadership behaviour, as perceived by
athletes, and its impact on student-athlete accountability, voice and performance.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper examines the constructs of coaches’ ethical leadership
behaviour, felt accountability and voice behaviour. The authors surveyed student-athletes from a variety of sports
who compete in the Ontario University Athletics Regional Association. A total of 303 respondents (n ¼ 303)
completed the survey. Partial least squares path modelling algorithm was utilised for testing hypotheses.
Findings – The results of the study indicate a significant relationship between a coach exhibiting ethical
leadership behaviour and student-athlete voice behaviour and performance. Felt accountability mediates the
effect of ethical leadership on voice and performance.
Practical implications – This study provides support for the hypothesis that coaches who behave ethically
and whose actions represent their words create an environment where a student-athlete feels accountable.
This is a powerful concept as it can positively impact individual and team success. The findings suggest that
one of the ways that coaches can impact athletes’ performance is to demonstrate and model ethical conduct,
and reward ethical acts.
Originality/value – The paper examines how coaches’ ethical behaviour might impact individual processes
of accountability, voice and performance. Second, the paper uses the construct of accountability to explain
how coaches’ ethical leadership impacts student-athlete behaviour. The accountability literature indicates
that followers’ behaviours can be understood as the consequences of his/her perceived accountability towards
the leader.
Keywords Accountability, Voice, Ethical leadership, Coaching sport teams
Paper type Research paper

Ethical scandals and inappropriate conduct in sports organisations have spurred interest in the
understanding of the role of ethics in the management of sports (Drewe, 2000; Hums et al., 1999;
Morgan, 2007; Zakus et al., 2007; Burton and Peachey, 2014; McNamee, 2010). Given their role,
their relationship with athletes and their position of authority, coaches have received particular
attention in this regard ( Jordan et al., 2004; Hardman and Jones, 2010). Coaches set goals and
objectives for themselves and their athletes, they establish and direct a strategy, and they set
priorities. Coaches decide on the types of learning activities that they employ in practice
situations, provide feedback in response to athletes’ performances and occasionally discipline
athletes (Horn, 2008). They direct athletes’ behaviour and measure performance to
achieve results. In this complex undertaking, coaches are expected to follow accepted norms
and have moral obligations to honour their contract to athletes, to sports organisations, to their
professional associations and to the broader society (Dulaney, 2001). Due to this responsibility, Sport, Business and Management:
An International Journal
coaching associations such as the Coaching Association of Canada have introduced codes of © Emerald Publishing Limited
2042-678X
ethics and corresponding standards of behavioural expectations for coaches. DOI 10.1108/SBM-11-2017-0079
 SBM Coaches are thrust into positions of leadership because of their influence on the actions
and behaviours of athletes. Leadership can be defined as “the process of being perceived by
others as a leader” (Lord and Maher, 2002, p. 11). Behavioural expectations and related
consequences that are perceived in the social environment influence how followers act and
think (Frink and Ferris, 1998). How coaches’ behaviours are perceived by athletes may be
particularly important for understanding how they impact athletes’ behaviour and
performance (Smoll et al., 1978; Smoll and Smith, 1989).
The literature on leadership is grounded in several theories (Mumford et al., 2009). The
social learning perspective on leadership (Sims and Lorenzi, 1992) posits that followers will
come to behave similarly to their leader through imitation and observational learning
(Bandura, 1986). This theory highlights how people learn from being rewarded and
punished, and through modelling the behaviour of esteemed role models (Sims and Lorenzi,
1992). Similarly, a variety of research in the field of sports coaching establishes the critical
importance of modelling on the acquisition and performance of skills (McCullagh et al.,
2012). The influence of social learning and role modelling on performance, as well as on
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

psychological variables such as self-efficacy, anxiety and self-regulation is well established

(McCullagh et al., 2012; Hodges and Franks, 2002). Much attention has been paid to the
study of coaching leadership styles and behavioural patterns that are the most effective
(Horn, 2008; Chelladurai, 2012; Côté and Gilbert, 2009). In this stream of research, coaching
effectiveness is identified by successful performance outcomes or by positive psychological
responses on the part of the athletes (Côté and Gilbert, 2009).
The social learning theory explains that leaders who demonstrate ethical behaviour may
strengthen values such as trust, integrity and honesty through behaviours such as rewards and
punishments (Brown et al., 2005). Ethical leadership is defined as “the demonstration of
normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and
the promotion of such conduct to followers through two-way communication, reinforcement,
and decision-making” (Brown et al., 2005, p. 120). Such conduct communicates the importance of
ethical standards, performance management systems and moral tone (Mayer et al., 2012).
Ethical leadership not only focuses on the moral traits of leaders like integrity, concern for
others, fairness and trustworthiness, but also draws on the social learning theory to explain that
the behaviour of followers is shaped by ethical leaders (Engelbrecht et al., 2017). While ethical
behaviour is a component in a number of other leadership theories such as transformational
leadership, authentic leadership, servant leadership (Bedi et al., 2016), the ethical leadership
theory explains the influence of leaders’ ethical behaviour on followers’ ethical behaviour
(Brown and Treviño, 2006).
Research into ethical leadership has focussed on investigating the construct in various
organisational contexts, including educational institutions (Shapiro and Stefkovich, 2016).
A 2014 special issue of the Journal of Intercollegiate Sport was dedicated to the topic of
ethical leadership in sports (Roby, 2014; Sagas and Wigley, 2014). In spite of the recognition
of the importance of moral behaviour in sports (Kavussanu and Stanger, 2017; Kavussanu
and Roberts, 2001), leadership for coaching (Chelladurai, 2012) and the prevalence of social
learning in the coaching literature (McCullagh et al., 2012), few studies have examined
the impact of coaches’ ethical leadership in general and in the context of coaching
student-athletes in particular. The objective of this study is to examine the relationship
between coaches’ ethical leadership behaviour and its impact on athletes in the context of
intercollegiate sports.
This study will contribute to the literature in two related ways. First, we use the context of
coaching student-athletes to explain how student-athletes’ perception of coaches’ ethical
leadership behaviour impacts their behaviour. This will help extend ethical leadership literature
to student-athlete samples. Second, we examine how coaches’ ethical behaviour might impact
the individual processes of accountability, voice and performance. The accountability literature
 indicates that followers’ behaviours can be understood as the consequences of his/her perceived Coaches’
accountability towards the leader (Erdogan et al., 2004; Lee et al., 2012). As we will explain in the ethical
following sections, the importance of accountability for the study of leadership in organisations leadership
has been recognised. However, to our knowledge, this will be the first study that uses
accountability in the context of coaching student-athletes. behaviour
In the following sections, we first present a review the literature on ethical leadership and
the relationship between leaders’ behaviour and followers’ voice, accountability and
performance. By doing so, we interpret prior ethical leadership research in the context of
coaching student-athletes. We then describe our cross-sectional study of student-athletes’
perception of their coaches ethical leadership behaviour and its impact on their behaviour.
In the third section, we present our findings. The final section discusses conclusions,
practical implications and avenues for further investigation.

Theoretical background and hypotheses

As depicted in Figure 1, we establish a pathway between ethical leadership and accountability,
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

voice and performance. Ethical leadership is grounded in social learning and social exchange
terms (Den Hartog, 2015). Ethical leaders are thought to be role models of the “right” ethical
behaviours for their followers (Mayer et al., 2009). They use reward and punishment to
stimulate desired behaviour and ethical conduct (Brown and Treviño, 2006). Furthermore,
followers will reciprocate when treated ethically by leaders (Hassan et al., 2013). Followers not
only respond to the leader’s behaviour by showing leader-focused citizenship behaviours,
but they also show wider constructive behaviours. These behaviours are aimed to contribute
to activities of the group or the organisation, towards goal achievement (De Hoogh and
Den Hartog, 2009). For example, ethical leadership has been demonstrated to have a positive
association with leadership outcomes such as psychological empowerment, commitment
(Zhu et al., 2004), perceived effectiveness of leaders, followers’ job satisfaction and dedication,
followers’ willingness to report problems (Brown et al., 2005), turnover intention, organisational
citizenship (Ruiz-Palomino et al., 2011), group ethical voice and group ethical voice efficacy
(Huang and Paterson, 2014).

Ethical leadership and voice behaviour

Voice behaviour research is rooted in employee dissatisfaction in the work environment
(Avey et al., 2012). When employees choose to voice their concerns, it provides the
opportunity for organisations to address them and develop solutions to the issues (Avey
et al., 2012). LePine and Van Dyne (1998) defined voice as “behavior that emphasizes
expression of a constructive challenge with an intent to improve rather than merely

Voice

H1

Ethical H5
leadership Performance
H4
H2
H3

Accountability Figure 1.
Conceptual model
 SBM criticize” (p. 109). LePine and Van Dyne (1998) note the importance of voice in work groups
is due to the shared “responsibility for outcomes” (p. 853). They argue that employee voice
is a constructive, change-oriented method of communication that allows followers to have
a say in decision making.
The definition of ethical leadership focuses on normatively appropriate conduct
(Brown et al., 2005). Social learning perspective suggests that leaders that emphasise
doing the right thing and speak out about inappropriate behaviour gain the trust and
respect of their followers and become appropriate role models (Brown et al., 2005). Ethical
leadership is shown to foster higher levels of group voice by affecting two core beliefs
(Walumbwa et al., 2012). The first core believe is efficacy. When one believes that one’s
input will be listened to and acted upon, one is more likely to speak up. The other belief is
safety. People are unlikely to exhibit voice behaviours if they feel that their input will fall
on deaf ears, or if they fear that they will be punished for speaking up (Walumbwa et al.,
2012). Ethical leaders demonstrate respect and fair treatment and create an environment
that supports and encourages people to speak out against inappropriate behaviour
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

(Brown et al., 2005). Psychological safety is an important predictor of voice behaviour

(Walumbwa and Schaubroeck, 2009).
In intercollegiate sports, coaches have a strong influence on setting the norms and the
trickling down of those organisational norms. When coaches demonstrate ethical leadership
behaviours, they demonstrate respect and fair treatment, and value the student-athletes’ input.
Student-athletes then reciprocate and are more likely to demonstrate positive behaviours
(Mayer et al., 2012) and express their voice (Avey et al., 2012). When student-athletes perceive
their coaches support for the “right” behaviour, they feel supported and are inclined to express
their voice:
H1. Coaches’ ethical leadership behaviour is positively associated with student-athlete voice.

Ethical leadership and accountability

Accountability is defined as the obligation of account given to a party who has the
power to impose rewards or sanctions (Roberts, 1991). It is a mechanism that enables
organisations to expect people to perform to certain standards, judge the performance
according to those standards, and distribute appropriate rewards or sanctions
(Ferris et al., 1997). Accountability always involves comparing “events” against a set of
“prescriptions” for what should occur or should have occurred (Schlenker et al., 1994). In a
coaching context, prescriptions include anything that explicitly or tacitly prescribes how
an athlete should behave. Coaches set goals, define what people should do to achieve
them, and determine what level of achievement is regarded as satisfactory. These
prescriptions (i.e. goals, rules and standards) act as a set of criteria to guide behaviour and
evaluate performance.
Felt accountability is a more subjective explanation that provides an understanding of a
“state of mind” (Hochwarter et al., 2007). This thought process is an implicit or explicit
expectation that one’s decisions or actions will be subject to evaluation by some salient
audience with the belief that there exists the potential for either rewards or sanctions
(Frink and Klimoski, 1998; Hall et al., 2003). While subjective in nature, felt accountability
can provide insight into the conscious mind and people’s actions and behaviours (Frink and
Klimoski, 1998).
Coaches who exhibit ethical leadership behaviour discuss ethics and values with team
members and listen to their input (Brown et al., 2005). They define success not just by results,
but also by an evaluation of the methods through which they are attained (Brown et al., 2005).
They also discipline team members who violate ethical standards (Brown et al., 2005).
 By setting expectations, openly discussing issues with the athletes, and offering rewards and/ Coaches’
or punishments, they impact athletes’ experience of accountability: ethical
H2. Coaches’ ethical leadership behaviour is positively associated with student-athlete leadership
“felt accountability”. behaviour

Accountability and performance

Accountability theory explains that a follower’s behaviours can be understood as the
consequences of his/her perceived accountability towards the leader (Hall et al., 2017).
Followers engage in behaviours congruent with performance expectations because they feel
they are answerable to the leader’s implicit and explicit expectations. In the accountability
theory, events are the units of action that the actor and the audience consider as a segment
for the purpose of evaluation (Schlenker et al., 1994). When the prescriptions that pertain to
the events are clear, the event-prescription link is strong (Schlenker et al., 1991). Specific and
clear prescriptions are associated with better performance (Miller et al., 1960). When actors
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

are committed to relevant prescriptions and have control over them, they are likely to
internalise them and perform according to those goals, rules and standards. Felt
accountability has been shown to be associated with performance (Breaux et al., 2009)
motivation, satisfaction and trust (Thoms et al., 2002).
This notion of felt accountability and its impact on performance is important within the
relationship of a coach and student-athlete. The coach-student-athlete relationship has a
foundation built on setting roles and expectations, and on rewards or sanctions, which are
based on skill or playing ability (Schroeder, 2010). Coaches may reward student-athletes
through incentives such as increased playing time. Conversely, coaches may discipline
athletes through what is known as “benching”, which equates to reduced or limited
playing time. Thoms et al. (2002) note that accountability supports results in specific areas,
such as performance, precision and focus. Furthermore, they show that accountability
is associated with motivation. In the sports environment, being motivated to achieve success
is critical for excellence. Studies have shown that individuals who are held accountable
demonstrate more favourable performances (Frink and Klimoski, 1998; Hall et al., 2003).
Similarly, we hypothesise that in the context of sports, felt accountability is associated
with performance:
H3. Student-athlete felt accountability is associated with student-athlete performance.
The extant literature indicates that a strong sense of responsibility will result in proactive
behaviour (Frese et al., 1999; LePine and Van Dyne, 1998). This is thought to be due to the
fact that individuals who feel responsible for the impact of their actions tend to be vigilant
and are likely to exchange information (McAllister et al., 1979). Accountability has been
shown to be associated with organisational citizenship behaviour (Hall et al., 2017) and
should promote voice behaviour. Consequently, student-athletes who feel accountable are
more likely to be proactive, viewing such behaviour as resulting in a sense of personal
satisfaction and accomplishment (Morrison and Phelps, 1999):
H4. Student-athlete felt accountability is positively associated with student-athlete voice.
The leadership literature has indicated clear links between leader behaviours and
cognitive and behavioural outcomes, most notably follower motivation and performance
(Epitropaki et al., 2017; Kark et al., 2018; Johnson, 2009). Social learning theory
and social exchange theory are used to explain the positive relationship between ethical
leadership and follower work effort and the processes through which leaders
positively influence followers’ attitudes, behaviours and performance (Kacmar et al.,
2013). Leadership effectiveness is realized through processes such as followers’ formation
 SBM of identification (Walumbwa et al., 2011), trust in the leader (Newman et al., 2014) and
commitment (Den Hartog, 2015).
The literature on voice argues that informing and allowing followers an input into what
they do can result in participation, understanding and hence commitment (Lewin and
Mitchell, 1992) and engagement (Rees et al., 2013). These imply that followers are expected to
expend discretionary efforts and lead improved performance due to factors such as greater
teamwork (Dundon et al., 2004). Student-athletes who identify with the coach and his or her
mission/vision, feel committed and engaged (Avolio et al., 2009; Rezania and Gurney, 2014).
Student-athletes’ emotions are effectively engaged for performance beyond expected
standards (Bedi et al., 2016). In examining the relationships between coach ethical leadership,
felt accountability, voice and performance, we hypothesise that ethical leadership is associated
with performance through felt accountability and voice:
H5a. Ethical leadership is positively associated with student-athlete performance.
H5b. Felt accountability mediates the effect of ethical leadership on student-athlete voice.
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

H5c. Felt accountability mediates the effect of ethical leadership on student-athlete

performance.

Method
A cross-sectional design was used. The survey was sent via e-mail to all 4,854
student-athletes who played on varsity teams that compete for a championship in the OUA
(Ontario University Athletics). A total of 303 (n ¼ 303) student-athletes out of 460 who
opened the invitation link returned completed surveys. The gender breakdown of study
respondents is as follows: 186 (61.39 per cent) identified as female, 116 (38.28 per cent)
identified as male and 1 (0.33 per cent) indicated “Other”. Participants were asked to indicate
how many years they had played for their current coach. The most common year was the
first year (n ¼ 135), followed by the second year (n ¼ 77), with the remaining being the third
year (n ¼ 45), the fourth year (n ¼ 31), and the fifth year or higher (n ¼ 15). Finally,
respondents indicated in which “sports division”, as defined by the OUA Sports Model, they
participated. The OUA Sport Model groups multiple sports into different divisions.
As multiple sports are listed in each “sport division”, the respondents are not identifiable by
sport, and therefore do not surrender anonymity. The majority of participants listed their
sports division as volleyball, soccer, rowing, field hockey, cross country, rugby, swimming,
track and field or wrestling (n ¼ 175), followed by the grouping of golf, baseball, lacrosse,
tennis, water polo, Nordic skiing, figure skating, fencing, curling or badminton (n ¼ 76). The
grouping of football, basketball or hockey was ranked third in the number of participants
(n ¼ 44). The smallest participant segment was those who were unable to determine in
which division they participated, indicated by the “other” division (n ¼ 8). While the number
of respondents is sufficient for analysis and the diversity of respondents are similar to the
diversity of all student-athletes in Ontario, we should acknowledge that only about
6 per cent of those who received the invitation returned the survey.

Measures
Survey questions were formatted on a five-item Likert-like Scale ranging from “Strongly
Disagree” to “Strongly Agree”. All constructs were defined as reflective constructs
measured through at least three indicators. To ensure content validity, we derived the items
from existing literature (Haynes et al., 1995). All items in the measurement model and their
cross-loadings are presented in Table I.
To measure ethical leadership, we used the Ethical Leadership Scale (ELS), adapted from
Brown et al. (2005). The student-athletes were asked to consider the current university team
 EthicaL Voice FAcct Perf Gender Sport p-value
Coaches’
ethical
Etic/1 0.84 0.01 −0.11 0.03 0.12 −0.02 o0.001 leadership
Etic/2 0.71 −0.02 0.05 −0.05 −0.05 0.06 o0.001
Etic/3 0.79 0.04 −0.01 −0.09 −0.03 −0.10 o0.001 behaviour
Etic/4 0.80 −0.07 0.07 0.09 0.07 0.06 o0.001
Etic/5 0.85 −0.02 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.14 o0.001
Etic/6 0.88 0.02 −0.08 −0.05 0.02 0.00 o0.001
Etic/7 0.70 −0.01 0.11 0.00 −0.10 0.09 o0.001
Etic/8 0.88 −0.02 0.03 −0.04 −0.05 −0.07 o0.001
Etic/9 0.78 0.05 −0.09 0.05 0.04 −0.12 o0.001
Etic/10 0.83 0.01 0.03 0.02 −0.06 −0.04 o0.001
Voice/1 0.11 0.78 0.07 −0.04 0.10 −0.06 o0.001
Voice/2 0.00 0.84 −0.02 −0.04 0.05 −0.01 o0.001
Voice/3 −0.14 0.80 −0.05 0.05 −0.06 0.03 o0.001
Voice/4 0.00 0.72 −0.01 −0.07 −0.08 0.03 o0.001
Voice/5 0.03 0.76 −0.06 −0.11 −0.05 0.00 o0.001
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

Voice/6 0.01 0.75 0.07 0.20 0.03 0.01 o0.001

FAcct/1 0.18 −0.14 0.53 −0.26 −0.06 0.03 o0.001
FAcct/2 −0.14 0.06 0.84 0.17 −0.02 0.06 o0.001
FAcct/3 −0.14 0.01 0.81 0.08 −0.09 −0.02 o0.001
FAcct/4 0.31 0.05 0.67 0.16 0.02 0.01 o0.001
FAcct/5 −0.12 −0.01 0.67 −0.26 0.16 −0.09 o0.001
Perfor/ 0 0 0 1 0 0 o0.001
Gender/ 0 0 0 0 1 0 o0.001
Sport 0 0 0 0 0 1 o0.001
Notes: EthicaL, coaches ethical leadership; Voice, voice behaviour; FAcct, felt accountability; Perf, student-athlete Table I.
performance. Loadings are unrotated and cross-loadings are oblique-rotated. p-values are for loadings. p-values Factor analysis and
o 0.05 are desirable for reflective indicators cross loading

for which they were playing and the current coach that they were playing for that season.
Sample items included:
• my coach listens to what team members have to say;
• my coach disciplines team members who violate ethical standards; and
• my coach conducts his/her personal life in an ethical manner.
In measuring felt accountability, we adopted five items from the scale developed by
Hochwarter et al. (2003). Sample items include:
• if things at my team do not go the way that they should, I will hear about it from my
coach;
• to a great extent, the success of my team rests on my shoulders; and
• my coach and my teammates closely scrutinise my efforts related to this team.
Van Dyne and LePine’s (1998) six-item scale was used to measure student-athlete voice
behaviour. Sample items included:
• I develop and make recommendations concerning issues that affect my team;
• I speak up and encourage others on my team to get involved in issues that affect my
team; and
• I communicate my opinions about issues to others in my team, even if my opinion is
deferent and others disagree with me.
 SBM To measure student-athlete performance, we used an evaluation scale that is commonly
used by Hockey Canada’s national team programme to evaluate athlete performance. The
modified scale had five ratings: an excellent elite performer (5), a consistent performance (4),
an inconsistent performance (3), struggling to get time in the game (2) and have not played
this season (1). As a sample, the first item was:
You are an excellent elite level performer. You have executed effectively in your position and within
your role on the team. Clearly, you outperform your counterparts in the same position or category.
You have had a lasting dominant effect through the games played to date.

Analysis
Partial least squares (PLS) path modelling algorithm (Hulland, 1999) was implemented in
WarpPLS version 5 (Kock, 2012). PLS was used because the data were not normally
distributed. This was expected, as student-athletes are selected to be high performers and as
such, their performance is not normally distributed. In terms of sample size, PLS requires a
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

minimum sample size that is either ten times the number of items comprising the most
formative constructs, or ten times the largest number of structural paths directed at a
particular construct in the inner path model (Barclay et al., 1995). With a sample size of 303
in this study, these requirements were met. The analysis of the PLS model was conducted in
two stages: the measurement model and the structural models for testing hypotheses.
For testing convergent validity, we used three criteria (Hair et al., 2016). First, factor
loading (see Table I) was used to determine if an item was significant. Table I presents the
cross-loadings of the constructs. It is observed that the loadings of items on the latent
constructs are higher than 0.7, which indicates that there is more shared variance between
the construct and its measures than error variance (Hair et al., 2016). All items were loaded
significantly on their respective factors, which supports indicator reliability.
Table II reports composite reliability and Cronbach’s α. Composite reliability and
Cronbach’s α values for all scales exceeded the minimum threshold level of 0.70, indicating
the reliability of scales (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). Table II also presents average
variance extracted (AVE) criterion (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). All latent constructs have an
AVE value greater than the minimum threshold value of 0.50. These results support the
convergent validity of constructs (Henseler et al., 2009).
Discriminant validity indicates the distinctiveness of two conceptually similar constructs
(Hair et al., 2016). For determining the discriminant validity of the measurement model, we
observe that in Table III, the square root of AVE exceeds the correlations between
the factors that make up each pair (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Furthermore, in examining
the cross-loadings in Table I, the observations show that each latent variable shares more
variance with its own block of indicators than with any other latent variable. A different
block of indicators represents each latent variable. For discriminant validity, the loading of

EthicaL Voice FAcct Perf Gender Sport

Composite reliability coefficients: acceptable W 0.7 0.95 0.90 0.83 1.00 1.00 1.00
Cronbach’s α coefficients: acceptable W0.7 0.94 0.87 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00
Average variances extracted: acceptable W 0.5 0.66 0.60 0.51 1.00 1.00 1.00
Q2 coefficients: W0 indicates predictive validity 0.20 0.05 0.20
R coefficients: acceptable W0.02
2
0.21 0.05 0.19
Table II. Full collinearity VIFs o3 indicates no common method bias 1.08 1.3 1.22 1.2 1.06 1.05
Latent variable Notes: EthicaL, coaches ethical leadership; Voice, voice behaviour; FAcct, felt accountability; Perf, student-athlete
coefficients performance
 each indicator is expected to be greater than its entire cross loading. This difference in Coaches’
loadings should be at least 0.10 (Gefen and Straub, 2005). Our model meets this requirement. ethical
These results support the notion that each construct is distinct from other constructs. leadership
The Q2 coefficients (Tenenhaus et al., 2005) are presented in Table II. All blocks have
positive values, which indicate that the model has acceptable predictive relevance (Chin, behaviour
1998). Construct validity is the degree to which an assessment instrument measures the
construct under investigation and subsumes all categories of validity (Haynes et al., 1995).
These tests of validity provide evidence of construct validity (Haynes et al., 1995).
We estimated paths between the constructs in WarpPLS performing the nonparametric
bootstrapping procedure using 100 subsamples to evaluate the statistical significance of each
path coefficient. Table IV and Figure 1 report the results of this analysis. In Figure 1, the path
coefficients are noted as β coefficients. In Table IV, effect sizes are presented. By looking at
Table IV and Figure 1, we note that H1 to H5a are supported with significant p-values (Figure 2).
Model fit and quality indices:
• average path coefficient (APC) ¼ 0.193, p o0.001;
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

• average R2 (ARS) ¼ 0.153, p ¼ 0.002;

• average adjusted R2 (AARS) ¼ 0.146, p ¼ 0.002;
• average block VIF (AVIF) ¼ 1.080, acceptable if ⩽ 5, ideally ⩽ 3.3;
• average full collinearity VIF (AFVIF) ¼ 1.154, acceptable if ⩽ 5, ideally ⩽ 3.3;
• Tenenhaus GoF (GoF) ¼ 0.349, small ⩾ 0.1, medium ⩾ 0.25, large ⩾ 0.36;
• Sympson’s paradox ratio (SPR) ¼ 1.000, acceptable if ⩾ 0.7, ideally ¼ 1;
• R2 contribution ratio (RSCR) ¼ 1.000, acceptable if ⩾ 0.9, ideally ¼ 1;
• statistical suppression ratio (SSR) ¼ 1.000, acceptable if ⩾ 0.7; and
• nonlinear bivariate causality direction ratio (NLBCDR) ¼ 0.875, acceptable if ⩾ 0.7.

EthicaL Voice FAcct Perf Gender Sport

EthicaL 0.81
Voice 0.24 0.78
FAcct 0.04 0.37 0.71
Perf 0.09 0.32 0.32 1.00
Gender −0.12 −0.01 0.02 0.11 1.00
Sport −0.03 0.07 −0.02 0.11 0.18 1.00
Notes: EthicaL, coaches ethical leadership; Voice, voice behaviour; FAcct, felt accountability; Perf, student-athlete
performance. Square roots of average variances extracted (AVEs) shown on diagonal. For discriminant validity,
for each latent variable, the square root of the AVE should be higher than any of the correlations involving that Table III.
latent variable (Fornell and Larcker, 1981) Variable correlations

EthicaL Voice FAcct Gender Sport

Voice 0.33 | 0.11 | o0.001 0.32 | 0.12 | o0.001

Table IV.
FAcct 0.23 | 0.05 | o0.001 (Total effects|effect
Perf 0.20 | 0.03 | o0.001 0.24 | 0.08 | o0.001 0.34 | 0.12 | o0.001 0.11 | 0.012 | 0.032 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.118 size| p-value) for paths
Notes: EthicaL, coaches ethical leadership; Voice, voice behaviour; FAcct, felt accountability; Perf, from column
student-athlete performance label to row
 SBM Sport
Voice (R )1i
(R )6i

R 2 = 0.20 Gender
(R )1i
 = 0.07
 = 0.26  = 0.24
(p = 0.12)  = 0.10
(p < 0.01) (p < 0.01)
 = 0.32 (p = 0.03)
(p < 0.01)
Perf
(R )1i
 = 0.06
R 2 = 0.20
(p = 0.17)
 = 0.27
Ethical (p < 0.01)
(R )10i

 = 0.23
(p < 0.01)
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

Figure 2. FACCT
(R )5i
Path model
2
R = 0.05

For testing H5b, we examine the indirect effect of ethical leadership (EthicaL) on voice
(Voice) through felt accountability (FAcct). The indirect path coefficient is 0.07, the effect
size is 0.03, the p-value is 0.03, and the standard error is 0.04. This supports the hypothesis
that accountability mediates the effect of ethical leadership on voice. To test H5c, we first
isolated the path EthicaL → FAcct→Perf by removing the path EthicaL→Voice and
performing the analysis. Examining the indirect effect of EthicaL on Performance through
FAcct, we observe an indirect path coefficient of 0.06, effect size of 0.01, and p-value of 0.064.
H5c is thus supported at a 90 per cent confidence interval.

Discussion
In this study, we sought to better understand how athletes’ perception of coaches’ ethical
leadership behaviour impacts their experience of accountability, voice and ultimately, their
performance. Consistent with previous literature on ethical leadership that examined the
impact of ethical leadership on individual level and team level outcomes (Bedi et al., 2016),
this study confirms the relationship between coaches’ ethical leadership and student-athlete
behavioural outcomes and performance. The results suggest that to the extent that a coach
is viewed by student-athletes as displaying high levels of ethical behaviour, athletes feel
more accountable and are more inclined to express their voice. Our results also show that
accountability and voice mediated the ethical leadership-performance relationship.
The implications of our findings and suggestions for future research are discussed below.
This study will contribute to the literature in two related ways. First, we used the context
of coaching student-athletes to explain how student-athletes’ perception of coaches’ ethical
leadership behaviour impacts their behaviour. This extends the ethical leadership literature
to student-athlete samples. Second, we examined how coaches’ ethical behaviour might
impact the individual processes of accountability, voice and performance.
Our findings demonstrate that the direct effect of ethical leadership on accountability
reflects the likelihood that higher levels of ethical leadership behaviour by coaches will
result in higher levels of student-athletes’ experience of accountability.
Emergence of accountability is dependent on the nature of the relationships in which
individuals are embedded (Dubnick, 2011; Burga and Rezania, 2017). While the leadership
literature often explains that followers’ behaviours can be understood as a consequence of
 the emergence of identity (Epitropaki et al., 2017), we use accountability theory to explain Coaches’
the impact of coaches’ ethical leadership on an athlete’s voice and performance. Holding ethical
followers accountable is embedded in the conceptualization of ethical leadership (Brown and leadership
Treviño, 2006). However, few studies have provided empirical support for the hypothesised
relationship in general and in the context of sport coaching in particular. Our study provides behaviour
evidence that perceived ethical leadership behaviour of coaches is associated with student-
athletes’ felt accountability. Through this felt accountability, student-athletes feel that
others are dependent on them and that in the overall, their efforts are important.
Accountability is an important concept in the context of athletic performance as it
involves reflection, learning and requires objective justification of one’s actions and their
consequences to an audience (Bovens, 2007). Examination of the coach-athlete relationship
under the lens of accountability is important, as accountability arrangements ensure that
individuals behave appropriately and in accordance with organisational norms and rules
(Frink and Klimoski, 1998). Our findings support the notion that felt-accountability
mediates the effect of ethical leadership on student-athlete performance and voice
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

behaviour. Student-athletes who feel accountable for their decisions and feel that their
teammates acknowledge their efforts related to the team, are more willing to express their
opinions. These student-athletes are also more likely to make positive recommendations
regarding issues affecting their team and to become involved in issues that affect the team’s
quality of life. Additionally, felt accountability plays an intervening role in performance.
Thus, accountability is well positioned as an explanatory construct for the influences of
ethical leadership behaviours on voice and performance. This is in line with the Lerner and
Tetlock (1999) assertion that accountability acts as a “natural bridging construct” (p. 256)
between the context and individuals in that context.
Looking at the impact of perceived ethical leadership behaviour on student-athlete voice,
we found that student-athletes are more likely to express voice behaviour when they perceive
their coach to be behaving in an ethical manner. Coaches’ ethical leadership behaviour
provides a fertile environment for voice behaviour. Even though an important understanding
in the voice literature is that this behaviour has positive performance effects (Walumbwa and
Schaubroeck, 2009), this construct has received little empirical attention in the sports coaching
literature. Further research could examine the impact of voice on other variables such as team
learning and individual development in the context of sports coaching.
These theoretical contributions demonstrate the potential of accountability as a
construct to explain the impact of leadership behaviours on psychological outcomes and
performance in the context of coaching student-athletes.

Practical implications
In addition to the theoretical implications, there are also practical implications resulting from
this study. First, ethical scandals and inappropriate conduct in high performance sports
organisations, where pressure for performance is a core element, impact all associate
stakeholders (Prior et al., 2013). Such scandals have spurred interest in the understanding of
the role of coaches in the management of sports. Coaches direct athletes’ behaviour and
measure performance to achieve results. In this complex undertaking, accountability
arrangements ensure that athletes behave appropriately and in accordance with
organisational norms and rules. Athletes should be aware of shared expectations and
believe that they will have to justify their conduct to others. They should feel accountable to
other members of the organisation and behave according to the expectations. The relevance of
accountability increases as pressures for performance intensify. Thoms et al. (2002) argued
that individuals in a group or on a team are motivated to succeed through accountability. This
study provides support for the hypothesis that coaches who behave ethically and whose
actions represent their words create an environment where a student-athlete feels accountable.
 SBM This is a powerful concept as it can positively impact individual and team success. The
findings suggest that one of the ways that coaches can impact student-athletes’ performance
is to demonstrate and model ethical conduct, and reward ethical acts. Not only does ethical
leadership impact performance directly, but our results demonstrate that it also leads to
higher accountability. Ethical leadership training for coaches may provide a foundation for
coaching practice and facilitate positive developmental outcomes for student-athletes.
Second, universities are a significant source of ethical education for students. The quest to
achieve excellence in sports through cultivating student-athletes further emphasises the
relevance of this inquiry for administrators. The findings of this study will support
administrators’ focus on ethical leadership in the recruitment and retention of coaches. Coaches
are under increasing pressure from administrators, parents and fans to achieve team success.
This influence should not perpetuate unethical behaviour as a means to achieve success. Rather,
this study supports the value of ethical leadership behaviour by coaches as it leads individual
student-athletes to success. Administrators should fundamentally support ethical leadership
behaviour in their coaches. Not only is it appropriate in the context of one of the mandates of
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

universities, but it also supports excellence in sports and the student-athlete experience.

Limitations and proposal for future studies

While the findings from this study support the hypotheses proposed, some limitations should
be noted. First, the study was only conducted in Ontario with the participant pool coming
from OUA student-athletes. It would be valuable to repeat this study in other contexts.
Second, participants in the survey did not identify their coach. We formed this process to
offer anonymity of data collection to the participants. Future studies could distribute the
survey via the coaches and keep track of the coaches. This would enable hierarchical analysis.
Third, we utilised an evaluation instrument to assess student-athlete performance that is
commonly used by Hockey Canada to rate athletes in their national team high-performance
programme. Further studies could consider alternative data collection strategies and the use
of publicly posted ratings of student-athletes.
Fourth, we had a response rate of 6 per cent. While the number of records returned was
sufficient for our analysis, the sample was not drawn as a random sample. Even though the
association between response rate and bias is very weak (Davern, 2013), possible response
bias may be present. Repeated studies are needed to provide further support for the finding
of this study.
While the findings of this study support the relationship between ethical leadership and
performance, further research at the individual and team level should also consider
contingencies of the relationship between ethical leadership and performance. It is important
to study if this relationship is stronger under some circumstances than under others. An
appreciation of institutional settings and coaching context is critical to understanding
effective coaching (Côté and Gilbert, 2009).
Further opportunities exist for research to continue to understand how a coach’s ethical
leadership can affect student-athlete performance. Such topics include motivation and stress
(Mageau and Vallerand, 2003), collective efficacy (Hampson and Jowett, 2014), commitment
(Rezania and Gurney, 2014), psychological contract (Barnhill, 2011, Rezania and Gurney,
2016), student-athlete well-being (Yukhymenko-Lescroart et al., 2015) and coach-athlete
compatibility (Kenow and Williams, 1999). Within these topics, the relationship between a
coach and student-athlete is a central theme, and the role of ethical leadership and
accountability merit further investigation.
In addition, although the importance of accountability for the effective operation of
groups and organisations is accepted, too much accountability may be counterproductive.
Student-athletes may resent increased accountability, which could, in turn, lead to a decline in
 motivation (Lerner and Tetlock, 1999). Further studies are needed to examine contingencies Coaches’
under which accountability positively impacts the outcomes of coaching. ethical
In conclusion, this study highlights the importance of ethical leadership behaviour by leadership
coaches for student-athletes’ performance and helps to explain this relationship by identifying
the role of accountability and voice as mediators. The results of this study should serve as an behaviour
impetus for future research relating ethical leadership to coaching outcomes in the context of
sports coaching.

References
Avey, J.B., Wernsing, T.S. and Palanski, M.E. (2012), “Exploring the process of ethical leadership: the
mediating role of employee voice and psychological ownership”, Journal of Business Ethics,
Vol. 107 No. 1, pp. 21-34.
Avolio, B.J., Walumbwa, F.O. and Weber, T.J. (2009), “Leadership: current theories, research, and future
directions”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 60, pp. 421-449.
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

Bandura, A. (1986), Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Barclay, D., Higgins, C. and Thompson, R. (1995), “The partial least squares (PLS) approach to causal
modeling: personal computer adoption and use as an illustration”, Technology Studies, Vol. 2
No. 2, pp. 285-309.
Barnhill, C.R. (2011), An Examination of the Antecedents and Outcomes of Psychological Contract
Violation of Intercollegiate Student-Athletes, Ohio State University, OH.
Bedi, A., Alpaslan, C.M. and Green, S. (2016), “A meta-analytic review of ethical leadership outcomes
and moderators”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 139 No. 3, pp. 517-536.
Bovens, M. (2007), “Analysing and assessing accountability: a conceptual framework”, European Law
Journal, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 447-468.
Breaux, D.M., Munyon, T.P., Hochwarter, W.A. and Ferris, G.R. (2009), “Politics as a moderator of the
accountability – job satisfaction relationship: evidence across three studies”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 307-326.
Brown, M.E. and Treviño, L.K. (2006), “Ethical leadership: a review and future directions”, The
Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 595-616.
Brown, M.E., Treviño, L.K. and Harrison, D.A. (2005), “Ethical leadership: a social learning perspective
for construct development and testing”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
Vol. 97 No. 2, pp. 117-134.
Burga, R. and Rezania, D. (2017), “Project accountability: an exploratory case study using actor–
network theory”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 1024-1036.
Burton, L. and Peachey, J.W. (2014), “Ethical leadership in intercollegiate sport: challenges,
opportunities, future directions”, Journal of Intercollegiate Sport, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 1-10.
Chelladurai, P. (2012), “Leadership and manifestations of sport”, in Murphy, S.M. (Ed.), The Oxford
Handbook of Sport and Performance Psychology, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
Chin, W.W. (1998), “The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling”, in
Marcoulides, G.A. (Ed.), Modern Methods for Business Research, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 294-336.
Côté, J. and Gilbert, W. (2009), “An integrative definition of coaching effectiveness and expertise”,
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 307-323.
Davern, M. (2013), “Nonresponse rates are a problematic indicator of nonresponse bias in survey
research”, Health Services Research, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 905-912.
De Hoogh, A. and Den Hartog, D. (2009), “Ethical leadership: the socially responsible use of power” in
Tjosvold, D. and Wisse, B. (Eds), Power and Interdependence in Organizations, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge and New York, NY, pp. 338-354.
 SBM Den Hartog, D.N. (2015), “Ethical leadership”, Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 409-434.
Drewe, S.B. (2000), “Coaches, ethics and autonomy”, Sport, Education and Society, Vol. 5 No. 2,
pp. 147-162.
Dubnick, M.J. (2011), “Move over Daniel: we need some ‘accountability space’”, Administration &
Society, Vol. 43 No. 6, pp. 704-716.
Dulaney, S. (2001), “Ethic in coaching”, The Sport Journal, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 3-5.
Dundon, T., Wilkinson*, A., Marchington, M. and Ackers, P. (2004), “The meanings and purpose of
employee voice”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 15 No. 6,
pp. 1149-1170.
Engelbrecht, A.S., Heine, G. and Mahembe, B. (2017), “Integrity, ethical leadership, trust and work
engagement”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 368-379.
Epitropaki, O., Kark, R., Mainemelis, C. and Lord, R.G. (2017), “Leadership and followership identity
processes: a multilevel review”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 104-129.
Erdogan, B., Sparrowe, R.T., Liden, R.C. and Dunegan, K.J. (2004), “Implications of organizational
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

exchanges for accountability theory”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 1,
pp. 19-45.
Ferris, G.R., Dulebohn, J.H., Frink, D.D., George-Falvy, J., Mitchell, T.R. and Matthews, L.M. (1997), “Job
and organizational characteristics, accountability, and employee influence”, Journal of
Managerial Issues, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 162-175.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Structural equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error: algebra and statistics”, Journal of Marketing Research (pre-1986), Vol. 18
No. 3, pp. 382-382.
Frese, M., Teng, E. and Wijnen, C.J. (1999), “Helping to improve suggestion systems: predictors of
making suggestions in companies”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, pp. 1139-1155.
Frink, D. and Klimoski, R. (1998), “Toward a theory of accountability in organizations and human
resources management”, in Ferris, G.R. (Ed.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources
Management, Vol. 16, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 1-51.
Frink, D.D. and Ferris, G.R. (1998), “Accountability, impression management, and goal setting in the
performance evaluation process”, Human Relations, Vol. 51 No. 10, pp. 1259-1283.
Gefen, D. and Straub, D. (2005), “A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-Graph: tutorial and
annotated example”, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 16 No. 1,
pp. 91-109.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C. and Sarstedt, M. (2016), A Primer on Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hall, A.T., Frink, D.D. and Buckley, M.R. (2017), “An accountability account: a review and synthesis of
the theoretical and empirical research on felt accountability”, Journal of Organizational
Behavior, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 204-224.
Hall, A.T., Frink, D.D., Ferris, G., Hochwarter, W.A., Kacmar, C.J. and Bowen, M.G. (2003),
“Accountability in human resources management”, in Schriesheim, C.A. and Neider, L.L. (Eds),
New Directions in Human Resource Management, IAP, pp. 29-63.
Hampson, R. and Jowett, S. (2014), “Effects of coach leadership and coach–athlete relationship on
collective efficacy”, Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 454-460.
Hardman, A.R. and Jones, C. (2010), The Ethics Of Sports Coaching, Routledge, Milton Park,
Abingdon, Oxon.
Hassan, S., Mahsud, R., Yukl, G. and Prussia, G.E. (2013), “Ethical and empowering leadership and
leader effectiveness”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 133-146.
Haynes, S.N., Richard, D. and Kubany, E.S. (1995), “Content validity in psychological assessment:
a functional approach to concepts and methods”, Psychological Assessment, Vol. 7 No. 3,
pp. 238-247.
 Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sinkovics, R.R. (2009), “The use of partial least squares path modeling in Coaches’
international marketing”, New Challenges to International Marketing, Emerald Group Publishing ethical
Limited, pp. 277-319.
leadership
Hochwarter, W.A., Kacmar, C.J. and Ferris, G.R. (2003), “Accountability at work: an examination of
antecedents and consequences”, paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society of
behaviour
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Orlando, FL.
Hochwarter, W.A., Ferris, G.R., Gavin, M.B., Perrewé, P.L., Hall, A.T. and Frink, D.D. (2007), “Political
skill as neutralizer of felt accountability – job tension effects on job performance ratings: a
longitudinal investigation”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 102
No. 2, pp. 226-239.
Hodges, N.J. and Franks, I.M. (2002), “Modelling coaching practice: the role of instruction and
demonstration”, Journal of Sports Sciences, Vol. 20 No. 10, pp. 793-811.
Horn, T.S. (2008), “Coaching effectiveness in the sport domain”, in Horn, T.S. (Ed.), Advances in Sport
Psychology, 3rd ed., Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL, pp. 239-268.
Huang, L. and Paterson, T.A. (2014), “Group ethical voice influence of ethical leadership and impact on
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

ethical performance”, Journal of Management, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 1157-1184.

Hulland, J. (1999), “Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: a review of four
recent studies”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 195-204.
Hums, M.A., Barr, C.A. and Gullion, L. (1999), “The ethical issues confronting managers in the sport
industry”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 51-66.
Johnson, S.K. (2009), “Do you feel what I feel? Mood contagion and leadership outcomes”, The
Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 814-827.
Jordan, J.S., Greenwell, T.C., Geist, A.L., Pastore, D.L. and Mahony, D.F. (2004), “Coaches’ perceptions of
conference code of ethics”, Physical Educator, Vol. 61 No. 3, pp. 131-145.
Kacmar, K.M., Carlson, D.S. and Harris, K.J. (2013), “Interactive effect of leaders’ influence tactics and
ethical leadership on work effort and helping behavior”, The Journal of Social Psychology,
Vol. 153 No. 5, pp. 577-597.
Kark, R., Van Dijk, D. and Vashdi, D.R. (2018), “Motivated or demotivated to be creative: the role of
self-regulatory focus in transformational and transactional leadership processes”, Applied
Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 1, pp. 186-224.
Kavussanu, M. and Roberts, G.C. (2001), “Moral functioning in sport: an achievement goal perspective”,
Journal of sport and Exercise Psychology, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 37-54.
Kavussanu, M. and Stanger, N. (2017), “Moral behavior in sport”, Current Opinion in Psychology,
Vol. 16, pp. 185-192.
Kenow, L. and Williams, J.M. (1999), “Coach-athlete compatibility and athlete’s perception of coaching
behaviors”, Journal of Sport Behavior, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 251-259.
Kock, N. (2012), “WarpPLS 5.0 User Manual”, ScriptWarp Systems, Laredo, TX.
Lee, M.J., Kim, S.S. and Kim, W. (2012), “Service employees’ organizational citizenship behaviors and
customer-oriented behaviors: an accountability theory perspective”, Journal of Foodservice
Business Research, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 335-361.
LePine, J.A. and Van Dyne, L. (1998), “Predicting voice behavior in work groups”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 6, pp. 853-868.
Lerner, J.S. and Tetlock, P.E. (1999), “Accounting for the effects of accountability”, Psychological
Bulletin, Vol. 125 No. 2, pp. 255-275.
Lewin, D. and Mitchell, D.J. (1992), “Systems of employee voice: theoretical and empirical perspectives”,
California Management Review, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 95-111.
Lord, R.G. and Maher, K.J. (2002), Leadership and Information Processing: Linking Perceptions and
Performance, Routledge.
 SBM McAllister, D.W., Mitchell, T.R. and Beach, L.R. (1979), “The contingency model for the selection of
decision strategies: an empirical test of the effects of significance, accountability, and
reversibility”, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 228-244.
McCullagh, P., Law, B. and Ste-Marie, D. (2012), “Modeling and performance”, in Murphy, S.M. (Ed.),
The Oxford Handbook of Sport and Performance Psychology, Oxford University Press, Oxford,
doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199731763.013.0013.
McNamee, M. (2010), The Ethics of Sports: A Reader, Routledge, Taylor & Francis, Milton Park,
Abingdon, Oxon.
Mageau, G.A. and Vallerand, R.J. (2003), “The coach–athlete relationship: a motivational model”,
Journal of Sports Science, Vol. 21 No. 11, pp. 883-904.
Mayer, D.M., Aquino, K., Greenbaum, R.L. and 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, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 151-171.
Mayer, D.M., Kuenzi, M., Greenbaum, R., Bardes, M. and Salvador, R.B. (2009), “How low does ethical
leadership flow? Test of a trickle-down model”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

Processes, Vol. 108 No. 1, pp. 1-13.

Miller, G.A., Galanter, E. and Pribram, K.H. (1960), Plans and the Structure of Behavior, Henry Holt
and Co., New York, NY.
Morgan, W.J. (2007), Ethics in Sport, Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL.
Morrison, E.W. and Phelps, C.C. (1999), “Taking charge at work: extrarole efforts to initiate workplace
change”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 403-419.
Mumford, M.D., Friedrich, T.L., Caughron, J.J. and Antes, A.L. (2009), “Leadership research: traditions,
developments, and current directions”, in Buchanan, D.A. and Bryman, A. (Eds), The Sage
Handbook of Organizational Research Methods, Sage, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 111-127.
Newman, A., Kiazad, K., Miao, Q. and Cooper, B. (2014), “Examining the cognitive and affective trust-
based mechanisms underlying the relationship between ethical leadership and organisational
citizenship: a case of the head leading the heart?”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 123 No. 1,
pp. 113-123.
Nunnally, J.C. and Bernstein, I. (1994), “The assessment of reliability”, Psychometric Theory, Vol. 3
No. 1, pp. 248-292.
Prior, D.D., O’Reilly, N., Mazanov, J. and Huybers, T. (2013), “The impact of scandal on sport
consumption: a conceptual framework for future research”, International Journal of Sport
Management and Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 188-211.
Rees, C., Alfes, K. and Gatenby, M. (2013), “Employee voice and engagement: connections and
consequences”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 24 No. 14,
pp. 2780-2798.
Rezania, D. and Gurney, R. (2014), “Building successful student-athlete coach relationships: examining
coaching practices and commitment to the coach”, SpringerPlus, Vol. 3 No. 1, p. 383, available at:
https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-383
Rezania, D. and Gurney, R. (2016), “The effect of coaching practices on psychological contract
fulfillment of student-athletes”, Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research, Vol. 71 No. 1,
pp. 21-29.
Roberts, J. (1991), “The possibilities of accountability”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 16
No. 4, pp. 355-368.
Roby, P.P. (2014), “Ethical leadership in college athletics”, Journal of Intercollegiate Sport, Vol. 7 No. 1,
pp. 35-39.
Ruiz-Palomino, P., Ruiz-Amaya, C. and Knörr, H. (2011), “Employee organizational citizenship behaviour:
the direct and indirect impact of ethical leadership”, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/
Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l’Administration, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 244-258.
 Sagas, M. and Wigley, B.J. (2014), “Gray area ethical leadership in the NCAA: the ethics of doing the Coaches’
wrong things right”, Journal of Intercollegiate Sport, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 40-57. ethical
Schlenker, B.R., Weigold, M.F. and Doherty, K. (1991), “Coping with accountability: self-identification leadership
and evaluative reckonings”.
Schlenker, B.R., Britt, T.W., Pennington, J., Murphy, R. and Doherty, K. (1994), “The triangle model of
behaviour
responsibility”, Psychological Review, Vol. 101 No. 4, pp. 632-652.
Schroeder, P.J. (2010), “Changing team culture: the perspectives of ten successful head coaches”,
Journal of Sport Behavior, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 63-88.
Shapiro, J.P. and Stefkovich, J.A. (2016), Ethical Leadership and Decision Making in Education: Applying
Theoretical Perspectives to Complex Dilemmas, Routledge, New York, NY.
Sims, H.P. Jr and Lorenzi, P. (1992), The New Leadership Paradigm: Social Learning and Cognition in
Organizations, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
Smoll, F.L. and Smith, R.E. (1989), “Leadership behaviors in sport: a theoretical model and research
paradigm”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 18, pp. 1522-1551.
Smoll, F.L., Smith, R.E., Curtis, B. and Hunt, E. (1978), “Toward a mediational model of coach-player
Downloaded by University Library At 03:48 19 June 2019 (PT)

relationships”, Research Quarterly. American Alliance for Health, Physical Education and
Recreation, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 528-541.
Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V.E., Chatelin, Y.-M. and Lauro, C. (2005), “PLS path modeling”, Computational
Statistics & Data Analysis, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 159-205.
Thoms, P., Dose, J.J. and Scott, K.S. (2002), “Relationships between accountability, job satisfaction, and
trust”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 307-323.
Van Dyne, L. and LePine, J.A. (1998), “Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: evidence of construct and
predictive validity”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 108-119.
Walumbwa, F.O. and Schaubroeck, J. (2009), “Leader personality traits and employee voice behavior:
mediating roles of ethical leadership and work group psychological safety”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 94 No. 5, pp. 1275-1286.
Walumbwa, F.O., Morrison, E.W. and Christensen, A.L. (2012), “Ethical leadership and group in-role
performance: the mediating roles of group conscientiousness and group voice”, The Leadership
Quarterly, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 953-964.
Walumbwa, F.O., Mayer, D.M., Wang, P., Wang, H., Workman, K. and Christensen, A.L. (2011),
“Linking ethical leadership to employee performance: the roles of leader–member exchange, self-
efficacy, and organizational identification”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, Vol. 115 No. 2, pp. 204-213.
Yukhymenko-Lescroart, M.A., Brown, M.E. and Paskus, T.S. (2015), “The relationship between ethical
and abusive coaching behaviors and student-athlete well-being”, Sport, Exercise, and
Performance Psychology, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 36-49.
Zakus, D.H., Malloy, D.C. and Edwards, A. (2007), “Critical and ethical thinking in sport management:
philosophical rationales and examples of methods”, Sport Management Review, Vol. 10 No. 2,
pp. 133-158.
Zhu, W., May, D.R. and Avolio, B.J. (2004), “The impact of ethical leadership behavior on employee
outcomes: the roles of psychological empowerment and authenticity”, Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 16-26.

Corresponding author
Davar Rezania can be contacted at: drezania@uoguelph.ca

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com