Public Relations Review 48 (2022) 102152

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Public Relations Review

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/pubrev

Full Length Article

The role of ethical leadership in building influence: Perspectives from

female public relations professionals
Juan Meng a, *, Marlene S. Neill b
a
Department of Advertising & Public Relations, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, United States
b
Department of Journalism, Public Relations & New Media, Baylor University, Waco, TX 76798, United States

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Practices of ethical leadership in public relations can be context-specific and they can influence organizational
Public relations effectiveness. By conducting a national survey, this study examines female public relations professionals’ per­
Ethical leadership spectives on ethical leadership. The results suggest that the majority of female professionals feel ready and
Gender
confident in providing ethics counseling as needed. Most importantly, the highest ranked public relations
Influence building
leaders’ ethical conduct help reinforce female professionals’ ethical practice. Female professionals indicate it is
Race
Ethical conduct necessary to use multiple strategies to build and enact influence as an ethical leader in public relations. Theo­
Influence strategies retical and practical implications are discussed.

1. Introduction Therefore, this research is designed to provide a detailed perspective of

Given the fact that many prominent ethical scandals happened in
virtually all types of organizations, it is obvious that emphasizing the
ethical dimension of leadership in public relations practice is not only
necessary but also urgent. The most recent 2020–2021 North American
Communication Monitor found six out of ten communication pro­
fessionals in Canada and the United States have encountered one or
more ethical challenges in their daily practice in the past year (Meng,
Reber, Berger, Gower, & Zerfass, 2021). Some recent research in public
relations leadership also confirmed the growing demands from stake­
holders for transparency of communication (e.g., Berger & Meng, 2014).
When stakeholders expect organizations to communicate directly with
external groups to address transparency, organizations shall prioritize
ethical leadership to implement strategies and actions to increase
transparency, both within and beyond the organization (Reber, 2014).
When leaders are one of the key sources of ethical guidance for em­
ployees, the demonstration of principled ethical behaviors through
personal actions, communication, and interpersonal relationships will
reinforce the importance of ethical conduct to followers (Brown &
Trevino, 2006).
A contribution to the ethical leadership literature in public relations
can be made by undertaking research that is both theoretically based
and practically capable of providing specific information about public
relations professionals’ readiness in providing ethics counseling.
ethical leadership as interpreted by public relations professionals in the
field. By positioning the role of public relations professionals with
particular emphasis on ethical advocacy, we assess whether public re­
lations professionals feel confident when there is a need to provide
ethics counseling on issues concerning public relations practice. As
related, we want to identify the influence of the highest ranked
communication leaders’ ethical conduct on followers’ perceived readi­
ness in providing ethics counseling.
More importantly, we argue that leadership is a process involving
influence (Yukl, 2002). Through ethical conduct, public relations
leaders create meaning for followers, support social functions and lead
constructive changes. Following this argument, we further assess how
building influence relates to public relations professionals’ adoption of
strategies when providing ethics counseling to the senior leadership
team within the organization. We hope to uncover the role of ethical
leadership in supporting public relations professionals to overcome
situational hurdles when building and enacting influence. By doing so,
we contribute to the research on ethical leadership by presenting a set of
principled ethical behavior viewpoints from public relations pro­
fessionals and their strategies to address some of the ethical issues that
arise in public relations practice. Our research also helps broaden the
understanding of the role of influence building in effective ethical
counseling in leadership situations, with an ultimate goal of achieving
leadership success and ethical public relations practice. Thus, we

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: jmeng@uga.edu (J. Meng), Marlene_Neill@baylor.edu (M.S. Neill).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2022.102152
Received 25 October 2020; Received in revised form 3 January 2022; Accepted 17 January 2022
0363-8111/© 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
J. Meng and M.S. Neill
conclude our research with strong theoretical and practical implications.
2. Literature review
2.1. Ethical leadership in public relations
As addressed by Bandura (1977, 1986) in social learning theory,
ethical leaders shall hold the standards of credible role models to
persuade their subordinates and followers. Moberg (2000) further
elaborated the ideal characteristics of an ethical role model and
addressed three key aspects, including demographic similarity, rele­
vancy, and attainability. Thus, leaders influence the ethical conduct of
followers via modeling as most individuals look outside themselves for
ethical guidance (Brown, Trevino, & Harrison, 2005). Brown and asso­
ciates’ (2005) systematically conceptualize and develop the ethical
leadership construct by using social learning theory as the theoretical
basis to explain why and how ethical leaders influence their followers.
Based on their research, ethical leaders are seen as honest and trust­
worthy advisors. Ethical leaders are fair and principled decision-makers.
Simultaneously, they behave ethically in their personal and professional
lives.
Based on this conceptual groundwork, Brown and associates (2005)
took a more descriptive approach to define ethical leadership. According
to Brown and associates (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). At the descriptive
level, ethical leaders are thought to be virtuous, honest and trustworthy
(Baker, 2008). Ethical leaders make fair and principled decisions that
bring constructive changes to people, the organization, and the broader
society. In addition, ethical leaders are expected to behave ethically in
their personal lives and pass that consistency from their personal lives
into their professional career. Brown and associates (2005), Brown and
Trevino (2006) characterize the above-mentioned personal traits as the
moral person aspect of ethical leadership.
At the same time, since both leaders and managers are engaged in
influencing people toward goal accomplishment (Northouse, 2018),
there is also the moral manager aspect of ethical leadership (Brown et al.,
2005). The moral manager aspect depicts ethical leaders’ proactive ef­
forts to communicate an ethics and values message, intentionally
demonstrate role modeling of ethical behavior, and use appropriate
rewards and punishments to hold followers accountable for ethical
conduct (Brown et al., 2005; Trevino, Brown, & Hartman, 2003). Brown
and associates (2005), Brown and Trevino (2006) argued that the moral
manager aspect of ethical leadership highlights the leader’s proactive
efforts to influence followers through ethical conduct and consideration.
According to Brown and Trevino (2006), ethical leaders always walk
the talk as “they practice what they preach and are proactive role models
for ethical conduct” (p. 597). This perspective of social learning theory is
consistent with virtue ethics. Baker (2008) wrote that “inherent to the
virtue ethics perspective” is the role of moral exemplars or role models
who teach others how to live moral lives (p. 239; Pojman, 2005).
Through their example, protégés learn virtues or desirable character
traits (Baker, 2008; Borden, 2019). When applying virtue ethics to the
profession of public relations, Baker (2008) identified eight desirable
virtues including humility, truth, transparency, respect for others, care,
authenticity, equity and social responsibility. As for vices, Baker (2008)
cited arrogance, deceit, manipulation and disregard for others. Hurst­
house (1999) suggested that “not only does each virtue generate a
prescription – do what is honest, charitable, generous – but each vice a
prohibition – do not do what is dishonest, uncharitable, mean” (p. 36).
For these reasons, Hursthouse (1999) suggested that if a virtuous person
is unsure what to do, he or she should seek out people who are kind,
honest, just and wiser and ask them for advice.
The moral manager aspect of ethical leadership has urged both
2
Public Relations Review 48 (2022) 102152
industry leaders and scholars in public relations to advocate for the
important ethical role public relations professionals demonstrate and set
to guide ethical decision making and actions (e.g., Meng & Berger, 2019;
Neill, 2016a, 2016b). Public relations scholars stress that public re­
lations professionals are the active agents to carry a critical role to
provide ethics counseling to senior organizational leaders in their or­
ganizations, which is a role sometimes referred to as an “ethical con­
science” (e.g., Bivins, 1992; Bowen, 2008; 2009; Fitzpatrick, 1996;
Fitzpatrick & Gauthier, 2001; Neill & Drumwright, 2012; Ryan & Mar­
tinson, 1983). This perspective of ethics research in public relations has
developed the strong argument that in the workplace public relations
professionals should be a central source of ethical conduct and guidance.
Research has suggested that public relations professionals’ role in
demonstrating ethical leadership and proving ethics counsel shall
encompass both the concerns of various stakeholders and communica­
tion about values (Bowen, 2008; Neill, 2016a, 2016b; Neill & Drum­
wright, 2012). Prior research has examined perceptions of preparedness
to provide ethics counsel among public relations professionals in general
compared to those who are accredited (Neill, 2016a, 2016b) and young
professionals (Neill & Weaver, 2017). These studies revealed that
accredited professionals had the highest confidence in their preparation,
followed by public relations professionals in general and young pro­
fessionals (Neill, 2016a, 2016b; Neill & Weaver, 2017). Perceptions of
preparedness are tied to moral efficacy or “confidence in one’s abilities”
(May, Luth & Schwoerer, 2014, p. 71). Consequently, moral efficacy is
an essential characteristic for public relations leaders to exercise the
moral courage that is necessary as an ethics counselor (May, Chan,
Hodges, & Avolio, 2003).
The role of acting as an ethical conscience or counselor in public
relations is consistent with the responsibility of issues management in
public relations (Bowen, 2004). Issues management involves several
steps including identifying issues before a crisis develops, analyzing the
issue, developing strategies and action plans (Wilcox, Cameron, &
Reber, 2015). Drawing on complexity theory, Liu and Pompper (2012)
identified key factors that should be considered in crisis and issues
management when complex issues of culture, ethnicity, and/or race are
involved. Their findings suggested that several distinctive communica­
tion factors such as historical consequences, emotional intelligence and
media dynamics should be considered to build a complexity manage­
ment approach to address issues and crises that involve culture,
ethnicity, and/or race (Liu & Pompper, 2012). With the purpose of
preventing crises and protecting organizational reputation (Wartick &
Rude, 1986), public relations professionals serve in a leadership role by
providing ethics counseling. The second responsibility associated with
ethical leadership in public relations is values communication or that of
a core values role (Lee, Heath, & Bowen, 2006). Lee et al. (2006)
described this role as instilling “an overarching ethical organizational
culture”, determining the organization’s values, and then rewarding
those who adhere to those values (p. 19). Research in this area suggests
it is important to develop communication strategies and programs to
promote an organization’s core values. It is even more critical to actually
routinely disseminate those messages through various internal
communication channels to promote the core values of the organization
(Neill, 2016a, 2016b; Sison, 2010).
2.2. Defining & achieving influence through ethical leadership
Previously, researchers have found that public relations pro­
fessionals tend to associate influence as “holding a seat at the decision
making table” (Berger & Reber, 2006, p. 17), a reference to that coveted
seat within the C-suite. Public relations professionals also described
influence as “having a voice” or “being listened to,” and “the ability to
convince others of your point of view” (Berger & Reber, 2006, p. 18).
Scholars have previously found that public relations leaders tend to have
more influence when issues are perceived as falling within their areas of
expertise, such as crisis communication, media relations and reputation
J. Meng and M.S. Neill
management (Bowen, 2009; Neill, 2015). In a previous study, Moss,
Warnaby, and Newman (2000) found that public relations executives’
access to the C-Suite and influence are associated with the personal
credibility and trust of the individual professional as well as others’
perceptions of the quality of the professional’s work and expertise. In
addition, Neill (2015) found that public relations efforts were not
influential or involved in strategic decisions when others did not follow
protocol or when issues were perceived as falling within another de­
partment’s area of expertise.
2.2.1. Influence strategies
When studying the various influence strategies available to public
relations professionals and the preferences of leaders, Berger and Reber
(2006) categorized these strategies as alpha or sanctioned tactics, and
omega or unsanctioned tactics. Some of the alpha tactics included rational
approaches such as conducting research or using case studies, recruiting
allies or forming coalitions, being persistent and assertive or pressure,
and utilizing emotional or legitimacy appeals (Berger & Reber, 2006).
Referencing research or case studies are considered informational
sources of power; allies and coalitions are classified as relational ap­
proaches (Berger & Reber, 2006). Legitimacy appeals refer to what is
legal or right, and references to the organization’s core values. Omega
tactics include activities such as leaking information to external stake­
holders, planting rumors, sabotaging implementation of a decision, and
serving as a whistleblower (Berger & Reber, 2006).
Previous research also identified the differences between men and
women in their choice of influence strategies (Aldoory, Reber, Berger, &
Toth, 2008). The top two influence strategies preferred by both men and
women included the use of ethics codes and appeals (i.e. legitimacy
appeals) based on honesty and integrity (39.7 % men vs. 40.9 %
women); and facts, rational arguments or case studies (34.9 % men vs.
44.2 % women) (Aldoory et al., 2008). However, men were more likely
to attempt to influence senior management through direct approaches
such as “confront, combat, challenge or oppose” while women used
terms such as “express, discussion, voice concerns” to describe their
attempts to influence supervisors (Aldoory et al., 2008, p. 744). Neill
and Barnes (2018) found that both male and female senior public re­
lations professionals preferred influence strategies that were collabora­
tive in nature such as asking questions, presenting alternatives, and
making recommendations. However, men were more likely to confront
senior managers directly. Overall, men preferred informational sources
of power including research and case studies, while women preferred
relational sources such as allies and coalitions (Neill & Barnes, 2018).
However, in her study on influence strategies, O’Neil (2004) determined
that gender was not a predictor for any of six influence tactics and
concluded that other variables such as power may explain any differ­
ences in influence tactics preferred by women and men.
Unfortunately, influence strategies used by women of color have not
received significant research attention in public relations scholarship.
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2020) reported that 66.4 % of the
public relations and fundraising managers are women. In terms of the
ethnic makeup, the profession includes 91 % white, 7.6 % Latin­
o/Hispanic, 4.3 % African American, and 2.3 % Asian American. Some
scholars have identified potential barriers that could impact the ability
of women of color to provide ethics counsel and their choice of influence
strategies. Through interviews with African American professionals,
Cose (1993) identified issues regarding others’ low expectations and
presumption of failure (Grunig, Toth, & Toth, 2008). Similarly, Oetzel
(2009) referred to this reality as subjugated ascriptions or “identities
given to others that put them in a lower or inferior position compared to
one’s own group” (p. 75). In a study with public relations managers,
Pompper (2012) found women of color were less comfortable accessing
formal networks inside their organizations, which are necessary for in­
fluence building.
Therefore, based on these normative ethical roles embedded in
public relations leaders as well as the strategies that have been widely
3
Public Relations Review 48 (2022) 102152
adopted to establish influence, it is appropriate and necessary to study
exemplars to understand the value of ethical leadership to effective and
influential public relations practice. It is also important to understand
the readiness of public relations professionals in providing ethical
counseling and the strategies they could use to establish and enact their
influence as a central source of ethical conduct and guidance. Specif­
ically, we proposed the following four research questions to guide our
research:
RQ1: How prepared do female public relations professionals feel to
provide ethics counseling to senior organizational leaders?
RQ2: To what degree does top communication leaders’ principled
ethical behaviors reinforce female public relations professionals’ read­
iness in providing ethics counseling?
RQ3: How do female public relations professionals define having
influence as a leader in communication?
RQ4: What strategies do female public relations professionals use to
establish and enact their influence as active agents in providing ethics
counseling?
3. Research method
3.1. Online survey and sampling design
A national online survey by using the audience database of Qualtrics
and its online survey platform was employed to recruit participants for
our study. Specifically, we designed our sample recruitment to include
only full-time female professionals working in public relations,
communication management and other related areas in the communi­
cation profession as women hold roughly 75 % of the PR jobs in the
industry (FitzPatrick, 2013). With the fact that men still occupy
approximately 80 % of the senior leadership roles in public relations and
communication in various types of organizations (FitzPatrick, 2013), we
were particularly interested in investigating female professionals’ per­
ceptions on ethical leadership, their preparedness to provide ethics
counseling, as well as their strategies to build their influence through
ethical conduct.
In addition, in order to obtain a more diverse national sample of
female public relations professionals, we pre-specified three key de­
mographic parameters (i.e., leadership position, years of professional
experience, and ethnicity) as part of our sampling strategies. Specif­
ically, the leadership position quota requires the final usable sample
must have at least 100 respondents (20.0 %) to self-identify themselves
having a defined leadership role. For years of professional experience,
we specified three categories: about 40 % of respondents having up to
five years of experience in communication, 30 % having 6–10 years of
professional experience, and 30 % having more than ten years of pro­
fessional experience in communication.
The last quota we used is ethnicity in order to recruit more qualified
minority groups in the sample that will help understand the perceptions
and challenges of women of color in the profession. In order to reflect a
true picture of the skewed racial representation in the public relations
industry, our quota specification on ethnicity is largely based on the
ethnic makeup of the industry itself. A 2018 Harvard Business Review
analysis confirmed public relations remains a majority-White profession
with 87.9 % being white (Chitkara, 2018). The most recent labor force
statistics released by The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2020) shows
the racial and ethnic makeup of the public relations industry include
91.0 % white, 7.6 % Hispanic or Latino, 4.3 % African American, and 2.3
% Asian American. It is disheartening to see the change is minimal
despite the fact that the industry is mandating more diversity and in­
clusion practice. Therefore, in order to collect the responses and per­
ceptions from more minority women, we made extra efforts in
oversampling by stretching our ethnicity quota to have 20 % African
American and 10 % of other minorities (i.e., Asian Americans, Hispanics,
Native Americans, Multiracial and other). By reducing and controlling
the actual percentage of white women in our sample to 70 %, we
J. Meng and M.S. Neill
intentionally set the spotlight on the concern of diversity and inclusion
facing the industry. We also believe this purposive stratified sampling
strategy will leverage the comparative power between the white ma­
jority and color minority in our sample.
3.2. Sample profiles
The final survey sample consists of 512 valid respondents who are
full-time female public relations and communication professionals in the
United States. By using a series of screening questions, we were able to
confirm that recruited respondents in our survey are qualified commu­
nication professionals performing a major communication role in their
current position. The top three areas of their job functions in commu­
nication are: 1) marketing, brand and consumer communication (n =
118; 23.0 %), 2) overall communication (generalist) (n = 103; 20.1 %),
and 3) community relations (n = 100; 19.5 %).
As pre-specified in our sampling demographic quotas, our final
sample included a reasonably balanced mix of ethnic groups reflecting
the skewed racial representation in the public relations industry (Chit­
kara, 2018; The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2020). However, at the
same time, the efforts we made to recruit more underrepresented mi­
nority women have leveraged the comparative capacity across different
ethnic groups as explained in our sampling design. Therefore, the final
sample include 360 white female professionals (70.3 %), 100 African
Americans (19.5 %) and 52 other minority groups (10.2 %). Among the
other minority groups, we had 4.5 % Hispanics, 2.7 % Asian Americans,
2.1 % multiracial, and 0.8 % Native Americans.
The sample showed a normal span in terms of years of professional
experience. We had 41.0 % of respondents having up to 5 years of
experience in communication (n = 210), 29.9 % (n = 153) having 6–10
years of experience, and 29.1 % (n = 149) having more than 10 years of
experience in the field. Related to years of professional experience, we
asked respondents to share the status of their leadership role, which asks
about the reporting levels between herself and the highest ranked PR/
communication leader in her current organization. Results indicated 8.2
% of respondents (n = 42) served as the top leader in public relations
and communication in their current organization. We had 39.1 % of
them (n = 200) who reported directly to the top communication leader,
i.e., one reporting level. The rest of the sample (n = 270 or 52.7 %)
reported staying at the lower level of the reporting hierarchy, i.e., two
and plus reporting levels. The sample profile analysis does not only
confirm the high quality of the sample but also meets our goal to recruit
a diverse and balanced sample with mixed experience and leadership
roles.
4. Results
4.1. Professionals’ preparedness to provide ethics counseling
The purpose of our first research question is to identify the pre­
paredness to provide ethics counseling to senior organizational leaders
as perceived by surveyed female public relations professionals. As part
of the research design, we asked female professionals whether they feel
prepared to provide counsel on ethical issues related to public relations
and communication to senior leaders in the organization as needed.
Their perceived readiness was assessed by their self-rating on a seven-
point Likert-type scale with “1 = not prepared at all” to “7 = well
prepared.”
Descriptive results showed that overall female professionals feel they
are ready to provide ethics counseling on issues related to public re­
lations and communication when needed (M = 5.01, S.D. = 1.48). The
percentage analysis also confirmed that almost three out of four female
professionals (72.5 %) indicated that they feel prepared to provide
leadership and ethics counseling on issues related to public relations
and/or communication to senior leadership team as needed.
When diving deeper into the data analysis as related to other key
4
Public Relations Review 48 (2022) 102152
demographic variables, we found that the nature of female pro­
fessionals’ job positions along the hierarchical reporting line is a major
factor affecting female professionals’ perceived readiness or confidence
in providing ethics counseling. Female respondents who identify
themselves as the top communication leader in their organization (or zero
reporting level) in our sample are the most confident group who are ready
to provide ethics counseling (M = 5.60, S.D. = 1.17), followed by re­
spondents with one reporting level (M = 5.16, S.D. = 1.46). Respondents
with two or more reporting levels feel less prepared to do so (M = 4.80, S.
D. = 1.50). Mean comparison confirmed significant group differences
along the hierarchical reporting line. When female professionals have to
go through more reporting levels in their current position, they feel less
confident in demonstrating the function of ethics counseling (F-value =
7.21, d.f. = 2, p < .01).
Such confidence gap is also found between white women and women
of color, but reversely. White women are less confident or feel less
prepared (M = 4.90, S.D. = 1.51) to provide leadership and ethics
counseling to their organization’s senior leadership team, if compared
with women of color (F-value = 3.25, d.f. = 2, p < .05). Specifically,
female African American professionals in our sample are the most pre­
pared and confident group who are ready to provide leadership and
ethics counseling based on their own evaluation (M = 5.33, S.D. = 1.33)
while other minority women are second confident group (M = 5.06, S.D.
= 1.43).
4.2. Top communication leaders’ principled ethical behaviors
In addition to understanding professionals’ perceived readiness in
providing ethics counseling, it is beneficial to understand their
communication leaders’ ethical behaviors. As we mentioned earlier in
our literature, leaders should be a key source of ethical guidance for
employees in the workplace. Thus, the purpose of our second research
question is to assess top communication leaders’ ethical conduct and to
identify whether leaders’ ethical behaviors generate any positive influ­
ence on professionals’ readiness and boost their confidence in providing
ethics counseling.
By adopting the Ethical Leadership Scale (ELS) developed by Brown
et al. (2005), we asked female professionals to evaluate the ethical
conduct of their highest ranked public relations or communication
leader based on their working relationship with the leader in the
workplace. We deliberately selected seven items out of the ten-item
instrument of ELS as these seven items “were rated significantly more
likely to reflect the domain of ethical leadership than consideration”
(Brown et al., 2005, p. 125). The content of the seven items represent
principled behaviors in ethical leadership.
The rating results from surveyed professionals indicated that top
communication leaders received a relatively high score on two princi­
pled behaviors, which include conducting his/her personal life in an
ethical manner (M = 5.22, S.D. = 1.60) and setting an example of how to
do things the right way in terms of ethics (M = 5.16, S.D. = 1.71). Be­
sides these top two exemplars, a second group of ethical behaviors with
mediocre performance were identified. Those were rated just above 5.0,
based on a seven-point Likert-type scale. They include behaviors like
making fair and balanced decisions (M = 5.07, S.D. = 1.67), defining
success not just by results but also the way that they are obtained (M =
5.07, S.D. = 1.64), and discussing business ethics or values with em­
ployees (M = 5.01, S.D. = 1.76). There are two principled behaviors
which received relatively low ratings based on professionals’ evaluation
scores, including behaviors such as asking “what is the right thing to do”
when making decisions (M = 4.98, S.D. = 1.75) and disciplining em­
ployees who violate ethical standards (M = 4.81, S.D. = 1.72).
Similarly, Table 1 displays female professionals’ evaluations of top
communication leaders’ ethical conduct in percentages of agreement.
The decrease in percentages is similar to their overall rating trend on
leaders’ principled ethical behaviors as explained earlier. The numbers
also reveal the behaviors that have been less endorsed (showing as
J. Meng and M.S. Neill Public Relations Review 48 (2022) 102152

Table 1
The evaluations of the highest ranked communication leaders and their ethical behaviors.
The highest ranked communication leader in my organization… Agreement Neutral Disagreement

Conducts his/her personal life in an ethical manner 68.2 % 18.0 % 13.9 %

Sets an example of how to do things the right way in terms of ethics 67.0 % 16.0 % 17.0 %
Makes fair and balanced decisions 65.8 % 17.8 % 16.4 %
Defines success not just by results but also the way that they are obtained 65.8 % 17.8 % 16.4 %
Discusses business ethics or values with employees 65.6 % 13.3 % 21.1 %
Asks “what is the right thing to do?” when making decisions 63.9 % 16.6 % 19.5 %
Disciplines employees who violate ethical standards 59.6 % 19.9 % 20.5 %

Note: all items were evaluated based on a seven-point Likert-type scale with “1 = never” and “7 = always.” The scale for all items was recoded and re-grouped into
categorical variables with disagreement representing scale points of 1–3, neutral representing scale point of 4, and agreement representing sale points of 5− 7. Items in
this table were sorted by the percentage of agreement.

“disagreement” in percentages) by top communication leaders. For
example, our respondents don’t think their top leaders have put suffi­
cient efforts in discussing business ethics or values with group members
nor coming up with the right solutions when there are employees who
violate ethical standards.
It is critical to mention that our results indicated the perceptual gaps
on top communication leaders’ principled ethical behaviors existing
among the ethnic groups in our sample. There is a significantly divided
viewpoint between African American women and other minority
women. African American women (n = 100, 19.5 %) gave the lowest
ratings on their top communication leaders’ principled ethics conduct
while other minority women (n = 52, 10.2 %) rated their top leaders the
highest on five out of seven items. White women (n = 360, 70.3 %) rated
their highest ranked communication leaders consistently between 4.80
and 5.26 on all principled ethical behaviors. The content of the two
items that received relatively low scores from other minority women
represents the actions of setting ethical examples as role models and
asking “what is the right thing to do” when making decisions. Table 2
displays the statistical gaps across three ethnic groups.
4.3. The impact of leaders’ principled ethical conduct on perceived
readiness
Reliability analysis of the seven principled ethical behaviors showed
all inter-item correlations are significant (p < .01). Factor analysis with
the approach of principal component analysis without any rotation
revealed a single factor of ethical leadership with an eigenvalue of 4.62,
explaining 65.97 % of variance in the sample. Cronbach’s alpha on
standardized items is 0.94, indicating strong internal reliability of the
factor itself. The grand mean of ethical leadership scale is 5.05 (F = 7.69,
d.f. = 6, p < .01). Based on the consistent and positive results of factor
analysis and reliability, we continued with a linear regression analysis.
The regression result confirmed a strong and positive influence of top
communication leaders’ principled ethical conduct on followers’
perceived readiness of providing ethics counseling (r = .24, F = 31.48, d.
f. = 1, p < .001). Such finding further confirmed the role of ethical
conduct as demonstrated by leaders will reinforce followers’ confidence
and readiness when there is a need to provide ethics counseling on issues
related to public relations and communication.
4.4. The meaning of having influence as a leader in public relations
As mentioned earlier in our literature review, leadership involves
influence (Yukl, 2002). Ethical leaders create meaning for members,
organizations and the society by generating influence in diverse ways
and using “an equally diverse set of influence resources” (Berger &
Reber, 2006, p. 19). The third research question addresses the meaning
of having influence as an ethical leader in public relations by our sur­
veyed female professionals. Their interpretation naturally links to our
fourth research question related to how to establish and enact your in­
fluence as an ethical leader in public relations.
In our survey, we asked female professionals at all levels of institu­
tional leadership to define the meaning of having influence as an ethical
leader in public relations or communication. We developed and built a
list of 12 empowerment-and-influence items based on some recent in­
dustry research (e.g., Catalyst, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007; Zenger &
Folkman, 2012) and scholarly research on power and leadership (e.g.,
Berger & Reber, 2006; Eagly, 2005; Ely, 1995; O’Neil, 2003, 2004). We
asked the professionals to rate the 12 items on a seven-point Likert-type
scale with “1 = not important at all” and “7 = extremely important.”
Based on the ratings of our surveyed professionals, the top-5 char­
acteristics describing the nature of having influence as an ethical public
relations leader include: 1) being seen as a trusted advisor (M = 5.92, S.
D. = 1.33); 2) having career advancement opportunities (M = 5.87, S.D.
= 1.36); 3) having a voice that colleagues and co-workers listen to (M =
5.81, S.D. = 1.43); 4) demonstrating expertise (M = 5.79, S.D. = 1.36);
and 5) cultivating a reputation for effectiveness that exceeds expecta­
tions (M = 5.77, S.D. = 1.38).
Our frequency analysis based on percentages showed similar pat­
terns. Surveyed professionals reached high percentages of agreement on
the same items featuring the meaning of having influence as an ethical
leader in public relations. The top characteristics define the meaning of
having influence as an ethical leader in public relations include being a
trusted advisor (85.7 %), having career advancement opportunities
(84.0 %), demonstrating expertise (83.0 %), having a voice being heard
(82.8 %), and cultivating a reputation for effectiveness (81.6 %). The full
list of influence measures were presented in Table 3 and organized by
the sorted results of percentage analysis.
More significantly, results of mean comparisons by race showed that

Table 2
The evaluations of top communication leaders’ principled ethical behaviors varied by race.
The highest ranked communication leader in my organization… Other minorities (n ¼ 52) White (n ¼ 360) Black (n ¼ 100) F-value

Conducts his/her personal life in an ethical manner 5.62 5.25 4.89 3.82*
Defines success not just by results but also the way that they are obtained 5.44 5.11 4.73 3.64*
Makes fair and balanced decisions 5.38 5.13 4.71 3.48*
Sets an example of how to do things the right way in terms of ethics 5.06 5.26 4.84 2.48
Discusses business ethics or values with employees 5.35 5.02 4.83 1.48
Disciplines employees who violate ethical standards 5.17 4.80 4.68 1.46
Asks “what is the right thing to do?” when making decisions 4.85 5.04 4.85 .63

Note: * p < .05. All item were measured by using a seven-point Likert-type scale with “1 = never” and “7 = always.” Items in this table were sorted by the F-value in an
ANOVA showing the variation between sample means.

5
J. Meng and M.S. Neill Public Relations Review 48 (2022) 102152

Table 3 (M = 6.10, S.D. = 1.26), being seen as a trusted advisor (M = 6.10, S.D.
Female professionals define the meaning of having influence as an ethical leader = 1.19), and gaining visibility through senior leadership positions (M =
from multiple perspectives. 6.02, S.D. = 1.18). At the same time, professionals in this ethnic group
Having influence as an ethical PR leader means… Agreement Mean (S. believe that having influence will bring better career advancement op­
D.) portunities to them (M = 5.98, S.D. = 1.21) and can cultivate a repu­
Being seen as a trusted advisor 85.7 % 5.92 tation for effectiveness (M = 5.90, S.D. = 1.40). One interesting result
(1.33) reflected in this group of professionals is they value the “take-care” ac­
Having career advancement opportunities 84.0 % 5.87 tions of supporting, consulting and rewarding (M = 5.90, S.D. = 1.19)
(1.36)
more than the “take-charge” actions of delegating, problem solving and
Demonstrating expertise 83.0 % 5.79
(1.36) influencing upward (M = 5.77, S.D. = 1.50), which is different from the
Having a voice that colleagues and co-workers listen to 82.8 % 5.81 overall rating across the entire sample as displayed in Table 3 earlier.
(1.43) Similar to what we found in first research question when asking the
Cultivating a reputation for effectiveness that exceeds 81.6 % 5.77 readiness of providing ethics counseling, professionals’ job positions
expectations (1.38)
Gaining visibility through senior leadership positions 81.1 % 5.70
along the leadership line showed a significant impact on their inter­
(1.37) pretation of having influence as an ethical leader in public relations.
Having competitive financial compensation 80.7 % 5.76 Female professionals at the lower reporting levels rated all influence
(1.45) characteristics higher than those who have made to the top. For
Advocating for other women’s opportunities 80.5 % 5.77
example, women having two or more reporting levels perceive getting
(1.46)
Performing in high-visibility assignments 79.7 % 5.60 more career advancement opportunities (M = 6.01, F = 5.30, d.f. = 2, p
(1.40) < .01) and being seen as a trusted advisor (M = 5.98, F = 3.44, d.f. = 2, p
Performing more take-charge actions of delegating, 78.9 % 5.62 < .01) as their immediate needs to build influence and establish
problem solving and influencing upward (1.40) reputation.
Developing informal relationships with influential 77.5 % 5.45
colleagues and clients (1.41)
Performing more take-care actions of supporting, 74.2 % 5.44 4.5. Using strategies to build and enact influence
consulting and rewarding (1.45)

Note: all items were evaluated based on a seven-point Likert-type scale with “1 = RQ4 further investigates the strategies female professionals have
not important at all” and “7 = extremely important.” The scale for all items was used to establish and exercise their influence in order to provide ethics
recoded and re-grouped into categorical variables with agreement representing counseling to senior leadership team within the organization. Based on
sale points of 5− 7. Items in this table were sorted by the percentage of the ratings of nine potential strategies we adapted from some recent
agreement. industry research regarding influence building (e.g., Catalyst, 2005,
2007), the most used and valued strategy is to invite questions and build
up a dialogue (M = 5.45, S.D. = 1.49), with the goal that the issue can be
Table 4 discussed and solved. Surveyed female professionals think the
Racial differences identified when evaluating the meaning of having influence. building-a-dialogue strategy is a positive approach to establish influence
Having influence as an ethical Other White Black F- and obtain desired outcomes. The strategy that receives the second
PR leader means… minorities (n women women value highest rating score is referring to the core values of the organization
= 52) (n = (n =
and addressing what is right or lawful (M = 5.23, S.D. = 1.51) while
360) 100)
providing ethics and leadership counseling. Another common strategy
Performing more take-care 5.90 5.52 4.96 8.85**
adopted by female professionals is to provide scenarios, discuss potential
actions of supporting,
consulting and rewarding consequences, and provide alternative solutions (M = 5.19, S.D. = 1.54).
Gaining visibility through 6.02 5.77 5.30 6.28** Female professionals also tend to use research results such as case
senior leadership positions studies, benchmark reports, and surveys (M = 5.15, S.D. = 1.58) to
Developing informal 5.69 5.53 5.05 5.44** provide persuasive and scientific evidence, which is consistent with the
relationships with
research findings of Neill and Barnes (2018).
influential colleagues and
clients Female professionals’ ratings also reflect some less-used strategies,
Demonstrating expertise 6.10 5.84 5.46 4.64** including raising concerns of stakeholders (M = 4.70, S.D. = 1.72),
Having career advancement 5.98 5.93 5.50 4.27** recruiting allies or forming coalitions (M = 4.74, S.D. = 1.65), and
opportunities
getting buy-in from team members (M = 4.83, S.D. = 1.72). Pro­
Cultivating a reputation for 5.90 5.85 5.42 4.06*
effectiveness that exceeds
fessionals indicated they do use personal experience with a combined
expectations strategy of emotional appeals (M = 5.07, S.D. = 1.59). The least used
Performing more take-charge 5.77 5.69 5.29 3.51* strategy is the direct approach to apply pressure or show persistence (M
actions of delegating, = 4.88, S.D. = 1.57) as indicated by women.
problem solving and
When comparing the likelihood of using influence-building strate­
influencing upward
Being seen as a trusted advisor 6.10 5.98 5.62 3.36* gies by race, women in other minority groups continue leading on the
rating scores for most items. They are in favor of three strategies
Note: * p < .05; ** p < .01. All item were measured by using a seven-point Likert-
particularly, which include inviting questions and create a dialogue (M
type scale with “1=strongly disagree” and “7=strongly agree.” Items in this table
= 5.75, S.D. = 1.61), providing scenarios, potential consequences or
were sorted by the F-value in an ANOVA showing the variation between sample
means. alternatives (M = 5.52, S.D. = 1.55), and making legitimacy appeals by
referring to the core values of the organization and presenting what is
right or lawful (M = 5.35, S.D. = 1.77).
other minority women (n = 52, 10.2 %) showed higher but different
Similarly, we found that female professionals’ selection and appli­
ratings when framing the important influence characteristics for being
cation of influence-building strategies varied along the leadership line.
an ethical female leader in public relations. Table 4 summarized the
Professionals at the lower levels rated all influence-building strategies
influence measures which received significantly higher scores from fe­
higher than those at higher levels but particularly higher on two stra­
male professionals in this group. They particularly valued three char­
tegies, which are creating a dialogue for discussion (M = 5.63, F = 7.44,
acteristics when defining influence, including demonstrating expertise
d.f. = 2, p < .01) and using personal experience and/or emotional

6
J. Meng and M.S. Neill
appeals (M = 5.23, F = 3.25, d.f. = 2, p < .01). On the other hand,
professionals at the top level (e.g., top leaders in communication) have
given all strategies average ratings (ranging from 4.60 to 5.10) without
showing any strong preferences.
5. Discussion
Making the appropriate ethical decision and selecting the appro­
priate ethical behaviors have proven challenging in many aspects due to
the complications of ethical scandals in a wide variety of situations
(Brown et al., 2005). Through the evaluations of a national sample of
qualified female public relations professionals, we aim at obtaining their
reflective perspectives of ethical leadership: 1) by identifying their level
of perceived readiness in providing ethics counseling, 2) their percep­
tions of the ethical conduct of the highest ranked public relations or
communication leader in their organization, 3) their interpretation of
having influence as a leader, and 4) the strategies they use to build and
enact their influence as an ethical leader.
The positive news is the majority of surveyed female professionals
indicated that they are ready and prepared to provide ethics counseling
concerning issues related to public relations and communications to
senior leaders in the organization, as needed. Preparedness is connected
to moral efficacy (May et al., 2014), and that confidence is necessary for
public relations leaders to act with the moral courage required to serve
as an ethical counselor (May et al., 2003). In fact, a recent Delphi study
with public relations leaders found that courage was the number one
ethics competency that is lacking in the industry (Neill, 2021). It is not
surprising that preparedness was tied to years of experience and lead­
ership roles as previous research found that more seasoned practitioners
felt prepared for this responsibility while young professionals did not
(Neill, 2016a, 2016b; Neill & Weaver, 2017). Typically, more senior
public relations professionals fulfill the role of ethical conscience as it
requires phronesis or practical wisdom that is developed based on years
of experience and moral development (Hursthouse, 1999) as well as
earning the trust and respect of senior executives (Neill & Barnes, 2018).
More senior communication professionals can serve as mentors for
younger professionals to prepare them for this responsibility.
Based on the ideal of role modeling and mentoring, we asked female
professionals to evaluate their top communication leaders’ performance
on ethical leadership based on their observation and task interaction.
We found that top communication leaders’ principled ethical behaviors
presented a significant influence on female professionals’ perception on
ethical conduct. Leaders’ ethical behaviors further reinforce followers’
readiness and confidence. Such a finding further confirmed the impor­
tance of building an ethical orientation dimension when demonstrating
excellent leadership performance in public relations (Meng, 2014; Meng
& Berger, 2019, 2021). To foster an ethical culture, Moberg (2000)
recommended that organizations identify ethically desirable behaviors,
then identify people engaging in such behavior, and publicly recognize
them and place them in visible roles to serve as teachers and role models
(Moberg, 2000). Younger communication professionals can then learn
virtuous and ethical behavior by talking to and observing more senior
communication professionals who have developed ethics expertise
through many years of experience and reflection (Borden, 2019;
Hursthouse, 1999). Unfortunately, our findings identified some weak­
nesses in the areas of serving as a moral manager (Brown et al., 2005)
and core values manager (Lee et al., 2006). The women rated their top
communication leader lower in the area of discussing business ethics or
values with employees, which indicates an area for improvement. In
addition, while there are legitimate privacy considerations, women in
public relations did not see evidence of consequences for unethical
behavior.
Although the meaning of having influence could be multifaceted,
results indicated inviting questions and creating a dialogue for discus­
sion is the most used and valued strategy in building influence. Using
research results and making legitimacy appeals also help female
7
Public Relations Review 48 (2022) 102152
professionals make their case when providing leadership and ethics
counseling to the senior leadership team when the issues are related to
public relations and communication. When we examined the results by
race, we found that white women were more likely to use approaches
such as personal examples and emotional appeals while women of color
tended to prefer dialogue, legitimacy appeals and research. As Pompper
(2012) found in her study, women of color may have less influence and
access to formal networks, so they may need to rely more on relational
approaches such as mutual problem solving and rational approaches
such as research to back up their recommendations (Conger, 1998;
Moberg & Seabright, 2000). It is difficult through survey research to
determine what may have motivated women of color to choose specific
influence strategies. Additional research using qualitative methods such
as interviews and focus groups is merited. Through this study’s results,
we can better understand what characterizes ethical leadership from the
perspective of public relations practice, and how it relates to female
professionals’ strategies and efforts in establishing and expanding
influence.
Ethical practice has always been one of the core foundations for the
public relations profession. For public relations professionals, the PRSA
Code of Ethics is central to the ethical practice of public relations. While
ethical concerns and scandals occur daily, they also raise important
questions about the role of leadership in shaping ethical conduct. If more
than 60 % of public relations professionals faced at least one ethical
challenge in the past year (Meng et al., 2021), the moral dimension in
ethical leadership is particularly important in defining values and
managing ethical challenges. Despite its normative perspective
embedded in transformational and charismatic leadership domains,
ethical leadership is a topic that has great potential for academic
research and practice in public relations.
6. Theoretical and practical implications
Drawing on social learning theory and virtue ethics, this study pro­
vided empirical support for the impact of communication leaders as
ethical role models. Based on this study’s findings, communication
leaders’ principled ethical behaviors will reinforce the importance of
ethical conduct and further support fellow professionals’ confidence in
providing ethics counseling as needed. Therefore, communication
leaders need to serve as ethical role models by practicing and commu­
nicating about the importance of ethical decision making in an organi­
zation. Moberg (2000) provided some insights regarding ideal
characteristics of role models, which might prove challenging due to the
lack of diversity in leadership in public relations. These characteristics
include demographic similarity, relevance and attainability (Moberg,
2000). Public relations leaders need to find ways to make ethics relevant
and attainable through regular communication about the importance of
ethics and their core values and rewarding ethical behavior. Ethical
leaders also should provide guidance about the impact of organizational
decisions on various stakeholders and identify ethical alternatives when
appropriate. They need to be politically astute regarding the most
appropriate influence strategies as senior leaders have different prefer­
ences (Berger, 2005). At the same time, leaders shall use the information
in research on ethical leadership to do frequent self-reflections and
strengthen their own leadership. It is critical to have leaders constantly
using those principled ethical behaviors tested in this study as bench­
marks for their own behavior.
In recent years, diversity-and-inclusion (D&I) management is
important in terms of its effectiveness in promoting equality. It responds
to different needs, career aspirations, contributions and lifestyles of
employees by recognizing employees’ differences and potential (Wirth,
2001). Literature on D&I management suggests that to practice diversity
and inclusion more effectively, leaders shall be responsible for contin­
ually developing themselves and their employees. It is important for
leaders to use an upward-appraisal approach to receive feedback on
their performance from their subordinates and peers (Kandola &
J. Meng and M.S. Neill
Fullerton, 1994). This approach has implications in improving the
mutual understanding of ethical leadership as well. Due to the distance
(e.g., physical distance, social distance, or frequency of task interaction)
between leaders and subordinates, it is critical for leaders to improve
their communication with subordinates about ethical leadership.
Leaders need to make sure their demonstration of principled ethical
behaviors is consistent and perceived well if no or limited direct
observation or interaction with subordinates is offered (Antonakis &
Atwater, 2002). As addressed in previous research on ethical leadership,
team members (or followers) would exhibit ethical norms, positive at­
titudes, and constructive ethical behaviors if their leaders serve as role
models when behaving ethically (Mayer, Kuenzi, Greenbaum, Bardes, &
Salvador, 2009).
This study also offers implications for practice. Public relations
leaders should review the list of principled ethical behaviors and
conduct a personal evaluation and identify areas for improvement. They
also should routinely have their employees evaluate their supervisors
and senior leadership on these criteria to make sure they are serving as
moral managers by consistently modeling and communicating about
ethical behavior and expectations. This is consistent with the Leadership
Report Card studies conducted by the Plank Center, which have found
that leaders often rate themselves more favorably than their employees
do (Meng, Berger, Heyman, & Reber, 2019). In areas where employees
rate their leaders less than ideal, senior leadership should develop
strategies to address those deficiencies.
7. Limitations & future research
While this study provided new insights on ethical leadership and
influence building by focusing on the perspectives from female public
relations professionals, the sample was limited to those working in the
U.S. Future studies should examine these issues within a more diverse
and inclusive sample not only in the U.S. but also in other countries. As
addressed in our research design, while we made an effort to oversample
women of color (e.g., Black women and women in other minority
groups) in comparison to their actual representation in the public re­
lations industry, more research efforts in recruiting respondents with
diverse backgrounds and qualifications are seriously needed. Such ef­
forts should be jointly performed by the academic community, busi­
nesses, professional associations, and the society. It is a disheartening
fact that the public relations industry has been criticized for lacking
racial diversity and representation at various levels, the number didn’t
change much over the years. We still face the reality that in general 76.4
% of public relations specialists are white (Data USA, 2019), and 91 % of
public relations managers are white U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,
2020) in the U.S in 2021. Although theory is rich on how important
diversity and inclusion are, we have little direct empirical evidence
about how they unfold in organizations. The issue itself is still systemic
and structural in the way unconscious biases and workplace practices
constrain women’s and other minorities’ leadership opportunities and
influence.
While we faced the challenge of recruiting more racial minorities and
respondents with diverse backgrounds, we hope our research may
further illuminate the dynamics of racial diversity and representation in
public relations research and practice. In light of the small number of
effective minority role models in public relations leadership, it would be
beneficial to conduct more focused research with specific ethnic groups
in the near future to identify different development paths for leadership
identity. Qualitative research such as focus groups or in-depth in­
terviews would provide insights regarding specific times that women
(esp. women of color) have served as an ethical conscience or counselor
and the specific influence strategies they selected and why. When the
number of women and minorities as ethical role models are inadequate
in practice, mentoring initiatives also merit serious attention in future
research, especially in light of the role they may play in reinforcing the
importance of ethical leadership.
8
Public Relations Review 48 (2022) 102152
Another potential limitation associate with our panel research is the
use of self-assessment data, which poses the risk for overly favorable
responses that may not accurately reflect actual performance (Critcher
& Dunning, 2009). However, the results in this study do demonstrate
that younger, less experienced professionals did respond in ways that
showed awareness of their weaknesses. In addition, future research
could also bring in the perspectives from male professionals to identify
the gender gaps, which can add to the knowledge about ethical lead­
ership in public relations practice.
This study has provided new insights regarding the impact of social
learning and role modeling on perceptions of preparedness to serve as an
ethical conscience or role model. One unique contribution of this study
is that we provided the perspectives of women and minorities, which are
often underrepresented at the senior leadership level of organizations.
We found that women and minorities are prepared and ready to embrace
the role of ethical leadership, which is critical to the survival and success
of organizations. Acquiring greater understanding of ethical leadership
among women and minorities will help the profession enrich its di­
versity and inclusion more effectively.
Although we focused on investigating female public relations pro­
fessionals’ perceived readiness in providing ethics counseling and their
strategies in building and expanding influence, previous research has
found gender differences in adopting influence strategies (e.g., Aldoory
et al., 2008). Future research could build upon what we have found and
test the factor of gender and other crucial demographic indicators
related to diversity and inclusion to identify differences and similarities
in adopting principles of ethical leadership. A new sub-discipline of
ethical leadership and influence strategies would provide a new forum
for diverse voices in advocating the influential power of public relations.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Declaration of Competing Interest
We confirm that there is no conflict of interest in this study.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank the co-funders for this research: The
Arthur W. Page Center for Integrity in Public Communication (Project
ID: FP00015696) and The Plank Center for Leadership in Public Re­
lations (Project ID: FP00015507).
References
Aldoory, L., Reber, B. H., Berger, B. K., & Toth, E. L. (2008). Provocations in public
relations: A study of gendered ideologies of power-influence in practice. Journalism
& Mass Communication Quarterly, 85(4), 735–750.
Antonakis, J., & Atwater, L. (2002). Leader distance: A review and proposed theory. The
Leadership Quarterly, 13, 673–704.
Baker, S. (2008). The model of the principled advocate and the pathological partisan: A
virtue ethics construct of opposing archetypes of public relations and advertising
practitioners. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 23, 235–253.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Berger, B. K. (2005). Power over, power with, and power to relations: Critical reflections
on public relations, the dominant coalition, and activism. Journal of Public Relations
Research, 17(1), 5–28.
Berger, B. K., & Meng, J. (2014). Public relations leaders as sensemakers: A global study of
leadership in public relations and communication management. New York: Routledge.
Berger, B. K., & Reber, B. H. (2006). Gaining influence in public relations: The role of
resistance in practice. Mahwah, NJ: LEA Publishers.
Bivins, T. H. (1992). A systems model for ethical decision making in public relations.
Public Relations Review, 18, 365–383.
Borden, S. L. (2019). Virtue ethics & media. In P. L. Plasisance (Ed.), Communication and
media ethics (pp. 171–190). Mouton De Gruyter.
Bowen, S. A. (2004). Organizational factors encouraging ethical decision making: An
exploration into the case of an exemplar. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(4), 311–324.
J. Meng and M.S. Neill
Bowen, S. A. (2008). A state of neglect: Public relations as ‘corporate conscience’ or
ethics counsel. Journal of Public Relations Research, 20, 271–296.
Bowen, S. A. (2009). What communication professionals tell us regarding dominant
coalition access and gaining membership. Journal of Applied Communication Research,
37(4), 418–443.
Brown, M. E., & Trevino, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions.
The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616.
Brown, M. E., Trevino, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social
learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes, 97(2), 117–134.
Catalyst. (2003). Women in U.S. Corporate leadership. New York: Catalyst.
Catalyst. (2004). Women and men in the U.S. Corporate leadership: Same workplace,
different realities? New York: Catalyst.
Catalyst. (2005). Women take care, men take charge: Stereotyping of business leaders
exposed. New York: Catalyst.
Catalyst. (2007). The double blind dilemma for women in leadership: Damned if you do;
doomed if you don’t. New York: Catalyst.
Chitkara, A. (2018). PR agencies need to be more diverse and inclusive. Here’s how to
start. Harvard Business Review. retrieved from https://hbr.org/2018/04/pr-agencie
s-need-to-be-more-diverse-and-inclusive-heres-how-to-start on August 27 2021.
Conger, J. A. (1998). The necessary art of persuasion. Harvard Business Review, 113(3),
84–95.
Cose, E. (1993). The rage of a privileged class. New York: HarperCollins.
Critcher, C. R., & Dunning, D. (2009). How chronic self-views influence (and mislead)
self-assessments of task performance: Self-views shape bottom-up experiences with
the task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 931–945.
Data USA. (2019). Public relations specialists. Retrieved from https://datausa.io/profile
/soc/public-relations-specialists on August 27, 2021.
Eagly, A. H. (2005). Achieving relational authenticity in leadership: Does gender matter?
The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 459–474.
Ely, R. J. (1995). The power in demography: Women’s social constructions of gender
identity at work. The Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 589–634.
Fitzpatrick, K. (1996). The role of public relations in the institutionalization of ethics.
Public Relations Review, 22(3), 249–258.
Fitzpatrick, K., & Gauthier, C. (2001). Toward a professional responsibility theory of
public relations ethics. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 16, 193–212.
FitzPatrick, M. (2013). A strong case for female inclusion at the top level. PRWeek. retrieved
from https://www.prweek.com/article/1276818/strong-case-female-inclusion-top-
level on September 15, 2019.
Grunig, L. A., Toth, E. L., & Toth, L. C. (2008). Women in public relations: How gender
influences practice. New York: Routledge.
Hursthouse, R. (1999). On virtue ethics. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Kandola, R., & Fullerton, J. (1994). Diversity: More than just an empty slogan. Personnel
Management, 26(4), 46.
Lee, J., Heath, R., & Bowen, S. (2006). An International study of ethical roles and counsel
in the public relations function. Conference Papers – International Communication
Association, 1–37.
Liu, B. F., & Pompper, D. (2012). The crisis with no name: Defining the interplay of
culture, ethnicity, and race on organizational issues and media outcomes. Journal of
Applied Communication Research, 40(2), 127–146.
May, D. R., Chan, A. Y. L., Hodges, T. D., & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Developing the moral
component of authentic leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 32(3), 247–260.
May, D. R., Luth, M. T., & Schwoerer, C. E. (2014). The influence of business ethics
education on moral efficacy, moral meaningfulness, and moral courage: A quasi-
experimental study. Journal of Business Ethics, 124(1), 67–80. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10551-013-1860-6
Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., Greenbaum, R. L., Bardes, M., & Salvador, R. (2009). How low
does ethical leadership flow? Test of a trickle-down model. Organizational behavior &
Human Decision Process, 108, 1–13.
Meng, J. (2014). Unpacking the relationship between organizational culture and
excellent leadership in public relations: An empirical investigation. Journal of
Communication Management, 18(4), 363–385.
Meng, J., & Berger, B. K. (2019). The impact of organizational culture and leadership
performance on PR professionals’ job satisfaction: Testing the joint mediating effects
of engagement and trust. Public Relations Review, 45, 64–75.
Meng, J., & Berger, B. K. (2021). The role of institutional environment in building
communication professionals’ trust and satisfaction: A moderated multiple-
mediation analysis. Corporate Communications an International Journal. https://doi.
org/10.1108/CCIJ-03-2021-0030
Public Relations Review 48 (2022) 102152
Meng, J., Berger, B. K., Heyman, W. C., & Reber, B. H. (2019). Public relations leaders earn
a “C+” in the Plank Center’s Report Card 2019: Is improving leadership even on the radar
screen in the profession? Tuscaloosa, AL: The Plank Center for Leadership in Public
Relations.
Meng, J., Reber, B. H., Berger, B. K., Gower, K. K., & Zerfass, A. (2021). North American
Communication Monitor 2020-2021. The impact of COVID-19 pandemic, ethical
challenges, gender issues, cybersecurity, and competence gaps in strategic communication.
Tuscaloosa, AL: The Plank Center for Leadership in Public Relations.
Moberg, D. J. (2000). Role models and moral exemplars: How do employees acquire
virtues by observing others? Business Ethics Quarterly, 10(3), 675–696.
Moberg, D. J., & Seabright, M. A. (2000). The development of moral imagination.
Business Ethics Quarterly, 10(4), 845–884.
Moss, D., Warnaby, G., & Newman, A. J. (2000). Public relations practitioner role
enactment at the senior management level within UK companies. Journal of Public
Relations Research, 12(4), 277–307.
Neill, M. S. (2021). Public relations professionals identify ethical issues, essential
competencies and deficiencies. Journal of Media Ethics, 36(1), 51–67.
Neill, M. S. (2015). Beyond the C-Suite: Corporate communications’ power & influence.
Journal of Communication Management, 19(2), 118–132.
Neill, M. S. (2016a). The influence of employer branding in internal communication.
Research Journal of the Institute for Public Relations, 3(1). Available online: htt
p://www.instituteforpr.org/influence-employer-branding-internal-communication.
Neill, M. S. (2016b). Accredited vs. non-accredited: How accreditation impacts
perceptions and readiness to provide ethics counsel. Public Relations Review, 42,
856–866.
Neill, M. S., & Barnes, A. (2018). Public relations ethics: Senior PR pros tell us how to speak
up and keep your job. New York, NY: Business Expert Press.
Neill, M. S., & Drumwright, M. E. (2012). PR professionals as organizational conscience.
Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 27(4), 220–234.
Neill, M. S., & Weaver, N. (2017). Silent & unprepared: Most millennial practitioners
have not embraced role as ethical conscience. Public Relations Review, 43(2),
337–344.
Northouse, P. G. (2018). Introduction to leadership: Concepts and practice (4th ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
O’Neil, J. (2003). An investigation of the sources of influence of corporate public
relations practitioners. Public Relations Review, 29(2), 159–169.
O’Neil, J. (2004). Effects of gender and power on PR managers’ upward influence.
Journal of Managerial Issues, 16(1), 127–144.
Oetzel, J. G. (2009). Intercultural communication: A layered approach. New York:
VangaBooks.
Pojman, L. P. (2005). How should we live? An introduction to ethics. Belmont, CA: Thomson
Wadsworth.
Pompper, D. (2012). On social capital and diversity in a feminized industry: Further
developing a theory of internal public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research,
24, 86–103.
Reber, B. H. (2014). Strategies and tactics leaders use to manage issues. In B. K. Berger, &
J. Meng (Eds.), Public relations leaders as sensemakers: A global study of leadership in
public relations and communication management (pp. 80–94). New York: Routledge.
Ryan, M., & Martinson, D. L. (1983). The PR officer as corporate conscience. Public
Relations Quarterly, 28(2), 20–23.
Sison, M. D. (2010). Recasting public relations roles: Agents of compliance, control or
conscience. Journal of Communication Management, 14(4), 319–336.
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2020). Labor force statistics from the current
population survey. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm on
September 8, 2021.
Trevino, L. K., Brown, M., & Hartman, L. P. (2003). A quantitative investigation of
perceived executive ethical leadership: Perceptions from inside and outside the
executive suite. Human Relations, 55, 5–37.
Wartick, S. L., & Rude, R. E. (1986). Issues Management: Corporate Fad or Corporate
Function? California Management Review, 29(1), 124–140.
Wilcox, D. L., Cameron, G. T., & Reber, B. H. (2015). Public relations strategies and tactics
(11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
Wirth, L. (2001). Breaking through the glass ceiling: Women in management. Geneva:
International Labour Organization.
Yukl, G. A. (2002). Leadership in organizations (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Zenger, J., & Folkman, J. (2012). Are women better leaders than men? Harvard Business
Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2012/03/a-study-in-leadership-women-do
on September 20, 2019.