See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/358113304

The effect of corporate social responsibility on unethical pro-organizational

behavior: the mediation of moral identity and moderation of supervisor-
employee value congruence

Article in Current Psychology · January 2022

DOI: 10.1007/s12144-022-02722-x

CITATIONS READS

8 1,805

5 authors, including:

Junyun Liao Yulang Guo

Jinan University (Guangzhou, China) Guangdong University of Finance and Economics
35 PUBLICATIONS 495 CITATIONS 16 PUBLICATIONS 256 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Xu Wang
Shanghai International Studies University
5 PUBLICATIONS 28 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Xu Wang on 23 February 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Current Psychology
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02722-x

The effect of corporate social responsibility on unethical pro-

organizational behavior: the mediation of moral identity
and moderation of supervisor-employee value congruence
Liu Zonghua1 · Liao Junyun2 · Guo Yulang3 · Zhang Ming1 · Wang Xu1

Accepted: 12 January 2022

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2022

Abstract
In recent years, the frequent occurrence of corporate scandals in Chinese companies, organizations have increased their
efforts to curb unethical employee behavior. However, little is known about whether corporate social responsibility (CSR)
inhibits unethical pro-organizational behavior. Drawing on social identity theory, this study investigates the relationship
between CSR, moral identity and unethical pro-organizational behavior. Data from 319 employees of new ventures in China
at two-time points are used to test hypotheses. Results show that CSR has a negative effect on unethical pro-organizational
behavior, moral identity plays a partial mediating role in the negative effect of CSR on unethical pro-organizational behavior.
Moreover, supervisor-employee value congruence moderates the effect of CSR on unethical pro-organizational behavior.
Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Keywords Corporate social responsibility · Moral identity · Supervisor-employee value congruence · Unethical pro-
organizational behavior

Introduction employees’ unethical acts committed that either benefit the

With the rapid development of China economy, business
scandals have occurred frequently in companies, such as
Sanlu Company’s melamine incident, Changsheng Scandal,
and the more recent case of Qihoo 360 Search involved in
false advertising of medicine. These scandals confirm that
unethical behaviors are being conducted within organiza-
tions (Zhang, 2020). Recently, some studies have mentioned
that employees may engage in these unethical behaviors for
their organizations’ interests (Johnson & Umphress, 2019;
Yan, Hu, & Wu, 2021a). This category of unethical behavior
is known as unethical pro-organizational behavior, which is
* Liu Zonghua
lwhu98@163.com
1 on individuals as tested at the individual level of analysis
College of Economics and Management, China Three
Gorges University, No. 8 Daxue Road, Xiling District,
Yichang 443002, Hubei, China
2
School of Management, Jinan University, Guangzhou,
Guangdong, China
3
School of Business Administration, Guangdong University
of Finance & Economics, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
organization or its agents.
(Umphress et al., 2010; Umphress & Bingham, 2011).
Although unethical pro-organizational behavior may be
committed with altruistic intent, it is morally problematic
and potentially damaging to the employees’ interests and
the organization’s reputation and financial standing (Bryant
& Merritt, 2021; Umphress & Bingham, 2011). Given the
potential damage, this study seeks to contribute to unethical
pro-organizational behavior research by testing the factors
that might inhibit unethical pro-organizational behavior.
In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the
micro level of corporate social responsibility (CSR), which
seeks to explain how CSR influences employees’ attitudes
and behaviors (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012; Hur et al., 2018; Li
et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2021). Micro-CSR is defined as the
research of the influence and experiences of CSR practices
(Hur et al., 2018; Rupp & Mallory, 2015). CSR assumes that
positive perceptions shaped by a firm’s CSR practices tend
to promote employees’ positive attitudinal and behavioral
changes (Rupp et al., 2006). Although the research on micro-
CSR mainly focuses on the influence of CSR perceptions on
employee positive behaviors, it rarely involves a specific type

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

of employee positive behavior-unethical pro-organizational
behavior (Yin et al., 2021). CSR takes responsibility to all
parties, focuses on long-term profits, and contributes to the
good of society by performing ethically (Garriga & Melé,
2004; Overall, 2016; Wuttichindanon, 2017). In the CSR
context, employees will perform ethically and have respon-
sibilities for the consequences of their behaviors (Overall,
2016). Thus, employees may become more self-responsible
and ethical, and are expected to be less engaged in unethical
pro-organizational behavior. Therefore, this study endeavors
to explore whether CSR perceptions can inhibit employee’s
unethical pro-organizational behavior.
Social cognitive theory posits that an individual’s attitudes
and behaviors are determined by individuals’ cognitive
evaluation of situational cues (Bandura, 1986). According
to social cognitive theory, CSR practices are a major source
of situational cues (Randy Evans & Davis, 2011), which
send informational cues that reflect a firm’s ethical stance
(Kotler & Lee, 2005) and moral nature (Aguilera et al.,
2007), highlight ethical norms (Carroll, 1991), respect all
stakeholders’ moral rights (Carroll, 1991), and develop an
ethical context in a firm (Hur et al., 2018). Employees are
positive recipients of these CSR situational cues, they can
positively interpret CSR practices from multiple perspectives,
which may foster employees’ moral identity (Yen & Yang,
2018). From a social cognitive perspective, moral identity
should exert a significant influence on a person’s cognition
and behavior (Aquino et al., 2009). Previous studies have
indicated that employees with a high moral identity are less
likely to conduct unethical behavior (Aquino et al., 2009;
Rupp et al., 2013; Wang, Wang, et al., 2017b). Therefore,
this study incorporates moral identity into the hypothesized
model and investigates the mediating mechanism between
CSR and unethical pro-organizational behavior.
Kim and Choi (2021) suggested that employees’ reac-
tions to CSR may vary based on supervisor-employee value
congruence. Supervisor-employee value congruence refers
to the degree to which an employee’s values are aligned with
ones of the supervisor (Edwards & Cable, 2009). According
to social cognitive theory, the degree of value congruence
between employees and their supervisor would significantly
influence the perceptions toward organizations’ CSR prac-
tices (Bandura, 1986; Edwards & Cable, 2009; Hoffman
et al., 2011). Employees will respond differently to the social
responsibilities based on the degree of value congruence
between them and the supervisors through the process of
interpretation and sense making of CSR practices (Kim &
Choi, 2021). Accordingly, supervisor-employee value con-
gruence may serve as a boundary condition for helping CSR
inhibits employees’ unethical pro-organizational behavior.
Thus, this study expects CSR and supervisor-employee value
congruence will jointly curb unethical pro-organizational
behavior.
13
Current Psychology
This study is grounded in social cognitive theory (Bandura,
1986). We have structured this study as follows. First, this
study presents the theoretical framework and discusses the
hypotheses. Next, this study presents the methodology and
the resulting findings. Finally, theoretical contributions,
practical implications, and research limitations of this study
are discussed.
Literature Review and Hypotheses
Development
Perceived CSR and Unethical pro‑Organizational
Behavior
CSR is defined as “context-specific organizational actions
and policies that take into account stakeholders’ expecta-
tions and the triple bottom line of economic, social, and
environmental performance” (Aguinis & Glavas, 2019,
p.1060–1061). To date, most of the CSR studies focused
on the impact of macro-level CSR on organizational out-
comes (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012), such as firm performance
(Briones Peñalver et al., 2018), corporate innovation (Khan
et al., 2018), and corporate reputation (Park, 2019; Verčič &
Ćorić, 2018). Until recently, researchers have focused on the
effect of CSR perception on employee outcomes (Kim et al.,
2021). CSR perception refers to employee’s perception of a
firm’s CSR behavior and the extent to which a firm fulfills
CSR (De Roeck & Farooq, 2018). Compared with macro-
CSR, CSR perception significantly contributes to employee
attitudes and behaviors (Rupp et al., 2018; Yan, Tang, &
Hao, 2020). According to Glavas (2016), Kunda, Ataman
and Behram (2019), if an organization takes beyond its pri-
mary task of achieving its financial goals by participating
in CSR activities, then its employees are willing to perform
beyond their primary job requirements by participating in
extra-role and discretionary behaviors that can promote their
organizational performance.
Unethical pro-organizational behavior refers to the actions
that are intended to benefit the company while violating the
interests of people outside the organization (Umphress et al.,
2010; Umphress & Bingham, 2011). Many scholars have
regarded pro-organization unethical behavior as an individ-
ual’s response to positive social exchange relationships and
excessive organizational identity (Bryant & Merritt, 2021;
Inam et al., 2021). Studies have shown that pro-organization
unethical behavior is significantly related with individual
differences (Chen et al., 2016; Thau et al., 2015), personal-
ity (Castille et al., 2018), values (Castille et al., 2018), job
characteristics (Lawrence & Kacmar, 2017), as well as lead-
ership style (Cheng et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2020). Notably,
recent empirical studies have suggested that unethical pro-
organizational behavior may be inhibited by organizational
Current Psychology
practices and polices such as corporate ethics programs
(Jannat et al., 2021). Based on social cognitive theory, this
study suggests that CSR may decrease employee’s unethical
pro-organizational behavior.
Social cognitive theory provides a framework for under-
standing how human thought, affect, and behavior is influ-
enced by external environmental stimuli (Bandura, 1986).
The basic view of social cognitive theory is that an indi-
vidual’s behavior is regulated by cognitive processes, and
by the environment through external social context (Cooper
& Lu, 2016). According to social cognitive theory, when
employees face with the situational cue of CSR practices
(Randy Evans & Davis, 2011), unethical pro-organizational
behavior may not occur as a result of CSR perception, which
is a cognitive process that involves an employee’s improve-
ment of value and ethical self-regulation.
Based on social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986), this
study proposes that perceived CSR significantly affects
unethical pro-organizational behavior. First, according to
social cognitive theory, an individual’s behavior is a result of
a particular situation (Bandura, 1991). Thus, employees can
construct their behavioral patterns by observing and inter-
preting firms’ CSR policies and practices in the workplace.
CSR behavior is not only a strategic investment and social
capital accumulation of an organization, but also an impor-
tant strategy for companies to gain organizational legitimacy
and enhance external image and reputation (Hur et al., 2021),
which in turn motivates employees to reduce unethical pro-
organizational behavior. Second, prior research has revealed
that CSR encourages employees to conduct the behaviors
that benefit the organization (e.g., organizational citizenship
behavior) (John et al., 2019; Kunda et al., 2019). Relying
on social cognitive theory, when employees observe the
organization’s considerable investment in CSR, they think
that their organization is genuine and reliable (Manimegalai
& Baral, 2018), employees will feel proud to be members of
their organization (Lythreatis et al., 2019; Zhou et al., 2018)
and raise their identification to the organization (Wang,
Yang, et al., 2019c). As a result, such a feeling of pride and
identification may motivate employees to positively com-
mit more ethical behaviors. Finally, CSR has already been
the social norm for each industry worldwide (Horng et al.,
2019). Firms that perform better in social responsibility tend
to follow higher standards of conduct, and accordingly, firms
are more honest, credible, and ethical. In such firms, CSR
can provide employees with the necessary cognition, right
attitude, and judgmental skills (Setó-Pamies & Papaoikono-
mou, 2016). Hence, CSR enables employees to feel respon-
sible and display intentions to engage in prosocial behavior
that can make life better for everyone (Afsar et al., 2020).
However, unethical pro-organizational behavior is incon-
sistent with the principles and values of CSR initiatives.
Thus, employees who work in a socially responsible firm
are unlikely to exhibit unethical pro-organizational behavior.
Based on the above discussion, it is hypothesized that:
Hypothesis 1. Perceived CSR will be negatively related
to unethical pro-organizational behavior
Mediating Role of Moral Identity
Moral identity is defined as “a self-conception organized
around a set of moral traits” (Aquino & Reed, 2002, p.
1424). Teng et al. (2020) maintained that moral identity
is a determinant of individual moral outcomes. Guo et al.
(2019) demonstrated that moral identity plays a major role
in inhibiting unethical or destructive behavior and enhancing
prosocial behavior. In this study, we propose that moral iden-
tity is a psychological process through which perceived CSR
influences employee’s unethical pro-organizational behav-
ior. First, based on social cognitive theory, an organiza-
tion’s policed such as CSR practices shape a person’s moral
identity (Aquino et al., 2009). Implementing CSR practices
aimed at uplifting the customers, society, environment, and
other stakeholders (Afsar et al., 2020) signal to employees
about firms’ preferences, social norms, and moral standards.
Employees then process the cues from firms’ CSR practices,
which affect employees’ moral identity. According to social
cognitive theory, moral identity will lead to higher intentions
to display prosocial and moral behaviors and resist antisocial
behaviors (Teng et al., 2020). Therefore, employees with
high levels of moral identity can act morally, they are less
likely to engage in unethical pro-organization behavior.
Second, social cognitive theory suggests that a firm’s
CSR practices as information cues can influence employ-
ees’ moral judgments by describing what is acceptable and
appropriate moral behavior in a firm (Aquino et al., 2009;
Rupp et al., 2013). CSR regulates organizational members’
moral identity by setting a series of ethical standards and
reinforcing such standards through reward and disciplinary
systems (Miao et al., 2020). However, CSR is represented
by values, norms, ethics, and rules (Matten & Moon, 2008;
Mostovicz et al., 2009), which in turn results in require-
ments for an employee to internalize and reflect in their
moral values. Unethical pro-organizational behavior, as a
type of unethical behavior, undoubtedly poses a threat to
individual moral self-concept. Considering the immorality
of unethical pro-organizational behavior, employees higher
on moral identity will reduce the propensity to engage in
actions that benefit their organization or its members but
violate laws, core societal values, or standards of proper
conduct (Umphress & Bingham, 2011).
Finally, social cognitive theory argues that a person’s
moral identity may be influenced by situational factors
(Aquino & Kay, 2018). CSR can be an important situ-
ational factor in developing employees’ moral identity
13

(Rupp et al., 2013). CSR fosters a moral organizational
environment (Sendlhofe, 2020), highlights sharing firms’
moral values and philanthropic wishes for society (Ko et al.,
2018), behaves socially responsibly and ethically (Carroll &
Shabana, 2010), and rewards ethical behavior and punishes
unethical behavior (Koričan & Jelavić, 2008). In this kind
of environment, employees would internalize moral values
and objectives of CSR as their own, and then demonstrate a
strong moral identity. Previous studies found that employees
with high moral identity are more likely to behave morally
and support corporate ethical actions (Singhapakdi et al.,
2019; Winterich et al., 2013). In addition, employees in high
moral identity are more inclined to resist unethical behavior
to uphold a moral self-image. Prior research suggested that
moral identity is a key inhibitor of unethical pro-organiza-
tional behavior (Bryant & Merritt, 2021; Wang, Long, et al.,
2019b). Based on the above discussion, it is hypothesized
that:
Hypothesis 2. Moral identity mediates the relationship
between perceived CSR and unethical pro-organizational
behavior
Moderating Role of Supervisor‑Employee Value
Congruence
Values refer to concepts or beliefs that guide individual
behavior or event assessment, going beyond specific situ-
ations (Schwartz & Bilsky, 1987). Qu et al. (2019) empiri-
cally suggested that values can motivate individual behav-
ior, such that individuals exhibit value-consistent behaviors.
When it comes to the relationship between the supervisor
and the employee, the value consistency between the super-
visor and the employee becomes important (Erdogan et al.,
2004). Supervisor-employee value congruence refers to the
similarity between the value system of the supervisor and
the employee (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). In an organiza-
tional context, leader-follower with a high level of value
congruence is more likely to share some aspects of infor-
mation processing in common (Lee et al., 2017), whereas
value incongruence between a leader and a follower indi-
cates that the two parties do not have same information
processing in their missions, goals, and behaviors (Brown
& Treviño, 2009; Cheng et al., 2019), Previous empirical
studies showed that supervisor-employee value congruence
can elicit employees’ positive attitudes and behaviors, such
as affective commitment (Byza et al., 2019), job satisfac-
tion (Byza et al., 2019), positive work behaviors (Bao & Li,
2019) and moral voice (Lee et al., 2017). We propose that
supervisor-employee value congruence may act as a bound-
ary condition of the effect of perceived CSR on unethical
pro-organizational behavior.
13
Current Psychology
High value congruence between the supervisors and
their employees may imply that the employees’ moral deci-
sion criterion is consistent with that of the supervisors (Lee
et al., 2017). As a result, employees can promptly adapt to
firm-level CSR activities (Farooq et al., 2017), which in turn
fosters the employees’ willingness to engage in prosocial
behavior (De Roeck & Farooq, 2018; Tao et al., 2018). In
other words, when an employee and a supervisor’s values
are highly consistent, the employee is more likely to support
CSR initiatives, and then exhibits behaviors in favor of both
the organization and external stakeholders. Moreover, when
two parties’ beliefs, values, and interests are well-matched,
employees are more willing to internalize the value of proso-
cial activities and intrinsically participate in an organiza-
tion’s CSR activities (De Roeck & Farooq, 2018), which
in turn may suppress unethical pro-organizational behavior.
However, when supervisors and employees’ value congru-
ence is low, value conflicts may occur (Cheng et al., 2019),
thus resulting in the correspondingly weakened impact of
perceived CSR on unethical pro-organizational behavior.
Based on the above discussion, it is hypothesized that:
Hypothesis 3. Supervisor-employee value congruence
moderates the relationship between perceived CSR and
unethical pro-organizational behavior such that the rela-
tionship will be stronger for employees with high levels
of supervisor-employee value congruence and weaker
for those with low levels of supervisor-employee value
congruence.
Figure 1 depicts the conceptual framework of the
research.
Methodology
Sample and Procedure
The social responsibility of new ventures has gained
increasing attention in recent years. This study takes new
ventures as research samples, following previous research
(Zahra, 1993), new ventures are defined as companies
established within 8 years. The survey was administered
to 28 companies located in Central and Southern China.
These companies were from a variety of industries, mainly
including IT, chemical industry, communications, pharma-
ceutical manufacturing, and petrochemical engineering.
As these industries are facing more public calls for pro-
tecting and improving the natural environment, these firms
were selected for survey. Before carrying out the survey,
we first contacted the authors’ former classmates, friends
or MBA students who were working in these companies
by telephone and explained the purpose and procedure of
Current Psychology
Fig. 1  Theoretical model
Perceived CSR
our study, and then asked them to invite their co-workers
to participate in this survey. Each employee’s question-
naire was put into a small envelope with double-sided
adhesive tape, and then the employee number was marked
in the inconspicuous place on the back of the envelope.
At Time 1 (from January to March in 2019), we invited
employees to report their perceived CSR and supervisor-
employee value congruence, together with employees’
demographics. 415 employees responded. We excluded
48 incomplete or invalid questionnaires in some other
way, leaving 367 valid ones. Two months later, at time
2 (from June to July in 2019), we invited 367 employees
who had attended the time-1 survey to rate moral identity
and unethical pro-organizational behavior, while 355 of
them responded again. The final number of usable ques-
tionnaires was 319, with a response rate of 89.9%. Among
the 319 respondents, 66.1% (n = 211) were male employ-
ees, whereas 33.9% (n = 108) were female employees). The
average age was 28.8 years (SD = 3.9), whereas 50% were
under the age of 30. In terms of respondents’ education
level, 24.2% had below junior college degree, 56.4% had a
bachelor’s degree, 17.2% had a master’s degree, 2.2% had
received their doctorate’s degree. The participants had an
average tenure of 3.1 years (SD = 1.6) (ranging from 1 to
9 years). In terms of enterprise nature, 2 were state-owned
enterprises, 26 were private enterprises. In terms of the
size of these corporations, there were 24 enterprises with
1–100 employees, 2 enterprises with 101–200 employees,
2 enterprises with 201–300 employees, and the average of
company age was 4.7 (SD = 1.7).
Measures
Following Brislin’s (1980) translation-back-translation
method, All items except for moral identity were translated
into the local language. For all measures, a five-point Likert-
type scale was used (ranging from 1 to 5 with 1 indicating
“completely disagree” and 5 indicating “completely agree”).
All scales demonstrated good reliability.
Moral identity
Unethical pro-
organizational behavior
Supervisor-employee
value congruence
Perceived CSR Perceived CSR was measured using eight
items from Ong et al.’s (2018) scale. This scale has widely
been validated in previous research (e.g., Liu et al., 2021;
Mao et al., 2020). Consistent with the micro-perspective, we
conceptually define CSR as employee’s perception of firms’
CSR, because employee’s perception of CSR may have a
stronger impact on their subsequent reactions compared to
the actual CSR behaviors, of which employee may not be
aware (Hansen et al., 2016; Wang, Zhang, & Jia, 2019a). A
sample item is “My company helps the local community.”
The reliability of perceived CSR was 0.916.
Moral Identity Moral identity was measured using Aquino
and Reed’s (2002) scale, like other studies on moral identity
in China (Chen & Liang, 2017; Lin & Cheng, 2017), we
utilized five items to measure moral identity for the present
study. The five items are “I particularly want to have these
qualities, such as justice, friendliness, honesty, and toler-
ance,” “I want to be a person with these qualities,” “It is
not important to me to have these qualities (reverse),” “It
makes me feel ashamed to be a person with these qualities,”
“It makes me feel good to be someone with these qualities”
(Lin & Cheng, 2017). The reliability of moral identity was
0.915.
Supervisor‑Employee Value Congruence Supervisor-
employee value congruence was measured using Cable and
DeRue’s (2002) three-item scale. This scale has widely used
in prior studies (Cheng et al., 2019). A sample item is “My
values match my supervisor’s values and beliefs.” The reli-
ability of supervisor-employee value congruence was 0.905.
Unethical pro‑Organizational Behavior Following Cheng
et al. (2019), Wang, Long, et al. (2019b), unethical pro-
organizational behavior was assessed using six items
adapted from Umphress et al.’s (2010). A sample item is
“If it would help my organization, I would exaggerate the
truth about my company’s products or services to customers
and clients.” The reliability of unethical pro-organizational
behavior was 0.923.
13
 Current Psychology

Control Variables Previous research has indicated that Results

individual demographic variables and firm-level controls
are associated with unethical pro-organizational behavior Reliability and Validity Tests
(Dang et al., 2017; Xia et al., 2020). Thus, we control for
employee age, gender, education, and tenure, as well as firm- The factor analysis of the four constructs is shown in
level controls, including company ownership, company size, Table 1. Every construct is classified into one factor, the
and company age, and tested whether unethical pro-organ- standard factor loadings of the items are all above 0.5. The
izational behavior could be influenced by these variables. results of Table 1 show that the composite reliability (CR)
for each construct are well above the acceptable value. For
confirming discriminant validity, we calculated the square
root of AVE for each construct separately. According to the
criterion of Fornell and Larcker (1981), if square root values
of AVE for a construct is greater than correlation values, the
discriminant validity is established. Table 1 presents AVE
Table 1  The items’ loadings and the constructs’ CR and AVEs
of the variables and the square root values of AVE for a
Constructs Items Factors CR AVE The square construct. The average AVEs of each construct ranged from
root of
AVE
0.787 to 0.845, which are all greater than 0.5, and the square
root of AVE value for each construct exceeds the correla-
Perceived CSR PCSR1 0.776 0.927 0.787 0.887 tion coefficients. Thus, the reliability and the validity are
PCSR2 0.783 acceptable.
PCSR3 0.785
PCSR4 0.772 Confirmatory Factor Analyses
PCSR5 0.744
PCSR6 0.750 Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted with
PCSR7 0.839 AMOS 22.0 to examine the measurement validity of the
PCSR8 0.820 study variables (see Table 2). Specifically, four correlated
MI MI1 0.842 0.923 0.843 0.918 factors were model (we modeled four correlated factors):
MI2 0.864 perceived corporate social responsibility, moral identity,
MI3 0.791 personal and organizational value congruence. This theo-
MI4 0.888 retical 4-factor model provided a reasonable fit to the data
MI5 0.829 (RMSEA = 0.077, χ2/df = 2.891, IFI = 0.927, TLI = 0.916,
SEVC SEVC1 0.841 0.914 0.883 0.940 CFI = 0.927), which was superior to other competitive mod-
SEVC2 0.913 els. Thus, the confirmatory factor analysis does not present
SEVC3 0.894 the common method variance, it demonstrates the validity
UPB UPB1 0.822 0.938 0.845 0.919 of the instrument.
UPB2 0.872
UPB3 0.839 Correlation Analysis
UPB4 0.778
UPB5 0.875 Table 3 presents the descriptive data and correlations of all
UPB6 0.882 the variables. As presented in Table 3, perceived CSR was
PCSR = perceived corporate social responsibility, MI = moral identity,
related to unethical pro-organizational behavior (r = −0.245,
SEVC = supervisor-employee value congruence, UPB = unethical pro- p < 0.01) and moral identity (r = 0.265, p < 0.01); moral
organizational behavior

Table 2  Results for Model χ2 df χ2/df IFI TLI CFI RMSEA

confirmatory factor analysis
4-factor model (PCSR,MI,SECV,UPB) 586.851 203 2.891 0.927 0.916 0.927 0.077
3-factor model (PCSR&MI, SECV,UPB) 1568.335 206 7.613 0.741 0.708 0.740 0.144
2-factor model (PCSR, MI &SECV,UPB) 2243.075 208 10.784 0.613 0.568 0.611 0.175
1-factor model (PCSR+MI + SECV&UPB) 3455.874 209 16.535 0.382 0.314 0.379 0.221

PCSR = perceived corporate social responsibility, MI = moral identity, SEVC = supervisor-employee value
congruence, UPB = unethical pro-organizational behavior

13
Current Psychology

identity was related to unethical pro-organizational behavior

11

–
(r = −0.285, p < 0.01); supervisor-employee value congru-

PCSR = perceived corporate social responsibility, MI = moral identity, SEVC = supervisor-employee value congruence, UPB = unethical pro-organizational behavior, ** p < 0.01,* p < 0.05
ence was related to unethical pro-organizational behavior

−0.572**
10 (r = −0.572, p < 0.01).

–
Hypothesis Tests

−0.285**
We applied the PROCESS SPSS macro developed by Hayes

0.401**
(2013) to test the hypothesis, which allows estimating simul-
9

–
taneously indirect and moderated effects, and moderated
(Yan, Tang, & Hao, 2021b). First, We conducted PRO-

−0.254**
0.265**
0.224**
CESS Model 4 (Hayes, 2013) to test the main effect of per-
ceived CSR on unethical pro-organizational behavior. The
8

results of model 1 in Table 4 show that perceived CSR had

−0.114*
a negative impact on on unethical pro-organizational behav-
−0.012
0.063
0.001

ior (β = −0.328, p < 0.001, 95% CI [−0.467, −0.189]), the

95% CI excludes 0. Thus, Hypothesis 1 is supported by the
7

data. Second, we tested the mediating effect of moral iden-

−0.234**

tity. As presented in Model 2 and Model 3 in Table 4, after

0.187**

0.326**
0.220**
−0.019

controlling the control variables, perceived CSR was posi-

tively related to moral identity (β = 0.315, p < 0.001, 95%
6

CI [0.190, 0.439]), moral identity was negatively related to

−0.150**

unethical pro-organizational behavior (β = −0.193, p < 0.01,

−0.078
−0.078
−0.033
0.015
0.016

95% CI [−0.315, −0.070]), the effect of perceived CSR on

5

unethical pro-organizational behavior became weaker but

was still significant (β = −0.267, p < 0.01, 95% CI [−0.401,
−0.146**
−0.115*

−0.125]), the 95% CI excludes 0. Thus, moral identity par-

0.226**
0.252**

0.145**
0.128*
0.033

tially mediated the relationship between perceived CSR and

4

unethical pro-organizational behavior, which supports for

H2.
0.161**
−0.016

−0.059

−0.017

−0.035
0.036

0.008

0.008

Third, we used Hayes (2013) PROCESS Model 1 to

test the moderating effect of supervisor-employee value
3

congruence. The results of the moderating effect analy-

−0.157**

sis were presented in Table 5. As depicted in Table 5 in

0.412**
0.558**

0.157**
−0.081

0.127*
0.048

0.087
0.056

Fig. 2, when supervisor-employee value congruence was

high (β = −0.301, p < 0.01, 95% CI [−0.471, −0.130])/
2

mean (β = −0.174, p < 0.01, 95% CI [−0.295, −0.053]), the

−0.167**

−0.201**
−0.113*

negative relationships between perceived CSR and unethical

0.178**
−0.064

−0.018
0.041

0.090

0.059

0.035

pro-organizational behavior were stronger (the slopes were

1

steeper), indicating that supervisor-employee value congru-

ence negatively moderated the relationship perceived CSR
0.986
0.474
3.867
0.777

1.237
1.702
1.620
0.659
0.804
0.711
0.866

and unethical pro-organizational behavior. Conversely, we

SD
Table 3  Correlation of variables (N = 319)

detected no significant relationship between perceived CSR

and unethical pro-organizational behavior when supervi-
28.843
Mean

1.906
0.339

2.940

2.893
4.740
3.125
4.045
3.434
4.043
2.304

sor-employee value congruence was low (β = −0.047,

p < 0.01, 95% CI [−0.219, 0.125]), CI includes 0. Thus,
Hypothesis 3 was supported. We plotted the moderating
5.Company ownership

effect of supervisor-employee value congruence in Fig. 2.

As shown in Fig. 2, the negative relationship between per-
6.Company size
7.Company age

ceived CSR and unethical pro-organizational behavior was

3.Education

stronger when supervisor-employee value congruence was

Variables

10.SEVC
2.Gender

4.Tenure

8.PCSR

11.UPB

high than when supervisor-employee value congruence was

1.Age

9.MI

low. That is to say, supervisor-employee value congruence

13
 Current Psychology

Table 4  Main effect and mediating effect analysis results

Variables UPB MI UPB
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
b SE LLCI ULCI b SE LLCI ULCI b SE LLCI ULCI

Control variables
Age 0 .064 0.102 0.165 0.092 0.096 0.101
Gender −0.029 0.016 0.003 0 .014 −0.028 0.015
Education 0.038 0.066 −0.041 0.059 0.030 0.065
Tenure −0.009 −0.356 0.038 0 .032 −0.002 0.035
Company ownership −0.067 0.047 −0.018 0 .042 −0.071 0.046
Company size −0.160 0.040 0.228 0.036 −0.116 0.042
Company age −0.016 0.029 −0.053 0.026 −0.026 0.283
Independent variable
PCSR −0.328*** 0.071 −0.467 −0.189 0.315*** 0.063 0.190 0.439 −0.267** 0.072 −0.401 −0.125
Mediating
MI −0.193** 0.062 −0.32 −0.070

PCSR = perceived corporate social responsibility, MI = moral identity, SEVC = supervisor-employee value congruence, UPB = unethical pro-
organizational behavior, *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01*, p < 0.05

Table 5  Test of the conditional effect of PCSR on UPB at the level of would strengthen the negative effect of perceived CSR on
SEVC unethical pro-organizational behavior, and the results further
Level b SE LLCI ULCI demonstrated the negatively moderating role of supervisor-
employee value congruence.
Mean-1 SD −0.047 0.087 −0.219 0.125
Mean −0.174 0.062 −0.295 −0.053
Mean + 1 SD −0.301 0.087 −0.471 −0.130

PCSR = perceived corporate social responsibility, MI = moral identity, Discussion and Conclusions
SEVC = supervisor-employee value congruence, UPB = unethical pro-
organizational behavior Theoretical Contribution

The research makes several significant theoretical contribu-

Fig. 2  Moderating effect of SEVC on the relationship between per-
ceived CSR and UPB
tions. First, this study examines the relationship between
perceived CSR and unethical pro-organizational behavior.
Unlike prior micro-level CSR research has mainly focused
employee positive behaviors (e.g., taking charge, Yan, Tang,
& Hao, 2021b) or negative behaviors (e.g., counterproduc-
tive work behavior, Hur et al., 2018; Shin et al., 2017), this
study argues that unethical pro-organizational behavior is a
special type of behavior characterized as unbeneficial and
even destructive (Grabowski et al., 2019). We suggest that
when employees perceive CSR practices as a signal to attend
to the interests of multiple stakeholders, they are less likely
to perform unethical pro-organizational behavior. Therefore,
this study extends the present CSR literature by exploring a
new CSR-related outcome. This finding also aligns with the
view of social cognitive theory, which suggests that social
environment shapes a person’s cognition and behavioral out-
comes (Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2020). Hence, this study
expands the application field of social cognitive theory and
provides us with a new theoretical respective for understand-
ing the effect of CSR on unethical behavior.

13
Current Psychology
Second, this study examines the mediating mechanism
linking CSR and unethical pro-organizational behavior.
Based on social cognitive theory, this study views CSR
practices as pro-organizational and ethical situational cues
(Yan, Hu, & Wu, 2021a) in understanding the potential influ-
ence of employees’ perceptions of CSR on unethical pro-
organizational behavior, our finding suggests that employ-
ees’ perceptions of CSR greatly affect their moral identity,
which ultimately inhibits their unethical pro-organizational
behavior within the organization. Our finding is consistent
with recent empirical findings that CSR can decrease nega-
tive or unethical behaviors via underlying mechanisms (Hur
et al., 2021; Kim & Choi, 2021). To some extent, this study
suggests that moral identity is an efficient inhibitor of unethi-
cal pro-organizational behavior. Thus, our study not only
advances the understanding of the indirect impact of moral
identity between CSR and unethical pro-organizational
behavior. Moreover, this finding supports the view of social
cognitive theory that individual’s behavior is a function of
cognitive process and environmental factors (Boateng et al.,
2016; Dang et al., 2021). It not only helps us have a deeper
understanding of the underlying mechanism of micro-level
CSR affecting employees’ unethical pro-organizational
behavior, but also advances the development of social cog-
nitive theory.
Finally, we suggest supervisor-employee value congru-
ence as a contextual variable to strengthen the relationship
between perceived CSR and unethical pro-organizational
behavior. The result of this study is in line with earlier stud-
ies such as Afsar et al. (2018), Chen et al. (2019) which sug-
gest that organizational situations influence the relationship
between CSR-employee behavior. The result indicates that
employees consider the supervisors’ values well match their
values, they tend to engage in unethical pro-organizational
behaviors less while the organization is carrying out CSR
initiatives. Our study answers recent calls to discuss the pos-
sible boundary conditions of micro-level CSR effects (Jia
et al., 2019; Vlachos et al., 2017). Thus, this study further
provides a better understanding of the impact of CSR by
linking it with a boundary condition.
Managerial Implications
This research has several important implications for man-
agement practices. Our results suggest that CSR can reduce
employee’s unethical pro-organizational behavior. Thus,
companies should be aware of CSR practices and pay more
attention to managing unethical pro-organizational behavior.
Companies should not build an atmosphere of over-emphasis
on profits and one-sided pursuit of profits. Instead, com-
panies should consider their plans from the perspective
of longer-term sustainability, and avoid giving employ-
ees excuses for unethical pro-organizational behavior. In
practical terms, we suggest that organizations should fulfill
meaningful CSR programs (e.g., improving labor conditions,
rewarding employees, fair and transparent procedures, fair
commercial practices, and preserving the environment)
which reflect the company’s philosophy and values. When
employees witness and participate in the design and imple-
mentation of these programs, they will likely conduct ethical
behaviors.
Second, our finding indicates that perceive CSR has an
indirect on unethical pro-organizational behavior via moral
identity. We suggest that the human resource department can
regard moral identity as an important selection criterion in
recruitment. For instance, organizations develop recruitment
and selection tools to attract and retain those candidates who
understand and accept organization’s values and ethics. Also,
organizations should instill and propagate the proper CSR
culture to cultivate moral atmosphere, employees perceive
it as moral and genuine, compelling them to enhance moral
identity. Examples of CSR culture that organizations shape
moral atmosphere are programs that aim at providing con-
sumers with safe and qualified products or services, actively
dealing with customer complaints, improving the quality of
products or services, as well as providing customers with
comprehensive and real products or services.
Finally, considering supervisor-employee value congru-
ence can strengthen the negative relationship between CSR
and unethical pro-organization behavior, the results urge
organizations to not only pay attention to the candidates’
work ability, but also consider whether the values of the
candidates are consistent with those of the department or
team leader when organizations recruit new employees. At
the same time, when organizations manage teams, leaders
should choose those subordinates whose values match their
values as team members.
Research Limitations and Further Research
Directions
This research has several limitations. First, this study utilizes
two-wave surveys at an average of two months’ interval and
thus cannot determine conclusively the causality between
perceived CSR and unethical pro-organizational behavior.
Future research can adopt an experimental or longitudinal
approach to examine the above findings. Second, our study
focused on the new ventures in China, the results of this
study may not be generalized to any other companies and
business sectors, so further research can be conducted in
other industries or other countries. Third, the CSR literature
suggests that CSR influences employee behavior through
various mediating and moderating mechanisms (Islam
et al., 2019). In future studies, other mediating and mod-
erating variables can be considered. For example, a sense
of meaningful work, psychological capital, and job security
13

can be used to explain the association mentioned above. As
posited by Farooq, Payaud, Merunk and Valette-Florence
(2014), Jia et al. (2019), Su and Swanson (2019), individual
characteristics and cultural values may be important mod-
erators. Therefore, the moderating role of individualism or
collectivism in the relationship between CSR and unethical
pro-organizational behaviors can be tested in future studies.
Conclusion
In closing, this study explores how micro-CSR could inhibit
employee unethical pro-organization behavior by adopting
social cognitive theory. Our results suggest that perceived
CSR can negatively influence unethical pro-organizational
behavior and that moral identity functions as a mediator
for this link. It indicates that perceived CSR decreases the
level of employee’s unethical pro-organizational behavior
by increasing the level of moral identity. Moreover, we find
that supervisor-employee value congruence serves as a key
contextual factor in the CSR-unethical pro-organizational
behavior link. The higher employees’ supervisor-employee
value congruence is, the stronger direct influence perceived
CSR exerts on unethical pro-organizational behavior.
Acknowledgments This research was funded by the financial support
from the Projects of the National Social Science Foundation of China
(No. 19BGL131) and National Natural Science Foundation of China
(NSFC) (No. 71802097).
Data Availability The datasets generated and analyzed during this
investigation are available from the corresponding author upon rea-
sonable request.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interests The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interests.
Ethical Approval The research involving human participants was
reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of College of Eco-
nomics & Management, China Three Gorges University.
Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained from all individual
participants included in the study.
References
Afsar, B., Cheema, S., & Javed, F. (2018). Activating employee's pro-
environmental behaviors: The role of CSR, organizational iden-
tification, and environmentally specific servant leadership. Cor-
porate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management,
25(5), 904–911. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​csr.​1506
Afsar, B., Al-Ghazali, B., & Umrani, W. (2020). Corporate social
responsibility, work meaningfulness, and employee engage-
ment: The joint moderating effects of incremental moral belief
13
Current Psychology
and moral identity centrality. Corporate Social Responsibility
and Environmental Management, 27(3), 1264–1278. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1002/​csr.​1882
Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about
corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda.
Journal of Management, 38(4), 932–968. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 177/​
01492​06311​436079
Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2019). On corporate social responsibility,
sensemaking, and the search for meaningfulness through work.
Journal of Management, 45(3), 1057–1086. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1177/​01492​06317​691575
Aquino, K., & Kay, A. (2018). A social cognitive model of moral iden-
tity. In K. Gray, J. Graham, K. Gray, & J. Graham (Eds.), Atlas of
moral psychology (pp. 133–140). GuilfordPress.
Aquino, K., & Reed, I. I. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1423–1440.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​0022-​3514.​83.6.​1423
Aquino, K., Freeman, D., Reed II, A., Lim, V. K., & Felps, W. (2009).
Testing a social-cognitive model of moral behavior: The interac-
tive influence of situations and moral identity centrality. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(1), 123–141. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1037/​a0015​406
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action.
Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of moral thought and
action. In W. M. Kurtines & J. L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Handbook of
moral behavior and development: Theory, research and applica-
tions (Vol. 1, pp. 71–129). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc..
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1097/​00002​826-​19920​2001-​00875
Bandura, A. (2014). Social cognitive theory of moral thought and
action. In Handbook of moral behavior and development (pp.
69–128). Psychology Press. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2307/​258004
Bao, Y., & Li, C. (2019). From moral leadership to positive work
behaviors: The mediating roles of value congruence and leader-
member exchange. Frontiers of Business Research in China,
13(6), 1–18. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s11782-​019-​0052-3
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable
distinction in social psychological research. Journal of Person-
ality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1037/​0022-​3514.​51.6.​1173
Begley, T. M., Lee, C., Fang, Y., et al. (2002). Power distance as a
moderator of the relationship between justice and employee out-
comes in a sample of Chinese employees. Journal of Manage-
rial Psychology, 17(8), 692–711. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​02683​
94021​04504​93
Boateng, H., Adam, D. R., Okoe, A. F., & Anning-Dorson, T. (2016).
Assessing the determinants of internet banking adoption inten-
tions: A social cognitive theory perspective. Computers in
Human Behavior, 65, 468–478. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​chb.​
2016.​09.​017
Briones Peñalver, A. J., Bernal Conesa, J. A., & de Nieves Nieto, C.
(2018). Analysis of corporate social responsibility in Spanish
agribusiness and its influence on innovation and performance.
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Manage-
ment, 25(2), 182–193. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​csr.​1448
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185–216. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1177/​13591​04570​00100​301
Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2009). Leader-follower values congru-
ence: Are socialized charismatic leaders better able to achieve
it? Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 478–490. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1037/​a0014​069
Bryant, W., & Merritt, S. M. (2021). Unethical pro-organizational
behavior and positive leader–employee relationships. Jour-
nal of Business Ethics, 168, 777–793. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s10551-​019-​04211-x
Current Psychology
Byza, O. A., Dörr, S. L., Schuh, S. C., & Maier, G. W. (2019).
When leaders and followers match: The impact of objective
value congruence, value extremity, and empowerment on
employee commitment and job satisfaction. Journal of Busi-
ness Ethics, 158(4), 1097–1112. https://​d oi.​o rg/​1 0.​1 007/​
s10551-​017-​3748-3
Cable, D. M., & DeRue, D. S. (2002). The convergent and discrimi-
nant validity of subjective fit perceptions. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 87(5), 875–884. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 037//0​ 021-9​ 010.​
87.5.​875
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility:
Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders.
Business Borizons (July/August), 39–48. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/​
0007-​6813(91)​90005-G
Carroll, A. B., & Shabana, K. M. (2010). The business case for cor-
porate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and
practice. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1),
85–105. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/j.​1468-​2370.​2009.​00275.x
Castille, C. M., Buckner, J. E., & Thoroughgood, C. N. (2018). Proso-
cial citizens without a moral compass? Examining the relation-
ship between Machiavellianism and unethical pro-organizational
behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 149(4), 919–930. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10551-​016-​3079-9
Chen, M., & Liang, J. (2017). High performance expectation and
unethical pro-organizational behavior: Social cognitive perspec-
tive. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49(1), 94–105. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.​
3724/​SP.J.​1041.​2017.​00094
Chen, M., Chen, C. C., & Sheldon, O. J. (2016). Relaxing moral rea-
soning to win: How organizational identification relates to uneth-
ical pro-organizational behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology,
101(8), 1082–1096. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​apl00​00111
Chen, Z. F., Hong, C., & Occa, A. (2019). How different CSR dimen-
sions impact organization-employee relationships: The moder-
ating role of CSR-culture fit. Corporate Communications: An
International Journal, 24(1), 63–78. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​
CCIJ-​07-​2018-​0078
Cheng, K., Wei, F., & Lin, Y. (2019). The trickle-down effect of
responsible leadership on unethical pro-organizational behav-
ior: The moderating role of leader-follower value congruence.
Journal of Business Research, 102, 34–43. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​jbusr​es.​2019.​04.​044
Cooper, C. L., & Lu, L. (2016). Presenteeism as a global phenomenon:
Unraveling the psychosocial mechanisms from the perspective of
social cognitive theory. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management,
23(2), 216–231. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​CCSM-​09-​2015-​0106
Dang, C. T., Umphress, E. E., & Mitchell, M. S. (2017). Leader
social accounts of subordinates’ unethical behavior: Examining
observer reactions to leader social accounts with moral disen-
gagement language. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(10),
1448–1461. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​apl00​00233
Dang, XT, Wang, J., Nguyen, H. V., Nguyen, Q. H., & Nguyen, N.
(2021). A moderated mediation study of consumer extrinsic
motivation and CSR beliefs towards organic drinking products
in an emerging economy. British Food Journal. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1108/​BFJ-​12-​2020-​1096.
De Roeck, K., & Farooq, O. (2018). Corporate social responsibil-
ity and ethical leadership: Investigating their interactive effect
on employees’ socially responsible behaviors. Journal of
Business Ethics, 151(4), 923–939. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s10551-​017-​3656-6
Edwards, J. R., & Cable, D. M. (2009). The value of value congruence.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(3), 654–677. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1037/​a0014​891
Erdogan, B., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2004). Work value con-
gruence and intrinsic career success: The compensatory roles of
leader-member exchange and perceived organizational support.
Personnel Psychology, 57, 305–332. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/j.​
1744-​6570.​2004.​tb024​93.x
Farooq, O., Payaud, M., Merunka, D., & Valette-Florence, P. (2014).
The impact of corporate social responsibility on organizational
commitment: Exploring multiple mediation mechanisms. Jour-
nal of Business Ethics, 125(4), 563–580. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 007/​
s10551-​013-​1928-3
Farooq, O., Rupp, D. E., & Farooq, M. (2017). The multiple pathways
through which internal and external corporate social responsi-
bility influence organizational identification and multifoci out-
comes: The moderating role of cultural and social orientations.
Academy of Management Journal, 60(3), 954–985. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​5465/​amj.​2014.​0849
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation
models with unobservable variables and measurement error.
Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1177/​00222​43781​01800​104
Garriga, E., & Melé, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theo-
ries: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1),
51–71.
Glavas, A. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and organizational
psychology: An integrative review. Frontiers in Psychology, 7,
144. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​fpsyg.​2016.​00144
Grabowski, D., Chudzicka-Czupała, A., Chrupała-Pniak, M., Mello,
A. L., & Paruzel-Czachura, M. (2019). Work ethic and organiza-
tional commitment as conditions of unethical pro-organizational
behavior: Do engaged workers break the ethical rules? Inter-
national Journal of Selection and Assessment, 27(2), 193–202.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​ijsa.​12241
Guo, Q., Sun, P., Cai, M., Zhang, X., & Song, K. (2019). Why are
smarter individuals more prosocial? A study on the mediating
roles of empathy and moral identity. Intelligence, 75, 1–8. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​intell.​2019.​02.​006
Hansen, S. D., Dunford, B. B., Alge, B. J., & Jackson, C. L. (2016).
Corporate social responsibility, ethical leadership, and trust pro-
pensity: A multi-experience model of perceived ethical climate.
Journal of Business Ethics, 137(4), 649–662. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1007/​s10551-​015-​2745-7
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and con-
ditional process analysis. Guilford.
Hoffman, B. J., Bynum, B. H., Piccolo, R. F., & Sutton, A. W. (2011).
Person-organization value congruence: How transformational
leaders influence work group effectiveness. Academy of Man-
agement Journal, 54(4), 779–796. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5465/​amj.​
2011.​64870​139
Horng, J. S., Hsu, H., & Tsai, C. Y. (2019). Learning corporate ethics
and social responsibility: Developing an influential curriculum
for undergraduate tourism and hospitality students. The Journal
of Hospitality Leisure Sport and Tourism, 24, 100–109. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jhlste.​2019.​01.​003
Hur, W. M., Moon, T. W., & Lee, H. G. (2018). Employee engagement
in CSR initiatives and customer-directed counterproductive work
behavior (CWB): The mediating roles of organizational civil-
ity norms and job calling. Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management, 25(6), 1087–1098. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1002/​csr.​1522
Hur, W. M., Moon, T. W., & Choi, W. H. (2021). The role of job
crafting and perceived organizational support in the link between
employees’ CSR perceptions and job performance: A moderated
mediation model. Current Psychology, 40(7), 3151–3165. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s12144-​019-​00242-9
Inam, A., Ho, J. A., Ng, S. I., & Mohamed, R. (2021). Inhibiting
unethical pro-organizational behavior: harnessing the effects
of responsible leadership and leader-member exchange. Inter-
national Journal of Manpower, https:// ​ d oi. ​ o rg/ ​ 1 0. ​ 1 108/​
IJM-​05-​2020-​0252.
13

Islam, T., Ali, G., & Asad, H. (2019). Environmental CSR and pro-
environmental behaviors to reduce environmental dilapidation:
The moderating role of empathy. Management Research Review,
42(3), 332–351. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​MRR-​12-​2017-​0408
Jannat, T., Alam, S. S., Ho, Y. H., Omar, N. A., & Lin, C. Y. (2021).
Can corporate ethics programs reduce unethical behavior? Threat
appraisal or coping appraisal. Journal of Business Ethics. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10551-​020-​04726-8.
Jia, Y., Yan, J., Liu, T., & Huang, J. (2019). How does internal and
external CSR affect employees’ work engagement? Exploring
multiple mediation mechanisms and boundary conditions. Inter-
national Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,
16, 2476. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​ijerp​h1614​2476
John, A., Qadeer, F., Shahzadi, G., & Jia, F. (2019). Getting paid to
be good: How and when employees respond to corporate social
responsibility? Journal of Cleaner Production, 215, 784–795.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2019.​01.​074
Johnson, H. H., & Umphress, E. E. (2019). To help my supervisor:
Identification, moral identity, and unethical pro-supervisor
behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2), 519–534. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10551-​018-​3836-z
Khan, H. U. R., Ali, M., Olya, H. G., Zulqarnain, M., & Khan, Z. R.
(2018). Transformational leadership, corporate social respon-
sibility, organizational innovation, and organizational perfor-
mance: Symmetrical and asymmetrical analytical approaches.
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Manage-
ment, 25(6), 1270–1283. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​csr.​1637
Kim, B. J., & Choi, S. Y. (2021). “Does a good company reduce the
unhealthy behavior of its members?”: The mediating effect of
organizational identification and the moderating effect of moral
identity. International Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 18, 6969. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.3​ 390/i​ jerph​ 18136​ 969
Kim, B. J., Kim, M. J., & Kim, T. H. (2021). “The power of ethical
leadership”: The influence of corporate social responsibility on
creativity, the mediating function of psychological safety, and
the moderating role of ethical leadership. International Journal
of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 2968. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​3390/​ijerp​h1806​2968
Ko, S. H., Moon, T. W., & Hur, W. M. (2018). Bridging service
employees’ perceptions of CSR and organizational citizenship
behavior: The moderated mediation effects of personal traits.
Current Psychology, 37(4), 816–831. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s12144-​017-​9565-0
Koričan, M., & Jelavić, I. (2008). CSR, women and SMEs: The Croa-
tian perspective. Social Responsibility Journal, 4(1/2), 56–62.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​17471​11081​08568​39
Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2005). Best of breed: When it comes to gaining
a market edge while supporting a social cause,“corporate social
marketing” leads the pack. Social Marketing Quarterly, 11(3–4),
91–103. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​15245​00050​04144​80
Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005).
Consequences of individuals’ ft at work: A meta-analysis of per-
son-job, person–organization, person-group, and person supervi-
sor ft. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 281–342. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1111/j.​1744-​6570.​2005.​00672.x
Kunda, M. M., Ataman, G., & Kartaltepe Behram, N. (2019). Corpo-
rate social responsibility and organizational citizenship behavior:
The mediating role of job satisfaction. Journal of Global Respon-
sibility, 10(1), 47–68. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 108/J​ GR-0​ 6-2​ 018-0​ 018
Lawrence, E. R., & Kacmar, K. M. (2017). Exploring the impact of
job insecurity on employees' unethical behavior. Business Ethics
Quarterly, 27, 39–70. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1017/​beq.​2016.​58
Lee, D., Choi, Y., Youn, S., & Chun, J. U. (2017). Ethical leadership
and employee moral voice: The mediating role of moral efficacy
and the moderating role of leader-follower value congruence.
13
Current Psychology
Journal of Business Ethics, 141(1), 47–57. https://d​ oi.​org/​10.​
1007/​s10551-​015-​2689-y
Li, Y. B., Zhang, G. Q., Wu, T. J., & Peng, C. L. (2020). Employee’s
corporate social responsibility perception and sustained innova-
tive behavior: Based on the psychological identity of employees.
Sustainability, 12, 8604. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su122​08604
Lin, Y., & Cheng, K. (2017). Differential leadership and employees’
unethical pro-organizational behavior: A perspective of insider
and outsider. Journal of Management Science, 30(3), 35–50.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​3969/j.​issn.​1672-​0334.​2017.​03.​004
Liu, Z., Guo, Y., Liao, J., Li, Y., & Wang, X. (2021). The effect of cor-
porate social responsibility on employee advocacy behaviors: A
perspective of conservation of resources. Chinese Management
Studies. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​CMS-​08-​2020-​0325
Lythreatis, S., Mostafa, A. M. S., & Wang, X. (2019). Participative
leadership and organizational identification in SMEs in the
MENA region: Testing the roles of CSR perceptions and pride
in membership. Journal of Business Ethics, 156(3), 635–650.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10551-​017-​3557-8
Manimegalai, S., & Baral, R. (2018). Examining the mediating role
of organizational trust in the relationship between CSR prac-
tices and job outcomes. Social Responsibility Journal, 14(3),
433–447. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​SRJ-​01-​2017-​0007
Mao, Y., He, J., Morrison, A. M., & Andres Coca-Stefaniak, J. (2020).
Effects of tourism CSR on employee psychological capital in
the COVID-19 crisis: From the perspective of conservation of
resources theory. Current Issues in Tourism, 1-19. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/​
10.​1080/​13683​500.​2020.​17707​06
Martin, S. R., Kish-Gephart, J. J., & Detert, J. R. (2014). Blind
forces:Ethical infrastructures and moral disengagement in organi-
zations. Organizational Psychology Review, 4, 295–325. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1177/​20413​86613​518576
Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: A con-
ceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate
social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2),
404–424. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5465/​amr.​2008.​31193​458
Miao, Q., Eva, N., Newman, A., Nielsen, I., & Herbert, K. (2020).
Ethical leadership and unethical pro-organizational behavior: The
mediating mechanism of reflective moral attentiveness. Applied
Psychology, 69(3), 834–853. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 111/a​ pps.1​ 2210
Mostovicz, I., Kakabadse, N., & Kakabadse, A. (2009). CSR: The role
of leadership in driving ethical outcomes. Corporate Govern-
ance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 9(4),
448–460. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​14720​70091​09849​90
Ong, M., Mayer, D. M., Tost, L. P., & Wellman, N. (2018). When
corporate social responsibility motivates employee citizenship
behavior: The sensitizing role of task significance. Organiza-
tional Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 144, 44–59.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​obhdp.​2017.​09.​006
Overall, J. (2016). Unethical behavior in organizations: Empirical find-
ings that challenge CSR and egoism theory. Business Ethics: A
European Review, 25(2), 113–127. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​beer.​
12110
Park, E. (2019). Corporate social responsibility as a determinant of
corporate reputation in the airline industry. Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services, 47, 215–221. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
jretc​onser.​2018.​11.​013
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources
of method bias in social science research and recommendations
on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1146/​annur​ev-​psych-​120710-​100452
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for
estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior
Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4), 717–731.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​3758/​BF032​06553
Current Psychology
Qu, Y. E., Dasborough, M. T., Zhou, M., & Todorova, G. (2019).
Should authentic leaders value power? A study of leaders’ val-
ues and perceived value congruence. Journal of Business Ethics,
156(4), 1027–1044. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10551-​017-​3617-0
Randy Evans, W., & Davis, W. D. (2011). An examination of perceived
corporate citizenship, job applicant attraction, and CSR work role
definition. Business & Society, 50(3), 456–480. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1177/​00076​50308​323517
Rupp, D. E., & Mallory, D. B. (2015). Corporate social responsibil-
ity: Psychological, person-centric, and progressing. Annual
Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational
Behavior, 2(1), 211–236. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1146/​annur​ev-​orgps​
ych-​032414-​111505
Rupp, D. E., Ganapathi, J., Aguilera, R. V., & Williams, C. A. (2006).
Employee reactions to corporate social responsibility: An organi-
zational justice framework. Journal of Organizational Behav-
ior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and
Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 27(4), 537–543.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​job.​380
Rupp, D. E., Shao, R., Thornton, M. A., & Skarlicki, D. P. (2013).
Applicants' and employees' reactions to corporate social respon-
sibility: The moderating effects of first-party justice perceptions
and moral identity. Personnel Psychology, 66(4), 895–933.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​peps.​12030
Rupp, D. E., Shao, R., Skarlicki, D. P., Paddock, E. L., Kim, T. Y., &
Nadisic, T. (2018). Corporate social responsibility and employee
engagement: The moderating role of CSR-specific relative auton-
omy and individualism. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
39(5), 559–579. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​job.​2282
Schuh, S. C., Cai, Y., Kaluza, A. J., Steffens, N. K., David, E. M., &
Haslam, A. (2021). Do leaders condone unethical pro-organi-
zational employee behaviors? The complex interplay between
leader organizational identification and moral disengagement.
Human Resource Management, 1-21. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​
hrm.​22060
Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020). Motivation and social
cognitive theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60,
101832. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​cedps​ych.​2019.​101832
Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Toward a psychological structure
of human values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
53, 550–562. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​0022-​3514.​53.3.​550
Sendlhofer, T. (2020). Decoupling from moral responsibility for
CSR: Employees' visionary procrastination at a SME. Journal
of Business Ethics, 167(2), 361–378. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s10551-​019-​04174-z
Setó-Pamies, D., & Papaoikonomou, E. (2016). A multi-level perspec-
tive for the integration of ethics, corporate social responsibility
and sustainability (ECSRS) in management education. Journal
of Business Ethics, 136(3), 523–538. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s10551-​014-​2535-7
Shin, I., Hur, W. M., Kim, M., & Kang, S. (2017). Hidden roles of
CSR: Perceived corporate social responsibility as a preventive
against counterproductive work behaviors. Sustainability, 9, 955.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su906​0955
Singhapakdi, A., Lee, D. J., Sirgy, M. J., Roh, H., Senasu, K., & Grace,
B. Y. (2019). Effects of perceived organizational CSR value and
employee moral identity on job satisfaction: A study of business
organizations in Thailand. Asian Journal of Business Ethics,
8(1), 53–72. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s13520-​019-​00088-1
Su, L., & Swanson, S. R. (2019). Perceived corporate social responsi-
bility's impact on the well-being and supportive green behaviors
of hotel employees: The mediating role of the employee-corpo-
rate relationship. Tourism Management, 72, 437–450. https://d​ oi.​
org/​10.​1016/j.​tourm​an.​2019.​01.​009
Suganthi, L. (2019). Examining the relationship between corporate
social responsibility, performance, employees’ pro-environmental
behavior at work with green practices as mediator. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 232, 739–750. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
jclep​ro.​2019.​05.​295
Tao, W., Song, B., Ferguson, M. A., & Kochhar, S. (2018). Employees’
prosocial behavioral intentions through empowerment in CSR
decision-making. Public Relations Review, 44(5), 667–680.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​pubrev.​2018.​07.​002
Teng, Z., Nie, Q., Zhu, Z., & Guo, C. (2020). Violent video game expo-
sure and (cyber) bullying perpetration among Chinese youth: The
moderating role of trait aggression and moral identity. Computers
in Human Behavior, 104, 106193. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​chb.​
2019.​106193
Thau, S., Derfler-Rozin, R., Pitesa, M., Mitchell, M. S., & Pillutla, M.
M. (2015). Unethical for the sake of the group: Risk of social
exclusion and pro-group unethical behavior. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 100(1), 98–113. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​a0036​708
Umphress, E. E., & Bingham, J. B. (2011). When employees do bad
things for good reasons: Examining unethical pro-organizational
behaviors. Organization Science, 22(3), 621–640. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/​
10.​1287/​orsc.​1100.​0559
Umphress, E. E., Bingham, J. B., & Mitchell, M. S. (2010). Unethical
behavior in the name of the company: The moderating effect of
organizational identification and positive reciprocity beliefs on
unethical pro-organizational behavior. Journal of Applied Psy-
chology, 95(4), 769–780. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​a0019​214
Verčič, A. T., & Ćorić, D. S. (2018). The relationship between reputa-
tion, employer branding and corporate social responsibility. Pub-
lic Relations Review, 44(4), 444–452. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
pubrev.​2018.​06.​005
Vlachos, P. A., Panagopoulos, N. G., & Rapp, A. A. (2014). Employee
judgments of and behaviors toward corporate social responsi-
bility: A multi-study investigation of direct, cascading, and
moderating effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(7),
990–1017. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​job.​1946
Vlachos, P. A., Panagopoulos, N. G., Bachrach, D. G., & Morgeson,
F. P. (2017). The effects of managerial and employee attribu-
tions for corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 38(7), 1111–1129. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1002/​job.​2189
Wang, X., Yang, L., Yang, J., Wang, P., & Lei, L. (2017a). Trait anger
and cyberbullying among young adults: A moderated mediation
model of moral disengagement and moral identity. Computers
in Human Behavior, 73, 519–526. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​chb.​
2017.​03.​073
Wang, Y., Wang, G., Chen, Q., & Li, L. (2017b). Depletion, moral
identity, and unethical behavior: Why people behave unethically
after self-control exertion. Consciousness and Cognition, 56,
188–198. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​concog.​2017.​09.​007
Wang, J., Zhang, Z., & Jia, M. (2019a). Echoes of corporate social
responsibility: How and when does CSR influence employees’
promotive and prohibitive voices? Journal of Business Ethics,
1-17. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10551-​019-​04151-6
Wang, T., Long, L., Zhang, Y., & He, W. (2019b). A social exchange
perspective of employee–organization relationships and
employee unethical pro-organizational behavior: The moderat-
ing role of individual moral identity. Journal of Business Ethics,
159(2), 473–489. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10551-​018-​3782-9
Wang, X. H. F., Yang, J., Cao, R., & Lee, B. Y. (2019c). Corporate
social responsibility and collective OCB: A social identification
perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2720. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​3389/​fpsyg.​2019.​02720
Winterich, K. P., Aquino, K., Mittal, V., & Swartz, R. (2013). When
moral identity symbolization motivates prosocial behavior: The
role of recognition and moral identity internalization. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 98(5), 759–770. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​
a0033​177
13

Wuttichindanon, S. (2017). Corporate social responsibility disclosure-
choices of report and its determinants: Empirical evidence from
firms listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand. Kasetsart Jour-
nal of Social Sciences, 38(2), 156–162. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.​
kjss.​2016.​07.​002
Xia, H., Ng, J. C. Y., & Wu, S. (2020). Exploring the effects of unethi-
cal pro-organizational behaviour on innovation strategy: An
examination based on firm survey in China. Asia Pacific Business
Review, 1-13. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​13602​381.​2020.​17807​13
Xu, T., & Lv, Z. (2018). HPWS and unethical pro-organizational
behavior: A moderated mediation model. Journal of Mana-
gerial Psychology, 33(3), 265–278. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​
JMP-​12-​2017-​0457
Yan, H., Hu, X., & Wu, C. H. (2021a). When and how can organiza-
tional punishment stop unethical pro-organizational behaviors in
hospitality? International Journal of Hospitality Management,
94, 102811. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijhm.​2020.​102811
Yan, A., Tang, L., & Hao, Y. (2021b). Can corporate social responsi-
bility promote employee taking charge? The mediating role of
thriving at work and the moderating role of task significance.
Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 613676. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​
fpsyg.​2020.​613676
Yen, G. F., & Yang, H. T. (2018). Does consumer empathy influence
consumer responses to strategic corporate social responsibility?
The dual mediation of moral identity. Sustainability, 10, 1812.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su100​61812
Yin, C., Zhang, Y., & Lu, L. (2021). Employee-oriented CSR and
unethical pro-organizational behavior: The role of perceived
insider status and ethical climate rules. Sustainability, 13, 6613.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su131​26613
13
View publication stats
Current Psychology
Zahra, S. A. (1993). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm
behavior: A critique and extension. Entrepreneurship Theory
and Practice, 17(4), 5–21. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​10422​58793​
01700​401
Zhang, S. (2020). Workplace spirituality and unethical pro-organiza-
tional behavior: The mediating effect of job satisfaction. Jour-
nal of Business Ethics, 161(3), 687–705. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 007/​
s10551-​018-​3966-3
Zhang, X., Liang, L., Tian, G., & Tian, Y. (2020). Heroes or villains?
The dark side of charismatic leadership and unethical pro-
organizational behavior. International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 17, 5546. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​
ijerp​h1715​5546
Zhou, Z., Luo, B. N., & Tang, T. L. P. (2018). Corporate social respon-
sibility excites ‘exponential’ positive employee engagement: The
Matthew effect in CSR and sustainable policy. Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(4), 339–354.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​csr.​1464
Zhu, Q., Yin, H., Liu, J., & Lai, K. H. (2014). How is employee per-
ception of organizational efforts in corporate social responsibil-
ity related to their satisfaction and loyalty towards developing
harmonious society in Chinese enterprises? Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management, 21(1), 28–40.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​csr.​1302
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.