Search

While prior research indicates that managers' efforts to facilitate moral repair in the aftermath of workplace wrongdoing can benefit both offenders and organizations, in this study we build on the restorative justice and unethical prosocial behavior theoretical frameworks to examine the potential dark side of managerial-facilitated moral repair. Results from a multi-wave survey of 244 full-time employees, where employees were asked to recall an incident where they had intentionally or unintentionally caused harm at work, show that their managers' restorative justice actions are associated with employees engaging in unethical pro-supervisor behavior (UPSB). This effect is mediated by their gratitude, desire to reciprocate, and identification with their manager. Importantly, the relationships between offending employees' gratitude and desire to reciprocate positive treatment and UPSB are weaker for employees with a strong moral identity. Implications for restorative justice theory and managerial practice are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although there is growing awareness of the importance of moral repair in understanding processes and outcomes of workplace wrongdoing, we know little about the role of the manager in facilitating moral repair of offenders. Based on qualitative accounts from 70 managers, Study 1 develops an inductive model of the manager-facilitated moral repair process, including motivating factors, manager-initiated actions intended to facilitate offender moral repair, facilitators and inhibitors, and outcomes of the moral repair process. Study 2 tests the proposed relationships between manager-facilitated moral repair actions and offender-related outcomes using quantitative survey data from 283 employees. The results of both studies indicate that manager-facilitated moral repair actions can positively influence offender satisfaction, commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviors, and reduce the likelihood of reoffending. Contrary to manager expectations, however, Study 2's results suggest that including third parties in reparative meetings may be counterproductive in terms of improving offender outcomes. Implications for incorporating organizational dynamics in the study of moral repair and for improving management practice are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]