Ethical Issues and Dilemmas at the Modern Workplace


Issues of ethics have been a significant concern within the workplace for decades. Adherence to ethics is paramount in the survival of every organization. Adherence to ethics contributes towards the improvement of business performance due to increment in the level of employee trust and commitment, high level of investor loyalty, and customer satisfaction (Jones, 2005). This aspect results in an increment in firms’ profitability. There are different definitions of the term “ethics” that have been postulated in an effort to explain the meaning of the time. The most common report of the term ethics includes what is good or bad in reference to a particular situation. Ethics is also composed of values, standards, and principles that direct the behavior of employees within their workplaces. Good moral values contribute to the development of healthy norms such as accountability, trust, and high-level integrity amongst employees (Ferrell & Ferrell, 2012). On the other hand, principles cover definite behaviors that are considered universally acceptable.

Despite the importance of ethics in the workplace, there has been an increment in cases of misconduct within businesses in different economies. A survey on ethics conducted by the Ethics Resource Center (ERC) in the US on 3,000 employees revealed that 49 percent of the respondents have at one time or another observed case of unethical behavior. Ferrell and Ferrell (2012) define an ethical issue in an organization to include a problem or situation that demands an organization to select what is moral or unethical amongst various options. Some of the specific ethical issues that have increased significantly include misuse of organizational resources, harassment, accounting fraud, bribery, conflict of interest, and abusive behavior. Increment in cases of unethical behavior in workplaces has shaken stakeholder confidence. Unethical behavior amongst employees affects an organization’s public trust adversely (Bowie & Schnieder, 2011). Different governments have implemented various measures, such as laws, in an effort to enhance ethics within the workplace (Lagan & Moran, 2005). The US is one of the economies that have enacted such laws (The Sarbanes-Oxley Act) aimed at enhancing ethics.

Organizations are also developing formal and informal ethical programs that aim at preventing unethical behaviors amongst employees, thus averting a major crisis. Some of the issues that organizations are increasingly becoming concerned with include transparency and nurturing interactive communication. The major challenge faced by organizations in dealing with unethical behavior in workplaces arises from the fact that managers do not recognize unethical behavior as a risk (Robbins, 2009). However, evil actions can be more damaging compared to other risks that businesses try to mitigate using conventional methods such as insurance. In view of the adverse effects of unethical behavior in workplaces, it is imperative for business leaders to consider failure to recognize unethical behavior amongst employees as the most significant risk that an organization may face. It is essential for firms’ management teams to be cognizant of the various ethical issues in workplaces. The objective of this paper is to identify major ethical issues in the workplace today.

Literature review

Recognizing ethical issues in the workplace

According to Ferrell and Ferrell (2012), it is difficult for organizations to recognize ethical issues. Failure to identify the ethical problems can endanger the success of an organization. Some employees may be engaged in unethical practices that aim at benefiting themselves rather than benefiting their organizations (Sims, 2003). Employees can engage in various forms of unethical issues. Some of the ethical issues that organizations should be concerned with include:

Honesty, fairness, and integrity

Honesty refers to the element of trustworthiness and truthfulness amongst employees. An honest employee conveys all information without concealing anything. Individuals possess different levels of openness. The lowest level of honesty is referred to as Li and is concerned with an individual’s superficial desires. Individuals characterized by this level of honesty strive to appear to be honest. Additionally, they are motivated by self-interest. The second category of honesty is referred to as Yi. At this level, an individual’s honesty revolves around the concept of reciprocity. Ren ranks as the highest level of honesty. Individuals possessing this level of loyalty are motivated to act honestly due to their level of empathy and understanding (Ferrell & Ferrell, 2012).

In the current business environment, honesty has become a major ethical issue, and there are different reasons that explain why honesty has become a problem. Firstly, business relationships arise from human relationships, which are in themselves directed by rules, need to attain personal advancement, competition, and the need to achieve profit maximization. Additionally, some individuals consider businesses to be like a game. However, it is not possible to impose a rule and morality in some games (Ferrell & Ferrell, 2012). This nature of reasoning has led to employees practicing unacceptable behaviors in organizations. Additionally, it has directed to some individuals comparing businesses to warfare. This element can have adverse effects on the operation of a business entity because employees will consider honesty to be a less critical virtue to uphold. The part of competition may lead to employees engaging in dubious conduct.

In an effort to attain their economic motive, some organizations engage in illegal activities. Dishonesty refers to a lack of integrity or failure to disclose necessary information. Other actions that constitute dishonesty include lying, stealing, and cheating. There are different reasons associated with deception in the workplace, and these reasons are related to organizational and individual pressures. For example, some employees may lie in an effort to achieve the predetermined performance objectives. Fairness entails being impartial and equitable in the delivery of services, and different factors stimulate individuals to be fair. These factors include reciprocity, equality, and the need to attain optimization. In organizations, equality deals with ensuring that income is equally distributed amongst employees. The element of reciprocity is concerned with ensuring that employees’ wages and salaries are equivalent to their efforts. An example of ethical issues with regard to fairness is well illustrated by the prevailing wage difference between the Chief Executive Officer and the lower-level employees. On the other hand, optimization entails the trade-off that exists between efficiency and other issues of equity, such as equality.

Integrity ranks as an essential virtue in the operation of business entities. According to Robbins (2009), integrity is directly related to ethical behavior in organizations. Possessing a high level of integrity ensures that employees do not deviate from the laid out standards of conduct. An organization can attain a high level of integrity by avoiding unethical practices such as deception and coercion. Despite organizations’ commitment towards the attainment of their economic objectives, it is vital for their operations to hinge on a high level of integrity, honesty, and fairness because there is a direct relationship that exists between an organization’s success and the level of honesty, justice, and integrity.

Ethical issues and dilemmas in the workplace

Misuse of organization resource

In their operation, organizations have formulated various policies that guide the utilization of company resources. However, a study by the Ethics Resource Centre revealed that misuse of the company is the leading type of misconduct in organizations. Enforcement of the instituted rules and regulations on resource utilization appears insurmountable for all the employees have developed a notion that they are entitled to using specific organizational resources. Misuse of company resources can range from using company equipment such as telephones and computers without the necessary authority to embezzlement of corporate funds (Bredeson & Goree, 2011).

In the retail business environment, cases of employees stealing products are high as compared to customer’s shoplifting. Another element of misuse of company resources is associated with time theft. Despite the fact that it is difficult to determine time theft costs, it is estimated that organizations lose billions of dollars due to the misuse of time by employees. On average, it is estimated that each employee “steals” approximately 4.25 hours every week through long excessive socializing, lunch breaks, late arrivals, leaving work early, and seeking inappropriate sick-offs, and watching videos during working hours.

Changes in the business environment have led to organizations considering implementing information communication and technology systems such as computers, which are connected to the Internet (Anandarajan & Simmers, 2003). The objective is to attain a high competitive advantage, for example, by operating more efficiently. However, misuse of the computer is one of the ethical issues that organizations are facing. Some employees may use the computer system to chat with their friends, relatives, and stockbrokers. Other activities that amount to a misuse of an organization’s computer system include accessing social sites such as Twitter and Facebook, downloading videos, music, undertaking online shopping, and sending personal emails.


This refers to the distortion of truth, and two main types of lies have become an ethical issue in workplaces. The first type is lying by commission, which involves forging a perception using words whose intention is to distort the message received by another party. In workplaces, employees may lie regarding their presence at their workstations, completion of job assignments, or on their expense reports. Alternatively, lying by the commission may also be perpetrated using noise. For example, if an employee does not want his or her message to be clearly understood by the intended receiver, he or she might prefer communicating in a manner, which the receiver does not understand. Employees can achieve this aspect by using technical terms that relate to their job description.

Another way through which employees may lie through commission is by incorporating complex procedures and processes that culminate in the creation of different meanings. In an effort to promote their products and services through advertising, some organizations may intend to use words that include puffery, which is well illustrated by the adoption of catchphrases such as “homemade,” whereas such products were manufactured in factories. Organizations may also cheat on the actual work by showing pictures of a different outcome in their advertising message in an effort to influence consumers. Such lies are common amongst fast food companies that buy iceberg lettuce to market their products but instead use romaine lettuce, which is popular amongst a large number of customers.

Lying by omission occurs if an employee intentionally fails to disclose information that might negatively affect other employees or customers. Examples of such information might relate to safety warnings and adverse effects of products, for instance, to children. For decades, tobacco-manufacturing companies had not included a safety-warning message on their products for customers to understand the risk they face in consuming such products. Other companies might also purport to offer free services, whereas there are additional hidden costs associated with their work. Such behavior may adversely affect a company’s reputation and hence its competitiveness. Additionally, in the event that lying results in another party experiencing a loss or a health risk, the company may be sued for such damages. Lying can also adversely affect a firm’s reputation, which is well illustrated by the events that led to the occurrence of the 2008 global economic recession. Top CEOs of American Insurance Group, Fannie Mae and Lehman Brothers, were interrogated in an effort to determine whether they had communicated accurate information regarding their companies’ financial condition (McGee, 2008). In the workplace, lying is an unethical issue because its sole intention is to distort the truth.

However, the determination of whether a particular lie or action is illegal rests with a country’s court system. In most cases, the lie must have caused damage to another party (Killion & Dempski, 2000). In the current working environment, some businesspeople might consider occasional lying as condonable by their organization. However, one of the issues that employees and business owners should ask themselves is whether such behavior negatively affects their ethical values, such as hindering them from being transparent.


This involves engaging in illegal and deceptive activities with the objective of draining value from a particular organization either directly or indirectly. Fraud can propagate at different levels with an organization. The reasons why employees engage in fraud vary from one employee to another. However, some common explanations explain why fraud sprouts in organizations. The first reason for copy in an organization is pressure arising from various sources such as the need to meet a particular target, maintain a specific promotion path, or due to financial constraints. In an effort to solve these issues, some employees may engage in fraud. Fraud in organizations can also thrive due to the continued rationalization of deception regarding fraud. Additionally, copy in organizations even succeeds due to a lack of proper internal control mechanisms. Low reporting structure and propagation of a blame culture within an organization are also some of the reasons that provide an opportunity for fraud to persist.

In the course of executing their duties, employees may engage in various forms of fraud. Some of the common examples of fraud in organizations include IT fraud, identity fraud, petty fraud, and manipulation of accounts. Given the high rate of technological innovation, it has become relatively easy for employees to engage in corporate fraud. This element has arisen from a reduction in safety measures with regard to physical boundaries that traditionally existed in workplaces. Currently, it is possible for employees to access and alter confidential information stored in company websites by hacking (Weckert, 2005). Identity fraud entails impersonation, which aims at deceiving another party. Hacking is one of the most common ways through which an individual may steal other people’s identities hence succeeding in the impersonation. Unlike IT fraud, manipulation of accounts, and identity theft, petty fraud is more common in organizations, which arises from the fact that perpetrators of such unethical behavior consider such acts “victimless.” However, little fraud, for example, unauthorized taking of company supplies, may result in the firm undertaking budgetary cuts.

Insider trading

Disclosure or failure to disclose sensitive company information that might affect a firm’s securities trading is one of the ethical issues that organizations are currently grappling with within the contemporary business world. Numerous companies have lost billions of dollars due to insider trading. Organizations’ employees may use sensitive company information to benefit themselves (Sunita, 2005). Despite this realization, differences occur with regard to whether insider trading is unethical or ethical. Some parties propose that the market is a free system; therefore, every individual has an opportunity of accessing information that s/he might capitalize on, thus making a profit. Insider information is also considered an organization’s asset. Consequently, prohibiting its utilization decreases its value. Moreover, some proponents argue that bans insider trading is beneficial to shareholders because it leads to a reduction in the cost that they would have incurred in hiring agents to monitor the operations of their firm. However, the expense saved is transferred to outsiders leading to the imposition of higher taxes, which is unethical (Sunita, 2005).

Insider trading is unethical because not every stakeholder has access to such valuable company information. Some stakeholders, such as shareholders, may access more useful information than other shareholders do. Such an occurrence means that the business does not operate in a fair environment characterized by free competition. The proliferation of insider trading is also unethical because it culminates in the promotion of greed within society. In most cases, company executives undertake insider trading within the workplace. With regard to its adverse financial effects on an organization, participating in insider trading is in itself a breach of trust on the part of directors. In the course of executing their duties, directors are not supposed to misuse sensitive company information to benefit themselves or their allies. According to Sunita (2005), such an action violates the basic rules of morality.

Conflict of interest

Cases of conflict of interest occur if an organization’s employees act in a manner that interferes with their normal execution of official duties. According to Chenoweth and McAuliffe (2005), employees should have undivided loyalty towards their organizations. Consequently, they should not engage in activities that are not in line with their organizations’ interests. Chenoweth and McAuliffe (2005) further assert that conflict of interest creates a conducive environment for corruption in addition to undermining an organization’s interest. According to Panza and Potthast (2010), cases of conflicts of interest are challenging because they undermine an employee’s professionalism, for example, his or her trained ability in making judgment and ability to act impartially.

Panza and Potthast (2010) further assert that despite the conflict of interest, not influencing an individual’s personal judgment, it is paramount for employees to disclose situations and cases of conflict of interest. Some everyday situations of conflicts of interest that employees should reveal relate to administrative, procurement, funding decisions, use of organizational materials, and equipment and consulting or business interests. Failure to disclose such cases will signal an uncertain working environment. On the other hand, disclosure of situations of conflict of interest can enable a firm’s management team to prevent conditions where the employees’ professional judgment is affected (Sims, 2003). Cases of conflict of interest fall into two main types, which include actual and perceived. Either exact or perceived, conflicts of interest adversely affect an organization’s reputation. Consequently, it is essential for employees to avoid situations of conflicts of interest by declaring their transparency in order to gain public confidence. The organization’s management teams should be observant and offer concise guidelines with regard to conflicts of interest. Management teams should also formulate proper procedures on how to deal with cases of conflicts of interest.


Holland and Ritvo (2008) are of the opinion that bribery thrives in most societies. Consequently, workplaces are not shielded from acts of corruption. Bribery entails giving something, for example, money to gain an illegitimate advantage. Morality forms the basis of deciding whether the “gift” issued to an employee is a bribe or not. According to Jeurissen (2007), bribery is considered immoral because it violates one’s integrity and trust. Additionally, issuing or accepting bribes are both forms of corruption. Consequently, many countries consider bribery as an unlawful act that is prosecutable in a court of law. In the work environment, bribery passes as an ethical issue.

Employees can engage in two forms of bribery, viz. active and passive corruption. Active corruption relates to the party offering the bribe. On the other hand, passive corruption relates to the employee receiving the bribe. Different economies have different definitions of bribery. For example, in the United States, inducing a public official to undertake a specific task more promptly does not pass as an illegal act. Such “tips” are issued due to prevailing bureaucracies in organizations (Moran, Harris & Moran). On the other hand, such a behavior qualifies as an illegal act in the United Kingdom. Most developed countries prohibit employees from accepting personal gifts, bribes, or special favors that may influence the result of a particular decision. However, in some states, bribery is considered a standard way of doing business. This aspect complicates workplace ethics in the global business environment. Similar to the conflict of interest, bribery can influence an employee’s professionalism for issuing monetary gifts can affect an employee’s expert decision (Panza & Potthast, 2010).

Corporate intelligence

Organizations have experienced a challenge with regard to corporate intelligence over the past few years. Corporate espionage refers to the analysis and collection of diverse information that affects an organization’s operation. This information relates to the firm’s competitors, customers, and market trends coupled with political, social, economic, and technological environments. In a bid to remain competitive, organizations ensure that their corporate intelligence is high and relevant. However, some employees may abuse such corporate espionage, which mainly occurs if an organization does not take into account due diligence with regard to the protection of such corporate intelligence (Holland & Ritvo, 2008). Most organizations have implemented computer systems such as the intranet or Local Area Network (LAN) to attain operational efficiency. The objective of such networks is to ensure effective and efficient sharing of information within an organization (Gilliland, Steiner, & Skarlicki, 2007). However, some employees may abuse such networks by hacking into protected sites such as those containing the organization’s trade secrets.

Hacking such sites can lead to an organization failing because the organization’s proprietary information, for example, its merger and acquisition plans, manufacturing formulas, and marketing strategies, maybe leaked to competitors. This aspect is unethical behavior that may adversely affect an organization’s competitive advantage. Leaking corporate intelligence can make an organization incur high financial costs. The high rate at which organizations are implementing computer systems has caused a loss of corporate espionage become a rampant trend in the current work environment. Globally, it is estimated that organizations lose approximately $300 billion annually due to trade secrets theft.

Participating in corporate intelligence theft may adversely an employee’s career; for example, upon being convicted, the employee may be dismissed from his or her duties (Throop & Castellucci, 2009). A case in point is that of Xiang Dong Yu, a former Ford Motor Company engineer who was jailed for six years and fined $ 12,500 for stealing the company’s trade secrets. Allegedly, Xiang Dong Yu had duplicated four thousand documents that contained the firm’s trade secrets before he was dismissed from the company. There are different ways through which employees can access a company’s trade secrets. Some of these ways include removing the firm’s hard drives and replicating the information saved in other computers, hacking, and bribing the organization’s key employees to disclose some of the firm’s trade secrets.

During the 21st century, hacking has become the most common way through which employees obtain company trade secrets. The prevalence of employees hacking sites containing company trade secrets has arisen from the high rate of technological innovation. Currently, numerous sites provide individuals with an opportunity to download hacking applications and tools. These hacking applications do not require the individual to possess expert knowledge of Internet protocols. Hacking falls into three main classes, which include remote, physical, and system hacking (Anandarajan & Simmers, 2003).

System and remote hacking

System hacking occurs when an individual has the privilege to access a user account, while remote hacking happens when an individual attempts to break into a particular computer system remotely across the Internet. Remote hackers do not want to possess the administrative or higher-level privilege to access sites containing company trade secrets. Prevalence of remote hacking is made possible by a number of reasons such as low system administration, buffer overflows and, input, and unexpected input. Currently, remote hacking has become rampant, especially in financial and business organizations. For example, hackers are increasingly attempting to break into networks of major financial institutions such as the Nasdaq Stock Market.

Physical hacking

Unlike remote and system hacking, physical hacking requires an individual to access an organization’s computer intelligence facility physically from where s/he looks for remote access to information. Upon accessing the computer system physically, the employee may affix protocol analyzers in the computer system-wiring closet. The protocol analyzers will, in turn, capture personal data such as passwords and user names. Such an act will provide the employee with an opportunity to access physical data.

Social engineering

Is another method that employees are increasingly using to steal valuable corporate intelligence. This method entails tricking other employees into revealing useful company information or their passwords. One of the ways through which social engineering is undertaken is by tricking company executive relatives into conversations that lead to the revelation of passwords. Alternatively, social hacking also occurs by sending emails to users purporting to be system administrators hence requesting passwords. Shoulder surfing, which entails looking over one’s shoulder to see the password typed, is another method of social engineering. Alternatively, hackers in the workplace may try to guess one’s password by trying out the most common password that an individual may use, such as birthdays, social security numbers, or children’s names and anniversaries.

Dumpster diving

Employees may also steal valuable company information through dumpster diving, which entails using company trash, for example, company documents that are no longer considered necessary. An intelligent computer agent can rely on such waste to hack. For example, disposing of company phone books, organizational charts, and memos may provide hackers with names and phone numbers of key employees within the organization to impersonate.

Phone eavesdropping

This form of hacking entails stealing corporate intelligence by monitoring and recording telephone conversations and faxes using digital recording machines. By playing back the talks, the intruder can access secret information without any other person’s knowledge. Some of the information that an intruder can access through phone eavesdropping includes passwords and account numbers.


This form refers to wireless hacking and is another method of stealing company intelligence. The perpetrator must be an intelligent computer agent to undertake to whack. Whacking is conducted using a radio that is used to track wireless transmission. With the right type of radio, the intruder can access all the private information transmitted through the wireless network, which is made possible by the fact that information transmitted through such systems is not usually encrypted. In case the organization does not have a wireless network, the employee may place an access node into an allegedly protected hard-wired network.


Given the high rate of globalization, there have been significant transformations within workplaces. Workplaces have increasingly become diverse based on religion, race, nationality, gender, color, and marital status, amongst others. Sexual and racial discrimination are amongst some of the ethical issues that are being experienced in the current work environment (Bolland, 2005). Most developed economies such as the UK and the US have illegalized employee discrimination based on race, color, gender, marital status, disability, nationality, age, sexual orientation, religion, disability, and origin. Additionally, employees should not be discriminated against for being members of individual trade unions or their political affiliation. Despite most economies formulating laws aimed at outlawing discrimination, this vice continues to be a significant ethical issue in workplaces (Giacalone & Swanson, 2012).

If an organization discriminates against employees on either of the above aspects, the employee may sue such a company. Race, age, disability, and gender are some of the most common issues of discrimination that are prevalent in workplaces. In the US, minority groups, which are composed of Hispanics and African-Americans, experience the highest level of discrimination. Employees within these category groups are mostly denied an opportunity to assume leadership positions in their organizations. In their recruitment processes, organizations should not discriminate against employees based on age. In their hiring process, organizations may form the tendency of not hiring employees aged between 49 and 69 years because these employees are close to their retirement age, which is 70 years in most economies. The firm’s management teams are prohibited from altering the employees’ retirement period, for example, by lowering the retirement age (Bolland, 2005).

In the wake of the recent global economic recession, most organizations have implemented the concept of downsizing in an effort to remain competitive. However, the downside of this strategy is that the laid-off employees consider suing their former employer. A report by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reveals that there is a 17 percent increment in the number of legal suits filed to EEOC since the setting in of the global recession (Miller & Jentz, 2010). There was also an increment in the number of unemployed old citizens with a margin of 330 percent during the period ranging between 2000 and 2010. Considering the fact that approximately 75 percent of the country’s population will be over 55 years, it is paramount for the firms in the US to adjust their approach with regard to older employees. This goal can be attained by ensuring that employers develop a workforce that is in line with their customer base (Giacalone & Swanson, 2012).

Organizations should implement initiatives such as affirmative action programs to prevent the prevalence of such discrimination in workplaces. These affirmative action programs should pursue hiring employees from minority groups based on gender and people that have hitherto faced discrimination. Additionally, organizations should also ensure that they provide these minority groups with an opportunity to advance their career (Throop & Castellucci, 2009), for this mover will play an essential role in promoting job satisfaction amongst the employees. Discrimination in workplaces may also be perpetrated against customers. Some organizations also discriminate against their customers based on race. For example, some organizations may charge higher prices for their products and services to customers who are of a different race or ethnicity or fail to offer services to them altogether.


Adherence to ethics is paramount in the success of every business organization. Some of the ethical issues that businesses should consider nurturing include fairness, honesty, and integrity. However, changes in the current working environment have led to the emergence of numerous ethical issues. In the course of executing their duties, some employees may misuse organizational resources such as computers and telephone lines for their personal benefit. Such behavior may result in an organization incurring a high financial cost. Lying is another ethical issue that has become prevalent in the work environment. This behavior may be propagated against the top management, fellow employees, or customers. The two primary forms of lying in workplaces include lying by omission and commission. The proliferation of lies in the workplace may result in a loss of trust between employees and the organizations’ clients. In an effort to attain operational efficiency, most organizations have implemented various types of computer technologies such as an intranet and the Internet. The development of computer systems has provided organizations with an opportunity to store their corporate intelligence in such networks. However, some employees may hack into such systems, thus stealing such information, thus jeopardizing the firm’s competitiveness.

Fraud is another ethical issue that businesses are currently grappling with within the contemporary business world. The most common forms of fraud that organizations’ employees may engage in include IT fraud, manipulation of accounting information, petty fraud, and identity theft. Engaging in either of these forms of fraud may culminate in the firm incurring high financial costs in addition to damaging the firm’s reputation. Employees may also engage in bribery. Such behavior may result in the unfair offering of delivery of services to customers. Bribery also forms the basis for the proliferation of corruption within an organization.

In their operation, organizations intend to achieve specific predetermined goals and objectives. Organizations recruit qualified employees to achieve this goal. However, their effectiveness in attaining the desired goals may be hindered by the existence of a conflict of interest amongst employees. Such situations may occur if employees decide to pursue their personal goals. The ultimate effect is that the probability of the organization deviating from the intended goal increases. The high rate of globalization has made workplaces to become more diverse. Consequently, there has been a rampant transformation in an organization with regard to workforce characteristics. Diversity in workplaces has led to an increment in the rate of discrimination based on various variables such as color, race, age, sexual orientation, and gender, amongst others.

Suggestion for future research

Future studies on ethics should evaluate the best ways of implementing ethical practices in workplaces. One of the ways areas that should be taken into account relates to implementing ethical leadership in organizations. It is imperative for organizations to develop a strong workforce to remain competitive, but this goal is only realizable if organizational leaders are role models. Corporate leaders should engage in practices that influence their followers positively. It is essential for firms’ management teams to evaluate their leadership styles to enhance ethical leadership, which is essential in making the necessary adjustments. The type of leadership adopted by an organization has a significant impact on its success. Transformational leadership is one of the most effective leadership styles that organizational leaders should take into account. Further research on the best ways to integrate ethics and transformational leadership should be undertaken. It is also imperative for organizations to consider the most effective way of making ethical decisions. Participation in unethical behavior can adversely affect an organization’s competitiveness and hence its future survival.

Reference List

Anandarajan, M., & Simmers, C. (2003). Managing web usage in the workplace; A social, ethical, and legal perspective. Oxford: Idea Group, Incorporation.

Bolland, L. (2005). Sexual harassment in the workplace. California: SphnixLegal.

Bowie, N., & Schnieder, M. (2011). Business ethics for dummies. New York: John Wiley.

Bredeson, D., & Goree, K. (2011). Ethics in the workplace. New York: Cengage Learning.

Chenoweth, L., & McAuliffe, D. (2005). The road to social work and human service practice; an introductory text. Sydney: Cengage Learning Australia.

Ferrell, O., & Ferrell, J. (2012). Business ethics: Ethical decision-making and cases. London: Cengage Learning.

Giacalone, R., & Swanson, D. (2012). Handbook of unethical work behavior: implications for individual wellbeing. Massachusetts: M.E Sharpe.

Gilliland, S., Steiner, D., & Skarlicki, D. (2007). Managing social and ethical issues in organizations. London: IAP.

Holland, P., & Ritvo, R. (2008). Non-profit organizations: principles and practices. Columbia: Columbia University Press.

Jeurissen, R. (2007). Ethics and business. Sydney: Uitgeverij Van Gorcum.

Jones, C. (2005). Business ethics; a critical approach. New York: Routledge.

Killion, S., & Dempski, K. (2000). Legal and ethical issues. Washington: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

McGee, R. (2008). Corporate governance in transition economies. London: Springer.

Miller, R., & Jentz, G. (2010). Business law today; the essentials. New York: Cengage Learning.

Panza, C., & Potthast, A. (2010). Ethics for dummies. Wales: John Wiley and Sons.

Robbins, S. (2009). Organizational behavior; global and South African perspectives. Cape Town: Pearson South Africa.

Sims, R. (2003). Ethics and corporate social responsibility: Why giants fall. Chicago: Greenwood Publishing Group.

Sunita, T. (2005). Politics, ethics and social responsibility of business (for B.Com) (Paragon Books). New Delhi: Ganga Dhar Chaudhary.

Throop, R., & Castellucci, M. (2009). Reaching your potential: personal and professional development. New York: Cengage Learning.

Weckert, J. (2005). Electronic monitoring in the workplace: controversies and solutions. London: Idea Group, Incorporation.