There are two broad approaches evident that link ethics with leadership. The first group of researchers consider that ethics is always an integral part of good leadership (e.g. Ciulla 2014), while the other group differentiates between ethical, ethically neutral, and unethical leadership (e.g. Treviño, Hartman & Brown 2000). The first approach of integrating ethics and leadership originates in their view from the root definition of leadership as a relationship of influence based on values or socially acceptable norms (e.g. Burnes & By 2012). A relationship of influence cannot be called good leadership when it violates the social norm (Ciulla 2014). Meanwhile, the second approach derives its definition of ethical leadership based on the empirical study of leadership practices (e.g. Treviño, Hartman & Brown 2000).
Another element that differentiates these two approaches is whether they take the perception of the follower into consideration. Based on an empirical study conducted by Treviño, Brown and Hartman (2003), a leader who always makes decisions ethically and practices socially acceptable norms in their personal life and the workplace can be perceived as an ethically neutral leader. The appraisal is especially so in the context of business organisations where the constant message of making profit overrides other elements of communication between a leader and his/her followers, including the ethical orientation of the leader. Therefore, eliciting the ethical elements of leadership will benefit by identifying parts of leader behaviour that will positively affect followers' ethical practice. To be seen as an ethical leader, a leader must behave as an ethical leader and also elicit ethical practices in followers (Treviño, Hartman & Brown 2000).
There are three methods used by the researchers to develop the ethical leadership construct. They are: 1) develop the concept by combining a philosophical perspective of ethics with a leadership construct (e.g. Dion 2012); 2) elicit the concept and measures based on prior leadership constructs
21
(e.g. Caldwell et al. 2012; Khuntia & Suar 2004), such as from measures of transformational leadership (Khuntia & Suar 2004); and 3) develop the construct and its related measures empirically (e.g. Brown, Treviño & Harrison 2005; Yukl et al. 2013). More than half of the articles which were published after 2006 used the formulation of ethical leadership as proposed by Brown, Treviño and Harrison (2005) who define ethical leadership as "the demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct to followers through two-way communication, reinforcement, and decision-making" (p. 120). This definition contains two major parts: the element of leader personal behaviours or being personally ethical; and the element of setting the organisational context. The first part is called "moral person" (Treviño, Hartman & Brown 2000, p. 130), referring to the personal aspect of the moral behaviour of the leader, and the second part is called "moral manager" (Treviño, Hartman & Brown 2000, p. 133), referring to the element of managing the environment of the organisation that supports ethical conduct and hinders unethical behaviour.
Being a moral person means making decisions ethically, having integrity and taking care of followers. This part of ethical leadership is, arguably, also part of the definition of other leadership constructs including transformational leadership, spiritual leadership and authentic leadership. A transformational leader influences followers through their idealised behaviour which is the normatively acceptable behaviour (Bass & Avolio 2000). In spiritual leadership and authentic leadership, the concept of being morally right also reflects this element of moral person and concern for others (Fry 2003; Luthans & Avolio 2003). However, an ethical leader based on Brown, Treviño and Harrison (2005) description of the ethical leadership construct, needs to ensure the transparency of these personal moral behaviours to their followers. An ethical leader is a role model of an ethical person in their organisation, meaning they are attractive and strongly perceived as a good ethical model. Learning from a role model means using individual cognitive capacity to observe others' behaviour and noting any associated consequences (Bandura 1977). The followers who perceive their supervisor as their role model will be more likely to imitate the observed behaviours.
Being a moral manager means the leader have to ensure the organisation is fully supportive of the ethical behaviour and against the unethical behaviour of the members of the organisation. In doing so, a leader communicates moral values to their followers (Treviño, Hartman & Brown 2000). This type of communication is important, especially in a business organisation where the constant message of making a profit is the one that is normally perceived as the norm of the organisation. An ethical leader must continuously stand firm and communicate to their followers that the means is as important as the ends, that doing ethical business is as important as making a profit for the
22
company. The element of communication also needs to be supported by the application of reward and consequences (Treviño, Brown & Hartman 2003). Rewarding ethical behaviour and assigning consequences for unethical behaviour are both important as cues to organisational ethical values and evidence of how a leader's integrity is being practised. Practising this part of ethical leadership is essentially similar to the transactional type of leadership whereby rewards are contingent on the desired actions (Brown, Treviño & Harrison 2005).
In developing measures for ethical leadership constructs, two approaches used by researchers are: extracting the ethics element of prior measures, for example, the idealised influence elements of transformational leadership (e.g. Khuntia & Suar 2004); and empirically developing measures of ethical leadership (e.g. Brown, Treviño & Harrison 2005; Kalshoven, Den Hartog & De Hoogh 2011b). Based on the selected articles, 89 out of 110 articles with a quantitative study method used the Ethical Leadership Scale (ELS) developed by Brown, Treviño and Harrison (2005) and reported a Cronbach's Alpha between 0.82 - 0.92. The measure consists of 10 items developed based on the elements of moral person and moral manager and mostly rated by the followers as the perceived ethical leadership of their supervisors or their senior management, including CEO and other senior management roles, e.g. ethics officers. The ELS measure is also used in this study as it represents the followers' perceptions of their supervisor's ethical leadership, which consist of their understanding of their supervisor's moral behaviour and how they perceive the communication and organisational context that was set up by their supervisor. The current study context of Indonesia as part of the South Asian cultural cluster will contribute to the application of the ELS measure in a new cultural context.
2.5. Antecedents and Consequences of Ethical Leadership