The vast majority of behavioral ethical research focuses on the antecedents of unethical behavior. Consequently, questions involving the consequences of organizational unethical behavior remain largely unanswered. Therefore, extant business ethics research largely neglects the impacts of organizational unethical behavior on individuals. Moreover, questions involving what organizations can do to correct or recover from having engaged in unethical behavior as well as individual responses to those efforts are also mostly ignored. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of unethical activity on employees and explore organizations that have failed ethically and their attempts at recovery. This study explores two issues. First, how do employees react to organizational unethical behavior (OUB) and to what extent are those reactions dependent on contextual and individual factors? Second, to what extent can organizations recover from the negative impacts of ethical failure? More specifically, is it possible for organizations that fail in their ethical responsibilities to recover such that they are paradoxically "better-off" than their counterparts that never failed in the first place? To explore these issues I review, integrate and draw upon the ethical decision-making and service failure recovery literatures for theoretical support. Empirical testing included two studies. The first was a field study using survey data acquired from the Ethics Resource Center (ERC) in which over 29,000 participants were asked about their perceptions of ethics at work. Second, a supplemental field study was conducted in which 100 employees rated the characteristics of unethical acts (e.g. severity). Results revealed a negative direct effect of severity and controllability of the OUB on perceptions of organizational ethicality and a negative direct effect of controllability of the OUB on organizational satisfaction. Ethical context moderated the relationship between OUB controllability and perceived organizational ethicality. Partial support was found for the moderating effects of ethical context on the relationship between OUB severity and perceived organizational ethicality. Results also supported an ethical failure recovery paradox.

No / Interest in third sector organisations (TSOs) is growing as their role in addressing social regeneration, especially in urban environments, is regarded as crucial by governmental and supra-governmental organisations. The challenge is increased in multicultural environments, where those from ethnic minorities may struggle to participate in the mainstream economy and society more broadly. There is an assumption that TSOs make a positive contribution to the social good of the diverse communities and client groups that they serve. However, although there have been many studies of ethicality in commercial and public sector organisations, few focus on TSOs. Furthermore, black and minority ethnic (BME) TSOs, in particular face specific pressures, caught between the high expectations of their capacity to engage with diverse communities where the public sector has failed and, in common with all TSOs, the struggle to secure the resources necessary to manage their organisations and deliver front-line services. In this article, we investigate how implicitly ethicality is constructed in TSOs, including those with a primary mission to provide support for and services to BME communities. Building on information obtained for 305 TSOs in a post-industrial city we develop a structural equation model (SEM) in order to evaluate the relationships between elements that we argue comprise ethicality. We then assess the manner in which TSOs generally, and BME TSOs specifically, vary in the manner in which they communicate their ethical purpose and the outcomes of their actions.

Background Brand loyalty has been studied by a large number of scholars over the past few decades, including its impact on consumer purchase behavior and as a core concept when creating brand value. Having ethical business practice helps retain customers trust and enforce their loyalty to the brand. However, brand’s unethical behavior has always been a topic discussed by society, especially for the soft drinks industry. Problem Previous research has shown that there is a link between brand loyalty, brand trust and brand attachment. It has also been implied that consumers with high commitment to a brand might justify a brands unethical behavior. However, there is a lack of research within the field of brand loyalty and ethical business practices within the beverage industry. Purpose The purpose of this study is to understand how millennials with different levels of brand loyalty respond to unethical marketing activities to soft drink brands within the beverage industry. Furthermore, this research would like to give an insight to whether consumers care about ethical brands within this industry or not. Additionally, this study can help brands in the beverage industry to build their marketing strategies and maintain their consumer relationship. Method This study used a qualitative research method, where 15 semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sampling method, with millennials as research objects. Additionally, the brand Pepsi has been used as a case to measure the participants brand loyalty in order to classify them to one of the three levels of loyalty in the conceptual framework.  Conclusion The results show that the more loyal consumers are towards brands, the less impact the brand’s unethical behavior has on them. For consumers with low loyalty, the chances of turning to alternatives when brands have ethical issues are greater. Whereas consumers who are on the Satisfied level have a neutral opinion towards the brand when it comes to unethical issues. While, consumers with high brand loyalty may ignore the brand's unethical behavior because of their loyalty and love for the brand. Brand image, product quality, product safety, environmental footprint and how brands handle the unethical issues have been identified as important factors when consumers make the purchasing decision.