Purpose: The impact of ethical leadership on employee emotional exhaustion has been widely analyzed. However, the effect of the leader's moral intensity on the employee's emotional state has gone unnoticed. This research seeks to show that ethical management by the leader affects employees' emotional exhaustion in accordance with the scope of the leader's moral standards. Their relationship is not necessarily linear but adopts a curvilinear pattern as a function of the leader's ethical intensity, and affective commitment acts as a mediating mechanism. Methods: A simple mediation model is used. The sample consists of 448 professionals in six organizations in the Colombian electrical sector who responded to an online questionnaire. The sampling is probabilistic by conglomerates. Findings: This research revealed that ethical behavior is voluntary in nature and develops in an environment of trust. When the ethical leader surpasses specific moral turning points, the follower's learning becomes an obligation, preventing affective fluidity. A search for acceptance implies constant consumption of resources that weakens the follower's capacity for self-regulation until it is exhausted. Furthermore, when the leader's expectations are difficult to achieve, affective commitment causes emotional ambiguity in followers, intensifying the stress associated with their role and increasing the likelihood of burnout. Originality: This research challenges conventional wisdom about the positive, linear effect of ethical leadership on employees' emotional state. It broadens the understanding of this management style and fills a crucial knowledge gap by introducing a new perspective. Practical Implications: A horizontal, balanced, and accessible leader can quickly convey a convincing ethical discourse. Emphasizing the vulnerability and importance of human beings can help prevent moral anguish and ethical distances. This, in turn, provides followers with resources to mitigate exhaustion and strengthen commitment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Santiago-Torner et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: