Deciding what's right: The role of external sanctions and embarrassment in shaping moral judgments in the workplace

Abstract We assert that previous research has overlooked the pervasive ambiguity in ethical situations in organizations, as well as how people pierce through this ambiguity to realize new distinctions between right and wrong. Focusing on well-intentioned individuals who unknowingly transgress, we present a theory of how they come to recalibrate their moral judgments. We begin by discussing the composition and nature of a moral judgment. Building on this discussion, we then consider how external sanctions can be used to shift moral judgments. Finally, we posit that internal emotional responses to sanctions (namely embarrassment) will facilitate this shift by triggering a sense of moral deficiency. More specifically, we assert that embarrassment will focus the transgressor's attention on what went wrong. This reflection provides an opportunity for the recalibration of the initial moral judgment. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of our theory.