A Delphi Method Exploration of Performance Pressures and Ethical Leadership Compromises in Business Organizations

A deep understanding of the dynamics between performance pressures and ethical leadership becomes crucial in an era of stressful economic recovery. This research explores the complex relationship between organizational performance pressures and ethical leadership, focusing on how these pressures impact ethical decision-making and the challenges of maintaining ethical integrity in demanding environments. Employing a convenience sampling method and the rank-type Delphi method, the study engaged 40 experts from both academic and practical fields to identify and rank key performance pressures that compromise ethical leadership. Significant pressures identified include the imperative to generate positive financial reports, achieve greater efficiency, withstand competitive pressures, and pursue aggressive growth strategies, all eroding ethical leadership. These pressures lead to unethical practices, such as falsifying financial reports, exploiting working conditions, unfair competition, and aggressive merger and acquisition tactics. The findings underscore the critical need for leaders to recognize and manage these pressures effectively to foster an environment conducive to ethical leadership. This study contributes valuable insights into the mechanisms by which performance pressures undermine ethical leadership and highlights the importance of cultivating a culture that promotes normative behavior and addresses ethical challenges, thereby enriching the existing body of knowledge on organizational ethics and leadership.


INTRODUCTION
Organizational leaders are under intense pressure to achieve economic success amid the ongoing global recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and growing local and global competitive pressures.
These issues, combined with continuous organizational moral dilemmas, have elevated ethical leadership to the top of the priority list for both local and multinational firms (Shin et al., 2015).Little is known about the empirical interplay between organizational performance pressures and ethical leadership.
According to Shin et al. (2015), organizations are under significant performance pressures to prosper in the face of economic adversities such as sluggish economic growth, intense competition, and customer socioeconomic challenges.Recent examples of ethical corporate failures such as Steinhoff inflated profits and assets by R250 billion, Tongaat Hulett overstating the value of the company by R3.5 to 4.5 billion, KPMG's failure in their independent auditing duties when it failed to report the alleged Gupta wrongdoing and many more, serve as a sharp reminder of the potentially disastrous consequences of business leaders' unfettered pursuit of profit maximization (Business Insider SA, 2020).Internationally, the collapses of Enron, Arthur Anderson, and WorldCom, which have been extensively documented in the literature, as well as the 2008 global financial crisis, which resulted in significant financial reforms following the collapse and bailout of organizations such as Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch, highlight the ongoing prevalence of unethical business practices (Drezner & McNamara, 2013).
Recent scholarly work reveals a growing interest in ethical leadership mechanisms and their impact on organizational integrity and performance.Studies have explored various aspects, including the definition and conceptualization of ethical leadership (Brown & Mitchell, 2010;Banks et al., 2020), its antecedents and outcomes (Ko et al., 2018;Roy et al., 2023), and its embeddedness in societal, industry, and organizational contexts (Eisenbeiss & Giessner, 2012).Researchers have identified the need for more empirical validations and longitudinal studies to better understand the direct impact of ethical leadership on decision-making and organizational culture (Roy et al., 2023).These studies underscore the importance of ethical management but frequently leave the direct impact of external pressures on ethical decision-making less examined.The ethical concerns that triggered these scandals were almost always linked to issues of ethical leadership.Recent research highlights the significant role of search engines, particularly Google, in shaping public perception of corporate scandals.Google Trends data has been used to analyze interest in business ethics, revealing geographical and temporal patterns (Kiss, 2019).This troubling tendency, in which each scandal outperforms the preceding one in terms of rand value and complexity of ethical misconduct, raises significant concerns about the role of leadership in these ethical crises These corporate crises have been linked to various unethical leadership activities, including bidrigging, price-fixing, collusion, fabrication of financial statements, corruption, and others (Competition Tribunal of South Africa, 2009;Pops, 2006).To emphasize the significance and relevance of the current study, which intends to identify organizational performance pressures and the factors that compromise ethical leadership when the two intersect.Management and academics must identify and better understand the interplay between the two constructs; the current study identifies these factors through a rank-type Delphi method.
Despite widespread recognition that performance pressures in today's business environment have become increasingly sophisticated as a result of the need for short-term results, growing global competition, and the economic downturn, there has been little systematic investigation into how these pressures impact ethical leadership behavior.The current study seeks to fill this void by identifying factors that risk ethical leadership under performance pressure.Brown and Mithcell (2010) define ethical leadership as normatively appropriate conduct demonstrated through personal acts, interpersonal interactions, and decision-making.This ethical leadership framework has two critical components: the leader as an ethical manager who directs subordinates to behave ethically, and the leader as an honorable person who embodies ethical behavior.Despite a wealth of research on ethical leadership, the impact of performance pressures on ethical leadership behavior has yet to receive much consideration.Most research on ethical leadership has focused on organizational culture, moral awareness, leadership styles, perceptions, and profitability.
The evaluation of ethical leadership under performance pressures is crucial in today's business environment, characterized by global economic instability and rising competitiveness.Recurring organizational failures reinforce this viewpoint, typically based on unethical leadership actions, such as the abovementioned ethical failures.There is a significant study vacuum in addressing the empirical link between ethical leadership and performance pressures, necessitating a thorough analysis to disentangle the complex dynamics at work.This research could be critical in developing effective ways to minimize ethical issues, thereby improving organizational sustainability and contributing to the global business ethics conversation.
Identifying organizational performance pressure and factors that compromise ethical leadership is critical for scientific knowledge of organizational behavior, effectiveness, and ethical management practices.This study adds to the body of knowledge by identifying and investigating how highperformance pressure environments can influence ethical behavior in the context of leadership.It can lead to new models and theories that provide a more nuanced understanding of leadership behavior and decision-making processes under challenging circumstances.Furthermore, the study's findings can be used to generate empirical evidence for creating strategies and treatments that encourage ethical leadership, even in high-performance contexts.As a result, the research has the potential to significantly increase ethical leadership quality and organizational performance and contribute to the broader area of management science.This study is relevant for leadership and organizational behavior studies because it investigates how critical stakeholders' pressures and expectations might impact individual and organizational behavior.
The influence of stakeholders' pressures and expectations on ethical leadership and organizational behavior comes before individual leaders and organizational levels.It highlights how these pressures influence decision-making, shaping corporate ethical standards and culture, performance expectations, accountability, regulatory pressures, innovation and sustainability pressures, and talent attraction and retention.Stakeholders, including investors, customers, employees, suppliers, and the community, have their expectations and demands from the organization.Leaders must navigate these pressures to align with ethical standards and promote positive organizational behavior.Performance expectations, accountability, transparency, compliance with regulations, and innovation and sustainability pressures also shape an organization's ethical culture.Leaders must cultivate an environment that values ethical behavior to attract and retain talent.Freeman & Dmytriyev (2017) argued that the stakeholder theory framework offers comprehension of how businesses can run in a way that considers the interests of all stakeholders, not just shareholders.This theory posits that the success of an organization depends on its ability to manage and integrate the needs and demands of its diverse stakeholders, which include customers, employees, suppliers, the community, and the environment, in addition to its shareholders.Integrating Stakeholder Theory with the perspective of stakeholder pressures and ethical leadership involves adopting a holistic and balanced approach to decision-making and organizational behavior.
An understanding of organizational behavior that is both complicated and nuanced can be attained by combining the theoretical frameworks of performance pressure and ethical leadership.
Theories are conceptual frameworks that present definitions, assertions, and qualities that aid in understanding, forecasting, and exercising control over phenomena.In this setting, the theory of performance pressure and ethical leadership are subjected to in-depth analysis.
According to Zimbardo & Leippe (1991), the term "performance pressure" refers to a mentality that leads to negative assessments concerning a person's level of performance and the idea that one's current level of performance is not adequate for the achievement of the following desired goal.Overstreet et al. (2013) define organizational performance as a process leading to accomplishing goals and objectives, and Kent (2018), who identifies pressure as situational incentives for optimal performance, contributes to expanding this concept.Together, these researchers provide an essential Ngcobo, L. S. & Reddy, C.D. (2024).A Delphi method exploration of performance pressures … contribution.However, this pressure can lead to ethical issues when goals are ill-conceived (Mitchell et al., 2018) and stakeholders exert undue pressure (Donaldson & Dunfee, 1994;Mitchell et al., 1997), as stated in the previous paragraph.Both Friedman's (1970) shareholder primacy position and Miles' (2017) stakeholder theory provide further illustration of the ethical responsibility of leaders and the source of such performance pressures.
According to Brown and Michell (2010) and also Ko et al. (2018), ethical leadership is a concept that combines ethics and leadership.This type of leadership is characterized by normatively appropriate behavior that is expressed through personal actions and interpersonal connections.Ethical leaders are aware of what behaviors and actions are appropriate and inappropriate when it comes to the pursuit of organizational prosperity, and they can influence the behaviors and actions of individuals for the sake of goal attainment (Botha & Musengi, 2012).According to Wart (2014), ethical leadership requires treating all stakeholders fairly and honestly and combining a variety of ethical perspectives, such as virtue ethics, deontology, and utilitarianism.
However, performance pressure and ethical leadership necessitate a critical assessment.
Excessive performance pressure can erode ethical leadership, leading to company crises and loss of trust among stakeholders, according to evidence from real-world circumstances (Business Insider SA, 2020).Theoretical foundations are helpful, but practical evidence shows that this can occur.The complexities and challenges in the real world, such as competing stakeholder interests, the everchanging nature of organizational goals, and the diverse ethical norms and practices in different cultures and nations, must be considered in the theories.Furthermore, they should include ways to prevent and mitigate ethical issues caused by performance pressures.
The theories must address the dichotomy between shareholder primacy and stakeholder theories.
The former places an exclusive emphasis on the interests of shareholders, whilst the latter promotes a fair and equitable approach to all relevant stakeholders.These competing interests must be reconciled, and performance demands must be managed not to compromise ethical leadership.The theories need to provide clear guidance for how to do this.The KPMG case serves as a reminder that ethical practices should be ensured by regulatory bodies as well as independent auditors (Business Insider SA, 2020).
Although performance pressure and ethical leadership provide valuable insights, the theories underlying these concepts must be continuously refined and critically evaluated to keep up with the ever-changing, complex, and challenging environment in which modern organizations operate.To address this need, the current study aims to close this gap by identifying factors that compromise ethical leadership under threat-appraised performance pressure.The research is guided by the following questions: (RQ1) What factors determine organizational performance pressures?; (RQ2) What are the factors that compromise ethical leadership when performance pressure is exerted?; (RQ3) What is the rank order of the most significant performance pressures and factors that compromise ethical leadership?This research not only fills a critical gap but also integrates the diverse needs and expectations of all stakeholders, thereby guiding ethical leadership practices and corporate strategies.This approach is pivotal in enhancing the organization's overall effectiveness, sustainability, and moral integrity (Freeman, 1994).

RESEARCH METHODS
This research revolves around the expert interplay between performance pressure and ethical leadership constructs.The study involved 40 experts, including 21 academics and 19 practitioners, from various fields, including ethics.The criteria for choosing these academic experts emphasized ethics, specific expertise, experience, and scholarly contributions.The aim was to gather a diverse group with varied perspectives and backgrounds to enrich the study, ensuring the credibility and relevance of their insights through their professional standing and recognition in the academic community.The selection process prioritized individuals who were knowledgeable, willing, and capable of effectively communicating and making meaningful contributions to the research objectives.The study used nonprobability convenience sampling techniques and the rank-type Delphi.The Delphi method is a valuable approach for researching ethical leadership and organizational performance.It allows for iterative, confidential exchanges between experts on sensitive topics (Fletcher & Marchildon, 2014;Okoli & Pawlowski, 2004).
The Delphi Method, a renowned consensus-building technique, was utilized to harness the collective wisdom of the expert panel.This method, grounded in the principles of group decisionmaking, is particularly suitable for our quest to explore and rank-order factors of threat-appraised performance pressure.Enabling anonymity and iterative feedback mitigates the risk of dominant voices unduly influencing the group's consensus (Fletcher & Marchildon, 2014;Okoli & Pawlowski, 2004).
The Delphi process unfolded over three phases.In the first brainstorming phase, experts were encouraged to generate factors related to performance pressure and ethical leadership through questionnaires 1 and 2. The second phase narrowed down these factors, using Questionnaire 3. The final phase focused on ranking pertinent factors via a fourth questionnaire, which underwent three iterations.The process was guided by a stop criterion (Kendall's W, 0.7), ensuring a robust consensus (Fletcher & Marchildon, 2014;Okoli & Pawlowski, 2004).
A custom measurement tool was created to capture the dynamics of organizational performance pressure.The instrument is grounded in Rubin et al. (2010) three-time measure and Mitchell et al.'s (2018) daily performance pressure measure.Experts were invited to respond to questions about identifying performance pressure and elucidating its negative manifestations in leadership behavior.
Parallel to exploring performance pressure, the study delved into ethical leadership.An instrument was crafted, drawing on three authoritative sources: The Ethical Leadership Scale (ELS) by Brown et al. (2005), the Ethical Leadership at Work Questionnaire (ELWQ) developed by Kalshoven et al. (2011), and the Ethical Leadership Questionnaire by Yukl et al. (2013).These tools, renowned for their reliability and validity, guided the development of questions that probed into ethical leadership factors and how these factors compromise leadership behavior under performance pressure.This methodological design serves as a pathway to navigate the intricate nexus of performance pressure and ethical leadership.It combines rigorous consensus-building techniques with robust measurement tools, offering an insightful exploration of the constructs under scrutiny.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The fundamental purpose of our research study is to contribute to the body of social scientific knowledge by expanding our understanding of the ethical leadership and performance pressure organizations face as they strive to achieve economic success.An instrument that was painstakingly designed to answer our research questions was based on the Brown et al. (2010) Ethical Leadership Scale (ELS), the Yukl (2006) Ethical Leadership at Work Questionnaire (ELWQ), and Rubin et al.'s (2010) Performance Pressure Scale.It allowed us to negotiate this complex interface and provide answers to our research questions.Under the strain of threat-appraised performance pressure, a three-phased rank-type Delphi approach was used, which offered an enriched identification of the factors that compromise ethical leadership.

Phase 1. Unearthing the Underlying Factors
In the first phase of our research, we generated four lists of organizational performance pressures: Organizational Performance Pressures List (OPPL), Profitability Pressures List (PPL), Productivity Pressures List (PrPL), Competitive Pressures List (CoPL), and Market Share Growth Pressures List (MSPL).We also generated a list of factors that negatively influence and compromise ethical leadership (FCEL).These lists of factors were identified through coding and categorization, and themes emerged and were placed under the list in Table 1.
During this stage, 157 antecedents of organizational performance pressures and 53 antecedents that compromise ethical leadership were identified.These two sets of findings characterized this phase.
Only five of each performance pressure is presented in these results to focus the study.These crucial antecedents, referred to as 'factors' for uniformity from this point forward, provide a comprehensive map of the pressures and leadership behaviors associated with them that permeate the organizational landscape.
The summary of the factors as identified by the top 60% of all experts is shown in

Quotes:
"…profits are a necessary evil in business; if you don't have a profit, you don't have a business.Beyond optimal performance, adverse pressure starts to creep in.In difficult economic conditions, there is no growth in profits, so reducing costs and restricting operations becomes the strategy…negative behavior: ..in dealing with costs, it becomes important to identify and reduce the biggest cost item, which is salaries.It is where exploitation of illegal economic migrants comes in…" AE20.
"…unbelievable pressure on lowering production costs keeps most production staff and the executives awake at night, and the level of burnout results in increased stress-related sickness within the production with production teams.Negative behaviour: it is common practice in this country to resort to sourcing cheap labour; the influx of economic migrants, many of them illegal, are used as cheap labour to realise competitive production costs."AE1 "…some industries have high input costs, particularly labor costs, failure to collaborate on labor cost may prove detrimental to the whole industry; …employers association come together as associations to determine industry salaries to forge uniformity.There is pressure to belong and join industry associations to achieve this…Negative behaviour: From these interactions, relationships are formed amongst senior managers, and they start to illegally collaborate with competitors in price-fixing and collusion, bid rigging, and collaboration to divide up the market and limit competition" PE19 "Organic organizational growth can sometimes be a daunting task.Big businesses usually take the route of acquisitions and mergers to grow at a faster rate…I guess it is the issue of resources for business for big businesses.Boards demand executives to be consistent in looking for potential acquisitions.Negative behavior: These industry manoeuvers lead to acquisitions of competitors to close them down to limit competition and maintain business growth."PE19

Phase 2. Refining the Factors
The academic and practitioner lists were refined throughout the second phase of the study, which helped narrow down the organizational performance pressures.It was essential to go through this pruning procedure to narrow down the most important factors relevant to the study issue.During this phase, academics identified 15 organizational pressures (AOPL) and 16 factors compromising ethical leadership (AFCEL), each supported by more than 60% of the academic experts.Similarly, our practitioner experts have distilled their views into 17 organizational performance factors (POPL) and 18 factors that negatively influence and compromise ethical leadership (PFCEL).The summary of the refined factors, as identified by the top 60% of the experts, is shown in Tables 2 and 3.The answer to RQ2: Academics and Practitioner Experts: What factors compromise ethical leadership?It is presented in the Table 3.

Phase 3: Ranking and Consensus Building
The answer to SrQ3: What is the rank order of the most influential organizational performance pressure and factors that compromise ethical leadership?It is presented in Table 4.
The final phase of the research endeavored to achieve a consensus on ranking factors among academic and practitioner experts.This culminated in a convergence of viewpoints on the constructs that were the subject of the examination.The culmination of this thorough iterative process was establishing the final ranked order of organizational performance pressures by the academic and practitioner experts.The results of the academic experts ranking order are presented in Table 4 .After the practitioners' ranking iteration process was completed, the following outcome emerged from the ranking process: the practitioner experts' final organizational performance pressures and the factors that compromise ethical leadership were concluded.The results of the practitioner experts' ranking order are presented in Table 5. Practitioners ranked competitive pressure, Pressure to present positive financial reports, Growth through acquisition pressures, and Quality as the top five highest organizational performance factors.Practitioners ranked Lack of accountability, Dishonesty, Lack of integrity, Short-termism, and Low moral judgement as the top five highest factors that compromise ethical leadership in Table 5.The results from these three phases, thus, provide a nuanced understanding of the organizational performance pressures and their interplay with ethical leadership, forming a robust foundation for further academic exploration and practical application.

Discussion
This study aimed to investigate the factors that influence ethical performance pressures and their negative expression on organizational leadership behavior.Three secondary research questions were considered to answer the primary research topic.The secondary research questions' aims were as follows: Identifying the factors influencing organizational performance pressures was the primary topic of the first secondary research question.The second secondary research question sought to uncover specific performance pressures.Finally, the third secondary research question determines the rank order of the factors that put the most pressure on organizational leaders and compromise ethical behavior.

Factors Influencing Organizational Performance Pressures
The findings suggested two methods for answering RQ1.The first strategy focused on recognizing and characterizing broad performance pressures, while the second focused on finding and expressing specific performance pressures.A pattern evolved that differentiated between internal and external performance pressures.Internal performance pressures influenced ethical leadership intention directly, but external performance pressures influenced ethical leadership indirectly.The study's context focused on factors directly influencing ethical leadership.After coding and categorizing the data, academic experts had 15 themes, and practitioner experts had 17 themes on performance pressures.

Performance Pressures Results
The study identified performance pressures and found that they could lead to outcomes perceived as either threat appraisal (negative) or challenge appraisal (positive).However, the present literature must clearly indicate the proper appraisal that could positively or negatively influence ethical leadership behavior (Bateman et al., 2019).A demarcation inside the study was required to understand the influence of performance pressure on ethical behavior without the necessity for a prefix such as "threat appraised."The second element of the research question looked into particular performance pressures that directly impact ethical leadership behaviors.
It is worth noting that academic experts identified additional factors, including a lack of powersharing, tolerance for ethical violations, untrustworthiness, a lack of empathy, fear, and intemperance.
On the other hand, practitioner experts highlighted factors such short-termism, poor corporate governance, a lack of compliance, imprudence, favoured stakeholders, process orientation, and conflict of interest.These rankings provide valuable insights into the factors that compromise ethical leadership under performance pressure, emphasizing the need to address accountability, integrity, moral judgment, and ethical advice.
Furthermore, this study also sheds light on the factors that harm and compromise ethical leadership under performance pressure.The found consensus factors and the factors causing disagreement among experts contribute to a complete knowledge of the issues confronting leaders attempting to uphold ethical norms.Further study can be conducted to identify techniques and interventions that promote ethical leadership while mitigating the impact of performance expectations.
The findings show the impact of organizational performance pressure on ethical leadership behavior.Performance pressures, including profitability, productivity, competitive pressure, and market share growth, have a negative impact on ethical leadership behavior when they are threat appraised.It emphasizes the importance of defining performance pressure evaluation to understand its impact on ethical behavior.Results also add to the body of knowledge on organizational performance pressure and its impact on ethical leadership.Organizations can proactively solve these difficulties and promote ethical decision-making and behavior among their leaders by recognizing the specific business pressures and factors that negatively influence ethical leadership behavior.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This study aimed to identify different types of organizational performance pressures that organizational leaders face and the effects of these pressures on ethical decision-making and behavior.
By analyzing secondary research questions and considerable empirical research, this work has provided valuable insights into the complex relationship between performance pressure and ethical leadership.
The findings reflect various performance pressures organizational leaders face.General organizational factors were recognized as indirect influencers on ethical leadership behavior, including market/economic pressure, competitive pressure, regulatory compliance/government pressure, growth through acquisition pressure, and societal pressure.External pressure comes from many stakeholders, like competitors, the government, and society, making it difficult for leaders to uphold ethical standards.
The study emphasized the factors that have a negative impact on and compromise ethical leadership when performance pressure is applied.The leading factors undermining ethical leadership are a lack of accountability, followed by a lack of integrity and dishonesty, low moral judgment, lack of transparency, unfairness, injustices, self-interest (greed), and inefficient communication.These

Table 1 ,
and a few participants' quotes are presented thereafter: Academic Experts are denoted by AE, and PE and the participant number denote the participant number and Practitioner Experts.The recap of Organizational Performance Pressures List (OPPL) and Factors that Compromised Ethical Leadership List (FCEL) can be presented in Table 1.

Table 2
presents the answer to RQ1 Academics and Practitioner Experts: What factors determine organizational performance pressures.

Table 4 . AOPL and AFCEL rank order
Academics ranked the performance pressure as competitive pressure, achieving greater efficiency, declining customer base, demanding customers, and Controlling mechanisms, among the top five highest organizational performance pressures.Academic experts identified.These AFCEL:Lack of accountability, Lack of integrity, Dishonesty, Lack of ethical guidance/sensitivity, and Low moral judgement are the top five highest in Table4.