Ethical work climate can be described as shared formal and informal conditions influencing employees’ response to policies, procedures and practices with moral consequences (Martin & Cullen 2006:293; Mitonga-Monga & Cilliers 2015:242; Treviño et al. 2014:635; Victor & Cullen 1988:104). Such a climate arises when employees are confident that certain forms of ethical reasoning and behaviour constitute expected standards or norms for decision-making within the organisation. Literature indicates that the key aspects of EWC include the following: (1) Caring, which refers to the perception that decisions are and should be based on an overarching concern for the well-being of others; (2) Law and codes, which refer to the perception that the organisation supports principled decision-making based on external codes, such as the law and professional codes of conduct; (3) Rules, which refer to the extent to which decisions are perceived to be guided by a strong, pervasive set of local rules or standards, such as a code of conduct; (4) Independence, which refers to the extent to which individuals believe that they should act according to their personal moral convictions to make ethical decisions; (5) Instrumental, which refers to the extent to which individuals look out for their own self-interest, first and foremost, to the exclusion of the interests of others (Mitonga-Monga 2018:15). The effect of perceptions relating to EWC on the WE of employees is of significant interest to researchers (Yener et al. 2012; Mitonga-Monga & Cilliers 2015:243). Researchers in the business ethics field commonly hypothesise that higher levels of employee engagement and psychological well-being will be present when employees consider there to be a strong and positive EWC (Mitonga-Monga & Cilliers 2015:243).

Kalshoven et al. (2013:212) argue that ELB largely influences employees’ behaviour and attitudes by establishing ethical standards and communicating them to employees. Leaders display ethical behaviour when their decisions are made for altruistic reasons, rather than being driven by self-interest (Brown et al. 2005:121; Kacmar et al. 2013:33). Ethical leadership behaviour refers to the extent to which individual leaders feel a responsibility to do what is right and honest; align themselves with moral principles and values; act with fairness, respect and integrity; make principled choices and refrain from showing preferential treatment; guide employees and clarify their responsibilities so that employees understand what is expected of them; emphasise ethical norms; and communicate expectations regarding ethical behaviour (De Hoogh & Den Hartog 2008:298; Eisenbeiß & Brodbeck 2014:343; Kalshoven et al. 2011).

Brown et al. (2005) define ELB as ‘the demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and promotion of such conduct to followers through two-way communication, reinforcement, and decision-making’. Literature outlines key components of ELB as follows: (1) Fairness, which refers to the extent to which ethical leaders act with integrity and treat employees fairly, make principled and fair choices, are trustworthy and honest, do not practise favouritism and take responsibility for their own actions; (2) Power sharing, which is the extent to which ethical leaders involve their employees in the decision-making process and listen to their ideas and concerns, allowing employees to have more control and be less dependent on the leaders; (3) Role clarification, which refers to the extent to which ethical leaders act in a transparent manner and engage in open communication, clarifying responsibilities, performance goals and expectations for employees; (4) People orientation, which refers to the extent to which ethical leaders demonstrate genuine caring behaviour, treating others with respect and dignity and providing support, and ensuring that their needs are met; (5) Ethical guidance, which refers to the extent to which ethical leaders convey standards regarding ethical conduct and set rules and codes of conduct which provide guardrails or guidelines for ethical behaviour; (6) Concern for sustainability, which refers to the extent to which ethical leaders are aware of their impact on stakeholders and society. It also refers to the extent to which ethical leaders take responsibility for protecting and promoting the interests of stakeholders; (7) Integrity, which refers to the extent to which ethical leaders align what they say with what they do, whether they keep promises, whether they behave in a consistent manner and whether they are trusted and believed (Kalshoven et al. (2011:52). Work environments in which there are strong and positive ethical leaders are likely to be characterised by norms and policies that value and reward ethical conduct (Den Hartog & Belschak 2012:35). Leaders who demonstrate positive ethical behaviour tend to hold workers accountable, and use discipline and punishment accordingly. Conversely, leaders who refrain from punishing unethical behaviour and apply rewards inconsistently may promote a work environment where employees will demonstrate a low level of engagement.

Researchers in the field of ethical behaviour consider EWC and ELB to be critical determinants of employee engagement (Chughtai et al. 2015:655; Rich et al. 2010:617). If EWC and ELB are considered to be organisational resources, they can be predictors of the level of employees’ WE. For this reason, it is possible to link EWC and ELB to WE. Work engagement is considered to be a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterised by various key aspects, such as vigour, dedication and absorption: (1) Vigour refers to willingness to invest effort in one’s work. This component is characterised by a high level of energy and mental resilience and persistence, even in the face of adversity. (2) Dedication refers to being fully involved in one’s work and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride and challenge. (3) Absorption refers to a person concentrating fully on and being happily engrossed in his or her work, to the extent that time seems to pass quickly and he or she experiences difficulty in detaching from this work. Engaged employees tend to feel vigorous and strong and be enthusiastic about their work, and are largely immersed in their work activities. Engaged employers tend to be dedicated and psychologically connected if their leader is ethical and shows concern for others, and demonstrates fairness and integrity. Research has established that high levels of WE can lead to valued outcomes such as job satisfaction (Lu et al. 2018:186; Saks 2006:600), improved health and well-being (Halbesleben 2010:201; Schaufeli, Bakker & Van Rhenen 2009:893; Schaufeli 2013:16), reduced turnover and lower absenteeism (Lee & Ok 2015:84), as well as enhanced performance (Rich et al. 2010:617).

Employees will be motivated to engage and perform when they are committed to their work, happy in their jobs and prepared to go the extra mile. According to Engelbrecht, Heine and Mahembe (2014:2), WE occurs when individuals have the ability, motivation, autonomy and knowledge to engage. EWC as an organisational resource contains elements that can influence WE (see Mitonga-Monga & Cilliers 2015:242; Yener et al. 2014:724). Firstly, employees have the ability to engage in their job when the organisation provides positive and clear policies, procedures and practices (indicative of a positive, EWC), as well as a supporting structure that contributes to employees’ ability to perform better (Lee & Ok 2015:84). Ethical work climate is one which reflects an organisation’s resources, processes, procedures, policies and practices, with moral consequences that may help employees in the execution of their daily work. According to DeConinck (2010:1349), these organisational resources are associated with WE because they provide employees with a positive perception of a psychologically healthy and meaningful working environment. It can thus be proposed that an employee’s positive perception of EWC contributes positively to his or her WE or psychological well-being.

Secondly, individuals will be encouraged to be engaged with and perform well in their work when they are treated with integrity, respect and fairness, and are valued by the organisation (Demirtas et al. 2017:183; Hassan & Ahmed 2011:164; Kalshoven et al. 2013:211; Lu & Lin 2014:209; Mayer, Kuenzi & Greenbaum 2010:8). According to Kalshoven et al. (2013:213) and Mayer et al. (2013:90), the behaviour of ethical leaders leads to employee engagement, as well as attitudinal and motivational well-being and performance-related outcomes, because employees are consulted, treated fairly, and experience care and support, which leads to a positive job attitude and constructive ethical behaviour. Highly engaged employees will be more motivated, encouraged and willing to put in extra effort, because they are more committed to delivering high-quality work performance (Babin, Boles & Robin 2000:346; DeConinck 2010:345).

Den Hartog and Belschak (2012:41) found ethical leadership to be a positive predictor of employees’ WE and argue that emphasis on shared moral values and the honesty, care, fairness, power sharing and role clarification modelled by ethical leaders will enhance employees’ WE and performance. In other words, employees tend to be engaged in their work when they perceive their leaders to be ethical and honest. The biographical characteristics of age, gender, education and tenure were found to be related to employees’ level of engagement (Changsuk et al. 2018:104; James, McKechnie & Swanberg 2011:178). This implies that older employees with a high level of education and experience seem to exhibit a higher level of engagement than younger employees. It can therefore be proposed that ELB has a positive influence on employees’ WE. Although research provides evidence of how EWC and ELB predict employees’ level of engagement and performance, the extent to which these influences are sustained in a developing country work setting, such as the DRC, is as yet unknown.

The objective of the study was to determine whether or not EWC and ELB influence employees’ level of WE in a railway organisation in the DRC. The following research question was formulated: Do employees’ perceptions of EWC and ELB influence their levels of WE? The outcome of this study could potentially contribute to future human resource interventions with regard to promoting employees’ level of engagement, well-being and performance. It is believed that such interventions will be successful in an environment where leaders create a positive and ethical work atmosphere, and act and treat others in an ethical manner (Mitonga-Monga & Cilliers 2016:35).

The participants were 2500 employees of a DRC railway organisation, who were purposively selected. Only 839 questionnaires were collected, yielding a final sample of n = 839 (response rate = 36%). The participants were permanently employed and the majority were men (68%) in the establishment stage of their careers (24–40 years: 63%), with a university degree (38%) and tenure in the organisation (31%).

Participants were invited to participate voluntarily in the study. The researcher respected their anonymity and confidentiality at all times. The participants received a sealed envelope that included an invitation letter, management approval to conduct the study and a participant informed consent form.

Participating employees were asked to complete the self-report survey on EWC, ELB and WE. These instruments are described below.

The statistical analysis was carried out with the help of the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), version 25 for Windows software (2018). Descriptive statistics, correlations and hierarchical multiple regressions were employed for data analysis. Correlational analysis was utilised to investigate the relationship between EWC and ELB as the independent variables, and WE as the dependent variable. In terms of statistical significance, it was decided to set a cut-off value at the 95% confidence level (p ≤ 0.05). Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were performed to determine whether or not EWC and ELB acted as significant predictors of the UWES variables. For the purpose of this study, R² values larger than 0.13 (medium effect) at p ≤ 0.05 (Cohen 1992:155–156) were regarded as practically significant. Prior to conducting the various regression analyses, Harman’s single-factor test was performed to ensure the absence of common method bias (using the cut-off point of eigenvalue = 1; σ ≤ 50). Collinearity diagnostics was examined to ensure that the zero-order correlations were below the level of concern (r ≥ 0.90), that the variance inflation factors did not exceed 10 and that the tolerance values were close to 1.0 (Hair et al. 2010:93–149).

Ethical clearance to conduct the research was obtained from the researcher’s institution, while permission for the study was obtained from the management of the railway organisation in the Democratic Republic of Congo (No 11/40.A022/SD.Form/2013).

The significant relationships between the ECQ, ELWQ and UWES variables are reported in Table 1. The results show that the EWC and ELB variables were significantly and positively related to the WE variables (r ≥ 0.35; medium practical effect size, to r ≥ 0.87; large practical effect size). These results indicate that the zero-order correlations were well below the threshold level of concern (≥ 0.90) about multicollinearity. Table 1 shows that the total people orientation, fairness, power sharing, concern for sustainability, ethical guidance, role clarification and integrity ELWQ variables and the total caring, law and codes, rules, independence and instrumental ECQ variables were positively and significantly related to the total vigour, dedication and absorption UWES variables (p-values range between p ≤ 0.01 and p ≤ 0.05). Age, education and tenure were significantly and positively related to the ECQ, EWLQ and UWES variables (r ≥ 0.10 ≤ 0.23; small effect; p ≤ 0.01).

Table 2 and Table 3 summarise the hierarchical multiple regression, with ELB and EWC (ELWQ and ECQ measure) as predictors of WE. The entry of the demographic variables as the first step of the regression analysis produced a statistical model where F (4, 835) = 416.80; p ≤ 0.001 accounts for approximately 15% of the variance in WE, as explained by the demographic variables. The entry of people orientation, fairness, power sharing, concern for sustainability, ethical guidance, role clarification and integrity ELWQ variables explained an additional 61.9% of variations in WE, and this change in R² was significant, because F (8, 831) = 136.80; p ≤ 0.001. The addition of caring, law and codes, rules, independence and instrumental ECQ variables to the regression model explained a further 68.4% of the variation in WE, and this change in R² was significant, because F (12, 827) = 132.27; p ≤ 0.001. The most important predictor of WE was the ELB variable, which accounted for 61.9% of the variation in WE. Together, the three independent variables accounted for 68.4% of the variations in WE.

The findings of this study could have important implications for both employees and organisations. The results demonstrate that nurturing EWC and ELB could contribute towards improving employees’ work-related well-being and performance, both in a developing country and elsewhere. Thus, organisations may consider creating a positive ethical work environment, establishing clear ethical standards, policies, procedures, regulations and values, hiring leaders that are more ethical and providing training to existing leaders in terms of ethical conduct. Furthermore, organisations should make use of an appropriate selection battery, such as integrity tests, interviews and assessments that focus on solving ethical issues and dilemmas. In addition, organisations should recognise the importance of employees’ WE and work harder to develop or improve it. An organisation that has a positive and ethical reputation and increases employees’ level of engagement will not only improve the well-being and performance of its employees but also survive in the long term. Organisations that need to increase profits should enforce ethical standards, because doing so can create a fruitful synergy that could encourage employees to be engaged and contribute to the organisation’s performance in the current competitive world of business. Organisations that create a positive ethical work environment, adopt an ethical management style and manage to increase WE will survive in this era of moral deficiency and ethical scandals.

Yukl (2013:340) proposes that leaders at all levels in organisations should behave in an ethical manner and strive to inculcate moral values and an ethical vision, making this visible by modelling it in the organisation and developing criteria that reward ethical behaviour, and facilitating fair and ethical solutions to problems that occur in the workplace. Taken together, our findings suggest that organisations should invest additional resources in developing ethical leaders and finding creative ways to teach and enforce ethical conduct and policies to facilitate workplace fairness. Such investment has the potential to improve organisational performance and the well-being of workers.

The study had certain limitations. The first of these was that the causal relationships between EWC, ELB and employees’ WE could not be proved because of the cross-sectional design that was used. Relationships between variables were therefore interpreted rather than established. These findings need to be replicated in future research in various organisations in developing countries before conclusions can be drawn about the relationship between EWC, ELB and employees’ WE. Secondly, longitudinal studies need to be conducted to examine the relationship between these variables, and how they can encourage or influence the well-being and performance of employees. The results of this study revealed a positive relationship between EWC, ELB and employees’ WE. This could be explained by the uniqueness of the study sample.