It is a difficult moral decision: when and how does other’s UPB cause individual’s whistleblowing dilemma

Purpose While unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB) has been extensively studied, there remains a gap in understanding how observers whistleblowing attitude towards others’ UPB. This paper aims to examine the paradoxical process mechanisms of other’s UPB influence individual’s whistleblowing decisions, using the dual-processing model of whistleblowing. Design/methodology/approach Two scenario-based experimental studies were conducted using a one-way between-subjects design. Study 1 (n = 197) examined the interactive effect of other’s UPB and observer’s moral philosophies on whistleblowing intentions. Study 2 (n = 234) further explored the mediation effects of vicarious shame and moral justification based on Study 1. Findings Study 1 demonstrated an interaction effect between other’s UPB and moral philosophy on individual’s whistleblowing intention, idealists exhibiting higher whistleblowing intention than relativists. Study 2 revealed that the interaction between other’s UPB and idealism positively influences internal/external whistleblowing intention through vicarious shame, while the interaction between other’s UPB and relativism suppresses internal/external whistleblowing intention via moral justification. Practical implications Individuals should form positive whistleblowing attitude toward UPB. Organizations need to strengthen moral emotion management and be alert to the moral justification psychology among employees. Originality/value This study elucidates how and when individuals have ambivalent whistleblowing attitudes toward other’s UPB. It enriches the potential consequences of UPB from a third-party perspective and offers new directions for research on UPB and whistleblowing.