While we all strive to maintain our moral standards, it is inevitable that there will be times when we err.  Research from the University of East Anglia suggests that when we’re able to self-reflect, we’re much more likely to recover from any failures and not divert from our “moral compass” as a result instead.

The researchers analyzed a concept known as moral disengagement, which is a psychological concept that explains how we routinize certain misbehavior and wrongdoing, thus removing any guilt or need to make amends.

The authors explain that moral disengagement can become so powerful that we gradually cease any self-sanctions at all, with misbehavior normalized.

Reducing moral disengagement

Of particular focus was the role moral self-efficacy can play in reducing moral disengagement.  Moral self-efficacy is a set of beliefs that we have about our ability to both self-reflect and then self-regulate our moral behavior.

The first part of the equation is our ability to self-reflect on past moral failures and thus better anticipate how we might improve in the future.  The second part then refers to our ability to effectively self-regulate our moral behaviors so that we do the right thing even when tempted to do otherwise.  Both approaches are crucial at reducing misbehaviors and wrongdoing at work.

“Although self-efficacious individuals are in general more self-regulated and motivated to behave in line with their standards, this does not mean they are morally infallible,” the researchers say.

“However, we show that highly morally efficacious individuals are more likely to ‘bounce back’ after a failure, and learn from their mistakes, rather than routinise misbehaviour and repeatedly deviate from their moral compass. Rather, they have the resources to restore their moral compass, to mindfully re-engage morally and are therefore less likely to continue justifying and engaging in wrongdoing.”

If we’re someone with low moral self-efficacy, moral disengagement can easily normalize poor behavior and lead to them being performed with little sense of guilt.  The researchers hope that their work helps to shed light on how wrongdoing occurs and how it becomes normalized.  They also provide some advice on how this can be prevented.

“Organizations should create opportunities to reflect on the complexities of moral decision making, the mechanisms often at play in the justification of wrongdoing and the capabilities needed to master moral challenges,” they conclude.