Traditional cyberloafing, mobile cyberloafing and personal mobile-internet loafing in business organizations: Exploring cognitive ethical logics

Abstract

Purpose

Possession and usage of data-enabled smartphones have added further complexity to the issue of cyberloafing behavior and it certainly evokes newer ethical concerns. This study aims to explore how working individuals perceive the ethicality of their cyberloafing behaviors at the workplace and the cognitive logics they apply to justify their cyberloafing behavior.

Design/methodology/approach

Incorporating constructivist grounded theory methodology, 19 working managers from various organizations were interviewed face-to-face and responses were audio-recorded with prior consent. The recordings were transcribed verbatim, simultaneously analyzed and coded to let the themes emerge out of the data.

Findings

The research showed that working managers use varied combinations of office computers, personal laptops, smartphones, wireless internet provided at the office and personal mobile-internet to loaf around at workplaces. Moreover, it unearthed that employees use nine different neutralization techniques and six different ethical logics (with normative undertones) in a network fashion while considering the ethicality of cyberloafing behavior.

Practical implications

Recognizing the complexities is imperative to moderate any deviant behavior in an organization. The layers of ethicality and neutralization tactics will equip the working managers and companies to place the required internet and smartphone usage policies in the future.

Originality/value

This research has taken into account all forms of cyberloafing behaviors. The perceived ethicality of cyberloafing behavior at the workplace was not fully explored in a holistic manner before, specifically in the Indian context.

Citation

Batabyal, S.K. and Bhal, K.T. (2020), "Traditional cyberloafing, mobile cyberloafing and personal mobile-internet loafing in business organizations: Exploring cognitive ethical logics", Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 631-647. https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-07-2019-0081