Despite the importance of moral distress in the nursing scholarship, little attention is paid to the phenomena in the psychological literature as an important occupational stressor. A factor limiting the application of moral distress to other occupational settings is its definitional features. First, a necessary condition of moral distress is the acknowledgment prior to behaviour initiation that behaviour will contravene personal moral ideals. Second, the definition of moral distress specifies that the inability to act in accordance with one's moral framework is driven by institutional constraints (non-autonomous behaviour). This article proposes that moral distress not be limited in these ways, and makes two central contributions to resolve this core problem. We offer a critique and extension of the conceptual definition of moral distress. Fourteen Australian medical doctors participated in a semi-structured interview regarding occupational morally distressing events. Medical doctors were chosen for our interviews because they are an occupational population with considerable decision-making autonomy. Based on the findings, two recommendations are made: (1) that the definition of moral distress is not limited to events where decision-making and behaviour is non-autonomous, and (2) moral distress should not be limited to occasions where the moral conflict is identified prior to decision-making or behaviour. An alternative definition of moral distress is proposed. We conclude that while organisational limitations are an important precipitate of moral distress, they are not a necessary condition for its emergence.

Several recent studies have connected information-processing styles, as described by Cognitive-Experiential Self-Theory (CEST), with important workplace behaviours, including leadership and conflict-handling styles. This article extends such research by examining the connection between CEST information-processing styles and organisational-influencing tactics. In Study 1 (N = 119), the CEST information-processing styles of behavioural coping and rational thinking were positively correlated with the use of rationality as an influencing tactic, as measured by the Profile of Organizational Influence Strategies. In Study 2 (N = 142), a broader self-report measure of influencing tactics was used; behavioural coping and rational thinking were positively correlated with effective influencing tactics such as rational persuasion. Together, behavioural coping and rational thinking accounted for more than 31% of the variance in preference for rational persuasion as an influencing tactic. Additionally, the apprising tactic was positively correlated with both behavioural coping and rational thinking. These findings emphasise the importance of examining individual differences in information-processing preferences to understand key elements of organisational behaviour.

The purpose of this article is to define ‘social undermining’ and to discuss its causes and effects within an organisational context. Central to social undermining is the effect of moral disengagement, which is the main precursor to the manifestation of social undermining in personal and professional behaviours. Possible causes and motivations for the social undermining of others and behavioural symptoms in its victims are examined. Reasons for why social undermining is important for organisations, employees, and the effect of it on workplace behaviours within organisations are then explored. Employee and organisational reputation are discussed in the context of social undermining as a workplace stressor and as existing on a continuum of supportive and/or derogative workplace behaviours.