Interaction Between Ethical Leadership, Affective Commitment and Social Sustainability in Transition Economies: A Model Mediated by Ethical Climate and Moderated by Psychological Empowerment in the Colombian Electricity Sector

Abstract

This inquiry articulates a conceptually cohesive framework to explore the interplay between ethical leadership–affective commitment, particularly in settings characterized by socio-environmental volatility. Central to the analysis is the examination of how ethical climate functions as a psychological conduit and how psychological empowerment modulates this pathway. Empirical validation was carried out with a sample of 448 employees (175 women, 273 men) from Colombia’s electricity sector, a context where institutional fragility elevates the salience of ethical practices. The study employed structural equation modeling to test the model’s robustness. Results underscore that ethical leadership cultivates a benevolent ethical climate, which in turn reinforces affective commitment. Importantly, this sequence is not fixed but is contingent upon psychological empowerment. The influence of ethical leadership on ethical climate and especially on affective commitment is amplified when empowerment is high; likewise, the ethical climate–affective commitment link becomes more salient under elevated empowerment conditions. These findings highlight the influence of ethical dynamics in organizations. Beyond model validation, this research contributes to broader conversations on social sustainability. Ethical leadership is shown to foster organizational climates rooted in fairness, stakeholder sensitivity, and moral coherence—factors essential for long-term institutional legitimacy. In environments such as Colombia’s electricity industry, where governance infrastructures are evolving, such leadership emerges as a necessary condition for rebuilding trust and promoting shared ethical standards. Accordingly, this study advocates for the systematic cultivation of ethical leadership as a means to enhance organizational loyalty and public credibility. The theoretical model presented here offers fertile ground for cross-cultural replication and further inquiry across industries in emerging economies.

1. Introduction

Over the years, ethical conduct within organizations has continued to prompt rigorous debate and scholarly attention [1]. A persistent international trend has emerged aiming to systematically delineate the intersection between ethical principles, organizational structures, and performance outcomes [2]. Along these lines, a significant number of studies have highlighted the crucial importance of ethical leadership and certain ethical climates in shaping organizational effectiveness [3,4,5,6,7].

Ethical leadership is commonly defined as the enactment of principled conduct grounded in universally endorsed norms, made evident through consistent personal and relational behaviors [8]. Empirical investigations suggest that such leaders function as moral exemplars, significantly influencing the ethical standards of their teams and cultivating an environment shaped by integrity and accountability [9,10,11]. Consequently, ethical leadership becomes indispensable in fostering a value-congruent organizational climate, where alignment between individual and institutional ethics is paramount [12]. The concept of ethical climate refers to the collective understanding among employees about appropriate conduct and the resolution of moral dilemmas within the workplace [13]. Employees who perceive this climate as an integral element of institutional policy tend to exhibit stronger engagement and alignment with organizational objectives [2].

An ethically grounded climate does more than guide decision-making; it represents a strategic organizational asset that empowers leadership to make decisions reflective of collective interests and interpersonal concern [14]. A climate that visibly prioritizes employee well-being and interpersonal support is associated with enhanced task engagement and elevated levels of affective commitment [2,15]. This form of commitment denotes the emotional attachment of employees to their organization, manifesting through loyalty, internalization of values, and an enduring identification with institutional goals [16,17].

There is substantial evidence linking ethical leadership with the development of ethical climates. Scholars such as Al Halbusi et al. [3] and Lu and Lin [18] argue that ethical leaders facilitate moral behavior among employees, largely by shaping the ethical climate. This perspective supports the notion that ethical leadership is pivotal in reinforcing normative structures that elicit prosocial behaviors within organizations.

Despite these findings, the psychological mechanisms connecting leadership, ethical climates, and affective commitment remain underexplored. Demirtas and Akdogan [2] posit that ethical leadership fosters affective commitment not only directly but also indirectly, via its influence on ethical climate perceptions. Likewise, Loi et al. [19] emphasize the mediating role of perceived organizational support (POS) in this relationship. Complementary studies by Asif et al. [20] and Negiş Işik [21] highlight affective commitment as a mediating variable in understanding how ethical leadership affects creativity and job satisfaction. Additionally, Huang et al. [22] and Kaur [23] observe that a caring ethical climate promotes affective commitment by enhancing job satisfaction.

Given the relative scarcity of research on these interrelations, especially within specific national contexts, it is crucial to further investigate the mediating role of ethical climate in the link between ethical leadership–affective commitment. Moreover, the existing evidence suggests that contextual factors may moderate this mediating process, thereby altering the strength or direction of the relationships involved. For example, employees tend to exhibit stronger affective commitment when they feel empowered by their leaders during decision-making processes [24]. In this framework, psychological empowerment emerges as a plausible moderating variable, characterized by heightened autonomy, competence, and perceived impact—attributes that can fortify the connection between ethical leadership, ethical climate, and affective commitment [25].

Recent contributions have begun to explore the interaction between ethical leadership and psychological empowerment. Qing et al. [26] reveal that ethical leadership bolsters affective commitment through psychological empowerment, acting as an intermediary mechanism. Furthermore, Kim and Vandenberghe [27] indicate that psychological empowerment can enhance the strength of this relationship when positioned as a moderator. Additional findings by Akkoç et al. [28] and Liu et al. [29] show that a supportive ethical climate contributes to psychological empowerment by fostering a sense of safety and self-efficacy. This empowerment facilitates professional autonomy and is reciprocated by employees through heightened affective commitment [30,31,32].

This study offers valuable contributions to the literature on ethical leadership. First, it addresses gaps concerning the nature of social exchanges between leaders and subordinates. Specifically, the mechanisms by which these exchanges yield reciprocal, prosocial behaviors remain insufficiently elucidated [2]. The present work proposes a robust linkage between ethical leadership–affective commitment—an association that remains understudied despite its potential to influence critical organizational behaviors such as increased dedication, cooperative engagement, lower turnover rates, and active participation in corporate initiatives [2,19,20].

Second, although the organizational outcomes of ethical leadership have been extensively researched, empirical evidence remains limited regarding its influence on employee identification with their organization in the Colombian context. Qing et al. [26] assert that leadership behaviors elicit varying responses depending on the national or cultural environment. This study argues that psychological empowerment is capable of controlling the following relationships: ethical leadership–ethical climate; ethical climate-affective commitment, together with the link between ethical leadership–affective commitment. These relationships have hardly been explored within the scientific community. People with a strong sense of empowerment, who feel more autonomous, qualified, and capable of influencing others, are more likely to develop a strong identification with the organization.

Third, while sustainability research has traditionally emphasized environmental and economic concerns, the social dimension—particularly employee well-being—has received comparatively little attention. Emerging studies suggest that promoting psychological empowerment and affective commitment enhances workplace well-being and, by extension, the social sustainability of organizations [24,26,27,28]. This study fills a notable empirical void in the Colombian context by examining the interplay among ethical climate, psychological empowerment, and affective commitment as drivers of social sustainability in the workplace.

Finally, ethical leadership may serve as a stabilizing force for affective commitment within organizations striving toward social sustainability. Ethical climate and psychological empowerment are theorized as underlying processes that anchor these effects. Perceived organizational support, manifested through an ethically driven climate, may act as the principal conduit linking ethical leadership to employees’ affective commitment. This interconnection has yet to receive adequate empirical scrutiny. Ultimately, both ethical climate and social sustainability are founded upon participative decision-making, equitable resource allocation, and interpersonal engagement—all factors intricately tied to psychological empowerment and affective commitment.

1.1. Study Contextualization

The Colombian energy industry has taken on an important role in the national sustainability program, especially with regard to expanding its energy resources, increasing energy efficiency, and reducing its environmental impact. Despite these strategic objectives, structural limitations—including deep-seated social inequality and historical governance challenges—continue to hinder the sector’s ability to equitably distribute energy resources. The current transition toward renewable energy sources, while necessary, is unfolding within a broader context of fiscal uncertainty, institutional distrust, and political volatility, notably exacerbated by governmental shifts and delays in subsidy payments since 2022.

In 2015, in response to national and international concerns over transparency and corruption, the sector initiated an anti-bribery and ethics-based governance agenda aimed at restoring its financial and reputational standing. Within this reform process, leadership based on ethical principles has been prioritized as a strategic response to reputational risk and organizational dysfunction. However, despite the recognition of its importance, the sector still lacks a comprehensive understanding of how leadership ethics interact with internal psychological mechanisms—such as empowerment—and social constructs like affective commitment.

The present study emerges from this institutional and societal complexity. It posits that a benevolent ethical climate, rooted in shared moral values and organizational solidarity, can act as a powerful facilitator of affective commitment. In turn, affective commitment is not merely an attitudinal outcome but a key preventive factor against workplace deviance and ethical transgressions. This is particularly relevant in sectors like energy, where corruption constitutes a critical impediment to achieving sustainable development goals.

Simultaneously, psychological empowerment is proposed as a vital cognitive-emotional mechanism that undergoes ethical behavior. The existing literature has established that diminished self-control and negative perceptions of authority are organizational precursors to deviance. Conversely, psychological empowerment—defined as a motivational state that enhances perceived autonomy, competence, and task significance—can reorient employee perspectives toward ethical leadership and reinforce principles such as integrity and moral courage. In this context, empowerment serves not only as an outcome but as a moderating force capable of enhancing ethical decision-making and organizational resilience in environments marked by institutional flux and operational uncertainty.

1.2. Linear Link Between Ethical Leadership-Affective Commitment

The leader, as the central agent of organizational communication, exerts a direct influence over follower behavior, serving as an interpretive reference of institutional intentions. When emotional bonds are formed between the leader and the follower, they often extend to the organization itself [33]. Ethical leaders exhibit a range of behaviors that reveal their emotional intelligence—listening actively to employees, addressing their concerns, and providing consistent feedback—actions that enhance relational depth [34]. These behaviors foster a climate of trust, which becomes instrumental in strengthening affective commitment. Empirical studies corroborate the close association between trust in leadership and the development of affective organizational bonds [35].

Ethical leadership also entails a commitment to organizational sustainability [36]. By prioritizing norm-based decision-making, ethical leaders contribute to the continuity and long-term security of the organization, thereby reinforcing employees’ sense of stability and future orientation [37]. Research by Ilyas et al. [38] emphasizes the role of ethical leadership in bolstering affective commitment, especially among employees with limited confidence in their own capabilities. Through qualities of openness, reliability, and integrity, ethical leaders create an environment where employees feel secure regardless of performance variability [9]. Such leadership is grounded in social exchange theory rather than transactional models, cultivating loyalty through mutual care and trust rather than extrinsic rewards [39,40]. Based on these conceptual underpinnings, we hypothesize:

H1. 

Ethical leadership will exhibit a positive and statistically significant relationship with affective commitment.

1.3. Ethical Leadership—Affective Commitment Through the Mediating Effect of Ethical Climate

Ethical leadership is an essential precursor to the development of an ethically aligned organizational culture. In assuming responsibility for the formation of ethical climates, ethical leaders act as central agents of institutional moral infrastructure [2]. These climates emerge through a convergence of socio-cultural influences, organizational structures, and the unique strategic directions of individual institutions [41].

Through the dual dimensions of moral person and moral manager, ethical leaders shape the ethical climate by combining personal virtues—such as fairness, reliability, and compassion—with deliberate behavioral management strategies, including reinforcement and discipline [42,43]. Within this theoretical framework, social learning theory offers a robust explanatory model. It posits that individuals internalize behavioral norms through observation, particularly of salient and credible role models [44,45,46,47]. Ethical leaders, by consistently modeling integrity and normative compliance, provide employees with explicit behavioral expectations and moral reference points.

Social learning mechanisms operate both directly and indirectly, allowing followers to interpret and emulate observed ethical standards. These leaders also shield followers from pressure that might otherwise prompt ethically compromise in pursuit of performance goals [12]. Grojean et al. [48] assert that daily leadership conduct is among the most influential variables in shaping ethical climates. Schminke et al. [49] further argue that such influence intensifies when leaders align their stated moral positions with observable behavior. Ethical climates flourish when leadership and follower moral development are aligned, producing climates characterized by mutual care and psychological safety. Accordingly, extensive empirical evidence supports the formative role of ethical leadership in cultivating ethical climates [2,3,6,12,15,18,42,50,51].

Supportive ethical climates, in particular, emphasize benevolence and interpersonal concern. This orientation fosters emotional attachment and retention, indicating a meaningful link between ethical climate-affective commitment [22,52]. The explanatory framework of social exchange theory elucidates how employees reciprocate perceived organizational care with affective identification. Reciprocity and perceived fairness are foundational to this theory; when employees experience supportive environments, they tend to reciprocate through affective commitment. Thus, climates that value individual contributions and align with broader societal well-being enhance fairness perceptions and strengthen emotional organizational ties [22,52]. Affective commitment, which encompasses shared values and goals, manifests in elevated performance, initiative, and a reinforced sense of membership [53,54]. According to Demirtas and Akdogan [2], ethical climates that integrate procedural clarity, security, and equity significantly increase affective commitment.

The interplay between ethical leadership–affective commitment, through the mediating effect of ethical climate, constitutes a foundational pillar of organizational social sustainability. Ethical leadership, by articulating and modeling normative standards rooted in fairness, transparency, and interpersonal respect, fosters a work environment in which employees perceive ethical conduct not as an abstract ideal but as an operational imperative. This perception coalesces into a shared ethical climate that reinforces prosocial values and equitable treatment, thereby facilitating the internalization of organizational goals and identity among employees. Affective commitment, in this context, is not merely a psychological outcome but a strategic asset—an expression of employees’ emotional investment in an ethical organizational culture that prioritizes human dignity and collective well-being. Such commitment directly supports the social dimension of sustainability, as it cultivates trust, reduces turnover, enhances cohesion, and promotes long-term relational stability within the organization. Hence, the mediating role of ethical climate in the ethical leadership–commitment nexus is not only a mechanism of behavioral alignment but also a critical vector through which social sustainability objectives are operationalized and sustained across organizational systems. On this basis, we propose:

H2. 

The ethical climate will act as a significant mediating mechanism in the link between ethical leadership and affective commitment.

1.4. Psychological Empowerment as a Moderating Factor

The convergence of ethical leadership, ethical climate, and affective commitment offers a robust framework for advancing organizational social sustainability, particularly when examined through the moderating lens of psychological empowerment. Ethical leadership sets the normative foundation by embodying moral principles in decision-making and interpersonal conduct, while the ethical climate translates these principles into shared organizational expectations and practices. However, the extent to which these ethical structures elicit strong affective bonds with the organization depends in part on employees’ psychological empowerment—that is, their perceived autonomy, competence, and impact. Empowered individuals are more likely to interpret ethical norms as personal meaningful and aligned with their intrinsic motivations, thereby amplifying the emotional attachment to an organization that reflects their values. In this way, psychological empowerment enhances the resonance of ethical leadership–ethical climate, reinforcing affective commitment as both a psychological state and a social mechanism. This dynamic, in turn, anchors social sustainability by fostering inclusive participation, reinforcing value congruence, and nurturing a sense of shared responsibility for organizational well-being. Thus, psychological empowerment is not merely a moderating variable, but a catalytic condition that transforms ethical infrastructure into sustainable human commitment.

Ethical leaders exert considerable influence not only over follower behavior but also in constructing the ethical climate. These leaders champion equality, embrace diversity, and deliberately foster relationships grounded in mutual respect and transparency [9,11]. By committing to fairness and promoting emotionally attuned environments, ethical leaders establish the foundation for psychological empowerment processes within organizations [24].

Psychological empowerment functions as an intrinsic motivational resource that enhances employee engagement and discretionary behavior [55]. It cultivates an emotional state characterized by autonomy, competence, and alignment with organizational values—conditions under which employees are more inclined to identify with the prevailing ethical climate [56,57,58]. Empirical studies, such as those by Dehghani-Tafti et al. [59], underscore that higher psychological empowerment correlates with stronger work engagement, lower discouragement, and improved intra-team communication. It follows that the link between ethical leadership–ethical climate may be amplified by employees’ psychological empowerment [59]. Empowered individuals, who perceive alignment between their values and those of the organization, tend to initiate and maintain prosocial interactions that reflect shared ethical commitments [60,61]. From these premises arises the following hypothesis:

H3a. 

Psychological empowerment will moderate the significant and positive association between ethical leadership–ethical climate. The strength of the link will increase in situations where workers express higher psychological empowerment.

The literature has repeatedly confirmed the ethical climate’s role in shaping affective commitment [2,14,16,22,52]. A climate oriented toward ethical values instills trust and security, which in turn encourages initiative and deepens employees’ psychological investment in their roles [62]. Taking Spreitzer [25], psychological empowerment is a scale that includes four dimensions: first, meaning; second, competence; third, self-determination; and fourth, impact. Meaning refers to the perceived relevance of the work; competence to confidence in one’s own abilities; self-determination to independence in performing tasks; and impact to the perceived effect on the success of the results [63].

Research by Seibert et al. [64] identifies psychological empowerment as a potent antecedent of affective commitment. Employees who perceive their work as meaningful and consistent with their core values report greater emotional identification with the organization. Dimensions such as competence and perceived impact foster behavioral expression of personal values in the workplace [55]. Consequently, the perception of empowerment fosters satisfaction and affective commitment through enhanced psychological alignment with organizational roles [30,65]. These arguments support the formulation of:

H3b. 

Psychological empowerment will moderate the significant and positive association between ethical climate–affective commitment. The strength of the bond will increase when employees perceive a higher level of empowerment.

To date, limited scholarly attention has been devoted to the indirect role of psychological empowerment in the link between ethical leadership–affective commitment. While Qing et al. [26] and Chao et al. [66] demonstrate a mediating effect, the potential moderating function of psychological empowerment remains underexamined. This omission restricts a full understanding of the relational dynamics between ethical leadership and follower outcomes.

Psychological empowerment redistributes decision-making authority to lower organizational levels, thereby promoting autonomy and self-directed performance [55]. Ethical leaders actively foster this process by aligning strategy with the individual development needs and competencies of employees. These leaders advocate for employee rights, ensure dignity and independence, and cultivate trust—all of which reinforce perceptions of empowerment [67]. When leadership actively supports employee growth and autonomy, affective commitment becomes a natural consequence [32]. The recognition of employee contributions and expansion of decision-making capacity increase psychological safety and solidify organizational attachment [29]. Psychological empowerment fosters proactivity and autonomy, which intensifies affective bonds between employees and the organization [30]. In light of this, we propose:

H3c. 

Psychological empowerment will moderate the significant and positive association between ethical leadership–affective commitment. The strength of the link will increase in situations where workers demonstrate higher psychological empowerment.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

This research was conducted with a sample comprising full-time employees from the Colombian electricity sector. The study followed a quantitative, cross-sectional, non-experimental, and correlational design. Data were obtained from 448 professionals across six companies operating in the sector. In line with Sedgwick’s [68] recommendations, a probabilistic cluster sampling strategy was employed using a 95% confidence level, which is particularly suitable for drawing inferences from geographically or structurally defined subpopulations. Initially, the national territory was segmented by selecting the sixteen most economically and administratively relevant departmental capitals. Cities with limited representation in the electricity industry were excluded to preserve the analytical relevance of the clusters. Each selected unit was assigned a numerical identifier from one to eight, and six cities—Bogotá, Medellín, Cali, Pereira, Manizales, and Ibagué—were randomly selected. The response rate reached 100%, as each organization allocated one hour during the workday to ensure survey completion. Participation was voluntary to control for self-selection bias. Two criteria were applied to include respondents: a minimum of one year of tenure and employment under a permanent contract, both of which guaranteed that participants were well integrated into their work environments and not influenced by contractual instability.

The sample consisted of 39% women (n = 175). The average participant age was 37 years (SD = 10), ranging from 21 to 70 years. The mean duration of employment was 13 years (SD = 9), with a range of 1 to 35 years. All respondents had completed higher education, with 57% holding postgraduate qualifications. Every participant had a permanent contract, and 58% reported having children.

2.2. Measures

The conceptual variables central to this study—ethical leadership, ethical climate, psychological empowerment, and affective commitment—were operationalized using rigorously validated scales supported by extensive empirical literature.

2.2.1. Ethical Leadership

Ethical leadership was captured using the 10-item instrument developed by Brown et al. [8], which has consistently demonstrated strong psychometric integrity across organizational contexts. The instrument’s reliability was confirmed via Cronbach’s alpha and its construct validity supported through AVE, calculated by averaging the squared standardized factor loadings [69]. Rated on a 6-point Likert-type scale ranging from (1)—strongly disagree to (6)—strongly agree.

2.2.2. Ethical Climate

Ethical climate was assessed via the multi-dimensional 11-item scale by Victor and Cullen [13], incorporating three thematic dimensions: organizational friendship (3 items), collective interest (4 items), and corporate social responsibility (4 items). This tool’s validity and internal consistency have been widely corroborated [70]. Also evaluated on a 6-point Likert scale.

2.2.3. Psychological Empowerment

Psychological empowerment was measured using Spreitzer’s 12-item framework [25], reflecting four latent domains: meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact (3 items each). The measure’s psychometric adequacy is supported by robust alpha coefficients and AVE indicators reported in prior literature [60]. Rated from 1 to 6.

2.2.4. Affective Commitment

Affective commitment was measured through the 6-item scale developed by Meyer et al. [71], whose structural reliability and validity have been substantiated by Cronbach’s alpha and AVE in numerous empirical investigations [72]. Rated on a scale from lowest to highest, i.e., from 1 to 6.

2.3. Procedure

Initial institutional engagement occurred in early 2021 through the company XM, a leader in sectoral transformation and transparency initiatives since 2015. The research objectives were jointly refined through a formal presentation led by the principal investigator and supplemented by inputs from senior figures across participating organizations. The measurement instruments were validated by expert reviewers from the involved institutions. The questionnaire was translated into Spanish following a rigorous back-translation process conducted by a bilingual researcher, and its linguistic and conceptual accuracy was evaluated by two independent experts [73]. The Ethics Committee of the UVic-UCC (Spain) granted ethical approval in the year 2021, through the following reference: 170-year 2021.

All participating entities received formal documentation via email outlining the principles of data confidentiality, informed consent, and the right to withdraw without consequence. Data collection was staggered across different days [74], and each institution scheduled a 60 min session to facilitate maximum participation. Surveys were administered digitally via Google Forms. The principal investigator remained actively involved throughout the implementation phase to clarify objectives and address any respondent concerns. Data were obtained from six organizations, and participant anonymity was strictly maintained to minimize potential concerns about personal data disclosure, thereby mitigating common method bias [74].

2.4. Data Analysis

Prior to hypothesis testing, the dataset underwent rigorous preprocessing [73,74]. Outlier detection was conducted via the probability method (p < 0.01), and normality was evaluated through skewness and kurtosis indices, all within Kline’s [75] acceptable bounds (<2). Homogeneity of variances was confirmed via Levene’s test (p > 0.05). To mitigate multicollinearity, all variance inflation factor (VIF) values were verified to remain under the threshold of 5. To examine moderated mediation effects, Hayes’ PROCESS macro (Model 59) was employed (version 3.5), incorporating 10,000 bootstrapped samples with 95% confidence intervals. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was performed in AMOS v26 to test the confirmatory factor structure and latent variable interactions [76].

3. Results

3.1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) yielded an acceptable model-data fit, as reflected by key indices: χ² = 931.67 (p < 0.01), relative χ²/df = 2.59, GFI = 0.911, RMSEA = 0.060, and SRMR = 0.0528. Incremental indices also supported the model’s robustness: IFI = 0.939, NFI = 0.904, and CFI = 0.938, each surpassing the 0.90 benchmark, thereby confirming the structural soundness of the latent constructs [77].

3.2. Descriptive Statistics and Discriminant Validity

Descriptive statistics confirmed the internal coherence and conceptual distinctiveness of each construct. Ethical climate exhibited its strongest correlation with ethical leadership (r = 0.55, p < 0.01), reflecting the tight interdependence between perceived ethical tone and leadership behavior. Psychological empowerment showed moderate positive alignment with affective commitment (r = 0.39, p < 0.01), while ethical leadership also demonstrated a significant direct correlation with affective commitment (r = 0.29, p < 0.01). These patterns affirm Hypothesis 1 and the broader theoretical proposition regarding the ethical foundations of employee engagement. (See

Table 1. Means standard deviations and correlations for the main study variables.

Variables	N	M	SD	EC	EL	PE	AC
Ethical climate (EC)	11	54.96	7.06	0.71
Ethical leadership (EL)	10	51.60	8.22	0.55 **	0.83
Psychological empowerment (PE)	12	58.91	7.54	0.36 **	0.38 **	0.89
Affective commitment (AC)	6	29.81	4.82	0.34 **	0.29 **	0.39 **	0.83

Note. N = 448. ** p< 0.01.

).

Internal consistency, assessed via Cronbach’s alpha, ranged from 0.86 to 0.92, exceeding the 0.70 standard outlined by Bonett and Wright [78]. According to Chin’s [79] recommendations, factor loadings exceeded 0.50 across all indicators. Composite reliability values surpassed 0.70, while AVE scores ranged from 0.51 to 0.80, in line with Bagozzi et al. [80]. Discriminant validity was confirmed through the Fornell–Larcker criteria, as each construct’s AVE square root surpassed inter-construct correlations [81,82]. (See

Table 2. Convergent–discriminant validity.

	Cronbach’s-Alpha	TStatistics	CReliabitily	AVE 1	DV 2
EC	0.88	gt 1.96	0.740	0.510	0.710
EL	0.92	gt 1.96	0.850	0.690	0.830
PE	0.87	gt 1.96	0.730	0.800	0.890
AC	0.86	gt 1.96	0.860	0.690	0.830

Note. ¹ Average variance extracted values. ² Discriminant validity values.

).

3.3. Mediating Effect Analysis

To evaluate Hypothesis 2, a four-step regression approach was applied to validate the mediating effect of ethical climate [83]. Ethical leadership was first confirmed as a significant predictor of affective commitment (β = 0.20, p < 0.01; 95% CI = [0.06, 0.34]). Second, leadership significantly influenced ethical climate perceptions (β = 0.59, p < 0.01; 95% CI = [0.49, 0.68]). Third, ethical climate remained a significant predictor of affective commitment, even after controlling for leadership (β = 0.50, p < 0.01; 95% CI = [0.37, 0.63]). Finally, a bootstrapped indirect effect (ab = 0.29; SE = 0.02; 95% CI = [0.22, 0.64]) accounted for 36% of the total variance, confirming full mediation and empirically substantiating Hypothesis 2. (See

Table 3. Testing the mediating effect of ethical leadership on affective commitment.

Predictors	Model 1 (AC)			Model 2 (EC)			Model 3 (AC)
	β	SE	t	β	SE	t	β	SE	t
EL	0.20 **	0.07	4.84 **	0.59 **	0.05	7.04 **	0.16 **	0.02	6.34 **
EC							0.50 **	0.06	12.16 **
R2	0.21 **			0.31 **			0.43 **
F	41.85 **			66.98 **			97.70 **
Indirect effect EC of EL on AC: β = 0.05; SE = 0.02 [0.02; 0.08]

Note. EL = ethical leadership; EC = ethical climate; AC = affective commitment. ** p < 0.01.

).

3.4. Moderated Mediation Analysis

To explore the conditional mechanisms proposed in Hypothesis 3, the study examined whether psychological empowerment modulated three key relationships: (1) the link between ethical leadership–ethical climate; (2) the relationship between ethical leadership and employees’ emotional commitment; (3) the association between ethical climate and the main dimension of commitment, i.e., affective commitment (Figure 1,

Table 4. Testing the moderated mediation.

Predictors	Model 1 (EC)			Model 2 (AC)			Model 3 (AC)
	β	SE	t	β	SE	t	β	SE	t
EL	0.95 **	0.18	5.26 **	0.29 **	0.20	3.18 **
PE	2.18 **	0.61	3.59 **	0.71 **	0.60	2.17 **
EL × PE	0.03 **	0.02	3.08 **	0.02 **	0.01	2.90 **
EC							0.47 **	0.22	3.43 **
EC × PE							0.02 **	0.03	2.24 **
R2	0.34 **			0.15 **			0.15 **
F	75.17 **			34.20 **			34.20 **

Note. EL = ethical leadership; PE = psychological empowerment; EC = ethical climate; AC = affective commitment. ** p < 0.01.

).

The interactions shown in Figure 1 and Table 4 yielded the following results: Moderation of Ethical Leadership → Ethical Climate (H3a): Empowerment significantly strengthened this relationship (b = 0.03; SE = 0.02; 95% CI = [0.22, 0.56]). The relationship became more pronounced at medium and high empowerment levels (Figure 2).

Moderation of Ethical Climate → Affective Commitment (H3b): Empowerment also magnified this link (b = 0.02; SE = 0.01; 95% CI = [0.19, 0.64]). Emotional attachment to the organization increased in tandem with empowerment intensity (Figure 3).

Moderation of Ethical Leadership → Affective Commitment (H3c): The direct influence of leadership was similarly contingent on empowerment levels (b = 0.02; SE = 0.01; 95% CI = [0.07, 0.62]) (Figure 4).

Across all models, empowerment emerged as a significant moderator, validating Hypotheses 3a–3c and reinforcing the conditional dynamics embedded in the theoretical framework.

4. Discussion

This research provides robust empirical support for a theoretically grounded model linking ethical leadership to affective commitment through a dual mechanism: ethical climate as a mediator and psychological empowerment as a moderator. Applied to the Colombian electricity sector—a context marked by historical reliance on hierarchical leadership—the findings offer both conceptual and practical insights into how ethical practices at the leadership level can enhance employees’ emotional engagement with the organization, thus reinforcing its social sustainability agenda.

The confirmation of Hypothesis 1 reinforces the existing literature [2,20,34,84,85] by demonstrating a statistically significant and positive association between ethical leadership–affective commitment. However, what differentiates this study from previous contributions is its contextual specificity and theoretical integration. In contrast to the dominant autocratic leadership styles observed in Colombia—often associated with rigid hierarchies and limited relational trust—ethical leadership emphasizes relational transparency, moral guidance, and care for stakeholder well-being [86]. Affective commitment, in this framework, is understood as an emotional reciprocation rooted in perceived integrity and relational quality, rather than mere alignment with organizational goals [2,85,87,88,89].

This shift is not simply behavioral but ideological: it reorients leadership practice toward inclusive and ethically responsible organizational cultures. From a sustainability standpoint, such leadership becomes instrumental in fostering trust-based relationships, which are central to long-term workforce retention, equity, and participatory governance. The sector-wide initiative launched in 2015 by the Colombian electricity industry—focusing on ethics and transparency—can thus be interpreted as a systemic move toward socially sustainable organizational design. Ethical leadership in this case facilitates the institutionalization of equitable practices that support diversity, elevate ethical norms, and promote engagement as a strategic value.

The second hypothesis, centered on the mediating role of ethical climate, is strongly supported by the data. While prior studies have touched on this connection [2], few have demonstrated it empirically in settings where ethical infrastructures are still maturing. Our findings confirm that ethical climate operates as a transmission mechanism through which the principles modeled by ethical leaders are disseminated, normalized, and collectively enacted. Ethical climate thus functions as a cultural scaffold that reinforces norms of solidarity, fairness, and social responsibility [16,18,90,91,92,93,94,95].

This aligns with social learning theory [45,46,51,96,97,98,99], which posits that individuals internalize behavioral norms through sustained observation of role models—in this case, ethical leaders. The daily conduct of leadership becomes the interpretive filter through which employees understand what behaviors are rewarded, tolerated, or discouraged. A benevolent climate grounded in care for both employees and external communities fosters not only compliance but identification with organizational values. From a sustainability perspective, this climate represents an ethical infrastructure that supports collective flourishing, not just rule adherence.

Importantly, our results further validate the positive association between ethical climate-affective commitment, corroborating the propositions of Cullen et al. [16] and Demirtas and Akdogan [2]. A work environment characterized by fairness, mutual support, and a commitment to the common good generates affective bonds that go beyond transactional relationships. In such environments, cohesion is enhanced, psychological safety is fostered, and the emotional needs of employees are acknowledged as integral to organizational life [100,101,102,103,104,105]. These relational dynamics are essential to any model of social sustainability, particularly in emerging economies where institutional trust may be fragile.

What decisively distinguishes this study is the integration of psychological empowerment as a moderator within the mediation framework. The moderation effects confirm Hypotheses 3a–3c, highlighting empowerment as a pivotal cognitive resource that conditions the intensity of leadership influence. Specifically, the interaction between ethical leadership–ethical climate (Hypothesis 3a) is significantly stronger for employees who perceive themselves as empowered—those who experience autonomy, competence, and influence in their roles [24,55,59,60]. Such individuals are more responsive to ethical cues and more likely to internalize leadership messages, as empowerment amplifies their interpretive engagement with organizational values [60,106,107].

Likewise, empowerment strengthens the relationship between ethical climate–affective commitment (Hypothesis 3b). Employees situated in ethical environments that promote inclusion and support are more inclined to feel valued and competent, thereby reinforcing their emotional identification with the organization [22,30,108,109]. Empowerment thus becomes both a perceptual lens and a motivational driver that enhances the employee’s sense of meaning, contribution, and belonging—all of which are foundational elements of sustainable engagement.

The final component of the model (Hypothesis 3c) reveals that the association between ethical leadership–affective commitment is also contingent on empowerment levels. This aligns with findings by Kim and Vandenberghe [27], suggesting that ethical supervision is most impactful when it simultaneously affirms employees’ autonomy and strengthens their perception of influence. This reinforces the idea that empowerment is not merely a psychological state but a relational outcome—co-produced through supportive leadership and ethical structures [110,111,112]. Empowered employees are more likely to experience their work as intrinsically meaningful, which has downstream effects on motivation, creativity, and commitment [109,113,114,115,116].

Taken together, these results make several unique contributions. First, they offer empirical validation of a fully moderated mediation model that explains how ethical leadership contributes to affective commitment through ethical climate and is amplified by psychological empowerment. Second, they bridge the gap between ethical leadership and social sustainability, demonstrating that affective commitment is not merely a desirable HR outcome but a marker of relational resilience and institutional credibility. Third, this study positions empowerment as an enabler of sustainability, capable of mobilizing employees toward shared goals related to inclusion, dignity, and access—especially relevant in contexts like Colombia, where organizations play a critical role in promoting equitable development [103].

Ultimately, this research advances a comprehensive and contextually sensitive model that integrates leadership ethics, organizational climate, and empowerment as synergistic forces for cultivating social sustainability. By grounding its hypotheses in empirical data and theoretical clarity, it contributes to both the academic discourse on leadership and the practical imperatives of building more humane, participatory, and sustainable organizations.

4.1. Theoretical Implications

This study significantly extends current theoretical understanding of ethical leadership by illuminating its role in shaping social exchange processes within socio-cultural contexts marked by strong collectivist values, such as Colombia. Our findings challenge the conventional assumption of a direct, unmediated relationship between ethical leadership–affective commitment by introducing a more sophisticated model that integrates both mediation and moderation mechanisms. While previous research—most notably Demirtas and Akdogan [2]—explored mediation via a principle-based ethical climate, their framework focused predominantly on normative and moral dimensions shaped by organizational rules. In contrast, our study is the first to demonstrate the full mediating role of a socially oriented benevolent ethical climate, underscoring solidarity, empathy, and interpersonal care as fundamental constructs.

Moreover, the cultural specificity of our research—rooted in Colombia’s ethnically diverse and deeply collectivist society—offers a critical comparative lens that distinguishes our findings from those conducted in hybrid cultural contexts like Turkey. This distinction not only enhances the contextual validity of our results but also contributes to the decolonization of leadership research by foregrounding Latin American organizational realities. Equally important is the innovative incorporation of a triple moderation model centered on psychological empowerment, which allows for a more precise understanding of when and how the relationship between leadership, climate, and commitment unfolds. To our knowledge, such a multidimensional theoretical architecture has not been empirically validated in prior studies.

This model elucidates that ethical leadership, by itself, does not directly generate affective commitment. Rather, it exerts influence through a benevolent ethical climate, whose effects are further conditioned by the level of psychological empowerment perceived by employees. This contributes to the broader theoretical dialogue by demonstrating that affective commitment emerges from complex relational perceptions—such as fairness, autonomy, and shared values—rather than as an automatic reaction to leadership behavior [85]. As such, our work reinforces the conceptual link between ethical leadership and social sustainability, since it positions affective commitment not merely as an attitudinal outcome but as a proxy for organizational equity and collective well-being.

In this framework, the ethical leader acts as an architect of socially sustainable work environments by cultivating climates grounded in mutual respect and human dignity. Such climates, when aligned with employees’ values and supported by coherent organizational policies, significantly enhance identification with the organization and contribute to long-term engagement [22,23,52,117]. While the previous literature acknowledges that leaders do not always act as agents of organizational transformation [19], our findings indicate that when they do, particularly through ethical behavior, the resulting impact on empowerment and climate is profound.

Together, the ethical leader’s ability to promote psychological empowerment, taking into account important characteristics such as role modeling, loyalty, and the values of each individual, represents a key advance in helping employees gain a deeper understanding of the concepts of competence, impact of work, self-determination, and meaning [27]. This is particularly salient in emerging economies like Colombia, where organizational structures are often rigid and hierarchical. Our study thus answers recent scholarly calls for the exploration of mechanisms linking ethical climate to behavior in such contexts [118,119].

Beyond mediating relationships, our data also substantiate the interactive effect of ethical climate–psychological empowerment. A benevolent climate that integrates moral concern with job security and ethical consistency fosters empowerment by creating relational safety and emotional resources [28,29]. These insights position our model at the intersection of organizational behavior and social sustainability, providing a robust framework for examining how micro-level ethical leadership processes can foster macro-level equity and inclusion.

Finally, the model’s application to the Colombian electricity sector provides not only empirical validation but also critical insights into sector-specific challenges. Given the sector’s history of inequality and systemic inefficiencies, the finding that a climate of benevolence fosters affective commitment reveals a vital mechanism for enhancing organizational resilience and ethical responsiveness. This is particularly relevant in a nation facing urgent demands for greater social justice and inclusion.

4.2. Practical Implications

The empirical results suggest that ethical leadership is essential for cultivating climates that promote perceived organizational support and, consequently, employee affective commitment. For companies operating in the Colombian electricity sector—currently undergoing a transition toward renewable energy—this implies that leadership must transcend mere technical competence to embody values such as transparency, integrity, and long-term vision. Indeed, the energy transition process requires widespread social legitimacy, which can only be achieved when leadership behaviors are perceived as equitable and future oriented. Prior research has established that ethical leadership significantly enhances sustainable behaviors and voluntary environmental engagement [120].

In this regard, both affective commitment and psychological empowerment emerge not only as strategic human capital outcomes but also as enablers of corporate and social sustainability [121]. These constructs support individual flourishing and community development, reinforcing the idea that empowered and committed employees are more inclined to support green innovation and ethical decision-making. This is particularly critical in the Colombian context, where social inequality remains one of the most pressing societal challenges.

As such, we recommend that the electricity sector implement participatory learning spaces that emphasize ethics and sustainability. These could take the form of interactive workshops and reflective practices, coupled with internal support networks that facilitate collective problem-solving and ethical deliberation. Building affective commitment and empowerment through personalized development plans, career pathways, and transparent communication can contribute to a socially engaged and resilient workforce.

Recruitment and leadership development processes must also be reconfigured to prioritize ethical consistency and emotional competence. Embedding ethics within organizational discourse and formal training ensures that leaders-in-training internalize principles that guide just and inclusive decision-making [19]. Furthermore, ethical leadership should be relationally grounded. Reciprocal bonds between leaders and followers—fueled by authentic concern, active listening, and trust—enhance affective responses [20], making them foundational to socially sustainable leadership practice.

Moreover, our findings indicate that a benevolent ethical climate fosters trust and psychological safety, which in turn promote cooperation, reduced turnover intentions, and organizational citizenship behavior [2]. For the Colombian electricity sector—an industry often marred by misconduct and institutional distrust—this insight is crucial. An ethical climate that centers on care and autonomy is likely to reduce fraudulent practices while enhancing service quality and organizational legitimacy.

In terms of empowerment, we underscore that ethical leaders must adopt a multidimensional approach. First, understanding the capabilities and workload of followers enables fair resource allocation and realistic expectations. Second, maintaining transparent and open channels of communication creates psychological safety. Third, offering concrete problem-solving support strengthens leader-follower dynamics [122]. Fourth, clearly defining roles enhances perceptions of meaning and efficacy. Finally, dismantling power centralization—a persistent challenge in the sector—can catalyze inclusive decision-making and participatory governance. This shift is particularly needed in a context historically dominated by top-down leadership and opaque information flows [123]. Ultimately, promoting fairness and distributive justice can significantly enhance psychological empowerment [24].

4.3. Limitations and Future Research

While this study provides a robust and contextually grounded theoretical framework, certain limitations must be acknowledged, particularly with respect to generalizability and methodological constraints. First, although our theoretical model is grounded in frameworks developed predominantly in Anglo-Saxon academic traditions, the empirical data were collected in a markedly different cultural and institutional context—namely, the Colombian electricity sector. This cultural divergence, while offering valuable insights into underrepresented contexts, also necessitates caution in extrapolating our findings to structurally or culturally dissimilar environments. Notably, despite growing empirical support for the link between ethical leadership–affective commitment, no prior research has simultaneously examined the mediating role of a benevolent ethical climate and the moderating role of psychological empowerment within this relationship. Therefore, our study introduces a novel integrated model whose replication in other collectivist or emerging economies could significantly enhance its external validity.

Second, in addressing common method bias, we employed rigorous design elements such as sourcing data from six distinct entities, randomizing item sequences across questionnaires, and collecting responses across different time points. Harman’s single-factor test yielded no evidence of substantive bias [74], and the direct involvement of the lead researcher during each data collection phase further minimized interpretation errors. However, inherent limitations remain, particularly regarding potential acquiescence bias linked to Likert-type response formats, which may skew results toward socially desirable answers.

Third, we addressed social desirability concerns through anonymity protocols and pre-survey informational sessions emphasizing response honesty. Nonetheless, the exclusive reliance on data from the Colombian electricity sector limits the scope of generalizability. Future research should apply this model to analogous energy subsectors—such as hydrocarbons or coal—to explore whether our theoretical assumptions hold across the broader spectrum of fossil-fuel-dependent industries.

Fourth, the probabilistic cluster sampling technique employed, while methodologically sound, may introduce sampling bias if the selected clusters do not accurately represent population heterogeneity. We mitigated this risk by ensuring that each cluster reflected a microcosm of the broader sectoral population. Nonetheless, this approach generally demands larger sample sizes to offset the potential loss in statistical representativeness.

Fifth, the cross-sectional nature of our study precludes definitive causal inferences. Although structural equation modeling (SEM) permitted a rigorous simultaneous evaluation of direct, mediating, and moderating paths, causality remains provisional. We encourage future researchers to utilize longitudinal or experimental designs to further explore the temporal stability and causal directionality of the relationships proposed herein. Specifically, factors such as job satisfaction, organizational trust, internal communication, and learning opportunities may act as alternative mediators or moderators in shaping affective commitment.

In sum, while the current study provides a compelling theoretical contribution, future research should test this framework across different industries, national contexts, and over time, to assess its conceptual robustness and practical adaptability in promoting ethically grounded and socially sustainable organizational systems.

5. Conclusions

This research reaffirms the centrality of ethical leadership in influencing employee attitudes and behaviors, especially within institutional contexts undergoing transformation toward sustainability. Ethical leaders, by modeling values such as fairness, integrity, and transparency, emerge as key agents in the construction of benevolent ethical climates—organizational environments characterized by care, solidarity, and moral coherence. These climates, in turn, significantly foster affective commitment among employees, not as a mechanical response to hierarchical directives, but as a deliberate, values-aligned engagement with the organizational mission.

The findings also demonstrate that the influence of ethical leadership is contingent upon the presence of mediating and moderating conditions. Specifically, the effect of ethical leadership on affective commitment is fully mediated by a benevolent ethical climate and significantly moderated by psychological empowerment. This nuanced understanding affirms that affective commitment is not solely an individual trait or a direct function of leadership style, but a complex emergent property of organizational context, employee perceptions, and ethical alignment.

Moreover, the implications of these findings extend well beyond theoretical modeling. By empirically validating the psychological mechanisms that underlie the ethical leadership–commitment relationship, this study offers a roadmap for strengthening social sustainability within organizational ecosystems. In the context of the Colombian electricity sector—marked by historical social inequalities and institutional distrust—our results suggest that ethical leadership can catalyze a transformation not only in corporate culture but in broader societal outcomes. Indeed, affective commitment grounded in ethical climates enhances social cohesion, fosters equitable work practices, and promotes organizational resilience.

Furthermore, as psychological empowerment deepens trust and perceived agency among employees, the internal social contract is reinforced. This leads to a virtuous cycle of reciprocity between leaders and employees, ultimately contributing to greater employee satisfaction, ethical engagement, and long-term organizational legitimacy. Such dynamics are foundational to social sustainability, which prioritizes the dignity, participation, and development of all organizational members.

Therefore, it is imperative for leadership across the Colombian electricity sector to explicitly integrate ethics and sustainability into organizational strategy and governance. Annual forums on ethics and transparency should not only showcase best practices but also serve as platforms for continuous improvement and stakeholder inclusion. As the global emphasis on ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) criteria intensifies, our research underscores the necessity of embedding social sustainability as a strategic imperative, not an ancillary objective.

In conclusion, this study contributes to the advancement of ethical leadership theory by offering a validated, context-sensitive model that links leadership, climate, and empowerment to affective commitment. It highlights the ethical leader as a catalyst for creating socially responsible, emotionally intelligent, and resilient organizations. We trust that these insights will inspire further empirical exploration and practical implementation, particularly in sectors where ethics and sustainability must converge for transformative impact.