Development and psychometric validation of the work attitudinal and values ethics scale (WAVE)

Human talent faces increasingly demanding work environments, characterised by the need to act with integrity, collaborate effectively and adapt to constant change (Hessari et al., 2024). In this regard, ethical values and positive attitudes in the workplace have been recognised as strategic competencies that directly impact organisational effectiveness while also strengthening personal well-being and long-term job stability (Mercader et al., 2025; Lu et al., 2022). Within this ecosystemic scenario, work ethics encompass internal convictions that guide decision-making in complex contexts (Grabowski et al., 2021). Attitudes, for their part, reflect the worker’s willingness to contribute to the environment with responsibility and commitment (Mercader et al., 2021).

In line with these claims, it has been empirically demonstrated that strong ethical values in workers foster organisational trust, reduce counterproductive behaviours and strengthen internal culture (Ellietheyet al., 2024; Ismail et al., 2022). At the same time, work attitudes such as proactivity, resilience and willingness to learn are associated with higher productivity, lower turnover and a better organisational climate (Cai et al., 2022; Yang and Lee, 2023). Despite this relevance, Pokojskiet al. (2022) stated that there is a lack of comprehensive instruments that allow both aspects to be assessed in an integrated manner in diverse workplace contexts.

On the other hand, it is important to acknowledge academic efforts to develop measurement instruments to assess workplace values (Mercader et al., 2021). Among them are the Work-Related Values Scale (EVRT), developed by Moreno and Marcaccio (2017), and the Organisational Ethical Culture Scale, validated by Toro-Arias et al. (2021). The EVRT addresses dimensions such as comfort, personal fulfilment, or status but focuses mainly on individual work motivations, overlooking deep ethical values and attitudes observable in everyday behaviour. Meanwhile, the Organisational Ethical Culture Scale focuses on the perception of institutionally promoted values, such as justice or transparency, without considering the worker’s active internalisation of these values or their daily attitudinal expressions. Moreover, both scales present limitations regarding intercultural validation, which restricts their applicability in contemporary Latin American work contexts (Clayton et al., 2021).

In this same vein, throughout the organisational literature, ethical values have commonly been approached through the figure of the ethical leader if their behaviour models norms and attitudes within the group (Rai, 2025; Zheng et al., 2021). However, this view has overshadowed the need to understand how workers internalise and express ethical values in their daily practice (Lemoine et al., 2023). This omission creates a significant gap in assessing the ethical factor from the operational base of organisations, thus limiting interventions that promote a transversal and participatory ethical culture (De Lurdes-Neves, 2025).

In response to these gaps, the present study proposes to psychometrically validate the Work Attitudinal and Values Ethics Scale (WAVE), a tool designed to assess in an integrated manner the ethical principles and attitudinal dispositions that workers manifest in their work environment. WAVE aims to evaluate the values individuals attribute to work and how these are translated into observable behaviours in the organisational context. Its application seeks to diagnose strengths and areas for improvement in individual ethical culture, providing relevant inputs for professional development processes, personnel selection and organisational transformation. This study aims to validate the psychometric properties of WAVE in a sample of workers from various sectors, analysing its internal consistency, factorial structure and item performance. In doing so, the aim is to offer a reliable and relevant tool that meets the need to assess a core construct in ethical people management.

To fulfil the stated objective, this article is structured as follows: first, the conceptual framework that underpins the scale’s construction is presented; second, the methodological process followed for its psychometric validation is described in detail; third, the main statistical findings are presented and analysed; fourth, the results are discussed and finally, the general conclusions of the study are presented, along with its main practical, theoretical and social contributions, as well as possible future research lines.

To theoretically frame the present study, the conceptual foundations guiding the measurement of ethical and attitudinal values in the workplace are developed below. From a perspective centred on virtue ethics, the main dimensions of ethical behaviour are explored, as well as their operationalisation into empirically assessable indicators that support the construction of the proposed instrument.

Work ethics has emerged as a topic of increasing interest within organisational studies, reflecting a global concern for the moral behaviour of individuals in work contexts (Böhm et al., 2022; Yazdanshenas and Mirzaei, 2022). According to Treviño et al. (1998), work ethics are the moral principles that guide workers’ decisions, attitudes and behaviours in their professional environment. Tziner and Persoff (2024) contributed to the debate by arguing that the approach should encompass both the prevention of inappropriate behaviour and the promotion of practices based on integrity, justice, respect and responsibility. This approach has been particularly strengthened in response to corporate scandals and institutional crises, highlighting organisations’ need for a solid ethical culture (Hald et al., 2020).

Under these premises, organisational ethics is configured as a normative framework and a system of values that directly influences organisational climate and decision-making (Roszkowska and Melé, 2020). Moreover, it has been shown that organisations with a strong ethical culture tend to exhibit higher levels of employee commitment, well-being and productivity (Schwepkeret al., 2020). However, critical views warn of the superficial use of ethical codes or ethics as a tool of control, which can strip its real application of meaning and generate scepticism among employees (Sumlin et al., 2021).

As mentioned in the introduction to this study, a key point in the current literature is the predominance of approaches centred on ethical leadership, where the leader is seen as an exemplary figure in transmitting values and correct behaviours (Zheng et al., 2021). While this is relevant, it has left in the background the need to understand how workers, beyond their hierarchical role, internalise and express ethical values in their daily practice (Lemoine et al., 2023). This omission has generated a significant gap in assessing the ethical component from the operational base of organisations, which limits interventions that promote a more participatory ethical culture (Lange et al., 2023).

To conceptually ground this worker-centred approach, it is appropriate to turn to virtue ethics. From this perspective, ethics is conceived as a construction that emerges from internal character dispositions, progressively forged through practice and experience, beyond mere adherence to external rules (Nguyen and Crossan, 2021). According to this framework, organisations should foster environments where workers can cultivate virtues such as honesty, temperance, generosity or responsibility rather than focusing exclusively on rules or instrumental outcomes (Gustafson and Peterson, 2023).

In line with this perspective, it is necessary to identify those virtues that workers practice in their daily duties. From this approach, the present study adopts an ethical perspective centred on the individual, in which integrity, self-discipline, resilience and empathy are conceived as concrete expressions of an ethical character in action, with direct implications for professional and organisational conduct. These dimensions allow for the translation of abstract principles into behavioural indicators that can be empirically assessed (Galván-Vela et al., 2023). Thus, the analysis of these dimensions, their conceptual foundations and their relevance in the contemporary organisational environment is addressed.

Ethics and integrity refer to the worker’s commitment to moral principles such as honesty, justice, responsibility and coherence between speech and action (Hayati and Caniago, 2025; Israel, 2015). This virtue, essential within work ethics, is manifested when individuals act according to their convictions, even in adverse contexts or without direct supervision (Zheng et al., 2021). This relationship has demonstrated that personal integrity is directly associated with organisational trust, reducing counterproductive behaviours and strengthening the ethical climate in work teams (Colominas, 2021). Moreover, it has been recognised that ethical and integral behaviours by employees foster trust among colleagues, promote a coherent organisational environment and strengthen collective ethical commitment (Ng, 2022). It has been shown that individual integrity acts as a behavioural reference point that facilitates the cohesion of shared norms in work teams (Nieto-Rojas, 2021). From the virtue ethics perspective, this dimension represents the practical expression of moral character. It justifies its inclusion in the WAVE instrument as a relevant dimension for evaluating individual ethics in the workplace.

Professional competence and discipline constitute ethical behaviour at work, reflecting the worker’s commitment to quality, responsibility and fulfilling their duties (Piccolo et al., 2010). This dimension encompasses both technical proficiency and the ability to organise oneself, communicate effectively and maintain consistent work habits aimed at achievement (Saeed et al., 2022). Recently, the relationship has been confirmed that perceived employee competence, when accompanied by personal discipline, is associated with greater trust from leaders and colleagues and a culture of ethical and sustained performance (Malik et al., 2022). In turn, it has become evident that self-discipline is directly related to professional responsibility, adherence to protocols and the ability to make ethical decisions under pressure (Spohrer, 2021). Therefore, including this dimension in the WAVE allows for a comprehensive assessment of the ethical principles guiding the worker and their capacity to maintain consistent and reliable professional practice.

Growth attitudes and resilience represent fundamental dispositions for sustaining ethical behaviour in demanding work contexts, especially in adversity, change and constant pressure (Monteverde, 2013). This dimension refers to the worker’s ability to self-motivate, learn continuously, persevere through obstacles and maintain a positive disposition towards their professional and personal development (Paul et al., 2019; Park et al., 2022). This relationship is grounded in the fact that resilience mediates emotional labour and job satisfaction, contributing to both individual well-being and organisational performance (Kim, 2023).

Likewise, it has been shown that these attitudes protect workers in critical environments, enabling them to uphold ethical commitment even under extreme conditions (Casalenguaet al., 2021). In addition, workplace resilience has been identified as a predictive resource among workers in vulnerable conditions, where emotional adaptability helps reduce stress’s negative impact and sustain constructive attitudes in the face of uncertainty (Ayieko et al., 2024). Therefore, including this dimension in the WAVE allows for capturing attitudinal elements that reflect the ethical character of the worker beyond regulatory compliance, focusing on their ability to remain in constant evolution with emotional and professional responsibility.

Empathy and interpersonal relationships represent theoretical benchmarks of organisational ethical behaviour, as they enable effective communication, teamwork and the creation of healthy work environments (Mercader et al., 2021; Paredes-Saavedra et al., 2024). These competencies are essential for resolving conflicts, fostering respect and facilitating mutual understanding between workers and leaders (Hussain et al., 2024). It has been demonstrated that strengthening interpersonal skills such as empathy, effective communication, and cooperation significantly enhances organisational cohesion and productivity in vulnerable groups (Bravo-Blandín, 2021). Likewise, the development of interpersonal competencies has been observed to facilitate coexistence and teamwork, which is crucial for professional and ethical development (Parvin et al., 2024). From a psychopathological perspective, it has been identified that deficits in empathy can lead to dysfunctional patterns of interaction, as seen in narcissistic personality disorder, where utilitarian interpersonal relationships and poor emotional regulation predominate (Sarti et al., 2021). It reinforces the need to include evaluative tools such as the WAVE to assess prosocial attitudes and empathy as core components of ethical performance.

Based on the theoretical foundation developed in the previous sections, the WAVE was designed to empirically and systematically evaluate the behavioural expressions of ethical values in the workplace context. This instrument is inspired by virtue ethics as a philosophical framework, seeking to identify those internal dispositions that workers manifest in an observable manner through their professional performance. The dimensions are ethics and integrity, professional competence and discipline, growth attitudes and resilience, empathy and interpersonal relationships. These were subsequently operationalised through items that reflect habitual behaviours, attitudes and relational styles consistent with the previously described ethical principles.

Each dimension was translated into concrete indicators, constructed in the format of evaluative statements that capture the presence of individual attitudes and the perception of ethical coherence in everyday practice. This methodology enables a transition from the conceptual to the empirical level, ensuring the instrument’s content validity. Table 1 describes the theoretical and operational structure of the measured construct, including the definitions, evaluated dimensions and associated indicators.

Based on the operationalisation described in Table 1, the WAVE items were developed. Each item was written based on the previously defined behavioural indicators, aiming to clearly and concretely capture the observable manifestations of the proposed ethical dimensions. The adopted format allows for self-assessment and application in various organisational contexts, facilitating subsequent psychometric analysis. Table 2 presents the preliminary version of the instrument, with items organised by theoretical dimension.

The following section details the methodology used for the psychometric validation of the WAVE scale. This section includes the study design, the characteristics of the participant sample, the application procedure, the instruments used and the statistical strategies implemented to evaluate the structural validity and reliability of the instrument. Each of these elements was carefully selected based on recognised theoretical and methodological frameworks in psychometric and organisational research.

The present study adopted a quantitative, non-experimental and cross-sectional design aimed at the development and psychometric validation of an instrument intended to assess ethical and attitudinal values in the workplace context (Tshilongamulenzhe, 2015). It falls within the instrumental approach, which is appropriate when the goal is to construct or refine measurement tools based on theoretical constructs, assessing their metric properties through specific statistical techniques (Verenzuela-Barroeta et al., 2024).

The instrumental design has been widely used in recent research to ensure the content validity, factorial structure and reliability of scales applied in social, educational and organisational contexts (Ramírez-Rodríguez et al., 2022). Likewise, it has proven effective in creating culturally relevant instruments, which is crucial in studies where ethical behaviour is influenced by contextual and relational factors (Carranza-Esteban et al., 2022). In this case, the design made it possible to conceptually structure the WAVE, operationalise its dimensions, construct its items and finally apply exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) procedures to a single sample, collected at a single point in time, to assess the internal consistency and structural validity of the instrument.

The sample consisted of 367 employees from diverse sectors within the Mexican economic landscape. Specifically, participants were drawn from the industrial (52.33%), service (23.02%), trade (12.05%), education (10.68%) and primary sectors (1.92%), as shown in Table 3. This selection was intentional, aiming to reflect the heterogeneity of the Mexican labour market and ensure the scale’s applicability across different organisational contexts. The predominance of the industrial sector aligns with Mexico’s economic structure, where manufacturing and production-related industries play a central role, making it a key setting for understanding workplace ethics and values.

Regarding organisational roles, the sample included workers across different levels of responsibility: 42.23% were operational-level employees, 39.51% held middle-management or supervisory positions and 18.26% were in top-level or executive roles. This distribution ensured representation of ethical and attitudinal expressions from both frontline and decision-making perspectives. The inclusion of multiple hierarchical levels was grounded in the theoretical premise of the WAVE scale, which conceptualises ethical behaviour as emerging not solely from leadership, but from individual character dispositions observable across all levels of organisational functioning.

A non-probabilistic convenience sampling method was used, which, while limiting generalisability, enabled practical access to a diverse and relevant working population (Pobee, 2021) and aligned with methodological standards that recommend sectoral and occupational variety for exploratory structural validation (MacCallum et al., 1999). Participants were recruited through professional networks, HR departments and direct invitations within private companies, educational institutions and service organisations that agreed to collaborate in the research. Inclusion criteria required participants to be currently employed and over 18 years of age.

The sample size 367 was determined based on recommendations for factorial analysis, which suggest a minimum of 5–10 participants per item for robust estimation (Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b). Given that the preliminary instrument included 20 items, a minimum of 200 participants was required, with larger samples enhancing the reliability of factor extraction. The selected sample size exceeds this threshold and aligns with best practices for both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, as noted by MacCallum et al. (1999).

The gender distribution was relatively balanced, with 49.30% women and 50.70% men. Most participants held a bachelor’s degree (77.16%) and worked primarily in private organisations (77.38%). The average age was 36.5 years (SD = 9.05), and the mean work experience was 11.4 years (SD = 8.38). Table 3 provides a detailed breakdown of the sociodemographic and work-related characteristics of the sample.

Regarding ethical considerations, all participants received clear and sufficient information about the study and signed an informed consent form, following the principles of autonomy, voluntariness and confidentiality established in research ethics involving human participants (Crane et al., 2013). The study also complied with the General Data Protection Regulation, applying appropriate safeguards for the responsible handling of sensitive data (Corti and Bishop, 2019). This research was reviewed and approved by the Research Ethics Committee of CETYS Universidad.

The instrument used was the WAVE, developed from a theoretical model grounded in virtue ethics and contemporary contributions from the literature on organisational ethics, as previously detailed. This scale was designed using a rigorous methodology for psychometric development and validation, aiming to assess ethical attitudes and dispositions in workers from a comprehensive perspective. The construction of the items was based on a deductive-conceptual approach, where each item was derived from the dimensions of the construct identified in theoretical and empirical studies on ethical behaviour in the workplace. This process is consistent with current guidelines in psychometric instrument development, which emphasise conceptual clarity, faithful construct representation and contextual adaptation of content (Miranda et al., 2021).

The scale was administered using a 7-point Likert-type format, with response options ranging from 1 (“totally disagree”) to 7 (“totally agree”) as follows: 1 = disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Slightly disagree, 4 = Neutral, 5 = Slightly agree, 6 = Agree and 7 = agree. This format allowed for capturing subtle gradations in participants’ ethical perceptions, following Dawes’ (2008) recommendations. Subsequently, the scale underwent a psychometric validation process that included EFA and CFA, techniques widely recognised for identifying underlying structures and verifying the fit of the proposed model (Moreira et al., 2023), the results of which are described in the following sections.

Data was collected over five months, between January and May 2025. A mixed-mode application strategy was implemented, using the digital version of the questionnaire, administered via the Google Forms platform and its printed paper format. This methodological decision responded to the need to facilitate access to the instrument for workers located in different organisational settings and with varying levels of access to digital technologies. The use of Google Forms has been supported as an efficient, secure and widely adopted tool in social and organisational research, given its ease of use, speed of data collection and reduction of human errors in data entry (Mondal et al., 2019).

The form included a general description of the study’s objectives and the ethical guidelines governing participation by established principles for research involving human subjects. It emphasised the voluntary nature of participation, data confidentiality, response anonymity, absence of physical or psychological risks and participants’ right to withdraw from the study at any time. This information was presented before starting the questionnaire, and only those who gave explicit consent could proceed with the survey. The mixed-mode application allowed for broad coverage and a more diverse representation of the Mexican labour environment, enhancing the study’s validity.

To reduce the risk of non-response bias, the survey was designed to make all items mandatory in digital and paper formats. Participants could not submit the form without completing the entire questionnaire, ensuring full data for all cases. Furthermore, participation was voluntary, and all respondents gave informed consent, which enhances engagement and response quality (Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b). No cases of partial or abandoned responses were recorded.

The statistical analysis of the data was conducted using Jamovi software version 2.6.26, a platform based on R that integrates specialised modules for psychometric analysis and has been validated as an effective tool in structural validation studies of instruments (Karch, 2023). The analysis began with an EFA to identify the underlying structure of the instrument. The Maximum Likelihood (ML) extraction method was applied, a technique widely recommended for its robustness in the analysis of latent variables, especially when data are approximately normally distributed (Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b). To optimise the factorial interpretation, Varimax rotation was used, an orthogonal rotation that maximises variance explained by each factor and facilitates the grouping of conceptually similar items (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2013).

The suitability of the data matrix for factorial analysis was verified through the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) index, with values above 0.80 considered meritorious, and Bartlett’s test of sphericity, which showed statistical significance (p < 0.001), confirming that the correlations between the items were sufficiently high to justify the application of the EFA (Kaiser, 1974; Bartlett, 1954).

Subsequently, a CFA was carried out to verify the adequacy of the theoretical model with the derived empirical structure. The ML method was used for parameter estimation, and the model fit quality was assessed through several indicators: relative chi-square (χ²/df), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and standardised root mean square residual (SRMR). According to classical evaluation criteria, CFI and TLI ≥ 0.90 values and RMSEA and SRMR ≤ 0.08 were considered acceptable (Hu and Bentler, 1999; Brown, 2015).

The internal consistency of each dimension was estimated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, setting a minimum acceptable value of 0.70. This measure remains one of psychometrics’ most used reliability indices to assess item homogeneity within the same construct (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). In addition, the analysis was complemented by the evaluation of factor loadings and communalities to ensure each factor’s theoretical and empirical coherence.

Although no formal piloting phase was conducted, all items were subject to theoretical review during development. Furthermore, the relatively large and diverse sample (n = 367) provided sufficient statistical power to empirically detect item inconsistencies and validate the structure of the instrument through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA) (Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b). These procedures allowed the refinement and retention of only the best-performing items, fulfilling the core aims of a piloting process.

The following results derive directly from the methodological procedures described in the previous section, including item construction, sampling and statistical analysis strategies used for instrument validation. To ensure a clear and coherent interpretation of the findings, this section presents in an organised manner the main results derived from the psychometric validation process of the WAVE. It begins with a descriptive analysis of the items, followed by evaluations of sampling adequacy, EFA, CFA, estimation of model reliability and validity and finally, the consolidation of the validated instrument.

Before proceeding with the factor analyses, a descriptive analysis was performed on the 20 items that comprise the WAVE to explore their distribution, central tendency and variability. In general, the items showed high means, ranging from 5.46 to 6.28 on a scale from 1 to 7, indicating a high perceived presence of ethical and attitudinal behaviours in the sample evaluated. The standard deviations remained within moderate ranges, suggesting acceptable dispersion.

Regarding distribution, the skewness and kurtosis coefficients revealed slightly right-skewed patterns, although not extreme. However, Shapiro-Wilk normality tests were significant (p < 0.001) for all items. It indicates that the response distribution deviates from normality, a common occurrence in social and psychometric studies using Likert-type scales. Although ML estimation assumes normality, its use remains acceptable in contexts with moderate violations and large samples, as in the present study (Byrne, 2016; Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b). Table 4 presents the complete descriptive statistics for each item of the scale.

Before exploring the latent structure of the instrument, data suitability for applying factor analysis was assessed. Two classical tests were used: Bartlett’s test of sphericity and the KMO index, both widely recognised in the psychometric literature as essential procedures for evaluating data adequacy (Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b; Tabachnick and Fidell, 2013).

Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (χ² = 1568, df = 171, p < 0.001), indicating that the correlations among items were sufficiently significant to justify the use of factor analysis. In addition, the overall KMO index was 0.936, a value considered “excellent” according to classical criteria by Kaiser (1974). Furthermore, all individual Measures of Sampling Adequacy (MSA) per item exceeded the minimum recommended threshold of 0.80, as shown in Table 5, confirming that each variable has sufficient correlation with the rest to be included in the factor analysis.

These results allow us to conclude that the correlation matrix is suitable for conducting an EFA and that the data meet the necessary technical assumptions, ensuring an interpretable and statistically sound structure.

Based on the sampling adequacy criteria previously described, an EFA was carried out using the ML method with Varimax rotation, a technique widely supported in the psychometric literature for its effectiveness in identifying latent structures when independence between factors is assumed (Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b).

The initial analysis identified a four-factor solution consistent with the theoretical structure proposed in the instrument’s design and later confirmed in the CFA. These factors explained 67.4% of the variance, representing a robust and adequate structure for attitudinal assessment instruments (Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b). Items ETI1, ETI5, ETI9, ETI10, ETI13 and ETI19 were eliminated for presenting factor loadings below 0.40 or for showing ambiguous saturation in more than one factor, which compromised the discriminant validity of the instrument (Fabrigar and Wegener, 2011).

The emerging dimensions were Ethics and integrity (ETI2, ETI3, ETI4), Professional competence and discipline (ETI6, ETI7, ETI8), Growth attitudes and resilience (ETI11, ETI12, ETI14, ETI15, ETI16) and Empathy and interpersonal relationships (ETI17, ETI18, ETI20). In addition, the uniqueness of each item was calculated as a complementary measure to assess the extent to which the common factors explain the variance of each item. A uniqueness below 0.60 was considered adequate as an indicative criterion that the item is adequately explained by the factorial model (Fabrigar and Wegener, 2011). Table 6 shows the retained items, their factor loadings and the variance each dimension explains.

In addition to the analysis of loadings and uniqueness, a scree plot was produced to support the decision on the optimal number of factors to retain, following the methodological recommendations of Costello and Osborne (2005). This plot visually represents the eigenvalues associated with each factor, ordered from highest to lowest. The presence of a clear inflexion point (“elbow”) in the curve made it possible to identify a four-factor solution as the most parsimonious, supporting both the theory and the empirical results of the EFA. Figure 1 shows this sharp drop between the first and subsequent factors, visually confirming the proposed four-component structure.

To assess the convergent and discriminant validity of the WAVE scale, Composite Reliability (CR), Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and the square root of AVE (√AVE) were calculated for each latent factor, by established psychometric guidelines (Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b). Table 7 shows that all constructs reached CR values close to or above the recommended minimum of 0.50. Moreover, √AVE values exceeded most inter-factor correlations, providing convergent and discriminant validity evidence.

These results support the internal consistency of the factors and the construct validity of the WAVE scale.

A CFA was carried out based on the items retained in the EFA to verify the structural validity of the proposed model. This technique allows for an empirical evaluation of the degree of fit between the theoretical model and the observed data and is considered a standard procedure in psychometric validation studies (Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b; Brown, 2015). The ML method was appropriate in contexts with moderate or large samples and moderate deviations from multivariate normality (Kline, 2016).

The four-factor model obtained satisfactory fit indices, indicating a good correspondence between the theoretical structure of the instrument and the empirical data. In particular, the comparative fit index (CFI = 0.963) and the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI = 0.952) exceeded the recommended threshold of 0.90, whereas the SRMR (0.045) and RMSEA (0.0632) error indices were within the acceptable range for models with adequate parsimony (Hu and Bentler, 1999). The chi-square test was significant (χ² = 112, df = 71, p = 0.001), as is common in large samples, but the RMSEA values (90% CI = [0.0396–0.084]) confirm a good fit.

The factor loadings of the items ranged between 0.625 and 0.852, all statistically significant (p < 0.001), which supports the convergent validity of the instrument. In addition, the covariances between factors were high and significant, reflecting a close but differentiated relationship between the dimensions of the ethical-attitudinal construct. All these values are presented below in Table 8.

Figure 2 presents the graphic model of the four factors.

Once the factorial structure of the instrument was confirmed through CFA, the internal reliability of the overall construct and each of its dimensions was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and McDonald’s omega. Both measures exceeded acceptable thresholds (>0.70), indicating high internal consistency both overall and by subscales, as recommended in recent psychometric studies (Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b). In particular, the complete scale reached a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.925 and a McDonald’s omega of 0.930, reflecting excellent reliability (Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b; Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). Likewise, the specific dimensions showed adequate internal consistency indices, supporting their statistical stability and independent interpretive value within the overall model. The results are presented in Table 9.

Moreover, interdimensional correlations among the identified factors were explored as an additional indicator of convergent validity. The literature establishes that moderate to high correlations between related factors are desirable, provided they do not imply conceptual redundancy (Brown, 2015). In this study, a strong yet distinct relationship was observed among the four main factors, which supports the existence of a familiar underlying ethical construct composed of dimensions that contribute in a complementary manner. Figure 3 presents a heat map with the correlations between dimensions, illustrating this theoretical and statistical coherence.

Figure 3 displays a heat map of the Pearson correlation coefficients between the 14 retained items of the WAVE scale. The matrix shows that all inter-item correlations are positive and statistically significant, ranging from moderate to substantial magnitude. These results suggest an appropriate level of internal coherence across the scale while preserving enough distinction between items to justify their distribution into four separate but related dimensions. The observed pattern further supports the instrument’s structural validity, as items from the same dimension tend to correlate more strongly with each other than with items from other dimensions. This visual representation complements the factorial and reliability analyses by illustrating the theoretical and empirical consistency of the scale’s underlying structure.

After completing the exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and verifying the reliability and validity levels of the model, the final version of the WAVE instrument was consolidated. This version includes 14 items distributed across four dimensions, which reflect the components of ethical and attitudinal behaviour in the workplace context: ethics and integrity, professional competence and discipline, growth and resilience attitudes and empathy and interpersonal relationships.

Each of the retained items showed significant factor loadings, adequate levels of uniqueness and strong coherence with its corresponding theoretical dimension. Likewise, the model presented optimal fit indicators, supporting its structural validity. This process allowed for the refinement and optimisation of the initial instrument, prioritising those items with greater explanatory power and statistical stability.

Including this validated final instrument facilitates the empirical assessment of ethical and attitudinal behaviour in organisational contexts and offers a valuable tool for diagnosis and design interventions in talent management, values training and the development of ethical capital. Table 10 presents WAVE Scale items grouped according to their theoretically and psychometrically validated dimensions.

The findings obtained in this study provide solid evidence regarding the validity and reliability of the WAVE Scale, positioning it as a pertinent tool for evaluating ethical values and attitudinal dispositions in an integrated manner within contemporary workplace contexts. The identified and empirically confirmed factorial structure perfectly aligns with the virtues and conceptual foundations that guided its development.

Firstly, the four-factor solution found through exploratory factor analysis and confirmed through CFA supports the theoretical hypothesis, which proposed the existence of differentiated but complementary dimensions in the expression of ethical behaviour at work. The grouping of items around the dimensions of ethics and integrity, professional competence and discipline, growth and resilience attitudes, empathy and interpersonal relationships reveals a coherent, statistically robust and theoretically grounded structure. These results coincide with previous studies highlighting the multifactorial nature of ethical behaviour beyond its reduction to rules or codes of conduct (Treviño et al., 1998; Gustafson and Peterson, 2023).

In addition, the internal consistency of the instrument was high across all its indicators (α = 0.925; ω = 0.930), aligning with recommended standards for scales evaluating complex constructs (Hair et al., 2019a, 2019b; Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). This level of reliability allows for the assertion that the included items coherently measure the proposed dimensions, being sensitive to individual variability without compromising the unity of the evaluated construct.

Regarding structural validity, the CFA results show highly satisfactory fit indices (CFI = 0.963; TLI = 0.952; RMSEA = 0.0632), confirming the empirical adequacy of the theoretical model. Such indicators are consistent with the most stringent psychometric standards (Hu and Bentler, 1999; Brown, 2015) and reinforce the relevance of the selected dimensions and the clarity of the retained items. It is worth noting that the eliminated items presented ambiguous loadings or limited explained variance, a methodological decision consistent with the recommendations of Hair et al. (2019a, 2019b) and Tabachnick and Fidell (2013) to optimise discriminant validity.

Furthermore, the correlations observed between factors reveal the presence of a general ethical-attitudinal construct composed of dimensions that are not redundant but complementary. It is consistent with assertions from virtue ethics, which maintain that ethical character manifests in a diversity of interrelated behavioural dispositions (Nguyen and Crossan, 2021). Thus, the instrument allows for evaluating specific behaviours and captures a meticulous configuration of personal virtues that guide workplace action.

Concerning comparison with previous instruments, the WAVE differs by integrating attitudinal dimensions such as resilience and empathy, which have traditionally been excluded from organisational ethics scales and are more focused on institutional norms (Toro-Arias et al., 2021; Moreno and Marcaccio, 2017). It also responds to the criticism pointed out by Lemoine et al. (2023) regarding the invisibilities of the ethical component at operational levels by proposing a tool centred on the worker as an active ethical subject.

Under these considerations, these findings position the WAVE as a scale with solid psychometric properties that are well-supported theoretically and have high practical application potential. Its parsimonious structure, conceptual clarity and empirical sensitivity make it an innovative tool for diagnosis, training and ethical management of people in organisations.

The present study aimed at the design, validation and psychometric analysis of the WAVE Scale, providing an empirically sound tool to assess the manifestation of ethical principles and attitudinal dispositions in the workplace. Based on an approach grounded in virtue ethics, it was possible to operationalise abstract constructs into observable indicators distributed across four key dimensions: ethics and integrity, professional competence and discipline, growth and resilience attitudes and empathy and interpersonal relationships.

The exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported the structural validity of the instrument, demonstrating a clear and coherent configuration with the initial theoretical proposal. Likewise, the reliability indicators obtained reveal high internal consistency, confirming the psychometric quality of the instrument for evaluating ethical behaviours in an integrated and contextualised manner.

From an organisational perspective, the WAVE represents a relevant advancement by enabling the assessment of ethical character from the direct experience of workers, going beyond approaches focused exclusively on leadership or institutional norms. Moreover, its design facilitates the identification of strengths and areas for improvement in individual ethical culture, providing valuable input for personal development processes, talent selection and organisational diagnosis.

From a practical and managerial perspective, the WAVE scale offers a robust and versatile strategic human resource management tool. It enables structured and valid assessment of key ethical attitudes and workplace values, supporting processes such as personnel selection, performance reviews, ethical climate diagnosis and values-based leadership training. Importantly, the scale can help address concrete organisational challenges such as integrity gaps, low engagement, or breakdowns in interpersonal trust – problems commonly observed in the industrial and service sectors from which our data were collected. By allowing organisations to identify attitudinal strengths and deficits across hierarchical levels (operational, middle and top management), WAVE provides actionable insights to reinforce ethical culture, guide talent development and reduce misalignment between formal values and informal behaviours. Furthermore, the self-assessment design encourages individual reflection and behavioural alignment, fostering intrinsic motivation for ethical conduct.

Theoretically, the WAVE scale contributes to advancing virtue ethics theory in organisational settings. While traditional organisational ethics models often prioritise rules or consequences, WAVE draws directly from virtue ethics, grounding its constructs in character traits and attitudinal dispositions (e.g. integrity, discipline, empathy). This focus bridges the gap between normative ethical theory and workplace realities by operationalising ethical traits in observable, measurable and behaviourally anchored ways. In addition, by applying rigorous psychometric procedures (EFA, CFA, AVE, CR), the study reinforces the empirical foundation of virtue ethics as a viable framework for ethical assessment. Integrating culturally relevant traits also expands the global applicability of virtue-based ethics models, contributing to a more inclusive and context-sensitive theoretical discourse.

Regarding social implications, the WAVE scale supports the creation of more ethical, collaborative and psychologically healthy workplaces. In contexts where short-term productivity often overshadows ethical considerations, this tool empowers organisations to prioritise soft traits, such as empathy, resilience and interpersonal integrity that enhance quality of life, team cohesion and long-term sustainability. It also has potential applications in policy design, public education and civic training by offering a measurable framework to promote ethical awareness and social responsibility. In this way, the study contributes to shifting public attitudes towards ethics in work as a shared responsibility, not just a regulatory obligation.

Based on the findings obtained, new possibilities arise to analyse the study of ethical and attitudinal values in diverse workplace contexts. Future research could assess the cross-cultural validity of the WAVE in different countries or economic sectors, as well as its relationship with organisational variables such as leadership, job satisfaction, workplace happiness, or performance. Likewise, it would be valuable to analyse its longitudinal behaviour to evaluate the stability of the construct over time and its sensitivity to ethical intervention processes within organisations. This type of research would contribute to consolidating the WAVE as an empirical benchmark in measuring ethical behaviour at work.

The authors express their sincere gratitude to all the participants who generously contributed their time and perspectives to this research. The authors also thank the anonymous peer reviewers and the editorial team for their valuable feedback and guidance throughout the publication.

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

This study was submitted to the Research Ethics Committee of CETYS Universidad and received ethical approval on 2 January 2025. All participants were provided with detailed information about the study’s purpose and procedures, and their participation was entirely voluntary. Each participant read and signed an informed consent form before data collection according to ethical principles for research involving human participants.