The four papers in this symposium cover a spectrum of topics, addressing unethical pro-organizational behavior, workplace incivility, cynicism and withdrawal, and accountability in the performance of public service at the executive level (Hassan, 2019; Kangas et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2023; Luan et al., 2023; Valentine et al., 2018). By engaging with these multifaceted issues, the papers aspire to contribute significantly to a more profound understanding of the intricate dynamics at play within public sector organizations. Furthermore, they aim to present potential avenues for minimizing the impacts of contemporary challenges on public service leadership, employee conduct and overall public service performance. In the first paper, Nguyen and colleagues shed light on the dearth of research and empirical evidence concerning the burgeoning unethical phenomenon within public administration: micromanagement and unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB). Employing an experiment design in Study 1 and a fieldwork survey in Study 2, this paper unveils the dark side of micromanagement, affective trust, and work engagement in fostering the engagement in UPB among public servants. The paper drawing upon social learning and conservation of resources theories contributes valuable insights to the ongoing discourse on micromanagement and UPB, prompting a call for increased attention to these critical issues in the public sector context. The findings offer significant implications for effective leadership and organizational management, emphasizing the need for proactive policies and measures to ensure ethical conduct within the context of public administration. Employing a mixed-method design comprising both qualitative and quantitative components, Paper 2 delves into the intricate dynamics of incivility influences. It sheds light on how seemingly minor acts can profoundly shape and jeopardize teams, giving rise to fear, gossip, anger, and revenge. These detrimental dynamics escalate tension, foster team divisions, promote exclusion, diminish trust, and ultimately contribute to high turnover. The study underscores the significance of line managers, revealing that the weak and inconsistent behaviors exhibited by them serve as catalysts for this toxic work environment. In light of these findings, Zhou and Plimmer recommend prioritizing line management capabilities as precursors to addressing workplace incivility, emphasizing the imperative need for leadership training and development programs in the public sector. Drawing on the Job Demands-Resources model, Paper 3 proposed and tested the moderating role of PSM on the indirect effect of illegitimate tasks on public servants’ withdrawal behavior via cynicism. Results of the Process Macro model with data from two waves of public servants in Vietnam show that illegitimate tasks are positively related to cynicism and subsequently to withdrawal behavior for public servants with low PSM. For high PSM public servants, the influence is contradictory: illegitimate tasks directly reduce cynicism and indirectly alleviate withdrawal behavior via cynicism. The results indicate that the effect of illegitimate tasks varies based on public servants’ PSM levels. Paper 4 leveraged data collected from senior executives within public administration in Brazil and Indonesia to explore the impact of both interfering and supportive political leadership on the strategic management of programs by executive public servants. In their contribution to the literature, Berman and Plimmer offer new insights by highlighting the pivotal role of felt accountability, coupled with supportive political behaviors instigated and exhibited by political leaders, in augmenting the strategic effectiveness of these crucial programs. This study highlights the essentiality of specific leadership behaviors at the executive level within public administration, asserting that such behaviors are instrumental in ensuring strategic effectiveness and efficiency.