Much of the deviant literature emphasises how the follower’s or employees’ divergence from acceptable standards or behaviour is deviant or bad. However, defining deviance from such a Westernised perspective alone could leave room for the mislabelling of inherently unethical behaviours that are viewed as acceptable norms. Hence, the work-chop phenomenon is introduced to the academic literature as unethical behaviour, which may only have been experienced in the discussed non-Western context. This means a nuanced interpretation of deviance is important given that the characterisation in the extant literature falls flat in the face of a different context. Based on an objective ethical position, this entry makes a compelling case for situating work-chop as ethical deviance. Additionally, it highlights the leader–follower relationship, particularly emphasising how leaders contribute to enabling followers’ work-chopping behaviours. Hence, although the study is delimited to the specificities of deviant behaviours within a specific context, it is not necessarily about the criticism of a people group. Instead, the argument is that there are differences in how these behaviours are perceived or enacted in non-Western settings. Geoghegan ^[1] commented that ‘In modern-day Britain, the law-abiding are being treated as oppressors while the criminals get off scot-free’ further accentuates the moral decadence of humans in a fallen world, be it in the first or third world. The profundity and simplicity of the message conveyed in this entry highlight the need for more contextual studies ^[2], particularly the incorporation of concepts from the African context into the global literature. The entry is based on a traditional review of the extant literature sourced from reputable journal articles, websites, and databases.