Dirty Hands Make Dirty Leaders?! The Effects of Touching Dirty Objects on Rewarding Unethical Subordinates as a Function of a Leader’s Self-Interest

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Florien M. Cramwinckel (1)
  David De Cremer (2) (3)
  Marius van Dijke (2)
  
• 关键词：Ethical leadership ; Leader ; Physical cleansing ; Physical cues ; Rewarding behavior ; Subordinate
• 刊名：Journal of Business Ethics
• 出版年：2013
• 出版时间：June 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：115
• 期：1
• 页码：93-100
• 全文大小：253KB
• 参考文献：1. Anderson, C., John, O. P., & Keltner, D. (2005). / Journal of Personality, / 80(2), 313-44. CrossRef
  2. Aquino, K., Freeman, D., Reed, A., I. I., Lim, V. K., & Felps, W. (2009). Testing a social-cognitive model of moral behavior: The interactive influence of situations and moral identity centrality. / Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, / 97(1), 123-41. CrossRef
  3. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. / Psychological Bulletin, / 117(3), 497-29. CrossRef
  4. Bazerman, M. H., & Tenbrunsel, A. E. (2011). / Blind spots: Why we fail to do what’s right and what to do about it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  5. Brewer, M. B. (2004). Taking the social origins of human nature seriously: Toward a more imperialist social psychology. / Personality and Social Psychology Review, / 8(2), 107-13. CrossRef
  6. Caruso, E. M., & Gino, F. (2011). Blind ethics: Closing one’s eyes polarizes moral judgments and discourages dishonest behavior. / Cognition, / 118, 280-85. CrossRef
  7. Cassidy, T., & Lynn, R. (1989). A multifactorial approach to achievement motivation: The development of a comprehensive measure. / Journal of Occupational Psychology, / 62, 301-12.
  8. De Cremer, D., & Tenbrunsel, A. E. (Eds.). (2012). / Behavioral business ethics: Ideas on an emerging field. London: Taylor & Francis.
  9. De Cremer, D., Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Van Dijke, M. (2010). Regulating ethical failures: Insights from psychology. / Journal of Business Ethics, / 95(SI 1), 1-. CrossRef
  10. DeWall, C. N., Baumeister, R. F., Mead, N. L., & Vohs, K. D. (2011). How leaders self-regulate their task performance: Evidence that power promotes diligence, depletion, and disdain. / Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, / 100(1), 47-5. CrossRef
  11. Eyal, T., Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2008). Judging near and distant virtue and vice. / Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, / 44(4), 1204-209. CrossRef
  12. Grouzet, F., Kasser, T., Ahuvia, A., Dols, J. M., Kim, Y., Lau, S., et al. (2005). The structure of goal contents across 15 cultures. / Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, / 89(5), 800-16. CrossRef
  13. Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue contingent model. / Academy of Management Review, / 16, 366-95.
  14. Kramer, R. M. (1996). Divergent realities and convergent disappointments in the hierarchic relation: Trust and the intuitive auditor at work. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), / Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 216-45). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. CrossRef
  15. Lee, S. W., & Schwarz, N. (2010). Dirty hands and dirty mouths: Embodiment of the moral-purity metaphor is specific to the motor modality involved in moral transgression. / Psychological Science, / 21, 1423-425. CrossRef
  16. Liljenquist, K., Zhong, C.-B., & Galinsky, A. D. (2010). The smell of virtue: Clean scents promote reciprocity and charity. / Psychological Science, / 21, 381-83. CrossRef
  17. Maner, J. K., & Mead, N. L. (2010). The essential tension between leadership and power: When leaders sacrifice group goals for the sake of self-interest. / Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, / 90(3), 297-82.
  18. Moore, D. A., & Loewenstein, G. (2004). Self-interest, automaticity, and the psychology of conflict of interest. / Social Justice Research, 17(2), 189-02.
  19. Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Assessing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. / Multivariate Behavioural Research, / 42, 185-27. CrossRef
  20. Rai, T. S., & Fiske, A. P. (2011). Moral psychology is relationship regulation: Moral motives for unity, hierarchy, equality, and proportionality. / Psychological Review, / 118(1), 57-5. CrossRef
  21. Rus, D., Van Knippenberg, D., & Wisse, B. (2012). Leader power and self-serving behavior: The moderating role of accountability. / The Leadership Quarterly, / 23(1), 13-6. CrossRef
  22. Rusbult, C. E., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2003). Interdependence, interaction, and relationships. / Annual Review of Psychology, / 54, 351-75. CrossRef
  23. Schnall, S., Benton, J., & Harvey, S. (2008a). With a clean conscience: Cleanliness reduces the severity of moral judgments. / Psychological Science, / 19(12), 1219-222. CrossRef
  24. Schnall, S., Haidt, J., Clore, G. J., & Jordan, A. H. (2008b). Disgust as embodied moral judgment. / Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, / 34(8), 1096-109. CrossRef
  25. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), / Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1-5). New York: Academic Press.
  26. Trevi?o, L. K., & Brown, M. (2005). The role of leaders in influencing unethical behavior in the workplace. In J. R. E. Kidwell & C. L. Martin (Eds.), / Managing organizational deviance (pp. 69-7). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. CrossRef
  27. Trevi?o, L. K., Brown, M., & Hartman, L. P. (2003). A qualitative investigation of perceived executive ethical leadership: Perceptions from inside and outside the executive suite. / Human Relations, / 56(1), 5-7. CrossRef
  28. Trevi?o, L. K., Hartman, L. P., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. / California Management Review, / 42(4), 128-42. CrossRef
  29. Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. (2002). Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments. / Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 1-0. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80003-X .
  30. Van Lange, P. A. M., De Cremer, D., Van Dijk, E., & Van Vugt, M. (2007). Self-interest and beyond: Basic principles of social interaction. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), / Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 540-61). New York: Guilford.
  31. Zhong, C. B., Bohns, V. K., & Gino, F. (2010a). Good lamps are the best police: Darkness increases dishonesty and self-interested behavior. / Psychological Science, / 21(3), 311-14. CrossRef
  32. Zhong, C. B., & Liljenquist, K. (2006). Washing away your sins: Threatened morality and physical cleansing. / Science, / 313, 1451-452. CrossRef
  33. Zhong, C., Liljenquist, K., & Cain, D. M. (2009). Moral self-regulation. Licensing and compensation. In D. De Cremer (Ed.), / Psychological perspectives on ethical behavior and decision making (pp. 75-19). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
  34. Zhong, C. B., Strejcek, B., & Sivanathan, N. (2010b). A clean self can render harsh moral judgment. / Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, / 46, 859-62. CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Florien M. Cramwinckel (1)
  David De Cremer (2) (3)
  Marius van Dijke (2)
  
  1. Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Social Psychology, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 1, Utrecht, The Netherlands
  2. Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  3. London Business School, London, UK
  
• ISSN：1573-0697

文摘

We studied the role of social dynamics in moral decision-making and behavior by investigating how physical sensations of dirtiness versus cleanliness influence moral behavior in leader–subordinate relationships, and whether a leader’s self-interest functions as a boundary condition to this effect. A pilot study (N?=?78) revealed that when participants imagined rewarding (vs. punishing) unethical behavior of a subordinate, they felt more dirty. Our main experiment (N?=?96) showed that directly manipulating dirtiness by allowing leaders to touch a dirty object (fake poop) led to more positive evaluations of, and higher bonuses for, unethical subordinates than touching a clean object (hygienic hand wipe). This effect, however, only emerged when the subordinate’s unethical behavior did not serve the leader’s own interest. Hence, subtle cues such as bodily sensations can shape moral decision-making and behavior in leader–subordinate relationships, but self-interest, as a core characteristic of interdependence, can override the influence of such cues on the leader’s moral behavior.