Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 111, Issue 2, pp 165–178 | Cite as

Behavioral Integrity: How Leader Referents and Trust Matter to Workplace Outcomes

  • Rangapriya Kannan-Narasimhan
  • Barbara S. Lawrence


Behavioral integrity (BI) is the alignment pattern between an actor’s words and deeds as perceived by another person. Employees’ perception that their leader’s actions and words are consistent leads to desirable workplace outcomes. Although BI is a powerful concept, the role of leader referents, the relationship between perceived BI of different referents, and the process by which BI affects outcomes are unclear. Our purpose is to elaborate upon this process and clarify the role of different leader referents in determining various outcomes. To understand the impact of referents, we explicitly compared the BIs of two leader referents: senior management and supervisor. In contrast to previous research findings where supervisory BI was found to have a stronger relationship with outcomes than senior management, we find that both referents are important. However, their impact varies based upon the outcome studied. Only senior management BI predicted organizational commitment, while senior management BI, supervisory BI and supervisory trust predicted organizational cynicism. Only trust in supervisor, and not supervisory BI, impacted organizational citizenship behaviors. When senior management is the referent, trust and not BI might play an important role for outcomes that require extensive employee investments, such as organizational commitment. In contrast, when the outcome measured does not require employee investments, BI might have a direct impact on the outcome. We also uncovered that trust in supervisor substantially influences the trust employees have in their senior management.


Behavioral integrity Dual referents Leader integrity Senior management behavioral integrity Supervisory behavioral integrity Trust 


  1. Abrams, L. C., Cross, R., Lesser, E., & Levin, D. Z. (2003). Nurturing interpersonal trust in knowledge-sharing networks. Academy of Management Executive, 17, 64–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albrecht, S. L. (2002). Perceptions of integrity, competence and trust in senior management as determinants of cynicism toward change. Public Administration & Management, 7, 320–343.Google Scholar
  3. Alder, S. G., Noel, T. W., & Ambrose, M. L. (2006). Clarifying the effects of internet monitoring on job attitudes: The mediating role of employee trust. Information & Management, 43, 894–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allen, N., & Meyer, J. (1990). Organizational socialization tactics: A longitudinal analysis of links to newcomer’s commitment and role orientation. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 847–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Andersson, L. M. (1996). Employee cynicism: An examination using a contract violation framework. Human Relations, 49, 1395–1418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Andersson, L., & Bateman, T. (1997). Cynicism in the workplace: Some causes and effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 449–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Aryee, S., Budhwar, P., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the relationship between organizational justice and work outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 267–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and organization. Academy of Management Review, 14, 20–39.Google Scholar
  9. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bauer, T. N., & Green, S. G. (1996). The development of leader member exchange: A longitudinal test. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1538–1567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.Google Scholar
  12. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Brandes, P., Dharwadkar, R., & Dean, J. W. (1999, May). Does organizational cynicism matter?: Employee and supervisor perspectives on work outcomes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Academy of Management, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  14. Carlson, D. S., & Kacmar, M. K. (2000). Work-family conflict in the organization: Do life role values make a difference? Journal of Management, 26, 1031–1054.Google Scholar
  15. Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2008). Testing mediation and suppression with latent variables: Bootstrapping with structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 296–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Craig, S. B., & Gustafson, S. B. (1998). Perceived Leader Integrity Scale: An instrument for assessing employee perceptions of leader integrity. Leadership Quarterly, 9, 127–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cropanzano, R., Byrne, Z. S., Bobocel, D. R., & Rupp, D. R. (2001). Moral virtues, fairness heuristics, social entities, and other denizens of organizational justice. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 164–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cropanzano, R., Prehar, C. A., & Chen, P. Y. (2002). Using social exchange theory to distinguish procedural from interactional justice. Group and Organizational Management, 27, 324–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Davis, W. D., & Gardner, W. L. (2004). Perceptions of politics and organizational cynicism: An attributional and leader-member exchange perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 439–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Davis, A. L., & Rothstein, H. R. (2006). The effects of the behavioral integrity of managers on employee attitudes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 67, 407–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dean, J. W., Brandes, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (1998). Organizational cynicism. Academy of Management Review, 23, 341–352.Google Scholar
  22. Dienesch, R. M., & Liden, R. C. (1986). Leader-member exchange model of leadership: A critique and further development. Academy of Management Review, 11, 618–663.Google Scholar
  23. Dineen, B. R., Lewicki, R. J., & Tomlinson, E. C. (2006). Supervisory guidance and behavioral integrity: Relationships with employee citizenship and deviant behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 622–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytical findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dirks, K. T., & Skarlicki, D. (2004). Trust in leaders: Existing research and emerging issues. In R. Kramer & K. Cook (Eds.), Trust and distrust in organizations: Dilemmas and approaches (pp. 21–40). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  26. Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 115–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Graen, G. B., & Cashman, J. F. (1975). A role making model in formal organizations: A developmental approach. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership frontiers (pp. 143–165). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9, 193–206.Google Scholar
  30. Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millineum. Communication Monographs, 76, 408–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hoyle, R. H. (1995). The structural equation modeling approach: Basic concepts and fundamental issues. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling, concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 1–15). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Coventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Johnson, J. L., & O’Leary-Kelly, A. M. (2003). The effects of psychological contract breach and organizational cynicism: Not all social exchange violations are created equal. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 627–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Konovsky, M. A., Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1987). Relative effects of procedural and distributive justice on employee attitudes. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 17, 15–24.Google Scholar
  36. Leroy, H., Palanski, M., & Simons, T. (in press). Authentic leadership and behavioral integrity as drivers of follower commitment and performance. Journal of Business Ethics.Google Scholar
  37. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. New York: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  38. Masterson, S. S., Lewis, K., Goldman, B. M., & Taylor, M. S. (2000). Integrating justice and social exchange: The differing effects of fair procedures and treatment of work relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 738–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, D. F. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.Google Scholar
  40. Mayer, R. C., & Gavin, M. B. (2005). Trust in management and performance: Who minds the shop while the employees watch the boss. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 874–888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McAllister, D. (1995). Affect and cognition based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 24–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McFarlin, D. B., & Sweeney, P. D. (1992). Distributive and procedural justice as predictors of satisfaction with personal and organizational outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 626–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Neihoff, B. P., & Moorman, R. H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behaviors. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 527–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. O’Reilly, C., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on pro-social behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Organ, D. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  47. Palanski, M. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (2009). Integrity and leadership: A multi-level conceptual framework. Leadership Quarterly, 20, 405–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Parry, K. W., & Proctor-Thomson, S. B. (2002). Perceived integrity of transformational leaders in organisational settings. Journal of Business Ethics, 35, 75–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. M., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method variance in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26, 513–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12, 69–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Blume, B. D. (2009). Individual and organizational level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 122–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulin, P. V. (1974). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 603–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation in communication research. In A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater, & L. B. Snyder (Eds.), The Sage sourcebook of advanced data analysis methods for communication research (pp. 13–54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  55. Preacher, K. J., & Kelley, K. (2011). Effect size measures for mediation models: Quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psychological Methods, 16, 93–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pugh, S. D., Skarlicki, D. P., & Passell, B. S. (2003). After the fall: Layoff victims’ trust and cynicism in re-employment. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 201–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Robinson, S. L. (1996). Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 574–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 173–220). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  59. Rousseau, D. M., & McLean Parks, J. (1993). The contracts of individuals and organizations. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 15, pp. 1–43). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  60. Scandura, T. A., & Pellegrini, E. K. (2008). Trust and leader-member exchange: A closer look at relational vulnerability. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 15, 101–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shamir, B. (1995). Social distance and charisma: Theoretical notes and an exploratory study. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 19–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sheehan, K. (2001, January). E-mail survey response rates: A review. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication, 6(2). Retrieved September 20, 2006, from
  63. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Simons, T. (2002). Behavioral integrity. Organization Science, 1, 20–35.Google Scholar
  65. Simons, T. (2008). The integrity dividend: Leading by the power of your word. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  66. Simons, T., Friedman, R., Liu, L. A., & McLean Parks, J. (2007). Racial differences in sensitivity to behavioral integrity: Attitudinal consequences, in-group effects, and “Trickle Down” among black and non-black employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 650–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Simons, T., & Hagen, J. (2006). The impact of behavioral integrity in supply chain management. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  68. Simons, T., & McLean Parks, J. (2000). Empty words: The impact of behavioral integrity on workers, customers and profits. Paper presented at the Academy of Management National Conference, Toronto.Google Scholar
  69. Sims, R. R., & Brinkman, J. (2003). Enron ethics (Or: Culture matters more than codes). Journal of Business Ethics, 45, 243–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Stefano, S. F., & Wasylyshyn, K. M. (2005). Integrity, courage, empathy: Three leadership essentials. Human Resource Planning, 28, 5–7.Google Scholar
  71. Stinglhamber, F., Cremer, D., & Mercken, L. (2006). Perceived support as a mediator of the relationship between justice and trust: A multiple foci approach. Group and Organization Management, 31, 442–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Terry, D. J., & Callan, V. J. (1998). In- group bias in response to an organizational merger. Group Dynamics, Theory, Research & Practice, 2, 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Thompson, R. C. Joseph, K. M. Bailey, L. L. Worley, J. A., & Williams, C. A. (1999). Organizational change: An assessment of trust and cynicism. Springfield, VA: US Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration.Google Scholar
  74. Waldman, D. A., Ramírez, G. G., House, R. J., & Puranam, P. (2001). Does leadership matter? CEO leadership attributes and profitability under conditions of perceived environmental uncertainty. The Academy of Management Journal, 44, 134–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wanous, J. P., Reichers, A. E., & Austin, J. T. (2000). Cynicism about organizational change: Measurement, antecedents and correlates. Group & Organization Management, 25, 132–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Whitener, E. M., Brodt, S. E., Korsgaard, M. A., & Werner, J. M. (1998). Managers as initiators of trust: An exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior. The Academy of Management Review, 23, 513–530.Google Scholar
  77. Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, 601–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Yang, J., & Mossholder, K. W. (2010). Examining the effects of trust in leaders: A bases-and-foci approach. Leadership Quarterly, 21, 50–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Zhu, W., May, D. R., & Avolio, B. J. (2004). The impact of ethical leadership behavior on employee outcomes: The roles of psychological empowerment and authenticity. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 11, 16–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rangapriya Kannan-Narasimhan
    • 1
  • Barbara S. Lawrence
    • 2
  1. 1.University of San DiegoSan DiegoUSA
  2. 2.Anderson School of ManagementUniversity of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations