Skip to main content

Ethical Decision Making and Leadership: Merging Social Role and Self-Construal Perspectives

Abstract

This research extends our understanding of ethical decision making on the part of leaders by merging social role and self-construal perspectives. Interdependent self-construal is generally seen as enhancing concern for justice and moral values. Across two studies, we tested the prediction that non-leading group members’ interdependent self-construal would be associated with lower levels of unethical decision making on behalf of their group but that, in contrast, this relationship would be weaker for leaders, given their social role. These predictions were experimentally tested by assigning participants to the role of leader or non-leading group member, and assessing the association between their interdependent self-construal and their unethical decision making. Across both studies, interdependence predicted less unethical decision making on behalf of one’s group for non-leading group members. However, the leader role was shown to weaken, and even reverse, this relationship. This research demonstrates that self-construal influences group-based ethical decision making, but that the nature of this influence is moderated by social role.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Notes

  1. Because self-construal, like other types of schemas and beliefs, is seen as both stable and enduring over time (Singelis 1994) as well as a temporarily accessible situational-level construct (Brewer and Gardner 1996; van Prooijen and van den Bos 2009), an attempt was made in this study to prime participants’ self-construal by employing pronoun tasks asking participants to circle pronouns (we/us [interdependent] or I/me [independent]) in a brief story and use these pronouns in a short writing task. Analyses revealed that the manipulation was ineffective in altering participants’ self-reported interdependent self-construal and results do not significantly differ when this is included as a control variable. Thus, the failed priming will not be discussed further.

  2. The general unethical decision making measure was somewhat positively skewed with skewness statistics at 1. A square root transformation was successful in decreasing the skewness and analyses with the transformed variable yield results similar to those with the untransformed scores. For ease of interpretation, analyses are presented with the untransformed data.

References

  • Aiken, L., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bem, D., & Allen, A. (1974). On predicting some of the people some of the time: The search for cross-situational consistencies in behavior. Psychological Review, 81, 506–520. doi:10.1037/h0037130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this “we”? Levels of collective identity and self representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 83–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., Chen, Y., Mannix, E. A., Leung, K., & Skarlicki, D. (2000). Culture and procedural justice: When the effects of what you do depend upon how you do it. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 138–159. doi:10.2307/2666982.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., De Cremer, D., van den Bos, K., & Chen, Y. (2005). The influence of interdependent self-construal on procedural fairness effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 96, 155–167. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2004.11.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemers, M. M. (2000). Leadership research and theory: A functional integration. Group Dynamics, 4(1), 27–43. doi:10.1037/1089-2699.4.1.27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cojuharenco, I., Shteynberg, G., Gelfand, M., & Schminke, M. (2012). Self-construal and unethical behavior. Journal of Business Ethics,. doi:10.1007/s10551-01101139-8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, S. E., Bacon, P. L., & Morris, M. L. (2000). The relational-interdependent self-construal and relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 791–808. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.4.791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, L. (1997). Ethical differences between men and women in the sales profession. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 1143–1152. doi:10.1023/A:1005721916646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Detert, J. R., Trevino, L. K., & Sweitzer, V. L. (2008). Moral disengagement in ethical decision making: A study of antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 374–391. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233–256. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, D., & Leviatan, U. (1975). Implicit leadership theory as a determinant of the factor structure underlying supervisory behavior scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(6), 736–741. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.60.6.736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, R., & Gelfand, M. J. (2010). When apologies work: How matching apology components to victims’ self-construals facilitates forgiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113, 37–50. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.04.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D. R., & Nye, J. L. (2008). Seeing and being a leader: The perceptual, cognitive, and interpersonal roots of conferred influence. In C. L. Hoyt, G. R. Goethals, & D. R. Forsyth (Eds.), Leadership at the crossroads: Leadership and psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 116–131). Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, W. L., Gabriel, S., & Hochschild, L. (2002). When you and I are “we,” you are no longer threatening: The role of self-expansion in social comparison processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 239251. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.82.2.239.

  • Gino, F., & Ariely, D. (2012). The dark side of creativity: Original thinkers can be more dishonest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 445–459. doi:10.1037/a0026406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., & Bucklein, K. (2007). Are “we” more punitive than “me”? Self-construal styles, justice-related attitudes, and punitive judgments. Social Justice Research, 20, 457–478. doi:10.1007/s11211-007-0051-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1987). The college sophomore as guinea pig: Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12, 157–159. doi:10.2307/258001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannover, B., & Kühnen, U. (2004). Culture, context and cognition: The semantic-procedural-interface model of the self. European Review of Social Psychology, 15, 297–333. doi:10.1080/10463280440000053.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(3), 184–200. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyt, C. L., Goethals, G. R., & Forsyth, D. R. (2008). Leadership and psychology (Vol. 1). In J. Ciulla’s (Ed.), Leadership at the crossroads. Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoyt, C. L., Price, T. L., & Emrick, A. E. (2010). Leadership and the more-important-than-average effect: Overestimation of group goals and the justification of unethical behavior. Leadership, 6(4), 391–407. doi:10.1177/1742715010379309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyt, C. L., Price, T., & Poatsy, L. (2013). The social role theory of unethical leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 24(5), 712–723. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leary, M. R., & Tangney, J. P. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of self and identity. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A. (1986). Generalizing from laboratory to field: Ecological validity or abstraction of essential elements. In E. A. Locke (Ed.), Generalizing from laboratory to field settings (pp. 3–9). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markus, H., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messick, D. M., & Kramer, R. M. (2005). The psychology of leadership: New perspectives and research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mischel, W. (1977). The interaction of personal and situation. In D. Magnusson & N. S. Endler (Eds.), Personality at the crossroads: Current issues in interactional psychology (pp. 333–352). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mischel, W. (2004). Toward an integrative science of the person. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 1–22. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.042902.130709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, T. (2006). Understanding ethical failures in leadership. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, T. L. (2008). Leadership ethics: An introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rus, D., van Knippenberg, D., & Wisse, B. (2010). Leader power and leader self-serving behavior: The role of effective leadership beliefs and performance information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(6), 922–933. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.06.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singelis, T. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin, 20, 580–591. doi:10.1177/0146167294205014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singelis, T. M., Bond, M. H., Sharkey, W. F., & Lai, K. S. Y. (1999). Unpackaging culture’s influence on self-esteem and embarrassability: The role of self-construals. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 315–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trafimow, D., Triandis, H. C., & Goto, S. G. (1991). Some tests of the distinction between the private self and the collective self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 649–655. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.5.649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W., & Van den Bos, K. (2009). We blame innocent victims more than I do: Self-construal level moderates responses to just world threats. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 1528–1539. doi:10.1177/0146167209344728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiltermuth, S. (2011). Cheating more when the spoils are split. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115, 157–168. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.10.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zacarro, S. J., Gulick, L. M. V., & Khare, V. P. (2008). Personality and leadership. In C. L. Hoyt, G. R. Goethals, & D. R. Forsyth (Eds.), Leadership at the crossroads: Leadership and psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 13–29). Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

We acknowledge and thank Andrew Benford, Justin Jackson, and Heather Schmitz for their contributions to this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Crystal L. Hoyt.

Additional information

Crystal L. Hoyt, Jepson School of Leadership Studies and Department of Psychology, University of Richmond; Terry L. Price, Jepson School of Leadership Studies and Philosophy, Politics, Economics, and Law (PPEL), University of Richmond.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hoyt, C.L., Price, T.L. Ethical Decision Making and Leadership: Merging Social Role and Self-Construal Perspectives. J Bus Ethics 126, 531–539 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1974-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1974-x

Keywords

  • Ethics
  • Group-based decision making
  • Interdependent self-construal
  • Leadership
  • Social roles