Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 150, Issue 3, pp 765–777 | Cite as

What is in it for Me? Middle Manager Behavioral Integrity and Performance

  • Sean A. Way
  • Tony Simons
  • Hannes Leroy
  • Elizabeth A. Tuleja


We propose that middle managers’ perceived organizational support enhances their performance through the sequential mediation of their behavioral integrity and follower organizational citizenship behaviors. We test our model with data collected from middle managers, their direct subordinates, and their direct superiors at 18 hotel properties in China. The current study’s findings contribute to the existing literature on perceived organizational support and behavioral integrity. They also add a practical self-interest argument for middle managers’ efforts to maintain their word-action alignment by demonstrating that middle manager behavioral integrity positively affects middle managers’ own task performance ratings, both directly and via its positive effect on subordinates’ organizational citizenship behaviors.


Behavioral integrity Perceived organizational support Task performance Subordinate organizational citizenship behaviors 


  1. Bergeron, D. M., Shipp, A., Rosen, B., & Furst, S. A. (2013). Organizational citizenship behavior and career outcomes: The cost of being a good citizen. Journal of Management, 39, 958–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chung, J. Y., & Petrick, J. F. (2013). Price fairness of airline ancillary fees: An attributional approach. Journal of Travel Research, 52, 168–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dineen, B. R., Lewicki, R. L., & 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
  4. Eisenberger, R. (2016). Perceived organizational support. University of Houston.
  5. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eisenberger, R., Shoss, M. K., Karagonlar, G., Gonzalez-Morales, M. G., Wickham, R., & Buffardi, L. C. (2014). The supervisor POS—LMX—subordinate POS chain: Moderation by reciprocation wariness and supervisor’s organizational embodiment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, 635–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B. S. (2000). A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. In J. Li, A. Tsui, & E. Weldon (Eds.), Management and organizations in the Chinese context. London, UK: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  8. Floyd, S. W., & Wooldridge, B. (1994). Dinosaurs or dynamos? Recognizing middle management’s strategic role. Academy of Management Executive, 8, 47–58.Google Scholar
  9. Fritz, J. M. H. (2002). How do I dislike thee: Let me count the ways. Management Communication Quarterly, 15, 410–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fritz, J. M. H., O’Neil, N. B., Popp, A. M., Williams, C. D., & Arnett, R. C. (2013). The influence of supervisory behavioral integrity on intent to comply with organizational ethical standards and organizational commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 114, 251–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kannan-Narasimhan, R., & Lawrence, B. S. (2012). Behavioral integrity: How leader referents and trust matter to workplace outcome. Journal of Business Ethics, 111, 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Leroy, H., Anseel, F., Gardner, W., & Sels, L. (2015). Authentic leadership, authentic followership, basic need satisfaction, and work role performance: A cross-level study. Journal of Management, 41, 1677–1697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Leroy, H., Palanski, M. E., & Simons, T. (2012). Authentic leadership and behavioral integrity as drivers of follower commitment and performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 255–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M.-H. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting statistical equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7, 64–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  18. Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It’s construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10, 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 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
  21. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 698–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Riggle, R. J., Edmondson, D. R., & Hansen, J. D. (2009). A meta-analysis of the relationship between perceived organizational support and job outcomes: 20 years of research. Journal of Business Research, 62, 1027–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rubin, R. S., Dierdorff, E. C., & Bachrach, D. G. (2013). Boundaries of citizenship behavior: Curvilinearity and context in the citizenship and task performance relationship. Personnel Psychology, 66, 377–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schaffer, B., & Riordan, C. (2003). A review of cross-cultural methodologies for organizations research: A best-practices approach. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 169–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shanock, L. R., & Eisenberger, R. (2006). When supervisors feel supported: Relationships with subordinates’ perceived supervisor support, perceived organizational support, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 689–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shi, W., Markoczy, L., & Dess, G. G. (2009). The role of middle management in the strategy process: Group affiliation, structural holes, and tertius lungens. Journal of Management, 35, 1453–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Simons, T. (1999). Behavioral integrity as a critical ingredient for transformational leadership. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12, 89–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Simons, T. (2002). Behavioral integrity: The perceived alignment between managers’ words and deeds as a research focus. Organization Science, 13, 18–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Simons, T. (2008). The integrity dividend: Leading by the power of your word. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  32. 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
  33. Simons, T., Leroy, H., Collewaert, V., & Masschelein, S. (2014). How leader alignment of words and deeds affects followers: A meta-analysis of behavioral integrity research. Journal of Business Ethics,. doi: 10.1007/s10551-014-2332-3.Google Scholar
  34. Simons, T., Tomlinson, E., & Leroy, H. (2011). Research on behavioral integrity: A promising construct for positive organizational scholarship. In K. S. Cameron & G. M. Spreitzer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 325–339). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Takeuchi, R., Yun, S., & Tesluk, P. E. (2002). An examination of crossover and spillover effects of spousal and expatriate cross-cultural adjustment on expatriate outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 655–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Van de Vijver, F. J. R., Breugelmans, S. M., & Schalk-Soekar, S. R. G. (2008). Multiculturalism: Construct validity and stability. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 93–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 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
  38. Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 18(4), 691–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wooldridge, B., Schmid, T., & Floyd, S. W. (2008). The middle management perspective on strategy process: Contributions, synthesis, and future research. Journal of Management, 34, 1190–1221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zagenczyk, T. J., Scott, K. D., Gibney, R., Murrell, A. J., & Thatcher, J. B. (2010). Social influence and perceived organizational support: A social networks analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 111, 127–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zohar, D. (2010). Thirty years of safety climate research: Reflections and future directions. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 1517–1522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sean A. Way
    • 1
  • Tony Simons
    • 2
  • Hannes Leroy
    • 3
  • Elizabeth A. Tuleja
    • 4
  1. 1.Lausanne Hospitality Research Center in Partnership with STR Global, Ecole hôtelière de Lausanne, HES-SOUniversity of Applied Sciences Western SwitzerlandLausanne 25Switzerland
  2. 2.School of Hotel AdministrationCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  3. 3.Rotterdam School of ManagementErasmus UniversityRotterdamThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Mendoza College of BusinessThe University of Notre DameNotre DameUSA

Personalised recommendations