Organizations Appear More Unethical than Individuals
Both individuals and organizations can (and do) engage in unethical behaviors. Across six experiments, we examine how people’s ethical judgments are affected by whether the agent engaging in unethical action is a person or an organization. People believe organizations are more unethical than individuals, even when both agents engage in identical behaviors (Experiments 1–2). Using both mediation (Experiments 3a–3b) and moderation (Experiment 4) analytical approaches, we find that this effect is explained by people’s beliefs that organizations produce more harm when behaving unethically, even when they do not, as well as people’s perceptions that organizations are relatively more blameworthy agents. We then explore how these judgments manifest across different kinds of organizations (Experiment 5) as well as how they produce discrepant punishments following ethically questionable business activities (Experiment 6). Although society and the law often treat individuals and organizations as equivalent, people believe for-profit organizations’ behaviors are less ethical than identical individual behaviors. We discuss the ethical implications of this discrepancy, as well as additional implications concerning reputation management, punishment, and signaling in organizational contexts.
KeywordsCorporate personhood Punishment Organizations
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of an institutional a research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants in these experiments.
- Burson-Marsteller. (2014). Corporate Perceptions Indicator. Retrieved from http://www.burson-marsteller.com/press-release/cnbc-and-burson-marsteller-reveal-results-of-first-ever-cnbcburson-marsteller-corporate-perception-indicator/.
- Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S. (2014).Google Scholar
- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010).Google Scholar
- Coates, D. J., & Tognazzini, N. A. (Eds.). (2013). Blame: Its nature and norms. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- French, P. A. (1984). Collective and corporate responsibility. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
- Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Jago, A. S., & Laurin, K. (2017). Corporate personhood: Lay perceptions and ethical consequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 23, 100–113.Google Scholar
- McCann, E. (2017). United’s apologies: A timeline. Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/14/business/united-airlines-passenger-doctor.html.
- Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
- Rucker, P. (2011). Mitt Romney says “corporations are people.” Washington Post, August 11, 2011.Google Scholar
- Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, 118 U.S. 394. (1886).Google Scholar
- Schweitzer, M. E., Brooks, A. W., & Galinsky, A. D. (2015). The organizational apology. Harvard Business Review, 94, 44–52.Google Scholar
- Tyler, T. R., & Mentovich, A. (2010). Punishing collective entities. Journal of Law and Policy, 19, 203–230.Google Scholar