Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

“If Only My Coworker Was More Ethical”: When Ethical and Performance Comparisons Lead to Negative Emotions, Social Undermining, and Ostracism

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Drawing on social comparison theory, we investigate employees’ ethical and performance comparisons relative to a similar coworker and subsequent emotional and behavioral responses. We test our theoretically driven hypotheses across two studies. Study 1, a cross-sectional field study (N = 310 employee–coworker dyads), reveals that employees who perceive they are more ethical than their coworkers (i.e., more ethical comparison) experience negative emotions toward the comparison coworkers and those feelings are even stronger when the employees perceive they are lower performers than their coworkers (i.e., lower-performance comparison). Results also reveal that negative emotions mediate the indirect relationship between being more ethical than a coworker, but also being a lower performer than that coworker onto (a) social undermining and (b) ostracism. Study 2, a 2 × 2 between-subjects experimental design (N = 121), provides further support for our moderated mediation model. Results reveal that participants experience negative emotions when they receive information that they are more ethical than a comparison participant. Negative emotions are amplified if the participant is told they were a lower performer than the comparison participant. Those participants indicate their desire to mistreat and ignore the comparison participant if given the opportunity. Thus, we find support for our hypotheses using a multi-method design.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Using an adapted definition of ethical leadership (Brown et al. 2005), we define ethical behavior as the demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct to others.

  2. We define ethical comparisons in terms of “perceptions,” but similar to the organizational justice literature (e.g., Folger and Cropanzano 1998, 2001), we contend that these perceptions can arise from actual or imagined accounts. Thus, an employee’s level of ethicality may truly be higher than a coworker, or the employee may simply believe that his/her level of ethicality is higher than the coworker’s. Regardless of whether these perceptions are derived from real or imagined accounts, we expect our predictions to remain the same because perceptions typically serve as the basis for a person’s sense of reality (Jussim 1991).

  3. Research on social comparisons commonly uses the terms downward comparison (i.e., I am superior) and upward comparison (i.e., I am inferior) (Wood 1989). For the sake of clarity in describing the predictor variables in our theoretical model, we refer to downward comparisons as more ethical or higher-performance comparisons and upward comparisons as less ethical or lower-performance comparisons.

References

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K., & Reed, A. R. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1423–1440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barden, J., Rucker, D. D., & Petty, R. E. (2005). “Saying one thing and doing another”: Examining the impact of event order on hypocrisy judgments of others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(11), 1463–1474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biernat, M., & Billings, L. S. (2001). Standards, expectancies, and social comparison. In A. Tesser & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of intraindividual processes (pp. 257–283). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bird, F. B., & Waters, J. A. (1989). The moral muteness of managers. California Management Review, 32(1), 73–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanton, H., Crocker, J., & Miller, D. T. (2000). The effects of in-group versus out-group social comparison on self-esteem in the context of a negative stereotype. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36(5), 519–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, S. N., & Molander, E. A. (1977). Is the ethics of business changing? Harvard Business Review, 55(1), 57–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., Davy, J., & Carter, C. (1985). Layoffs, self-esteem, and survivor guilt: Motivational, affective, and attitudinal consequences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36(2), 229–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97(2), 117–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buunk, B. P., Collins, R. L., Taylor, S. E., Van Yperen, N. W., & Dakof, G. A. (1990). The affective consequences of social comparison: Either direction has its ups and downs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1238–1249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buunk, B. P., & Gibbons, F. X. (2007). Social comparison: The end of a theory and the emergence of a field. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102(1), 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buunk, B. P., Zurriaga, R., Peiro, J. M., Nauta, A., & Gosalvez, I. (2005). Social comparisons at work as related to a cooperative social climate and to individual differences in social comparison orientation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(1), 61–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cadsby, C. B., Song, F., & Tapon, F. (2007). Sorting and incentive effects of pay for performance: An experimental investigation. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 387–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1987). In search of the moral manager. Business Horizons, 30(2), 7–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen-Charash, Y. (2009). Episodic envy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(9), 2128–2173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen-Charash, Y., & Mueller, J. S. (2007). Does perceived unfairness exacerbate or mitigate counterproductive interpersonal work behaviors related to envy? Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 666–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, J., Major, B., & Steele, C. (1998). Social stigma. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 504–553). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

  • Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2007). The BIAS Map: Behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(4), 631–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Beninger, A. (2011). The dynamics of warmth and competence judgments, and their outcomes in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31(1), 73–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D. C., & Pagon, M. (2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 45(2), 331–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, J., Ruedy, N. E., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2012). It hurts both ways: How social comparisons harm affective and cognitive trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 2–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2007). Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Effron, D. A., & Monin, B. (2010). Letting people off the hook: When do good deeds excuse transgressions? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(12), 1618–1634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellemers, N., Pagliaro, S., Barreto, M., & Leach, C. W. (2008). Is it better to be moral or smart? The effects of morality and competence norms on the decision to work at group status improvement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1397–1410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, A. J. (2006). The hierarchical model of approach-avoidance motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 30(2), 111–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, A. J., & Covington, M. V. (2001). Approach and avoidance motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 73–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emmons, R. A. (1987). Narcissism: Theory and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 11–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, D. L., Brown, D. J., Berry, J. W., & Lian, H. (2008). The development and validation of the workplace ostracism scale. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1348–1366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, D. L., Yan, M., Lim, V. K. G., Chen, Y., & Fatimah, S. (2016). An approach/avoidance framework of workplace aggression. Academy of Management Journal, 59(5), 1777–1800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P. S., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878–902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, F. J., & Wiltermuth, S. S. (2010). Who’s with me? False consensus, brokerage, and ethical decision making in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1074–1089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. (1998). Fairness as a moral virtue. In Schminke, M. (Ed.) Managerial ethics: Moral management of people and processes (pp. 13–34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Folger, R. (2001). Fairness as deonance. In S. W. Gilliland, D. D. Steiner, & D. P. Skarlicki (Eds.), Research in social issues in management (pp. 3–33). New York: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. G., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. G., & Cropanzano, R. (2001). Fairness theory: Justice as accountability. Advances in Organizational Justice, 1, 1–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, F. X. (1986). Social comparison and depression: Company’s effect on misery. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(1), 140–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gino, F., & Margolis, J. D. (2011). Bringing ethics into focus: How regulatory focus and risk preferences influence (un)ethical behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 145–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goethals, G. R., & Nelson, R. (1973). Similarity in the influence process: The belief-value distinction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25(1), 117–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, J. A. (1990). Brain systems that mediate both emotion and cognition. Cognition and Emotion, 4(3), 269–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenbaum, R. L., Mawritz, M. B., & Eissa, G. (2012). Bottom-line mentality as an antecedent of social undermining and the moderating roles of core self-evaluations and conscientiousness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 343–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenbaum, R. L., Quade, M. J., & Bonner, J. (2015). Why do leaders practice amoral management? A conceptual investigation of the impediments to ethical leadership. Organizational Psychology Review, 5(1), 26–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J., Ashton-James, C. E., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2007). Social comparison processes in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102(1), 22–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2018). An introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Rick, S. I. (2014). Cheating more for less: Upward social comparisons motivate the poorly compensated to cheat. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 123(2), 101–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jussim, L. (1991). Social perception and social reality: A reflection-construction model. Psychological Review, 98(1), 54–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1785/1948). Groundwork of metaphysics and morals, translated by H. Paton as Moral Law. London, UK: Hutchingson.

  • Kant, I. (1797/1991). The metaphysics of morals (M. Gregor, Trans). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

  • Kerr, S. (1975). On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B. Academy of Management Journal, 18(4), 769–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kish-Gephart, J. J., Harrison, D. A., & Treviño, L. K. (2010). Bad apples, bad cases, and bad barrels: Meta-analytic evidence about sources of unethical decisions at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, W. M. (1997). Objective standards are not enough: Affective, self-evaluative, and behavioral responses to social comparison information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(4), 763–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreps, T. A., & Monin, B. (2011). “Doing well by doing good”? Ambivalent moral framing in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31(1), 99–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruglanski, A. W., & Mayseless, O. (1987). Motivational effects in the social comparison of opinions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(5), 834–853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruglanski, A. W., & Mayseless, O. (1990). Classic and current social comparison research: Expanding the perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 108(2), 195–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (2007). New developments in and directions for goal-setting research. European Psychologist, 12(4), 290–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyubomirsky, S., & Ross, L. (1997). Hedonic consequences of social comparison: A contrast of happy and unhappy people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(6), 1141–1157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, D. M., Aquino, K., Greenbaum, R. L., & Kuenzi, M. (2012). Who displays ethical leadership, and why does it matter? An examination of antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 151–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 437–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mettee, D. R., & Smith, G. (1977). Social comparison and interpersonal attraction: The case for dissimilarity. In J. M. Suls & R. L. Miller (Eds.), Social comparison processes: Theoretical and empirical perspectives (pp. 115–142). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moran, S., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2008). When better is worse: Envy and the use of deception. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 1(1), 3–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morse, S., & Gergen, K. J. (1970). Social comparison, self-consistency, and the concept of self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16(1), 148–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1985). Organizational dissidence: The case of whistle-blowing. Journal of Business Ethics, 4(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1986). Retaliation against whistle blowers: Predictors and effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(1), 137–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuberg, S. L., & Cottrell, C. A. (2008). Managing the threats and opportunities afforded by human sociality. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 12(1), 63–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peeters, G. (1983). Relational and informational patterns in social cognition. Current Issues in European Social Psychology, 1, 201–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piccolo, R. F., Greenbaum, R. L., Den Hartog, D. N., & Folger, R. (2010). The relationship between ethical leadership and core job characteristics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(2–3), 259–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitesa, M., & Thau, S. (2013). Masters of the universe: How power and accountability influence self-serving decisions under moral hazard. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(3), 550–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interaction effects in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31(4), 437–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raskin, R. N., & Hall, C. S. (1979). A narcissistic personality inventory. Psychological Reports, 45(2), 590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roseman, I. J., Wiest, C., & Swartz, T. S. (1994). Phenomenology, behaviors, and goals differentiate discrete emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 206–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Statistical conclusion validity and internal validity. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference (pp. 33–63). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simons, T. (2002). Behavioral integrity: The perceived alignment between managers’ words and deeds as a research focus. Organization Science, 13(1), 18–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. H. (2000). Assimilative and contrastive emotional reactions to upward and downward social comparisons. In J. Suls & L. Wheeler (Eds.), Handbook of social comparison: Theory and research (pp. 173–200). New York, NY: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tafarodi, R. W., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (1995). Self-liking and self-competence as dimensions of global self-esteem: Initial validation of a measure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 65(2), 322–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesser, A. (1986). Some effects of self-evaluation maintenance on cognition and action. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (pp. 435–464). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesser, A. (1988). Toward a self-evaluation maintenance model of social behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 1–32). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesser, A., Millar, M., & Moore, J. (1988). Some affective consequences of social comparison and reflection processes: The pain and pleasure of being close. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(1), 49–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesser, A., & Smith, J. (1980). Some effects of task relevance and friendship on helping: You don’t always help the one you like. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16(6), 582–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2007). The psychological structure of pride: A tale of two facets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3), 506–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treviño, L. K., den Nieuwenboer, N. A., & Kish-Gephart, J. J. (2014). (Un)ethical behavior in organizations. Annual Review of Psychology, 65(1), 635–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treviño, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2011). Managing business ethics: Straight talk about how to do it right. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treviño, L. K., Weaver, G. R., & Reynolds, S. J. (2006). Behavioral ethics in organizations: A review. Journal of Management, 32(6), 951–990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turnipseed, D. L. (2002). Are good soldiers good? Exploring the link between organization citizenship behavior and personal ethics. Journal of Business Research, 55(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vance, R. J., & Colella, A. (1990). Effects of two types of feedback on goal acceptance and personal goals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(1), 68–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vecchio, R. P. (2000). Negative emotion in the workplace: Employee jealousy and envy. International Journal of Stress Management, 7(3), 161–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vonk, R. (1999). Effects of other-profitability and self-profitability on evaluative judgements of behaviours. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29(7), 833–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(3), 601–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison principles in social psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 90(2), 245–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wojciszke, B. (2005). Morality and competence in person- and self-perception. European Review of Social Psychology, 16(1), 155–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wojciszke, B., & Dowhyluk, M. (2003). Emotional responses toward own and others’ behavioral acts related to competence and morality. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 34(3), 143–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wojciszke, B., & Szymków, A. (2003). Emotions related to others’ competence and morality. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 34(3), 135–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, D. M. (1988). Is there integrity in the bottom line: Managing obstacles to executive integrity. In S. Srivastva (Ed.), Executive integrity: The search for high human values in organizational life (pp. 140–171). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, J. V. (1989). Theory and research concerning social comparisons of personal attributes. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 231–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University, One Bear Place #98006, Waco, TX, 76798, USA

    Matthew J. Quade

  2. Spears School of Business, Oklahoma State University, 320A Business Building, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA

    Rebecca L. Greenbaum

  3. LeBow College of Business, Drexel University, 3141 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Mary B. Mawritz

Authors
  1. Matthew J. Quade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rebecca L. Greenbaum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mary B. Mawritz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew J. Quade.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All of the study’s authors declare they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Funding

There is no external funding to report.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the studies.

Appendices

Appendix A: Scale Items


Ethical Comparison (α = .93) (1 = much less likely compared with coworker, 7 = much more likely compared with coworker) (adapted from Brown et al. 2005)

  1. 1.

    Listen to what others have to say

  2. 2.

    Believe others should be disciplined for violating ethical standards

  3. 3.

    Conduct your personal life in an ethical manner

  4. 4.

    Have the best interests of others in mind

  5. 5.

    Make fair and balanced decisions

  6. 6.

    Be trusted by others

  7. 7.

    Discuss business ethics or values with others

  8. 8.

    Set an example of how to do things the right way in terms of ethics

  9. 9.

    Define success not just by results but also the way that they are obtained

  10. 10.

    Ask “what is the right thing to do?” when making decisions


Performance Comparison (α = .91) (1 = much less likely compared with coworker, 7 = much more likely compared with coworker) (adapted from Williams and Anderson 1991)

  1. 1.

    Adequately complete assigned duties

  2. 2.

    Fulfill responsibilities specified in job description

  3. 3.

    Perform tasks that are expected of you

  4. 4.

    Meet formal performance requirements of the job

  5. 5.

    Engage in activities that will directly affect your performance evaluation

  6. 6.

    Neglect aspects of the job you are obligated to perform (reverse scored)

  7. 7.

    Fail to perform essential duties (reverse scored)


Negative emotions (Study 1: α = .91; Study 2: α = .79) (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) (shortened version of Dunn et al. 2012)

  1. 1.

    I feel contempt toward him/her

  2. 2.

    He/she makes me feel tense

  3. 3.

    I feel disgusted by him/her

  4. 4.

    I feel stress thinking about him/her

  5. 5.

    I feel repulsed by him/her

  6. 6.

    I feel apprehensive toward him/her


Social Undermining

Study 1: (α = .95) (1 = never, 7 = always) (Duffy et al. 2002)

  1. 1.

    Insult you

  2. 2.

    Give you the silent treatment

  3. 3.

    Spread rumors about you

  4. 4.

    Delay work to make you look bad or slow you down

  5. 5.

    Belittle your ideas

  6. 6.

    Hurt your feelings

  7. 7.

    Talk bad about you behind your back

  8. 8.

    Criticize the way you handled things on the job in a way that is not helpful

  9. 9.

    Not give you as much help as he/she promised

  10. 10.

    Give you incorrect or misleading information about the job

  11. 11.

    Compete with you for status and recognition

  12. 12.

    Let you know that he/she does not like you or something about you

  13. 13.

    Not defend you when people speak poorly of you


Study 2: (α = .95) (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree)

  1. 1.

    Hinder his/her ability to maintain positive interpersonal relationships with others

  2. 2.

    Hinder his/her ability to experience school-related success

  3. 3.

    Hinder his/her favorable reputation


Ostracism

Study 1: (α = .95) (1 = never, 7 = always) (Ferris et al. 2008)

  1. 1.

    Ignore you at work

  2. 2.

    Leave the area when you enter

  3. 3.

    Not answer your greetings

  4. 4.

    Not sit with you in a lunchroom at work

  5. 5.

    Avoid you at work

  6. 6.

    Not look at you at work

  7. 7.

    Shut you out of the conversation

  8. 8.

    Refuse to talk to you at work

  9. 9.

    Treat you as if you weren’t there

  10. 10.

    Not invite you or ask you if you want anything when he/she goes out for a coffee break


Study 2: (α = .90) (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree)

  1. 1.

    You would ignore him/her

  2. 2.

    You would exclude him/her

  3. 3.

    You would avoid him/her


Positive emotions (Study 1: α = .76; Study 2: α = .73) (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) (compiled based on Emmons 1987; Raskin and Hall 1979; Tracy and Robins 2007)

  1. 1.

    He/she can learn a great deal from me

  2. 2.

    I feel accomplished compared to him/her

  3. 3.

    I am more knowledgeable than him/her

Appendix B: Ethical Dilemmas from Study 2

Dilemmas created by Flynn and Wiltermuth (2010). Response options created for the purpose of Study 2.

  1. 1.

    You are in charge of testing a new software package that your company has recently developed. It will be launched in a week, which means you will need to set up round-the-clock testing before then. You have to assign people to two teams—one day shift and one graveyard shift. What would you do?

    1. a.

      Flip a coin to randomly assign employees to each of the two teams

    2. b.

      Assign all of the married employees that have kids to the daytime shift

    3. c.

      Ask employees to volunteer for one of the two shifts

    4. d.

      Pay the people who are willing to work the graveyard shift more money to do so

  2. 2.

    You notice one of your best employees taking printer paper, highlighters, and post-it notes home in her laptop bag. This employee has worked at the firm for many years, but there is a rule against this and clear procedures for providing employees with supplies if they choose to work at home. According to company policy, you are required to fire this employee on the spot. What would you do?

    1. a.

      I would not fire her

    2. b.

      I would fire her immediately

    3. c.

      I would meet with her to confront her about the situation

    4. d.

      I would talk to her coworkers to find out how long this has been going on

  3. 3.

    Your colleague, who you consider to be a friend, is looking to hire a new manager in her department. She has identified an external candidate she would like to hire, but company rules require her to consider internal candidates first. She has asked you not to disclose to people within the company that she has already picked out an external candidate for the position. However, you know two employees in your area who would like to have this job, and each has asked you directly if your colleague has already picked someone for this position. What would you do?

    1. a.

      Tell them she has not picked anyone yet

    2. b.

      Tell them she has already picked someone from outside the company

    3. c.

      Talk to the colleague to try and persuade her to consider the two internal employees

    4. d.

      Talk to someone in HR to let them know your colleague plans to ignore the company rule

  4. 4.

    You work in a small division of a large company. Two of your colleagues, whom you are friends with outside of work, have been working on a new business venture together. Although it is against company policy, you notice that they have been spending a significant amount of time at work making plans for this new business. Despite their involvement in this side business, these colleagues have always made time to help you with the issues you encounter at work. Your boss, who is concerned by the declining performance of your group, asks you if these colleagues are using company time to pursue interests not related to the company. What would you do?

    1. a.

      Tell your boss that the colleagues are pursuing their own interests on company time

    2. b.

      Play dumb and pretend that you aren’t really sure why performance is declining

    3. c.

      Cover for your colleagues and tell your boss they aren’t using company time to pursue their own interests

    4. d.

      Take the blame and tell your boss you have been really distracted by things happening at home and that you’ll get things turned around

  5. 5.

    You manage a small company that is trying to secure an additional round of venture-capital financing. The firm employs five people, each of whom has an irreplaceable set of skills. If any of the five were to leave, the company would struggle to secure additional financing. One of the principal employees, whom you consider a friend, has recently informed you that he has received an extremely appealing offer from another company that is much more likely to succeed. The employee must make a decision in the next two days. Out of respect for you, this employee has told you that he will go to the other company only if you offer your blessing. What would you do?

    1. a.

      Talk to the other employees to see if they think the group can pick up the slack if this person leaves

    2. b.

      Encourage this person to take the offer with your blessing

    3. c.

      Fire the person on the spot because they clearly don’t want to be a part of your company anymore

    4. d.

      Discourage the employee from leaving out of concern for the group

  6. 6.

    You manage a medium-sized company that is located in a small town. Unfortunately, you are forced to lay off a third of your workforce in six-month time. You know that as soon as you announce the layoffs property prices in the small town will fall off considerably, as will the effort of the company’s employees. One of your favorite employees, whom you admire very much, has been going through some hard times financially. You would like to give this employee some advance notice so that he could sell his house for a reasonable price. However, you know that if you tell him to sell the house, there is a chance the rest of the company would read the sale as a sign that layoffs are imminent long before the planned announcement date. If this were to happen, not only would property prices drop, so too would firm productivity. What would you do?

    1. a.

      Bring the employee in and drop hints that he should sell his house

    2. b.

      Clearly tell him to sell his house

    3. c.

      Don’t have a conversation with the employee prior to announcing the layoffs

    4. d.

      Warn the entire company that layoffs may be on the horizon and that they should be aware of this and consider every option

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Quade, M.J., Greenbaum, R.L. & Mawritz, M.B. “If Only My Coworker Was More Ethical”: When Ethical and Performance Comparisons Lead to Negative Emotions, Social Undermining, and Ostracism. J Bus Ethics 159, 567–586 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3841-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3841-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation