Hans van Dijk

Why and when does ethical leadership evoke unethical follower behavior

Purpose – In examining whether social exchange or social identity mechanisms drive the relationship between ethical leadership and unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB), the purpose of this paper is to argue that the mechanism linking ethical leadership and UPB varies for different levels of job autonomy. Design/methodology/approach – Data were requested from 225 employees in several Dutch organizations, of which 156 questionnaires were returned. The authors used multilevel path analysis in MPlus to test the hypotheses, which allows for simultaneous estimation of different regression equations and for testing the significance of indirect effects. Findings – In line with the hypotheses, results revealed a direct relationship between ethical leadership and UPB when followers have little job autonomy. For followers high on job autonomy, the authors found that ethical leadership relates to UPB via organizational identification. Practical implications – It is advised to use ethical leadership with care when it focusses on reciprocity and identification. The results suggest that followers may be inclined to justify their unethical actions by appealing to the principle of higher loyalty – believing they are just doing what the organization wants them to do. Originality/value – Previous research has used social learning theory to show that ethical leadership is likely to stimulate and transfer ethical norms and behaviors. The current study however demonstrates the reciprocal and dark side of ethical leadership, as the authors found that ethical leadership can encourage UPB for followers with low job autonomy.

The perceived value of team players: a longitudinal study of how group identification affects status in work groups

Theory and research on status attainment in work groups primarily focuses on members’ abilities and characteristics that make them appear competent as predictors of their status in the group. We complement the abilities perspective with a social identity perspective by arguing that another important determinant of a member’s status is based on the extent to which the member serves the group’s interests. Specifically, we assert that a member’s identification with the group affects performance on behalf of the group, which in turn affects other members’ assessment of the member’s status. We test this social identity perspective on status attainment by studying the influence of members’ group identification on their performance and status in the group, while controlling for the members’ abilities and status characteristics. In a three-wave longitudinal field study following 33 work groups during a six-month group project, we find that members’ identification enhances their performance on behalf of the group, which in turn increases their status within the group. As such, our study advances insights in the determinants of status attainment in work groups and points to the relevance of the social identity approach for research on the antecedents of status in work groups.

If it doesn’t help, it doesn’t hurt? Information elaboration harms the performance of gender-diverse teams when attributions of competence are inaccurate

Information elaboration—the act of exchanging, discussing, and integrating information and perspectives through verbal communication—tends to be considered as the silver bullet that drives the performance of diverse teams. We challenge this notion by proposing that the effect of information elaboration on team performance depends on the accuracy of within-group competence attributions, i.e. the extent to which attributions of task competence among team members correspond with members’ actual task competence. We argue that information elaboration may actually harm performance when within-group competence attributions are inaccurate, given that in such teams decisions are likely to be based on suggestions from members who have much influence but little competence. We conducted an experiment with 97 gender-heterogeneous teams working on gender-typical problems and coded their interactions. Our findings support our hypotheses that members who are perceived as more competent are more influential in the information elaboration process, and that information elaboration harms performance when competence attributions are not accurate. In contrast to our expectations, pro-diversity beliefs did not mitigate this negative effect of inaccurate competence attributions. We argue that this speaks to the robustness of our findings regarding the detrimental effects of information elaboration when competence attributions are inaccurate.

Work Group Diversity and Group Performance: A Status Configuration Process Model

For years the social categorization and the information/decision- making perspective have guided research to the relationship between work group diversity and performance. Recently, however, it has been noticed that status-related processes too may account for the diversity-performance relationship. In this conceptual paper, we advance a process model of the diversity- performance relationship that depicts how status-related processes relate to and interact with social categorization and information elaboration processes. Among others, we propose that work group diversity through social categorization processes more or less automatically yields within-group status differences, and that these status differences impact group behavior (of which information elaboration is just one aspect) and group performance. We advance a research agenda and discuss the implications of our model for managing diverse work groups.