IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v181y2024ics0749597824000025.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When loyalty binds: Examining the effectiveness of group versus personal loyalty calls on followers’ compliance with leaders’ unethical requests

Author

Listed:
  • Hildreth, John Angus D.

Abstract

When leaders call on their followers’ loyalty, is it an effective strategy, particularly when such loyalty calls conflict with other ethical duties? And, if calling on loyalty is an effective strategy, when and why are such appeals more effective? These questions were examined in six studies measuring the unethical compliance of workers interacting online, students working together in classroom and fraternity members collaborating in their houses. Findings revealed that the effectiveness of leaders’ loyalty calls depended critically on the target of loyalty: calling on group loyalty was generally more effective than calling on personal loyalty to the leader in eliciting followers’ compliance with leaders’ unethical requests and in helping followers feel better about their deceit because such calls helped followers to rationalize their unethical behavior more easily. Thus, calling on group loyalty not only increases followers’ unethical behavior but also helps them feel righteous about their deceit.

Suggested Citation

  • Hildreth, John Angus D., 2024. "When loyalty binds: Examining the effectiveness of group versus personal loyalty calls on followers’ compliance with leaders’ unethical requests," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:181:y:2024:i:c:s0749597824000025
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104310
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597824000025
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104310?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:181:y:2024:i:c:s0749597824000025. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.