IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v115y2013i1p93-100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dirty Hands Make Dirty Leaders?! The Effects of Touching Dirty Objects on Rewarding Unethical Subordinates as a Function of a Leader’s Self-Interest

Author

Listed:
  • Florien Cramwinckel
  • David Cremer
  • Marius Dijke

Abstract

We studied the role of social dynamics in moral decision-making and behavior by investigating how physical sensations of dirtiness versus cleanliness influence moral behavior in leader–subordinate relationships, and whether a leader’s self-interest functions as a boundary condition to this effect. A pilot study (N = 78) revealed that when participants imagined rewarding (vs. punishing) unethical behavior of a subordinate, they felt more dirty. Our main experiment (N = 96) showed that directly manipulating dirtiness by allowing leaders to touch a dirty object (fake poop) led to more positive evaluations of, and higher bonuses for, unethical subordinates than touching a clean object (hygienic hand wipe). This effect, however, only emerged when the subordinate’s unethical behavior did not serve the leader’s own interest. Hence, subtle cues such as bodily sensations can shape moral decision-making and behavior in leader–subordinate relationships, but self-interest, as a core characteristic of interdependence, can override the influence of such cues on the leader’s moral behavior. Copyright The Author(s) 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Florien Cramwinckel & David Cremer & Marius Dijke, 2013. "Dirty Hands Make Dirty Leaders?! The Effects of Touching Dirty Objects on Rewarding Unethical Subordinates as a Function of a Leader’s Self-Interest," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(1), pages 93-100, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:115:y:2013:i:1:p:93-100
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-012-1385-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10551-012-1385-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-012-1385-4?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Cremer & Ann Tenbrunsel & Marius Dijke, 2010. "Regulating Ethical Failures: Insights from Psychology," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 1-6, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Juliana Guedes Almeida & Deanne N. Den Hartog & Annebel H. B. Hoogh & Vithor Rosa Franco & Juliana Barreiros Porto, 2022. "Harmful Leader Behaviors: Toward an Increased Understanding of How Different Forms of Unethical Leader Behavior Can Harm Subordinates," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 215-244, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David Motherway & Federica Pazzaglia & Karan Sonpar, 2018. "Failures in Regulator-Led Deinstitutionalization of Questionable Business Practices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 627-641, May.
    2. Faisal Alshehri & Saleema Kauser & Marianna Fotaki, 2019. "Muslims’ View of God as a Predictor of Ethical Behaviour in Organisations: Scale Development and Validation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(4), pages 1009-1027, September.
    3. William Graham & William Cooper, 2013. "Taking Credit," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(2), pages 403-425, June.
    4. Kelly Raz & Alison R. Fragale & Liat Levontin, 2023. "Who Do I (Dis)Trust and Monitor for Ethical Misconduct? Status, Power, and the Structural Paradox," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(2), pages 443-464, January.

    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:kap:jbuset:v:115:y:2013:i:1:p:93-100. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.