IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ems/eureri/22721.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using a Relational Models Perspective to Understand Normatively Appropriate Conduct in Ethical Leadership

Author

Listed:
  • Giessner, S.R.
  • van Quaquebeke, N.

Abstract

To describe leadership as ethical is largely a perceptional phenomenon informed by beliefs about what is normatively appropriate. Yet there is a remarkable scarcity in the leadership literature regarding how to define what is “normatively appropriate”. To shed light on this issue, we draw upon Relational Models Theory (Fiske: 1992, Psychological Review, 99, 689-723), which differentiates between four types of relationships: communal sharing, authority ranking, equality matching, and market pricing. We describe how each of these relationship models dictates a distinct set of normatively appropriate behaviors. We argue that perceptions of unethical leadership behavior result from one of three situations: a) a mismatch between leader’s and follower’s relational models, b) a different understanding about the behavioral expression, or preos, of the same relational model, or c) a violation of a previously agreed upon relational model. Further, we argue that the type of relational model mismatch impacts the perceived severity of a transgression. Finally, we discuss the implications of our model with regard to understanding, managing, and regulating ethical leadership failures.

Suggested Citation

  • Giessner, S.R. & van Quaquebeke, N., 2011. "Using a Relational Models Perspective to Understand Normatively Appropriate Conduct in Ethical Leadership," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2011-002-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    • Handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:22721
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repub.eur.nl/pub/22721/ERS-2011-002-ORG.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McGraw, A Peter & Tetlock, Philip E & Kristel, Orie V, 2003. "The Limits of Fungibility: Relational Schemata and the Value of Things," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 219-229, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Russell Belk, 2007. "Why Not Share Rather Than Own?," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 611(1), pages 126-140, May.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:40-47 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. A. Peter McGraw & Eldar Shafir & Alexander Todorov, 2010. "Valuing Money and Things: Why a $20 Item Can Be Worth More and Less Than $20," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 816-830, May.
    4. Steffen Giessner & Niels Quaquebeke, 2010. "Using a Relational Models Perspective to Understand Normatively Appropriate Conduct in Ethical Leadership," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 43-55, September.
    5. Rebecca Trump & Stacey Finkelstein & Paul Connell, 2015. "I will risk a stranger’s money, but not my own or my friend’s money: Effect of proximity of the money source to the self on financial risk-taking," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 501-512, December.
    6. Marek, Ewelina & Raux, Charles & Engelmann, Dirk, 2018. "Personal carbon allowances: Can a budget label do the trick?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 170-178.
    7. Whynes, David K. & Sach, Tracey H., 2007. "WTP and WTA: Do people think differently?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(5), pages 946-957, September.
    8. Tuk, M.A. & Verlegh, P.W.J. & Smidts, A. & Wigboldus, D.H.J., 2008. "Sales and Sincerity: The Role of Relational Framing in Word-of-Mouth Marketing," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-056-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    9. A. Peter McGraw & Derick F. Davis & Sydney E. Scott & Philip E. Tetlock, 2016. "The price of not putting a price on love," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(1), pages 40-47, January.
    10. Kristina Shampanier & Nina Mazar & Dan Ariely, 2007. "Zero as a Special Price: The True Value of Free Products," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 742-757, 11-12.
    11. Gupta, Manjul & Esmaeilzadeh, Pouyan & Uz, Irem & Tennant, Vanesa M., 2019. "The effects of national cultural values on individuals' intention to participate in peer-to-peer sharing economy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 20-29.
    12. Felix C Brodbeck & Katharina G Kugler & Julia A M Reif & Markus A Maier, 2013. "Morals Matter in Economic Games," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-1, December.
    13. Philip E. Tetlock & Barbara A. Mellers & J. Peter Scoblic, 2017. "Sacred versus Pseudo-sacred Values: How People Cope with Taboo Trade-Offs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 96-99, May.
    14. Nicole Nikiforow & Sebastian Wagener, 2021. "The contextual effect of completion on the effectiveness of performance feedback," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(1), pages 61-90, February.
    15. Malika Malika & Durairaj Maheswaran & Shailendra Pratap Jain, 2022. "Perceived financial constraints and normative influence: discretionary purchase decisions across cultures," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 252-271, March.
    16. Jin Young Chung, 2017. "Price fairness and PWYW (pay what you want): a behavioral economics perspective," Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 16(1), pages 40-55, February.
    17. Zlatev, Julian J. & Miller, Dale T., 2016. "Selfishly benevolent or benevolently selfish: When self-interest undermines versus promotes prosocial behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 112-122.
    18. Jefferson, Therese & Taplin, Ross, 2012. "Relational aspects of decisions to sell," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 697-704.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ethical leadership; ethics; morality; regulation; relational models theory; transgression; violation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • M - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics
    • M10 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - General
    • M12 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Personnel Management; Executives; Executive Compensation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ems:eureri:22721. 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: RePub (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erimanl.html .

    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.