EXPRESS: Bottom-Line Mentality from a Goal Shielding Perspective: Does Bottom-Line Mentality Explain the Link between Rewards and Pro-Self Unethical Behavior?
Mary B. Mawritz, Andrea Farro, Joongseo Kim, Rebecca L. Greenbaum, Cynthia S. Wang, Julena M Bonner
{"title":"EXPRESS: Bottom-Line Mentality from a Goal Shielding Perspective: Does Bottom-Line Mentality Explain the Link between Rewards and Pro-Self Unethical Behavior?","authors":"Mary B. Mawritz, Andrea Farro, Joongseo Kim, Rebecca L. Greenbaum, Cynthia S. Wang, Julena M Bonner","doi":"10.1177/00187267221138187","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We extend research on goal-contingent rewards and bottom-line mentality (BLM) by drawing on goal shielding theory to examine BLM as a goal shielding process that explains the link between goal-contingent rewards and pro-self, unethical behavior. We also examine future orientation as a first and second stage moderator and suggest that the detrimental effects of goal-contingent rewards and subsequent BLMs are weakened for employees who have high future orientations. We tested our hypotheses with two field studies and found general support for our predictions. Overall, our findings suggest rewards that are contingent on goal attainment prompt organizational members to solely focus on their bottom-line outcomes, which in turn, drives their pro-self, unethical behaviors, but these indirect effects are less likely for those who are high on future orientation, because they approach their work with a longer-term perspective. The theoretical and practical implications of this research are discussed.","PeriodicalId":48433,"journal":{"name":"Human Relations","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Relations","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267221138187","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
We extend research on goal-contingent rewards and bottom-line mentality (BLM) by drawing on goal shielding theory to examine BLM as a goal shielding process that explains the link between goal-contingent rewards and pro-self, unethical behavior. We also examine future orientation as a first and second stage moderator and suggest that the detrimental effects of goal-contingent rewards and subsequent BLMs are weakened for employees who have high future orientations. We tested our hypotheses with two field studies and found general support for our predictions. Overall, our findings suggest rewards that are contingent on goal attainment prompt organizational members to solely focus on their bottom-line outcomes, which in turn, drives their pro-self, unethical behaviors, but these indirect effects are less likely for those who are high on future orientation, because they approach their work with a longer-term perspective. The theoretical and practical implications of this research are discussed.
期刊介绍：
Human Relations is an international peer reviewed journal, which publishes the highest quality original research to advance our understanding of social relationships at and around work through theoretical development and empirical investigation. Scope Human Relations seeks high quality research papers that extend our knowledge of social relationships at work and organizational forms, practices and processes that affect the nature, structure and conditions of work and work organizations. Human Relations welcomes manuscripts that seek to cross disciplinary boundaries in order to develop new perspectives and insights into social relationships and relationships between people and organizations. Human Relations encourages strong empirical contributions that develop and extend theory as well as more conceptual papers that integrate, critique and expand existing theory. Human Relations welcomes critical reviews and essays: - Critical reviews advance a field through new theory, new methods, a novel synthesis of extant evidence, or a combination of two or three of these elements. Reviews that identify new research questions and that make links between management and organizations and the wider social sciences are particularly welcome. Surveys or overviews of a field are unlikely to meet these criteria. - Critical essays address contemporary scholarly issues and debates within the journal''s scope. They are more controversial than conventional papers or reviews, and can be shorter. They argue a point of view, but must meet standards of academic rigour. Anyone with an idea for a critical essay is particularly encouraged to discuss it at an early stage with the Editor-in-Chief. Human Relations encourages research that relates social theory to social practice and translates knowledge about human relations into prospects for social action and policy-making that aims to improve working lives.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
