When focus and vision become a nightmare: Bottom-line mentality climate, shared vision, and unit unethical conduct.

IF 9.4 1区 心理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Journal of Applied Psychology Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-27 DOI:10.1037/apl0001111
Christian J Resick, Lorenzo Lucianetti, Mary B Mawritz, Jae Young Choi, Stacy L Boyer, Lauren D'Innocenzo
{"title":"When focus and vision become a nightmare: Bottom-line mentality climate, shared vision, and unit unethical conduct.","authors":"Christian J Resick, Lorenzo Lucianetti, Mary B Mawritz, Jae Young Choi, Stacy L Boyer, Lauren D'Innocenzo","doi":"10.1037/apl0001111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Drawing on goal shielding theory (Shah et al., 2002), our study highlights the roles of bottom-line mentality climates and shared vision in encouraging collective unethical conduct in pursuit of financial results. Consistent with the theory, we hypothesize that high bottom-line mentality leaders shape their unit's bottom-line mentality climate by explicitly clarifying the importance of prioritizing financial results above all else and using motivational resources to encourage a sole focus on bottom-line attainment. We further hypothesize that a unit's shared vision, which captures a collective sense of purpose and direction, is a critical aspect of the unit's motivational context that increases the likelihood for collective bottom-line enhancing, unethical behaviors (i.e., concealing errors, bribery, and unethical pro-organizational behavior) in units with a salient bottom-line mentality climate. We test our hypotheses in a two-wave, multi-industry field study of work units in central Italy (<i>N</i> = 96). Results indicate that leaders with a bottom-line mentality foster a bottom-line mentality climate in the units they lead, and the linkages with unit unethical conduct are dependent on the unit's shared vision. While shared vision strengthened the effects of bottom-line mentality climates on concealing errors, it served as a necessary condition to motivate more severe forms of unethical conduct. Our study thus demonstrates a dark side to shared vision in that it channels motivational resources toward a unit's bottom-line priorities. When those priorities are singularly focused on the bottom line, shared vision can help to motivate undesirable behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"2053-2069"},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001111","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Drawing on goal shielding theory (Shah et al., 2002), our study highlights the roles of bottom-line mentality climates and shared vision in encouraging collective unethical conduct in pursuit of financial results. Consistent with the theory, we hypothesize that high bottom-line mentality leaders shape their unit's bottom-line mentality climate by explicitly clarifying the importance of prioritizing financial results above all else and using motivational resources to encourage a sole focus on bottom-line attainment. We further hypothesize that a unit's shared vision, which captures a collective sense of purpose and direction, is a critical aspect of the unit's motivational context that increases the likelihood for collective bottom-line enhancing, unethical behaviors (i.e., concealing errors, bribery, and unethical pro-organizational behavior) in units with a salient bottom-line mentality climate. We test our hypotheses in a two-wave, multi-industry field study of work units in central Italy (N = 96). Results indicate that leaders with a bottom-line mentality foster a bottom-line mentality climate in the units they lead, and the linkages with unit unethical conduct are dependent on the unit's shared vision. While shared vision strengthened the effects of bottom-line mentality climates on concealing errors, it served as a necessary condition to motivate more severe forms of unethical conduct. Our study thus demonstrates a dark side to shared vision in that it channels motivational resources toward a unit's bottom-line priorities. When those priorities are singularly focused on the bottom line, shared vision can help to motivate undesirable behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
当焦点和愿景成为噩梦时:底线心态、共同愿景和团队不道德行为。
利用目标屏蔽理论(Shah et al., 2002),我们的研究强调了底线心态气候和共同愿景在鼓励追求财务结果的集体不道德行为方面的作用。与理论一致,我们假设高底线心态的领导者通过明确澄清将财务结果置于其他一切之上的重要性,并利用激励资源鼓励只关注底线的实现,来塑造其单位的底线心态氛围。我们进一步假设,一个单位的共同愿景,捕捉了集体的目的感和方向感,是单位动机背景的一个关键方面,它增加了具有显著底线心态的单位中集体底线增强,不道德行为(即隐瞒错误,贿赂和不道德的亲组织行为)的可能性。我们在意大利中部工作单位的两波多行业实地研究中检验了我们的假设(N = 96)。结果表明,具有底线心态的领导者在其领导的单位中培养了一种底线心态,并且与单位不道德行为的联系取决于单位的共同愿景。虽然共同愿景加强了底线心态对隐藏错误的影响,但它是激发更严重的不道德行为形式的必要条件。因此,我们的研究显示了共同愿景的阴暗面,因为它将激励资源引向了一个单位的底线优先事项。当这些优先事项都集中在底线上时,共同的愿景可以帮助激发不良行为。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
175
期刊介绍: The Journal of Applied Psychology® focuses on publishing original investigations that contribute new knowledge and understanding to fields of applied psychology (excluding clinical and applied experimental or human factors, which are better suited for other APA journals). The journal primarily considers empirical and theoretical investigations that enhance understanding of cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral psychological phenomena in work and organizational settings. These phenomena can occur at individual, group, organizational, or cultural levels, and in various work settings such as business, education, training, health, service, government, or military institutions. The journal welcomes submissions from both public and private sector organizations, for-profit or nonprofit. It publishes several types of articles, including: 1.Rigorously conducted empirical investigations that expand conceptual understanding (original investigations or meta-analyses). 2.Theory development articles and integrative conceptual reviews that synthesize literature and generate new theories on psychological phenomena to stimulate novel research. 3.Rigorously conducted qualitative research on phenomena that are challenging to capture with quantitative methods or require inductive theory building.
期刊最新文献
Prospects for reducing group mean differences on cognitive tests via item selection strategies. Self-promotion in entrepreneurship: A driver for proactive adaptation. Coping with work-nonwork stressors over time: A person-centered, multistudy integration of coping breadth and depth. A person-centered approach to behaving badly at work: An examination of workplace deviance patterns. How perceived lack of benevolence harms trust of artificial intelligence management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1