ABSTRACT
Scholars have suggested that leader diversity ideologies are imbued with ethical or normative content (e.g., Nkomo & Hoobler, 2014). We advance this literature by examining the ethical consequences of leader diversity ideologies. Specifically, we integrate the ethical leadership framework and the theory of recognition to suggest that leaders who communicate about diversity by acknowledging individuals' racial/ethnic identities (i.e., use identity-conscious ideology) are deemed by followers as more ethical than leaders who do not (i.e., use identity-blind ideologies). We further suggest that this effect is stronger for followers who are higher in institutional discrimination awareness (defined as those who are more likely to view racial/ethnic identities as consequential within society). Finally, we assert that this interactive effect on ethical leadership will subsequently influence follower engagement in discretionary, proactive behavior directed toward the organization. We found support for our predictions across two experiments and a field study. Overall, our findings illustrate the ethical consequences of leader diversity ideologies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
Subject(s)
Citizenship , Leadership , Humans , Employment , Social Discrimination , PerceptionABSTRACT
When providing social accounts (Sitkin & Bies, 1993) for the unethical conduct of subordinates, leaders may use language consistent with cognitive strategies described by Bandura (1991, 1999) in his work on moral disengagement. That is, leader's social accounts may reframe or reconstrue subordinates' unethical conduct such that it appears less reprehensible. We predict observers will respond negatively to leaders when they use moral disengagement language within social accounts and, specifically, observers will ostracize these leaders. In addition, we predict that observer moral disengagement propensity moderates this effect, such that the relationship between leaders' use of moral disengagement language within a social account and ostracism is stronger when observer moral disengagement propensity is lower versus higher. Finally, we predict that the reason why observers ostracize the leader is because observers perceive the leader's social account with moral disengagement language as unethical. Thus, perceived leader social account ethicality is predicted to mediate the interaction effect of leader's use of moral disengagement language within social accounts and observer moral disengagement propensity on ostracism. Results from an experiment and field study support our predictions. Implications for theory and practice are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record
