Featured Post from Baylor University

Feelings of Ethical Superiority Can Lead to Workplace Ostracism, Social Undermining, Baylor Study Says

Oct 22, 2018

4 min

Matt Quade, Ph.D.

Managers should consider ethics and performance when rewarding employees, Baylor professor says


Do you consider yourself more ethical than your coworker?

Caution! Your feelings of ethical superiority can cause a chain reaction that is detrimental to you, your coworker and your organization, according to Baylor University management research.


A new study published in the Journal of Business Ethics suggests that your feelings of ethical superiority can lead you to have negative emotions toward a “less ethical” coworker. Those negative emotions can be amplified if you also believe you do not perform as well as that coworker. And, furthermore, those negative emotions can lead to your mistreatment and/or ostracism (social exclusion) of that less ethical, higher-performing coworker.


“One way to think of this is that it is – and should be – concerning to us to believe that we are more ethical than our coworkers, especially if we do not perform as well as they do,” said lead author Matthew Quade, Ph.D., assistant professor of management in Baylor University’s Hankamer School of Business and an expert on workplace ethics and ostracism.


The research, Quade said, can help managers create better atmospheres and improve the bottom line.


“The managerial implication is that we need to create environments where ethics and performance are both rewarded,” he said.


A total of 741 people, among them 310 employees (“focal employees”) and an equal number of their coworkers (“comparison coworkers”), were surveyed for the study. Focal employees compared themselves with their coworkers based on two areas: perceived ethics and performance. Then they rated their levels of negative emotions (i.e., feelings of contempt, tension or disgust) toward those same comparison coworkers.


Results show that employees who believe they are more ethical than similar coworkers (i.e., those that hold similar positions, have similar education background and similar tenure in the organization) feel negative emotions (i.e., contempt, disgust, stress, repulsion) when thinking about those coworkers. These negative emotions about the coworker are amplified when the employees also believe they do not perform as well as those same coworkers.


In turn, the comparison coworkers rated how often they experienced social undermining (i.e., insults, spreading of rumors, belittling of ideas) and ostracism (i.e., ignored, avoided, shut out of conversations) from the focal employee.


Results also show that the negative emotions that the “more ethical, lower performing” employees experience may result in them behaving in unethical ways directed at their coworkers. Specifically, they become more likely to socially undermine and ostracize those “less ethical, higher performing” coworkers. All the study’s results exist regardless of gender and any positive emotion the employees may experience as a result of believing they are more ethical.


Ultimately, such workplace scenarios pose a conundrum for managers, Quade said. On one hand, there is the ethical worker who doesn’t perform as well. On the other hand, there’s the less ethical worker who hits all the goals.


Who gets rewarded?


“If high performance is the result of questionable or unethical behavior, that combination should not be celebrated,” the researchers wrote. “Instead, organizations should be cautious when rewarding and promoting performance within organizations, ensuring that they also consider the way the job is done from an ethical standpoint.”


The ideal situation, the study reveals, is when high ethics and high performance are the norm – and employees are rewarded.


“Enhancing the ethical behavior of all employees should be an emphasis to attempt to remove some of the disparity that tends to exist between employees when it comes to their moral behavior at work,” the researchers wrote.


ABOUT THE STUDY

“’If Only My Coworker Was More Ethical’: When Ethical and Performance Comparisons Lead to Negative Emotions, Social Undermining, and Ostracism,” published in the Journal of Business Ethics, is authored by Matthew Quade, Ph.D., assistant professor of management, Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University; Rebecca Greenbaum, Ph.D., associate professor of management, Spears School of Business, Oklahoma State University; and Mary Mawritz, Ph.D., associate professor of management, LeBow College of Business, Drexel University.


ABOUT BAYLOR UNIVERSITY

Baylor University is a private Christian University and a nationally ranked research institution. The University provides a vibrant campus community for more than 17,000 students by blending interdisciplinary research with an international reputation for educational excellence and a faculty commitment to teaching and scholarship. Chartered in 1845 by the Republic of Texas through the efforts of Baptist pioneers, Baylor is the oldest continually operating University in Texas. Located in Waco, Baylor welcomes students from all 50 states and more than 80 countries to study a broad range of degrees among its 12 nationally recognized academic divisions.


ABOUT HANKAMER SCHOOL OF BUSINESS

Baylor University’s Hankamer School of Business provides a rigorous academic experience, consisting of classroom and hands-on learning, guided by Christian commitment and a global perspective. Recognized nationally for several programs, including Entrepreneurship and Accounting, the school offers 24 undergraduate and 13 graduate areas of study. Visit www.baylor.edu/businessand follow on Twitter at twitter.com/Baylor_Business.


Connect with:
Matt Quade, Ph.D.

Matt Quade, Ph.D.

Kimberly and Aaron P. Graft Professor in Christian Leadership in Business; Associate Professor of Management; Director, Christian Leadership and Ethics

Christian leadership & ethics expert focusing on ethical and servant leadership, bottom-line mentality & pro-adoption workplace policies

TeachingSocial UnderminingCustomer Unethical BehaviorEthical LeadershipData Analysis

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Baylor University

5 min

Digital Dementia: Does Technology Use by ‘Digital Pioneers’ Correlate to Cognitive Decline?

As the first generation that interacted with digital technology reaches an age where dementia risks emerge, scientists have asked the question: Is there a correlation between digital technology use and an increased risk of dementia? With the phrases “brain rot” and “brain drain” circulating on social media, it would appear that most people would assume the answer is yes. However, a new study in Nature Human Behavior by neuroscientists at Baylor University and the University of Texas at Austin Dell Medical School reveals the opposite – digital technologies are actually associated with reduced cognitive decline. The study – A meta-analysis of technology use and cognitive aging – was sparked by the ongoing concern about the passive activity of digital technologies and their relation to accelerating risks of dementia. Study co-authors are Jared F. Benge, Ph.D., clinical neuropsychologist and associate professor of neurology at Dell Medical School and UT Health Austin’s Comprehensive Memory Center within the Mulva Clinic for the Neurosciences, and Michael K. Scullin, Ph.D., associate professor of psychology and neuroscience at Baylor. “You can flip on the news on just about any day and you’ll see people talking about how technologies are harming us,” Scullin said. “People often use the terms ‘brain drain’ and ‘brain rot,’ and now digital dementia is an emerging phrase. As researchers, we wanted to know if this was true.” The “digital dementia” hypothesis predicts that a lifetime of exposure to digital technology will worsen cognitive abilities. On the contrary, the study’s findings challenge this hypothesis, indicating instead that engagement with digital technology fosters cognitive resilience in these adults. Reviewing more than 136 studies with data that encompassed over 400,000 adults, and longitudinal studies with an average of 6 years of follow-up data, Scullin and Benge found compelling evidence that digital technology use is associated with better cognitive aging outcomes, rather than harm. The researchers’ study supported the “technological reserve” hypothesis, finding that digital technologies can promote behaviors that preserve cognition. In fact, their study revealed that digital technology use correlates with a 58% lower risk of cognitive impairment. This pattern of cognitive protection persisted when the researchers controlled for socioeconomic status, education, age, gender, baseline cognitive ability, social support, overall health, and engagement with mental activities like reading that might have explained the findings. Increase in problem-solving skills Scullin said that for some, these findings are surprising as technology use is often associated with being sedentary both physically and mentally. However, for the current generation of older adults who were introduced to the first technological advancements – computers, the Internet and smartphones – past their childhood, using technology is cognitively challenging because it is everchanging. “One of the first things that middle-age and older adults were saying is that ‘I’m so frustrated by this computer. This is hard to learn.’ That's actually a reflection of the cognitive challenge, which may be beneficial for the brain even if it doesn’t feel great in the moment.” Scullin said. Technology requires constant adaption, he said, such as understanding new software updates, troubleshooting Internet loss or filtering out website ads. “If you’re doing that for years and you’re really engaging with it, even though you might experience frustration, that may be a sign of you exercising your brain,” he said. Social connection Technology also enables communication and engagement like never before, which can expand opportunities for connectivity. Video calls, emails and messaging apps help maintain social networks, especially for people who would not otherwise regularly see their family members. “Now you can connect with families across generations,” Scullin said. “You not only can talk to them, you can see them. You can share pictures. You can exchange emails and it's all within a second or less. So that means there's a greater opportunity for decreasing loneliness.” Better social connectedness is a well-documented correlate of cognitive functioning in older adults, providing a link between decreased isolation from digital technologies and reduced risks of dementia. Impact of “digital scaffolding” A dementia diagnosis is indicated in part when cognitive changes lead to a loss of independence with daily tasks. Tools such as digital reminders, GPS navigation and online banking allow older adults to remain independent despite cognitive difficulties through digital scaffolding. According to the research article, this digital scaffold “facilitates better functional outcomes in older adults while general cognitive functioning declines.” Technologies can serve as a compensatory support system to maintain general independence and reduce the risk of a dementia diagnosis even with the presence of some cognitive decline. “As clinical practice continues to move toward an individualized, precision-medicine approach, it will be necessary for the field to identify for whom and for how long, such digital scaffolding is effective,” the researchers said. Promoting healthy technology use While Scullin recognizes the negative effects of technology, such as distracted driving or using technology over consistent face-to-face interaction, he also emphasizes how promoting a healthy use of digital tools in older adults is beneficial for their cognitive health. “If you have a parent or grandparent who’s just staying away from technology, maybe revisit that. Could they learn to use photo, messaging, or calendar apps on a smartphone or tablet? Start simple and be very patient while they learn,” he said. Social media use is another highly debated topic in terms of cognitive effects. While he says it’s hard to predict the cognitive effects of endlessly scrolling on TikTok, Scullin does argue that generating videos through creative cognition could be beneficial. In addition, he said that interacting with communities online can provide benefits by forming social connections. “We could spend a long time talking about all the specific ways in which technology use can be bad. However, the net effect since the 1990s has been positive for overall cognition in older adults,” he said. FUNDING The study was supported by funding from the National Institutes of Health (R01AG082783; M.K.S., J.F.B.). Michael Scullin was named Baylor’s inaugural Newsmaker of the Year in 2018, after his “to-do list” research was widely covered by media outlets, including ABC’s Good Morning America, TODAY.com, USA TODAY, Discover, LiveScience, HealthDay, BBC Radio and many more, reaching an international circulation and viewership of nearly 1 billion people. Looking to interview or chat with Michael Scullin? Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

2 min

Daylight Saving Time: Baylor Sleep Expert Offers Suggestions to Help Adjust to the Change

Daylight saving time, with its one-hour spring forward at 2 a.m. Sunday, March 12, may seem like a small shift of just a single hour, but on a societal level, it has startling effects, says Baylor University sleep researcher Michael Scullin, Ph.D., associate professor of psychology and neuroscience and director of the Sleep Neuroscience and Cognition Laboratory at Baylor. So what are the consequences of this one-hour time shift on our sleep quality and how can we quickly adjust when springing our clocks forward? "Many people not only lose that single hour of sleep," Scullin said, "but also have difficulty over several subsequent nights adjusting their circadian rhythms to the new bed-wake time schedules." For example, parents who have routine bedtimes for their children experience difficulty for the whole family because children will not want to (or be able to) go to bed one hour earlier than their body is used to. "When you couple this bedtime difficulty with the fact that most people have morning school and work schedules that require them to wake up at a set time," Scullin said, "it becomes clear that ‘springing forward’ has a larger consequence than skipping a single hour." The consequences of the spring daylight saving time shift are well documented. Researchers have observed changes in cognitive functioning, increased driving accidents, moodiness and willingness to punish others for mistakes. "Researchers have also documented that acute sleep loss and circadian dysregulation lead to an increase in cardiovascular events," Scullin said. "If someone's cardiovascular health is ‘borderline’ then the springtime shift can be the factor that precipitates a stroke or a myocardial infarction (heart attack)." Scullin offers some simple suggestions to anticipate and adapt to the spring forward shift: Adjust in advance. About a week before the "spring forward," go to bed 15 or 20 minutes earlier each day. Avoid long naps during the day. If you need a nap, take it earlier in the day and for no more than 20 minutes. Bring on the sunlight. Getting more natural sunlight in the morning hours is very beneficial in resetting our biological clock. In some cases, evening melatonin also can help people to adapt to the time change. Scullin has published numerous studies focusing on sleep and brain function, including the connection between sleep and creativity, musical “earworms” and their effect on sleep and how writing a to-do list before you turn in for the night can help you get better sleep. In fact, Scullin was named Baylor’s inaugural Newsmaker of the Year in 2018, after his “to-do list” research was widely covered by media outlets, including ABC’s Good Morning America, TODAY.com, USA TODAY, Discover, LiveScience, HealthDay, BBC Radio and many more, reaching an international circulation and viewership of nearly 1 billion people. Looking to interview or chat with Michael Scullin? Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

4 min

Defining Oligarchy: The Fusion of Wealth and Power in American Democracy

Oligarchy is being thrown around a lot these days. But what does the term mean? Is America an oligarchy? And how does oligarchy help explain American democracy today? Political rhetoric scholar Luke Winslow, Ph.D., associate professor of communication at Baylor University and author of  “Oligarchy in America: Power, Justice, and the Rule of the Few,” has traced the evolution of oligarchy in the United States to shed light on how modern oligarchy is reshaping America through the increasing fusion of economic power and political influence. Winslow’s research focuses on how the influence of oligarchy has impacted American political rhetoric, as well as how it is showing up in modern politics and political communications. Defining Oligarchy Oligarchy is a term that most people associate with other countries, but it “is not something that just happens in Russia. It's something that happens everywhere, and it always has,” Winslow said. In the simplest of terms, oligarchy attempts to explain the convergence of economic and political power. Winslow offered four key distinctions on oligarchy: Oligarchy is exclusive. It represents a form of governance focused on preserving the political and economic influence of the wealthy by securing the approval of the rest of the population. “It assumes not everyone is qualified to deliberate, participate and legislate,” Winslow said. When it comes to oligarchy, there is a belief that extreme wealth is equated to intellectual fitness across all domains, including governance. Wealth vs. income. It is important to distinguish between wealth and income. Income covers daily expenses, whereas wealth is more easily used to exert political power. “What truly sets an oligarch apart is the political power their wealth can command,” Winslow said. Understated and subtle. Modern oligarchy operates through persuasion by “enticing rather than commanding citizens and maintaining what seems like an absence from political authority,” Winslow said. It is in this absence that oligarchs can influence indirect political actions, especially since they are not (typically) elected officials and cannot be removed from office. Legal Immunity. Oligarchs have no fear of legal consequences because oligarchy itself is not against the law, Winslow said. The First Amendment protects the right “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” legitimizing lobbying and campaign donations. A robust system of campaign contributions and political lobbying – both of which are perfectly legal – can shape media narratives and put pressure on state and local governments. While wealth and politics have always coexisted, oligarchy is about how these forces merge to create a system where the ultra-rich exert undue influence over democratic institutions, Winslow said. “This convergence has long existed in history but is now unfolding in the U.S. more visibly – and perhaps more accepted – than ever before,” he said. Communication of Oligarchy Winslow’s research shows that American society has come to view billionaires as transcendent figures – individuals whose success in business qualifies them to lead in politics – a mindset that is not new. The Gilded Age of the late 19th century saw figures like Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller wield enormous economic and political power, shaping legislation to favor their interests. Winslow’s research traces this historical precedent, suggesting that today’s tech titans are the latest iteration of a long-standing trend. Perhaps the most intriguing question Winslow raises is not just how oligarchy and its fusion of wealth and governance has taken root, but why the American public has been so willing to accept it as natural – perhaps even beneficial. “The arguments being made in public discourse encourage us to go along with it,” he said. “We’re being told, implicitly, that this is just how things work now.” Yet, these practices also reveal how the government serves the narrow interests of the ultra-wealthy, diverting resources from productive economic opportunities for the majority toward political wins that benefit a small, affluent minority, Winslow said. “What's so interesting about oligarchy now is that the cover has been ripped off, the veil has been thrown open and we’re not even hiding the fact that money gets you more influence,” he said. Ultimately, Winslow hopes his work will get people to be curious as to why Americans are now accepting oligarchy in the U.S. “The ways that the extremely wealthy are yielded political power is seemingly acceptable now, and that is a question that we all should be asking,” Winslow said. Looking to know more? Then let us help. To connect with Luke Winslow, simply contact Shelby Cefaratti-Bertin, M.A, Assistant Director of Media and Public Relations now to arrange an interview today.

View all posts
Powered by