The effects of self-other rating agreement on ethical behavior: an experimental investigation

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of self-other rating agreement (SOA) on ethical decisions and behavior.Design/methodology/approachA sample of 169 students (60 women and 109 men) enrolled in a part-time, regional MBA program was divided into three SOA categories: (1) Self-aware, individuals whose self-ratings matched observer ratings, (2) Underraters, those whose self-ratings were lower than observer ratings and (3) Overraters, individuals whose self-ratings were higher than other ratings. Ethical behavior was evaluated with the completion of a managerial in-basket assessment.FindingsThe results revealed that ethical behavior varied by SOA, with underraters exhibiting the highest levels of ethical behavior, followed by self-aware (i.e. accurate) and then overraters. One of the intriguing results is that underraters displayed more ethical behaviors than accurate raters, raising questions about the use of accurate self-assessments as an indicator of personal and professional effectiveness.Originality/valueThe results indicate that organizations should consider SOA in their human resource processes because it has important implications for employee training, selection and promotion. While prior research has examined the effect of SOA on performance, commitment and leadership perceptions, the authors contribute to the literature by examining whether SOA influences actual ethical decisions and actions.

Do personal traits of the leader predict differences in leader and subordinate evaluations of leader effectiveness: a study in the banking industry in Ethiopia

“…There is a considerable evidence indicating that self-ratings can be inflated or biased (Carless and Roberts-Thompson, 2001; Dunning et al. , 2004; Mabe and West, 1982; Kass et al. , 2021) due to self-enhancement bias or unrealistic optimism (London and Smither, 1995; Yammarino and Atwater, 1997).…”

“…, 2018) which asserts that most prior studies that examine self-other rating agreement take place in the USA (e.g. Kass et al. , 2021).…”

“…There is a considerable evidence indicating that self-ratings can be inflated or biased (Carless and Roberts-Thompson, 2001;Dunning et al, 2004;Mabe and West, 1982;Kass et al, 2021) due to self-enhancement bias or unrealistic optimism (London and Smither, 1995;Yammarino and Atwater, 1997). Further, meta-analytic studies (Harris and Schaubroeck, 1988;Mabe and West, 1982) have shown that there is a weak agreement between self-ratings and ratings made by others.…”

“…The study is in response to a call made by some investigations (Amundsen and Martinsen, 2014;Atwater et al, 2009;Fleenor et al, 2010;Mosson et al, 2018) which asserts that most prior studies that examine self-other rating agreement take place in the USA (e.g. Kass et al, 2021). Furthermore, Atwater et al (2009) pointed out that the role of cultural characteristics and the importance of researching outside the USA to understand potential cultural differences and their implication for SOA.…”