The higher they are, the harder they fall: The effects of wrongdoer status on observer punishment recommendations and intentionality attributions

Blame the shepherd not the sheep: Imitating higher-ranking transgressors mitigates punishment for unethical behavior

“…Fragale et al, 2009). In practice, however, managers have considerable discretion when deciding how to interpret and enforce formal rules (Butterfield et al, 1996;Mooijman, van Dijk, Ellmers, van Dijk, 2015;Podsakoff, 1982).…”

“…Blame is a negative evaluation of an actor based on a judgment that the actor intentionally engaged in unwarranted, norm-incongruent, negative behavior (Malle et al, 2014). To assign blame, people perform a complex set of appraisals that consider whether the actor intentionally caused the event (e.g., Cushman, 2008;Fragale et al, 2009;Malle & Knobe, 1997;Shaver, 1985;Sloman, Fernbach, & Ewing, 2009) and whether there are mitigating circumstances or reasons that may justify the action (e.g., Malle, 2004;Riordan, Marlin, & Kellogg, 1983;Scanlon, 2008). 1 In sum, blame is a judgment about an actor rather than an evaluation of a behavior or an outcome, and observers may disapprove of an action, independent of whether they also condemn the actor.…”

“…Also, people expect higher-ranking individuals to bear more responsibility (Bell & Tetlock, 1989;Sanders et al, 1996;Treviño, 1992;Weiner, 1995;see also Bandura, 1999;Milgram 1974) and lower-ranking individuals to conform to examples set by higher-ranking authorities (Overbeck, Tiedens, & Brion, 2006). Compared to higher-ranking individuals, people perceive lower-ranking individuals' behavior as less intentional (Fragale et al, 2009), more confined by organizational scripts (Gioia, 1992;Gioia & Poole, 1984), and governed more by situational than dispositional influences (Overbeck et al, 2006). In sum, people tend to attribute less intentionality and responsibility to low-than high-ranking individuals, which in turn should reduce blame and punishment for low-ranking transgressors.…”

“…Our research extends theories of retributive justice and punishment by examining a downstream consequence of transgressions committed by high-ranking members of organizations. Prior research has mainly focused on relatively stable characteristics of transgressors and transgressions on punishment (e.g., Arvey & Jones, 1985;Darley & Pittman, 2003;Fragale et al, 2009). For example, actors' position in a hierarchy influences how much punishment they receive for a given offense (Feather, 1994;Fragale et al, 2009).…”

“…Our research is the first to consider more transient features of situations (e.g., recent misconduct) as a unique influence on culpability and punishment. As in prior research on retributive justice (e.g., Darly & Pittman, 2003;Fragale, Rosen, Xu, & Merideth, 2009;Okimoto & Wenzel, 2014), we focus on lay observers' reactions to transgressions. Although leaders and supervisors have the formal authority and responsibility to punish undesirable behavior, employees often scold, sabotage, or ostracize their coworkers for misbehaving (e.g., Barker, 1993;Gromet & Okimoto, 2014;Hollinger & Clark, 1982;O'Reilly & Aquino, 2011;Struthers, Miller, Boudens, & Briggs, 2001), and this type of punishment from peers is a very effective deterrent of unethical behavior (e.g., Hollinger & Clark, 1982;Tittle, 1977;Tittle & Logan, 1973;Zimring & Hawkins, 1973).…”