The Ethics of Bluffing: The Effects of Individual Differences On Perceived Ethicality and Bluffing Behavior

Although researchers have debated the ethicality of bluffing in business, little research has examined individuals’ attitudes and beliefs towards bluffing and how characteristics of the individual influence such perceptions and subsequent behavior. We consider this issue by examining how individuals’ ethical orientation influences their perceptions of the ethicality of bluffing select organizational stakeholders, their willingness to bluff, and their actual bluffing behavior. Results indicate that ethical orientation exerts direct effects on the perceived ethicality of bluffing and indirect effects on individuals’ reported willingness to engage in this misleading form of communication as well as their actual bluffing behavior. Implications for their practice and research are discussed

A Field Study of the Antecedents and Performance Consequences of Perceived Accountability

Building on theoretical and empirical work considering the implications of accountability on individual behavior, the authors explored the antecedents and consequences of individual perceptions of accountability for job performance. Using data from two field samples, the authors considered whether the manager’s monitoring behavior thought to enhance perceptions of accountability for behaviors and outcomes predicted greater perceived accountability for task performance and interpersonal facilitation performance. They also explored whether perceived accountability mediated the relationship between monitoring behavior and subsequent performance. Hierarchical linear modeling indicated that subordinates of managers whose monitoring behavior reinforced perceptions of accountability perceived greater accountability for performance and that this perception mediated the relationship between managerial monitoring behavior and performance. The implications of these results and directions for future research are discussed

From "me against you" to "us against them": alliance formation based on inter-alliance rivalry

This article investigates and integrates the concepts of alliance competition and inter-alliance rivalry. While past research has focused primarily on intra-alliance dynamics such as why, when, and with whom alliances are formed, the outcome of such agreements is unclear. This paper focuses on inter-alliance dynamics that involve conceptualizing group-versus-group or alliance competition and inter-alliance rivalry by studying the competitive engagements of firms through alliances. We develop a model that includes a set of market and firm-specific variables that can explain alliance competitive engagement.Alliances Competitive dynamics Alliance rivalry

Perceptions of Accountability in Family Business: Using Accountability Theory to Understand Differences Between Family and Nonfamily Executives

Family business success rests on implementing a governance system that recognizes a complex nexus of social relationships. While scholars have used existing frameworks such as agency theory to explore the effect of financial incentives on agent behavior and performance, they have not integrated perspectives from psychology and sociology in a way that fully addresses the challenges of effective family business governance. Our research advances current knowledge of governance in family business by examining the implications of accountability theory to explore differences in the perceptions of accountability between family and nonfamily executives as a result of family firm monitoring. We examine the elements and linkages that form the basis of accountability in the context of firm characteristics uniquely common to family business and that are influential in the development of perceptions between executives of contrasting family status. Potential contingencies to the family status–accountability relationship is also considered, as are the implications of effective monitoring for family firm performance