People who cheat on their spouses are significantly more likely to engage in misconduct in the workplace, according to a new study.

The researchers looked at the records of police officers, financial advisers, white-collar criminals, and senior executives who used the Ashley Madison marital infidelity website.

Operating under the slogan “Life is short. Have an affair,” Ashley Madison advertises itself as a dating service for married people to have “discreet encounters.” Despite promises of discreetness, the data were put in the public domain through a hack in 2015 that included 36 million user accounts, including 1 million paid users in the United States.

Ashley Madison users in the professional settings researchers studied were more than twice as likely to engage in corporate misconduct.

“This is the first study that’s been able to look at whether there is a correlation between personal infidelity and professional conduct,” Kruger says. “We find a strong correlation, which tells us that infidelity is informative about expected professional conduct.”

The researchers investigated four study groups totaling 11,235 individuals using data on police officers from the Citizens Police Data Project; data on financial advisers from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority BrokerCheck database; data on defendants in SEC cases from the Securities and Exchange Commission’s litigation release archives; and data on CEOs and CFOs from Execucomp.

Even after matching misconduct professionals to misconduct-free individuals with similar ages, genders, and experiences and controlling for a wide range of executive and cultural variables, the researchers found that people with histories of misconduct were significantly more likely to use the Ashley Madison website.

Their findings suggest a strong connection between people’s actions in their personal and professional lives and provide support for the idea that eliminating workplace sexual misconduct may also reduce fraudulent activity.

“Our results show that personal sexual conduct is correlated with professional conduct,” Kruger says. “Eliminating sexual misconduct in the workplace could have the extra benefit of contributing to more ethical corporate cultures in general.”

The study appears in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Source: UT Austin

Related

Complex rules for businesses are easier to break

Successful leaders prioritize their moral compass

These kinds of regrets last the longest

Leaders who value morality outperform their unethical peers, regardless of industry, company size, or role, according to new research. But because we all define a “moral leader” differently, leaders who try to do good may face unexpected difficulties.

The research team examined more than 300 books, essays, and studies on moral leadership from 1970 to 2018. They discovered that leaders who prioritized morality had higher performing organizations with less turnover and that their employees were more creative, proactive, engaged, and satisfied.

“Over and over again, our research found that followers perceived ethical leaders as more effective and trusted, and those leaders enjoyed greater personal well-being than managers with questionable morality,” says study coauthor Jim Lemoine, assistant professor of organization and human resources at the University at Buffalo. “The problem is, though, that when we talk about an ‘ethical business leader,’ we’re often not talking about the same person.”

The study appears in the journal Academy of Management Annals.

Morality is in the eye of the beholder?

Lemoine says prior research often treats all forms of moral leadership the same, missing their unique attributes and consequences.

Consider, for example, a company with an opportunity to sell cigarettes in a developing country. One executive would argue the sale is ethical because no norms or rules prohibit it. A servant leader might turn down the deal because of its negative health and environmental impacts. And a third leader, guided by his or her own internal convictions, might choose another course of action entirely.

All three of these leaders are acting morally, Lemoine says, even though they disagree with one another and might even view the others as immoral.

“Morality can be subjective, and how leaders put their own ethics into practice can have massive implications for the effectiveness of their leadership, teams, and organizations,” Lemoine says.

The researchers found a strong sense of morality is positive for leaders and their organizations, increasing performance, engagement, motivation, and other factors—but each specific approach to ethics had slightly different outcomes.

Leaders focused on matching norms and standards are often politically skilled and avoid legal scandals, but may exploit the rules to their own ends, the study showed.

Servant leaders had the strongest results for customer service, community impact, and employees’ work-life balance, but may struggle to manage competing priorities from their stakeholders.

Finally, independent-minded leaders—think of the late John McCain, widely regarded as a maverick steadfast in his personal beliefs—can simultaneously build cultures of innovation and transparency, while potentially frustrating employers who wish they would follow the company line more often.

Gauging leadership’s moral compass

So, which moral philosophy is best?

None were consistently better or worse than the others, the study found. Instead, Lemoine says, the trick for leaders is to emphasize the overall importance of morality and its positive impact on profitability, while also defining your specific code of ethics and recognizing your approach may not match those of your organization or followers.

“Morality is a great thing for managers to incorporate into their leadership styles,” Lemoine says. “But just because we consider something ‘moral,’ we can’t assume everyone else sees it that way. It’s important for leaders and organizations to get these differences out in the open and discuss them to avoid future misunderstandings and misconceptions.”

Researchers from Georgia State University and Erasmus University also contributed to this study.

Source: University at Buffalo

Related

Your morals may be more flexible than you think

Nope, your boss probably isn’t actually a psychopath

Email distractions make bosses worse leaders