In this research, we examine the effects that customer perceptions of employee deception have on the customers’ attitudes toward an organization. Based on interview, archival, and observational data within the international airline industry, we develop a model to explain the complex effects of perceived dishonesty on observer’s attitudes and intentions toward the airline. The data revealed three types of perceived deceit (about beliefs, intentions, and emotions) and three additional factors that influence customer intentions and attitudes: the players involved, the beneficiaries (...) of the deceit, and the harm done by the perceived lie. We develop a model with specific propositions to guide organizations with respect to apparently deceitful behavior of their employees. Implications and directions for future research are provided, focusing on the question of whether organizations should consistently encourage honesty or train their employees to be effective liars. (shrink)

Many organizations offer their employees the opportunity to voice their opinions about work-related issues because of the positive consequences associated with offering such an opportunity. However, little attention has been given to the possibility that offering voice may have negative effects as well. We propose that negative consequences are particularly likely to occur when employees perceive the opportunity to voice opinions to be “pseudo voice”—voice opportunity given by managers who do not have the intention to actually consider employee input (i.e., (...) managerial disregard). The effects of this kind of deception were examined by means of a survey among employees (N = 137) and managers (N = 14) of a Dutch healthcare organization. We hypothesized and found that perceived pseudo voice led to reduced voice behavior and, as a result, increased intragroup conflict. These results imply that while offering voice opportunity is mostly seen as an effective management strategy, negative effects are likely to occur when a manager is perceived to try to deceive employees by pretending to be interested in their points of view. (shrink)

Conventional wisdom suggests that dishonesty on the part of an organization's employees has a negative effect on the organization's reputation. However, many organizations condone (or even require) dishonesty under certain circumstances. In this research of 128 airline passengers, we examine situations in which employees are perceived to be dishonest within one such industry, the international airlines, and examine the impact of this dishonesty on organizational reputation and customer satisfaction. We found that the reputation of the firm was most damaged when (...) the lie benefited the company or the employee, rather than the passenger. In addition, the view of the airline significantly decreased when the lie caused a high amount of harm (compared with a low amount) to the passenger. (shrink)

Many organizations offer their employees the opportunity to voice their opinions about work-related issues because of the positive consequences associated with offering such an opportunity. However, little attention has been given to the possibility that offering voice may have negative effects as well. We propose that negative consequences are particularly likely to occur when employees perceive the opportunity to voice opinions to be “pseudo voice”—voice opportunity given by managers who do not have the intention to actually consider employee input (i.e., (...) managerial disregard). The effects of this kind of deception were examined by means of a survey among employees ( N = 137) and managers ( N = 14) of a Dutch healthcare organization. We hypothesized and found that perceived pseudo voice led to reduced voice behavior and, as a result, increased intragroup conflict. These results imply that while offering voice opportunity is mostly seen as an effective management strategy, negative effects are likely to occur when a manager is perceived to try to deceive employees by pretending to be interested in their points of view. (shrink)

This paper describes the moral judgments made by various stakeholders in determining whether an event, caused by an organizational employee, constitutes dishonesty. It models person-situation interaction effects of situations in organizational settings and persons making moral judgments to predict judgments of dishonesty. Using a prototype definition of dishonesty, the paper examines the effects of differences in four areas (the prototypicality of the act, the actor''s motivation, the potential consequences, and the person judging the event) on the moral judgment of whether (...) the event constitutes dishonesty. The implications for managers and researchers of the resulting contingent prototype model of dishonesty are discussed. (shrink)