Abstract

Manager stewardship behavior, defined as an ethical initiative whereby managers subjugate their personal interests to protect their organization’s long-term welfare, has been widely considered beneficial for organizations and subordinates. However, is manager stewardship behavior also viewed as good in the eyes of peers? This research examines peer reactions to manager stewardship behavior. Drawing on person perception theory, we expect that a peer may credit and support manager stewardship behavior or stigmatize and undermine it depending on his or her attributions (organizational concern versus impression management). Study 1 (a vignette experiment: _n_ = 200) found that manager stewardship behavior is related to credit evaluation by a peer and subsequently increases peer support and decreases peer undermining when attributed to organizational concern motives; however, it is related to stigma evaluation by a peer and subsequently increases peer undermining and decreases peer support when attributed to impression management motives. Study 2 (_n_ = 221) replicated the results of Study 1 using a field survey design. These findings expand our understanding of the implications of stewardship behavior from a peer perspective and offer insight for managers into how to engage in stewardship behavior wisely.