When leading by example leads to less corrupt collaboration

Abstract We contribute to the pressing question of how organizational design influences corporate wrongdoing by studying different decision structures — simultaneous vs. sequential — in experimental coordination games. Participants can report private information honestly, or lie to increase their own, as well as the group’s, payoff. In simultaneous decision structures, all group members report at the same time, without information about the reports of others, whereas in sequential decision structures there is a first mover who decides first. We find that the presence of a first mover decreases dishonesty levels in repeated interactions (but not in one-shot settings). We argue that this effect is primarily driven by image concerns of decision leaders.

[1]  Torsten Biemann,et al.  The dark side of team incentives: Experimental evidence on advice quality from financial service professionals , 2013 .

[2]  Martin Sefton,et al.  Cooperation in small groups: the effect of group size , 2013, Experimental Economics.

[3]  Astrid Dannenberg,et al.  Leading by example versus leading by words in voluntary contribution experiments , 2015, Soc. Choice Welf..

[4]  S. Gächter,et al.  Who Makes a Good Leader? Cooperativeness, Optimism, and Leading‐By‐Example , 2012 .

[5]  U. Fischbacher,et al.  Lies in Disguise. An experimental study on cheating , 2013 .

[6]  A. Falk,et al.  Diffusion of Being Pivotal and Immoral Outcomes , 2020, The Review of Economic Studies.

[7]  C. Loch,et al.  What do the followers want? The core functions of leadership , 2020 .

[8]  Samuel Bendahan,et al.  Leader corruption depends on power and testosterone , 2015 .

[9]  Rainer Michael Rilke,et al.  Lying and Team Incentives , 2013, Social Science Research Network.

[10]  Carmen Tanner,et al.  Preferences for Truthfulness: Heterogeneity Among and Within Individuals , 2012 .

[11]  J. Sobel,et al.  Lying Aversion and the Size of the Lie , 2016 .

[12]  T. Offerman,et al.  Ethical Free Riding: When Honest People Find Dishonest Partners , 2018, Psychological science.

[13]  Dirk Sliwka,et al.  Disguising Lies - Image Concerns and Partial Lying in Cheating Games , 2019, American Economic Journal: Microeconomics.

[14]  J. Abeler,et al.  Preferences for Truth-Telling , 2016, Econometrica.

[15]  Gerald Eisenkopf Words and deeds – Experimental evidence on leading-by-example , 2020 .

[16]  Shaul Shalvi,et al.  The collaborative roots of corruption , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  Ro’i Zultan,et al.  The bad consequences of teamwork , 2017 .

[18]  A. Nicklisch,et al.  Leading With(Out) Sacrifice? A Public-Goods Experiment with a Privileged Player , 2011 .

[19]  Michael Eichenseer Leading by Example in Public Goods Experiments: What Do We Know? , 2019, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[20]  Armin Falk,et al.  Representative evidence on lying costs , 2014 .

[21]  Urs Fischbacher,et al.  Shifting the Blame: On Delegation and Responsibility , 2011 .

[22]  Maik T. Schneider,et al.  Honesty and Self-Selection into Cheap Talk , 2020, The Economic Journal.

[23]  Simeon Schudy,et al.  I Lie? We Lie! Why? Experimental Evidence on a Dishonesty Shift in Groups , 2016, Manag. Sci..

[24]  Devesh Rustagi,et al.  Reputation, Honesty, and Cheating in Informal Milk Markets in India , 2017 .

[25]  W. Güth,et al.  Leading by example with and without exclusion power in voluntary contribution experiments , 2007 .

[26]  Ben Greiner,et al.  Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE , 2015, Journal of the Economic Science Association.

[27]  Fabio Galeotti,et al.  Cheating in the Lab Predicts Fraud in the Field: An Experiment in Public Transportations , 2017, Manag. Sci..

[28]  Roberto A. Weber,et al.  Do Leaders Affect Ethical Conduct? , 2014 .

[29]  M. Sutter,et al.  The benefits of voluntary leadership in experimental public goods games , 2011 .

[30]  Bjørn-Atle Reme,et al.  Leadership and Incentives , 2013, Manag. Sci..

[31]  Julie Wulf,et al.  The Flattening Firm: Evidence from Panel Data on the Changing Nature of Corporate Hierarchies , 2003, The Review of Economics and Statistics.

[32]  Scott S. Wiltermuth Cheating more when the spoils are split , 2011 .

[33]  Gerd Muehlheusser,et al.  Moral Transgressions by Groups: What Drives Individual Voting Behavior? , 2020, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[34]  Philip M. Podsakoff,et al.  Experimental designs in management and leadership research: Strengths, limitations, and recommendations for improving publishability , 2019, The Leadership Quarterly.

[35]  DaiZhixin,et al.  Cheating in the Lab Predicts Fraud in the Field , 2018 .

[36]  A. Barr,et al.  Complicity without connection or communication , 2017 .

[37]  J. Potters,et al.  Do cheaters in the lab also cheat in the field , 2016 .

[38]  B. Rockenbach,et al.  Motivating teammates: The leader's choice between positive and negative incentives , 2009 .