Slipping on Stereotypes – Gender Effects in the Erosion of Ethical Behavior

Abstract

Ethical outcomes in organizations can strongly be influenced by gender constellations and related stereotypical ascriptions in the workplace. In this paper, we investigate experimentally how people’s gender affects ethical outcomes in repeated same- or mixed-gender interactions. In our first study (N = 681), we apply a slippery slope auditing setting (Gino and Bazerman, 2009) in which an auditor takes an approval decision on the unethical behavior of an “estimator” (the audited firm) that emerges either suddenly – in an “abrupt treatment”, or gradually – in a “slip- pery slope” treatment. We find that in same-gender estimator-auditor constellations, there are no significant differences in auditors’ approvals of overestimated amounts between the abrupt and the slippery slope treatment. Strikingly, in mixed-gender constellations, we find significant opposite effects: when male estimators are audited by females, we observe a significant slippery slope effect, caused by a high approval frequency of overestimations in the slippery slope treat- ment. Contrarily, when female estimators are audited by a males, approval frequencies spike in the abrupt treatment. To better understand these findings, in a second study (N = 90), we asked participants which level of competence or honesty they ascribe to male and female esti- mators in the estimation task. Responses indicate that the detected slippery slope effect when male estimators are audited by females may be driven by female auditors ascribing more com- petence to male estimators, what becomes particularly relevant in the slippery slope treatment where unethical behavior is difficult to perceive. Further, our finding that male auditors are especially prone to approve overestimated amounts by females in the abrupt treatment, where unethical behavior becomes salient, might root in a more ethical evaluation of female estimates. Implications for organizations are discussed.