How do you climb the corporate ladder? A multi-regional analysis of the ethical preferences for influencing superiors

David A. RALSTON*, Carolyn P. EGRI, Irina NAOUMOVA, Florian WANGENHEIM, Ping Ping FU, María Teresa DE LA GARZA CARRANZA, Laurie MILTON, Tania CASADO, Prem RAMBURUTH, Mahfooz ANSARI, Liesl RIDDLE, Ho Beng CHIA, Ilya GIRSON, Malika RICHARDS, Ian PALMER, David M. BROCK, Arif BUTT, Narasimhan SRINIVASAN, Marina DABIC, Arunas STARKUSVojko V. POTOCAN, Harald HERRIG, Tevfik DALGIC, Hung VU THANH, Phillip HALLINGER, Francisco CASTRO, Olivier FURRER, Yong Lin MOON, Christine KUO, Mario MOLTENI, Andre PEKERTI, Mo Lin Moureen TANG, Man Kei Paulina WAN, Tomasz LENARTOWICZ, Ana MARIA ROSSI, Isabelle MAIGNAN, Ruth MAY, Donna LEDGERWOOD, Mark WEBER, Wade DANIS, Alan WALLACE

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)peer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

We investigate upward influence ethics in 35 societies. A global converging was found on the acceptability of different types of upward influence ethics. Differences among the regions, and societies within each region, as well as this overarching trend of consistency, were also found. Additionally, macro-level (economic wealth), as well as the micro-level (egalitarian commitment- conservatism), factors provide predictive power for this model. Thus, our findings provide evidence that a global model should be based on multiple-level variables.

Original languageEnglish
Number of pages6
JournalAcademy of Management Proceedings
Volume2005
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2005
Event65th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, AOM 2005 - Honolulu, HI, United States
Duration: 5 Aug 200510 Aug 2005

Keywords

  • Ethics
  • Influence (Psychology)
  • Conservatism
  • Individualism
  • Collectivism
  • Social networks
  • Commitment (Psychology)
  • Wealth
  • Culture
  • Globalization

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'How do you climb the corporate ladder? A multi-regional analysis of the ethical preferences for influencing superiors'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this