Tag: Ashley Hardin

Displaying family photos in the workplace cuts down on employee fraud and other unethical behavior, new WashU Olin research finds.

For instance, in one study the researchers conducted, participants who looked at pictures of family or friends filed expense reports claiming about $8 less on average than workers without pictures. While $8 may not seem like much, it can add up quickly.

“If numerous employees submit monthly expense reports to a company, it’s easy to imagine the financial impact of the reduction in unethical behavior over time,” said Olin’s Ashley Hardin, assistant professor of organizational behavior.

Hardin is coauthor of “Show me the … family: How photos of meaningful relationships reduce unethical behavior at work,” in the journal Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.

Photos at work

More than 70% of workers display photos in their workspace, and people have a great deal of choice in what they put up, Hardin said.

At the same time, companies have considerable influence over whether employees have photos in their workstations by signaling their acceptability.

Hardin and coauthors theorized that having photos of “close others” in view “decreases the hegemony of an economic schema in people’s minds”—in other words, reduces the prioritization of self-interest, among other things, which decreases their propensity to misbehave. These hypotheses were supported across four studies. These hypotheses were supported across four studies.

Photos are a cue to the self and others because they convey information about values and interests, previous research has found. Until now, however, the effect of personalizing one’s workplace with photos on financial transgressions was unexplored.

The authors conducted a field survey and three experiments and found a negative relationship between displaying photos of family or friends, rather than photos of landscapes, at work and financial transgressions.

Practical implications

Given the frequency and cost of unethical behavior at work, “there is great interest in understanding what contributes to these behaviors and how to curb such conduct,” the authors write. Hardin conducted the research with Christopher Bauman of the University of California, Irvine, and David Mayer of the University of Michigan.

Their results consistently indicate that the presence of photos of close others (e.g., family and friends) reduces the likelihood that individuals will over-report their earnings, pad expense reports and engage in other bad behavior.

“Our findings are relevant for individuals at work. For example, individuals who want to guard against their own unethical behavior could display photos of friends and family in their workspaces,” Hardin said.

And companies should consider encouraging employees to display photos of family and friends.

“More broadly, companies and individuals alike should be mindful of how their physical surroundings may be influencing their behavior,” the authors write.

“Whereas some organizations encourage segmentation of work and life by penalizing those who bring outside topics into work, our findings suggest that this segmentation may have an unexpected downside in terms of unethical behavior.

“Our results suggest that subtle adjustments to the physical context can alter employee behavior, and it should, therefore, be possible to design organizational interventions that help to inhibit fraud and other forms of undesirable behavior.”

A consultant inflates his hours so he’ll be paid more. Will his dishonesty later affect whether he’ll be able to tell when his client is pleased or upset? 

In a word, yes, according to a newly published paper by four researchers, including WashU Olin’s Ashley E. Hardin.

Dishonest deeds diminish a person’s ability to read others’ emotions, or “interpersonal cognition,” the research found.

And here’s one of the other big findings: The consequences snowball. One dishonest act can set in motion even more dishonesty.

“It can be a vicious cycle,” said Hardin, assistant professor of organizational behavior. “Sometimes people will tell a white lie and think it’s not a big deal. But a decision to be dishonest in one moment will have implications for how you interact with people subsequently.” 

Repercussions in the workplace

It’s no surprise that liars and cheaters can hurt the workplace, as well.

“Given the rise of group work in organizations, there’s a heightened awareness of the importance of understanding others’ emotions,” said Hardin, assistant professor of organizational behavior. Also, a person’s ability to read emotions is crucial in negotiations and in building relationships. 

Dishonesty has repercussions beyond harming trust and one’s reputation if others become aware of it, according to “The interpersonal costs of dishonesty: How dishonest behavior reduces individuals’ ability to read others’ emotions,” in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.

Lying and cheating is “not only is financially costly (e.g., in the case of stealing from a company or increasing the risk of costly lawsuits) but also can harm interpersonal relationships through a particular channel: individuals’ ability to detect others’ emotions,” even when those others are not the victims of the wrongdoing.

Eight studies involving 1,500+ adults

Hardin’s areas of expertise are organizational behavior, team development and negotiation. She conducted the research with Julia J. Lee, of the University of Michigan, Bidhan Parmar, of the University of Virginia, and Francesca Gino, of Harvard University.

In all, the researchers conducted eight studies involving more than 1,500 adults to gauge lying and cheating in various scenarios. The findings support the following:

• A connection exists between dishonest behavior and one’s ability to accurately read and empathize with others’ emotions.
• Bad actors are less likely than others to define themselves in terms of close relationships, for example as a sister or a mentor.
• Dishonest behavior leads to damage downstream; the first transgression is a catalyst to dehumanize others and perform even more dishonest acts. 
• People who are more socially attuned are less likely to behave dishonestly.

“When individuals are lacking their physiological capacity for social sensitivity, they may be more susceptible to the social distancing effects of engaging in dishonest behavior,” the researchers write.

‘Dynamic tension’

The findings fundamentally challenge views that lump morality and empathy into a single construct, Hardin said. Social psychology research has long argued that empathy is a moral sentiment that triggers prosocial behavior. But empathy toward others can also lead employees to cross ethical boundaries.

Consider a 2010 study by WashU Olin’s Lamar Pierce and Gino, of Harvard. The research was in the context of vehicle emissions. Employees helped customers with standard vehicles, as opposed to luxury cars, by illegally passing the cars on emissions tests. The results suggested that empathy toward others with a similar economic status can motivate dishonest behavior. Basically, the findings highlighted the importance of social context in ethical decision-making.

“Our work adds to this dynamic tension between dishonesty and empathy by showing … that one’s empathic accuracy can be affected by the specific psychological state produced by one’s dishonest behavior,” Hardin and her co-researchers write.

Originally from Michigan, Ashley Hardin, assistant professor of organizational behavior, earned her undergraduate degree in business from Michigan’s Ross School of Business and later worked in strategy consulting. However, after consulting and observing people at work up close, she realized she wanted to pursue her passion: Understanding how people relate in the workplace.

She returned to Ross for her doctorate and is now dedicated to understanding why people treat one another well, with responsiveness, or treat each other in an undermining fashion.

“When I was deciding where I wanted to join as a faculty member, it was really important for me to find a strong community, since I study the importance of relationships at work,” Hardin said. “I wanted to go somewhere where there were great relationships and I could form those bonds.”

How should employees handle personal difficulties in a professional setting? “To disclose or not to disclose” is often the question, and is the crux of Harvard Business Review’s “What to Do When a Personal Crisis Is Hurting Your Professional Life.”

The author, HBR contributing editor Amy Gallo, turns to several organizational behavior experts to answer this question, including Olin Prof. Ashley Hardin:

It’s better to share if you feel OK doing so
If you do feel that it’s safe to share, it’s often better to do so. “We’ve been encouraged to keep the boundaries between private and professional distinct, but that’s not always helpful,” says Anne Kreamer, author of It’s Always Personal. In fact, research by Ashley Hardin, a professor at Washington University’s Olin Business School, shows that when you allow coworkers to discover more about your personal life, they are more motivated to meet your needs. “If the situation is interfering with your ability to complete your job, it’s likely that your coworkers may already realize something is amiss, and in that case you are better off letting them in on what is going on,” Hardin explains. You can also give permission to your close colleagues to share your circumstances with other coworkers if it is too difficult for you to tell them directly. “This type of indirect disclosure can open up a space for your teammates to brainstorm ways to help you,” Hardin adds.

Check out the full post on Harvard Business Review.

[RELATED: How to restore civility to the workplace]