Skip to main content
EDIT

Research: How Wrongdoers Gain Loyalty from Strangers

Research: How Wrongdoers Gain Loyalty from Strangers

New research from Assistant Professor Zachariah Berry found people don’t need to know someone personally to give them their loyalty.

by: Faculty Perspectives
10.08.24
A handshake connected in a web of associates

Published research from Assistant Professor Zachariah Berry demonstrates the power of loyalty can be called upon to support those accused of wrongdoing, even those outside one's immediate circle of friends.
[iStock Photo]

Featured

Stay Informed + Stay Connected

MARSHALL MONTHLY BRINGS YOU ESSENTIAL NEWS AND EVENTS FROM FACULTY, STUDENTS, AND ALUMNI.
SIGN UP

There are myriad examples of wrongdoers evading consequences for their wrongdoing within their organizations for months or even years. Sean “Diddy” Combs, Harvey Weinstein, and Larry Nassar are a few prime examples. How do these individuals manage to get away with their wrongdoing for such extended periods?

In a recent article, published in Organization Science, USC Marshall Assistant Professor of Management and Organization Zachariah Berry, along with coauthor Cornell University Assistant Professor of Management and Organizations Angus Hildreth, explored one way in which wrongdoers receive support from colleagues, even those they do not know personally: the network effect of loyalty-based obligations.

Researchers found that loyalty can be called upon to support those accused of wrongdoing, even when the person being called upon does not know the accused. Across 11 pre-registered studies, including 10 experiments and one field study, Berry and Hildreth demonstrated that loyalty-based obligations to a direct tie (i.e., someone with whom one has a loyal relationship) can extend beyond the direct tie. This loyalty can influence support for indirect ties, such as a friend of a friend, (i.e., people they do not know but are connected to via their direct tie) who have been accused of wrongdoing.

Why does this occur? The researchers found that one’s loyalty to the person making the request made salient their relational identity with the requestor, which highlighted the norms for why they should grant the request. Specifically, participants reported greater trust and value alignment with the requestor when loyal to them; they also had greater relational concerns with the requestor if they did not grant their request when loyal to them.

In their first study, the researchers recruited full-time employees across a variety of industries and asked them to think of two different colleagues (in random order): one colleague to whom they were loyal and one with whom they worked. For each colleague, participants provided information about their colleague and their relationship to them, and were then presented with a story involving this colleague. Participants imagined that their colleague approached them at work and asked them to support a close friend of theirs, who the participant imagined not having a relationship with, but who was accused of engaging in wrongdoing at work.

Loyalty can be called upon to support those accused of wrongdoing, even when the person being called upon does not know the accused.

— Zachariah Berry
Assistant Professor of Management and Organization

Researchers found that when participants imagined receiving this request from their colleague at work to whom they were loyal (compared to their colleague with whom loyalty was not a defining feature of the relationship), they reported being far more likely to grant their colleague’s request. They found that not only were they likely to grant their colleagues’ request, but they were also far more likely to indicate intentions to speak up publicly in support of their colleague’s friend, and speak up publicly to condemn the accusations made against their colleague’s friend.

The researchers conducted several follow-up studies replicating the results and demonstrating that the effect holds across many types of wrongdoing (e.g., theft, sexual harassment, dishonesty, plagiarism), and even across different forms and degrees of evidence against the accused. This included multiple accusations against the accused and evidence that proved the accused was guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.

In a field experiment, they recruited fraternity brothers living on a college campus through confederates (i.e., a fraternity brother secretly working with the researchers to carry out the study). Each house that participated had one confederate employed by the researchers who utilized a cover story about their friend who was accused of misappropriating the finances of a club on campus.

The confederate, not a leader in the house but an established member, was selected to introduce variation in loyalty without the influence of authority. The confederate asked one brother at a time privately if they would sign their name on a petition to support their friend, who the brother did not know, and help ensure that their friend would not face disciplinary action or be expelled. They found that brothers who were loyal to the confederate were far more likely to sign their name on the petition compared to brothers who reported not being loyal to the confederate.

This work demonstrates one way in which wrongdoers can receive support from various people throughout their organization, even those with whom they do not share a relationship. The research regarding relational identity and loyalty uncover key insights into why a wrongdoer may get away with their wrongdoing for extended periods of times.

RELATED