Employees may not always seek and give help when needed in the dyadic context because of status disparity. Drawing on the cost and benefit framework in social exchange, we examine the effects of relative status on help seeking and giving willingness and behaviors among dyads. We argue that low-status individuals tend to provide more help but seek less help from their high-status counterparts. We further consider two moderators that can help restore the balance in cross-status helping relationships: employees’ past helping history and low power distance (PD) value. Additionally, we investigate the mediating roles of perceived entitlement and perceived obligation in the relationships between relative status and help seeking and giving, respectively. We tested our hypotheses in three studies using both dyadic field studies and experiments with employee participants. Our findings consistently demonstrate that low-status employees had a disadvantage in dyadic help-seeking and help-giving relationships. We also find that past helping history mitigated the effects of relative status in predicting help giving, whereas low PD value attenuated the effects of relative status in predicting help seeking. Finally, we find support for the mediated effects of perceived entitlement and obligation in the hypothesized relationships.
AmesDRFlynnFJWeberEU (2004) It’s the thought that counts: On perceiving how helpers decide to lend a hand. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin30(4): 461–474.
2.
AndersonCJohnOPKeltnerD, et al. (2001) Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology81(1): 116–132.
3.
AstleyWGSachdevaPS (1984) Structural sources of intraorganizational power: A theoretical synthesis. Academy of Management Review9(1): 104–113.
4.
BelmiPPfefferJ (2015) How “organization” can weaken the norm of reciprocity: The effects of attributions for favors and a calculative mindset. Academy of Management Discoveries1(1): 36–57.
5.
BergerJRosenholtzSJZelditchMJr (1980) Status organizing processes. Annual Review of Sociology6(1): 479–508.
6.
BergeronDMShippAJRosenB, et al. (2013) Organizational citizenship behavior and career outcomes: The cost of being a good citizen. Journal of Management39(4): 958–984.
7.
BolinoMC (1999) Citizenship and impression management: Good soldiers or good actors?Academy of Management Review24(1): 82–98.
8.
BorgattiSPCrossR (2003) A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science49(4): 432–445.
9.
BowlerWMBrassDJ (2006) Relational correlates of interpersonal citizenship behavior: A social network perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology91(1): 70–82.
10.
BrislinRW (1980) Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In: TriandisHCBerryJW (eds) Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 389–444.
11.
BurtRS (1992) Structural Holes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12.
ByrneD (1971) The Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
13.
CampbellWKBonacciAMSheltonJ, et al. (2004) Psychological entitlement: Interpersonal consequences and validation of a self-report measure. Journal of Personality Assessment83(1): 29–45.
14.
ChanME (2013) Antecedents of instrumental interpersonal help-seeking: An integrative review. Applied Psychology62(4): 571–596.
15.
ChiaburuDSStoverinkACLiN, et al. (2015) Extraverts engage in more interpersonal citizenship when motivated to impression manage: Getting along to get ahead?Journal of Management41(7): 2004–2031.
16.
CookKSCheshireCRiceERW, et al. (2013) Social exchange theory. In: DeLamaterJWardA (eds) Handbook of Social Psychology (2nd edn). New York, NY: Springer, 61–88.
17.
CôtéSStellarJEWillerR, et al. (2021) The psychology of entrenched privilege: High socioeconomic status individuals from affluent backgrounds are uniquely high in entitlement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin47(1): 70–88.
18.
CropanzanoRMitchellMS (2005) Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management31(6): 874–900.
19.
de JongSBvan der VegtGSMollemanE (2007) The relationships among asymmetry in task dependence, perceived helping behavior, and trust. Journal of Applied Psychology92(6): 1625–1637.
20.
DeckopJRCirkaCCAnderssonLM (2003) Doing unto others: The reciprocity of helping behavior in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics47(2): 101–113.
21.
EisenbergerRArmeliSRexwinkelB, et al. (2001) Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology86(1): 42–51.
22.
EisenbergerRLynchPAselageJ, et al. (2004) Who takes the most revenge? Individual differences in negative reciprocity norm endorsement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin30(6): 787–799.
23.
FarhJLHackettRDLiangJ (2007) Individual-level cultural values as moderators of perceived organizational support–employee outcome relationships in China: Comparing the effects of power distance and traditionality. Academy of Management Journal50(3): 715–729.
24.
FastNJHalevyNGalinskyAD (2012) The destructive nature of power without status. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology48(1): 391–394.
25.
FlynnFJ (2003) How much should I give and how often? The effects of generosity and frequency of favor exchange on social status and productivity. Academy of Management Journal46(5): 539–553.
26.
FlynnFJ (2006) How much is it worth to you? Subjective evaluations of help in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior27: 133–174.
27.
FlynnFJLakeVK (2008) If you need help, just ask: Underestimating compliance with direct requests for help. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology95(1): 128–143.
28.
FlynnFJYuA (2021) Better to give than reciprocate? Status and reciprocity in prosocial exchange. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology121(1): 115–136.
29.
FlynnFJReagansREAmanatullahET, et al. (2006) Helping one’s way to the top: Self-monitors achieve status by helping others and knowing who helps whom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology91(6): 1123–1137.
30.
FrenchJRRavenB (1959) The bases of social power. In: CartwrightD (ed.) Studies in Social Power. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 50–167.
31.
FriedmanACarmeliADuttonJE (2018) When does respectful engagement with one’s supervisor foster help-seeking behaviors and performance?Journal of Vocational Behavior104: 184–198.
32.
GiebelsEDe DreuCKVan De VliertE (2000) Interdependence in negotiation: Effects of exit options and social motive on distributive and integrative negotiation. European Journal of Social Psychology30(2): 255–272.
33.
GolanMEBambergerPA (2015) Mapping the emergent choreography of assistance: The dynamics of dyadic peer helping relations in organizations. Academy of Management Discoveries1(2): 124–149.
34.
GouldnerAW (1960) The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review25(2): 161–178.
35.
GrubbsJBExlineJJ (2016) Trait entitlement: A cognitive-personality source of vulnerability to psychological distress. Psychological Bulletin142(11): 1204–1226.
36.
HalbeslebenJRBowlerWBolinoMC, et al. (2010) Organizational concern, prosocial values, or impression management? How supervisors attribute motives to organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology40(6): 1450–1489.
37.
HansenMT (1999) The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly44(1): 82–111.
38.
HarariDParkeMRMarrJC (2021) When helping hurts helpers: Anticipatory versus reactive helping, helper’s relative status, and recipient self-threat. Academy of Management Journal. Epub ahead of print 7October2021. DOI: 10.5465/amj.2019.0049.
39.
HardyCLVan VugtM (2006) Nice guys finish first: The competitive altruism hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin32(10): 1402–1413.
40.
HarveyPDasboroughMT (2015) Entitled to solutions: The need for research on workplace entitlement. Journal of Organizational Behavior36(3): 460–465.
41.
HofstedeG (2001) Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
42.
InesiMEGruenfeldDHGalinskyAD (2012) How power corrupts relationships: Cynical attributions for others’ generous acts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology48(4): 795–803.
43.
JoshiA (2014) By whom and when is women’s expertise recognized? The interactive effects of gender and education in science and engineering teams. Administrative Science Quarterly59(2): 202–239.
44.
KennyDAKashyDACookWL (2006) Dyadic Data Analysis. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
45.
KennyDAMohrCDLevesqueMJ (2001) A social relations variance partitioning of dyadic behavior. Psychological bulletin127(1): 128–141.
46.
KirkmanBLChenGFarhJL, et al. (2009) Individual power distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: A cross-level, cross-cultural examination. Academy of Management Journal52(4): 744–764.
47.
LammersJStapelDAGalinskyAD (2010) Power increases hypocrisy: Moralizing in reasoning, immorality in behavior. Psychological Science21(5): 737–744.
48.
LangeJRedfordLCrusiusJ (2019) A status-seeking account of psychological entitlement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin45(7): 1113–1128.
49.
LeeF (2002) The social costs of seeking help. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science38(1): 17–35.
50.
LimJHTaiKBambergerPA, et al. (2020) Soliciting resources from others: An integrative review. Academy of Management Annals14(1): 122–159.
51.
MorrisonEWSeeKEPanC (2015) An approach-inhibition model of employee silence: The joint effects of personal sense of power and target openness. Personnel Psychology68(3): 547–580.
52.
MuellerJSKamdarD (2011) Why seeking help from teammates is a blessing and a curse: A theory of help seeking and individual creativity in team contexts. Journal of Applied Psychology96(2): 263–276.
53.
NadlerA (2002) Inter-group helping relations as power relations: Maintaining or challenging social dominance between groups through helping. Journal of Social Issues58(3): 487–502.
54.
NadlerAChernyak-HaiL (2014) Helping them stay where they are: Status effects on dependency/autonomy-oriented helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology106(1): 58–72.
55.
NadlerAHalabiS (2006) Intergroup helping as status relations: Effects of status stability, identification, and type of help on receptivity to high-status group’s help. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology91(1): 97–110.
56.
NebusJ (2006) Building collegial information networks: A theory of advice network generation. Academy of Management Review31(3): 615–637.
57.
O’BrienLTMajorB (2009) Group status and feelings of personal entitlement: The roles of social comparison and system justifying beliefs. In: JostJTKayAThorosdottirH (eds) Social and Psychological Bases of Ideology and System Justification. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 427–443.
58.
OhHChungMHLabiancaG (2004) Group social capital and group effectiveness: The role of informal socializing ties. Academy of Management Journal47(6): 860–875.
59.
OuyangKXuEHuangX, et al. (2018) Reaching the limits of reciprocity in favor exchange: The effects of generous, stingy, and matched favor giving on social status. Journal of Applied Psychology103(6): 614–630.
60.
PerlowLWeeksJ (2002) Who’s helping whom? Layers of culture and workplace behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior23(4): 345–361.
61.
PodsakoffPMAhearneMMacKenzieSB (1997) Organizational citizenship behavior and the quantity and quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology82(2): 262–270.
62.
PreacherKJHayesAF (2004) SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers36(4): 717–731.
PriesemuthMTaylorRM (2016) The more I want, the less I have left to give: The moderating role of psychological entitlement on the relationship between psychological contract violation, depressive mood states, and citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior37(7): 967–982.
65.
RafaeliEGleasonME (2009) Skilled support within intimate relationships. Journal of Family Theory & Review1(1): 20–37.
66.
RasbashJBrowneWJ (2008) Non-hierarchical multilevel models. In: LeeuwJDMeijerE (eds) Handbook of Multilevel Analysis. New York, NY: Springer, 301–334.
67.
RhoadesLEisenbergerR (2002) Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology87(4): 698–714.
68.
RiouxSMPennerLA (2001) The causes of organizational citizenship behavior: A motivational analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology86(6): 1306–1314.
69.
SheeranPTrafimowDArmitageCJ (2003) Predicting behaviour from perceived behavioural control: Tests of the accuracy assumption of the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology42(3): 393–410.
70.
SnijdersTABBoskerRJ (1999) Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London, England: Sage.
71.
TamborskiMBrownRPChowningK (2012) Self-serving bias or simply serving the self? Evidence for a dimensional approach to narcissism. Personality and Individual Differences52(8): 942–946.
72.
TomlinsonEC (2013) An integrative model of entitlement beliefs. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal25(2): 67–87.
73.
van der VegtGSBundersonJSOosterhofA (2006) Expertness diversity and interpersonal helping in teams: Why those who need the most help end up getting the least. Academy of Management Journal49(5): 877–893.
74.
VenkataramaniVDalalRS (2007) Who helps and harms whom? Relational antecedents of interpersonal helping and harming in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology92(4): 952–966.
75.
WilkeHLanzettaJT (1970) The obligation to help: The effects of amount of prior help on subsequent helping behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology6(4): 488–493.
76.
ZhangLMorandD (2014) The linkage between status-leveling symbols and work attitudes. Journal of Managerial Psychology29(8): 973–993.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
