Summary Despite the importance of apology in reconciling interpersonal transgressions, little research has focused on the people engaging in the behavior. Why do transgressors apologize in the workplace, and do apology motives shape transgressor perceptions of reconciliation? We conducted three field studies using qualitative and quantitative methodologies to examine these questions. In Studies 1 and 2 (total N = 781), we identified four distinct apology motives—self‐blame, relational value, personal expedience, and fear of sanctions—and developed self‐report scales to measure the motives. In Study 3 (N = 420), we examined relations between apology motives and transgressor perceptions of victim forgiveness and relationship reconciliation through the lens of motivated cognition. We found that apologizing due to self‐blame, relational value, and personal expedience increases perceptions of victim forgiveness, whereas apologizing due to fear of sanctions decreases perceived forgiveness. Moreover, mediation analyses revealed that motives indirectly influence transgressor perceptions of relationship reconciliation through perceived forgiveness. Taken together, our research presents a novel multidimensional perspective on apology‐giving in the workplace, suggesting that why transgressors apologize can affect their perceptions of reconciliation. Overall, our research highlights the need to incorporate transgressor cognitive and motivational processes into reconciliation research.

Despite demonstrating high levels of academic and professional competence, Asians are underrepresented in leadership roles in North America. The limited research on this topic has found that Asian Americans are perceived by others as poorer leaders than White Americans due to perceptions that Asians lack the ideal traits of a Western leader (i.e., agentic) relative to White Americans. However, we contend that, in addition to poorly activating ideal leader traits, Asian Americans may strongly activate ideal follower traits (e.g., industrious and reliable), and being seen as a good follower may pigeonhole Asian Americans in non-managerial roles. Across 4 studies, our findings generally supported our arguments regarding the activation of ideal follower traits and lack of activation of ideal leader traits for Asian American workers. However, compared to their majority group counterparts, we found some unexpected evidence for a more favorable view of Asian Americans as leaders, which was primarily driven by the greater activation of ideal follower traits (i.e., industry and good citizen) among Asian American workers. Yet, we uncover an important boundary condition in that these "good follower" advantages did not accrue when observers experienced threat-revealing how the benefits of so-called positive stereotypes of Asian American workers are context dependent.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract