Prosocial lies, or lies intended to benefit others, are ubiquitous behaviors that have important social and economic consequences. Though emotions play a central role in many forms of prosocial behavior, no work has investigated how emotions influence behavior when one has the opportunity to tell a prosocial lie-a situation that presents a conflict between two prosocial ethics: lying to prevent harm to another, and honesty, which might also provide benefits to the target of the lie. Here, we examine whether the emotion of compassion influences prosocial lying, and find that compassion causally increases and positively predicts prosocial lying. In Studies 1 and 2, participants evaluated a poorly written essay and provided feedback to the essay writer. Experimentally induced compassion felt towards the essay writer (Study 1) and individual differences in trait compassion (Study 2) were positively associated with inflated feedback to the essay writer. In both of these studies, the relationship between compassion and prosocial lying was partially mediated by an enhanced desire to prevent emotional harm. In Study 3, we found moderation such that experimentally induced compassion increased lies that resulted in financial gains for a charity, but not lies that produced financial gains for the self. This research illuminates the emotional underpinnings of the common yet morally complex behavior of prosocial lying, and builds on work highlighting the potentially harmful effects of compassionan emotion typically seen as socially beneficial.

Summary Scholars have investigated work behaviors that are intended to help others, yet at the same time violate societal values, norms, laws, or standards of proper conduct. We refer to these actions collectively as unethical prosocial behavior (UPB) at work. In this paper, we provide a critical review of the UPB literature. Our review makes several contributions: First, we clarify definitional issues surrounding UPB, while also offering suggestions for the improvement of measurement and methodology in the study of UPB. Second, we review the major theoretical perspectives that have been adopted in empirical research on UPB at different levels of analysis and summarize the empirical findings on the topic. In doing so, we highlight the theoretical and empirical challenges facing this work. Finally, we develop an agenda for future research that clears a path toward resolving these issues and advancing knowledge of UPB.

Research summary Deliberate cognition is an important mechanism for overcoming inertia. Yet, the precise nature of cognition that propels decision‐makers to endorse novelty is not well understood. We propose that expertise distance is a fundamental force shaping decision‐makers' willingness to invest in novelty. We further suggest that the level of mental construal through which information is processed moderates the effect of expertise distance on investment propensity, principally by changing decision‐makers' perceptions of an idea's novelty and usefulness. We test our theory in two studies. Study 1 is a field study of 120 decision‐makers considering a novel technological idea—quantum key distribution. Study 2 is an experiment that conceptually replicates our first study. Our findings contribute to the debate on strategic cognition and the microfoundations of strategic adaptation. Managerial summary While the pursuit of novel technological ideas is the driving force of sustained competitive advantage, managers often reject novel ideas in favor of more familiar ones. How then can managers who are out of their depth with a novel technology make sense of it without rejecting it outright? Some suggest that managers should mentally extrapolate from prior experiences with similar ideas. Yet, such extrapolation is impossible when ideas are truly novel and no previous experience with related ideas can be called upon. We resolve this issue by showing that the level at which managers who are unfamiliar with a novel technological idea mentally process it (abstract versus concrete) influences their perceptions of the idea's novelty and usefulness, which, in turn, influences their propensity to invest.

No abstract