1. Of note here is the socially constructed nature of political ideology. The “discursive superstructure” of a political ideology, or the network of socially constructed beliefs and narratives that become associated with a political ideology, is, in part, influenced by social “elites”—e.g., elected political officials, business/cultural leaders, media representatives (Jost et al., 2009, p. 315). So, even though within a given time and place, certain beliefs and narratives are associated with the labels “liberalism” and “conservativism,” this may shift over time and place (Ellis & Stimson, 2012).

2. Note that conservatives are also concerned with issues of equality (see Graham et al., 2013). However, a key substantive difference between liberalism and conservativism is the benefits/tradeoffs of change and stability. Conservatives are supportive of a measured and gradual approach to change and these social institutions and norms that were pivotal for providing order and structure to chaotic and uncertain environments (e.g., Durkheim, 1957).

3. We first conducted a pretest, confirming the charity is viewed as apolitical (see Supplemental Pilot Study #2 in the Supplemental Materials).

4. Participants were asked what the political ideology of the team leader was (1 = conservative, 2 = moderate, 3 = liberal). A chi-square test showed that the relation between condition and ideology of the team manager was significant, X² (2) = 179.83, p < .001, such that participants in the conservative condition were more likely to identify the manager as conservative while participants in the liberal condition were more likely to identify the manager as liberal.

5. When including these participants, the results for H3 are consistent with what is reported in the paper. The results for H2 show that while the interaction of condition × focal ideology on volunteering is significant (b = .19, SE = .09, p = .037), the slope of the liberal line is marginally significant (b =  − .51, SE = .28, p = .071).

• Amira, K., Wright, J. C., & Goya-Tocchetto, D. (2021). In-group love versus out-group hate: Which is more important to partisans and when? Political Behavior, 43, 473–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09557-6

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Avery, D. R., McKay, P. F., Volpone, S. D., & Malka, A. (2015). Are companies beholden to bias? The impact of leader race on consumer purchasing behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 127, 85–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.01.004

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 230–244. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.230

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Bernerth, J. B., & Aguinis, H. (2016). A critical review and best-practice recommendations for control variable usage. Personnel Psychology, 69, 229–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12103

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Bolino, M. C., & Grant, A. M. (2016). The bright side of being prosocial at work, and the dark side, too: A review and agenda for research on other-oriented motives, behavior, and impact in organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 10, 599–670. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2016.1153260

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Briscoe, F., & Joshi, A. (2017). Bringing the boss’s politics in Supervisor political ideology and the gender gap in earnings. Academy of Management Journal, 60, 1415–1441. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.0179

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). The chameleon effect The perception–behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 893.

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Chen, P. G., & Goren, P. N. (2016). Operational ideology and party identification: A dynamic model of individual-level change in partisan and ideological predispositions. Political Research Quarterly, 69, 703–715. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912916658551

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Dang, C. T., & Joshi, A. (2023). On the plurality and politics of ally work: Liberalism and self, relational, and organizational ally work. Academy of Management Journal, 66, 1554–1585. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2021.0999

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Dang, C. T., Umphress, E. E., & Mitchell, M. S. (2017). Leader social accounts of subordinates’ unethical behavior: Examining observer reactions to leader social accounts with moral disengagement language. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 1448–1461. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000233

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• DiTomaso, N. (2023). Rethinking “woke” and “integrative” diversity strategies: Diversity, equity, inclusion—and inequality. Academy of Management Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2023.0013

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Drury, B. J., & Kaiser, C. R. (2014). Allies against sexism: The role of men in confronting sexism. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 637–652. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12083

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Durkheim, É. (1957). Professional ethics and civic morals. Routledge and Kegan Paul.

  Google Scholar 

• Ehrhart, M.G. (2018). Helping in organizations: A review and directions for future research. In P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. Mackenzie, & N. P. Podsakoff (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational citizenship behavior (pp. 475–505).

• Eliasoph, N. (1998). Avoiding politics. Cambridge University Press.

  Book  Google Scholar 

• Ellis, C., & Stimson, J. A. (2012). Ideology in America. Cambridge University Press.

  Book  Google Scholar 

• Evans, S., & Boyte, H. C. (1986). Free spaces: The sources of democratic change in America. Harper & Row.

  Google Scholar 

• Federico, C. M., & Ekstrom, P. D. (2018). The political self: How identity aligns preferences with epistemic needs. Psychological Science, 29, 901–913. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617748679

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Foss, N. J., & Klein, P. G. (2023). Why do companies go woke? Academy of Management Perspectives, 37, 351–367. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2021.0201

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P., & Ditto, P. H. (2013). Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 47, pp. 55–130). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00002-4

• Grant, A. M. (2012). Giving time, time after time: Work de- sign and sustained employee participation in corporate volunteering. Academy of Management Review, 37, 589–615. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2010.0280

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Hambrick, D. C., & Wowak, A. J. (2021). CEO sociopolitical activism: A stakeholder alignment model. Academy of Management Review, 46, 33–59. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2018.0084

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Hooks, B. (2000). Feminist theory: From margin to center. Pluto Press.

• Hustinx, L., Haski-Leventhal, D., & Handy, F. (2008). One of a kind? Comparing episodic and regular volunteers at the Philadelphia Ronald McDonald House. The International Journal of Volunteer Administration, 25, 50–66.

  Google Scholar 

• Iyer, A., & Achia, T. (2020). Mobilized or marginalized? Understanding low-status groups’ responses to social justice efforts led by high-status groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120, 1287–1316. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000325

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Jost, J. T., Federico, C. M., & Napier, J. L. (2009). Political ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 307–337. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163600

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Kruglanski, A. W., Bélanger, J. J., Chen, X., Köpetz, C., Pierro, A., & Mannetti, L. (2012). The energetics of motivated cognition: A force-field analysis. Psychological Review, 119, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025488

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Kulik, C. T., & Roberson, L. (2008). Common goals and golden opportunities: Evaluations of diversity education in academic and organizational settings. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7, 309–331. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2008.34251670

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Lee, A. H. Y. (2021). How the politicization of everyday activities affects the public sphere: The effects of partisan stereotypes on cross-cutting interactions. Political Communication, 38, 499–518. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1799124

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Leslie, L. M. (2019). Diversity initiative effectiveness: A typological theory of unintended consequences. Academy of Management Review, 44, 538–563. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2017.0087

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Lykken, D. T. (1968). Statistical significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 151–159. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0026141

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17, 437–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028085

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Melaku, T. M., & Winkler, C. (2022). Are your organization’s DEI efforts superficial or structural? Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2022/06/are-your-organizations-dei-efforts-superficial-or-structural. Accessed 23 Apr 2024

• Mitchell, M. S., Vogel, R., & Folger, R. (2015). Third parties’ reactions to abusive supervision of coworkers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 1040–1055. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000002

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Morrison, E. W. (2014). Employee voice and silence. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 173–197. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091328

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Musick, M. A., & Wilson, J. W. (2008). Volunteers: A social profile. Indiana University Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Omoto, A. M., & Snyder, M. (1993). AIDS volunteers and their motivations: Theoretical issues and practical concerns. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 4(2), 157–176. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.4130040204

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Ouchi, W. G. (1979). A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms. Management Science, 25, 833–848. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.25.9.833

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Pirlott, A. G., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2016). Design approaches to experimental mediation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66, 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.09.012

  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Blume, B. D. (2009). Individual-and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 122–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013079

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Podsakoff, N. P., Podsakoff, P., & Kuskova, V. (2010). Dispelling misconceptions and providing guidelines for leader reward and punishment behavior. Business Horizons, 53, 291–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2010.01.003

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Portney, K. E., & Berry, J. M. (1997). Mobilizing minority communities: Social capital and participation in urban neighborhoods. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(5), 632–644. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764297040005009

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Radke, H. R., Kutlaca, M., Siem, B., Wright, S. C., & Becker, J. C. (2020). Beyond allyship: Motivations for advantaged group members to engage in action for disadvantaged groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 24, 291–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868320918698

  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

• Rao, H., & Dutta, S. (2012). Free spaces as organizational weapons of the weak: Religious festivals and regimental mutinies in the 1857 Bengal Native Army. Administrative Science Quarterly, 57, 625–668. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839212467744

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Rodell, J. B. (2013). Finding meaning through volunteering: Why do employees volunteer and what does it mean for their jobs? Academy of Management Journal, 56, 1274–1294. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0611

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Rodell, J. B., Breitsohl, H., Schröder, M., & Keating, D. J. (2016). Employee volunteering: A review and framework for future research. Journal of Management, 42, 55–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315614374

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Rodell, J. B., Booth, J. E., Lynch, J. W., & Zipay, K. P. (2017). Corporate volunteering climate: Mobilizing employee passion for societal causes and inspiring future charitable action. Academy of Management Journal, 60, 1662–1681. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0611

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Roth, P. L., Goldberg, C. B., & Thatcher, J. B. (2017). The role of political affiliation in employment decisions: A model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 1286–1304.

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Roth, P. L., Thatcher, J. B., Bobko, P., Matthews, K. D., Ellingson, J. E., & Goldberg, C. B. (2020). Political affiliation and employment screening decisions: The role of similarity and identification processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105, 472–486. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000422

  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1987.tb00609.x

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Scully, M., Rothenberg, S., Beaton, E. E., & Tang, Z. (2018). Mobilizing the wealthy: Doing “privilege work” and challenging the roots of inequality. Business & Society, 57, 1075–1113. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650317698941

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Selznick, P. (2011). Leadership in administration: A sociological interpretation. Quid Pro Books.

• Society for Human Resource Management. (2016). Policies on politics in the workplace. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/trends-and-forecasting/research-and-surveys/Documents/SHRM-Policies-Politics-Workplace.pdf. Accessed 23 Apr 2024

• Swigart, K. L., Anantharaman, A., Williamson, J. A., & Grandey, A. A. (2020). Working while liberal/conservative: A review of political ideology in organizations. Journal of Management, 46, 1063–1091. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320909419

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Tsang, E. W., & Kwan, K. M. (1999). Replication and theory development in organizational science: A critical realist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24, 759–780. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.2553252

  Article  Google Scholar 

• van Dijk, T. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. SAGE Publications. Thousand Oaks: CA.

  Google Scholar 

• Van Dyne, L., & LePine, J. A. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 108–119. https://doi.org/10.5465/256902

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Harvard University Press.

• Warren, D. E. (2022). “Woke” corporations and the stigmatization of corporate social initiatives. Business Ethics Quarterly, 32, 169–198. https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2021.48

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Weiss, R. M., & Miller, L. E. (1987). The concept of ideology in organizational analysis: The sociology of knowledge or the social psychology of beliefs? Academy of Management Review, 12, 104–116. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1987.4306492

  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

1. Smeal College of Business, The Pennsylvania State University, 449 Business Building, University Park, PA, 16802, USA

   Carolyn T. Dang

2. UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 4727 McColl Building, Campus Box 3490, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA

   Marie S. Mitchell

Correspondence to Carolyn T. Dang.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Additional supplementary materials may be found here by searching on article title https://osf.io/collections/jbp/discover

Sometimes, employees may engage in behaviors at work that go above and beyond their job duties, and.

• Volunteer: volunteer to participate in organization sponsored volunteering events. Such sponsored Employee Volunteer Programs (EVPs) are organizationally planned and sponsored events in which employees can volunteer their time, effort, and skills to charities or other organizations.

• Helping: engage in acts that provide help to others and/or to their organizations overall. For example, employees may help others learn about/improve their work, assist others with their work tasks, etc.

• Voice: make innovative suggestions for change and recommend modifications to standard procedures. For example, employees may speak up with ideas for new projects or changes in procedures, make suggestions for ways to improve the quality of work life, get involved in tasks that benefit their organization’s production/performance goals, etc.

• In-role: employees may engage in behaviors at work that meet and fulfill their job duties. For example, employees may perform the tasks that are expected of them as part of their job, try to meet performance expectations, etc.

Within the workplace, managers engage in different behaviors. We will be describing the actions of a senior vice president at a Fortune 100 consumer products company. This person engages in different types of managerial behaviors at work. Typically, managerial behaviors include but are not limited to:

• Fulfilling the responsibilities specified in the job description

• Performing tasks that are expected as part of the job

• Meeting performance expectations

• Completing job tasks

Within the workplace, managers engage in different behaviors. We will be describing the actions of a senior vice president at a Fortune 100 consumer products company. This person engages in behaviors at work to support colleagues who belong to underrepresented social groups. Typically, these groups include, but are not limited to, racial/ethnic minorities (Blacks/African-Americans, Hispanic [non-Caucasian], Native Americans, etc.); females; individuals from the LBGTQ community; and individuals with disabilities. Specifically, to support underrepresented colleagues, this person engages in behaviors to change/improve aspects of themselves—e.g., knowledge, attitudes, consumption patterns—so that they can better serve underrepresented colleagues. For example, this person:

• Seeks out relevant materials (e.g., books, articles, podcasts) about the experiences of underrepresented colleagues

• Reflects on their privilege and how it can be used to advocate for underrepresented colleagues

• Thinks critically about their advantaged position in society and how it can be used to support underrepresented colleagues

• Tries to change aspects of themselves (e.g., thoughts, feelings, actions) that prevent them from being an ally to underrepresented colleagues

Well once I was put in charge of my team at my company. I really tried to focus on ways to act like a manager to these people. So I focused on fulfilling the responsibilities specified in my job description. Some specific things I did was seek out a bunch of books, articles, and podcasts about being a good manager. I also reflected a lot on my past experience and how it could be used to be a manager to the people I was leading. I also thought critically about my job responsibilities and how to be a manager. I also did my best to constantly be aware and behave according to performance expectations of a team manager. For example, I helped create people’s schedules, answered questions if they had scheduling conflict, and made sure everyone completed the job tasks that were assigned to them. In short, I really just did my best to be a good manager.

Well once I was put in charge of my team at my company. I really tried to focus on ways to support people from underrepresented social groups in society. So I focused on changing and improving aspects of myself to serve underrepresented team mates. Some specific things I did was seek out a bunch of books, articles, and podcasts about the experiences of minorities in society. I also reflected a lot about my privilege, and how it can be used to advocate for underrepresented people I was leading. I also thought really critically about my advantaged position in society and how it can used to support underrepresented people. I also did my best to constantly be aware and change my thoughts, feelings, and actions to reduce my implicit bias that may have prevented underrepresented people from opportunities. For example, because I’m privileged and people like me are privileged, I took time to learn from minorities and share their experiences to the overall group. In short, I really just did my best to be an ally.

I think it’s best to stand on the shoulders of giants. I look to leaders I believe make a difference and hold the beliefs I do. I’m ideologically conservative [liberal] and look at leaders who share my beliefs and whose beliefs mirror mine.

The Fortune 100 company you read about sponsors Employee Volunteer Programs (EVP), which are planned events in which employees at the company can volunteer their time, effort, and skills to charities or other organizations. Suppose the senior VP is in charge of choosing a charity/organization in which employees may volunteer. Because participation in this charity/organization is not required as part of your formal job duties, the senior VP is asking for employees’ voluntary participation. The senior VP has chosen United Way. United Way is an international network of over 1800 local nonprofit fundraising affiliates. United Way works with companies, governments, nonprofits, and other organizations to address complex challenges on a worldwide scale.

Okay hi again. As the manager, there were certain things I could choose from in my last task and I chose info on volunteer programs. You know there are employee volunteer programs, which are planed events in which employees can volunteer their time, effort, and skills to a charity. It’s not required as part of the job. The charity that I’m requesting that you participate in is United Way. This is a description of the charity: “United Way is an international network of over 1,800 local nonprofit fundraising affiliates. United Way works with companies, governments, nonprofits and other organizations to address complex challenges. We will be sponsoring events with United Way to support nonprofit agencies and organizations that do so much. This year United Way is expecting over 800 volunteers to complete over 60 regional projects!”.

As the manager of the team, I am requesting that you volunteer and participate.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions