Seeking attention versus seeking approval: How conspicuous consumption differs between grandiose and vulnerable narcissists

Narcissism, a personality trait characterized by entitlement and conceit, is increasingly prevalent in society. Two subtypes of narcissism exist: grandiose narcissism (characterized by arrogance and dominance) and vulnerable narcissism (characterized by social insecurity and overreliance on others’ feedback). We posit that both narcissistic subtypes will engage in ostentatious, showy purchases, that is, conspicuous consumption. Since the two subtypes differ so profoundly in their self-esteem regulation strategies, we further posit that their motivations to consume conspicuously may vary. Specifically, we hypothesize that grandiose narcissists’ conspicuous consumption will be driven by their need-for-uniqueness, whilst that of vulnerable narcissists by their need to avoid social disapproval. We test our hypotheses using data obtained from 382 participants. Our results support our expectations that both narcissism subtypes predict conspicuous consumption and that the relationship between grandiose narcissism and conspicuous consumption is mediated by their need-for-uniqueness. Meanwhile, we find that approval-seeking (AS) is only a marginally significant mediator of vulnerable narcissism and conspicuous consumption in females. We discuss theoretical and managerial implications.     

Organizational Commitment and Ethical Behavior: An Empirical Study of Information System Professionals

IS professionals have been reported to have one of the highest turnover rates. They have also often been accused of unethical conduct, specifically, pirating software, hacking, giving professional opinion that exceeds their knowledge, and not protecting people's privacy. In a sample of 71 IS professionals and 250 members of other professions we found that IS professionals were more committed to their organizations than the other professionals, and that IS professionals were, indeed, less ethical with respect to software piracy and hacking. However, we found that they were not less ethical regarding professional opinions that exceed one's knowledge and protecting people's privacy.     

Ownership, Privacy and Monitoring in the Workplace: A Debate on Technology and Ethics

A panel held at the International Conference on Information Systems, December 5–7, 1993, addressed the importance and ethicality of several issues relating to ethics and information technology use. The substance of the debate and results of audience votes on the issues are presented in this paper as a means of initiating a broader debate on the issues, for it is with debate that we reach a group consensus on acceptable behavior and practice. With consensus, we can begin to develop codes and policies that are feasible and practical for ethical computer use.Specific dilemmas debated involved the issues of privacy and ownership, including the ethicality of using company resources for personal use and monitoring compliance to company policies about computer use. In general, we found little consensus about ethicality of any of the types of conduct, although we found a high degree of consensus that the debated issues were important and should continue to be discussed. The final question concerned policies and codes. While policies and codes were believed to be necessary, they were also perceived as ineffective. Several suggestions for practical action to enhance the efficacy of ethical codes are presented.     

Ethical standards for computer professionals: A comparative analysis of four major codes

Professions have adopted ethical codes and codes of conduct. Physicians, lawyers, engineers, and other professionals have moral responsibilities. They know to whom they are responsible. Professionals in the data processing field, too, need to know that they have moral responsibilities and to whom they are responsible. This paper compares and evaluates the ethical codes of four major organizations of computer professionals in America. The analysis is done along the following obligations that every professional has: to society, to the employer, to clients, to colleagues, to the professional organization, and to the profession.Professionals in the information technology field have no single, agreed upon code of conduct. In the US alone there are four organizations promoting four different codes. While some of the behavioral precepts are similar, others are not. People who are members of more than one organization may wonder how they should act in certain circumstances. Furthermore, computer professionals are not provided with any guidance for cases of ethical conflicts.Flaws of the four codes and differences among them are discussed, examples of moral dilemmas are given, and points for improvement are suggested.Effy Oz is an assistant professor of Management Information Systems in the School of Business Administration at Wayne State University, and the coordinator of the MIS program. He has published articles inInformation Executive, OMEGA, Decision Sciences, Information & Management, Journal of Systems Management, andMiS Quarterly.