When Does Rule-Breaking Hurt Performance? Evidence from Judo, Soccer, and Organizational Settings

A common feature of both sports and life in organizations is competition. While competition can inspire individuals and groups to function at their highest levels, it can also instigate unethical behavior in competitors who seek self-enhancement at the expense of opponents. Scholars have explored competitors' motivations to act unethically in great detail, but what remains unclear is whether rule-breaking actually benefits competitors. Across five studies, we explore how the actual performance consequences of rule-breaking vary across competitors of different ranks. Data from professional judo and soccer competitions (Studies 1 and 2) establish our primary finding: higher ranked competitors experience a more negative relationship between rule violations and performance. In three subsequent experiments, we find this effect is due to higher ranked competitors underestimating the downside risks of breaking rules (Studies 4a and 4b), as opposed to being differentially detected or punished (Studies 3a through c). A final experiment (Study 5) uses objective performance measures to confirm both the underlying dysfunctional choices made by higher ranked competitors and the associated performance effects. These findings indicate that the consequences of unethical behavior in competitive contexts are more complex and heterogeneous than previously thought.