Justice as a dynamic construct: effects of individual trajectories on distal work outcomes

Despite an amassing organizational justice literature, few studies have directly addressed the temporal patterning of justice judgments and the effects that changes in these perceptions have on important work outcomes. Drawing from Gestalt characteristics theory (Ariely & Carmon, 2000, 2003), we examine the concept of justice trajectories (i.e., levels and trends of individual fairness perceptions over time) and offer empirical evidence to highlight the value of considering fairness within a dynamic context. Participants included 523 working adults who completed surveys about their work experiences on 4 occasions over the course of 1 year. Results indicate that justice trends explained additional variance in distal work outcomes (job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intentions) after controlling for end-state levels of justice, demonstrating the cumulative effects of justice over time. Findings also reveal that change in procedural justice perceptions affected distal work outcomes more strongly than any other justice dimension. Implications for theory and future investigations of justice as a dynamic construct are discussed.     

Justice at the millennium: a meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.

The field of organizational justice continues to be marked by several important research questions, including the size of relationships among justice dimensions, the relative importance of different justice criteria, and the unique effects of justice dimensions on key outcomes. To address such questions, the authors conducted a meta-analytic review of 183 justice studies. The results suggest that although different justice dimensions are moderately to highly related, they contribute incremental variance explained in fairness perceptions. The results also illustrate the overall and unique relationships among distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice and several organizational outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction, organizational commitment, evaluation of authority, organizational citizenship behavior, withdrawal, performance). These findings are reviewed in terms of their implications for future research on organizational justice.     

Why managers should care about fairness: the effects of aggregate justice perceptions on organizational outcomes

This work examines the aggregation of justice perceptions to the departmental level and the business-unit level, the impact of these aggregate perceptions on business-unit-level outcomes, and the usefulness of the distinction between procedural and interpersonal justice at different levels of analysis. Latent variables analyses of individual-level and department-level data from 4,539 employees in 783 departments at 97 hotel properties showed that the 2 justice types exercise unique paths of impact on employees' organizational commitment and thus on turnover intentions and discretionary service behavior. Business-unit-level analyses further demonstrate paths of association between aggregate justice perceptions, aggregate commitment levels, and the business-unit-level outcomes of employee turnover rates and customer satisfaction ratings.     

Perceptions of Systemic Justice: The Effects of Distributive, Procedural, and Interactional Justice

The literature on organizational justice has identified 3 key components of this process: distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. On the basis of fairness heuristic theory, we reasoned that employees may use perceptions of these 3 components as a basis for drawing inferences about the fairness of the organization as a whole (i.e., their perceptions of systemic justice). A field study was conducted on a sample of 232 employees working in various organizations. Results show that employees' perceptions of procedural justice and interactional justice in their organizations positively predicted perceptions of systemic justice (i.e., that the organization was fair overall). Perceptions of distributive justice, however, did not predict perceptions of systemic justice. Practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: test of a trickle-down model

The authors examined antecedents of abusive supervision and the relative importance of interactional and procedural justice as mediators of the relationship between abusive supervision and the work outcomes of affective organizational commitment and individual- and organization-directed citizenship behaviors. Data were obtained from subordinate-supervisor dyads from a telecommunication company located in southeastern China. Results of moderated regression analysis revealed that authoritarian leadership style moderated the relationship between supervisors' perceptions of interactional justice and abusive supervision such that the relationship was stronger for supervisors high rather than low in authoritarian leadership style. In addition, results of structural equation modeling analysis revealed that subordinates' perceptions of interactional but not procedural justice fully mediated the relationship between abusive supervision and the work outcomes. Implications for future investigations of abusive supervision are discussed.     

Antecedents and outcomes of unit cohesion and affective commitment to the Army

Group cohesion and affective commitment have shown to have critical relevance to military organizations in particular. The relationship between cohesion and affective commitment is established, and the two constructs share a number of common organizational antecedents and employee outcomes. The authors explored the relationship between cohesion and affective commitment in a model that incorporates antecedents (effectiveness of immediate leadership and procedural justice) and consequences (organizational citizenship behaviors [OCBs] and turnover intentions) common to both. Respondents (N = 714, 102 women, 612 men) were Canadian Army personnel. The models suggest that cohesion partially mediates the relationships between (a) perceptions of immediate leadership and affective commitment to the Army and (b) perceptions of unit procedural justice and affective commitment to the Army. Furthermore, affective commitment to the Army partially mediates the relationship between unit cohesion and turnover intentions but fully mediates the relationship between unit cohesion and OCBs. This model helps explain some common variance between unit cohesion and organizational affective commitment.     

THE PRECURSORS AND PRODUCTS OF JUSTICE CLIMATES: GROUP LEADER ANTECEDENTS AND EMPLOYEE ATTITUDINAL CONSEQUENCES

Drawing on the organizational justice, organizational climate, leadership and personality, and social comparison theory literatures, we develop hypotheses about the effects of leader personality on the development of 3 types of justice climates (e.g., procedural, interpersonal, and informational) and the moderating effects of these climates on individual-level justice–attitude relationships. Largely consistent with the theoretically derived hypotheses, the results showed that leader (a) Agreeableness was positively related to procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice climates; (b) Conscientiousness was positively related to a procedural justice climate; and (c) Neuroticism was negatively related to all 3 types of justice climates. Further, consistent with social comparison theory, multilevel data analyses revealed that the relationship between individual justice perceptions and job attitudes (e.g., job satisfaction, commitment) was moderated by justice climate such that the relationships were stronger when justice climate was high.     

The influence of national culture on the perceived fairness of grading procedures: a comparison of the United States and China

Although the desire to be treated fairly is a fundamental human preference, perceptions of fair treatment can be influenced by cultural beliefs and values. For this article, the author used a scenario-based experimental study to examine students' fairness perceptions of grading procedures in 2 countries with distinct national cultures, China and the United States. The results suggest that culture can influence students' perceptions of the fairness of 2 aspects of procedural justice: voice and interpersonal justice. Chinese students were more likely to value interpersonal justice (i.e., being treated with dignity and respect, and being provided with explanations of grading procedures) and perceived the lack of interpersonal justice as less fair than did U.S. participants. In contrast, U.S. students were more likely to perceive voice (i.e., the opportunity to discuss and appeal a grading decision) as fair. These findings are connected to differences in the cultural values of the United States and China.     

Examining changes in procedural justice and their influence on problem‐solving court outcomes

The number of problem‐solving courts has grown substantially since the mid‐1990s. Research consistently indicates that participation in these courts lowers recidivism, which is often attributed to defendants’ increased perceptions of procedural justice in these programs. Yet, prior studies are limited in their focus, often examining interactions with the judge in a single court or examining defendant perceptions and outcomes at a single time point. In the present study, we investigate defendant perceptions of procedural justice with judges and case managers across multiple problem‐solving courts over time. Findings indicate that procedural justice varies across court actors and over time. Procedural justice is lower among judges than among case managers; however, changes in perceptions of procedural justice with the judge are associated with improved court outcomes. We suggest that defendant perceptions are variable and complex but important in explaining variations in outcomes.     

The Influence of National Culture on the Perceived Fairness of Grading Procedures: A Comparison of the United States and China

Although the desire to be treated fairly is a fundamental human preference, perceptions of fair treatment can be influenced by cultural beliefs and values. For this article, the author used a scenario-based experimental study to examine students' fairness perceptions of grading procedures in 2 countries with distinct national cultures, China and the United States. The results suggest that culture can influence students' perceptions of the fairness of 2 aspects of procedural justice: voice and interpersonal justice. Chinese students were more likely to value interpersonal justice (i.e., being treated with dignity and respect, and being provided with explanations of grading procedures) and perceived the lack of interpersonal justice as less fair than did U.S. participants. In contrast, U.S. students were more likely to perceive voice (i.e., the opportunity to discuss and appeal a grading decision) as fair. These findings are connected to differences in the cultural values of the United States and China.     

The relationships between justice perceptions, trust, and employee attitudes in a downsized organization

The authors examined perceptions of distributive justice, procedural justice, trust, organizational commitment, organizational satisfaction, and turnover intentions among survivors in an organization that had recently completed an organizational downsizing. Results suggested that trust partially mediated the relationship between distributive justice and both organizational satisfaction and affective commitment. Additionally, the relationship between procedural justice and turnover intentions was mediated by trust perceptions.     

The impact of justice climate and justice orientation on work outcomes: a cross-level multifoci framework

In this article, which takes a person-situation approach, the authors propose and test a cross-level multifoci model of workplace justice. They crossed 3 types of justice (procedural, informational, and interpersonal) with 2 foci (organization and supervisor) and aggregated to the group level to create 6 distinct justice climate variables. They then tested for the effects of these variables on either organization-directed or supervisor-directed commitment, satisfaction, and citizenship behavior. The authors also tested justice orientation as a moderator of these relationships. The results, based on 231 employees constituting 44 work groups representing multiple organizations and occupations, revealed that 4 forms of justice climate (organization-focused procedural and informational justice climate and supervisor-focused procedural and interpersonal justice climate) were significantly related to various work outcomes after controlling for corresponding individual-level justice perceptions. In addition, some moderation effects were found. Implications for organizations and future research are discussed.     

The relationship between justice and attitudes: An examination of justice effects on event and system-related attitudes

Research in organizational justice has always been interested in the relationship between justice and attitudes. This research often examines how different types of justice affect different attitudes, with distributive justice predicted to affect attitudes about specific events (e.g., performance evaluation) and procedural justice predicted to affect attitudes about organizations (e.g., organizational commitment). However, there is mixed support for these predictions. Moreover, this approach generally ignores the relationship between attitudes about the specific event and attitudes toward the organization. In this study we identify three alternative models of justice and attitudes. We use customer responses to complaint handling to test these alternative conceptualizations. Results generally support a mediated model, wherein event attitudes mediate the effect of justice perceptions on system-related attitudes. The implication of these findings for organizations and justice researchers are discussed.     

Exploring the role of emotions in injustice perceptions and retaliation

Although organizational justice scholars often describe unfairness as an emotionally laden experience, the role of emotion is underresearched. In a study of individuals who experienced being laid off (N = 173), the authors found that outcome favorability interacts with both procedural and interactional justice to predict participants' emotions. The pattern of interaction differed for inward-focused (i.e., shame and guilt) and outward-focused (i.e., anger and hostility) negative emotions. Attributions of blame mediated the relationship between fairness perceptions and outward-focused negative emotion. Outward-focused emotion mediated the relationship between fairness perceptions and retaliation.     

To whom does voice in groups matter? Effects of voice on affect and procedural fairness judgments as a function of social dominance orientation

The authors investigated the effects of voice--the opportunity to provide input in decision-making processes--on perceptions of procedural fairness. In particular, the authors studied the moderating role of social dominance orientation (SDO) in shaping this relation. SDO is an important individual differences variable that causes people to favor unequal relationships within and between social groups. Results revealed that voice was more strongly related to fairness judgments when participants had a high rather than low SDO. Moreover, positive affect mediated this moderation effect. The authors interpreted these results to indicate that high-SDO participants were especially sensitive to voice manipulations because such manipulations enhance perceptions of control over group resources and outcomes. The authors conclude by discussing alternative explanations based on other fairness theories.     

The utility of a multifoci approach to the study of organizational justice: A meta-analytic investigation into the consideration of normative rules,moral accountability,bandwidth-fidelity,and social exchange

Multifoci justice pulls from research on social exchange theory to argue that despite the proliferation of rule sets in the literature (often referred to as the “types” of justice), individuals seek to hold some party accountable for the violation/upholding of such rules, and it is these parties (e.g., supervisors, the organization as a whole) that are most likely to be the recipients of attitudes and behaviors (i.e., target similarity effects). To explore these issues, we meta-analytically (k = 647, N = 235,682) compared the predictive validities of source- vs. type-based justice perceptions and found that (a) multifoci justice perceptions more strongly predicted outcomes directed at matched sources than did type-based justice perceptions, (b) multifoci justice perceptions more strongly predicted target similar than dissimilar outcomes, and (c) the relationships between multifoci justice perceptions and target similar outcomes were mediated by source-specific social exchange.     

What determines people’s fairness judgments? Identification and outcomes influence procedural justice evaluations under uncertainty

When the procedures people experience are uncertain, factors unrelated to principles of procedural justice may nevertheless shape procedural justice judgments. This paper investigates two of these factors: an individual’s level of social identification with the group enacting the procedures and the outcomes associated with the procedure. It was predicted and found that high (vs. low) levels of identification promote relatively positive perceptions of procedural justice. It was also predicted and found that desirable (vs. undesirable) outcomes promote relatively positive perceptions of procedural justice. These effects only emerged in the absence of direct information indicating whether procedures were (un)fair. By showing an influence of identification and outcomes on procedural justice judgments under conditions of informational uncertainty, these studies provide important experimental evidence that integrates and extends previous research on justice, identity, and uncertainty to understand subjective evaluations of process fairness.     

The mediating effects of social exchange relationships in predicting workplace outcomes from multifoci organizational justice

This study tests a social exchange model of multifoci justice. We compared perceptions of justice emanating from the supervisor to those emanating from the organization as a whole. In presenting our model, we hypothesize that the link between multifoci justice and multifoci outcomes (e.g. performance and OCB) is mediated by the formation of multifoci social exchange relationships. We further expected organizationally focused justice and relationships to predict organizationally relevant outcomes and supervisory focused justice and relationships to predict both supervisory and organizationally relevant outcomes. Findings generally supported our expectations, but more so for interactional justice and less so for procedural justice.     

Role of employee felt obligation and endorsement of the just world hypothesis: A social exchange theory investigation in an organizational justice context

According to social exchange theory, felt obligation after being treated justly is key to explaining why justice perceptions influence behaviors important to organizations, such as task performance and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Perhaps those who believe in a just world (Just World Hypothesis, JWH) are more likely to feel obligated to reciprocate just treatment with behaviors benefiting the organization. Thus, our goal was to investigate whether belief in the JWH influences to what extent people feel obligated after being treated justly and the importance of felt obligation in regard to behavioral outcomes, such as OCB and task performance. Based on 160 university alumni and their supervisors, results provide support that justice perceptions can relate to both job performance and OCB via felt obligation, providing empirical support for the theoretical role of felt obligation in the social exchange theory explanation of how justice perceptions can translate into employee behaviors benefiting the organization. Results also suggest that endorsement of the JWH interacts with procedural and distributive justice perceptions, but not interpersonal justice perceptions, to influence felt obligation and that the indirect effect of distributive and procedural justice perceptions on both OCB and task performance via felt obligation is only significant for individuals with relatively high levels of endorsement of the JWH. Implications are discussed.