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.     

Linking Justice, Performance, and Citizenship via Leader–Member Exchange

While organizational justice continues to garner attention by researchers, why perceptions of justice influence a variety of outcomes is still in need of explanation. In this paper, we examine one type of social exchange process that may provide a better link between perceptions of fairness and important organizational outcomes. Specifically, we examine how leader–member exchange (LMX) affects the relationship between employee perceptions of fairness and supervisor-rated performance and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs). Data from our study demonstrates that LMX fully mediates the relationship between interactional justice and performance and OCBs. In addition, the results demonstrate that LMX moderates the relationship between both distributive and procedural justice and OCBs.     

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.     

Organizational justice and Black applicants' reactions to affirmative action

Using organizational justice as a guiding framework, the authors studied perceptions of affirmative action programs by presumed beneficiaries. Three conceptual issues were addressed: (a) the content of different affirmative action plans; (b) the 3-way interaction among distributive, procedural, and interactional justice; and (c) the distinction between outcome favorability and distributive justice. These ideas were tested with a sample of Black engineering students who responded to 1 of 6 plans. Participants distinguished among the various plans, with some policies being viewed as more fair than others. In addition, a 3-way interaction among the 3 types of organizational justice was observed. Specifically, the 2-way interaction between distributive and interactional fairness was only significant when procedural justice was low. Implications for organizational justice and for the design of affirmative action programs are discussed.     

When Leaders Are Seen as Transformational: The Effects of Organizational Justice1

In 2 studies, we attempted to make a first step toward integrating the literature on transformational leadership and organizational justice. We examined the extent to which justice affects perceptions of transformational leadership. We predicted that especially interactional justice should have strong effects. Study 1 was a vignette study (N = 100) in which distributive, procedural, and interactional justice were manipulated orthogonally. As expected, only interactional justice affected transformational leadership perceptions. Study 2 replicated these results in an organizational field study (N = 257). Distributive and procedural justice affected perceptions of transformational leadership, but when interactional justice was entered in the regression equation, their effects disappeared. Implications for integrating the literature on transformational leadership and organizational justice are discussed.     

HEARING IT THROUGH THE GRAPEVINE: THE INFLUENCE OF SOURCE, LEADER-RELATIONS, AND LEGITIMACY ON SURVIVORS' FAIRNESS PERCEPTIONS

This study developed and tested a model of survivors' fairness perceptions. Data on leader-member relations and affective commitment was collected from 217 R&D professionals approximately 15 months prior to a major layoff. A second wave of data assessed source of layoff announcement, legitimacy of the organizational account, and procedural and distributive fairness 1 month after the layoff occurred. Results of path analysis confirmed hypothesized relationships, and the variance accounted for in distributive and procedural fairness was 24% and 48%, respectively. Procedural fairness was higher for survivors who were informed of impending layoffs by their managers. However, this effect was stronger for high than for low leader-member exchange (LMX) employees. Legitimacy of the account was positively related to procedural fairness. Distributive fairness was indirectly related to the independent variables through procedural fairness. Affective commitment of 78 of the original respondents was assessed approximately 24 months after the layoff. Post-layoff affective commitment was significantly related to procedural but not to distributive fairness perceptions. The findings underscore the critical role of direct supervisors in layoff announcements as well as providing evidence of the long-term effects of procedural fairness on survivor commitment.     

Are employees' ratings of coworkers' organizational citizenship behavior influenced by their own perceptions of organizational justice?'

Partial correlation analysis of questionnaire data from 62 of 65 employees of a Turkish company indicated that employees' own perceptions of organizational justice in terms of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice were related to how they rated their coworkers' organizational citizenship behavior. Specifically, all three two-way interactions between the justice variables were related to organizational citizenship behavior.     

The Effects of Regulatory Fit between Explanation Framing and Applicants’ Regulatory Foci on Applicant Reaction

Abstract

Drawing from regulatory fit theory and the literature on persuasion, the current study is the first to explore whether the fit between explanation framing and applicants’ regulatory foci could enhance applicant reaction. We hypothesized that a positively framed explanation fits with applicants’ promotion foci and that a negatively framed explanation fits with applicants’ prevention foci. Three studies were conducted in which participants with different regulatory foci rated their perceived procedural fairness and organizational attractiveness after reading differently framed recruitment advertisements, rejection letters, and job offer letters. The results supported our hypothesis by showing significant interactions between explanation framing and participants’ regulatory foci on procedural fairness and organizational attractiveness perception in the contexts of recruitment advertising and rejection letters. In these contexts, compared with receiving a negatively framed explanation, promotion-focused recipients reported higher levels of perceived fairness and organizational attractiveness after receiving a positively framed explanation, and promotion-focused recipients’ fairness and attractiveness perceptions were higher than prevention-focused recipients’, after receiving a positively framed explanation. Moreover, perceived procedural fairness mediated the relationship between regulatory fit and perceived organizational attractiveness. However, regulatory fit effects were not found in the context of job offer letters.     

Employer Treatment of Employees During a Community Crisis: The Role of Procedural and Distributive Justice

This study applies organizational justice principles to human resource decisions made during a crisis situation. Three-hundred and sixty-six working individuals of ice storm affected households responded to a telephone survey that included measures of interactional, procedural and distributive justice, organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Confirmatory Factor Analysis suggested collapsing the interactional and procedural justice measures into one measure of procedural treatment. Overall, there was considerable support for the relevance of procedural justice and its interaction with distributive justice in predicting the work attitudes of employee following a disaster. Multiple regression analyses revealed that perceptions of procedural justice most strongly predicted job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Consistent with existing theory, an interaction between distributive and procedural was found to predict job satisfaction. The predicted interaction was not detected for organizational commitment.We would like to acknowledge the capable research assistance of Paula Warnholtz and the financial assistance from the Senate Research Committee at Bishop’s University.     

Understanding Employee Job Satisfaction: The Importance of Procedural and Distributive Justice

The importance of perceived fair treatment and its effect on employee job satisfaction cannot be overlooked. Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that structural procedural justice, interpersonal procedural justice, and distributive justice each accounted for significant unique variance in employee job satisfaction. In addition, when job satisfaction was regressed on all three types of organizational justice, all three justice perceptions significantly predicted job satisfaction. However, interpersonal procedural justice and distributive justice were more strongly related to job satisfaction with distributive justice having the strongest relationship of the three fairness perceptions.     

Shared perceptions of perceived justice as a predictor of externally rated departmental level academic performance

The purpose of this study was to investigate if shared perceptions of organizational justice affect externally rated group‐level performance. Previous studies did not consider distributive justice, nor did they control for the possible confounding effects of baseline performance. The present study relates shared perceptions of procedural, interactional, and distributive justice to externally rated departmental level academic performance and takes previous performance into account. We found support for the distributive justice–performance link, partial support for the procedural justice‐performance link, but contrary to our expectations interactional justice was unrelated to performance. All in all, the results seem to support the call for a re‐examination of the role of distributive justice in organizational processes.     

Organization structure as a moderator of the relationship between procedural justice,interactional justice,perceived organizational support,and supervisory trust

Organizational justice researchers recognize the important role organization context plays in justice perceptions, yet few studies systematically examine contextual variables. This article examines how 1 aspect of context--organizational structure--affects the relationship between justice perceptions and 2 types of social exchange relationships, organizational and supervisory. The authors suggest that under different structural conditions, procedural and interactional justice will play differentially important roles in determining the quality of organizational social exchange (as evidenced by perceived organizational support [POS]) and supervisory social exchange (as evidenced by supervisory trust). In particular, the authors hypothesized that the relationship between procedural justice and POS would be stronger in mechanistic organizations and that the relationship between interactional justice and supervisory trust would be stronger in organic organizations. The authors' results support these hypotheses.     

公正的启发理论述评

组织公正感包括分配公正、程序公正、互动公正等重要的组成要素。尽管这些公正感的构成要素有不同的内涵和影响因素,然而在许多情况下,这些要素之间有较高的一致性。与过去注重这些要素的差异性相反,Lind看到了这些公正感要素之间的一致性,提出了试图整合这些一致性的公正理论：公正的启发理论。该文比较全面地介绍了公正的启发理论的含义,如何启发等核心概念,并对启发理论存在的问题进行了分析,指出了启发理论研究的方向。     

Exchange fairness and employee performance: An examination of the relationship between organizational politics and procedural justice

Data obtained from a manufacturing firm and a newspaper firm in India were used to examine the relationship between organizational politics and procedural justice in three separate studies. Study 1 constructively replicated research on the distinctiveness of the two constructs. Confirmatory factor analyses in which data from the manufacturing firm served as the development sample and data from the newspaper firm served as the validation sample demonstrated the distinctiveness of organizational politics and procedural justice. Study 2 examined the antecedents of the two constructs using data from the manufacturing firm. Structural equation modeling (SEM) results revealed formalization and participation in decision making to be positively related to procedural justice but negatively related to organizational politics. Further, authority hierarchy and spatial distance were positively related to organizational politics but unrelated to procedural justice. Study 3 examined the consequences of the two constructs in terms of task and contextual performance using data from the newspaper firm. Results of SEM analysis revealed procedural justice but not organizational politics to be related to task performance and the contextual performance dimensions of interpersonal facilitation and job dedication.     

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.     

Perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor of employee attitudes and job performance

Although management of drug testing programs is becoming a critical organizational issue, no systematic conceptual framework has been applied to the study of employee reactions to drug testing. In this study an organizational justice framework was used to explain and predict the relationships among two types of justice (procedural justice and outcome fairness) employee attitudes (job satisfaction, commitment, and management trust), and behavior (turnover intentions and performance). Survey data from 195 employees in a pathology laboratory indicated that justice predicts employee attitudes and performance. Specifically, procedural justice, but not outcome fairness, predicted all 5 criterion variables. These results demonstrate the importance of procedural justice perceptions for predicting employee reactions to drug testing programs.     

Procedural Justice and Perceptions of Fairness in Selection Practice

Demonstrating procedural justice through a focus on the psychometric job-related approach to selection continues to be the most effective means for employers to meet legal requirements and potential claims of unfair treatment. A study of selection practice in a large local UK City Council reports how a structured, highly ‘job-focused’ approach can result in negative perceptions about the fairness of the process, its outcomes and effectiveness. Its findings reveal an organizational dilemma – how to develop selection systems that are sufficiently robust in terms of demonstrating maximum procedural fairness and objectivity to withstand potential litigation but are sufficiently flexible to accommodate those other factors which influence individual perceptions of fairness. It considers the future of the highly structured approach in the light of pressures to develop selection processes which can meet the needs of rapidly changing organizational structures as well the expansion of anti-discrimination legislation and litigation.     

Investigating the Moderating Role of Cultural Practices on the Effect of Selection Fairness Perceptions

Utilizing a sample of applicants to positions in a global corporation, we examined whether cultural practices moderate the effect of selection fairness perceptions on organizational attractiveness and job choice. Positive relationships were anticipated between fairness perceptions and outcomes, and performance orientation and uncertainty avoidance cultural practices were hypothesized to moderate the effects of structural and information sharing perceptions, respectively. Structural fairness perceptions were positively associated with both outcomes, but information‐sharing perceptions were significantly related only to organizational attractiveness. National variability in the effect of selection fairness perceptions was observed only for the effect of structural perceptions on organizational attractiveness. Performance orientation moderated this effect such that the strongest relationship was seen among applicants from more performance‐oriented countries.     

Absolute vs Relative Performance Rating Formats: Implications for fairness and organizational justice

The choice of performance rating format may influence employees' fairness perceptions. Participants in two studies, one consisting of 208 participants and the other of 393 participants, evaluated the fairness of common relative and absolute rating formats. The participants in the second study also evaluated the fairness of two rating formats, one absolute and one relative, presented in organizational contexts of varying procedural and distributive justice. Results indicate that not only are absolute formats perceived as more fair than relative formats, but differences in fairness perceptions also occur among relative and absolute formats. Furthermore, it appears that rating format influences procedural justice, especially when outcomes are perceived as fair. Implications for organizations' appraisal practices are discussed.     

Due process model of procedural justice in performance appraisal: promotion versus termination scenarios

In a laboratory study, 318 student participants (148 male, 169 female, and one who did not report sex; M age 25.0, SD = 6.0) in introductory organizational behavior classes responded to scenarios in which performance appraisal resulted in either employee promotion or termination. Each scenario had varying levels of three procedural justice criteria for performance appraisal. For both promotion and termination outcomes, analysis showed that, as the number of criteria increased, perceptions of procedural fairness increased. A comparison between the two outcomes showed that perceptions of fairness were significantly stronger for the promotion outcome than for termination.