进谏行为与组织公民行为的关系研究：诺莫网络视角

进谏行为和组织公民行为等角色外行为研究近年来备受关注。与组织公民行为相比,进谏行为是一个新的构念。本研究探索了进谏行为的构念内涵,并借鉴诺莫网络思路考察了进谏行为与组织公民行为的关系。问卷研究的结果表明：进谏行为能融入组织公民行为构念,领导公平和情感承诺对两者都具有正面影响,而大五中的宜人性维度对两者的影响表现出差异性;从事角色外行为会导致更高的工作满意感。研究证实了进谏行为与组织公民行为构念内涵的相似性及存在的细微差异。     

Contributive Justice and Meaningful Work

The dominant focus of thinking about economic justice is overwhelmingly distributive, that is, concerned with what people get in terms of resources and opportunities. It views work mainly negatively, as a burden or cost, or else is neutral about it, rather than seeing it as a source of meaning and fulfilment—a good in its own right. However, what we do in life has at least as much, if not more, influence on whom we become, as does what we get. Thus we have good reason also to be concerned with what Paul Gomberg has termed contributive justice, that is, justice as regards what people are expected and able to contribute in terms of work. Complex, interesting work allows workers not only to develop and exercise their capacities, and gain the satisfaction from achieving the internal goods of a practice, but to gain the external goods of recognition and esteem. As Gomberg’s analysis of the concept of contributive justice in relation to equality of opportunity shows, as long as the more satisfying kinds of work are concentrated into a subset of jobs, rather than shared out among all jobs, then many workers will be denied the chance to have meaningful work and the recognition that goes with it. In this paper I examine the contributive justice argument, suggest how it can be further strengthened, arguing, inter alia, that ignoring contributive injustice tends to support legitimations of distributive inequality.

大五和组织公平感对进谏行为的影响研究

以361名长三角地区17家国有企业白领员工为样本,本研究探索了大五个性、组织公平知觉与进谏行为之间的关系。结果表明:责任感、外向性与进谏行为具有正相关,神经质、开放性与进谏行为呈负相关;组织公平知觉对进谏行为具有显著促进作用;此外,组织公平知觉对部分个性特征,如神经质与进谏行为之间的关系具有缓冲作用,高公平知觉会削弱神经质对进谏行为的负面效应。文章还对研究结果做了相关讨论。     

社会公平:构建社会主义和谐社会的伦理基础

社会公平是社会主义最核心的价值追求,是构建社会主义和谐社会的伦理基础。社会公平是当代社会经济发展的基本理念,也是一个由机会平等、按贡献分配以及社会调节等原则组成的基本规则体系,具体表现为权利公平、机会公平、规则公平和分配结果的相对公平。在社会转型时期,必须坚持社会公平原则,对社会的有限资源和权利义务进行有效而合理的配置和安排,才能建立公正合理的社会经济生活秩序,建设一个经济繁荣、政治文明、社会秩序稳定、人民安居乐业的和谐社会。     

自由主义:伦理内涵的嬗变与困境

任何完整的政治理论都有其特定的价值结构,为其现实政治主张、制度结构、政策机制的提供伦理支持,并随着时代政治、经济、文化条件的发展而变换其内涵。西方自由主义政治理论的发展分为启蒙时期、功利主义、现代自由主义等重要阶段,自然权利、功利原则和社会公正分别是其不同时代的核心价值要求。阐释和分析自由主义的伦理内涵变换及其理论和现实困境,为了解当代西方自由主义的价值变换及政策走向提供了一个有益的理论视角。     

西方公共行政及其正义价值

公共行政本质上所具有的伦理特性以及公共行政理论和范式在不同发展时期所具有的不同特点和价值诉求,使得从伦理的角度对公共行政进行审视成为可能。公共行政正义价值既体现了民主社会自由、平等的价值追求,也蕴涵着公共行政本身所具有的对公共利益的价值取向,同时也是公共行政人员德性的体现。     

分配公正、程序公正、互动公正影响效果的差异

以大学生奖学金评比为例,探讨了组织公正各维度影响效果的差异。以661名大学生为被试,采用2×2×2的完全随机设计,以情境故事法（scenarios）呈现刺激,研究了奖学金评比中分配公正、程序公正、互动公正对大学生学习投入、班级荣誉感、班级归属感、与辅导员的关系的影响。结果表明,组织公正三个维度与效果变量之间存在清晰的对应影响关系：分配公正主要影响具体、以个人为参照的效果变量;程序公正主要影响与组织有关的效果变量;互动公正主要影响与上司有关的效果变量。     

程序公正及其心理机制

程序公正是组织公正的重要成分。自从Thibaut和Walker（1975）提出程序公正的概念以后,程序公正被引入了很多领域的研究,得到了极大的发展,但是程序公正的内容需要整合统一。发言权效应和尊重效应讨论了影响程序公正判断的因素,个人利益模型和团体价值模型则分析了其内在的心理机制。程序公正影响了大量与工作有关的态度和行为,并与分配结果产生了交互作用,其内在机制也在文章中得到了讨论。     

The Global Scope of Justice

In this paper, I examine the question of the scope of justice, in a not unusual distributive, egalitarian, and universalistic framework. Part I outlines some central features of the egalitarian theory of justice I am proposing. According to such a conception, justice is – at least prima facie – immediately universal, and therefore global. It does not morally recognize any judicial boundaries or limits. Part II examines whether, even from a universalistic perspective, there are moral or pragmatic grounds for rejecting or limiting the global scope of justice. In particular, I scrutinize five universalistic objections: (1) the principle of "moral division of labor"; (2) the connection between cooperation and distributive justice; (3) the primacy of democracy; (4) the dangers of a world state; and (5) political-pragmatic reasons. I intend to show that these objections cannot undermine the strong normative claims of global justice. At the most, political-pragmatic reasons speak in favor of initially striving for somewhat less, in order to receive more general backing.     

Global Distributive Justice

The paper discusses the problem of global distributive justice. It proposes to distinguish between principles for the domestic and for the global or intersocietal distribution of wealth. It is argued that there may be a plurality of partly diverging domestic conceptions of distributive justice, not all of which need to be liberal egalitarian conceptions. It is maintained, however, that principles regulating the intersocietal distribution of wealth have to be egalitarian principles. This claim is defended against Rawls's argument in The Law of Peoples that egalitarian principles of distributive justice should not be applied globally. Moreover, it is explained in detail, why Rawls's "duty of assistance to burdened societies" cannot be an appropriate substitute for a global principle of distributive justice.