What dimension of justice is defined as the perceived fairness of the communications provided to employees by authorities?

Employees’ perceptions of justice in their organization can impact important outcomes and should not be ignored. In this Idea, positive changes in distributive, procedural, and interactional justice are linked to job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Read on to find how these can be built upon in your workplace.

IDEA SUMMARY

Organizational justice has become a major focus of management research in recent years, due to its connection with numerous employee outcomes; satisfaction, commitment, trust and reduced levels of turnover have all been associated with an employee’s perceived level of justice in their workplace. But how exactly do changes in perceptions of justices—both and positive or negative—affect employee attitudes? In a 2013 paper, Tae-Yeol Kim from CEIBS explores this question, alongside researchers from the University of Macau and City University of Hong Kong. They propose that changes in outcome allocations, company procedures and interpersonal treatment that make employees feel that they are being treated more fairly can go a long way towards improving their job satisfaction, employee engagement and commitment.

Kim et al collected survey data from 151 employees across a wide variety of organizations in Hong Kong, including participants from the finance, service, information technology, manufacturing, and education industries. In particular, they measured fairness perceptions, job satisfaction and affective organizational commitment. They found that changes in distributive, procedural, and interactional justice significantly explained variances in job satisfaction. They describe these types of justice perceptions as follows:

• Distributive justice: employees’ perceived fairness of organizational outcomes that they receive. In other words, are they getting back as much as they are putting in?
• Procedural justice: employees’ perceived fairness of the processes by which outcomes are allocated.
• Interactional justice: employees’ perceived fairness of the interpersonal treatment they receive from authority figures (such as dignity, respect, etc.)

Positive changes in these forms of justice were found to be strongly related to job satisfaction and affective organizational commitment. In particular, procedural justice was more strongly related to employee attitudes than other types of justice.

Previous research in this area has focused primarily on US workers, and the results have suggested that negative changes in fairness perceptions have a stronger impact on employee attitudes than positive changes. This study, however, showed the opposite; positive changes had a stronger affect on the job attitudes of employees in Hong Kong. This may be due to cultural differences, but is nevertheless relevant for global organizations that may wish to do business in the region.

BUSINESS APPLICATION

According to Kim et al’s research, organizations and executives that want to build affective commitment and enhance their employees’ job satisfaction need to promote and highlight these positive changes in order to leverage their benefits on job attitudes. Undoubtedly, improving employees’ perceptions of fairness is very important, and these findings suggest this can be done by:

• establishing fair procedures in allocating rewards;
• providing detailed and timely explanations for decision procedures and outcomes; and
• tailoring communication to meet employees’ specific needs.

In addition, training supervisors to help them implement fair practices in their interactions with subordinates may also be helpful.

They also found that justice perceptions tended to decrease over time in newcomers to an organization, which might be explained due to the wearing off of a ‘honeymoon effect’. This can be prevented by providing realistic previews of fairness issues in the organization to reduce unrealistic expectations.

1

2 Learning Goals What is trust? What are justice and ethics?
In what three sources can trust be rooted? What dimensions can be used to describe how trustworthy an authority is? Employees judge the fairness of an authority’s decision making along four dimensions. What are those dimensions? What is the four-component model of ethical decision making?

3 Learning Goals, Cont’d How does trust affect job performance and organizational commitment? What steps can organizations take to become more trustworthy?

4 Trust, Justice, and Ethics
Trust is defined as the willingness to be vulnerable to an authority based on positive expectations about the authority’s actions and intentions. Person-based Organization-based Justice reflects the perceived fairness of an authority’s decision making. Ethics reflects the degree to which the behaviors of an authority are in accordance with generally accepted moral norms.

5 “America’s Most Admired Companies”
Table 7-1

6 Discussion Questions Why are some authorities more trusted than others? Would you be willing to let that person have significant influence over your professional or educational future?

7 Trust Disposition-based trust means that your personality traits include a general propensity to trust others. Cognition-based trust means that trust is rooted in a rational assessment of the authority’s trustworthiness. Affect-based trust means that it depends on feelings toward the authority that go beyond any rational assessment.

8 Disposition-Based Trust
Has less to do with the authority and more to do with the trustor. Some trustors are high in trust propensity —a general expectation that the words, promises, and statements of individuals and groups can be relied upon. Shaped from both genetics and environment Trust propensity levels are actually relatively high in the United States, especially in relation to countries in Europe and South America.

9 Trust Propensities by Nation
Figure 7-2

10 Cognition-Based Trust
Our trust begins to be based on cognitions we‘ve developed about the authority, as opposed to our own personality or disposition. Trustworthiness is defined as the characteristics or attributes of a trustee that inspire trust. Driven by the authority’s “track record.” Competence, character, and benevolence

11 The Track Record Competence is defined as the skills, abilities, and areas of expertise that enable an authority to be successful in some specific area. Doctor, lawyer Character is defined as the perception that the authority adheres to a set of values and principles that the trustor finds acceptable. Integrity Benevolence is defined as the belief that the authority wants to do good for the trustor, apart from any selfish or profit-centered motives. Mentor-protégé OB on Screen Pirates of the Caribbean

12 Affect-Based Trust Often more emotional than rational.
Affect-based trust acts as a leap of faith in the face of uncertainty about trustworthiness. Affect-based trust sometimes acts as a supplement to the types of trust discussed previously. An emotional bond develops, and our feelings for the trustee further increase our willingness to accept vulnerability.

13 Types of Trust Over Time
Figure 7-3

14 Factors that Influence Trust Levels
Figure 7-1

15 Justice Distributive justice reflects the perceived fairness of decision-making outcomes. Employees gauge distributive justice by asking whether decision outcomes, such as pay, rewards, evaluations, promotions, and work assignments, are allocated using proper norms. Procedural justice reflects the perceived fairness of decision-making processes. Fostered when authorities adhere to rules of fair process.

16 Procedural Justice Rules
Voice concerns giving employees a chance to express their opinions and views during the course of decision making. Improves employees reactions to decisions. Correctability provides employees with a chance to request an appeal when a procedure seems to have worked ineffectively. Consistency, bias suppression, representativeness, and accuracy rules help ensure that procedures are neutral and objective, as opposed to biased and discriminatory. Interview questions, compensation practices

17 Procedural Justice Does procedural justice really matter—don’t people just care about the outcomes that they receive? Distributive justice and procedural justice combine to influence employee reactions. When outcomes are bad, procedural justice becomes enormously important. Procedural justice tends to be a stronger driver of reactions to authorities than distributive justice.

18 Combined Effects of Distributive and Procedural Justice
Figure 7-4

19 Justice, Cont’d Interpersonal justice reflects the perceived fairness of the treatment received by employees from authorities. Interpersonal justice is fostered when authorities adhere to two particular rules. Respect rule pertains to whether authorities treat employees in a dignified and sincere manner. Propriety rule reflects whether authorities refrain from making improper or offensive remarks.

20 Justice, Cont’d Informational justice reflects the perceived fairness of the communications provided to employees from authorities. Informational justice is fostered when authorities adhere to two particular rules. The justification rule mandates that authorities explain decision-making procedures and outcomes in a comprehensive and reasonable manner. The truthfulness rule requires that those communications be honest and candid.

21 The Effects of Informational and Interpersonal Justice on Theft During a Pay Cut
Figure 7-5

22 The Four Dimensions of Justice
Table 7-2

23 Ethics Research on ethics seeks to explain why people behave in a manner consistent with generally accepted norms of morality, and why they sometimes violate those norms. Whistle-blowing occurs when employees expose illegal actions by their employer. 76 percent of employees have observed illegal or unethical conduct on the job within the past 12 months.

24 The Four Component Model of Ethical Decision Making
Moral awareness occurs when an authority recognizes that a moral issue exists in a situation or that an ethical standard or principle is relevant to the circumstance. Ethical sensitivity reflects the ability to recognize that a particular decision has ethical content. Moral intensity captures the degree to which the issue has ethical urgency.

25 The Six Facets of Moral Intensity
Table 7-4

26 The Four Component Model of Ethical Decision Making, Cont’d
Moral judgment is when the authority accurately identifies the morally “right” course of action. Cognitive moral development theory argues that as people age and mature, they move through several stages of moral development—each more mature and sophisticated than the prior one.

27 Stages of Cognitive Moral Development
Table 7-7

28 The Four Component Model of Ethical Decision Making, Cont’d
Moral intent reflects an authority’s degree of commitment to the moral course of action. The distinction between awareness, judgment, and intent is important, because many unethical people know and understand that what they do is wrong—they just don’t really care. One driver of moral intent is moral identity —the degree to which a person sees him- or herself as a “moral person.” Strong moral identity increases ethical behaviors because failing to act morally will trigger a strong sense of guilt or shame.

29 The Four Component Model of Ethical Decision Making
Figure 7-6

30 Why Are Some Authorities More Trusted than Others?
Figure 7-8

31 How Important Is Trust? Trust relates to performance because it increases an employees ability to focus. Trust also influences citizenship behavior and counterproductive behavior because it allows employees to develop social exchange relationships instead of economic exchange relationships with their employers. Economic exchange relationships that are based on narrowly defined, quid pro quo obligations that are specified in advance and have an explicit repayment schedule. Social exchange relationships are based on vaguely defined obligations that are open-ended and long-term in their repayment schedule.

32 Effects of Trust on Performance and Commitment
Table 7-9

33 Corporate Social Responsibility
Corporate social responsibility is a perspective that acknowledges that the responsibility of a business encompasses the economic, legal, ethical, and citizenship expectations of society. A company’s obligations do not end with profit maximization. Organizations have an obligation to do what is right, just, and fair and to avoid harm. Wal-Mart

34 Takeaways Trust is the willingness to be vulnerable to an authority based on positive expectations about the authority’s actions and intentions. Justice reflects the perceived fairness of an authority’s decision making and can be used to explain why employees judge some authorities as more trustworthy than others. Ethics reflects the degree to which the behaviors of an authority are in accordance with generally accepted moral norms. Trust can be disposition-based, cognition-based, or affect-based. Trustworthiness is judged along three dimensions: competence, character, and benevolence.

35 Takeaways, Cont’d The fairness of an authority’s decision making can be judged along four dimensions: distributive justice, procedural justice, interpersonal justice, and informational justice. The four-component model of ethical decision making argues that ethical behavior depends on three concepts. Moral awareness reflects whether an authority recognizes that a moral issue exists in a situation. Moral judgment reflects whether the authority can accurately identify the “right” course of action. Moral intent reflects an authority’s degree of commitment to the moral course of action.

36 Takeaways, Cont’d Trust has a moderate positive relationship with job performance and a strong positive relationship with organizational commitment. Organizations can become more trustworthy by emphasizing corporate social responsibility, a perspective that acknowledges that the responsibility of a business encompasses the economic, legal, ethical, and citizenship expectations of society.