Search results

The development of the digital age has made data and information more transparent, enhancing the strategic perspectives of both buyers (strategic waiting) and sellers (price fluctuations) in their decision-making. This research investigates the optimal dynamic pricing strategy of the content product developer in relation to their consideration of consumer fairness concerns to elucidate the impact of consumer fairness concerns on the dynamic pricing strategy of the developer.

This paper assumes that monopolistic content developers implement a dynamic pricing strategy for the content product. Through constructing a two-period dynamic pricing game model, this research investigates the optimal decisions of the content developer, contingent upon their consideration or disregard of consumer fairness concerns. In the extension section, the authors additionally account for the influence of myopic consumers on these optimal decisions.

Our findings reveal that the degree of consumer fairness concerns significantly influences the developer’s optimal dynamic pricing decision. When a developer offers content products with lower depth, there is a propensity for the developer to refrain from incorporating consumer fairness concerns into a dynamic pricing strategy. Conversely, in cases where the developer offers a high-depth content product, consumer fairness concerns benefit the developer. Furthermore, our analysis reveals a consistent benefit for the developer from the inclusion of myopic consumers.

Few studies have delved into the conjoined influence of consumer fairness concerns and strategic behavior on dynamic pricing strategy. Our findings indicate that consumer fairness concerns can enhance the efficiency of the value chain for content products under specific conditions. This paper not only enriches the existing literature on dynamic pricing by incorporating consumer fairness concerns theoretically but also offers practical insights. The outcomes of this research can guide content product developers in devising optimal dynamic pricing strategies.

Research on how performance measurement systems affect employees’ perceptions of workplace fairness is important. As organizations often rely on their performance measurement systems to communicate information to their employees, it is useful to ascertain if and how the developments of performance measurement systems that are far more comprehensive than traditional financial systems affect employees’ perceptions of informational fairness through the information communicated to employees. Informational fairness refers to employees’ perceptions of workplace fairness that is based on the amount and the truthfulness of information that organizations provide to their employees. Based on a sample of managers from manufacturing organizations, the Partial Least Square results indicate that comprehensive performance measurement systems (comprehensive PMS) have a significant direct effect on job-relevant information. They also indicate that comprehensive PMS have an indirect effect on informational fairness via job-relevant information. In contrast, systems that are based on financial measures have no significant effects on job-relevant information and informational fairness. These results demonstrate how comprehensive PMS (through the communication of a greater amount of job-relevant information) can be used to engender employees’ perceptions of high workplace fairness.

Organizational justice research traditionally focuses on individuals’ reactions to how they are treated by others. However, little attention has been given to why individuals choose to behave fairly or unfairly in the first place. Our chapter draws on the literature in ethical decision making (Rest, 1986) to identify five distinct factors that influence an individual's decision to treat others fairly. Using this model as a foundation, and drawing on extant research in justice, we explore five different types of roadblocks to fair behavior. We explore the implications of these roadblocks for organizations concerned with creating and maintaining a fair workplace. Finally, we discuss future research suggested by the five factors and some dilemmas, issues, and caveats relevant to the proposed model.

Justice rules are standards that serve as criteria for formulating fairness judgments. Though justice rules play a role in the organizational justice literature, they have seldom been the subject of analysis in their own right. To address this limitation, we first consider three meta-theoretical dualities that are highlighted by justice rules – the distinction between justice versus fairness, indirect versus direct measurement, and normative versus descriptive paradigms. Second, we review existing justice rules and organize them into four types of justice: distributive (e.g., equity, equality), procedural (e.g., voice, consistent treatment), interpersonal (e.g., politeness, respectfulness), and informational (e.g., candor, timeliness). We also emphasize emergent rules that have not received sufficient research attention. Third, we consider various computation models purporting to explain how justice rules are assessed and aggregated to form fairness judgments. Fourth and last, we conclude by reviewing research that enriches our understanding of justice rules by showing how they are cognitively processed. We observe that there are a number of influences on fairness judgments, and situations exist in which individuals do not systematically consider justice rules.

This study uses a path analytic model to investigate the influence of fairness (i.e., procedural fairness, distributive fairness, and interactional fairness) on managers’ budget satisfaction and the influence of managers’ budget satisfaction on budget performance. To this end, data from 92 U.S. individual managers are used for the study. The results show that fairness perceptions have a significant positive impact on budget satisfaction which, in turn, positively affects budget performance. Further analyses indicate that budget satisfaction mediates the relationship between fairness measures and budget performance. The implications, limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.

Purpose – The adoption of performance measurement and evaluation systems comprising nonfinancial measures has rendered the investigation of behavioral consequences of such measures an increasingly important research issue. The purpose of this study is to investigate the process by which the use of nonfinancial measures affects employees’ perceptions of procedural fairness. It proposes that the effects of nonfinancial measures on procedural fairness are indirect through the mediating variables of (1) job relevant information and (2) role clarity.

Methodology – Data collected from a survey of 276 managers in different functional areas are used to test the models. The data are analyzed using structural equation modeling (Partial Least Square).

Findings – Results from structural models indicate that the use of nonfinancial measures has a positive impact on job relevant information, role clarity, and procedural fairness. In addition, the findings suggest that the use of nonfinancial measures is indirectly related to procedural fairness through job relevant information and role clarity. Specifically, the results indicate that the use of nonfinancial measures affects job relevant information. Job relevant information then influences role clarity. Role clarity, in turn, is positively related to procedural fairness.

Value of paper – This study provides systematic empirical evidence on how the use of nonfinancial measures for performance measurement and evaluation can affect employee perceptions of procedural fairness. It helps organizations to understand how this process occurs and provides them with some assurance that the adoption of nonfinancial measures may be beneficial particularly through the higher information content of such measures and the consequential enhancement of employee role clarity and perception of fairness. By studying the effects of nonfinancial measures, in isolation, this study also helps to demonstrate to organizations that some of the beneficial effects on employee outcomes found by prior management accounting studies involving a combination of financial and nonfinancial measures may be achievable from the use of nonfinancial measures alone without the need of financial measures. This may assist organizations in designing simpler performance measurement systems.

The aim of this chapter is to examine and challenge the fairness rhetoric used by many US lawmakers to prevent trans girls and women from participating in school sports. Legislators embrace faulty scientific claims to assert unfairness based on physiology and many sport philosophers work from the premise that the first priority of sport is to be competitively fair. We argue that this is a misguided notion and that sport must be just before it can be fair. Using Iris Marion Young's framework of justice, we contend that excluding trans athletes from school sport is an injustice. We propose that focusing on the eradication of injustice is the ethical path forward for the inclusion and full participation of trans people in sport.

This chapter examines how public attitudes and judgments about tax fairness reflect distributive justice rules about proportionality/contributions, needs, and equality; fairness issues that influence voluntary tax compliance (Hofmann, Hoelzl, & Kirchler, 2008; Spicer & Lundstedt, 1976). Most public polls and some prior research indicate the general public considers progressive income tax rates as fairer than flat tax rates, a reflection of the Needs rule of distributive justice theory; our 1,138 participants respond similarly. However, two-thirds of our politically representative sample of the American public actually assign “fair shares” of income taxes consistently with fairness-as-proportionality above an exempt amount of income, consistent with the Contributions rule of Equity Theory. We argue experimental assignments of fair shares of income taxes can best be understood as a combination of the Needs rule, applied by exempting incomes below the poverty line from income taxation (via current standard deductions) and taxing incomes above this exempt amount at a single tax rate (i.e., a flat-rate tax) consistent with the Proportionality/Contributions rule. Viewed in combination, these two distributive justice rules explain the tax fairness judgments of 89% of our sample and indicate surprising general agreement about what constitutes a fair share of income taxes that should be paid by US citizens from the 5th percentile to the 95th percentile of the income distribution. The joint application of these fairness rules indicates how seemingly competing, partisan distributive justice concerns can inform our understanding of social attitudes about tax fairness across income classes.

The study emphasizes the importance of human perception in engaging stakeholders and sheds light on the way the often “disregarded” actors (i.e. local communities) make sense of an organization's behavior at the corporate, project and individual level.

Departing from the normative stance of stakeholder theory, this conceptual paper aims to unfold the benefits of a more holistic and inclusive organizational approach to stakeholders. The conceptual framework is elucidated through the lens of attribution theory, which points to communication as the source of stakeholders' attributional processes and thus their perception of fairness.

Focusing the authors’ attention on construction and infrastructure projects, this research suggests that early transparent and informative communication with local community stakeholders motivates them to perceive fairness, from both the process of decision-making (distributive) and the outcome of decisions (procedural), as well as the way in which they are treated (interactional). Such communications lead to less biased attributions as they reduce the influence of personal beliefs in achieving a conscious and non-biased attribution mode.

In this paper, the authors adopt attribution theory as their lens with which to interpret the process whereby individuals attempt to make sense of an organization's behavior. Focusing on secondary stakeholder engagement such as local community, the authors’ conceptualization shapes both a framework highlighting communication as the mediator for shaping human perceptions, and a process model to guide project organizations and practitioners to embrace an inclusive approach toward the often-disregarded stakeholders, which is aimed at enhancing their perception of fairness at the corporate, project and individual levels. The authors highlight the need for organization to provide clear and transparent communication to a broader range of stakeholders, such as those that have had little to say in the decision-making process (the often-disregarded voices). By seeking collaboration rather than manipulation, a project organization might promote stakeholders' non-biased perception of fairness, in terms of both the process and outcome of the project.

The authors analysed fairness as an antecedent of trust to understand how trust building can be actively managed to facilitate collaboration in buyer–supplier relationships.

A case study was employed to buyer–supplier relationships of five organic food companies from three different sectors. The research was developed with data collected in 2022 through qualitative research interviews and analysed using a structured content analysis. A practitioner workshop served to complement findings and confirm the interpretation of data by discussing interview results from a managerial perspective.

A conceptual model based on organisational trust and justice theory was developed to examine causal relations between fairness and trust. Findings show that perceived distributional, procedural and interactional fairness mutually interact with the perceived trustworthiness of business partners and that both contribute to building personal, organisational and institutional trust. Qualitative data support the conceptual model and show that trust is a valuable relational resource that affects relationship quality and the willingness to collaborate and to take risks in times of uncertainty.

High trust levels developed through positive fairness perceptions can lower risk perceptions whilst increasing the willingness to collaborate in supply chain relationships. This can help deal with market uncertainties.

Through the lens of organisational trust and justice theory, this study extends the literature on collaboration in supply chains by including a comprehensive view on the formation of trust in business-to-business (B2B) relationships.