Search results

The purpose of this paper is to draw on the agent-system model of (in)justice and negative norm of reciprocity of social exchange theory to examine the indirect impact of supervisory interactional injustice (i.e. interpersonal and informational) on employees’ target-specific extra-role work behaviours [counterproductive work behaviour directed at supervisor (CWB-S) and organisational citizenship behaviour directed at supervisor (OCB-S)] via distrust in supervisor.

The authors conducted a two-wave study, and participants (n = 401) were recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk using a survey methodology. Bias-corrected confidence intervals (CIs) constructed in 20,000 bootstrap samples were used to test the mediation effects.

The findings indicated that interpersonal and informational injustice are positively related to employees’ distrust in supervisor. Furthermore, interpersonal and informational injustice indirectly affected CWB-S and OCB-S via distrust in supervisor.

Several limitations and future research should be discussed. First, the cross-sectional nature of this study prevented us from establishing the causal direction implied by the mediation models in this research. Second, the authors cannot rule out the potential for common method variance. These limitations can be addressed by collecting data from multiple sources (e.g. supervisor and coworkers) at different points in time or by experimental study design. Lastly, the authors did not consider contextual variables (e.g. formal policies, practices, ethical rules and cultural climate) that may influence the proposed relationships’ strengths and directions.

Even though perceptions of distributive and procedural injustice can affect employee deviant behaviours targeted at the organisation and organisational members, the present findings suggest that practitioners should be aware that perceptions of supervisory interactional injustice (i.e. interpersonal and informational) are likely be requited with employees’ extra-role work behaviours targeted at the supervisor. The present findings suggest that, via distrust in supervisor, employees are likely to engage in more CWB-S and fewer OCB-S as a result of supervisory interactional injustice. Considering the costs associated with high CWB-S and low OCB-S, supervisors should be trained in adhering to interactional justice rules. Additionally, supervisors should be mindful and practice caution when interacting with subordinates, to ensure that interactional justice norms are not violated. Lastly, supervisors can seek feedback from subordinates regarding their perceptions of supervisory interactional injustice, as these assessments will allow the supervisors to adapt their behaviours to impede subordinates’ deviant behaviours aimed towards them.

This study contributes to the literature on organisational injustice and workplace behaviour. First, most injustice research assumes that injustice is the opposite of justice; this study examines the effect of interactional injustice. Second, the authors develop a target-specific model focusing on the interactions between two key organisational stakeholders (i.e. supervisors and employees). The authors suggest that supervisor’s disrespect and untruthfulness towards the employee will eventually result in employee revenge (i.e. CWB-S) and lack of cooperation (i.e. OCB-S) towards supervisor. Finally, the authors examine the mechanism (i.e. distrust in supervisor) through which supervisory interactional injustice may ensue in employee extra-role behaviours directed at the supervisor.

This study aims to explain how negative workplace interactions are formed by the application of a performance management system (PMS).

The study draws from unique in-depth interviews with service workers who resigned from an accounting shared service centre (SSC), discussing the reasons behind the resignations. Following an abductive approach, organisational justice theory is used to analyse the service workers' perceptions of negative interactions and to link the negative interactions to the use of the PMS.

The findings suggest that negative workplace interactions are characterised by cost consciousness, inequality and competitiveness. These interactions are attributed to the use of a PMS in the centre and are related to perceptions of distributive, procedural and interactional injustice.

Managers and leaders of shared service–type organisations should not rely on PMSs as an all-encompassing solution; instead, they should acknowledge the fairness of the use of PMSs. Moreover, HR professionals should choose and train employees to apply PMSs fairly. Fairness is important in work allocation, resourcing, monitoring, giving feedback, recognising good performance, promotion and interaction between peers.

This study contributes to the literature by taking an overall perspective on PMSs to analyse and explain the unintended negative consequences of a PMS in a highly scripted and monitored work environment that is usually considered appropriate for such a system's use. Through the analysis, the study highlights pitfalls in the use of a PMS and the importance of interactional injustice not only between but also within organisational levels.

This research aims to unpack the relationship between employees' perceived organizational politics (POP) and their self-determined motivation by itemizing the mediating role of hostility and a moderating role of organizational injustice.

Data were collected at two different times from 270 employees working in various universities in Pakistan. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test the hypotheses.

The findings revealed that POP negatively influence intrinsic motivation, autonomous extrinsic motivation and positively impact amotivation, whereas POP does not affect employees' controlled extrinsic motivation. Furthermore, POP positively influences hostility. Moreover, hostility mediates the relationships between perceived organizational politics and self-determined motivation. Finally, the findings also revealed that the relationship between perceived organizational politics and hostility was stronger when the perceived organizational injustice was high.

POP can lead to intentional efforts to harm the organization by enhancing employee hostility, which divulges how this peril can be restrained by implanting organizational fairness. Moreover, proactive employees with superior emotional intelligence skills have a greater capability to control their negative emotions. Emotional intelligence (EI) training can effectively reduce the hostility between employees provoked by POP and ultimately diminish self-determined motivation.

The current study revealed that ambiguous forms of political behavior trigger isolated work emotions, negatively affecting organizational sustainability and outcomes. These results have valuable suggestions regarding organizational injustice as a moderator to diminish the hostility resulting from POP.

This study aims to detail how employees’ experience of distributive injustice may compromise their job performance, with specific attention to how this detrimental process may be explained in part by their beliefs about organization-level underperformance and moderated by their own psychological entitlement.

The research hypotheses were tested with three-round, time-lagged data collected among employees and their supervisors.

A critical channel through which employees’ perceptions that their organization’s reward system is unfair translates into thwarted job performance is a conviction that their organization does not meet its own performance targets. As a mediator, such organizational underperformance beliefs have particularly salient effects on employees who believe they are more deserving than others.

This study gives HR managers insights into how they can reduce the danger that unfair reward practices escalate into a reduced propensity by employees to complete their job tasks diligently. HR managers should make employees aware of their possible entitlement and discourage them from expecting that things always must go their way.

This research unpacks the connection between distributive injustice and job performance, by delineating the unique roles of two pertinent factors (organizational underperformance beliefs and psychological entitlement) in this connection.

Drawing on conservation of resources theory, this study aims to examine how employees’ experiences of excessive workloads may direct them away from efforts to share knowledge with other organizational members, as well as the circumstances in which this process is more or less likely. To untangle the process, the authors predict a mediating role of job dissatisfaction and moderating roles of two complementary resources that help employees cope with failure: resilience as a personal resource and organizational forgiveness as an organizational resource.

Survey data were gathered from employees of an organization that operates in the construction retail sector. The Process macro provides an empirical test of the moderated mediation dynamic that underpins the proposed conceptual framework.

The statistical findings affirm that an important channel through which employees’ perceptions that their work demands are unreasonable escalate into a diminished propensity to share knowledge is their lack of enthusiasm about their jobs. Their ability to recover from challenging work situations and their beliefs that the organization does not hold grudges against people who commit mistakes both mitigate this harmful effect.

For organizational practitioners, this research shows that when employees feel frustrated about extreme work pressures, the resource-draining situation may escalate into diminished knowledge sharing, which might inadvertently undermine their ability to receive valuable feedback for dealing with the challenges. From a positive perspective, individual resilience and organizational forgiveness represent resources that can protect employees against this negative spiral.

This study explicates an unexplored harmful effect of strenuous workloads on knowledge sharing, which is explained by employees’ beliefs that their organization fails to provide satisfactory job experiences. This effect also is mitigated to the extent that employees can draw from valuable personal and organizational resources.

Workplace deviant behaviors (WDBs) have a significant negative impact on firms. Present study explores the role of employees’ perception of firms’ internal corporate social responsibility (internal CSR) in reducing their intention to engage in WDB. Social exchange theory (SET) and job demand-resource (JD-R) model form the conceptual underpinning of the study.

Hypotheses were developed based on a comprehensive literature review and tested on employees working in various public and private sector organizations in India. AMOS and SPSS PROCESS macro were used to test the conceptual model.

Employees’ perception of firms’ internal CSR reduced their intention to engage in WDB. Occupational strain was confirmed as a mediator in the above mentioned relationship. Further, the study also establishes internal CSR as an antecedent to increased perceptions of procedural justice.

Managers may leverage internal CSR communication as a tool to minimize WDB at the workplace. Moreover, it may also be used to reduce occupational strain and strengthen the perceptions of fairness among employees.

Very limited research is available on internal CSR and WDB. Through this study authors contribute to the nascent literature by affirming the negative relationship between internal CSR and WDB using the SET and JD-R model.

This paper aims to explore the role of perceived organizational injustice (POI) leading to workplace conflict in determining organizational performance (OP) among healthcare employees. This paper also examines the serial mediating effects of moral disengagement (MD) and knowledge hiding (KH).

In all, 244 public and private hospital employees in Pakistan provided the data set.

According to partial least squares-structural equation modeling findings, the negative association between POI and OP was serially mediated by KH and MD. The recovery process underlying the linkage between POI and OP is tested and highlighted in this paper as a first step in unraveling it.

The findings highlight the significance of taking moral and KH models into account when attempting to understand the moral cognitive processes that employees go through when they see injustice. Organizations should guarantee the equitable distribution of incentives and resources, as distributive and procedural justices are concerned with organizations.

By directing actions meant to prevent MD and KH, the findings may potentially inspire new, more focused treatments to safeguard patient safety and avoid losses in the healthcare industry. One way to reduce unethical conduct and MD is to have people declare or agree to a code of ethics.

This study aims to investigate the effect of the Diamond Justice model on self-efficiency with the mediating role of job stress among the staff of Qazvin hospitals affiliated with Qazvin University of Medical Sciences. This study is a cross-sectional descriptive-analytical study conducted among the staff of Qazvin hospitals affiliated with Qazvin University of Medical Sciences in 2020.

Sampling was performed using the structural equation method. Data collection tools included three sections: demographic information, justice and self-efficiency questionnaire and job stress questionnaire. Data were finally analyzed using SPSS software version 26 and AMOS version 23 at a significance level of 0.05.

The structural equation model’s standard estimation coefficients show that all existing paths are at a significant level. Finally, the regression analysis showed that justice is inversely related to stress level (ß = −0.185, p = 0.015). Justice is directly related with self-efficiency (ß = 0.282, p < 0.001).

Justice, stress and self-efficacy have been measured in various studies among health workers. However, a fitting model showing these three variables’ interaction was necessary. Therefore, this study tries to conceptualize the multifaceted relationships of the components of these concepts by presenting a model.

Drawing on organizational justice theory, this study aims to investigate how perceived organizational exploitation induces frontline hospitality employees’ organizational and interpersonal deviance. Specifically, this study explored the mediating effect of distributive and procedural justice, as well as the moderating effect of justice sensitivity.

The focal research analyzed multiphase survey data from 267 frontline service employees with structural equation modeling.

The results revealed that perceived organizational exploitation induced frontline hospitality employees’ organizational and interpersonal deviance through their perceptions of distributive and procedural justice. Moreover, employees’ justice sensitivity amplified perceived organizational exploitation’s harmful impact on justice perceptions and its conditional influence on organizational and interpersonal deviance.

Organizations should take actions to reduce the occurrence of exploitation to prevent employees’ workplace deviance behaviors. Moreover, organizations can foster employees’ justice perceptions and take care of employees with strong justice sensitivity to reduce the destructive behaviors triggered by organizational exploitation.

By investigating frontline employees’ workplace deviant behaviors, this research identifies new outcomes of exploitation by hospitality organizations. Moreover, the research contributes by offering a justice-based perspective to understand the effects of perceived organizational exploitation. Furthermore, this research helps identify a new boundary condition of being exploited by organizations.

Scholarship on America’s K-12 economics curriculum reveals an inattention to many harmful economic realities, specifically wealth inequality. Critics of the present curriculum posit that its emphasis on out-dated concepts and models ignores crucial elements of reality that impact economic interaction and identities. In response to the dominant economic paradigm and methods, this practitioner-focused paper discusses an economically pluralist, pedagogically critical approach to interrogating destructive economic realities. It details how three social studies classroom simulations based on the board game Monopoly may be integrated with certain informational texts to explore economic factors that contribute to America’s unique form of wealth inequality.

This paper describes wealth inequality in America and rationalizes the need to make this social problem a focus of study in the secondary social studies classroom. First, I survey the present curricular apparatus of K-12 economics education and then argue for a pluralist approach that expands the curriculum’s dominant neoclassical paradigm. Connecting economic pluralism to critical citizen education, I draw upon emerging critical economic citizen education scholarship to explain attendant pedagogical and instructional approaches. The described lesson builds upon a tradition of Monopoly simulations, is rooted in critical citizen education pedagogy and aligns with Soroko’s (2023) critical economic literacy framework.

This paper progresses the curricular movement of economic pluralism through its critique of America’s current K-12 economics curriculum that does not focus on immediate, lived social problems. It further defines critical economics, citizenship and pedagogy, then details an instructional practice that employs critical disciplinary tools to investigate contributing factors of American wealth inequality.

This paper contributes to the growing field of pluralist economic perspectives and pedagogies. Specifically, it enriches understanding of critical economics citizenship education by further defining attendant pedagogy and explaining Monopoly as an instructional tool for critical economics citizen education. Previous works have discussed Monopoly’s utility for teaching various concepts within the social studies disciplines. This simulation lesson is unique in its instructional approach that merges simulation experiences with certain informational texts to cultivate critical economic knowledge of American wealth inequality and critical economic skills for critiquing and transforming oppressive economic realities.