Search results

The use of teams has increased significantly over the past two decades, with recent estimates suggesting that between 50% and 90% of employees work in some kind of team. This chapter examines the implications of this trend for the literature on organizational justice – the study of fairness perceptions and effects in the workplace. In particular, we explore three specific research questions: (1) Will the justice effects observed in individual contexts generalize to team contexts and member-directed reactions? (2) Will the justice experienced by specific teammates have direct or interactive effects on members’ own reactions? (3) Will the justice experienced by the team as a whole impact reactions at the team level of analysis? Our review of almost 30 studies suggests that each question can be answered in the affirmative, illustrating that team contexts can magnify the importance of justice in organizations.

This study seeks to examine the processes through which leadership is fostered and developed within student leadership development programs. While there has been some scholarly literature written in this area, a dearth in the literature exists with respect to providing a detailed chronicle and examination of the complete processes employed within an exemplary student leadership development program. Through the analysis of such a program – validated by a recent NASPA (2011) study as an exemplar in the field of student leadership development – such a program will be examined. Through a qualitative, grounded theory approach using interviews to inductively build a framework of understanding, seven themes of student leadership development are identified. How these findings extend existing literature is then presented, as is a new theoretical model illustrating the process through which leadership is fostered and developed within students, thereby aiding the construction of future programs.

M. Ronald Buckley is a Professor of Management and a Professor of Psychology and the holder of the JC Penney Company Business Leadership Chair in the Michael F. Price College of Business at the University of Oklahoma. He received his Ph.D. in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from Auburn University. His research interests are diverse and include decision making in the employment interview, performance evaluation, organizational entry processes, and the issues surrounding unethical behavior in organizations. He has published over 70 refereed journal articles in, among others, the Academy of Management Review, Journal of Applied Psychology, Applied Psychological Measurement, Journal of Management, and Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes on topics related to human resource management issues.

This study aims to explore how individual-level and organizational-level factors interact to influence pay information (PI) seeking and PI sharing preferences in PI conversations (i.e. the face-to-face communications context). The authors examine how an individual’s judgment of their pay relative to others – or pay equity perception – affects their PI seeking and PI sharing preferences and how those relationships are affected by organizationally created pay transparency policies and pay transparency practices.

Using a 2 × 2 × 2 experimental design on the MTurk platform, the authors used a scenario-based prompt method to manipulate employee perceptions of pay equity and organizational pay transparency and tested those effects on employee pay disclosure preferences. The authors consider both pay policy and pay practice dimensions of pay transparency and both PI seeking and PI sharing dimensions of pay disclosure preferences. The final sample had 597 participants.

The authors find employees’ pay equity perceptions are negatively related to PI seeking behaviors and are even more so when organizations have restrictive pay transparency policies. Also, both pay transparency policy and pay transparency practice increase PI sharing preferences.

The authors provide insight into how individual perceptions drive pay disclosure motivations and the role of organizational policy and practice in influencing pay disclosure preferences within PI conversations. The authors provide insight into the antecedents that shape pay disclosure preferences, which lead to a both PI conversations among coworkers and an increase in one’s pay understanding. This study shows the contextual nature of PI seeking and PI sharing preferences, which are a motivational antecedent to pay-related sensemaking behaviors.

In the competitive retailing environment, retailers who provide service experiences that stand out from the competition can gain a competitive advantage. Increasingly, an important aspect of the service experience involves product returns, in particular, the fairness of returns policies and procedures. Previous research studies support that interpersonal justice and informational justice relate positively to consumer attitudes and behaviors. In this paper, the authors examine the relative effects of interpersonal justice and informational justice on return satisfaction, positive word-of-mouth (PWOM) and trust. Additionally, the authors examine the moderating effects of returns process convenience and returns policy restrictiveness as indicators of procedural justice.

A scenario-based experiment methodology was used to test the relationships of interest.

Results support that the effects of interpersonal justice on the outcome variables are stronger than the effects of informational justice. There is also support for a moderating effect of returns process convenience on the relationships between interpersonal justice and each outcome variable, as well as partial support for the moderating effect of returns policy restrictiveness on the relationship between interpersonal justice and PWOM.

The research extends previous work on the effects of justice on customer outcomes. Results support the importance of retailers treating customers with fairness during the returns experience and further support the benefits of providing a convenient returns experience.

Based on social exchange theory and the norm of reciprocity, interactional justice has been proposed to be an important construct in explaining individual performance. However, meta-analytic results have noted the relationship is modest at best. The present study extends the understanding of the justice-performance relationship by empirically examining how interactional justice and political skill interactively influence contextual job performance. Focusing on interpersonal aspects of justice and performance, the paper proposes that the existence of interactional justice will only lead to improvements in interpersonally facilitative behavior if employees recognize this situation as an opportunity to invest their skill-related assets into the organization. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Integrating research on political skill with social exchange theory, the current study contends that interactional justice stemming from the supervisor will likely lead to employees feeling obligated and/or wanting to help, cooperate, and consider others in the workplace. However, only employees with political skill will be able to recognize the conditions and act appropriately on these conditions. As such, this paper investigates the moderating role of political skill in the interactional justice-performance relationship. The paper used multi-source survey methodology and applied hierarchical moderated multiple regression analysis to test the hypotheses.

Results from 189 respondents indicated that interactional justice was more strongly related to supervisor-rated interpersonal facilitation when employees possessed higher levels of political skill. This suggests that when both interactional justice and political skill are high, the potential for interpersonal facilitation is also high. Conversely, when one or both are low, interpersonal facilitation is less likely.

Previous articulations and evaluations of the relationship between interactional justice, political skill, and interpersonal facilitation have omitted either situational determinants of motivation or individual differences in job-related skills. With the current study, the paper sought to address these omissions by exploring the interactive effects of interactional justice and political skill on interpersonal facilitation.

The purpose of this study is to assess the pathway through which authentic leadership influences organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). The authors examine how the perception of overall fairness and a sense of belongingness mediate the relationship between authentic leadership and OCB.

The authors distributed survey questionnaires to full-time employees working for an insurance company. Data were collected in two phases. To test the hypotheses, the authors conducted hierarchical multiple regression analysis using the PROCESS macro by Hayes (2012).

PROCESS analysis reveals that overall fairness mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and subordinates' sense of belongingness, which is then positively related to OCB. Taken together, these findings are largely in line with the authors’ theoretical model.

Empirical research has yet to explore how authentic leaders create the perception of fairness, which influences subordinates' OCB. Thus, this study extends the authors’ knowledge on the extant literature of organizational behavior by integrating two important domains—authentic leadership and organizational fairness—to propose that authentic leadership is a fair leadership that aids in promoting OCB. Also, studies on authentic leadership processes have examined basic models and neglected the possibility of sequential mediation. To better understand the complex relationship of authentic leadership and OCB, the authors examine overall fairness and belongingness as sequential mediators.

One aspect of attracting new employees that has historically been ignored by recruitment researchers is salary negotiations. In this study, we used a hypothetical scenario design to depict salary negotiation experiences in which we varied the levels of salary offer, the behavior of a company and its representative, and the deadlines for receiving a signing bonus. MBA students served as study participants who read the scenarios and responded to questions about perceived organizational attractiveness and job acceptance decisions—two important recruitment outcomes. As hypothesized, our results indicated that salaries, a company's responsiveness to candidate questions, and a company representative's expression of derogatory comments all impact recruitment outcomes. However, exploding signing bonuses had no significant effects, calling into question the negative connotation practitioners have of exploding compensation schemes. Our justice framework revealed that many of the effects that we found for our manipulations on participants' judgments regarding our recruitment outcomes were mediated by perceptions of organizational justice. Finally, we found some evidence of the frustration effect, as procedures that were considered fair worsened rather than mitigated the negative effects of unfair outcomes on job acceptance decisions.