Search results

1 – 10 of over 34000
To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 17 December 2008

Barry Markovsky, Lisa M. Dilks, Pamela Koch, Shannon McDonough, Jennifer Triplett and Leia Velasquez

Theories in the justice area have proliferated with little regard either to their interconnections or to the general scientific criterion of parsimony. Recently, there…

Abstract

Theories in the justice area have proliferated with little regard either to their interconnections or to the general scientific criterion of parsimony. Recently, there have been several attempts to integrate justice theories. However, there has been practically no discussion of theoretical method, that is, precisely what it means to integrate two or more theories and what must be done to accomplish it. This chapter advocates building integrated theories by developing smaller modularized theories that can be formulated and assembled for multiple purposes. To illustrate the process, we construct five modules addressing different areas connected to justice issues and show how they may be combined into a single integrated structure.

Details

Justice
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-84855-104-6

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 14 March 2016

Lilian Otaye-Ebede, Paul Sparrow and Wilson Wong

Organizational justice research has become the main paradigm of research in the field of HRM. The purpose of this paper is to outline a number of underlying challenges to…

Abstract

Purpose

Organizational justice research has become the main paradigm of research in the field of HRM. The purpose of this paper is to outline a number of underlying challenges to which this paradigm is ill-suited. It broadens the traditional understanding of what is meant by fairness within the HRM literature to help explain how justice judgements are formed and may be used to influence societal-level fairness processes. It develops a framework to aid the understanding of the fairness of decisions that individuals or organizations make.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper presents a conceptual review of the main paradigms used in fairness research. It draws upon the organizational justice literature as the dominant paradigm in HRM research, and conducts a cross-disciplinary review that introduces a range of theories less frequently used by HRM researchers – specifically capability theory, game theory, tournament theory, equity sensitivity theory, theories of intergenerational equity, and burden sharing. It demonstrates the relevance of these theories to a number of areas of organizational effectiveness.

Findings

The paper shows that researchers are now augmenting the organizational justice research paradigm under two important pressures – awareness of hidden structures that preclude the option for real fairness; and new variables that are being added to the consideration of organizational justice.

Practical implications

HR functions have invested significant resources in employee engagement or insight units, but if their policies trigger significant inequality of outcomes, perceived problems of justice, a lack of burden sharing, no sense proportionality, organizations may not be able to achieve other important HR strategies such as sustaining and deepening employee engagement, developing organizational advocacy, building an employer brand, or being seen to have authenticity in its values. The framework suggests a broadened educational base for HR practitioners around fairness. It also suggests that there may be complex employees segments concerning perceptions of fairness.

Originality/value

The cross-disciplinary perspective taken on fairness helps deconstruct the judgements that employees likely make, enabling organizations and individuals alike to ask more critical questions about their respective behaviour.

Details

Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, vol. 3 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2051-6614

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 1 January 2000

Marjorie Chan

The paper examines various organizational justice theories and three landmark cases which illustrate that with enabling legislation, the violations of organizational…

Abstract

The paper examines various organizational justice theories and three landmark cases which illustrate that with enabling legislation, the violations of organizational justice (distributive, procedural, and interactional justice) give rise to lawsuits on the part of the unfairly treated employees. These lawsuits, if successful, bring about various remedies. Violations of each justice component have unfavorable consequences. As Folger and Cropanzano's (1998) fairness theory integrates prior organizational justice theories and various justice concepts such as distributive, procedural, and interactional justice, each case's justice violations are assessed in accordance with fairness theory. Each successful case results in a landmark monetary settlement and court‐mandated remedial initiatives.

Details

The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, vol. 8 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1055-3185

Content available
Book part
Publication date: 30 April 2019

S. J. Oswald A. J. Mascarenhas

This focal chapter deals with the understanding of important ethical theories used in executive moral reasoning such as teleology, deontology, distributive justice and…

Abstract

Executive Summary

This focal chapter deals with the understanding of important ethical theories used in executive moral reasoning such as teleology, deontology, distributive justice and corrective justice, virtue ethics versus ethics of trust, from the perspectives of intrinsic versus instrumental good, moral worth versus moral obligation, and moral conscience versus moral justification. Ethical and moral reasoning will power executives to identify, explore, and resolve corporate moral dilemma, especially in the wake of emerging gray market areas where good and evil, right or wrong, just or unjust, and truth and falsehood cannot be easily distinguished. We focus on developing corporate skills of awareness of ethical values and moral imperatives in current otherwise highly commoditized and turbulent human, market, and corporate situations. The challenges of morality are multifaceted and diverse. Professionals usually have self-discipline and self-regulation abilities, ego strength, and social skills. Morality in the professions is not concerned with the issues of rudimentary socialization; rather, the issues involve deciding between conflicting values, where each value represents something good in itself. There are problems in both knowing what is right, good, true, and just on the one hand, and on the other hand, in doing what is right and avoiding wrong, doing good and avoiding evil, and being fair and just while avoiding being unfair and unjust. Several contemporary cases will illustrate the challenging dimensions of ethical and moral reasoning, moral judgment and moral justification embedded in executive decision processes, and corporate growth and profitability ventures.

Details

Corporate Ethics for Turbulent Markets
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78756-192-2

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 10 June 2015

Russell Cropanzano, Marion Fortin and Jessica F. Kirk

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…

Abstract

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.

Details

Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78560-016-6

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 7 June 2010

Leigh Plunkett Tost and E. Allan Lind

Purpose – In this chapter, we seek to resolve the conflicting implications that emerge from status quo theories of justice, on the one hand, and theories of distributive…

Abstract

Purpose – In this chapter, we seek to resolve the conflicting implications that emerge from status quo theories of justice, on the one hand, and theories of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice on the other. Specifically, status quo theories depict individuals as resistant to perceptions of injustice in their social environments, whereas theories of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice depict individuals as quite sensitive to the justice that characterizes outcomes and treatment.

Methodology/approach – We build on previous research on the justice judgment process to consider ways in which the findings from these two research streams can be integrated.

Findings – We suggest that the two overarching streams of research have identified and empirically explored two distinct modes of justice evaluation: a system justification mode and a system critique mode.

Originality/value of chapter – We develop a model of the justice judgment process that specifies the circumstances under which each of the two modes is likely to operate.

Details

Fairness and Groups
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-85724-162-7

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 18 February 2021

Jinlin Wan, Yaobin Lu and Sumeet Gupta

Dashang refers to a reward given voluntarily to street performers in return for their performance. Some social media platforms have created a way to integrate this as a…

Abstract

Purpose

Dashang refers to a reward given voluntarily to street performers in return for their performance. Some social media platforms have created a way to integrate this as a function, referred to as the dashang feature, to allow users to reward live performers online as well. Over the last few years, this function has become extremely popular among social media users, as it recreates the nostalgic experience of watching street performances. Platforms now consider it indispensable, as it has become a source of substantial revenue (commission on rewards earned by performers). However, not all users reward performers. For each user who pays, there are many more who lurk on the platform. This study examines the reasons for these differences using the Big Five personality perspective and justice theory.

Design/methodology/approach

We develop an empirical model using the Big Five theory and justice theory and test it using empirical data collected through a survey of WeChat users.

Findings

The results indicate that distributive justice, interpersonal justice and informational justice are essential factors in relation to social media users' use of the dashang feature. It is also found that personality type affects these three factors.

Originality/value

This study makes three key contributions. First, it examines the factors that influence users' voluntary use of the dashang feature using the lenses of the Big Five theory and justice theory. Second, this study extends previous results on perceived justice to examine use of the dashang feature in social media. Third, this study applies these theories to the study of consumer behavior by exploring the role of user characteristics in social media use.

Details

Information Technology & People, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0959-3845

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 7 June 2010

Deborah E. Rupp and E. Layne Paddock

Purpose – We outline a theoretical model of the emergence of justice climate in groups, teams, and organizations, and in doing so integrate multiple justice perspectives…

Abstract

Purpose – We outline a theoretical model of the emergence of justice climate in groups, teams, and organizations, and in doing so integrate multiple justice perspectives (e.g., affective events, fairness heuristic, deonance, justice integration, multifoci justice, overall justice).

Approach – In this theoretical paper, we propose that justice climate is spawned at the level of the event; individuals experience discrete events and then use their emotional reactions related to these events as information in forming fairness judgments. Cognitive processes explicated in justice integration theory, fairness heuristic theory, and fairness theory also play a role. Over time, these judgments about various perpetrators – which may include the evaluation of outcomes, procedures, information, and interpersonal treatment – are aggregated to form individual-level, stable judgments regarding the fairness of exchange partners with whom employees interact (e.g., supervisors, coworkers, and customers). Through socialization and social-information processing, and influenced by organizational structure and social networks, these individual multifoci justice perceptions merge to form multifoci justice climate, which over time lead to the formation of shared cognitions of overall justice climate.

Value – The chapter proposes a temporal model of how discrete events at the individual level merge to form individuals’ multifoci justice perceptions, shared multifoci justice climate, and ultimately overall justice climate. The chapter offers multiple propositions and concludes with recommendations for empirically testing the model.

Details

Fairness and Groups
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-85724-162-7

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 1 June 2005

Laurie J. Barclay

To examine Mary Parker Follett's writings with respect to organizational justice and highlight insights that can advance contemporary organizational justice theory as well…

Abstract

Purpose

To examine Mary Parker Follett's writings with respect to organizational justice and highlight insights that can advance contemporary organizational justice theory as well as help justice scholars effectively address challenges currently facing the field.

Design/methodology/approach

By comparing and contrasting Follett's writings with contemporary research, the author argues that Follett provides a number of insights that can advance contemporary justice theory and research. Discusses ways in which the field can capitalize on these insights.

Findings

Follett foreshadowed a number of important justice issues that have subsequently captured the attention of contemporary justice scholars. More importantly, her process‐oriented perspective suggests a number of research avenues that have yet to be fully explored including emotionality of injustice, integrative unity, and circular responses. In order to take advantage of Follett's insights, however, contemporary justice researchers may need to re‐examine current assumptions about: the nature of organizational justice; the way that it should be studied; and the relationship between theory and practice.

Originality/value

This paper is the first to examine Follett's writings in the context of organizational justice. Although the field of organizational justice has not yet recognized Follett's work, her writings deal both explicitly and implicitly with the concept of justice in considerable depth. Not only does Follett foreshadow contemporary research, but her writings also provide alternative avenues for theory development and research.

Details

Management Decision, vol. 43 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0025-1747

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 17 May 2021

Kai Zeng, Duanxu Wang, Qingyan Ye, Zhengwei Li and Xianwei Zheng

Because unethical behaviour pervades in organisations, how to inhibit the interpersonal influence of unethical behaviour has become increasingly important. This study aims…

Abstract

Purpose

Because unethical behaviour pervades in organisations, how to inhibit the interpersonal influence of unethical behaviour has become increasingly important. This study aims to integrate the deontic justice theory and affective events theory to examine the relationship between an individual’s unethical behaviour and his or her peers’ vicarious learning by highlighting the mediating effect of peers’ moral anger and the moderating effect of task interdependence on this relationship.

Design/methodology/approach

Data were collected in two waves from 254 employees of a large manufacturing company in the People’s Republic of China.

Findings

The hypothesised moderated mediation model was supported. Specifically, as expected, peers’ moral anger mediated the negative relationship between an individual’s unethical behaviour and peers’ vicarious learning. Task interdependence moderated the direct relationship between the individual’s unethical behaviour and his or her peers’ moral anger and the indirect relationship between an individual’s unethical behaviour and his or her peers’ vicarious learning via the peers’ moral anger such that these relationships were stronger when the level of task interdependence was higher.

Originality/value

This study argues that the deontic justice theory is a supplement for the social learning theory in explaining the interpersonal influence of unethical behaviour. Drawing on the deontic justice theory, this study demonstrates that an individual’s unethical behaviours are unlikely to be rewarded or accepted, and by integrating the theories of deontic justice and affective events, offers a rationale for the emotional mechanism that underlies the interpersonal influence of unethical behaviour.

Details

Chinese Management Studies, vol. 15 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1750-614X

Keywords

1 – 10 of over 34000