Search results

1 – 10 of over 21000
Article
Publication date: 20 March 2024

Nakbum Choi and Jaeseong Jang

Recently, the interest of scholars studying procedural justice in policing has shifted from the relationship between procedural justice and citizen compliance to trust in police…

Abstract

Purpose

Recently, the interest of scholars studying procedural justice in policing has shifted from the relationship between procedural justice and citizen compliance to trust in police officers’ perceptions of who exercises it. This study explores the relationship between organizational justice and the perception of procedural justice from the perspective of police officers. Furthermore, it investigates the mediating roles of discretion and responsiveness.

Design/methodology/approach

Using 441 survey responses from South Korean police officers, a mediation model is outlined and tested using structural equation modeling (SEM). The results showed that police officers’ perceptions of organizational justice had indirect effects on the perceived importance of procedural justice. Moreover, discretion and responsiveness mediate the relationship between organizational justice and perceived procedural justice.

Findings

Officers who perceive police fairness are more likely to have a positive perception of procedural justice toward citizens when they have a higher level of discretion and responsiveness. However, police officers’ perceptions of organizational justice are not directly linked to their perceptions of procedural justice.

Originality/value

This study contributes to the generalization of knowledge by empirically testing Van Craen’s theoretical model of the Korean police. It also expands the existing theoretical model by investigating the influence of overall organizational justice and its possible mediators on procedural justice.

Details

Policing: An International Journal, vol. 47 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1363-951X

Keywords

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 seldom…

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

Book part
Publication date: 27 April 2004

Karen A Hegtvedt and Jody Clay-Warner

Processes of legitimacy and justice pervade work organizations. Here we focus on how legitimacy (collective sources of support for an authority) and procedural justice (use of…

Abstract

Processes of legitimacy and justice pervade work organizations. Here we focus on how legitimacy (collective sources of support for an authority) and procedural justice (use of fair procedures) affect how individuals interpret and respond to situations involving unfair outcomes such as underpayment. We draw upon the legitimacy perspective of Walker and Zelditch and the procedural justice approach of Tyler to develop two new models, one in which the two factors constitute objective and independent contextual elements and one in which perceptions of legitimacy and procedural justice are reciprocal. Both models have implications for understanding fairness and compliance in organizations.

Details

Legitimacy Processes in Organizations
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-76231-008-1

Book part
Publication date: 8 July 2010

Jane Dillard-Eggers and Michael L. Roberts

In light of advances in the theory of cognition (Anderson, 1996, 2000; Anderson & Fincham, 1994; Anderson & Lebiere, 1998) and research on learning from worked examples (Atkinson…

Abstract

In light of advances in the theory of cognition (Anderson, 1996, 2000; Anderson & Fincham, 1994; Anderson & Lebiere, 1998) and research on learning from worked examples (Atkinson et al., 2000; Cooper & Sweller, 1987; Sweller & Cooper, 1985), this study extends earlier research findings that auditors need practice and certain kinds of feedback to acquire procedural knowledge to identify causes of variations between expected and actual financial ratios. We test an alternative form of instruction: worked examples. As predicted by Anderson's ACT-R 4.0 theory, the results indicate individuals’ pre-test declarative knowledge interacts significantly with learning method (with or without examples) on procedural knowledge acquisition. In contrast to prior findings, this study shows that improvements in auditing procedural knowledge can be achieved by passive instruction in worked examples, a potentially more efficient (cost-effective) method than practice and feedback for auditor training.

Details

Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-85724-137-5

Book part
Publication date: 9 May 2014

Debbie P. S. Chia, Chong M. Lau and Sharon L. C. Tan

The widespread adoption of the Balanced Scorecard has led to a need to understand how performance measures affect employees’ attitudes and behaviors. Despite the growing trend in…

Abstract

Purpose

The widespread adoption of the Balanced Scorecard has led to a need to understand how performance measures affect employees’ attitudes and behaviors. Despite the growing trend in the implementation of the Balanced Scorecard, there is little research evidence available on the behavioral outcomes resulting from the use of nonfinancial performance measures. This study seeks to address this gap by examining several behavioral outcomes, including job satisfaction, organizational commitment and managerial performance, resulting from the use of financial and nonfinancial performance measures.

Methodology

Data were collected using a mailed questionnaire survey to manufacturing organizations in Singapore. Path analysis technique was employed in this study to investigate the relationships.

Findings

The results of the study show that behavioral outcomes are indifferent regardless of the nature and type of performance measures used. However, the relationships between performance measures and behavioral outcomes are indirect through procedural fairness and trust in supervisor.

Research limitations

Survey questionnaire method was used in this study and there are limitations associated with survey questionnaire method. As our sample was selected from large organizations, it is unclear if our results are generalizable to small organizations. Also, as our sample was selected from the manufacturing sector, generalizing our results to the nonmanufacturing sectors should be made with caution.

Practical implications

This study highlights the need for organizations to pay attention to issues pertaining to procedural fairness and interpersonal trust in the design and implementation of performance measurement systems.

Details

Performance Measurement and Management Control: Behavioral Implications and Human Actions
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78350-378-0

Keywords

Book part
Publication date: 17 December 2008

Jan-Willem van Prooijen

In the current contribution I suggest that reactions to decision-making procedures often are influenced by egocentric concerns. Such egocentrism can be inferred from various…

Abstract

In the current contribution I suggest that reactions to decision-making procedures often are influenced by egocentric concerns. Such egocentrism can be inferred from various theories that assume people's procedural justice judgments to be based on the implications of decision-making procedures for themselves instead of for others. The present review considers evidence for two propositions: (1) People respond more negatively to procedural injustice when it happens to themselves than when it happens to others, and (2) an egocentric self-focus amplifies people's fairness-based responses to decision-making procedures. It is concluded that egocentric motives play a central role in procedural justice effects.

Details

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

Article
Publication date: 23 November 2023

Lemessa Bayissa Gobena

The aim of this study was to examine the moderating roles of the legitimate power and distributive justice of the tax authority on the effect of procedural justice on the…

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to examine the moderating roles of the legitimate power and distributive justice of the tax authority on the effect of procedural justice on the voluntary tax compliance of taxpayers in Addis Ababa, the capital of Ethiopia, by using survey data collected from taxpayers in the city.

Design/methodology/approach

Data for the study were collected from 800 sample taxpayers who were drawn by using a systematic sampling technique. The variables of the study were constructed as indices from composing the scale items developed and tested for their validity by prior researchers. Having collected the data by using a 7-point Likert scale questionnaire and forming the latent variables, hierarchical multiple regressions were applied to determine the moderating effects of the two variables (i.e. legitimate power and distributive justice) on the effect of procedural justice on voluntary tax compliance.

Findings

The author found that both the legitimate power of the tax authority and distributive justice of the authority moderate the effect of procedural justice on voluntary tax compliance. The moderating roles of the two variables appear to be opposite in that low (but not high) distributive justice and high (but not low) legitimate power of the tax authority stimulate the effect of procedural justice on voluntary tax compliance.

Research limitations/implications

The first limitation is that the data used in this study are self-reported data while the subject of the study is sensitive subject about which respondents are not believed to provide genuine responses. This is presumably because taxpayers are less likely to confess their tax evasion as they fear legal actions following their self-report. Hence, other controlled methods such as the experimental design are recommended to replicate the results of this study. The second limitation is that data for the study were gathered through a one-time cross-sectional survey and hence it would not warrant a causal claim between the study variables. Consequently, other research with a longitudinal or experimental design might warrant a causal relationship between the variables.

Practical implications

Therefore, the tax authorities must endeavor to attain high legitimacy by doing “the right things” as perceived by the taxpayers so that their tax-related decisions gain acceptance from the decision recipients. Tax policy makers as well ought to consider the importance of and the relationship between procedural justice, distributive justice and legitimate power of the tax authority in order to attain the maximum possible voluntary compliance of taxpayers that significantly reduces the administrative cost of taxes.

Social implications

The study benefits society by enhancing tax compliance and hence helping the government secure a better amount of tax revenue and provide better public goods and services.

Originality/value

The findings of this study are of high theoretical and policy significance. Theoretically, the findings contribute to the integrative literature on economic deterrence and social-psychological factors that are responsible for voluntary tax compliance decisions. The parallel moderating roles of the two variables on the relationship between procedural justice and voluntary cooperation in a single model and in the tax compliance context are novel. In terms of applicability to policy formulations, they shed light on the need for a shift from a pure focus on aggressive tax audits and penalties, especially in emerging economies to a combination of the tax audits and the nurturing of the voluntary deference of taxpayers to the tax authority's decisions. Caution must, however, be taken that the results of this study may not be applicable to tax environments in other countries.

Details

Asian Review of Accounting, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1321-7348

Keywords

Book part
Publication date: 29 March 2021

Steven E. Abraham and Paula B. Voos

We examine the evolution of labor arbitration decisions between 1988 and 2018 in which a union-represented employee was alleged to have committed sexual harassment. We find that…

Abstract

We examine the evolution of labor arbitration decisions between 1988 and 2018 in which a union-represented employee was alleged to have committed sexual harassment. We find that management punished sexual harassment more stringently over time and that arbitrators became more sensitive to whether or not good procedure was followed by management over time. Distributive justice was also a major concern for arbitrators. The results suggest that it is essential for management to exercise procedural justice in disciplining employees, but that it is just as important for management to consider distributive justice when it comes to imposing discipline for inappropriate behavior.

Details

Advances in Industrial and Labor Relations
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-83982-132-5

Keywords

Book part
Publication date: 1 January 2014

Robert J. Parker, James M. Kohlmeyer, Sakthi Mahenthirian and Terry Sincich

Prior studies in accounting argue that subordinates have private information about their areas of responsibility and that revelation of such information benefits the organization…

Abstract

Purpose

Prior studies in accounting argue that subordinates have private information about their areas of responsibility and that revelation of such information benefits the organization. This study investigates factors that encourage subordinates to share this information with their superiors during the budgeting process. According to the proposed theory, the fairness of the budgeting system, specifically its procedural justice, influences the degree of information sharing. If the subordinate believes that budgeting procedures are fair, the subordinate is more likely to disclose private information during the budgeting process.

Design/methodology/approach

We conduct an anonymous survey of supervisors and managers in four companies. Regression model is developed with information sharing as the dependent variable. Independent variables include procedural justice of budgeting system and also budget participation and organizational commitment, variables that prior studies have identified as important in information sharing.

Findings

Results support the proposed model in general. The three independent variables (procedural justice, budget participation, commitment) interact in their effect on information sharing.

Research limitations/implications

Results suggest that companies that seek the private information of subordinates should consider the fairness of the budgeting system. Fair procedures encourage information exchange.

Details

Advances in Management Accounting
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78350-632-3

Keywords

Book part
Publication date: 7 June 2010

Heather Barry and Tom R. Tyler

Purpose – This chapter reviews the authors’ research on group procedural justice and group-serving behavior. It makes the case that fairness and unfairness can both motivate…

Abstract

Purpose – This chapter reviews the authors’ research on group procedural justice and group-serving behavior. It makes the case that fairness and unfairness can both motivate group-serving behavior; the former makes group members feel good about their identity, leading them to “reward” the group, and the latter indicates a group shortcoming, leading members to “repair” the group.

Design/methodology/approach – The chapter describes several studies published elsewhere. Correlational research with employees and students examines the relationship between group procedural fairness and group members’ positive affect, which should translate into group-serving behavior. Experimental research with students investigates whether group procedural unfairness can result in group-serving behavior (measured via self-report and observed helping). Complementary findings from other authors are briefly described and discussed in support of a developed theoretical model of group procedural justice and group-serving behavior.

Findings – Group procedural fairness was more strongly related to arousing positive affect for strongly identified group members. Separately, strongly identified group members engaged in more group-serving behavior when their group had unfair rather than fair procedures.

Research limitations/implications – Possible boundary conditions for the motivating effects of unfairness are discussed (e.g., group permeability, time frame, and anonymity of unfairness). Suggestions for future research are proposed (e.g., examine the effect of justice information on group-serving behavior when group members can also modify group procedures).

Practical implications – Better understanding the effects of group procedural unfairness should influence how organizations and societies promote group-serving behavior.

Originality/value – Research on the motivating effects of both group procedural fairness and unfairness are synthesized into one theoretical model.

Details

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

1 – 10 of over 21000