Search results

This study revisits the area of reliance on budget to evaluate employee performance. It contributes in several ways. First, it updates this traditional research area making it more relevant to the current debate on the use of financial vis-à-vis nonfinancial measures in multidimensional performance measurement systems. Second, it examines the relationship between reliance on budget and budgetary participation in a manner that is different from that used by prior studies. Instead of treating budgetary participation as a moderating variable, the study examines it as a mediating variable. Specifically, the study hypothesizes that reliance on budget as performance measures affects the extent of employee budgetary participation. Third, it incorporates the recent interest by management accounting researchers in organizational fairness into this research area. It hypothesizes that budgetary participation affects the extent of employees’ perceptions of procedural fairness, which, in turn, influences employee job satisfaction and performance. The structural equation modeling results based on a sample of 152 managers indicate that the use of budget targets for performance evaluation is positively associated with employee job satisfaction and performance. However, much of these effects are indirect via (1) budgetary participation and (2) procedural fairness.

Based on the referent cognitions theory (RCT), individuals compare their outcomes to a given reference point. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of centrality bias in subjective performance evaluation on two employees’ work behaviors; willingness to exert work effort and retaliation intention.

A 2  ×  2 × 2 between-subject real-effort task experiment was conducted on 162 Accounting and Management students. Centrality bias and level of task difficulty were each manipulated into two groups. Meanwhile, the level of performance was divided based on the average score of the real-effort task.

The experimental data were examined using MANOVA and PROCESS macro regression. It reveals that centrality bias negatively affects willingness to exert work effort through perceived procedural fairness and positively affects retaliation intention. These findings align with the RCT in explaining the perceived procedural fairness psychological mechanism and the work behavior resulting from an unfair evaluation procedure.

This study is the first of its kind to investigate the effect of centrality bias in subjective performance evaluation on positive and negative employee behaviors concurrently, which refers to the real-effort experimental task. The study demonstrates the significant impact of centrality bias on unwillingness to exert effort and adverse behavior.

The purpose of this paper is to ascertain if it is procedural fairness, or role clarity, or both procedural fairness and role clarity that mediate the relationship between non-financial measures and managerial performance. Role clarity and procedural fairness may mediate the relationship between performance measures and managerial performance.

A survey questionnaire was used to collect the required data. The sample was drawn from 149 managers from 103 large manufacturing organisations located in the UK. The data were analysed by structural equation modelling.

The results indicate that it is role clarity that significantly mediates the relationship between non-financial measures and managerial performance. Surprisingly, procedural fairness has no significant mediating effect on the relationship.

To date, no prior studies have investigated systematically the effects of non-financial measures as well as the mechanism by which non-financial measures influence role clarity, procedural fairness and managerial performance. This study contributes by incorporating both procedural fairness and role clarity within an integrated model. This assists the research to ascertain precisely which variable (procedural fairness or role clarity) mediates the relationship between non-financial measures and managerial performance as well as the relative strengths of the two mediating variables.

The existing literature has a lack of modeling of procedural fairness concerns in the supply chain level. This paper aims to investigate how procedural fairness concerns affect channel decisions, performance and coordination.

This paper considers a supply chain consisting of one supplier and one retailer who have procedural fairness concerns in a classic Stackelberg game setting. The model is set in sales promotional environment. According to the existing literature, engagement is used to depict fair process. Some findings are made through analyzing respective decisions of the supplier and the retailer under the influence of procedural fairness concerns.

The results show that the channel efficiency can be improved when the retailer exhibits procedural fairness concerns, but if the aversion to unfair process exceeds a certain threshold, the retailer cannot benefit from it. Besides, the retailer profits more when he cares about distributional fairness, although the whole channel surplus can be improved by procedural fairness concerns.

This is the first paper to study the influences of procedural fairness concerns on supply chain decisions and channel performance. Finally, a mechanism combining a wholesale price contract with slotting allowances is proposed to coordinate the supply chain.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to examine a varied set of personal characteristics (i.e. cultural values tied to Confucianism, Big Five personality attributes and test experience) for their combined ability to predict job applicants’ expected and experienced procedural fairness in the context of personnel selection.

A total of 324 applicants were surveyed as part of a process to select entry-level positions at a large IT manufacturing company in eastern China. Data were gathered in two waves, such that applicants’ personal characteristics and fairness expectations were obtained prior to their perceptions of procedural fairness, which were collected after the selection interview.

Confucian values, neuroticism, conscientiousness and test experience all predicted applicants’ procedural fairness expectations. Only test experience had both direct and indirect effects on procedural justice perceptions. All other effects involving personal characteristics and experience of procedural fairness were mediated by applicants’ fairness expectations.

The demonstration of the impact of a varied set of personal characteristics on applicants’ perceptions of procedural fairness is consistent with theory-driven models intended to understand and predict these perceptions. The findings suggest, among other considerations, that multinational businesses cannot assume that a standardized approach to selection will be viewed in the same manner by applicants across national contexts.

The authors show, in an operational employee selection context, how a varied set of personal characteristics can usefully combine to predict applicants’ procedural fairness expectations, as well as their experience of procedural fairness.

The purpose of this research is to explore the relationship between supervisor-subordinate Guanxi (SSG) and employee affective commitment. Integrating social exchange theory (SET) with conservation of resource (COR) theory, this paper explores the mixed effect of SSG on affective commitment as well as the moderating roles of an individual difference (subordinate work ethic) and a contextual variable (procedural fairness).

This research adopted a survey involving 249 subordinates to test the hypothesized model.

The results showed that the relationship between SSG and affective commitment was inverted U-shaped, and this relationship was moderated by work ethic and procedural fairness, respectively.

Despite those contributions listed above, there are still some limitations that future research should seek to address. First, the data of this research are cross-sectional, which might cause common method bias to responses. However, all the hypotheses are higher-order forms of the main effects (curvilinear and moderating effects), which are not affected by the cross-sectional nature of the study (Podskoff et al., 2003). Moreover, given these variables in the model are related to subordinates' internal psychological states or perceptions, data for the study should be collected from subordinates. Relatedly, the cross-sectional nature of the dataset may raise a question about the directionality of the relationships. However, the research model is based on strong theories (i.e. SET and COR theory). In addition, prior research has indicated that Guanxi has an influence on commitment, not vice versa (Cheung et al., 2009; Chen and O'Leary, 2018). However, given that only experimental design can conclusively prove the directionality of the relationship, the authors encourage to replicate the current study using such a design. In addition, the authors encourage future studies to collect longitudinal data and replicate the current study. Second, this study only tested how work ethic and procedural fairness moderated the relationship between SSG and affective commitment. The authors encourage future research to explore the moderating effect of other moderators, such as the integrity of supervisors. In particular, when the supervisor has a high level of integrity, the negative influence of higher SSG may be weakened. Third, this study did not explore the mechanism linking SSG with affective commitment. Future studies should explore the potential mechanisms. For example, subordinates' emotional exhaustion might be the potential mechanism between SSG and affective commitment.

The results imply that supervisors should treat SSG as a double-edged sword and maximize the positive influence of SSG. In addition, organizations should hire individuals with high work ethic or provide related training. At last, organizations should realize the importance of procedural fairness and set a sector that oversees making and executing well-designed roles.

Previous studies on SSG mainly focused on its positive effect on affective commitment, neglecting to explore its negative effect. This paper helped to illustrate the relationship between SSG and affective commitment comprehensively by indicating the relationship between SSG and affective commitment was inverted U-shaped and moderated by work ethic and procedural fairness, respectively.

While studies about business-to-business (B2B) relationships have mainly addressed buyer–supplier long-term exchanges, focusing on social outcomes such as trust, commitment and cooperation, there is little research that explores the social outcomes which stem from short-term B2B transactions. The purpose of this paper is to explain buyers’ intention to renew a contract after discrete and time-delimited transactions by suggesting a model that complements social exchange theory with theories of fairness. In detail, this study aims to determine how evaluations of economic and social outcomes are complemented by both procedural fairness and distributive fairness.

The hypotheses are tested in the social couponing industry with a survey of a sample of 199 firms purchasing advertising services from daily deal websites. Data are analyzed using covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM).

The findings reveal direct effects of procedural fairness on social outcomes (satisfaction) and distributive fairness on the intention to renew a contract, negative moderating effect of procedural fairness on the relationship between economic outcomes (campaign effectiveness) and social outcomes (satisfaction).

In discrete, time-delimited transactions, high levels of procedural fairness may partially compensate for low levels of economic outcomes and prevent a reduction in social outcomes. Hence, when economic outcomes are influenced largely by external, uncontrollable conditions, the buyer seems to appreciate the supplier’s efforts to behave fairly.

Social outcomes matter even in discrete transactions and considerations of fairness should be integrated in the management of discrete transactions. Sharing economic outcomes fairly is not sufficient to secure the buyer’s intention to renew the contract.

This study proposes and tests a model that complements social exchange theory with theories of fairness and explains contract renewal in discrete, time-delimited transactions, encompassing both economic outcomes and social outcomes.

The purpose of this study is to contribute to current hospitality and tourism research on the sharing economy by studying the under-researched aspects of regulatory desirability, moral legitimacy and fairness in the context of home-sharing platforms (e.g. Airbnb).

Three separate 2×1 between-subjects experimental vignette surveys are used to test the effects of three types of fairness (procedural, interpersonal and informational) on two outcomes: moral legitimacy and regulatory desirability.

The results of the research show that high perceived fairness across all three types increases moral legitimacy and reduces regulatory desirability. Respondents who perceive a fictional home-sharing platform to be fair consider it to be more legitimate and want it to be less regulated.

Following established practices and reducing external validity, the study uses a fictional scenario and a fictional company for the experimental vignette. The data collection took place in the UK, prohibiting cultural comparisons.

The research is useful for home-sharing platform managers by showing how they can boost moral legitimacy and decrease regulatory desirability through a strong focus on fairness. It can also help policymakers and consumer protection advocates by providing evidence about regulatory desirability and how it is affected by fairness perceptions.

The study adds to hospitality and tourism research by offering theoretically meaningful and practically relevant conclusions about the importance of fairness in driving stakeholder opinions about home-sharing platforms.