1. Trang chủ
  2. » Kinh Doanh - Tiếp Thị

The oxford handbook of justice in the workplace (oxford library of psychology) 1st edition {PRRG} 2015

697 67 0

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

Tài liệu hạn chế xem trước, để xem đầy đủ mời bạn chọn Tải xuống

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Định dạng
Số trang 697
Dung lượng 7,33 MB

Các công cụ chuyển đổi và chỉnh sửa cho tài liệu này

Nội dung

Seeing the forest or the trees of organizational justice: Eects of temporal perspective on employee concerns about unfair treatment at work.. Eects of procedural and distributive justice

Trang 57

, ,

Christian, J S., Christian, M S., Garza, A S., & Ellis, A P

J (2012) Examining retaliatory responses to justice vio

-lations and recovery attempts in teams

, , 12181232

Cojuharenco, I., Patient, D., & Bashshur, M R (2011) Seeing

the forest or the trees of organizational justice: Eects

of temporal perspective on employee concerns about unfair

treatment at work

, , 1731

Cojuharenco, I., Shteynberg, G., Gelfand, M., & Schminke,

M (2012) Self-construal and unethical behavior

, , 447461

Colquitt, J A (2001) On the dimensionality of organizational

justice: A construct validation of a measure

, , 386 400

Colquitt, J A., Scott, B A., Judge, T A., & Shaw, J C (2006)

Justice and personality: Using integrative theories to derive

moderators of justice eects

, , 110127

Colquitt, J A., & Shaw, J C (2005) How organizational

jus-tice should be measured In J Greenberg & J A Colquitt

Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Colquitt, J A., & Zapata-Phelan, C P (2007) Trends in

the-ory building and thethe-ory testing: A ve-decade study of the

Academy of Management Journal

, 50, 12811303

Colquitt, J A., Zapata-Phelan, C P., & Greenberg, J (2005)

What is organizational justice? A historical overview In J

Greenberg & J A Colquitt (Eds.),

(pp 358) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Cooper, W H., & Richardson, A J (1986) Unfair

Coyle-Shapiro, J., & Dhensa, R K (2011) Justice in the

twenty-rst-century organization In K Townsend & A

Wilinson (Eds.),

(pp 385404) Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar

Cropanzano, R., & Ambrose, M L (2001) Procedural and

dis-tributive justice are more similar than you think: A monis

-tic perspective and a research agenda In J Greenberg & R

119151) Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press

Cropanzano, R., Byrne, Z S., Bobocel, D R., & Rupp, D E

(2001) Moral virtues, fairness heuristics, social entities,

and other denizens of organizational justice

, , 164209

Cropanzano, R., & Konovsky, M A (1995) Resolving the

justice dilemma by improving the outcomes: e case of

, 239263

Cropanzano, R., Walumbwa, F O., & Aryee, S (2013,

April)

Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the

Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology

Houston, TX

Dayan, M., Di Benedetto, C A., & Colak, M (2009) Managerial

trust in new product development projects: Its antecedents

and consequences , , 2137

De Backer, M., Boen, F., Ceux, T., De Cuyper, B., Hoigaard,

R., Callens, F & Vande Broek, G (2011) Do perceived

justice and need support of the coach predict team

iden-tication and cohesion? Testing their relative importance

among top volleyball and handball players in Belgium and

DeConinck, J B (2010) e eect of organizational justice, perceived organizational support, and perceived supervisor support on marketing employees level of trust

, , 13491355

Echambadi, R., Arroniz, I., Reinartz, W., & Lee, J (2006) Empirical generalizations from brand extension research: How sure are we?

, , 253261

Echambadi, R., Campbell, B A., & Agarwal, R (2006) Encouraging best practice in quantitative management research: An incomplete list of opportunities

, , 18011820

Edwards, J R (2009) Seven deadly myths of testing moderation in organizational research In R.J Vandenberg (Ed.),

(pp 143164) New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group

Edwards, J R., & Berry, J W (2010) e presence of some thing or the absence of nothing: Increasing theoretical precision in management research

orga-Erdogan, B., & Bauer, T N (2010) Dierentiated leadermember exchanges: e buering role of justice cli -

Evans, E M., & McShane, S L (1988) Employee perceptions of performance appraisal fairness in 2 organiza-tions

-, , 177191

Folger, R., & Konovsky, M A (1989) Eects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions

, , 115130

Frazier, M L., Johnson, P D., Gavin, M., Gooty, J., & Snow,

D B (2010) Organizational justice, trustworthiness, and trust: A multifoci examination

Hauenstein, N M A., McGonigle, T., & Flinder, S W (2001)

A meta-analysis of the relationship between procedural

Trang 58

justice and distributive justice: Implications for justice

, 3956

Herda, D N., & Lavelle, J J (2011) e eects of organi

-zational fairness and commitment on the extent of

ben-ets big four alumni provide their former rm

, , 156166

Herda, D N., & Lavelle, J J (2012) e auditor-audit rm

relationship and its eect on burnout and turnover inten

-tion , , 707723

Heslin, P A., & VandeWalle, D (2011) Performance

appraisal procedural justice: e role of a managers

implicit person theory , ,

16941718

Hollensbe, E C., Khazanchi, S., & Masterson, S S (2008)

How do I assess if my supervisor and organization are

fair? Identifying the rules underlying entity-based jus

10991116

Holtz, B C., & Harold, C M (2009) Fair today, fair

tomor-row? A longitudinal investigation of overall justice percep

Holtz, B C., & Harold, C M (2013) Eects of leadership

consideration and structure on employee perceptions of

justice and counterproductive work behavior

, , 492519

Hulland, J., Nenkov, G Y., & Barclay, D W (2012) Perceived

marketing-sales relationship eectiveness: a matter of

450467

Johnson, J., Truxillo, D M., Erdogan, B., Bauer, T N., &

Hammer, L (2009) Perceptions of overall fairness: Are

eects on job performance moderated by leader-member

exchange? , , 432449

Johnson, R E., Chang, C H., & Rosen, C C (2010) Who I

am depends on how fairly Im treated: Eects of justice on

self-identity and regulatory focus

, , 30203058

Johnson, R E., & Lord, R G (2010) Implicit eects of justice

on self-identity , , 681695

Johnson, R E., Rosen, C C., Chang, C H., Djurdjevic, E.,

& Taing, M U (2012) Recommendations for

improv-ing the construct clarity of higher-order

, 6272

Johnson, R E., Selenta, C., & Lord, R G (2006) When

orga-nizational justice and the self-concept meet: Consequences

for the organization and its members

, , 175201

Jones, D A., & Martens, M L (2009) e mediating role of

overall fairness and the moderating role of trust certainty in

justice-criteria relationships: e formation and use of

fair-ness heuristics in the workplace

, , 10251051

Kenny, D A (2008) Reections on mediation

, , 353358

Kim, H.-S (2007) A multilevel study of antecedents and a

mediator of employee-organization relationships

, (2), 167197

Kim, T.-Y (2004) e eects of cognitive appraisal on justice

judgments: How and why do Asians dier from United States

Leventhal, G S (1980) What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships In K Gergen, M Greenberg, & R Willis

2755) New York, NY: Plenum Press

Leventhal, G S., Karuza, J., & Fry, W R (1980) Beyond fairness: A theory of allocation preferences In G Mikula (Ed.), (pp 167218) New York, NY: Springer-Verlag

Li, A., Cropanzano, R., & Bagger, J (2013) Justice climate and peer justice climate

Liao, H., & Rupp, D E (2005) e impact of justice climate and justice orientation on work outcomes: A cross level

242256

Lind, E A (2001a) Fairness Heuristic eory: Justice ments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations In

judg-J Greenberg, & R Cropanzano (Eds.),

(pp 5688) Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press

Lind, E A (2001b) inking critically about justice judg

Lind, E A., Kulik, C T., Ambrose, M L., & deVera Park,

M V (1993) Individual and corporate dispute tion: Using procedural fairness as a decision heuristic

resolu-, resolu-, 224251

Lind, E A., & Tyler, T R (1988)

New York, NY: Plenum Press

Madera, J M (2012) Using social networking websites as a selection tool: e role of selection process fairness and job pursuit intentions

, , 12761282

Mayer, D M., Bardes, M., & Piccolo, R F (2008) Do servant-leaders help satisfy follower needs? An organiza-tional justice perspective

, , 180197

Nicklin, J M., Greenbaum, R., McNall, L A., Folger, R., & Williams, K J (2011) e importance of contextual vari -ables when judging fairness: An examination of counterfac-tual thoughts and fairness theory

, , 127141

Nieho, B P., & Moorman, R H (1993) Justice as a tor of the relationship between methods of monitor-ing and organizational citizenship behavior

media-, media-, 527556

Patel, C., Budhwar, P., & Varma, A (2012) Overall justice, work group identication and work outcomes: Test of

Trang 67

Recent research and theory expands the

mul-tifoci justice framework by looking outward from

the organization and incorporating external

stake-holders as targets of organizational injustice (Rupp,

2011) In this regard, the question faced by

employ-ees now becomes, How fairly does my organization

treat external stakeholders such as customers, com

-munities, unions, and the natural environment?

Research on third-party observers is germane to

this question and indicates that employee attitudes

and behaviors can be inuenced by justice

percep-tions even when the employee is not the recipient of

the (un)fair treatment (e.g., Turillo, Folger, Lavelle,

Umphress, & Gee, 2002).

Whereas much of the justice literature focuses on

victims reactions to unfair treatment, third-party

justice is concerned with how and why observers may

react when others are treated unfairly e deontic

model of justice (Folger, 2001) is particularly rele

-vant to understanding why observers might respond

to the unfair treatment of others From this

perspec-tive, fairness matters as an end in and of itself at

is, people are concerned with and respond to unfair

treatment based upon a desire to uphold moral

stan-dards and principles (Cropanzano, Goldman, &

Folger, 2003) A series of experiments by Turillo and

colleagues (2002) oer support for this perspective

demonstrating that participants desired to punish

perpetrators and were willing to sacrice personal

economic gain even when they had no relationship

with the victim us, the deontic perspective sug

-gests that employees are likely to pay attention and

react to perceptions of how fairly the organization

treats its external stakeholders.

Recent empirical ndings support the rationale

that employees may react to their organizations

corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives via

third-party justice judgments For example, Turker

(2008) found that employee organizational

com-mitment was positively inuenced by CSR eorts

Hansen et al (2011) showed that employees with

positive perceptions of organizational CSR activi

-ties were less likely to leave the organization and

more likely to engage in citizenship behaviors,

with these relationships being partially mediated

by employee trust ese results demonstrate the

utility of studying employees third-party

reac-tions to their organizareac-tions treatment of external

constituents.

Rupp, Shao, ornton, & Skarlicki (2013) extend

this line of research by investigating a multimotive

framework that simultaneously assesses reactions to both rst-party (i.e., self-focused) and third-party (i.e., other-focused) perceptions of justice ese researchers found that both job applicants and employees react negatively toward organizations that they perceive to be socially irresponsible First, through a scenario-based experiment, the authors demonstrated that the positive relationship between CSR perceptions and applicants job pursuit inten- tions was strengthened by the applicants moral identity A second study replicated these interactive eects by showing that the relationship between employees CSR perceptions and their organiza- tional citizenship behavior was stronger for employ - ees who were high in moral identity Across both studies, the eects of CSR perceptions were also found to be stronger the less individuals perceived that they themselves were treated in a fair manner Based on this intriguing pattern of results, Rupp

et al suggest that the strength of deontic concerns may vary across individuals, and that self-focused fairness perceptions may alert individuals to the unfair treatment of others.

Overall, research that considers the psychol ogy of CSR perceptions is only just beginning to accumulate (Greening & Turban, 2000; Gully, Phillips, Castellano, Han, & Kim, 2013; Jones, 2010; Jones, Willness, & Madey, 2013; Turban & Greening, 1997), making this area ripe for future contributions In particular, the multifoci perspec- tive of justice is amenable to future research on the micro-foundations of CSR through the study of justice perceptions and reactions of various sources (e.g., job applicants, employees, customers, etc.) In brief, by shifting the focus of multifoci justice to external targets of organizational justice, research - ers may develop a more complete understanding of the far-reaching eects of justice on employee reac- tions and behavior.

-e goal of this chapt-er has b-e-en to discuss emerging research pertaining to the multifoci per - spective of justice including sources both internal and external to the organization Although much

of the extant organizational justice literature has recognized the consequences of diering types

of justice, our chapter suggests there is much to

be gained by emphasizing the source of justice Recently, scholars have stressed the importance of a target similarity approach to the study of organiza - tional justice by highlighting the signicance of the source of justice to a more nuanced understanding

Trang 68

, , ,

Lavelle, J J., McMahan, G C., & Harris, C (2011) Patients

and workgroups as beneciaries of organizational

citizen-ship behavior: A multifoci justice and resource depletion

perspective Paper presented at the

, Savannah, GA

Lavelle, J J., Rupp, D E., & Brockner, J (2007) Taking a

multifoci approach to the study of justice, social exchange,

and citizenship behavior: e target similarity model

, , 841866

Leung, K (2005) How generalizable are justice eects

across cultures? In J Greenberg, & J A Colquitt (Eds.),

(pp 555586)

Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Leventhal, G S (1976) e distribution of rewards and

resources in groups and organizations In L Berkowitz &

E Walster (Eds.),

(pp 91131) New York, NY: Academic Press

Leventhal, G S (1980) What should be done with equity

theory? In K J Gergen, M S Greenberg, & R H Willis

2755) New York, NY: Plenum

Lind, A (2001a) Fairness heuristic theory: justice judgments

as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations In J

Greenberg, & R Cropanzano (Eds.),

Masterson, S S., Lewis, K., Goldman, B M., & Taylor, M S

(2000) Integrating justice and social exchange: e dif

-fering eects of fair procedures and treatment on work

738748

Maurer, T J., & Tarulli, B A (1994) Investigation of

per-ceived environment, perper-ceived outcome, and person vari

-ables in relationship to voluntary development activity by

Olkkonen, M., & Lipponen, J (2006) Relationships between

organizational justice, identication with organization and

work-unit, and group related outcomes

, , 202215

Price, K., Lavelle, J J., Henley, A B., Cocchiara, F., &

Buchanan, R (2006) Judging the fairness of voice-based

participation across multiple and interrelated stages of deci

-sion making

, , 212226

Rego, A., Ribeiro, N., & Cunha, M P (2010) Perceptions of

organizational virtuousness and happiness as predictors of

organizational citizenship behaviors

, , 215235

Rupp, D E (2011) An employee-centered model of organi

-zational justice and social responsibility

, , 7294

Rupp, D E., & Aquino, K F (2009) Nothing so practical

as a good justice theory

, , 205210

Rupp, D E., & Cropanzano, R (2002) Multifoci justice and

social exchange relationships

, , 925946

Rupp, D E., Ganapathi, J., Aguilera, R V., & Williams,

C A (2006) Employee reactions to corporate social

responsibility: An organizational justice framework

, , 537543

Rupp, D E., McCance, A S., & Grandey, A (2007) A cognitive-emotional theory of customer injustice and emotional labor In D De Cremer (Ed.)

(pp.199226) Charlotte, NC: Information Age

Rupp, D E., McCance, A S., Spencer, S., & Sonntag, K (2008) Customer (in)justice and emotional labor: e role

of perspective taking, anger, and emotional regulation

, , 903924

Rupp, D E., & Paddock, E L (2010) From justice events

to justice climate: A multilevel temporal model of information aggregation and judgment

-, -, 239267

Rupp, D E., Shao, R., Jones, K S., & Liao, H (2014) e util ity of a multifoci approach to the study of organizational justice: A meta-analytic investigation into the consideration

-of normative rules, moral accountability, bandwidth-delity, and social exchange

, 159185

Rupp, D E., Shao, R., ornton, M A., & Skarlicki, D P (2013) Applicants and employees reactions to corporate social responsibility: e moderating eects of rst-party justice perceptions and moral identity , (4), 895933 doi:10.1111/peps.12030

Rupp, D E., & Spencer, S (2006) When customers lash out: e eect of customer interactional injustice on emo -tional labor and the mediating role of discrete emotions

Schaufeli, W B (2006) e balance of give and take: Toward

a social exchange model of burnout

citizen-Skarlicki, D P., & Latham, G P (1997) Leadership ing in organizational justice to increase citizenship behavior within a labor union , , 617633

train-Skarlicki, D P., Van Jaarsveld, D D., & Walker, D D (2008) Getting even for customer mistreatment: e role of moral identity in the relationship between customer interper-sonal injustice and employee sabotage

, , 13351347

Spencer, S., & Rupp, D E (2009) Angry, guilty, and icted: Injustice toward co-workers heightens emotional labor through cognitive and emotional mechanisms

con-, con-, 429444

Tepper, B J (2001) Health consequences of organizational injustice: Tests of main and interactive eects

, , 197215

Ngày đăng: 22/04/2019, 13:13

TỪ KHÓA LIÊN QUAN

🧩 Sản phẩm bạn có thể quan tâm