We explore workers' justice judgment patterns to understand how they use information to assess fair treatment at work. Justice judgment patterns are the unique set of information that individuals draw upon and use when evaluating the overall fairness of an entity. Data from four samples of workers from Malaysia, Cambodia, the Philippines, and China were analyzed using a multi-group latent class analysis. Results suggest four classes of justice judgment processes, three of which represent different patterns of heuristic processing. Comprehensive processors use a wide range of information when making justice judgments, while minimalist processors consider a limited range of information. Reward-focused processors focus on distributive justice cues and treatment-focused processors specifically attend to interpersonal justice cues while neglecting distributive justice cues. The latent class structure shared conceptual meaning across countries but the patterns had different rates of representation. Findings suggest that individuals do not always use complete information when assessing how fairly they are treated at work. Many appear to use heuristics that emphasize minimizing information processing, instrumental outcomes, or more relational outcomes. Results and implications are discussed.

This study applies social exchange theory to examine the effects of employees’ perceptions of monitoring proc edures on turnover intentions in call centers. Social exchange theory suggests that employees can have exchange relationships with their organizations (Blau, 1964). The authors suggest that reactions to monitoring systems may either strengthen or weaken those exchanges to the point where negative reactions may cause employees to consider leaving their organizations. Random samples of employees from an inbound (n = 80) and outbound (n = 90) call center are analyzed. Three different types of monitoring systems are examined: monitoring done in-house by the call center; monitoring performed by an external agency; and monitoring the time spent between calls. Employee perceptions of each of the monitoring procedures significantly predict their intentions to turnove r. From a practical standpoint, turnover is a major problem in the call center industry due to the high costs associated with training new employees. The finding that specific monitoring procedures are contributing to employees intentions to turnover suggests that changes to problematic monitoring procedures could help to alleviate turnover problems and reduce call center costs. Theoretically, the findings of this study suggest that positive reactions to monitoring strengthen the social exchange relationship between employees and their organizations decreasing the likelihood that employees will express intentions to turnover. Conversely, negative reactions to monitoring systems weaken the social exchanges between employees and their organizations to the point where employees are more likely to express intentions to turnover.

We explore workers' justice judgment patterns to understand how they use information to assess fair treatment. Justice judgment patterns are the unique set of information that individuals draw upon and use when evaluating the overall fairness of an entity. Drawing on fairness heuristics theory, we expect that some workers will use restricted and/or focused sets of information. Data from four samples of workers from Malaysia, Cambodia, The Philippines, and China were analyzed using a multi-group latent class analysis. Results suggest four classes of justice judgment processes, three of which represent different patterns of heuristic processing. Comprehensive processors use a wide range of information when making justice judgments, while minimalist processors consider a limited range. Reward-focused processors focus on distributive justice cues and treatment- focused processors specifically attend to interpersonal justice cues while neglecting distributive justice cues. The latent class structure shared meaning across countries but patterns had different rates of representation.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to apply social exchange theory to predict the effects of procedural and interpersonal justice on turnover intentions. Specifically, it is predicted that organizational commitment mediates the effects of procedural justice on turnover intentions and that supervisory commitment mediates the effect of interpersonal justice on turnover intentions.Design/methodology/approachSurveys were administered to 212 call center employees to measure the effects of procedural justice, interpersonal justice, organizational commitment, supervisory commitment and turnover intentions. Mediation effects were tested using Baron and Kenny's methodology.FindingsSupport was found for a partial mediation effect of organizational commitment on the effect of procedural justice on turnover intentions; and for a full mediation effect of supervisory commitment on the effect of interpersonal justice on turnover intentions.Practical implicationsReduction of turnover is a major problem for the call center industry, as considerable resources are spent training new employees. This research suggests that turnover intentions can be reduced by addressing problems with organizational procedures and with the treatment of employees by supervisors.Originality/valueThe findings of this study replicate the mediation effects of organizational commitment on the effect of procedural justice on turnover intentions in call centers. In addition, this is the first study of its kind to show the mediation effects of supervisory commitment on the effect of interpersonal justice on turnover intentions.

Procedural justice has shown significant linkages to organizational outcomes such as organizational commitment and turnover. For this reason, we propose that measures of procedural justice can serve a diagnostic function to signal potential problems with important organizational-level outcomes. However, if used alone, it does not tell us which specific procedures require change in order to resolve potential problems. This study proposes, and tests, a methodology which combines general measures of procedural justice with measures of perceptions of specific procedures in order to diagnose problems with organizational outcomes. This is tested in two call centers. The research design employs a survey of randomly selected employees from the call centers. The effects of a general measure of procedural justice on the organizational outcomes of turnover intentions and organizational commitment are examined. Further, we examine the effects of attitudes towards specific monitoring procedures on a general measure of procedural justice. Baron and Kenny’s statistical methodology is employed to test these relationships; to show that procedural justice mediates the effect of employee perceptions of monitoring on turnover intentions and organizational commitment. Our findings support complete mediation effects. The implications of these findings are that general perceptions of procedural justice can be used to screen for potential problems with organizational outcomes. If general effects are found, organizations can employ more specific measures of organizational procedures to target procedural problems. The methodology proposed here has the potential to identify specific procedures that organizations can focus on in order to improve organizational outcomes. Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE AR-SA /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}

Employees in three call centers were surveyed about their perceptions of organizational justice. Four factors were measured: distributive justice, procedural justice, interpersonal justice, and informational justice. Structural equation modeling was employed to test whether a two-, three-, or four-factor model best fit the call center data. A three-factor model of distributive, procedural, and informational justice provided the best fit to these data. The three-factor model that showed the best fit does not conform to any of the more traditional models identified in the organizational justice literature. This implies that the context in which organizational justice is measured may play a role in identifying which justice factors are relevant to employees. Findings add to the empirical evidence on the dimensionality of organizational justice and imply that dimensionality of organizational justice is more context-dependent than previously thought.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present a new method to account for investments in human capital, which the authors have named investment capitalization. This method uses investments in training and hiring of employees as a surrogate for their intellectual capital, capitalizing and amortizing the investment over its useful life. Investment capitalization is compared to the more conventional Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and the newer intellectual capital accounting methods.Design/methodology/approachScenarios comparing the effects of downsizing or organizational performance are used to demonstrate the effects of decisions based on intellectual capitalization and GAAP.FindingsResults of the scenario analysis show that the investement capitalization method causes less destruction of intellectual capital during downsizing decisions than does GAAP.Originality/valueThis paper presents a new method of accounting for intellectual capital and demonstates the benefits of this method when making downsizing decsions.

This study examined polarization of perceptions of Procedural Justice. Two polarization mechanisms are examined, Persuasive Arguments and Social Comparisons. Participants were students enrolled in a first-year introductory business class. There were 216 participants in the Persuasive Arguments study, 429 in the Social Comparisons study. The average age of all participants was 22.3 yr. (SD = 2.1); 56% were women. Fields of study represented were business, engineering, information technology, and sports. Analysis showed under conditions of low Procedural Justice, polarization effects were only found with the Persuasive Arguments mechanism. Under conditions of high Procedural Justice, polarization effects were only found with Social Comparisons. Implications for group polarization and Procedural Justice theories are considered.

In a laboratory study, 318 student participants (148 male, 169 female, and one who did not report sex; M age 25.0, SD = 6.0) in introductory organizational behavior classes responded to scenarios in which performance appraisal resulted in either employee promotion or termination. Each scenario had varying levels of three procedural justice criteria for performance appraisal. For both promotion and termination outcomes, analysis showed that, as the number of criteria increased, perceptions of procedural fairness increased. A comparison between the two outcomes showed that perceptions of fairness were significantly stronger for the promotion outcome than for termination.

This article considers potential conflicts between the principles of equity, equality and need in perceptions of fairness regarding employee benefits, based on self-interest bias, and makes specific predictions regarding perceptions of distributive justice in specific benefit plans. It includes predictions regarding perceptions of procedural justice. A survey of 497 employees in seven Canadian organizations tested the predictions. Findings indicate that need is still an important criterion for assessing distributive justice in employee benefits, although the survey also found evidence of self-interest bias. Perceptions of procedural justice were found to be significantly higher in plans with extensive communication and employee participation in plan design. Organizations that take a proactive approach to understanding how employees determine their perceptions of procedural and distributive justice in employee benefits, and design a benefit plan accordingly, can potentially increase employees’ perceptions of justice regarding employee benefits and reap associated benefits including improved employee retention, enhanced ability to hire and increased benefit satisfaction.

The self‐interest and relational models of organizational justice were tested to explain the relationship between benefit plan type and organizational justice. Benefit plan types considered were flexible and traditional plans. In support of the self‐interest model employees in flexible benefit plans had significantly higher perceptions of procedural justice than employees in traditional benefit plans. There were no significant differences in perceptions of distributive justice between the plan types.

This study has two objectives. First, to predict the outcomes of a public sector downsizing; second to measure effects of downsizing at organizational and inter‐organizational levels. Primary data to assess the organizational level effects was collected through interviews with senior executives at two of Metro‐Toronto's hospitals. Secondary data, to assess the inter‐organizational effects, was collected from government documents and media reports. Due to the exploratory nature of the study's objectives a case study method was employed. Most institutional downsizing practices aligned with successful outcomes. Procedures involved at the inter‐organizational level aligned with unsuccessful outcomes and negated organizational initiatives. This resulted in an overall alignment with unsuccessful procedures. The implication, based on private sector downsizings, is that the post‐downsized hospital system was more costly and less effective.

This work examined the effect of procedural justice and item frame on responses to positively and negatively worded survey items. Under conditions of low procedural justice, there is a significant difference in the rating of distributive justice items positively and negatively framed, but not when procedural justice is high. Implications for decision frame theory and biasing of responses to survey items are considered.

This paper develops a model of organizational justice to explain the outcomes of multi-source performance appraisal. Central to this explanation is how employee reactions to appraisal cause changes in performance. This paper examines the literature on organizational justice and proposes a model to determine how employees will react to performance appraisal ratings. The model suggests that when performance appraisal ratings are low, employees use procedural justice evaluations to determine the fairness of those ratings. Employees act to improve low ratings that they perceive to be fair. Their performance may decrease on ratings they perceive to be unfair.