Employees, Supervisors, and Workplace Mediation

Abstract

This study explores the experience of disputant–disputant interpersonal justice in workplace mediation in a public organization. The results show that there are significant differences between employees’ and supervisors’ experiences of disputant–disputant interpersonal justice. Moreover, the results indicate that the quality of participants’ interactions in mediation is significantly related to the quality of the mediated outcome in terms of settlement or case resolution. When disputants experience interpersonal justice with each other during mediation, they are more likely to reach a full resolution to the dispute. When disputants corroborate each other’s reports of their own behaviors during mediation, they are also more likely to achieve settlement of the mediation. Disputants who received an apology from the other party were more likely to report a settlement to the dispute. In sum, this field test supports the theory of disputant–disputant interpersonal justice and provides evidence that it is an important element in the mediated resolution of a workplace dispute.