Justice Climate Research Articles

Perspectives on justice, democracy and global climate change

Anthropogenic climate change, understood as the ongoing and complex pattern of changes in the composition of the earth's atmosphere arising from human activity, has in recent years prompted a re-th...

Contingent reward transactional leadership, work attitudes, and organizational citizenship behavior: The role of procedural justice climate perceptions and strength

Using a sample of 212 bank employees, we developed a model in which procedural justice climate perceptions and strength mediated the relationships between contingent reward leader behavior and follower satisfaction with supervisor, organizational commitment, and rated organizational citizenship behavior, controlling for perceived supervisor support. Results from the HLM analysis showed that procedural justice climate perceptions and strength completely mediated the relationships between contingent reward leader behavior and followers' satisfaction with supervisor and levels of organizational commitment, and partially mediated the relationship between contingent reward leader behavior and supervisor rated organizational citizenship behavior. Implications for research and practice of our findings are discussed.

The role of procedural justice in the new product development process

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore the antecedents and consequences of the level of procedural justice climate in new product development (NPD) teams. The aim is to discover answers to the following questions: First, can the procedural justice climate level be used to predict NPD team outcomes such as product performance and product creativity? Second, what NPD team characteristics can be leveraged to improve the justice climate?Design/methodology/approachA theoretical model was developed and tested on the survey data collected from 93 product managers of Turkish companies. The product managers who participated in this study represented various industries, including those of telecommunications, food, material, software, machinery, chemicals, and service technologies.FindingsStatistical analyses demonstrated that stability, collectivism, and moderate‐level functional diversity of teams were significantly related to the procedural justice climate. In addition, procedural justice climate had significant positive impacts on new product creativity and speed to market. Such impacts were found to be more significant with regard to high‐turbulence conditions.Originality/valueThis paper is the first attempt to explore the role of procedural justice in NPD teams.

EMPLOYEE SILENCE ON CRITICAL WORK ISSUES: THE CROSS LEVEL EFFECTS OF PROCEDURAL JUSTICE CLIMATE

This study examined the cross‐level effects of procedural justice climate on employee silence—that is, the intentional withholding of critical work‐related information by employees from their workgroup members. In a survey‐based study of 606 nurses nested within 30 workgroups, we found that procedural justice climate moderated the effects of individual‐level antecedents of employee silence. Specifically, when procedural justice climate was higher, the effects of antecedents that inhibit employee silence (e.g., workgroup identification, professional commitment) were stronger. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

THE PRECURSORS AND PRODUCTS OF JUSTICE CLIMATES: GROUP LEADER ANTECEDENTS AND EMPLOYEE ATTITUDINAL CONSEQUENCES

Drawing on the organizational justice, organizational climate, leadership and personality, and social comparison theory literatures, we develop hypotheses about the effects of leader personality on the development of 3 types of justice climates (e.g., procedural, interpersonal, and informational) and the moderating effects of these climates on individual‐level justice–attitude relationships. Largely consistent with the theoretically derived hypotheses, the results showed that leader (a) Agreeableness was positively related to procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice climates; (b) Conscientiousness was positively related to a procedural justice climate; and (c) Neuroticism was negatively related to all 3 types of justice climates. Further, consistent with social comparison theory, multilevel data analyses revealed that the relationship between individual justice perceptions and job attitudes (e.g., job satisfaction, commitment) was moderated by justice climate such that the relationships were stronger when justice climate was high.

Leader‐member exchange and attitudinal outcomes: role of procedural justice climate

PurposeBuilding upon the “fair exchange in leadership” notion (Hollander; Scandura), the purpose of this paper was to hypothesize the mediating impact of procedural justice climate on the relationship between leader‐member exchange (LMX) and two attitudinal outcomes: organizational commitment and turnover intentions.Design/methodology/approachA total of 224 managers voluntarily participated in the study. They represented nine multinational companies located in northern Malaysia. Data were collected by means of a structured questionnaire containing widely used scales to measure LMX (contribution, affect, loyalty, and professional respect), procedural justice climate, organizational commitment (affective, normative, and continuance), and turnover intentions. After establishing the goodness of measures, hypothesized relationships were examined using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). While commitment and LMX were, respectively, conceptualized as 3‐ and 4‐dimensional constructs, procedural justice climate and turnover intentions were each treated as unidimensional constructs.FindingsWhereas hypotheses for direct effects received low‐to‐moderate support, the mediation hypothesis received substantial support only in the case of professional respect dimension of LMX.Research limitations/implicationsThe study has obvious implications for leader‐member exchange and procedural justice in organizations. Though findings are in line with those in the past research, they should be viewed with caution – given the nature of cross‐sectional data.Originality/valueManagement needs to pay attention to the quality of LMX, as today's employees look for mutual trust.

A Multi-Level Analysis of Organizational Justice Climate, Structure, and Employee Mental Health†

This study uses a sample of 483 employees to investigate how fairness assessments and organizational structure relate to employee mental health. The authors explain these effects using a social contagion framework, which describes the creation of group effects that would occur in addition to individual-level influences. They found that the interactive effects of distributive and procedural justice climates significantly influence individual feelings of both anxiety and depression. This effect goes beyond the main effects of justice at the individual level.

Mediating Effect of Cooperative Norm in Predicting Organizational Citizenship Behaviors from Procedural Justice Climate

Although the relationships between procedural justice climate and organizational citizenship behaviors have been examined in recent years, little research has explored the mechanism by which procedural justice climate shapes individual employee prosocial behaviors in the workplace. The purpose of this study was to examine the mediating role of a group-level cooperative norm on the relationships between the group-level procedural justice climate and individual-level organizational citizenship behaviors. The survey involved 45 work groups in four different industry fields in Taiwan, including manufacturing, technology, banking, and insurance, and each of the groups was composed of one supervisor and three subordinates. Cross-level analyses using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) indicated that the cooperative norm fully mediated the relationship between procedural justice climate and individual helping behaviors. Procedural justice climate indirectly affects individual helping behaviors through their effects on the cooperative norm.

Examining Justice Climate: Issues of Fit, Simplicity, and Content

The chapter by Rupp, Bashur, and Liao (in this volume) is rich with ideas for the study of a justice climate. This comment on their chapter focuses on three areas that flow from their presentation: issues in modeling climate strength, complexity and simplicity in conceptualizing a justice climate, and an alternative conceptualization of a justice climate. Specifically, it describes how polynomial regression and response surface methodology may assist researchers in examining climate fit. The comment also describes the benefits of a simplified view of a justice climate – one focusing on the overall justice climate. Finally, it develops a framework for examining a climate for justice – a climate that promotes fair behavior in organizations.

Justice Climate Past, Present, and Future: Models of Structure and Emergence

This chapter reviews research on multi-level organizational justice. The first half of the chapter provides the historical context for this issue, discusses organizational-level antecedents to individual-level justice perceptions (i.e., culture and organizational structure), and then focuses on the study of justice climate. A summary model depicts the justice climate findings to date and gives recommendations for future research. The second half of the chapter discusses the process of justice climate emergence. Pulling from classical bottom-up and top-down climate emergence models as well as contemporary justice theory, it outlines a theoretical model whereby individual differences and environmental characteristics interact to influence justice judgments. Through a process of information sharing, shared and unique experiences, and interactions among group members, a justice climate emerges. The chapter concludes by presenting ideas about how such a process might be empirically modeled.

Justice Climate: Consideration of Source, Target, Type, Specificity, and Emergence

This chapter seeks to integrate and expand on the ideas presented by Cropanzano, Li, and James (this volume), Ambrose and Schminke (this volume), and Rupp, Bashshur, and Liao (this volume). First, it summarizes and comments on the key insights made by each set of authors. It then presents five propositions, along with some preliminary evidence supporting each: (1) employees can and do make source-based justice judgments; (2) justice treatment is directed at different targets (including individuals and groups, both internal and external to the organization); (3) global justice climate may be a useful approach to studying justice once the relationship between more specific justice climates (e.g., interunit or intraunit justice climate) is better understood; (4) it is necessary to study both general and specific justice climates to understand the unfolding of justice reactions over time; and (5) a climate for justice can be behaviorally measured and trained.

Procedural justice climate and group power distance: An examination of cross-level interaction effects.

In this article, the authors extend research on the cross-level effects of procedural justice climate by theorizing and testing its interaction with group power distance. The results indicated that group power distance moderated the relationships between procedural justice climate and individual-level outcomes (organizational commitment and organization-directed citizenship behavior). More specifically, a larger group power distance was found to attenuate the positive cross-level effects of procedural justice climate. Implications for procedural justice climate research are discussed.

Justice in Teams: The Effects of Interdependence and Identification on Referent Choice and Justice Climate Strength

Using theories of social comparison and influence as a lens through which to view the operation of justice in teams, this study explores the effects of interdependence and group identification on referent choice and justice climate strength. 372 undergraduate students participated in a laboratory experiment with two levels each of team interdependence, procedural treatment, and outcome favorability. The results showed that members of highly interdependent teams were more likely to make intergroup justice comparisons and that group identification partially mediated this relationship. Interdependence was also related to variability in team climate perceptions, with group identification as a mediator between interdependence and procedural justice climate strength. Overall, the findings highlight interdependence and social identity as contextual variables that influence the emergence of team-level justice perceptions.

LEADERSHIP, PROCEDURAL JUSTICE CLIMATE, WORK ATTITUDES, AND ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR.

This study examined the role of procedural justice climate (PJC) in mediating the influence of contingent reward transactional leadership (CRTL) on follower satisfaction with supervisor, organizati...

Justice in teams: The activation and role of sensemaking in the emergence of justice climates

Justice climates are considered to be an emergent phenomenon, which originates in the cognition, affect and behaviors of individuals, but is amplified by their interactions and manifests itself as a collective construct (see Kozlowski & Klein, 2000). However, researchers have given little attention to the role of social interaction in the convergence of member justice perceptions in teams. Using conversational data from 372 students working in a team business simulation with two levels each of procedural treatment and outcome favorability, this study examines how treatment fairness arouses sensemaking in teams and the features of such sensemaking processes that give rise to shared justice perceptions. The results highlight an interactive effect of outcomes and procedures on team sensemaking, which is shown to influence justice climate strength. The results also provide insight into the effects of discussion content, intensity and duration on the emergence of justice climates.

Getting even or moving on? Power, procedural justice, and types of offense as predictors of revenge, forgiveness, reconciliation, and avoidance in organizations.

A field study and an experimental study examined relationships among organizational variables and various responses of victims to perceived wrongdoing. Both studies showed that procedural justice climate moderates the effect of organizational variables on the victim's revenge, forgiveness, reconciliation, or avoidance behaviors. In Study 1, a field study, absolute hierarchical status enhanced forgiveness and reconciliation, but only when perceptions of procedural justice climate were high; relative hierarchical status increased revenge, but only when perceptions of procedural justice climate were low. In Study 2, a laboratory experiment, victims were less likely to endorse vengeance or avoidance depending on the type of wrongdoing, but only when perceptions of procedural justice climate were high.

Collective Justice Perceptions in Group-Oriented Cultures: Proposal of a New Construct

The concept of organizational justice has been basically conceptualized as an individual level concern. However, the concern of organizational justice has not only arisen from individual level issues, but also from group and/or collective level issues. Based on this multi-level perspective, we attempt to propose the concept of collective justice perceptions. Collective justice perception is more likely to be associated with group-oriented cultures (e.g., in East Asia) and are also expected to be a meaningful and useful construct in organizational justice research. Collective justice perceptions refer to a distinct group-level cognition about whether a group as a whole is treated fairly within the organization. This new construct is different in numerous ways from procedural justice climate which has been proposed by some researchers (e.g., Naumann and Bennett, 2000). Based on various conceptualization of collective justice perceptions, we offer several testable propositions regarding this concept. We also discuss measurement issues and implications for theory and practice.

Group Citizenship Behaviour Conceptualization and Preliminary Tests of its Antecedents and Consequences

Group citizenship behaviour (GCB) is conceptualized as a distinct group-level phenomenon concerning the extent to which work groups engage in behaviours that support other work groups and the organization as a whole. These behaviours are different from task performance; they enhance and maintain the social and psychological environment in which task performance occurs. Based on the referent-shift consensus model (Chan, 1998), we developed a GCB scale and examined its nomological network. In a sample of 148 work groups in the Hong Kong office of a multinational bank (a total of 743 employees), between-group differences in GCB were greater than within-group differences. GCB was positively associated with procedural justice climate and work group leadership support. Work group cohesiveness and group-organizational goal congruence interactively predicted GCB, as did the negative affective tone of the group and the group's negative affectivity homogeneity. In addition, GCB was positively related to group performance, and negatively related to employee turnover intentions. The theoretical and empirical implications of this study are discussed in the context of Chinese organizations.

Ellul and the Weather

Global climate change may result in a wide array of social and environmental harms, and this prospect has given rise to an international treaty, the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Scientific uncertainties, nation state politics, and economic resistance had to be addressed before this landmark environmental agreement could be realized. However, questions remain about the foundations and core commitments of this agreement. Ellul's characterology of technique is applied to the task of building a critique of the current international response to climate change and is allied to the proposition that ecological justice should guide the social response to climate change. It is argued that contemporary international efforts are directed at producing a “rational climate,” rather than a climate for ecological justice

The Impact of Justice Climate and Justice Orientation on Work Outcomes: A Cross-Level Multifoci Framework.

In this article, which takes a person-situation approach, the authors propose and test a cross-level multifoci model of workplace justice. They crossed 3 types of justice (procedural, informational, and interpersonal) with 2 foci (organization and supervisor) and aggregated to the group level to create 6 distinct justice climate variables. They then tested for the effects of these variables on either organization-directed or supervisor-directed commitment, satisfaction, and citizenship behavior. The authors also tested justice orientation as a moderator of these relationships. The results, based on 231 employees constituting 44 work groups representing multiple organizations and occupations, revealed that 4 forms of justice climate (organization-focused procedural and informational justice climate and supervisor-focused procedural and interpersonal justice climate) were significantly related to various work outcomes after controlling for corresponding individual-level justice perceptions. In addition, some moderation effects were found. Implications for organizations and future research are discussed.