Perceptions Of Procedural Fairness Research Articles

Can AI Algorithmic Decision-making Improve Employees’ Perception of Procedural Fairness?

With the development of digital technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence and machine learning, many organizations try to introduce AI algorithms into the decision-making process to avoid the subjective inherent biases. Although AI algorithms improve the scientificity of decision-making, they also raise the issue of fairness in the decision-making process. Considering that employees are the direct subject of HR decision-making, how employees view and evaluate the fairness of AI algorithmic decision-making process is very important. However, researches on the above questions are rather limited.Based on the procedural fairness theory, this study discusses the impact of different decision-making subjects (AI algorithms vs. supervisors) on employees’ perception of fairness in the HR decision-making process. Through two experiments, we find that: (1) The decision-making of AI algorithms makes employees have a lower perception of procedural fairness than that of supervisors. (2) Information transparency mediates the relationship between AI algorithmic decision-making and employees’ perception of procedural fairness. Employees believe that AI algorithmic decision-making has lower information transparency, which in turn produces a lower perception of procedural fairness. (3) Inclusive climate moderates the relationship between AI algorithmic decision-making and employees’ perception of procedural fairness. When employees perceive a high level of organizational inclusive climate, the effect of AI algorithmic decision-making on the perception of program fairness will be weakened.Overall, this study responds to the call for more research that bridges AI algorithmic decision-making and individual perception of procedural fairness by examining information transparency as a mediator and inclusive climate as a moderator in this relationship. The findings not only challenge the existing mainstream view that AI algorithmic decision-making does not exist a lower bias than human decision-making, but also offer useful advice to managers and provide implications for organizational HR decision-making practices in the digital and intelligent era.

Self-management and Self-leadership in the Digital and AI Era: An Overview and Future Directions

This special issue was developed to call for more scholarly attention to self-management and self-leadership research. Technological advances have embraced many kinds of new economy and organizational design such as platform economy, telecommuting, and humans working alongside machines, among others. Digital technologies and AI not only make organizations more open, flat, and flexible, but also increase individuals’ capacity to process information and make decisions, and their autonomy in choosing when and where to work. Meanwhile, as digital natives, Generation Z’s work behaviors are increasingly influenced by social media. All these changes have weakened the effectiveness of traditional organizational control that is mainly based on a formal system of rules and procedures; effective organizational control relies more and more on organizational members’ self-management or self-regulation. Therefore, self-management and self-leadership are particularly important and essential in the era of digital technology and AI. We encourage organizational scholars to research self-management and self-leadership in the context of advances in digital technology and AI: Investigate organizations’ novel practices in this digital and AI era, and research on the underlying meanings, manifestations, and working mechanisms of self-management and self-leadership. This special issue collected four empirical papers that respectively examine the effects of AI on employees’ thriving at work, sales employees’ self-leadership behaviors in digital platforms, the effects of algorithm-based decision-making on employees’ procedural fairness perceptions, and the effects of algorithm-based decision-making on employees’ overall justice perceptions and deviance behaviors. Building on these empirical papers, we invite more research on self-management and self-leadership that may contribute to the optimization of human resources in the era of digital technology and AI.

Time Served in Prison, in-Prison Experiences, and Perceptions of Procedural Justice

The coercive nature of prisons is a longstanding topic of academic inquiry. Although correctional staff help incarcerated individuals adjust to prison by enforcing prison rules and providing guidance, incarcerated individuals are confined against their will. Most research on this topic typically does not focus on the role that time served in prison and in-prison experiences may have on perceptions of fairness by correctional staff. In this study, we examine whether in-prison experiences vary in their effect across different lengths of time served on perceptions of procedural justice. The findings from a nationally representative sample of incarcerated individuals reveal that most in-prison experiences, such as confinement in restrictive housing, decreased perceptions of procedural justice and fairness. As correctional agencies develop strategies to help incarcerated individuals adjust to prison, it is important to recognize that the coercive nature of prisons creates difficulties for individuals to perceive treatment by staff as procedurally just.

Can explanations improve applicant reactions towards gamified assessment methods?

AbstractGamification is increasingly being used by organizations in hiring decisions. However, the use of gamification in assessment has advanced quicker than corresponding research. One area in need of research is how applicants' perceptions of fairness are formed when gamified assessments are used in employee selection. Therefore, two studies were conducted to explore the impact of using gamified assessments to applicants' justice perceptions and the role of providing explanations to applicants. Adopting an experimental design to explore organizational justice model in the context of gamified assessments, results indicated that individuals' perceptions of job relatedness are higher when a situational judgment tests (SJT) is used rather than a gamified version, leading to more positive perceptions of procedural fairness and organizational attractiveness (Study 1). The mediating effects of the procedural rules of ease of faking and opportunity to perform were not supported. Subsequently, a 2 × 2 design was used (Study 2) to explore the role of providing explanations. It seems that the provision of explanations on the assessment's faking difficulty generates more positive reactions towards gamified SJTs than text‐based SJTs, in relation to ease of faking and procedural justice, and a spillover effect, invoking favorable reactions to the recruiting organization as well (Study 2).

Understanding the Bounds of Legitimacy: Weber’s Facets of Legitimacy and the Police Empowerment Hypothesis

Despite considerable evidence that police legitimacy results in beneficial outcomes like compliance, cooperation, and empowerment, scholars have yet to agree on how to define and operationalize legitimacy. Drawing on Max Weber’s facets of legitimacy, we developed and tested a measure of “traditional authority,” reflecting the possibility that some people legitimate the police more so based on tradition than normative concerns regarding fairness. Confirmatory factor analysis of survey data from a national sample of 701 US adults revealed that our traditional authority items loaded separately from items commonly used to capture feelings of trust, obligation to obey, and moral alignment. Furthermore, although perceived legitimacy appears to flow from perceptions of procedural and distributive fairness regardless of how it is measured, traditional authority is more strongly associated with empowerment of the police. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings and urge researchers to replicate and extend our work.

Curbing opportunism in marketing channels: The roles of influence strategy and perceived fairness

Opportunism is vital in marketing channel relationships and existing research has identified several influential factors as antecedents of opportunism. Nonetheless, we have little specific knowledge of how manufacturer’s influence strategies or how reseller’s fairness perception affects reseller’s opportunistic behavior. This study examines the independent and interactive effects of influence strategies and fairness perception on the resellers’ opportunism tendency. Empirical evidence shows that the manufacturer’s use of coercive influence strategy increases the resellers’ opportunism tendency whereas manufacturer’s use of noncoercive influence strategy reduces it. The results also suggest that distributive and procedural fairness perceptions moderate the relationship between influence strategies and opportunism tendency. In particular, procedural fairness perception strengthens the effect of noncoercive influence on opportunism tendency. Contrary to our hypothesis, distributive fairness worsens the harmful effect of coercive influence on the reseller’s opportunism tendency. The latter counterintuitive finding provides directions for future research along with insights for channel management.

How do political decision-making processes affect the acceptability of decisions? Results from a survey experiment

This study aims to identify the types of city council decision-making processes that influence public perceptions of procedural fairness and the acceptability of decisions. Using an online experimental scenario survey conducted in Japan, this study found that, given the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process and when the decision is reached through a compromise among council members, people tend to feel that the process is fair and accept the decision even when it is unfavourable to them. This result is important for the governance of many advanced countries with low economic growth rates but great public demands. Additionally, this study highlights the process preferences of the public, which has received little attention compared with research on policy preferences.

The effect of enabling versus coercive performance measurement systems on procedural fairness and red tape

In this study, we investigate the effects of an enabling versus a coercive performance measurement system on how employees perceive the procedural quality of such systems. In particular, we examine the design characteristics and the development process of performance measurement systems. We hypothesize that an enabling design and an enabling development process, as compared to a coercive design and a coercive development process, lead to perceptions of greater procedural fairness and less red tape. To test our hypotheses, we conduct an experiment with two different samples (a student laboratory sample and an online sample). In general, our results indicate that an enabling performance measurement system design and an enabling system development process both independently increase procedural fairness and decrease red tape. These findings imply that organizations interested in improving the procedural quality of their performance measurement system should focus on designing and developing a system that is enabling rather than coercive.

Changes in workplace practices during the COVID-19 pandemic: the roles of emotion, psychological safety and organisation support

Changes in workplace practices during the COVID-19 pandemic: the roles of emotion, psychological safety and organisation support

Perceived police legitimacy in Ghana: The role of procedural fairness and contacts with the police

The primary purpose of the present study is to examine the extent to which procedural justice and contacts with police influence people's assessments of their local police in post-colonial societies. Specifically, the study aimed to 1) determine whether favorable perceptions of procedural fairness predict individuals' willingness to accept the police as authority Fig. 2) assess the effects of two types of contacts – police-initiated and citizen-initiated contacts – on people's decision to view the police as legitimate and 3) assess the combine effect of fairness and contact on the likelihood of citizens voluntarily accepting their local police as authority figure in the community. Analyzing data systematically collected from two large metropolitan areas in Ghana, results demonstrate significant effects of procedural fairness and police-initiated contacts on citizens' propensity to consider the police as legitimate. Moreover, results further revealed an interactive effect on police legitimacy in Ghana.

Faktor-Faktor yang Meningkatkan Organizational Citizenship Behavior

The teacher is the front liner needed to achieve the school's vision and mission because it is the teacher who interacts directly with students and their parents. Teachers who spontaneously contribute more than what is written in the job description are compulsory. So, the impact on overall school effectiveness will be felt and can also reduce tensions between teachers and school management. A teacher's attitude and willingness to go beyond a predetermined target can be translated into the Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) variable of the teacher. This study aimed to determine the effect of perceived organizational support, procedural fairness, and organizational commitment to OCB teachers at SD Methodist Jakarta. The study data were obtained from distributing questionnaires to 28 teachers who were actively teaching in the Methodist Elementary School. This study uses a quantitative approach to the PLS-SEM method, where data analysis uses the SmartPLS v 3.2.7 software to calculate the outer model and the inner model. The results showed that the perception of organizational support, procedural fairness, and organizational commitment had a positive effect on OCB teachers at SD Methodist Jakarta.

Winner–loser effects in contentious constitutional referenda: Perceptions of procedural fairness and the Brexit referendum

This article addresses a critical gap in the literature on winner–loser effects that consists of the lack of attention for highly contentious constitutional referenda. It uses unique multi-wave panel data of over 13,000 people that is unrivalled in size and richness. We estimate causal effects of the referendum on rarely studied but crucial public perceptions of the fairness of the way a referendum is conducted. These perceptions pertain to the highly contentious 2016 European Union (Brexit) referendum in the United Kingdom, which is an ideal-type example of a wider class of referenda for which similar outcomes can be expected. We use difference-in-differences methods and find winner–loser effects of a magnitude far greater than ever observed for general elections. Moreover, we find that these effects not only persist, but even grow over time. The findings have profound implications for the use of such referenda.

Effect of Manager’s Characteristics on Budget Participation mediated by Perception of Procedural Justice

Objective: To examine the relationship between managerial characteristics, perception of procedural fairness and budget participation.Method: A survey was conducted with 94 managers of large hotels in Brazil. We adopted the technique of Structural Equation Modeling for data analysis, performed in the software SmartPLS version 3.Originality/Relevance: The proposal indicates that decisions taken during the budget process are related to managers’ characteristics. These characteristics influence budget participation and the perception of procedural justice. The relevance of the research is to check the mediation of procedural justice in the relationship between managers’ characteristics and budget participation.Results: The results indicate that managers’ characteristics are directly related to budget participation, and managers' perception of procedural justice is related to budget participation. Also, it has a mediating relationship between managers’ characteristics and budget participation. Based on the findings, it appears that the characteristics of Brazilian hotel managers determine the way managers feel procedurally justified and improve their budget participation.Theoretical/Methodological contributions: This paper makes a relevant contribution to the literature on the study theme, as there is still little knowledge of how procedural justice can mediate this relationship between managerial characteristics and budget participation.Social/management contributions: The present research contributes to hotel management because it is a sector characterized by a high level of competition and risk, in which budget efficiency can be one of the key success factors.

Influence of Fairness Perceptions on Cooperative Behavior in Construction Arbitration

Construction arbitration is characterized by incessant challenges to its awards. Although these challenges suggest dissatisfaction with the outcomes, the role of perceived fairness in influencing disputants’ cooperative behavioral reactions to arbitral awards remains unclear. To address this research gap, a qualitative multiple case study involving documentary analysis and 13 semistructured interviews of arbitrators, parties, and party representatives in five exemplifying cases was undertaken. Findings indicate that although fairness is an integral aspect of the dispute resolution process, perception of its influence on disputants’ cooperative behavior varied. While award favorability influenced perceived award fairness and consequently award acceptability and postdispute relations, perception of procedural and interactional fairness influenced the choice of arbitration as an avenue for resolving future construction disputes. Thus, the extent to which the awards were favorable to one party, based on the degree of control commanded over the process, determined disputants’ cooperative behavior. These findings are significant because they provide a nuanced understanding of how the various components of organizational justice interacted in influencing cooperative behavior in construction arbitration among the cases studied.

Not all that glitters is golden: The impact of procedural fairness perceptions on firm evaluations and customer satisfaction with favorable outcomes

Firms often strive to delight their customers and build strong customer-firm relationships by providing favored benefits to their customers. Drawing from the organizational justice literature, we show that even when customers receive favorable outcomes from distributively fair firm actions, considerations of procedural unfairness may adversely affect their firm evaluations. Procedural fairness salience and customers’ perceived relationship with the firm determine the extent to which procedural fairness affects firm-evaluations. Customers in communal relationships, focused on social/relational factors, are more sensitive to procedural fairness, leading to improved (diminished) firm evaluations when the procedure is perceived as fair (unfair). Those in exchange relationships are unaffected by procedural fairness and evaluate the firm based largely on outcome favorability. Firm trustworthiness mediates the impact of procedural fairness on evaluations. Implications of procedural fairness being driven by relational and non-instrumental considerations are discussed.

Perceptions of procedural justice and coercion among forensic psychiatric patients: a study protocol for a prospective, mixed-methods investigation

BackgroundThe risk and recovery paradigms are the dominant frameworks informing forensic mental health services and have been the focus of increasing research interest. Despite this, there are significant gaps in our understanding of the nature of mental health recovery in forensic settings (i.e., ‘secure recovery’), and specifically, the key elements of recovery as perceived by forensic patients and their treatment providers. Importantly, we know little about how patients perceive the forensic mental health system, to what extent they see it as fair and legitimate, and how these perceptions impact upon treatment engagement, risk for adversity, and progress in recovery.MethodsIn this prospective, mixed-methods study, we investigate patient perceptions of procedural justice and coercion within the context of the forensic mental health system in Ontario, Canada (final N = 120 forensic patients and their primary care providers). We elicit patient self-assessments of risk and progress in recovery, and assess the degree of concordance with clinician-rated estimates of these constructs. Both qualitative and quantitative methods are used to assess the degree to which patient perceptions of coercion, fairness and legitimacy impact upon their level of treatment engagement, risk for adversity and progress in recovery. A prospective, two-year follow-up will investigate the impact of patient and clinician perspectives on outcomes in the domains of forensic hospital readmission, criminal reoffending, and rate of progress through the forensic system.DiscussionResults from this mixed-methods study will yield a rich and detailed account of patient perceptions of the forensic mental health system, and specifically whether perceptions of procedural fairness, justice and legitimacy, as well as perceived coercion, systematically influence patients’ risk for adversity, their ability to progress in their recovery, and ultimately, advance through the forensic system towards successful community living. Findings will provide conceptual clarity to the key elements of secure recovery, and illuminate areas of similarity and divergence with respect to how patients and clinicians assess risk and recovery needs. In doing so, knowledge from this study will provide a deep understanding of factors that promote patient safety and recovery, and provide a foundation for optimizing the forensic mental health system to improve patient outcomes.

What is Fair in Groundwater Allocation? Distributive and Procedural Fairness Perceptions of California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act

Fairness perceptions can contribute to trust or distrust in a policy process. Under California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) basins may limit groundwater extraction for users, including farmers. Using a 2017 survey of 137 farmers in Yolo County, we adapt a typology of fairness principles, previously applied to climate policy, to examine farmers’ fairness perceptions for groundwater allocation strategies and reconciliation options. Yolo farmers show clear preference for allocation by overlying land area and dispute reconciliation by the local Groundwater Sustainability Agency. Using ordered logit regression models, we find that positive procedural perceptions of SGMA predict both allocation and dispute resolution preferences. We find no evidence for self-interested bias in allocation preferences, but rather the contextual default for allocation (egalitarian) appears to drive current fairness perceptions. Insight into contextual norms and perceptions of the policy process can align allocation and dispute resolution decisions with stakeholder fairness assessments.

Mutualistic symbiosis?

PurposeAlthough principal–agent theory has gained a prominent place in research, its negative image of self-serving managers is frequently criticized. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to examine how existing theories of agency and stewardship can be combined by using behavioral characteristics.Design/methodology/approachThis study reviewed articles on the behavior of agents and stewards from the domains of finance, economics, management, corporate governance and organizational research. Additional theoretical and meta-analytical empirical literature from the fields of psychology and sociology was used to account for general patterns of human behavior.FindingsThe results indicate that goal congruency and the perception of fairness can serve as moderators distinguishing agency theory and stewardship theory. Goal congruency can be achieved by stipulating psychological ownership. The perception of distributive and procedural fairness is demonstrated by two major corporate governance mechanisms: performance-based compensation and board monitoring. The results are summarized in six hypotheses that allow a situational, customized corporate governance. These hypotheses can be tested in future research.Originality/valuePrior work either focused on the merits of principal-agent theory or advocates the utilization of positive management theories, such as stewardship theory. However, little work has been done on bridging the gap between both constructs and develop a more extensive view of management theory.

Do minorities perceive procedural fairness merely in terms of ethnic bias suppression? Evaluation of the concept of fairness in multicultural conflicts

ABSTRACTThe present study investigated the impact of perceived procedural fairness enacted by societal actors on minority members’ willingness to accept decisions regarding multicultural issues. We particularly focused on ethnic bias suppression, which we expected to be highly salient in this type of conflict and deemed pivotal given its impact on the collective social self. Four studies (one cross-sectional study and three experiments) were conducted in African American minority samples. The results revealed that: (1) perceptions of procedural fairness cannot be reduced to solely evaluations of ethnic bias suppression, (2) the weight placed on bias suppression is indeed substantial, (3) procedural fairness and bias suppression each play a strong role in shaping minority members’ legitimacy perceptions of a decision-maker, and in turn, (4) decision acceptance. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Distributive fairness and local acceptance of wind turbines: The role of compensation schemes

To address increasing opposition to wind projects in Denmark three compensation schemes were introduced in the 2008 Renewable Energy Act. The aim was to address issues of distributive fairness and thereby to increase local acceptance. This paper analyses the role of two individual compensation schemes – the property value-loss scheme and the co-ownership scheme – on local citizens’ perceptions of fair distribution of the benefits and burdens of wind energy projects. The qualitative case study of three Danish wind energy projects discloses that distributive unfairness was a prevalent concern among local citizens, and that this concern was inseparable from perceptions of procedural fairness and recognition. The key conclusion is that the two compensation schemes are not successfully offsetting perceptions of unfair distribution. The schemes are challenged by a multitude of intertwined concerns. The compensation schemes are not equipped to address the plethora of non-monetary values affected by the wind projects. Specifically the compensation schemes are criticised for not offering adequate local benefits or distribution thereof, equal access, fair procedures and transparency. In fact the schemes were by some considered unfair and created perceptions of lack of recognition and bribery which undermined their role in promoting distributive fairness and local acceptance.