Organizational justice


Published on


Published in: Business, Career
No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Organizational justice

  1. 1. Presented By Anugamini Priya Sucheta Agarwal (Research Scholar) (Research Scholar) DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES,
  2. 2. JUSTICE ‗Justice defines the very essence of individuals relationship to employers…. Injustice is hurtful to individuals and harmful to organizations‘ ‘Justice, Sir, is the greatest interest of man on earth’ Justice or fairness refers to —Daniel Webster the idea that an action or decision is morally right,
  3. 3. Organizational justice It is a personal evaluation about the ethical and moral standing of managerial conduct.  It refers to how an employee judges the behaviour of the organization and their resulting attitude and behaviour that comes from this. (Greenberg ,1987 ) 
  4. 4. Ethics Religion Fairness Law. Organizational Justice i s s u e s perceptions of fair pay, equal opportunities for promotion, and personnel selection procedures (Tabibnia, Satpute, & Lieberman, 2008).
  5. 5. Evolution     The idea of organizational justice stems from Equity theory (Adams, 1963, 1965)of motivation, which posits that judgments of equity and inequity are derived from comparisons between one‘s self and others based on inputs and outcomes. Inputs refer to what a person perceives to contribute (e.g., knowledge and effort). Outcomes are what an individual perceives to get out of an exchange relationship (e.g., pay and recognition). Comparison points against which these inputs and outcomes are judged may be internal (one‘s self at an earlier time) or external (other individuals).
  6. 6. Three reasons why justice matters to people    Long-range benefits. The ‗control model‘ proposes that people are often motivated by economic and quasi-economic interests . Social considerations: The ―group-value model,‖ just treatment tells us that we are respected and esteemed by the larger group. Ethical considerations When individuals witness an event they believe is ethically inappropriate, they are likely to take considerable risks in the hopes of extracting retribution. (Russell Cropanzano, David E. Bowen, and Stephen W. GillilandT, 2007, The Management of Organizational Justice , Academy of Management Perspectives, 34-48)
  7. 7. Types of organizational justice Distributive Justice: Appropriateness of outcomes. ● Equity: Rewarding employees based on their contributions. ● Equality: Providing each employee roughly the same compensation. ● Need: Providing a benefit based on one‘s personal requirements. --Aristotle, 
  8. 8.  Procedural Justice: Appropriateness of the allocation process. ● Consistency: All employees are treated the same. ● Lack of Bias: No person or group is singled out for discrimination or ill treatment. ● Accuracy: Decisions are based on accurate information. ● Representation of All Concerned: Appropriate stakeholders have input into a decision. ● Correction: There is an appeals process or other mechanism for fixing mistakes. ● Ethics: Norms of professional conduct are not violated. --Leventhal et al., 1976, 1980
  9. 9. Fair Process Effect Copyright© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 210
  10. 10. Interactional Justice: Appropriateness of the treatment one receives from authority figures. ● Interpersonal Justice: Treating an employee with dignity, courtesy, and respect. ● Informational Justice: Sharing relevant information with employees.  --Colquitt, Conlon, Wesson, Porter, & Ng, 2001 (Russell Cropanzano, David E. Bowen, and Stephen W. GillilandT, 2007, The Management of Organizational Justice , Academy of Management Perspectives, 34-48)
  11. 11. Goldman studied the relationship between justice and filing legal claims for alleged workplace discrimination and found that claimants were most likely to pursue litigation when distributive, procedural, and interactional justice were all low. If just one component of justice was judged to be high, the likelihood of a legal claim dropped. (2003)
  12. 12. Antecedents of organizational justice perceptions Employee participation  Extent to which employees feel that they are involved in decision-making or other organizational procedures. (Greenberg & Folger, 1983; Bies & Shapiro, 1988).  In addition, other studies have shown that employee input is related to both procedural and interpersonal justice perceptions (Kernan & Hanges, 2002).
  13. 13. Leadership:  Historical and theoretical experiments prove the direct relations of leadership to decision making and organizational justice.  in just and ethical environment, the decisions that leaders make reflects fair treatment of people & are concerned for their welfare. (B. Charles tatum, 2003)
  14. 14. Communication   The quality of communication by an organization or manager can improve justice perceptions by improving employee perceptions of manager trustworthiness and also by reducing feelings of uncertainty (Kernan & Hanges, 2002). It is important that the information provided be accurate, timely, and helpful in order for the impact on justice perceptions to be positive (Schweiger & DeNisi, 1991).
  15. 15. Justice climate   Recent research suggests that team level perceptions of justice form what is called a ‗justice climate‘ which can impact individuals‘ own views of justice (Li & Cropanzano, 2009). Research findings shows that individuals can ―learn‖ justice evaluations from team members and these can lead to homogeneity of justice perceptions within teams, creating a strong justice climate (Roberson & Colquitt, 2005).
  16. 16. Outcomes of organizational justice Employees‘ perceptions of injustice within the organization can result in a myriad of outcomes both positive and negative. Trust on supervisor  A positive relationship between an employee and supervisor can lead to trust in the organization (Karriker & Williams, 2009) (Hubbell & Chory-Assad, 2005; CohenCharash & Spector, 2001;Konosvky and Pugh, 1994). . Performance  Improving justice perceptions improves productivity and performance (Karriker & Williams, 2009). 
  17. 17. Job satisfaction and organizational commitment  was found to be positively associated with overall perceptions of organizational justice (Al-Zu‘bi, 2010). (DeConick, 2010; Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001). Organizational citizenship behaviors are actions  that employees take to support the organization that go above and beyond the scope of their job description. OCBs are related to both procedural justice (DeConick, 2010; Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Karriker & Williams, 2009) and distributive justice perceptions (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Karriker & Williams, 2009).
  18. 18. Counterproductive work behaviors • Increased judgments of procedural injustice, for instance, can lead to employee unwillingness to comply with an organization‘s rules. Thus, the more perceptions of procedural injustice lead employees to perceived normative conflict, the more it is likely that CWBs occur. (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001) (Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara & Verano-Tacoronte, 2007) Absenteeism and withdrawal • Failure to receive a promotion is an example of a situation in which feelings of injustice may result in an employee being absent from work without reason. Johns (2001)(Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001).
  19. 19. Emotional exhaustion • which related to employee health and burnout, is related to overall organizational justice perceptions. As perceptions of justice increase employee health increases and (Liljegren & Ekberg, 2009)
  20. 20. CASE STUDY: KEY POINTS Sarah was a trainee; joined Ashu Joshi's five-member team as Assistant Systems Engineer at Caremark.  Moved to CVS Caremark project at TCSNoida after a successful stint at Tegro project in TCS-Bangalore.  Caremark offered better career prospects ;handsome pay hike for becoming a confirmed employee +USA or UK project 
  21. 21. Comparisons between bosses: Ashu : Team leader of CVS Caremark project –Autocratic style  Does not interfere with subordinates work and leaves them alone to do their work without any guidance  Efficient at what he did and extremely intelligent, but neither had time nor the inclination to groom his subordinates  If work did not get finished on time, he would just blame the team, and totally disassociate himself from them. Sudhir Reddy:  TL of Tegro Project – participative cum democratic style  A guide and mentor - always guiding, but never interfering.  Allows to make own mistakes and learn from them and had always encouraged individual ideas, and let the team discover the flaws, if any, through discussion and experience.  considered responsibility for any failure was collective 
  22. 22. The issue: New project was facing a few glitches with the new software  Sarah thought about the problem & drawn several possible solutions  Unexpected response from Ashu Joshi disturbed her.  Work environment a bit dull- no participation in discussions from other employees. 
  23. 23. Few statements:     Ashu said: ‗I will send an email with the solution to all the members of the team by the end of the day. Sanjay, one of the team members, said, "What is the point in our discussing these things? Ashu is not going to have time to listen to us or discuss anything. Sarah felt ―I didn't really need to think; my boss had all the answers‖. And turned into mediocre techie.
  24. 24. Verifying questions- Was Sarah treated fairly? Were you ever treated rudely or disrespectfully?  Were you up for a promotion / raise / job, and didn‘t get it when you thought you should have?  Why was it unfair? How did you know?  How did you react? Did you take action? Why or why not? 
  25. 25. Prospective Implications of injustice No participation on the part of employees  Reduction in productivity, creativity, innovative ideas & commitment.  Lack of smoother communication between leader and subordinate.  Lack of external motivation and learning environment.  Absenteeism ,turnover or counter productive work behaviors 
  26. 26. Process to create perceptions of organizational justice • Selection Procedures: Positive Job Candidates • Building Justice Into Management Systems • Reward Systems: Justly Balancing Multiple Goals • Conflict Management: You Don‘t Have to Win • Layoffs: Softening Hardship • Performance Appraisals: Keeping Score Fairly (Russell Cropanzano, David E. Bowen, and Stephen W. GillilandT, 2007, The Management of Organizational Justice , Academy of Management Perspectives, 34-48)
  27. 27. Ways to promote organizational justice  Pay workers what they deserve  Follow open and fair procedures  Offer workers a voice  Meet regularly and invite input  Conduct employee surveys  Keep an ―open door policy‖  Use suggestion system Copyright© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice 228