Chapter 9 From justice events to justice climate: A multi-level temporal model of information aggregation and judgment

The Joint Effects of Justice Climate, Group Moral Identity, and Corporate Social Responsibility on the Prosocial and Deviant Behaviors of Groups

“…Whereas Ambrose and Schminke (2009) demonstrated that overall justice perceptions are based on different facet-based experiences of justice (e.g., procedural, distributive, interpersonal), other researchers have suggested that overall justice climate emerges from different experiences workgroups have with various parties, which are encoded not according to the type of fairness experienced but the source (Rupp and Paddock 2010). Regardless of the theoretical perspective (facet vs. source-based), events that occur at the individual level (which have distributive, procedural, and interactional characteristics and may be encoded into memory according to the foci or parties held responsible for these (un)just acts) are evaluated in terms of justice, and are said to converge into a collective sense of overall justice climate within groups.…”

“…As fairness is an intangible good valued in an exchange context, it should elicit a number of positive responses from groups. In addition, fairness can engender positive group responses through trust, as fairness indicates whether workgroups can trust other parties (Rupp and Paddock 2010). Deonance theory (Folger 2001) similarly suggests that groups will respond to injustice in commensurate ways.…”

Deontic Justice and Organizational Neuroscience

“…As mentioned above, a key insight of deontic justice theory is that an unfortunate or harmful event is evaluated with respect to some 'normative criteria' (Cugueró-Escofet and Fortin 2014, p. 2) or 'justice rules' (Hollensbe et al 2008(Hollensbe et al , p. 1099 or 'moral intuitions' (Greene and Haidt 2002, p. 517). When a transgressor's behavior toward another violates these rules, the observer or witness believes that the victim has been treated unfairly (Cropanzano et al 2015;Rupp and Paddock 2010). As we shall see, justice rules are emotionally weighted and they can be distinguished from simple social conventions, which Deontic Justice and Organizational Neuroscience are instead situational and somewhat arbitrary (e.g., Smetana et al 1993).…”

What Was, What Is, and What May Be in OP/OB

“…Research on justice in organizations has also been prominent, and the facets of organizational justice have been explicated by replicating earlier laboratory studies of justice (Colquitt et al 2001). There is significant research on justice climates that suggests justice is not only an individual experience but also a facet of organizational functioning (Rupp & Paddock 2010). In addition, although path-goal theory has apparently passed into the textbooks of history, there continues, of course, to be active research on leadership effects in organizations.…”