Elaborating Procedural Fairness: Justice Becomes Both Simpler and more Complex

Folger, Robert; Cropanzano, Russell; Timmerman, Thomas A.; Howes, John C.; Mitchell, David B.

doi:10.1177/0146167296225001

Cited by 27 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These main eects converge with ®ndings from correlational research, where it has been Power use and dierential competence 863 observed that decision making authorities are evaluated more negatively when they do not allow say in (the process of) decision making (e.g. Folger et al, 1996;Tyler et al, 1985). In a similar vein, people generally seem less satis®ed with an autocratic leader than with a democratic one (Stitt, Schmidt, Price & Kipnis, 1983).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Power use and differential competence as determinants of subordinates' evaluative and behavioural responses in simulated organizations

Bruins

Ellemers

Gilder³

1999

Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Insights from leader±member exchange theory and social justice theory were combined to derive predictions about the eects of relative competence and power use by a more powerful other on evaluative and behavioural responses of subordinates. These predictions were tested in two experiments, using a simulated organizational structure. The main results of the ®rst experiment (N 73) indicate that frequency of power use is an important determinant of subordinates' evaluations of the status quo, supporting predictions from leader±member exchange theory. However, in line with a procedural justice explanation, perceived legitimacy of the superior's behaviour and participants' cooperative intentions were determined jointly by power use and relative competence. A second experiment (N 152) more closely investigated behavioural responses. The ®ndings obtained in Experiment 1 were replicated, and as predicted, interaction eects of the superior's power use and competence were found for subordinates' collaborative behaviour and employee turnover. Both these eects were mediated by participants' sense of commitment to their superior. Theoretical and practical implications of the ®ndings are discussed. Copyright # 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.On a day-to-day basis, managers in organizations are confronted with the question how they may enact their leadership role without frustrating or even antagonizing their subordinates. Inevitably, people with a superior power position in the organization are required to evaluate and if necessary correct the performance of those who work under their supervision. Sometimes supervisors have to take such action without being able to consult their subordinates, or even without having the CCC 0046±2772/99/070843±28$17.50Received 3 Greenberg, 1990;Skarlicki & Folger, 1997). At the same time, people's willingness to behave in a cooperative or altruistic way (their so-called`contextual' performance) is often just as important as their personal task-related activities for organizational success (MacKenzie, Podsako & Fetter, 1991;Podsako, Ahearne & MacKenzie, 1997). Therefore it is crucial to know the circumstances under which such forms of power exertion are likely to harm cooperative eorts from one's subordinates, or may be considered legitimate, so that good working relations between superior and subordinate can be maintained. In this paper we report two studies that examine how subordinates in a simulated organization respond when their eorts are rejected by their superior, in order to predict the consequences this power use may have for future collaboration (see Emerson, 1962). To be able to investigate speci®c theoretical predictions on the eects of power use, we have opted for experimental work in an area where traditionally correlational ®eld studies are done (cf. Tyler & Lind, 1992). This enables us to focus on the causal relations between relevant variables and systematically study their combined and interactive eects, which may help us complement and extend existing insights that are de...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Power use and differential competence as determinants of subordinates' evaluative and behavioural responses in simulated organizations

Bruins

Ellemers

Gilder³

1999

Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We now know that a variety of conditions increase support for nonadversarial procedures. On the one hand, autocratic, inquisitorial-style procedures (with less process control than the adversarial model) are rated more favorably when they provide opportunities for voice (Sheppard, 1985;Folger, Cropanzano, Timmerman, Howes, et al, 1996), or when the conflict involves a highly volatile opponent (Morris, Leung, & Iyengar, 2004). On other hand, disputants often prefer to retain decision control (through bilateral bargaining or non-binding third-party mediation) when they have strong bargaining power, when integrative solutions are apparent, when a more adversary process threatens the disputants' ongoing relationship, or in more collectivist, communitarian cultures (see Heuer & Penrod, 1986;Leung & Lind, 1986;Leung, 1987;Lind, Huo, & Tyler, 1994;Shestowksy, 2004).…”

Section: Procedural Preferences For Dispute Resolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

VOICE, CONTROL, AND BELONGING: The Double-Edged Sword of Procedural Fairness

MacCoun

2005

Annu. Rev. Law. Soc. Sci.

270

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The procedural justice literature has grown enormously since the early work of Thibaut and Walker in the 1970s. Since then, the finding that citizens care enormously about the process by which outcomes are reached -even unfavorable outcomes -has been replicated using a wide range of methodologies (including panel surveys, psychometric work, and experimentation), cultures (throughout North America, Europe, and Asia), and settings (including tort litigation, policing, taxpayer compliance, support for public policies, and organizational citizenship). We have learned a great deal about the antecedents and consequences of these judgments. In particular, the work of Tom Tyler and Allan Lind and their colleagues suggests that people care about voice, dignity, and respect for relational and symbolic rather than (or in addition to) instrumental reasons. This has benevolent implications for governance and social cooperation, but also some troubling implications, leaving people susceptible to manipulation and exploitation.

show abstract

“…More recently, Folger, Cropanzano, Timmerman, Howes, and Mitchell (1996) argued that Sheppard's (1985) findings were a result of confounding the role of the third party with the voice of the disputants. The purely adversarial fourth procedure gave voice to the disputants but not to the judge (i.e., the judge could not ask questions of the disputants).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Folger et al (1996) notwithstanding, there are at least two interrelated reasons why voice may not be directly related to procedural fairness. The first reason is that increases in voice usually come at the expense of time.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can You have too Much of a Good Thing? The Limits of Voice for Improving Satisfaction with Leaders

Peterson

1999

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on procedural justice has consistently found that increases in voice are associated with enhanced ratings of procedural fairness, satisfaction with leaders, and acceptance of decisions made by authorities. This research extends those findings in two ways by (a) replicating the voice effect in small group decision making with a low status leader and (b) illustrating the limit of voice in improving support for leaders under conditions of persistent conflict. Results from Study 1 suggest that people care about their treatment by leaders because it provides them with information about their value within the group rather than because the leader controls important resources. Study 2 demonstrates that very high levels of voice can be associated with reduced leader support and lower levels of decision satisfaction under conditions of persistent conflict. These results suggest that extensive use of voice by leaders has limited advantages when people fundamentally disagree.

show abstract

Elaborating Procedural Fairness: Justice Becomes Both Simpler and more Complex

Cited by 27 publications

References 11 publications

Power use and differential competence as determinants of subordinates' evaluative and behavioural responses in simulated organizations

Power use and differential competence as determinants of subordinates' evaluative and behavioural responses in simulated organizations

VOICE, CONTROL, AND BELONGING: The Double-Edged Sword of Procedural Fairness

Can You have too Much of a Good Thing? The Limits of Voice for Improving Satisfaction with Leaders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About