Equity, Equality, Power, and Conflict

Abstract

Although equity theory has dominated the conception oi justice in organizational reldions, equality also shapes justice expectations and behaviors. Therefore, there are two basic and, in principle, inevitable pressures toward conflict: (a) one stems from equity violations and results in overt conflict involving attempts to restore justice and (b) the other stems from equality violations and results in nondirected conflict that is symptomatic of decreased social cohesiveness. Power shapes distributive orientations, and. therefore, it is an important determinant of conflict pressures. A frconework linking distributive justice principles, power, and conflict is advanced and used to suggest a new perspective on issues of organizational strategy.

Can guanxi be a problem? Contexts, ties, and some unfavorable consequences of social capital in China

“…Cooperation tends to become greater when resources are perceived to have been distributed equally rather than unequally. This is because equal distribution of resources enhances feelings of group harmony and social responsibility, and thus promotes cooperative response to resource scarcity (Deutsch, 1975;Kabanoff, 1991).…”

Equity issues in land acquisition: A source of delays in large construction projects in Vietnam

“…Therefore, many landacquired households accepted handing over their land because they were aware of the potential costs if they had protested. These findings support Kabanoff (1991), Cosier and Dalton (1983), Weick (1966), Ring and Andrew (1994), and (Hayibor & Collins, 2016b) who suggested that the resource dependence and costs of reactions could mediate or prevent tough behavioural responses, and extend them further by recognising that the resource dependence and costs of reactions in land acquisition were created by the political environment.…”

“…This is because they could receive higher costs for their responses. Kabanoff (1991), Cosier and Dalton (1983), Weick (1966), Ring and Andrew (1994) also raised the importance of these moderators of responses. Social relationships are also moderators of responses to inequity.…”

Leadership and Team Values Shape Employee Engagement: Test of a Multilevel Moderated Mediation Model

“…By nature, organizations need to manage a fundamental paradox between inequality and solidarity-on one hand, organizational members must consent to differential distribution of status/power, resources, and opportunities to operate within hierarchy; on the other hand, leaders and followers need to work together to maintain group cohesiveness (Kabanoff, 1991). Power distance reflects organizational members' orientation toward the uneven allocation and inequality, whereas collectivism reflects the members' agreement to share common goals and relational identity.…”