Perceptions of Discrimination: A Multiple Needs Model Perspective

Abstract

The multiple needs model of justice was used to understand employee reactions to perceived discrimination. In particular, the fulfillment of the three needs discussed in that model-economic, interpersonal, and deontic (ethical)-were tested as consequences of perceived discrimination and as antecedents of job attitudes and turnover intentions. A representative sample of the U.S. workforce (N = 5,605) rated the three needs-fulfillment variables while also rating their perceptions of discrimination, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and intent to leave. The proposed model was supported. This study extends research on perceived discrimination by proposing a role for the multiple needs model of justice through the use of a specific and important role for needs fulfillment. It also extends support for the multiple needs model of justice.

Perceived Gender Discrimination and Women’s Subjective Career Success: The Moderating Role of Career Anchors

“…Goldman et al's (2008) multiple needs model of perceptions of discrimination provides a compelling argument for this. In essence, their perspective suggests that perceptions of discrimination are negatively related to both economic-based need fulfillment and interpersonal-based need fulfillment.…”

Workplace Discrimination Climate and Team Effectiveness: The Mediating Role of Collective Value Congruence, Team Cohesion, and Collective Affective Commitment

“…Employees in organizations observe how others are being treated, therefore, it is important to understand the negative reactions that some employees have towards the ill-treatment of others, especially in their immediate work teams. This is consistent with research showing that when employees perceive discrimination in the organization in general (directed at themselves or at others), they are more likely to say that the organization has a deontic deficiency, meaning that it lacks integrity (Goldman et al, 2008). This implies that perceiving mistreatment toward marginalized group members at work may damage the company's reputation in the eyes of the observer employees, especially those with a high value for diversity (Triana, Wagstaff, & Kim, 2012).…”

“…Not only is discrimination both legally and morally wrong (Demuijnck, 2009;Dipboye & Colella 2005), but such actions send a signal to all employees about the integrity of the organization and its leaders (Goldman, Slaughter, Schmit, Wiley, & Brooks, 2008;Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). This aspect of justice goes beyond a focus on individuals' tangible benefits, such as social standing or rewards, in that many individuals are concerned about the welfare of others.…”

“…As people experience negative acts at work, such as discrimination, they are likely to associate work with negatively related feelings and become less affectively committed to their organization. Previous research has shown that perceived discrimination at work is negatively related to affective commitment (e.g., Goldman et al, 2008). Social exchange theory suggests that perceptions of a supportive and fair exchange relationship between the organization and its employees is necessary for the development and continuation of high affective commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1997;Shore & Wayne, 1993).…”

To Help or Not to Help? Personal Value for Diversity Moderates the Relationship Between Discrimination Against Minorities and Citizenship Behavior Toward Minorities

“…Discrimination against minorities sends a signal to other employees about the integrity of the organization and its leaders (Goldman et al, 2008;Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978). In addition, minorities tend to have the strongest racial identities, experience the most discrimination, and have higher turnover rates (McKay et al, 2007;Phinney, 1992;Robinson and Dechant, 1997;Utsey et al, 2002).…”