Power distance as a moderator of the relationship between justice and employee outcomes in a sample of Chinese employees

Abstract

Power distance was tested as a moderator of the relationship between justice concerns and employee outcomes in a sample of employees in the People's Republic of China. Two hypotheses were developed based on the quality of authority-member relations prescribed by the relational model of authority in groups. In two-way interactions, higher power distance combined with procedural justice to predict employee outcomes, whereas lower power distance combined with distributive justice.

Cultural and leadership predictors of corporate social responsibility values of top management: a GLOBE study of 15 countries

“…Higher power distance cultures accept that the hierarchy that exists between superiors and subordinates is extensive, customary, and legitimate. Notably, employees in cultures with higher power distance values will recognize that existing barriers should regulate attempts to form relationships with superiors (Begley et al, 2001). In line with Carl et al (2004), we define power distance values as the extent to which societal members believe that power should be concentrated in the hands of only a few people in a culture, and that those people should be obeyed without question and afforded special privileges.…”

Organisational citizenship behaviour in the People's Republic of China and comparison to the West: construct, antecedents, consequences and implications for future research

“…Farh et al (2001Farh et al ( , 2004Farh et al ( , 2007, Zhong and Farh (2003) and Yao and Wang (2008) Altruism towards colleagues (task) Tjosvold et al (2003a), Wong et al (2002Wong et al ( , 2003Wong et al ( , 2006Wong et al ( , 2005, Hui et al (1999Hui et al ( , 2008, Chen et al (2002aChen et al ( , 2005b, Chen and Francesco (2003), Wong and Liu (2007), Tjosvold and Yu (2004) and Zhang et al (2007Zhang et al ( , 2008 Interpersonal facilitation Aryee et al (2008) and Wang et al (2008) Altruism (task) Wang et al (2005), Hui et al (2004aHui et al ( , 2004b, Tjosvold et al (1998), Begley et al (2002Begley et al ( , 2006, Zhong et al (2006), Chang (2008a, 2008b), Li and Wan (2007), Felfe et al (2008), Zhang and Agarwal (2009) Farh et al (2001Farh et al ( , 2004Farh et al ( , 2007, Zhong and Farh (2003) and Yao and Wang (2008 Tjosvold et al (2003a), Wong et al (2007), Hui et al (1999), Chen and Farh (2001), Chen et al (2002a…”

“…In comparison, the picture in China is the following: perceived job mobility ; organisational commitment (Chen and Francesco, 2003;Felfe et al, 2008;Snape et al, 2006) and supervisory commitment (Chen et al, 2002;Wong et al, 2002;Wong and Liu, 2007); personality (conscientiousness and agreeableness) (Xu, 2005); proactive personality (Baba et al, 2009); psychological contract fulfilment (Hui et al, 2004b) and psychological contract breach ; perceived fairness (Begley et al, 2002;Zhang and Agarwal, 2009); trust in organisation (Wong et al, 2006); and trust in supervisor (Wong et al, 2003). Figure 1 depicts the similarities and differences on the individual characteristics of OCB antecedents between China and the West.…”

“…Identification with company Tjosvold et al (2003a), Wong et al (2007), Chen and Farh (2001), Hui et al (1999), Wong and Liu (2007) and Tjosvold and Yu (2004) Civic virtue Begley et al (2006Begley et al ( , 2002, Wang et al (2005), Hui et al (2004aHui et al ( , 2004b, Tjosvold et al (2003b), Chang (2008a, 2008b), Wan (2007), Felfe et al (2008), Zhang et al (2008), Zhang and Agarwal (2009) and Baba et al (2009) Group participation Farh et al (2001Farh et al ( , 2004 and Zhong and Farh (2003) Sportsmanship Wang et al (2005), Hui et al (2004aHui et al ( , 2004bHui et al ( , 2008, Chen et al (1998), Tjosvold et al (2003a), Begley et al (2006), Chang (2008a, 2008b), Li and Wan (2007), Zhang et al (2008), Markoczy et al (2009), Zhang andAgarwal (2009) and Baba et al (2009) Courtesy Tjosvold et al (2003b, Wang et al (2005), Hui et al (2004aHui et al ( , 2004bHui et al ( , 2008, Begley et al (2006), Chang (2008a, 2008b), Li and W...…”

Küreselleşen Dünya'da Okullar İçi̇n Ve Di̇

“…This low power distance indicates that constituents see power as situational and feel that decisions should be questioned, discussed and agreed upon. Societies with a low power distance have less social, economic and political stratification, which translates into a need for relational leadership skills with a focus on social and civic responsibility in reflection to the community's needs (Begley, 2001;Carl, 2004;Holfstede, 2001;House, 2004;Javidan, 2006). Social responsibility is crucial to educational leadership.…”