Procedural justice in promotion decisions of managerial staff in Malaysia

Abstract

Previous research indicates that procedural justice in promotion decisions has affected employees' organizational commitment, intent to leave and career satisfaction. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of procedural justice in promotion decisions on managers' commitment, specifically organizational commitment, intent to leave, career satisfaction and job performance in multinational companies in Malaysia. Data were obtained from a sample of managers with more than 10 years of service in the organization through in-depth interviews. The findings show that perceived procedural injustice in promotion decisions have an unfavourable impact on employee commitment, job performance and career satisfaction. The intent to leave is also higher, especially among young managerial staff.

Exploring the Relationship Between Exclusive Talent Management, Perceived Organizational Justice and Employee Engagement: Bridging the Literature

“…Therefore, due to this moderating effect, we postulate that employees, who are treated with respect (interpersonal injustice), provided with appropriate information (informational justice), and transparent and fair procedures (procedural justice), before any TM decisions are made regarding who is included and excluded in the organizational talent pool, and who understand the whole process, will have a more positive reaction to announced TM outcomes (that is, the identities of those selected for the organization's HiPo talent pool), even if the outcome is not favorable to them (Biswas et al 2013;Gelens et al 2014;Ghosh et al 2014). Findings from other studies suggest that it is an organization's HRM procedures, and not the actual HRM content, that have a greater influence on employee reactions, which suggests that perceptions of procedural justice influence employee reactions to HRM programs (Cohen-Charash and Spector 2001;Katou 2013;Wan et al 2012). …”

“…Employee reactions to perceived injustice have been found to result in dissatisfaction (Wan et al 2012), low commitment and poor performance (Mahajan and Benson 2013), with some employees withdrawing and becoming disengaged (Frank et al 2004;Ghosh et al 2014;Saks 2006). This supports Marescaux et al's (2013) finding that workforce differentiation, which is at the core of exclusive TM, leads to negative employee and organizational outcomes.…”

“…Procedural justice, the perceived justice and fairness of the allocation process, extends the study of distributive justice (Greenberg and Folger 1983;Leventhal 1980). Research has shown that the distribution of outcomes (such as pay, promotion) is not always as important as the fairness of the allocation process of the outcomes (CohenCharash and Spector 2001; Wan et al 2012). Finally, interactional justice (Bies 1987;Bies and Moag 1986) is based on the perceived quality of the interpersonal treatment people receive while practices are being implemented.…”

Reward Management Strategies and Employee Performance in Selected Universities in Nakuru County, Kenya

“…Upholding the same argument, many lecturers will consider leaving the institutions where they work if they do not have equal promotion opportunities as offered by other universities, particularly young lecturers who are looking for more work experiences from various institutions before deciding to remain with a particular institution. Lecturers in private institutions were more satisfied with their promotional opportunities than in public universities [47].…”

Knowledge Sharing and Employee Development in Oil and Gas Companies in the United Arab Emirates

“…So procedural justice have a direct effect on employee development, and managers should take it into consideration when taking the decision to promote employees and apply a fair employment law. Failing to do so could affect employee's behavior and accordingly may force them to quit (Wan & Sulaiman et al, 2012).…”