Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A metaanalytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance.

The trust literature distinguishes trustworthiness (the ability, benevolence, and integrity of a trustee) and trust propensity (a dispositional willingness to rely on others) from trust (the intention to accept vulnerability to a trustee based on positive expectations of his or her actions). Although this distinction has clarified some confusion in the literature, it remains unclear (a) which trust antecedents have the strongest relationships with trust and (b) whether trust fully mediates the effects of trustworthiness and trust propensity on behavioral outcomes. Our meta-analysis of 132 independent samples summarized the relationships between the trust variables and both risk taking and job performance (task performance, citizenship behavior, counterproductive behavior). Meta-analytic structural equation modeling supported a partial mediation model wherein trustworthiness and trust propensity explained incremental variance in the behavioral outcomes when trust was controlled. Further analyses revealed that the trustworthiness dimensions also predicted affective commitment, which had unique relationships with the outcomes when controlling for trust. These results generalized across different types of trust measures (i.e., positive expectations measures, willingness-to-be-vulnerable measures, and direct measures) and different trust referents (i.e., leaders, coworkers)

An actor-focused model of justice rule adherence and violation: The role of managerial motives and discretion.

Research on organizational justice has focused primarily on the receivers of just and unjust treatment. Little is known about why managers adhere to or violate rules of justice in the first place. The authors introduce a model for understanding justice rule adherence and violation. They identify both cognitive motives and affective motives that explain why managers adhere to and violate justice rules. They also draw distinctions among the justice rules by specifying which rules offer managers more or less discretion in their execution. They then describe how motives and discretion interact to influence justice-relevant actions. Finally, the authors incorporate managers' emotional reactions to consider how their actions may change over time. Implications of the model for theory, research, and practice are discussed

'It's Reducing a Human Being to a Percentage'; Perceptions of Justice in Algorithmic Decisions

Data-driven decision-making consequential to individuals raises important questions of accountability and justice. Indeed, European law provides individuals limited rights to 'meaningful information about the logic' behind significant, autonomous decisions such as loan approvals, insurance quotes, and CV filtering. We undertake three experimental studies examining people's perceptions of justice in algorithmic decision-making under different scenarios and explanation styles. Dimensions of justice previously observed in response to human decision-making appear similarly engaged in response to algorithmic decisions. Qualitative analysis identified several concerns and heuristics involved in justice perceptions including arbitrariness, generalisation, and (in)dignity. Quantitative analysis indicates that explanation styles primarily matter to justice perceptions only when subjects are exposed to multiple different styles---under repeated exposure of one style, scenario effects obscure any explanation effects. Our results suggests there may be no 'best' approach to explaining algorithmic decisions, and that reflection on their automated nature both implicates and mitigates justice dimensions.Comment: 14 pages, 3 figures, ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'18), April 21--26, Montreal, Canad

Does justice of the one interact with the justice of the many? Reactions to procedural justice in teams.

This article reported the results of 2 studies that examined reactions to procedural justice in teams. Both studies predicted that individual members' reactions would be driven not just by their own procedural justice levels but also by the justice experienced by other team members. Study 1 examined intact student teams, whereas Study 2 occurred in a laboratory setting. The results showed that individual members' own justice interacted with others' justice, such that higher levels of role performance occurred when justice was consistent within the team. These effects were strongest in highly interdependent teams and weakest for members who were benevolent with respect to equity sensitivity

Organizational behavior : improving performance and commitment in the workplace, 2nd ed./ Colquitt

xxiii, 630 hal.: ill, tab.; 25 cm

Organizational behavior : improving performance and commitment in the workplace, 2nd ed./ Colquitt

xxiii, 630 hal.: ill, tab.; 25 cm

Organizational behavior : improving performance and commitment in the workplace, 2nd ed./ Colquitt

xxiii, 630 hal.: ill, tab.; 25 cm

Organizational behavior: improving performance and commitment in the workplace

Buku ini membahas tentang manajemen perilaku karyawan. Bagaimana memotivasi karyawan, apa yang membuat karyawan bekerja secara efektif, apa yang membuat bekerja menjadi menyenangkan. Buku ini sangat cocok dibaca oleh manajer SDM dan karyawan untuk meningkatkan kinerja dan loyalitas karyawan