Using self-definition to predict the influence of procedural justice on organizational, interpersonal, and job/task-oriented citizenship behaviors

An integrative self-definition model is proposed to improve our understanding of how procedural justice affects different outcome modalities in organizational behavior. Specifically, it is examined whether the strength of different levels of self-definition (collective, relational, and individual) each uniquely interact with procedural justice to predict organizational, interpersonal, and job/task-oriented citizenship behaviors, respectively. Results from experimental and (both single and multisource) field data consistently revealed stronger procedural justice effects (1) on organizational-oriented citizenship behavior among those who define themselves strongly in terms of organizational characteristics, (2) on interpersonal-oriented citizenship behavior among those who define themselves strongly in terms of their interpersonal relationships, and (3) on job/task-oriented citizenship behavior among those who define themselves weakly in terms of their distinctiveness or uniqueness. We discuss the relevance of these results with respect to how employees can be motivated most effectively in organizational settings

Whom to Punish? How observers sanction norm-violating behavior in ostracism situations

When observing ostracism, individuals can either side with the target or the sources of ostracism. Here we demonstrate that side-taking depends on whether the target previously acted in adherence to or in violation of perceived social norms. In four studies, a target behaved either norm-consistently or violated a social norm, and was subsequently either excluded by the sources or was not. Next, participants could sanction the behavior of the observed persons by refraining to assign money (Studies 1 and 2), or by subtracting money from a bonus (Studies 3 and 4). Observers assigned less money to the sources when these excluded a norm-consistent target. However, when the target had violated a social norm before, participants assigned less money to the target instead. These results have far-reaching implications because the (in)actions of neutral individuals can legitimize the sources' behavior, or help a target under attack

Justice and feelings: Toward a new era in justice research

In this special issue, the relationship between feelings and justice and its consequences are highlighted. Five articles discuss the role that affect, feelings, and emotions play in justice processes across a variety of social settings. In the present introductory article, the position of past and present justice research in relationship to these topics is briefly reviewed. In addition, reasons are outlined to show why a focus on these issues may be pivotal for a better understanding of social justice and how this may pave the way for a new, more process-oriented era in social justice research, focusing more on “hot” cognitive aspects as they pertain to social justice concerns

What’s past (and present) is prologue : interactions between justice levels and trajectories predicting behavioral reciprocity

Much of organizational justice research has tended to take a static approach, linking employees’ contemporaneous justice levels to outcomes of interest. In the present study, we tested a dynamic model emphasizing the interactive influences of both justice levels and trajectories for predicting behavioral social exchange outcomes. Specifically, our model posited both main effects and interactions between present justice levels and past justice changes over time in predicting helping behavior and voluntary turnover behavior. Data over four yearly measurement periods from 4,348 employees of a banking organization generally supported the notion that justice trajectories interact with absolute levels to predict both outcomes. Together, the findings highlight how employees invoke present fairness evaluations within the context of past fairness trends—rather than either in isolation—to inform decisions about behaviorally reciprocating at work

How fair versus how long: An integrative theory‐based examination of procedural justice and procedural timeliness

Although studies have linked procedural justice to a range of positive attitudes and behaviors, the focus on justice has neglected other aspects of decision‐making procedures. We explore one of those neglected aspects: procedural timeliness—defined as the degree to which procedures are started and completed within an acceptable time frame. Do employees react to how long a procedure takes, not just how fair it seems to be? To explore that question, we examined the potential effects of procedural timeliness using six theories created to explain the benefits of procedural justice. This integrative theory‐based approach allowed us to explore whether “how long” had unique effects apart from “how fair.” The results of a three‐wave, two‐source field study showed that procedural timeliness had a significant indirect effect on citizenship behavior through many of the theory‐based mechanisms, even when controlling for procedural justice. A laboratory study then replicated those effects while distinguishing procedures that were too fast versus too slow. We discuss the implications of our results for research on fostering citizenship behavior and improving supervisors’ decision‐making procedures

Should the decisions of institutional review boards be consistent?

In response to increasing concerns regarding inconsistency in the decision-making of institutional review boards (IRBs), we introduce the decision-maker's dilemma, which arises when complex, normative decisions must be made regularly. Those faced with such decisions can either develop a process of algorithmic decision-making, in which consistency is ensured but many morally relevant factors are excluded from the process, or embrace discretionary decision-making, which makes space for morally relevant factors to shape decisions but leads to decisions that are inconsistent. Based on an exploration of similarities between systems of criminal sentencing and of research ethics review, we argue for a discretionary system of decision-making, even though it leads to more inconsistency than does an algorithmic system. We conclude with a discussion of some safeguards that could improve consistency while still making space for discretion to enter IRBs' decision-making processes

Wrongful behaviours among manufacturing employees in Malaysia: An exploratory study

Wrongful behaviour is an important subject that needs to be seriously understood as it represents a reality of work life amongst employees in organizations.Furthermore, managers and practitioners should be concerned about this phenomenon since it may bring harmful effects to the organization in the long run if it is not effectively managed.To do so, managers need to understand the nature of it.This paper reports some findings of a survey conducted among 324 manufacturing employees in some parts of Malaysia.Three different forms of wrongful behaviour have been identified i.e. irresponsible behaviour, nonproductive behaviour and loitering behaviour.The survey generally found that manufacturing employees tend to engage in organizational deviance/wrongful behaviour.Discussion on the findings, their implications to practice and research, and limitations of the studies are also highlighted in this paper

Failure to report as a breach of moral and professional expectation

Cases of poor care have been documented across the world. Contrary to professional requirements, evidence indicates that these sometimes go unaddressed. For patients the outcomes of this inaction are invariably negative. Previous work has either focused on why poor care occurs and what might be done to prevent it, or on the reasons why those who are witness to it find it difficult to raise their concerns. Here we build on this work but specifically foreground the responsibilities of registrants and students who witness poor care. Acknowledging the challenges associated with raising concerns, we make the case that failure to address poor care is a breach of moral expectation, professional requirement and sometimes, legal frameworks. We argue that reporting will be more likely to take place if those who wish to enter the profession have a realistic view of the challenges they may encounter. When nurses are provided with robust and applied education on ethics, when ‘real-world’ cases and exemplars are used in practice and when steps are taken to develop and encourage individual moral courage, we may begin to see positive change. Ultimately however, significant change is only likely to take place where practice cultures invite and welcome feedback, promote critical reflection, and where strong, clear leadership support is shown by those in positions of influence across organisations