Then what is the influential effect of interactional justice? Researchers have done a lot of empirical studies on the outcome variables of the perception of interactional justice. To summarize the current literature, this paper explores the outcome variables of interactional justice from the individual and organizational level.
After conducting a meta-analysis of organizational justice, Colquitt et al. Among them, it proved that there was a strong relationship between interactional justice and agent evaluation of authority and job satisfaction and a rather weak relationship between interactional justice and job performance, organizational commitment and withdrawal behavior of employees.
In addition, Cohen-Charash and Spector [22] also conducted a meta-analysis of organizational justice and the result showed that there were eight kinds of outcome variables about organizational justice.
Some of the findings were proved to be the same as the research result of Colquitt et al. However, some of the findings turned out to be different from the result of Colquitt et al. Moreover, with the continuing development of the theory of interactional justice, more and more researchers start to carry out related studies. For example, Ambrose and Schminke [23] illustrated that the perception of interactional justice had close relationship with the trust of the seniors.
In addition, Otto and Mamatoglu [24] explored the impact effect of interactional justice on the basis of social exchange theory with an investigation on employees from the electronic information industry.
In addition to positive behaviors, interactional justice has been examined to be linked with negative behaviors. Le Roy, Bastounis and Poussard [25] in their study found that low perceived interactional justice was significantly related to higher counterproductive work behavior from individuals.
In other words, when perceiving low interactional justice, individuals would engage in more active and passive counterproductive work behavior. Interactional justice mainly involves the association and communication between employees and the administrators, which leads to the lack of the exploration on the high-level of outcome variables.
In spite of this, a large number of studies have sought to link justice perceptions to a variety of organizational outcomes. Lu [26] explored how interactional justice influenced the conflict and attachment among cooperative enterprises from different countries. The study found out that interactional justice not only had positive influence on the attachment between enterprises and enterprises, but also could reduce the negative influence brought by cultural difference to enterprises.
Luo [27] integrated the theory of fairness and strategic alliances to explore the influence of distributive justice, procedural justice and interactional justice on organization alliance performance. The result revealed that high level of interactional justice could increase the unity between top managers, which could further improve the alliance performance.
What is more, other researchers also conducted the related research on the perception of fairness and alliance formation. If employees feel treated fairly by leaders, they will show much more positive attitudes and do more behaviors beneficial to the development of organization. In this process, the leader plays a key role as the one who communicates with the employees most. Bies [29] suggested the integration of the theory of fairness to the theory of leadership behaviors.
Hence, the study on the integration of interactional justice and leader behavior can not only enrich the theory of both of them, but also bring inspiration to the management of enterprises. After literature review, we find that most of the researches study the antecedent variables and outcome variables of interactional justice separately and few of them bring them into an integrated framework to make systematic theory construction.
Because of the diversity in antecedent variables and outcome variables, interactional justice is a field in need of integration. Therefore, future study should on one hand figure out the moderation and mediation role of interactional justice in some key antecedent variables and outcome variables and on the other hand investigate the mediation and moderation mechanism between interactional justice and antecedent variables as well as the mediation and moderation mechanism between interactional justice and outcome variables.
In any event, much attention should be attached to the integration mechanism of interactional justice. So carrying out the study on interactional justice under the Chinese culture background is very important and urgent. Under the impact of individualism and rational thinking, communication style of western society focuses on the consideration of individual itself and puts less care on the surrounding interpersonal relationship. In this way, although they seem to be unkind to each other, they actually have mutual trust on each other because they are protected by laws.
However, things are different from China. Influenced by Confucianism, Chinese people not only take consideration of the surrounding interpersonal relationship, but also concern the social power structure. So before carrying out the local study of interactional justice, future studies need to answer these two questions: how Chinese people define interactional justice and how to measure the perception of interactional justice of Chinese people.
Taken together, in the future, researchers should explore the principles of interactional justice in Chinese people and then compile the scale of interactional justice fit for Chinese people to help this field enter a more mature stage. Management World, 5, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale. Justice and Social Interaction, 3, Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 1, Journal of Management, 16, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, Journal of Service Science and Management, 3, Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, Academy of Management Journal, 36, Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, Personnel Psychology, 60, Management and Organization Review, 10, The Journal of Social Psychology, , Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, Academy of Management Journal, 32, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, The Journal of Psychology, , Human Relations, 59, Academy of Management Journal, 50, Strategic Management Journal, 31, Brockner, J.
An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Brown, W. Organizational change and development: the efficacy of transformational leadership training.
Buengeler, C. National diversity and team performance: the moderating role of interactional justice. Caesens, G. Carless, S. A short measure of transformational leadership. Carter, M. Transformational leadership, interactional justice, and organizational citizenship behavior: the effects of racial and gender dissimilarity between supervisors and subordinates. Group Organ. Cheung, G.
Evaluating goodness-of fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Choi, J. Colquitt, J. On the dimensionality of organizational justice: a construct validation of a measure. Justice at the millennium: a meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.
Greenberg and J. Colquitt Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum , — Diener, E. The satisfaction with life scale. Enders, C. Applied Missing Data Analysis. New York, NY: Guilford. Gillet, N. The effects of job demands and organizational resources through psychological need satisfaction and thwarting. Transformational leadership, work-family conflict and enrichment, and commitment. Le Travail Hum. Gupta, V. Impact of performance appraisal justice on employee engagement: a study of Indian professionals.
Hipp, J. Local solutions in the estimation of growth mixture models. Methods 11, 36— Huang, C. The mediating role of burnout in the relationships between perceived fit, leader-member exchange, psychological illness, and job performance.
Stress Manag. Kam, C. Are commitment profiles stable and predictable? A latent transition analysis. Kass, E. Interactional justice, negotiator outcome satisfaction, and desire for future negotiations: respect at the negotiating table.
Lanza, S. Latent class analysis with distal outcomes: a flexible model-based approach. Linden, M. Die job-angst-skala. Zeitschrift Arbeits Organ. Loi, R. Four-factor justice and daily job satisfaction: a multilevel investigation. Marsh, H. A Festschrift for Roderick P.
McDonald , eds A. Maydeu-Olivares and J. McDonald, R. Theoretical foundations of principal factor analysis, canonical factor analysis, and alpha factor analysis. Millsap, R. Statistical Approaches To Measurement Invariance. Morin, A. Meyer Cheltenham: Edward Elgar , — A bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling framework for the identification of distinct sources of construct-relevant psychometric multidimensionality. Complementary variable- and person-centered approaches to exploring the dimensionality of psychometric constructs: application to psychological wellbeing at work.
Munir, F. Parry, K. Researching the trainability of transformational organisational leadership. Podsakoff, E. Organizational citizenship behavior and sales unit effectiveness. Rego, A. Organisational justice and citizenship behaviors: a study in the Portuguese cultural context.
Rindskopf, D. Some theory and applications of confirmatory second-order factor analysis. Rineer, J. The moderating effect of perceived organizational support on the relation between organizational justice and objective measures of cardiovascular health. Work Organ. Rofcanin, Y. Family supportive supervisor behaviors and organizational culture: effects on work engagement and performance. Health Psychol. Scott, B. An actor-focused model of justice rule adherence and violation: the role of managerial motives and discretion.
Semmer, N. Illegitimate tasks as a source of work stress. Work Stress 29, 32— Shirom, A. A comparison of the construct validity of two burnout measures in two groups of professionals. Stress Manag,. Skarlicki, D. Retaliation in the workplace: the roles of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice.
Leadership amd fairness: the state of the art. Team autonomy, organizational commitment and company performance—A study in the retail trade. Wang, R. Watson, D. Wu, C. Transformational leadership, cohesion perceptions, and employee cynicism about organizational change: the mediating role of justice perceptions.
Yang, L. To branch out or stay focused? Affective shifts differentially predict organizational citizenship behavior and task performance. Keywords : organizational justice, latent profiles, bifactor, confirmatory factor analyses, transformational leadership, well-being, burnout.
The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author s and the copyright owner s are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.
No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. Introduction Numerous studies in the organizational and managerial literature Colquitt et al. Research has shown that organizational justice is linked to positive outcomes such as. Organizational justice is also linked to negative outcomes such as counterproductive work behaviors, turnover and burnout , such that employees who perceive fairness in outcomes and processes tend to engage less in these negative behaviors Colquitt et al.
It is important for organizations to ensure that they treat their employees fairly through ensuring that both outcomes and processes are equitable and just. Organizations can ensure that organizational practices are transparent and equitable so that employees remain committed to the goals of the organization.
Based on the empirical evidence for the relationship between team-efficacy and team performance, this dossier is assigned a Level 5 rating, Based on a 1- 5 measurement scale. A level 5 is the highest rating score for a dossier based on the evidence provided on the efficacy of organizational justice. To date, the research on organizational justice has demonstrated the importance of this construct on a myriad of organizational outcomes.
Moreover, the research has been conducted at the individual, team, and organizational level. Join our monthly newsletter to receive management tips, tricks and insights directly into your inbox! Barsky, A. If you feel bad, it's unfair: A quantitative synthesis of affect and organizational justice perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 , — Bies, R. Voice and justification: their influence on procedural fairness judgments. Academy of Management Journal , 31, Colquitt, J.
On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86 , — Justice at the millennium, a decade later: A meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect-based perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98 , 2, Greenberg, J. A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12 , Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of pay cuts.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 75 , 5, Kernan, M. Survivor reactions to reorganization: antecedents and consequences of procedural, interpersonal and information justice. Journal of Applied Psychology , 87, Lang, J. Journal of Applied Psychology. Li, A. Fairness at the group level: Justice climate and intra-unit justice climate.
Journal of Management, 35 , Roberson, Q. Shared and configural justice: A social network model of justice in teams. Academy of Management Review, 30 , CQ Net.