ijcrb.webs.com
I
DECEMBER2011
JC
NTERDISCIPLINARY OURNAL OF
RB
ONTEMPORARY
ESEARCH IN USINESS
OL O
V 3,N 8
Role of Perceived Organizational Justice in Job Satisfaction: Evidence
from Higher Education Institutions of Pakistan
Prof. Dr. Muhammad Ehsan Malik
Dean, Faculty of Economics and Management Sciences/Director, Institute of Business Administration
(IBA)/Director General, Gujranwala Campus, University of the Punjab (Pakistan)
Basharat Naeem
Lecturer at IBA, University of the Punjab, Lahore (Pakistan) & PhD Scholar at COMSATS Institute of
Information Technology (CIIT), Islamabad Campus (Pakistan)
Abstract
From the last 35 years, empirical evidence on organizational justice and its impact on work
related outcomes such as in-role performance, extra-role performance, turnover intentions,
organizational commitment, trust, motivation and job satisfaction endorsed its significant
importance not only for management researchers but also for business organizations.
However, limited researches are available on whether or not fairness perceptions can foster
the teacher’s job satisfaction employed by higher education institutions of Pakistan. Hence,
this study is focused on exploring the relationship between organizational justice (and
dimensions) and job satisfaction while taking faculty designation into consideration. For this
purpose, data was collected from 463 faculty members serving in public and private HEIs of
Pakistan. Regression analyses were employed to address the research question. Implications
for academic administrators and future researchers are presented.
Keywords: Organizational Justice, Job Satisfaction, Faculty, Higher Education Institutions
(HEIs), Pakistan
Introduction:
In today’s competitive world, human resource management played a very crucial role in
developing organizations and its sustainability. The intense competition among the
competitors and swift escalation of economy entirely changed the rhythm of the employees’
performance, physical and mental development at the workplace. To figure out the current
environment of different organizations, it is become inevitable to respond to critical question
regarding how workers’ behaviors and attitudes influences psychological, individual and
organizational factors (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002; Van Dick, 2004; Meyer & Allen,
1997). Fairness perceptions holds an important position in the decisions and processes as per
human resource aspect (Thurston and McNall, 2010; Jawahar, 2007; Cohen-Charash and
Spector, 2001) such as pay, benefits and other compensation facets. In actual fact, fairness in
compensation received, decisions regarding the compensation-related process and the way
this information is communicated to all the employees hold an integral role in formulating the
responses about the compensatory system (Nelson et al., 2008; Milkovich and Newman,
2008).
Greenberg (1990) reviewed the literature pertaining to organizational justice and noted that
“social scientists have long recognized the importance of the ideals of justice as a basic
requirement for the effective functioning of organizations and the personal satisfaction of the
individuals they employ”. He also declared the justice as “first virtue of social institutions”.
Organizational justice mainly concentrates on the workplace’s fairness which influences
numerous organizational and individual work-related factors like turnover intentions,
absenteeism, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, role breadth, job performance,
leader-member exchange, trust, leadership and job satisfaction (e.g., Lambert, Hogan, &
COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
662
ijcrb.webs.com
I
DECEMBER2011
JC
NTERDISCIPLINARY OURNAL OF
RB
ONTEMPORARY
ESEARCH IN USINESS
OL O
V
3,N 8
Griffin, 2007; Vermunt & Steensma, 2003; Bakhshi & Kumar, 2009; Hubbel & Chory-Assad,
2005; Judge & Colquitt, 2004; Wat and Shaffer, 2005; Byrne, 2005; Greenberg, 2004;
Colquitt et al., 2001; Boer et al., 2002).
In the light of above literature, several researches were carried out among the relationship of
organizational justice and work related behaviors, but mostly researches were conducted at
business context in western countries. Lam et al. (2002) claimed that “studies of the effects of
distributive and procedural justice do not provide consistent and mutually supportive
conclusions as to generalizability across cultures”. Taking the limited literature into
consideration in Asia specifically Pakistan, the objective of this current research is to
determine the relationship of organizational justice dimensions with job satisfaction among
the faculty members serving in public and private sector institutions of higher learning in
Pakistan.
Literature Review:
In the year of 2007 “of Education Administration” published its special issue on “Leadership,
Learning and Social Justice” to contribute the literature pertaining to learning and justice in
educational context of different countries. Number of articles were published (e.g., Fua,
2007; Normore et al., 2007; Kana and Aitken, 2007; Skrla et al., 2007; McMahon, 2007;
Chiu and Walker, 2007; Brooks and Jean-Marie, 2007; Landorf and Nevin, 2007; Stevenson,
2007; Collard, 2007) for enlightening the theme of justice in numerous countries like Hong
Kong, Canada, Tonga, New Zealand, UK, United States of America and Australia. In
educational scenario especially in higher education, the most important contributor for
organization is to nurture the role of organizational justice in educational institutions.
Researchers (see Hauenstein et al., 2001, Lind, 2001a; van den Bos & Lind, 2002; Lind,
2001b; Ambrose & Arnaud, 2005; Lind & van den Bos, 2002) also suggested that the
paradigm shifting concerning overall fairness may give comprehensive understanding the role
of justice in organizational settings.
Numerous studies used organizational justice with its other three dimensions in
organizational research as explanatory variables (e.g., Sweeney and McFarlin, 1993;
Leventhal, 1976; Alexander and Ruderman, 1987; McFarlin and Sweeney, 1992; Folger and
Konovsky, 1989; Lind and Tyler, 1988; Lam et al., 2002; Greenberg, 1990). Organizational
justice can be defined as the employee’s perception regarding their treatment in the
organization fairly and honestly (Elovainio et al., 2005) and the outcomes of these processes
are fair or not (Hubbel & Chory-Assad, 2005). Cremer (2005) depicted organizational justice
as the dominating factor in organizational life. In existing literature, organizational justice
characterized into three broad categories named “distributive”, “procedural”, and
“interactional” justice (Martinez-tur et al., 2006).
Distributive justice, recognized as first sub-dimension of organization justice, mainly
considered with the workers’ perception in the fairness of outcomes (Greenberg, 1987) such
as monetary rewards obtained by the workers from the organization (Colquitt et al., 2006;
Elovainio et al., 2004; Ramamoorthy & Flood, 2004; Greenberg, 2006; Aryee, Budhwar, &
Chen, 2002). The first notion came out from the literature was distributive justice which is
defined as by Moorman (1991) as “the fairness of outcomes an employee receives such as
pay and promotions”. This type of justice based on equity theory which emphasized on the
judgments made by the employees about the outcomes (for example promotion, pay) offered
COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
663
ijcrb.webs.com
I
DECEMBER2011
JC
NTERDISCIPLINARY OURNAL OF
RB
ONTEMPORARY
ESEARCH IN USINESS
OL O
V
3,N 8
by the organization against their effort by which they work or in accordance with given
criteria (Cropanzano and Greenberg, 1997; Hubbel & Chory-Assad, 2005; Blakely et al.,
2005; Colquitt et al., 2006; Alder & Ambrose, 2005). Distributive justice also considered as
the leading factor toward organizational effectiveness (Tang and Sarsfield-Baldwin, 1996).
Procedural justice introduced by Thibaut and Walker (1975) during their research on dispute
resolution procedures. Colquitt et al. (2001) claimed that distributive and procedural justice is
distinct constructs in nature. It refers to the fairness in the process of decision making about
resource allocation (Korsgaard et al., 1995; Farmer et al., 2003; Alexander and Ruderman,
1987). Procuderal justice is the employees’ observations about fairness in rules and
regulation which are used to make a decision that will lead to the ultimate outcome
(Elovainio et al., 2004; Greenberg, 2004; Aryee et al. 2002; Byrne, 2005; Greenberg, 2001).
Moorman (1991) defined it as “the fairness of the procedures used in determining employee
outcomes”.
Interactional justice is considered as key aspect in workplace settings because of its
relationship with unfair and fair treatment (Martı´nez-Tur et al., 2006; Cohen-Charash and
Spector, 2001). Greenberg (1990) defined it as “the interpersonal treatment employees
receive from decision makers and the adequacy with which the formal decision-making
procedures are explained”. Afterward, literature proved two subcategory of interactional
justice known as interpersonal and informational justice and should considered as separately
(Colquitt, 2001). Greenberg (1990) proposed two specific type of interpersonal treatment; (1)
informational justice who primarily focuses why the specific outcome of an activity had
come out in certain fashion, and (2) interpersonal justice provides the degree of which
employees were treated with dignity, politeness and respect by people.
In organizational studies, Currivan (2000) claimed that job satisfaction is widely studied as
work outcomes in organizational settings. Numerous researchers (for instance Goris et al.,
2000; Smith et al., 1969) conceptualized job satisfaction as multifaceted instrument consisted
of “work itself”, “quality of supervision”, “relationships with coworkers”, “promotion
opportunities”, and “pay” whereas some researchers (Currivan, 2000) taken is as global
instrument for measuring job satisfaction of the employees. Spector (1996) defined it as “the
extent to which people like their jobs”, while Cranny, Smith and Stone (1992) referred it as
the employee’s emotional or effective response towards the job. Role ambiguity,
dangerousness, role conflict and role overload associated with lower satisfaction regarding
the job (Lambert et. al., 2005, 2004; Lambert & Paoline, 2005). Job autonomy, satisfaction
with pay, integration, quality of supervision, training, equitable treatment and incentive
program boast the employees’ satisfaction in the organization (Griffin, 2001; Lambert, 2004;
K. Wright et al., 1997; Lambert et al. 2006; Lambert et al., 2002; Stohr et al., 1994; Dennis,
1998; Hepburn & Knepper, 1993; Griffin et al., 2005; Hepburn, 1987; Lambert & Paoline,
2005; Whitehead & Lindquist, 1986; Lambert et al., 2004). Though the fairness perceptions
is important to all decision pertaining to human resource and its processes (Jawahar, 2007;
Thurston and McNall, 2010) but, it particularly important to the employees’ satisfaction with
the job as well.
Organizational justice which primarily focuses on the fairness at workplace put stronger
impact on different attitudes of the employees like turnover intentions, absenteeism, role
breadth, job satisfaction, job performance, leader-member exchange, trust, leadership and
organizational commitment (e.g. Bakhshi & Kumar, 2009; Lambert, Hogan, & Griffin, 2007;
COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
664
Hubbel & Chory-Assad, 2005; Byrne, 2005; Wat and Shaffer, 2005; Greenberg, 2004; Judge
& Colquitt, 2004; Vermunt & Steensma, 2003; Boer et al., 2002; Lam et al., 2002; Colquitt et
al., 2001). Folger and Konovsky (1989) found positive association among the dimensions of
organizational justice with organizational commitment and job satisfaction. The studies of
Colquitt et al., (2001), Folger and Cropanzano (1998), Cohen-Charash and Spector (2001)
also found that justice dimensions hacve positive and significant impact of job satisfaction.
Lambert (2003) observed positive relationship of procedural and distributive justice on
satisfaction of Midwestern prisons. In educational contexts, Zaman, Ali and Ali (2010) was
conducted a research on the dimensions of organizational justice, job satisfaction and
organizational commitment and found that justice dimensions foster the job satisfaction and
commitment of the employees. In another study, Bakhshi, Kumar and Rani (2009) reported
the positive and significant association of distributive justice and procedural justice with
organizational commitment and job satisfaction of medical college employees in India.
Consistent with the prior findings, Najafi et al. (2011) also concluded that educational experts
of different universities reported higher job satisfaction the provision of organizational justice.
Fatt et al. (2010) reported that “the higher level of employee’s perception towards procedural
justice and distributive justice tended to increase the level of employees’ job satisfaction and
organizational commitment”.
Research Methods:
To answer the following research questions, self-administered questionnaires were to gather
the data.
Research Question: Do the dimensions of organizational justice (distributive, procedural and
interactional justice) effect the job satisfaction of the faculty members having diverse faculty
positions in higher education institutions of Pakistan?
Data was collected from the five universities / degree awarding institutes accredited by
Higher Education Commission of Pakistan (HEC) operating in Lahore, Pakistan. Four
universities and institutes were operating in private sector whereas one public sector
university considered as one of the largest institution of higher learning in Pakistan. The
study participants were the faculty members who were either having the regular or contract
employment status in these academic institutions. Seven hundred and fifty questionnaires
were distributed in December 2009 to February, 2010 among faculty members and after
multiple follow ups resulted in 467 (63 %) statistically usable questionnaires.
Organizational justice and its three dimensions such as distributive, procedural and
interactional justice were measured by using the scale developed by Niehoff and Moorman
(1993). Six items of Schriesheim and Tsui (1980) used to measure overall job satisfaction of
the faculty members. Five point Likert scale was used to measure the responses where 5 refers
to strongly agree and 1 refers to strongly disagree. The inter-item consistency scores of
distributive justice (a=0.84), procedural justice (a=0.90), interactional justice (a=0.93) and job
satisfaction (a=0.79) were found to be adequate for the analysis purpose. Regression analyses
were employed separately for Lecturer, Assistant Professors, Associate Professors and
Professor in public and private higher education institutions to testify the research question.
COPY RIGHT
665
Results:
The demographic characteristics of the faculty members working in public and private sector
institutions were as follows:
■ Male respondents were in majority (66%).
■ 202 faculty members having age between 31-44 years followed by 148 were between
25-30 years and 72 respondents were more than 44 years old.
■ 31% faculty members were unmarried.
■ Master degree holder respondents were in majority (187) followed by M. Phil (172) and
PhD (105).
■ 53% had job experience up to 5 years, 26% between 6 to 10 years, 09% between 11 to
15 years and 11% more than 15 years.
■ 63% of the faculty (292) was working as Lecturer, 27% (124) as Assistant Professor,
9% as Associate Professor and Professor.
■ 288 faculty members serving in public sector institutions whereas 166 were in private
sector universities / degree awarding institutes accredited by HEC.
Table # 1 shows the descriptive statistics of independent and dependent variables.
Table 1: Descriptive Statistics of Study Constructs (N=467) ___________________________
Study Variables
Mean
Std. Deviation
Distributive Justice (DJ) 3.78 0.90
Procedural Justice (PJ) 3.54 0.95
Interactive Justice (IJ) 4.10 1.00
Overall Job Satisfaction ___________________ 3.72 __________________ 074 ______________
The table # 2 showed the regression analysis for the post of lecturers. Overall job satisfaction
was regressed on three dimensions of organizational justice (distributive, procedural and
interactive). Distributive justice contributed 47% unique variance whereas interactional
justice explained 12% variability in overall job satisfaction.. The results showed that
distributive justice had relatively stronger positive impact (P = .47, t = 10.42, p<0.001) on
lecturers’ overall job satisfaction than interactional justice (p = .41, t = 9.22, p<0.001)
whereas procedural justice was excluded from the regression model.
Table # 2: Regression (Overall Job Satisfaction) for Lecturers _________________________
Distributive Justice (DJ)
R2 Change ----------------------------------------------------------------- 047
P(t-statistic)
0.47* (10.42)
Interactional Justice (IJ)
R2 Change
012
P(t-statistic)
0.41* (9.22)
Model F-statistic
207.69* _____________________
* Significant at 0.001 level: One-tailed
Results of regression analysis (table # 03) showed that distributive justice explained 42%
variance whereas interactional justice explained 5% variance in the overall job satisfaction of
the faulty members serving in public and private sector universities of Pakistan for the post of
Assistant Professors. No significant impact was observed of procedural justice on overall job
satisfaction. The results showed that distributive justice had relatively stronger positive
COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
666
ijcrb.webs.com
I
DECEMBER2011
JC
NTERDISCIPLINARY OURNAL OF
RB
ONTEMPORARY
ESEARCH IN USINESS
OL O
V
3,N 8
impact (β = .54, t = 7.32, p<0.001) on Assistant Professors overall job satisfaction than
interactional justice (β = .26, t = 3.48, p<0.001).
Table 03: Regression (Overall Job Satisfaction) for Assistant Professors
Distributive Justice (DJ)
R2 change
0.42
β (t-statistic)
0.54* (7.32)
Interactional Justice (IJ)
R2 Change
0.05
β (t-statistic)
0.26* (3.48)
Model F–statistic
53.61*
* Significant at 0.001 level: One-tailed
Table # 04 depicts that only one dimension of organizational justice explained variance
(48%) in the overall job satisfaction of the faculty members working as Associate Professors
and Professors. Interestingly neither procedural justice nor interactive justice had significant
impact on overall job satisfaction of the senior faculty (Associate Professors and Professors).
Table 04: Regression (Overall Job Satisfaction) for Associate Professors & Professors
Distributive Justice (DJ)
R2 change
0.48
β (t-statistic)
0.69* (6.17)
Model F–statistic
36.07*
* Significant at 0.001 level: One-tailed
Distributive justice had relatively stronger impact (β = .69) on overall job satisfaction of
senior faculty members followed by Assistant Professors (β = .54) and then Lecturers (β =
.47). Procedural justice did not moderate the relationship of organizational justice dimensions
and overall job satisfaction for any faculty positions. As far as the impact of interactional
justice is concerned, it had relatively stronger influence on overall job satisfaction for
Lecturers (β = .41) as compared with Assistant Professors (β = .26).
Conclusion and Recommendation:
The main purpose of this research was to determine the relationship of organizational justice
dimensions and job satisfaction across faculty members’ positions working in public and
private sector institutions of higher learning. The study findings showed that the positive
relationship of distributive justice with overall job satisfaction moderated by all faculty
positions whereas interactional justice and overall job satisfaction positive association was
only influenced by faculty positions (Lecturers and Assistant Professors). Procedural justice
was found to have no effect on overall job satisfaction of faculty members serving in public
and private sector institutions of higher learning. Job satisfaction considered as extensively
studied topic in organizational behavior literature (Malik et al., 2010; Park et al, 2005; Najafi
et al., 2011). The study findings were consisted with the prior researchers that the
organizational justice dimensions foster the overall job satisfaction of the employees
(Bakhshi et al. 2009; Robbins et al., 2000; Zaman et al. 2010; Ponnu & Chuah, 2010;
Lambert et al. 2007; Ramamoorthy & Flood, 2004; Aryee, et al. 2002; Najafi et al. 2011).
As regards implications of this research, the top management and policy makers could boost
the overall job satisfaction by promoting distributive and interactional justice practices in
their respective institutions for their faculty members. This research also had some
COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
667
limitations. Future researchers should take into consideration that this research is exploratory
in nature and did not provide any conclusive evidence. Numerous work related outcomes like
job involvement, turnover, organizational citizenship behavior, organizational commitment,
job performance and workplace spirituality should also be incorporated in the research
models.
COPY RIGHT
668
ijcrb.webs.com
I
DECEMBER2011
JC
NTERDISCIPLINARY OURNAL OF
RB
ONTEMPORARY
ESEARCH IN USINESS
OL O
V
3,N 8
References
Alder, G. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2005). Towards understanding fairness judgments
associated with computer performance monitoring: An integration of the feedback,
justice, and monitoring research. Human Resource Management Review, 15, 43–67.
Alexander, S., Ruderman,M., 1987. The role of procedural and distributive justice in
organizational behavior. Social Justice Research 1 (2), 177–198. Ambrose, M. L., &
Arnaud, A. (2005). Distributive and procedural justice: Construct
distinctiveness, construct interdependence, and overall justice. In J. Greenberg & J.
Colquitt (Eds.), The handbook of organizational justice (pp. 59–84). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum. Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the
relationship
between organizational justice and work outcomes: test of a social exchange model.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 267–285. Bakhshi A, Kumar K, Rani E (2009).
Organizational justice perceptions as predictor of job
satisfaction and organizational commitment. Int. J. Bus. Manage., 4(9): 145-154 Blakely,
G., Andrews, M., & Moorman, R. (2005). The moderating effects of equity
sensitivity on the relationship between organizational justice and organizational
citizenship behavior. Journal of Business Psychology, 20(2), 259-273. Boer, E. M. D.,
Bakker, A. B., Syroit, J. E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2002). Unfairness at work as
a predictor of absenteeism. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 181-197. Brooks,
J.S. and Jean-Marie, G. (2007), “Black leadership, white leadership: race and race
relations in an urban high school”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 45 No.
6, pp. 756-68. Byrne, Z. S. (2005). Fairness reduces the negative effects of
organizational politics on
turnover intentions, citizenship behavior and job performance. Journal of Business
and Psychology, 20(2), 175-200. Chiu, M.M. and Walker, A. (2007), “Leadership for
social justice in Hong Kong schools:
addressing mechanisms of inequality”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 45
No. 6, pp. 724-39. Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. (2001). The role of justice in
organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86,
278-232. Collard, J. (2007), “Constructing theory for leadership in intercultural contexts”,
Journal of
Educational Administration, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 740-55. Colquitt, J.A. (2001). On the
dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation
of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 386–400. Cranny, C., Smith, P., &
Stone, E. (Eds.). (1992). Job satisfaction: How people feel about
their jobs and how it affects their performance. New York: Lexington Books. Cremer, D.
(2005), “Procedural and distributive justice effects moderated by organizational
identification”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 4-13. Cropanzano,
R., & Greenberg, J. (1997). Progress in organizational justice: Tunneling
through the maze. In C. Cooper & I. Robertson (Eds.), Interactional review of
industrial and organizational psychology, 317-372. New York: Wiley. Currivan, D.B.
(2000), “The causal order of job satisfaction and organizational commitment
in models of employee turnover”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 9 No.
4, pp. 495 524. Elovainio, M., Kivimaki, M., Steen, N., & Vahtera, J. (2004). Job
decision latitude,
organizational justice and health: multilevel covariance structure analysis. Social
Science and Medicine, 58, 1659-1669.
COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
669
ijcrb.webs.com
I
DECEMBER2011
JC
NTERDISCIPLINARY OURNAL OF
RB
ONTEMPORARY
ESEARCH IN USINESS
OL O
V
3,N 8
Elovainio, M., Van den Bos, K., Linna, A., Kivimaki, M., Ala-Mursula, L., Pentti, J., &
Vahtera, J. (2005). Combined effects of uncertainty and organizational justice on
employee health: Testing the uncertainty management model of fairness judgments
among Finnish public sector employees. Social Science and Medicine, 61(12), 2501-2512.
Farmer, S., Beehr, T., & Love, K. (2003). Becoming an undercover police officer: A note on
fairness perceptions, behavior, and attitudes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24,
373-387. Fatt CK, Khin EWS, Heng TN (2010). The Impact of Organizational Justice on
Employee’s
Job Satisfaction:The Malaysian Companies Perspectives. Am. J. Econ. Bus. Adm., 2
(1): 56-63. Folger, R., Konovsky, M.A., 1989. Effects of procedural and distributive
justice on reactions
to pay raise decisions. Academy of Management Journal 32 (1), 115–130. Fua, S.J.
(2007), “Looking towards the source – social justice and leadership
conceptualizations from Tonga”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 45 No.
6, pp. 672-83. Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today and
tomorrow. Journal of
Management, 16, 399-432. Greenberg, J. (2004). Stress Fairness to Fare No Stress:
Managing Workplace Stress by
Promoting Organizational Justice. Organizational Dynamics, 33(4), 352-365. Greenberg,
J. (2006). Losing Sleep Over Organizational Injustice: Attenuating Insomniac
Reactions to Underpayment Inequity With Supervisory Training in Interactional
Justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 58–69. Greenberg, J. 1987. Reactions to
procedural injustice in payment distributions: Do the means
justify the ends? Journal of Applied Psychology 72, 55–61. Hauenstein, N. M. A.,
McGonigle, T., & Flinder, S. W. (2001). A meta-analysis of the
relationship between procedural justice and distributive justice: Implications for
justice research. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 13, 39-56. Hubbel, A. P.,
& Chory-Assad, R. M. (2005). Motivating Factors: Perceptions of Justice and
Their Relationship with Managerial and Organizational Trust. Communication
Studies, 56(1), 47-70. Jawahar, I.M. (2007), “The influence of perceptions of fairness on
performance appraisal
reactions”, Journal of Labor Research, Vol. 28, pp. 735-54. Judge, T. A., & Colquitt, J.
A. (2004). Organizational Justice and Stress: The Mediating Role
of Work-Family Conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(3), 395-404. Kana, P. and
Aitken, V. (2007), “She didn’t ask me about my grandma: using process drama
to explore issues of cultural exclusion and educational leadership”, Journal of
Educational Administration, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 97-710. Korsgaard, M.A., Schweiger,
D.M. and Sapienza, H.J. (1995), “Building commitment,
attachment, and trust in strategic decision-making teams: the role of procedural
justice”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38, pp. 60-84. Lam, S.S.K.,
Schaubroeck, J. and Aryee, S. (2002), “Relationship between organizational
justice and employee work outcomes: a cross-national study”, Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 1-18. Lambert, E. (2001). Absent
correctional staff: A discussion of the issue and recommendations
for future research. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 25, 279-292. Lambert, E.
(2003). Justice in corrections: An exploratory study of the impact of
organizational justice on correctional staff. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31, 155-168.
COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
670
ijcrb.webs.com
I
DECEMBER2011
JC
NTERDISCIPLINARY OURNAL OF
RB
ONTEMPORARY
ESEARCH IN USINESS
OL O
V
3,N 8
Lambert, E. (2004). The impact of job characteristics on correctional staff. Prison Journal, 84,
208-227. Lambert, E. G., Hogan, N. L., & Griffin, M. L. (2007). The impact of
distributive and
procedural justice on correctional staff job stress, job satisfaction, and organizational
commitment. Journal of Criminal Justice, 35, 644-656. Lambert, E., & Paoline, E.
(2005). The impact of jail medical issues on the job stress and job
satisfaction of jail staff: An exploratory study. Punishment and Society: The
International Journal of Penology, 7, 259-275. Lambert, E., Barton, S., Hogan, N., &
Clarke, A. (2002). The impact of instrumental
communication and integration on correctional staff. Justice Professional, 15,
181-193. Lambert, E., Hogan, N., & Allen, R. (2006). Correlates of correctional officer
job stress: The
impact of organizational structure. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 30,
227-246. Lambert, E., Hogan, N., & Barton, S. (2003). The impact of workfamily
conflict on
correctional staff job satisfaction. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 27, 35-51.
Landorf, H. and Nevin, A. (2007), “Inclusive global education: implications for social
justice”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 711-23. Leventhal, G.
S. (1976a). Fairness in social relationships. In J. W. Thibaut, J. T. Spence, & R.
C. Carson (Eds.), Contemporary Topics in Social Psychology, Morristown, NJ:
General Learning Press. Leventhal, G. S. (1976b). The distribution of rewards and
resources in groups and
organizations. In L. Berkowitz & E. Walster (Eds.), Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, 9, 91-131. Lind, E. A. (2001). Fairness Heuristic Theory: Justice judgments
as pivotal cognitions in
organizational relations. In J. Greenberg, & R. Lind, E. A. (2001b). Thinking critically
about justice judgments. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 58, 220–226. Lind, E. A., & van den Bos, K. (2002). When fairness works:
Toward a general theory of
uncertainty management. In B. M. Staw & R. M. Kramer (Eds.), Research in
organizational behavior (Vol. 24, pp. 181– 223). Boston: Elsevier. Lind, E.A., Tyler,
T.R., 1988. The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. Plenum Press,
New York. Malik, M. E., Nawab, S., Naeem, B., & Danish, R. Q. (2010). Job
Satisfaction and
Organizational Commitment of University Teachers in Public Sector of Pakistan.
International Journal of Business and Management Vol. 5 (6). 17 – 26. Martinez-Tur, V.,
Peiro, J. M., Ramos, J., and Moliner, C. 2006. “Justice Perceptions as
Predictors of Customer Satisfaction: The Impact of Distributive, Procedural, and
Interactional Justice,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology (36:1), pp. 100-119.
McFarlin, D., Sweeney, P.D., 1992. Distributive and procedural justice as predictors of
satisfaction with personal and organizational outcomes. Academy of Management
Journal 35 (3), 626–637. McMahon, B. (2007), “Educational administrators’ conceptions
of whiteness, anti-racism and
social justice”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 684-96. Meyer,
J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage. Milkovich, G.T. and Newman, J.M. (2008), Compensation, 9th ed., McGraw-Hill,
New
York, NY.
COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
671
ijcrb.webs.com
I
DECEMBER2011
JC
NTERDISCIPLINARY OURNAL OF
RB
ONTEMPORARY
ESEARCH IN USINESS
OL O
V
3,N 8
Moorman, R. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational
citizenship behaviours: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 845-855. Najafi, S., Noruzy, A., Azar, H. K., NazariShirkouhi, S., & Dalvand, M. R. (2011).
Investigating the relationship between organizational justice, psychological
empowerment, job satisfaction, organizational commitment and organizational
citizenship behavior: An empirical model. African Journal of Business Management,
Vol. 5(13), pp. 5241-5248. Nelson, M., Stone, T.H., Frye, C.M. and Chown, D. (2008),
“Pay me more: what companies
need to know about employee satisfaction”, Compensation & Benefits Review, Vol.
40, pp. 35 42. Normore, A.H., Rodriguez, L. and Wynne, J. (2007), “Making all children
winners:
confronting social justice issues to redeem America’s soul”, Journal of Educational
Administration, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 653-71. Park, S., Henkin, A.B., & Egley, R. (2005).
Teacher team commitment, teamwork, and trust:
exploring associations, Journal of Educational Administration, 43(5), 462-79. Ponnu, C.
H., Chuah, C. C. (2010). Organizational commitment, organizational justice and
employee turnover in Malaysia. African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 4(13),
pp. 2676-2692. Ramamoorthy, N., & Flood, P. C. (2004). Gender and Employee
Attitudes: The Role of
Organizational Justice Perceptions. British Journal of Management, 15, 247–258.
Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: a review of the
literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 698–714. Robbins, T. L., Summers, T. P.,
& Miller, J. L. (2000). Intra- and inter-justice relationships:
Assessing the direction. Human Relations, 53(10), 1329-1355. Skrla, L., McKenzie, K.B.
and Scheurich, J.J. (2007), “Concluding reflections on ‘leadership
for learning in the context of social justice: an international perspective’”, Journal of
Educational Administration, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 782-7. Spector, P. (1996). Industrial and
organizational psychology: Research and practice. New
York: John Wiley. Stevenson, H.J. (2007), “A case study in leading schools for social
justice: when morals and
markets collide”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 769-81.
Sweeney, P.D. and McFarlin, D.B. (1993), “Workers’ evaluations of the ‘ends’ and the
‘means’: an examination of four models of distributive and procedural justice”,
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 23-40. Tang
TL, Sarsfield-Baldwin LJ (1996). Distributive and procedural justice as related to
satisfaction and commitment. SAM Adv. Manage. J., 61(3): 25-31. Thibaut, J., &
Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum. Thurston, P. and McNall, P. (2010), “Justice perceptions of performance
appraisal practices”,
Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 201-28. van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A.
(2002). Uncertainty management by means of fairness
judgments. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol.
34, pp. 1–60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Van Dick, R. (2004). My job is my
castle: identification in organizational contexts. In C. L.
Cooper, & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational
psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 171–203). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Vermunt, R., & Steensma,
H. (2003). Physiological Relaxation: Stress Reduction Through
Fair Treatment. Social Justice Research, 16(2), 135-149.
COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
672
Wat, D. dan Shaffer, M.A. 2005. Equity and relationship quality influences on organizational
citizenship behavior. Personnel Review. 34(4):406-422. Zaman, G., Ali, N., & Ali, N.
(2010). Impact of Organizational Justice on Employees
Outcomes: An Empirical Evidence. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 3 (1).
COPY RIGHT
673