Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Organizational Justice Across Cultures: A Systematic Review of Four Decades of Research and Some Directions for the Future

  • Published:
Social Justice Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This review aims to provide an overview of the main frameworks and findings of cross-cultural organizational justice research and some directions for future research. We systematically reviewed the literature and analysed 74 papers, which include more than one country, from the justice receiver perspective. We contribute to the literature in two ways. First, our analysis of methodological aspects highlights some limitations: most studies compare two countries, mainly China and the USA; cross-cultural equivalence checks are rare; and most studies do not directly measure culture, rather tend to use collectivism and power distance as post hoc explanations of country differences. Second, we offer a broad view of country differences by investigating contextual effects that go beyond national values. Our analysis of the influence of sociocultural influence levels shows that culture, socioeconomic development, organizational, situational, and individual characteristics interact to predict the development of and reactions to (in)justice across countries. A greater integration of levels is important for the advancement of research. Across cultures, more positive justice perceptions are related to positive outcomes, but are achieved differently, so organizations should be aware of sociocultural influences on employees’ perceptions of justice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. ISI Web of Knowledge; ProQuest ABI Inform Complete; EBSCOhost; and Scopus.

  2. Those papers are identified with * in the reference section.

  3. In adversary procedures, the parties are responsible for presenting the evidence and a third party makes the decision, and in inquisitorial procedures both the pursuit of evidence and the decision are made by a third party.

  4. Reviews, meta-analysis and qualitative studies are excluded because they typically do not involve the use of measurement scales.

References

  • Adams, J. (1965). Iniquity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 276–299). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B. E., & Johnson, S. A. (2001). Which hat to wear? The relative salience of multiple identities in organizational contexts. In M. A. Hogg & D. J. Terry (Eds.), Social identity processes in organizational contexts (pp. 31–48). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Au, K., Hui, M. K., & Leung, K. (2001). Who should be responsible? Effects of voice and compensation on responsibility attribution, perceived justice, and post-complaint behaviors across cultures. International Journal of Conflict Management, 12(4), 350–364.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J., Shapiro, D. L., & Cummings, L. L. (1988). Causal accounts and managing organizational conflict: Is it enough to say it’s not my fault. Communication Research, 15(4), 381–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, J. S., Gregersen, H. B., Mendenhall, M. E., & Stroh, L. K. (1998). Globalizing people through international assignments. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blader, S. L., Chang, C.-C., & Tyler, T. R. (2001). Procedural justice and retaliation in organizations: Comparing cross-nationally the importance of fair group processes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 12(4), 295–311.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blader, S. L., & Chen, Y.-R. (2012). What influences how higher-status people respond to lower-status others? Effects of procedural fairness, outcome favorability, and concerns about status. Organization Science, 22(4), 1040–1060.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blader, S. L., & Tyler, T. R. (2009). Testing and extending the group engagement model: Linkages between social identity, procedural justice, economic outcomes and extra role behaviour. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 445–464.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, M. H., Leung, K., & Schwartz, S. (1992). Explaining choices in procedural and distributive justice across cultures. International Journal of Psychology, 27(2), 211–225.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this “we”? Levels of collective identity and self-representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 83–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., Ackerman, G., Greenberg, J., Gelfand, M. J., Francesco, A. M., Chen, Z. X., … Shapiro, D. (2001). Culture and procedural justice: The influence of power distance on reactions to voice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(4), 300–315.*

  • Brockner, J., Chen, Y.-R., Mannix, E. A., Leung, K., & Skarlicki, D. P. (2000). Culture and procedural fairness: When the effects of what you do depend on how you do it. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(1), 138.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. C. (1995). New trends in rewards allocation preferences: A Sino–U.S. comparison. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 408–428.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. C., Meindl, J. R., & Hui, H. (1998). Deciding on equity or parity: A test of situational, cultural, and individual factors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(2), 115–129.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiang, F. F. T., & Birtch, T. A. (2005). A taxonomy of reward preference: Examining country differences. Journal of International Management, 11(3), 357–375.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, C.-Y. (1991). Responses to injustice in popular Chinese sayings and among Hong Kong chinese students. The Journal of Social Psychology, 131(5), 655–665.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, S., & Mattila, A. (2006). The role of disclosure in variable hotel pricing: A cross-cultural comparison of customers’ fairness perceptions. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 47(1), 27–35.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, N. (2009). Cross-cultural conceptions of organizational justice: The impact of eastern religions/philosophies. The Business Review, Cambridge, 12(2), 18–25.*

    Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J., Conlon, D., Wesson, M., Porter, C., & Ng, K. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 425–445.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Conner, D. S. (2003). Socially appraising justice: A cross-cultural perspective. Social Justice Research, 16(1), 29–39.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crossan, M. M., & Apaydin, M. (2010). A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies, 47(6), 1154–1191. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D., Brockner, J., Fishman, A., van Dijke, M., van Olffen, W., & Mayer, D. M. (2010). When do procedural fairness and outcome fairness interact to influence employees’ work attitudes and behaviors? The moderating effect of uncertainty. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(2), 291–304.*

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, R. D., Caldwell, C., Chatchutimakorn, A., Gradney, K., & Rattanametangkul, K. (2010). Managing justly across cultures: The problem of fairness in international business. Journal of Management and Strategy, 1(1), 22–32.*

  • Erez, M., & Earley, P. C. (1993). Culture, self-identity, and work. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, R., & Gelfand, M. J. (2012). The forgiving organization: A multilevel model of forgiveness at work. Academy of Management Review, 37(4), 664–688.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, R., Minibas-Poussard, J., & Bastounis, M. (2009). The moderating role of seeking social support on coping styles and perceptions of organizational justice: A study with French and Turkish students. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 37(6), 845–862.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, R. (2004). Organizational reward allocation: A comparison of British and German organizations. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 28(2), 151–164.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, R. (2009). Where is culture in cross cultural research? An outline of a multilevel research process for measuring culture as a shared meaning system. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 9(1), 25–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, R. (2013). Belonging, status, or self-protection? Examining justice motives in a three-level cultural meta-analysis of organizational justice effects. Cross-Cultural Research, 47(1), 3–41.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, R., Ferreira, M. C., Jiang, D.-Y., Cheng, B.-S., Achoui, M. M., Wong, C. C., … Assmar, E. M. (2011). Are perceptions of organizational justice universal? An exploration of measurement invariance across thirteen cultures. Social Justice Research, 24(4), 297–313.*

  • Fischer, R., & Smith, P. B. (2003). Reward allocation and culture a meta-analysis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34(3), 251–268.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, R., & Smith, P. B. (2004). Values and organizational justice: Performance- and seniority-based allocation criteria in the United Kingdom and Germany. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(6), 669–688.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, R., & Smith, P. B. (2006). Who cares about justice? The moderating effect of values on the link between organisational justice and work behaviour. Applied Psychology, 55(4), 541–562.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, R., Smith, P. B., Richey, B., Ferreira, M. C., Assmar, E. M., Maes, J., & Stumpf, S. (2007). How do organizations allocate rewards? The predictive validity of national values, economic and organizational factors across six nations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38(1), 3–18.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forstenlechner, I. (2010). Exploring expatriates’ behavioural reaction to institutional injustice on host country level. Personnel Review, 39(2), 178–194.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giacobbe-Miller, J. K., Miller, D. J., & Victorov, V. I. (1998). A comparison of Russian and U.S. pay allocation decisions, distributive justice judgments, and productivity under different payment conditions. Personnel Psychology, 51(1), 137–163.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giacobbe-Miller, J. K., Miller, D. J., Zhang, W., & Victorov, V. I. (2003). Country and organizational-level adaptation to foreign workplace ideologies: A comparative study of distributive justice values in China, Russia and the United States. Journal of International Business Studies, 34, 389–406.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilliland, S. W. (1994). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to a selection system. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 691–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (2001). Studing organizational justice cross-culturally: Fundamental challenges. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 12(4), 365–375.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J., Bies, R. J., & Eskew, D. E. (1991). Establishing fairness in the eye of the beholder: Managing impressions of organizational justice. In R. A. Giacalone & P. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Applying impression management: How image making affects managerial decision making (pp. 111–132). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (2001). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, R., Hanges, P., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P., & Grupta, V. (2004). Culture, leadership and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hui, M. K., & Au, K. (2001). Justice perceptions of complaint-handling: A cross-cultural comparison between PRC and Canadian customers. Journal of Business Research, 52(2), 161–173.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hui, C. H., Triandis, H. C., & Yee, C. (1991). Cultural differences in reward allocation: Is collectivism the explanation? British Journal of Social Psychology, 30(2), 145–157.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huseman, R.C., Hatfield, J.D. & Miles, E.W. (1987). A New Perspective on Equity Theory: The Equity Sensitivity Construct. The Academy of Management Review, 12, 222–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hysom, S. J., & Fisek, M. H. (2011). Situational determinants of reward allocation: The equity–equality equilibrium model. Social Science Research, 40(4), 1263–1285.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R. (1971). The silent revolution in Europe: Intergenerational change in post-industrial societies. American Political Science Review, 65, 991–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R., & Baker, W. E. (2000). Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review, 65, 19–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasso, G., & Milgrom, E. M. (2008). Distributive justice and CEO compensation. Acta Sociologica, 51(2), 123–143.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, T.-Y. (2004). The effects of cognitive appraisal on justice judgments: How and why do Asians differ from United States Americans? Dissertation Abstracts International, 65, 2671. (AAT 3140349)

  • Kim, T.-Y., & Leung, K. (2007). Forming and reacting to overall fairness: A cross-cultural comparison. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104(1), 83–95.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. I., Park, H. J., & Suzuki, N. (1990). Reward allocations in the United States, Japan, and Korea: A comparison of individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 188–198.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kluegel, J. R., & Smith, E. (1986). Beliefs about inequality: Americans’ views of what is and what ought to be. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lam, S. S. K., Schaubroeck, J., & Aryee, S. (2002). Relationship between organizational justice and employee work outcomes: A cross-national study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(1), 1–18.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K. (1987). Some determinants of reactions to procedural models for conflict resolution: A cross-national study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(5), 898–908.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., Au, Y.-F., Fernández-Dols, J. M., & Iwawaki, S. (1992). Preference for methods of conflict processing in two collectivist cultures. International Journal of Psychology, 27(2), 195–209.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., Bond, M. H., Carment, D. W., Krishnan, L., & Liebrand, W. B. G. (1990). Effects of cultural femininity on preference for methods of conflict procession: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 373–388.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., & Iwawaki, S. (1988). Cultural collectivism and distributive behavior. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 19(1), 35–49.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., & Kwong, J. Y. Y. (2003). Human resource management practices in international joint ventures in mainland China: A justice analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 13(1), 85–105.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., Lin, X., & Lu, L. (2014). Compensation disparity between locals and expatriates in China: A multilevel analysis of the influence of norms. Management International Review., 54(1), 107–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., & Lind, E. A. (1986). Procedural justice and culture: Effects of culture, gender, and investigator status on procedural preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(6), 1134.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., Smith, P. B., Wang, Z., & Sun, H. (1996). Job satisfaction in joint venture hotels in China: An organizational justice analysis. Journal of International Business Studies, 27, 947–962.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., & Stephan, W. G. (1998). Perceptions of injustice in intercultural relations. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 7(3), 195–205.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., Su, S., & Morris, M. W. (2001a). When is criticism not constructive? The roles of fairness perceptions and dispositional attributions in employee acceptance of critical supervisory feedback. Human Relations, 54(9), 1155–1187.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., Wang, Z., & Smith, P. B. (2001b). Job attitudes and organizational justice in joint venture hotels in China: The role of expatriate managers. International Journal of Human Resources Management., 12, 926–945.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, G., Karuza, J., & Fry, W. (1980). Beyond fair theory of allocation preferences. In G. Mikulka (Ed.), Justice and interaction (pp. 167–218). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, A., & Cropanzano, R. (2009). Do East Asians respond more/less strongly to organizational justice than North Americans? A meta-analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 46(5), 787–805.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., & Earley, P. C. (1992). Procedural justice and culture. International Journal of Psychology, 27(2), 227–242.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., Erickson, B. E., Friedland, N., & Dickenberger, M. (1978). Reactions to procedural models for adjudicative conflict resolution: A cross-national study. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 22(2), 318–339.*

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (1997). Procedural context and culture: Variation in the antecedents of procedural justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(4), 767–780.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E., & Van den Boss, K. (2002). When fairness works: Toward a general theory of uncertainty management. In B. Stawn & R. Kramer (Eds.), Research in organizational behaviour (Vol. 24, pp. 181–223). Boston: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lunnan, R., & Traavik, L. E. M. (2009). Is the standardization of human resource practices perceived as fair across national cultures? The cases of China, Lithuania, and Norway. Baltic Journal of Management, 4(2), 127–148.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan, A. (2011). Host country national’s reactions to expatriate pay policies: Making a case for a cultural alignment pay model. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(1), 121–137.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marín, G. (1985). The preference for equity when judging the attractiveness and fairness of an allocator: The role of familiarity and culture. The Journal of Social Psychology, 125(5), 543–549.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattila, A. S., & Patterson, P. G. (2004). Service recovery and fairness perceptions in collectivist and individualist contexts. Journal of Service Research, 6(4), 336–346.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, G., & Pak, P. C. (1996). It’s all fair in love, war, and business: Cognitive philosophies in ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(9), 973–996.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFarlin, D. B., & Sweeney, P. D. (1993) Cross-cultural applications of organizational justice. In R. Cropanzano & N. Mahwah (Eds.), Justice in the workplace: From theory to practice (Vol. 2, pp. 67–96), Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 6, 845–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • More, K. V., & Tzafrir, S. S. (2009). The role of trust in core team employees: A three-nation study. Cross Cultural Management: An International Review, 16(4), 410–433.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M., & Leung, K. (2000). Justice for all? Progress in research on cultural variation in the psychology of distributive and procedural justice. Applied Psychology, An International Review, 49(1), 100–132.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M. W., Leung, K., Ames, D., & Lickel, B. (1999). Views from inside and outside: Integrating emic and etic insights about culture and justice judgment. The Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 781.*

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M., Leung, K., & Iyengar, S. (2004). Person perception in the heat of conflict: Negative trait attributions affect procedural preferences and account for situational and cultural differences. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 127–147.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, S. L., & Clarke, L. D. (1998). Political-economic context and sensitivity to equity: Differences between the United States and the transition economies of central and Eastern Europe. Academy of Management Journal, 41(3), 319–329.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, C. W., Iverson, R. D., & Jo, D. G. (1999). Distributive justice evaluations in two cultural contexts: A comparison of U.S. and South Korean teachers. Human Relations, 52(7), 869–893.*

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy-Berman, J. J. B., Berman, J. J., Singh, P., Pachauri, A., & Kumar, P. (1984). Factors affecting allocation to needy and meritorious recipients: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(6), 1267–1272.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nance, W., & White, D. (2009). Service performance and procedural justice: The mediating roles of family life cycle and culture. Journal of Services Marketing, 23(3), 195–207.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neusner, J., Sonn, T., & Brockopp, J. E. (2000). Judaism and Islam in practice: A sourcebook. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niehoff, B. P., & Moorman, R. H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 527–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T., & Shils, E. A. (1951). Toward a general theory of action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pillai, R., Scandura, T. A., & Williams, E. A. (1999). Leadership and organizational justice: Similarities and differences across cultures. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(4), 763–779.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pillai, R., Williams, E., & Tan, J. (2001). Are the scales tipped in favor of distributive or procedural justice: An investigation in U.S., India, Germany and Hong Kong. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 12(4), 312–332.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, L. A. (2005). Justice judgments as complex psychocultural constructions: An equity-based heuristic for mapping two- and three-dimensional fairness representations in perceptual space. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36(1), 48–73.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, J. L., & Mueller, C. W. (1981). Professional turnover: The case of nurses. New York: SP Medical and Scientific Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rahim, M. A., Magner, N. R., Antonioni, D., & Rahman, S. (2001). Do justice relationships with organization-directed reactions differ across U.S. and Bangladesh employees? International Journal of Conflict Management, 12(4), 333–349.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockstuhl, T., Dulebohn, J. H., Ang, S., & Shore, L. M. (2012). Leader–member exchange (LMX) and culture: A meta-analysis of correlates of LMX across 23 countries. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1097–1130.*

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Runciman, W. G. (1966). Relative deprivation and social justice: A study of attitudes and social inequality in twentieth-century England. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D., & Bell, C. (2010). Retribution, moral self-regulation and self interest in the decision to punish: A moral motives extension of the deontic model of justice. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20, 89–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, A. M., Boyce, A. S., Ghumman, S., Jundt, D., Schmidt, G., & Gibby, R. (2009). Going global: Cultural values and perceptions of selection procedures. Applied Psychology, 58(4), 520–556.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheer, L., Kumar, N., & Steenkamp, J. (2003). Reactions to perceived inequity in U.S. and Dutch interorganizational relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 46(3), 303–316.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theory and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shao, R., Rupp, D. E., Skarlicki, D. P., & Jones, K. S. (2013). Employee justice across cultures: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 39(1), 263–301.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A., Bolton, R., & Wagner, J. (1999). A model of customer satisfaction with service encounters involving failure and recovery. Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 356–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, D. D., & Gilliland, S. W. (1996). Fairness reactions to personnel selection techniques in France and the United States. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(2), 134–141.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tata, J. (2000). Differences between Caucasian and Hispanic undergraduates in emphasis on distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. Psychological Reports, 87(5), 151.*

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tata, J., Fu, P. P., & Wu, R. (2003). An examination of procedural justice principles in China and the U.S. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 20, 205–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toh, S., & Denisi, A. (2003). Host country national reactions to expatriate pay policies: A model and implications. Academy of Management Review, 28(4), 606–621.*

    Google Scholar 

  • Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14, 207–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triandis, H. C., & Gelfand, M. J. (1998). Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 118–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A. S., Nifadkar, S. S., & Ou, A. Y. (2007). Cross-national, cross-cultural organizational behavior research: Advances, gaps, and recommendations. Journal of Management, 33(3), 426–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115–191). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tziner, A., Kaufmann, R., Vasiliu, C., & Tordera, N. (2011). Organizational perceptions, leadership and performance in work settings. Revista de Psicología Del Trabajo Y de Las Organizaciones, 27(3), 205.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walster, E. G., Walster, W., & Berscheid, E. (1973). New directions in equity research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 151–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C., & Mattila, A. S. (2011). A cross-cultural comparison of perceived informational fairness with service failure explanations. Journal of Services Marketing, 25(6), 429–439.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamaguchi, I. (2009). Influences of organizational communication tactics on trust with procedural justice effects: A cross-cultural study between Japanese and American workers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 33(1), 21–31.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zourrig, H., Chebat, J. C., & Toffoli, R. (2009). Consumer revenge behavior: A cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Business Research, 62(10), 995–1001.*

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was partially funded by the Portuguese Foundation of Science and Technology (FCT, PTDC/PSI/73347/2006).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Business Research Unit, ISCTE – Lisbon University Institute, Av. das Forças Armadas, Edifício ISCTE, 1649-026, Lisbon, Portugal

    Maria Rita Silva & António Caetano

Authors
  1. Maria Rita Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. António Caetano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Rita Silva.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Silva, M.R., Caetano, A. Organizational Justice Across Cultures: A Systematic Review of Four Decades of Research and Some Directions for the Future. Soc Just Res 29, 257–287 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-016-0263-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-016-0263-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation