Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Justice Climate and Workgroup Outcomes: The Role of Coworker Fair Behavior and Workgroup Structure

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research on justice climate demonstrates a consistent effect on workgroup outcomes such as job satisfaction, commitment, and performance. However, little research considers how justice climate affects these outcomes and when the relationship is stronger or weaker. In an effort to extend the literature on justice climate, we draw on research on other types of organizational climate to suggest justice climate influences the fair behavior of coworkers. Specifically, we propose fair coworker behavior mediates the relationship between justice climate and outcomes. Further, we examine the influence of workgroup structure on this mediated relationship. We examine these relationships in two studies and find support for the mediating effect of fair coworker behavior and the proposed moderated mediation model. Implications of these results for justice and climate research are considered.

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. The only significant effect for the control variables was department tenure, which had a significant effect on workgroup deviance (Beta = .005, p < .05).

  2. For simplicity, control variables are omitted from the tables. The only significant effect for the control variable was sex on coworker fair behavior (Beta = − .133, p < .05) in Study 2.

References

  • Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2001). Are flexible organizations the death knell for the future of procedural justice? In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace II: From theory to practice (pp. 229–244). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2003). Organization structure as a moderator of the relationship between procedural justice, interactional justice, POS and supervisory trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 295–305. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2007). Examining justice climate: Issues of fit, simplicity, and content. In F. Dansereau & F. J. Yammarino (Eds.), Research in multilevel issues (Vol. 6, pp. 397–413). New York: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2009). The role of overall justice judgments in organizational justice: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 491–500. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M. L., Schminke, M., & Mayer, D. (2013). Trickle-down effects of supervisor perceptions of interactional justice: A moderated mediation approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 678–689. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M. L., Wo, X. H., & Griffith, M. D. (2015). Overall justice: Looking back and looking forward. In R. S. Cropanzano & M. L. Ambrose (Eds.), The Oxford University Press handbook on justice in the workplace (pp. 109–135). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antonakis, J., Bendahan, S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive, R. (2010). On making causal claims: A review and recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(6), 1086–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bal, P., de Lange, A. H., Ybema, J. F., Jansen, P. W., & van der Velde, M. G. (2011). Age and trust as moderators in the relation between procedural justice and turnover: A large-scale longitudinal study. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 60, 66–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2010.00427.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1969). Social-learning theory of identificatory processes. In D. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 213–262). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought & action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, T. E. (2005). Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational research: A qualitative analysis with recommendations. Organizational Research Methods, 8(3), 274–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105278021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Begley, T. M., Lee, C., & Hui, C. (2006). Organizational level as a moderator of the relationship between justice perceptions and work-related reactions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 705–721. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 349–360. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.85.3.349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (1995). The use and abuse of power: Justice as social control. In R. Cropanzano & K. M. Kacmar (Eds.), Organizational politics, justice, and support (pp. 131–145). Westport, CT: London Quorum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., Nobel, R., & Ridderstråle, J. (2002). Knowledge as a contingency variable: Do the characteristics of knowledge predict organization structure? Organization Science, 13(3), 274–289.

    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 extrarole behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 445–464. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research and methods in organizations (pp. 349–381). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branscombe, N. R., Spears, R., Ellemer, N., & Doosje, B. (2002). Intragroup and intergroup evaluation effects on group behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 744–753. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202289004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., De Cremer, D., van den Bos, K., & Chen, Y. (2005). The influence of interdependent selfconstrual on procedural fairness effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 96, 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2004.11.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97(2), 117–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The management of innovation. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, S., Liu, Y., Fedor, D. B., & Herold, D. M. (2009). Why are perceptions of change in the “eye of the beholder”?: The role of age, sex, and tenure in procedural justice judgments. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 45(3), 437–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886309336068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (2005). Microeconometrics: Methods and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, M. Z., Mossholder, K. W., & Harris, J. N. (2018). Congruence effects of contingent reward leadership intended and experienced on team effectiveness: The mediating role of distributive justice climate. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 91(3), 465–485. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatman, J. A., & Flynn, F. J. (2001). The influence of demographic heterogeneity on the emergence and consequences of cooperative norms in work teams. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 956–970. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, X. P., He, W., & Weng, L. C. (2018). What is wrong with treating followers differently? The basis of leader–member exchange differentiation matters. Journal of Management, 44(3), 946–971. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315598372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, X., Lam, S. S. K., Naumann, S. E., & Schaubroeck, J. (2005). Group citizenship behaviour: Conceptualization and preliminary tests of its antecedents and consequences. Management and Organization Review, 1, 273–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2005.00012.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiaburu, D. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis and metaanalysis of coworker effects on perceptions, attitudes, OCBs, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1082–1103. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.1082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chughtai, A., Byrne, M., & Flood, B. (2015). Linking ethical leadership to employee well-being: The role of trust in supervisor. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(3), 653–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clegg, S. R., & Hardy, C. (1996). Organizations, organization, and organizing. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 1–28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Noe, R. A., & Jackson, C. L. (2002). Justice in teams: Antecedents and consequences of procedural justice climate. Personnel Psychology, 55, 83–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2002.tb00104.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2007). Trends in theory building and theory testing: A five-decade study of the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1281–1303. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2007.28165855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Zapata-Phelan, C., & Roberson, Q. (2005). Justice in teams: A literature review and agenda for future research. In J. J. Martocchio (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resource management (Vol. 24, pp. 53–94). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 75–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., Li, A., & Benson, L. (2011). Peer justice and teamwork process. Group & Organization Management, 36(5), 567–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601111414561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., Prehar, C. A., & Chen, P. Y. (2002). Using social exchange theory to distinguish procedural from interactional justice. Group & Organization Management, 27, 324–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601102027003002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D. (2002). Respect and cooperation in social dilemmas: The importance of feeling included. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1335–1341. https://doi.org/10.1177/014616702236830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D., Brockner, J., Fishman, A., van Dijke, M., van Olffen, W., & Mayer, D. (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, 291–304. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D., & Van Hiel, A. (2006). Effects of another person’s fair treatment on one’s own emotions and behaviors: The moderating role of how much the other cares for you. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 231–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.10.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeGroot, T., & Brownlee, A. L. (2006). Effect of department structure on the organizational citizenship behavior–department effectiveness relationship. Journal of Business research, 59(10–11), 1116–1123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delaney, J. T., & Huselid, M. A. (1996). The impact of human resource management practices on perceptions of organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 949–969. https://doi.org/10.2307/256718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diefendorff, J. M., & Richard, E. M. (2003). Antecedents and consequences of emotional display rule perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 284–294. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dimotakis, N., Davison, R. B., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (2012). Team structure and regulatory focus: The impact of regulatory fit on team dynamic. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donavan, M. A., Drasgow, F., & Mullen, L. J. (1993). The perceptions of fair interpersonal treatment scale: Development and validation of a measure of interpersonal treatment in the workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 683–692. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.5.683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D. C., & Pagon, M. (2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 331–351. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D. C., Shaw, J. D., Johnson, J. L., & Pagon, M. (2006). The social context of undermining behavior at work. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101, 105–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.04.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdogan, B., Liden, R. C., & Kraimer, M. L. (2006). Justice and leader-member exchange: The moderating role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 395–406. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2006.20786086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R., Ganegoda, D. B., Rice, D. B., Taylor, R., & Wo, D. X. (2013). Bounded autonomy and behavioral ethics: Deonance and reactance as competing motives. Human Relations, 66(7), 905–924. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726713482013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, J. M., & James, L. R. (1993). Personality, affect, and behavior in groups revisited: Comment on aggregation, level of analysis, and a recent application of within and between analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 798–804. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.5.798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 499–517. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glick, W. H. (1985). Conceptualizing and measuring organizational and psychological climate: Pitfalls in multilevel research. Academy of Management Review, 10, 601–616. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1985.4279045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gracia, E., Cifre, E., & Grau, R. (2010). Service quality: The key role of service climate and service behavior of boundary employee units. Group & Organization Management, 35(3), 276–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J., & Bies, R. J. (1992). Establishing the role of empirical studies of organizational justice in philosophical inquiries into business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(5–6), 433–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W. H. (2008). The econometric approach to efficiency analysis. The Measurement of Productive Efficiency and Productivity Growth, 1(1), 92–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, M. A., & Neal, A. (2000). Perceptions of safety at work: A framework for linking safety climate to safety performance, knowledge, and motivation. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(3), 347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hakonen, M., & Lipponen, J. (2008). Procedural justice and identification with virtual teams: The moderating role of face-to-face meetings and geographical dispersion. Social Justice Research, 21, 164–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0070-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halbesleben, J. B., & Bowler, W. (2007). Emotional exhaustion and job performance: The mediating role of motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 93–106. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoegl, M., & Gemuenden, H. G. (2001). Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: A theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organization Science, 12, 435–449. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.4.435.10635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holtz, B. C., & Harold, C. M. (2009). Fair today, fair tomorrow? A longitudinal investigation of overall justice perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1185–1199. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyle, R. H., & Panter, A. T. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 158–176). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaksen, S. G. (2007). The climate for transformation: Lessons for leaders. Creativity and Innovation Management, 16, 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2007.00415.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, L. R. (1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 219–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.67.2.219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31, 386–408. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2006.20208687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. A., & Martens, M. L. (2009). The mediating role of overall fairness and the moderating role of trust certainty in justice–criteria relationships: The formation and use of fairness heuristics in the workplace. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 1025–1051. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jung, D., Chow, C., & Wu, A. (2003). The role of transformational leadership in enhancing organizational innovation: Hypotheses and some preliminary findings. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 525–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00050-X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz-Navon, T., Naveh, E., & Stern, Z. (2005). Safety climate in health care organizations: A multidimensional approach. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 1075–1089. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005.19573110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, P. (2003). A guide to econometrics. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D. A. (2008). Reflections on mediation. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 353–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428107308978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khandwalla, P. N. (1976/1977). Some top management styles, their context and performance. Organization and Administrative Sciences, 7, 21–51.

  • Kim, T., & Leung, K. (2007). Forming and reacting to overall fairness: A cross-cultural comparison. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104, 83–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.01.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konovsky, M. A., & Pugh, S. D. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 656–669. https://doi.org/10.2307/256704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuenzi, M., & Schminke, M. (2009). Assembling fragments into a lens: A review, critique, and proposed research agenda for the organizational work climate literature. Journal of Management, 35, 634–717. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308330559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, C. T., Lind, E. A., Ambrose, M. L., & MacCoun, R. (1996). Understanding gender differences in distributive and procedural justice. Social Justice Research, 9, 351–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02196990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Labedo, O. J., Awotunde, J. M., & AbdulSalaam-Saghir, P. (2008). Coworkers’ and supervisor interactional justice: Correlates of extension personnel’s job satisfaction, distress, and aggressive behavior. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 9, 206–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latham, G. P., & Saari, L. M. (1979). Application of social-learning theory to training supervisors through behavioral modeling. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 239–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.64.3.239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavelle, J. J., Brockner, J., Konovsky, M., Price, K. H., Henley, A. B., Taneja, A., et al. (2009). Commitment and procedural fairness, and organizational citizenship behavior: A multifoci analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 337–357. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavelle, J. J., Rupp, D. E., & Brockner, J. (2007). Taking a multifoci approach to the study of justice, social exchange, and citizenship behavior: The target similarity model. Journal of Management, 33, 841–866. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307307635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Organization and environment. Homewood, IL: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Letwin, C., Wo, D., Folger, R., Rice, D., Taylor, R., Richard, B., et al. (2016). The “right” and the “good” in ethical leadership: Implications for supervisors’ performance and promotability evaluations. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(4), 743–755. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2747-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, A., & Cropanzano, R. (2009). Fairness at the group level: Justice climate and intraunit justice climate. Journal of Management, 35, 564–599. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308330557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, J., & Hambrick, D. C. (2005). Factional groups: A new vantage on demographic faultlines, conflict, and disintegration in work teams. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 794–813. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005.18803923.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, H., & Rupp, D. E. (2005). The impact of justice climate and justice orientation on work outcomes: A cross level multifoci framework. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 242–257. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.2.242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., Kray, L. J., & Thompson, L. (1998). The social construction of injustice: Fairness judgments in response to own and others’ unfair treatment by authorities. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, L. C., Chang, H. H., & Chang, A. (2015). Consumer personality and green buying intention: The mediate role of consumer ethical beliefs. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(1), 205–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, C. S., & Lin, C. C. (2014). The effects of ethical leadership and ethical climate on employee ethical behavior in the international port context. Journal of Business Ethics, 124(2), 209–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, D. P., Coxe, S., & Baraldi, A. N. (2012). Guidelines for the investigation of mediating variables in business research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magni, M., Ahuja, M. K., & Maruping, L. M. (2018). Distant but fair: Intra-team justice climate and performance in dispersed teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 35(4), 1031–1059. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2018.1522909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masterson, S. S. (2001). A trickle-down model of organizational justice: relating employees' and customers' perceptions of and reactions to fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(4), 594–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masterson, S. S., Lewis, K., Goldman, B. M., & Taylor, M. S. (2000). Integrating justice and social exchange: The differing effects of fair procedures and treatment of work relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 738–748. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mawritz, M. B., Dust, S. B., & Resick, C. J. (2014a). Hostile climate, abusive supervision, and employee coping: Does conscientiousness matter? Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(4), 737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mawritz, M. B., Folger, R., & Latham, G. P. (2014b). Supervisors’ exceedingly difficult goals and abusive supervision: The mediating effects of hindrance stress, anger, and anxiety. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(3), 358–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mawritz, M. B., Mayer, D. M., Hoobler, J. M., Wayne, S. J., & Marinova, S. J. (2012). A trickle-down model of abusive supervision. Personnel Psychology, 65, 325–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2012.01246.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, D. M., Aquino, K., Greenbaum, R. L., & Kuenzi, M. (2012). Who displays ethical leadership and why does it matter? An examination of antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 151–171. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2008.0276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, D. M., & Kuenzi, M. (2010). Exploring the “black box” of justice climate: What mechanisms link justice climate and outcomes? In E. Mullen, E. Mannix, & M. Neale (Eds.), Research on managing groups and teams: Fairness (Vol. 13, pp. 331–346). London: Elsevier Science Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., & Greenbaum, R. L. (2010). Examining the link between ethical leadership and employee misconduct: The mediating role of ethical climate. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(1), 7–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, D., Nishii, L., Schneider, B., & Goldstein, H. (2007). The precursors and products of justice climates: Group leader antecedents and employee attitudinal consequences. Personnel Psychology, 60, 929–963. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00096.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mechinda, P., & Patterson, P. G. (2011). The impact of service climate and service provider personality on employees’ customer-oriented behavior in a high-contact setting. Journal of Services Marketing, 25(2), 101–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moliner, C., Martínez-Tur, V., Peiró, J. M., Ramos, J., & Cropanzano, R. (2005). Relationships between organizational justice and burnout at the work-unit level. International Journal of Stress Management, 12, 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1037/1072-5245.12.2.99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moorman, R. H., Blakely, G. L., & Niehoff, B. P. (1998). Does perceived organizational support mediate the relationship between procedural justice and organizational citizenship behavior? Academy of Management Journal, 41, 351–357. https://doi.org/10.2307/256913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mossholder, K. W., Bennett, N., & Martin, C. L. (1998). A multilevel analysis of procedural justice context. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 131–141. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naumann, S. E., & Bennett, N. (2000). A case for procedural justice climate: Development and test of a multilevel model. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 881–890. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naumann, S. E., & Bennett, N. (2002). The effects of procedural justice climate on work group performance. Small Group Research, 33, 361–377. https://doi.org/10.1177/10496402033003004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naveh, E., Katz-Navon, T., & Stern, Z. (2005). Treatment errors in healthcare: A safety climate approach. Management Science, 51, 948–960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neal, A., & Griffin, M. A. (2006). A study of the lagged relationships among safety climate, safety motivation, safety behavior, and accidents at the individual and group levels. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4), 946.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Offermann, L. R., & Malamut, A. B. (2002). When leaders harass: The impact of target perceptions of organizational leadership and climate on harassment reporting and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 885–893. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piccolo, R. F., Greenbaum, R., Den Hartog, D. N., & Folger, R. (2010). The relationship between ethical leadership and core job characteristics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 259–278. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Priesemuth, M., Arnaud, A., & Schminke, M. (2013). Bad behavior in groups: The impact of overall justice climate and functional dependence on counterproductive work behavior in work units. Group & Organization Management, 38(2), 230–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichers, A. E., & Schneider, B. (1990). Climate and culture: An evolution of constructs. In B. Schneider (Ed.), Organizational climate and culture (pp. 5–39). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, H., & Vandenberg, R. (2005). Integrating managerial perceptions and transformational leadership into a work-unit level model of employee involvement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 561–589. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberson, Q. M. (2006). Justice in teams: The activation and role of sensemaking in the emergence of justice climates. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 177–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.02.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberson, Q. M., & Colquitt, J. A. (2005). Shared and configural justice: A social network model of justice in teams. Academy of Management Review, 30, 595–607. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2005.17293715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberson, Q. M., & Williamson, I. O. (2010). The fairness of difference: How team composition affects the emergence of justice climates. In M. A. Neale, E. A. Mannix, & E. Mullen (Eds.), Research on managing groups and teams: Fairness and groups (pp. 274–298). London: Emerald Group Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S. L., & O’Leary-Kelly, A. M. (1998). Monkey see, monkey do: The influence of work groups on the antisocial behavior of employees. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 658–672. https://doi.org/10.2307/256963.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubino, C., Avery, D. R., McKay, P. F., Moore, B. L., Wilson, D. C., Van Driel, M. S., … & McDonald, D. P. (2018). And justice for all: How organizational justice climate deters sexual harassment. Personnel Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12274.

  • Rupp, D. E., Bashshur, M. R., & Liao, H. (2007). Justice climate past, present, and future: Models of structure and emergence. In F. Dansereau & F. Yammarino (Eds.), Research in multilevel issues (Vol. 6, pp. 357–396). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E., & Paddock, E. L. (2010). From justice events to justice climate: A multi-level temporal model of information aggregation and judgment. In E. A. Mannix, M. A. Neale, & E. Mullen (Eds.), Fairness in groups: Research on managing groups and teams (Vol. 13, pp. 245–273). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Salancik, G., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schminke, M., Ambrose, M. L., & Cropanzano, R. (2000). The effect of organizational structure on perceptions of fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 294–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schminke, M., Arnaud, A., & Taylor, R. (2015a). Ethics, values, and organizational justice: Individuals, organizations, and beyond. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(3), 727–736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2251-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schminke, M., Cropanzano, R., & Rupp, D. E. (2002). Organization structure and fairness perceptions: The moderating effects of organizational level. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 881–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00034-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schminke, M., Johnson, M., & Rice, D. (2015b). Justice and organizational structure: A review. In R. S. Cropanzano & M. L. Ambrose (Eds.), The Oxford University Press handbook on justice in the workplace (pp. 541–560). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M., Mayer, D., Saltz, J., & Niles-Jolly, K. (2005). Understanding organization customer links in service settings. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 1017–1032. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005.19573107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B., González-Romá, V., Ostroff, C., & West, M. A. (2017). Organizational climate and culture: Reflections on the history of the constructs in the Journal of Applied Psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 468–482. https://doi.org/10.1037/APL0000090.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B., & Reichers, A. (1983). On the etiology of climates. Personnel Psychology, 36, 19–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1983.tb00500.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B., Salvaggio, A. N., & Subirats, M. (2002). Climate strength: A new direction for climate research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 220–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B., White, S., & Paul, M. (1998). Linking service climate and customer perceptions of service quality: Test of a causal model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 150–163. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.2.150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Settoon, R. P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: The differential effects of perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 219–227. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.3.219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shalley, C. E., & Gilson, L. L. (2004). What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity. Leadership Quarterly, 15, 33–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.12.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shamir, B., & Howell, J. M. (1999). Organizational and contextual influences on the emergence and effectiveness of charismatic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 257–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanker, R., Bhanugopan, R., Van der Heijden, B. I., & Farrell, M. (2017). Organizational climate for innovation and organizational performance: The mediating effect of innovative work behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 100, 67–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaver, J. M. (2005). Testing for mediating variables in management research: Concerns, implications, and alternative strategies. Journal of Management, 31(3), 330–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, T., & Roberson, Q. (2003). Why managers should care about fairness: The effects of aggregate justice perceptions on organizational outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 432–443. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skarlicki, D., O’Reilly, J., & Kulik, C. (2015). The third party perspective of justice. In R. S. Cropanzano & M. L. Ambrose (Eds.), The Oxford University Press handbook on justice in the workplace. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653–663. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.68.4.653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sora, B., Caballer, A., Peiro, J. M., Silla, I., & Gracia, F. J. (2010). Moderating influence of organizational justice on the relationship between job insecurity and its outcomes: A multilevel analysis. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 31, 613–637. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831X10365924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sparrowe, R. T., Soetjipto, B. W., & Kraimer, M. L. (2006). Do leaders’ influence tactics relate to members’ helping behavior? It depends on the quality of the relationship. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 1194–1208. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2006.23478645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, S., & Rupp, D. E. (2009). Angry, guilty, and conflicted: Injustice toward coworkers heightens emotional labor through cognitive and emotional mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 429–444. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinglhamber, F., & De Cremer, D. (2008). Co-worker justice judgments, own justice judgments and employee commitment: A multi-foci approach. Psychologica Belgica, 48, 197–218. https://doi.org/10.5334/pb-48-2-3-197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoverink, A. C., Umphress, E. E., Gardner, R. G., & Miner, K. N. (2014). Misery loves company: Team dissonance and the influence of supervisor-focused interpersonal justice climate on team cohesiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(6), 1059–1073. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, M. A., & Rupp, D. E. (2016). The joint effects of justice climate, group moral identity, and corporate social responsibility on the prosocial and deviant behaviors of groups. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(4), 677–697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2748-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tracey, J. B., & Tews, M. (2005). Construct validity of a general training climate scale. Organizational Research Methods, 8, 353–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105280055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2003). The group engagement model: Procedural justice, social identity, and cooperative behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 349–361. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0704_07.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • van Gils, S., Hogg, M. A., Van Quaquebeke, N., & van Knippenberg, D. (2017). When organizational identification elicits moral decision-making: A matter of the right climate. Journal of Business Ethics, 142(1), 155–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2784-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, J. C., Edwards, B. D., Paul, J., Burke, M., Christian, M., & Eissa, G. (2016). Change the referent? A meta-analytic investigation of direct and referent-shift consensus models for organizational climate. Journal of Management, 42(4), 838–861. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313484520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walumbwa, F. O., Hartnell, C. A., & Misati, E. (2017). Does ethical leadership enhance group learning behavior? Examining the mediating influence of group ethical conduct, justice climate, and peer justice. Journal of Business Research, 72, 14–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walumbwa, F. O., Hartnell, C. A., & Oke, A. (2010). Servant leadership, procedural justice climate, service climate, employee attitudes, and organizational citizenship behavior: a cross-level investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(3), 517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, G. R., & Trevino, L. K. (2001). The role of human resources in ethics/compliance management: A fairness perspective. Human Resource Management Review, 11(1–2), 113–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1947). The theory of economic and social organization (A. M. Henderson and T. Parsons, Trans.). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Whitman, D. S., Caleo, S., Carpenter, N. C., Horner, M. T., & Bernerth, J. B. (2012). Fairness at the collective level: A meta-analytic examination of the consequences and boundary conditions of organizational justice climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 776–791. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, L. J., Cote, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (1989). Lack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: Reality or artifact? Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(3), 462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wimbush, J. C., Shepard, J. M., & Markham, S. E. (1997). An empirical examination of the relationship between ethical climate and ethical behavior from multiple levels of analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(16), 1705–1716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, A. J., Loi, R., & Ngo, H. Y. (2016). Ethical leadership behavior and employee justice perceptions: The mediating role of trust in organization. Journal of Business Ethics, 134(3), 493–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yam, K. C., Fehr, R., Keng-Highberger, F. T., Klotz, A. C., & Reynolds, S. J. (2016). Out of control: A self-control perspective on the link between surface acting and abusive supervision. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(2), 292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, D. (1980). Safety climate in industrial organizations: Theoretical and applied implications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 96–102. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.65.1.96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, D. (2002). Modifying supervisory practices to improve subunit safety: A leadership-based intervention model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 156–163. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, D., & Luria, G. (2004). Climate as a social—cognitive construction of supervisory safety practices: Scripts as proxy of behavior patterns. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 322–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, D., & Luria, G. (2005). A multilevel model of safety climate: Cross-level relationships between organization and group-level outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 616–628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, D., & Tenne-Gazit, O. (2008). Transformational leadership and group interaction as climate antecedents: A social network analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 744–757. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.4.744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Central Florida, Orlando, USA

    Maureen L. Ambrose

  2. Miami University, Oxford, USA

    Darryl B. Rice

  3. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA

    David M. Mayer

Authors
  1. Maureen L. Ambrose
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Darryl B. Rice
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David M. Mayer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Darryl B. Rice.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that no conflict of interest exists.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ambrose, M.L., Rice, D.B. & Mayer, D.M. Justice Climate and Workgroup Outcomes: The Role of Coworker Fair Behavior and Workgroup Structure. J Bus Ethics 172, 79–99 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04348-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04348-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation