Journal of Business and Psychology

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 469–484 | Cite as

The Moderating Effect of Personality on Employees’ Reactions to Procedural Fairness and Outcome Favorability

  • Meredith F. Burnett
  • Ian O. Williamson
  • Kathryn M. Bartol



The purpose of this study was to examine how personality moderates the interactive effect of procedural fairness perceptions and outcome favorability on employees’ job attitudes.


Longitudinal data were collected from seniors enrolled at a mid-Atlantic university via questionnaires that were administered to students prior to graduation and after beginning their full-time jobs (n = 1,581).


Employees with high levels of conscientiousness report higher levels of job satisfaction when they perceive their work environment as having low levels of extrinsic rewards but high levels of procedural fairness. Employees with high levels of extraversion report greater intentions to remain when they perceive their work environment as having high levels of social rewards but low levels of procedural fairness.


Understanding that conscientious employees develop positive attitudes even in work settings where there are less than optimal levels of extrinsic rewards shows that even when organizations cannot provide high levels of pay or promotion opportunities, highly conscientious employees are likely to maintain positive perceptions of their work environments as long as practices are fair. In situations where the work context offers high levels of social support but some organizational procedures are viewed as unpopular, and as a result unfair, managers should focus on selecting applicants who score high on extraversion.


This is one of the first studies to challenge an implicit assumption of prior research that employees view procedural fairness and outcome favorability as equally salient cues when attempting to make sense of their work environment.


Extraversion Conscientiousness Extrinsic rewards Intrinsic rewards Intention to remain Job satisfaction Procedural fairness Outcome favorability 


  1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Ambrose, M. L., & Cropanzano, R. (2003). A longitudinal analysis of organizational fairness: An examination of reactions to tenure and promotion decisions. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 266–275. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.266.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 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. doi: 10.1002/job.138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bauer, T. N., Truxillo, D. M., Paronto, M. E., Weekley, J. A., & Campion, M. A. (2004). Applicant reactions to different selection technology: Face-to-face, interactive voice response, and computer-assisted telephone screening interviews. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12, 135–148. doi: 10.1111/j.0965-075X.2004.00269.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Belsky, J. (1996). Parent, infant, and social-contextual antecedents of father-son attachment security. Developmental Psychology, 32, 905–913. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.32.5.905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bing, M. N., Stewart, S. M., Davison, H. K., Green, P. D., McIntyre, M. D., & James, L. R. (2007). An integrative typology of personality assessment for aggression: Implications for predicting counterproductive workplace behavior. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 722–744. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.722.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Bluedorn, A. C. (1982). A unified model of turnover from organizations. Human Relations, 35, 135–153. doi: 10.1177/001872678203500204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Bretz, R. D., Jr., Boudreau, J. W., & Judge, T. A. (1994). Job search behavior of employed managers. Personnel Psychology, 47, 275–301. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1994.tb01725.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brockner, J. (2002). Making sense of procedural fairness: How high procedural fairness can reduce or heighten the influence of outcome favorability. Academy of Management Review, 27, 58–76. doi: 10.2307/4134369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brockner, J., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: Interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 189–208. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.120.2.189.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Brown, D. (2009). Rewards for fairness: How much bonus is enough? Personnel Today. Sutton: Jan 27, 2009, p. 14.Google Scholar
  15. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternate ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Champoux, J. E., & Peters, W. S. (1987). Form, effect size and power in moderated regression analysis. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 60, 243–255.Google Scholar
  17. Colbert, A. E., Mount, M. K., Harter, J. K., Witt, L. A., & Barrick, M. R. (2004). Interactive effects of personality and perceptions of the work situation on workplace deviance. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 599–609. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.4.599.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386–400. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.386.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425–445. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.425.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Colquitt, J. A., & Greenberg, J. (2003). Organizational justice: A fair assessment of the state of the literature. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science (pp. 165–210). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Judge, T. A., & Shaw, J. C. (2006). Justice and personality: Using integrative theories to derive moderators of justice effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 110–127. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.09.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Connell, J., Ferres, N., & Travaglione, T. (2003). Engendering trust in management-subordinate relationships: Predictors and outcomes. Personnel Review, 32, 569–589. doi: 10.1108/00483480310488342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  24. Dineen, B. R., Noe, R. A., & Wang, C. (2004). Perceived fairness of web-based applicant screening procedures: Weighing the rules of justice and the role of individual differences. Human Resource Management, 43, 127–145. doi: 10.1002/hrm.20011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Edwards, J., Cable, D. M., Williamson, I. O., Lambert, L. S., & Shipp, A. J. (2006). The phenomenology of fit: Linking the person and environment to the subjective experience of person-environment fit. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 802–827. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.802.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 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.Google Scholar
  27. Esen, E. (2004). SHRM/CNNfn Job Satisfaction Series: Job Compensation/Pay Survey Report. Society for Human Resource Management/CNNfn. Virginia: Society for Human Resource Management.Google Scholar
  28. Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 115–130. doi: 10.2307/256422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Forret, M. L., & Dougherty, T. W. (2001). Correlates of networking behavior for managerial and professional employees. Group & Organization Management, 26, 283–311. doi: 10.1177/1059601101263004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Furnham, A. (1992). Personality at work: The role of individual differences in the workplace. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Gardner, D. G., Van Dyne, L., & Pierce, J. L. (2004). The effects of pay level on organization-based self-esteem and performance: A field study. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 307–322. doi: 10.1348/0963179041752646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gellatly, I. R. (1996). Conscientiousness and task performance: Test of a cognitive process model. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 474–482. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.81.5.474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Grover, S. L., & Crooker, K. J. (1995). Who appreciates family-responsive human resource policies: The impact of family friendly policies on the organizational attachment of parents and non-parents. Personnel Psychology, 48, 271–288. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01757.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Haar, J., & Spell, C. S. (2003). Where is the justice? Examining work-family backlash in New Zealand: The potential for employee resentment. New Zealand Journal of Industrial Relations, 28, 59–74.Google Scholar
  35. Henle, C. A. (2005). Predicting workplace deviance from the interaction between organizational justice and personality. Journal of Managerial Issues, 17, 247–263.Google Scholar
  36. Holtz, B. C., Ployhart, R. E., & Dominguez, A. (2005). Testing the rules of justice: The effects of frame-of-reference and pre-test validity information on personality test responses and test perceptions. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13, 75–86. doi: 10.1111/j.0965-075X.2005.00301.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jones, J. R., & Schaubroeck, J. (2004). Mediators of the relationship between race and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Managerial Issues, 16, 505–527.Google Scholar
  38. Joreskog, K., & Sorbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. SSI.Google Scholar
  39. Konrad, A. M., Corrigall, E., Lieb, P., & Ritchie, J. E. (2000). Sex differences in job attribute preferences among managers and business students. Group & Organization Management, 25, 108–131. doi: 10.1177/1059601100252002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lee, C., Pillutla, M., & Law, K. S. (2000). Power-distance, gender and organizational justice. Journal of Management, 26, 685–704. doi: 10.1016/S0149-2063(00)00052-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Liao, H., Joshi, A., & Chuang, A. (2004). Sticking out like a sore thumb: Employee dissimilarity and deviance at work. Personnel Psychology, 57, 969–1000. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.00012.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Liao, H., & Rupp, D. E. (2005). The impact of justice climate and justice orientation on work outcomes: A cross-level multifoci framework. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 242–256. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.90.2.242.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Martell, R. F., Lane, D. M., & Emrich, C. (1996). Male–female differences: A computer simulation. The American Psychologist, 51, 157–158. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 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 on work relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 738–748. doi: 10.2307/1556364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mayer, D. M., Nishii, L. H., Schneider, B., & Goldstein, H. W. (2009). The precursors and products of fair climates: Group leader antecedents and employee attitudinal consequences. Personnel Psychology, 60, 929–963.Google Scholar
  46. McClelland, G. H., & Judd, C. M. (1993). Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 376–390. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.114.2.376.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. McFarlin, D. B., & Sweeney, P. D. (1992). Distributive and procedural justice as predictors of satisfaction with personal and organizational outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 626–637. doi: 10.2307/256489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Medsker, G. J., Williams, L. J., & Holahan, P. J. (1994). A review of current practices for evaluating causal models in organizational behavior and human resources management research. Journal of Management, 20, 439–464. doi: 10.1016/0149-2063(94)90022-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Meyer, J. P., Irving, P. G., & Allen, N. J. (1998). Examination of the combined effects of work values and early work experiences on organizational commitment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 29–52. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199801)19:1<29::AID-JOB818>3.0.CO;2-U.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mischel, W. (1968). Personality and assessment. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  51. Morris, J. H., Sherman, J., & Mansfield, E. R. (1986). Failures to detect moderating effects with ordinary least squares-moderated multiple regression: Some reasons and a remedy. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 282–288. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.99.2.282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mossholder, K. W., Settoon, R. P., & Henagan, S. C. (2005). A relational perspective on turnover: Examining structural, attitudinal, and behavioral predictors. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 607–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Parker, C. P., Baltes, B. B., & Christiansen, N. D. (1997). Support for affirmative action, justice perceptions, and work attitudes: A study of gender and racial-ethnic group differences. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 376–389. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.82.3.376.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Perlow, L. A. (1998). Boundary control: The social ordering of work and family time in a high-tech corporation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 328–357. doi: 10.2307/2393855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Phillips, A. S., & Bedeian, A. G. (1994). Leader-follower exchange quality: The role of personal and interpersonal attributes. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 990–1001. doi: 10.2307/256608.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Raja, U., Johns, G., & Ntalianis, F. (2004). The impact of personality on psychological contracts. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 350–367.Google Scholar
  58. Ramamoorthy, N., & Flood, P. C. (2004). Gender and employee attitudes: The role of organizational justice perceptions. British Journal of Management, 15, 247–258. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2004.00417.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schaubroeck, J., May, D. R., & Brown, F. W. (1994). Procedural justice explanations and employee reactions to economic hardship: A field experiment. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 455–460. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.79.3.455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437–453. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1987.tb00609.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Seers, A. (1989). Team-member exchange quality: A new construct for role-making research. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 118–135. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(89)90060-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Seers, A., McGee, G. W., Serey, T. T., & Graen, G. B. (1983). The interaction of job stress and social support: A strong inference investigation. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 273–284. doi: 10.2307/255975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Shaw, J. D., Duffy, M. K., Mitra, A., Lockhart, D. E., & Bowler, M. (2003). Reactions to merit pay increases: A longitudinal test of a signal sensitivity perspective. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 538–544. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.538.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Sherony, K. M., & Green, S. G. (2002). Coworker exchange: Relationships between coworkers, leader-member exchange, and work attitudes. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 542–548. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.542.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., & Wright, J. C. (1989). Intuitive interactionism in person perception: Effects of situation-behavior relations on dispositional judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 41–53. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.56.1.41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Simons, T., & Roberson, Q. (2003). Why managers should care about fairness: The effects of aggregate justice perceptions on organizational outcomes. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 432–443. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.432.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Skarlicki, D. P., Folger, R., & Tesluk, P. (1999). Personality as a moderator in the relationship between fairness and retaliation. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 100–108. doi: 10.2307/256877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sweeney, P. D., & McFarlin, D. B. (1997). Process and outcome: Gender differences in the assessment of justice. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 83–98. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199701)18:1<83::AID-JOB779>3.0.CO;2-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Tekleab, A. G., Bartol, K. M., & Liu, W. (2005). Is it pay levels or pay raises that matter to fairness and turnover? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 899–921. doi: 10.1002/job.352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Trevor, C. O. (2001). Interactions among actual ease-of-movement determinants and job satisfaction in the prediction of voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 621–638. doi: 10.2307/3069407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Truxillo, D. M., Bauer, T. N., Campion, M. A., & Paronto, M. E. (2006). A field study of the role of big five personality in applicant perceptions of selection fairness, self, and the hiring organization. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 269–277. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00351.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Westerman, J. W., & Simmons, B. L. (2007). The effects of work environment on the personality- performance relationship: An exploratory study. Journal of Managerial Issues, 19, 288–305.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meredith F. Burnett
    • 1
  • Ian O. Williamson
    • 2
  • Kathryn M. Bartol
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Management & International Business, College of Business AdministrationFlorida International UniversityMiamiUSA
  2. 2.Melbourne Business SchoolThe University of MelbourneCarltonAustralia
  3. 3.Department of Management and Organization, Robert H. Smith School of BusinessThe University of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations