Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An integrated model of perceived unfairness in organizations

  • Published:
Social Justice Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Attitudes and behaviors of employees in organizations are influenced by fairness judgments employees make about organizations. A model is presented that proposes (i) when fairness becomes an issue to employees, (ii) how certain rules are chosen to evaluate a situation as fair or unfair, and (iii) the psychological and behavioral reactions that may result from judging something as unfair. The managerial implications of the model are discussed.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.),Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Vol. 2, Academic Press, New York, pp. 267–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., and Fishbein, M. (1980).Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, W., McGinn, W. C., and Susmilch, C.. (1980). Internal standards revisited: Effects of social comparisons and expectancies on judgments of fairness and satisfaction.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 16: 426–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J. (1987). The predicament of injustice: The management of moral outrage. In Cummings, L. L., and Staw, B. M. (eds),Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 9, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 289–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. K., and Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In Lewicki, R. J., Sheppard, B. H., and Bazerman, M. H. (eds),Research on Negotiation in Organizations, Vol. 1, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 43–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boles, T. L., and Messick, D. M. (1993). A reverse outcome bias: The influence of multiple reference points on the evaluations of outcomes and decisions, DRRC Working Paper No. 96, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, M. H., Leung, K., and Wan, K. C. (1982). How does cultural collectivism operate? The impact of task and maintenance contributions on reward distribution.J. Cross-Cultural Psychol. 13: 186–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J. (1985). The relation of trait self-esteem and positive inequity to productivity.J. Pers. 53: 517–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., Tyler, T. R., and Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1994). The interactive impact of procedural and outcome fairness on reactions to a decision: The effects of what you do depend on how you do it. Paper presented at the 1994 Academy of Management Convention, Dallas, TX.

  • Cohen, R. L. (1982). Perceiving justice: An attributional perspective. In: Greenberg, J., and Cohen, R. L. (eds),Equity and Justice in Social Behavior, Academic Press, New York, pp. 119–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crozier, R. (1989). Postdecisional justification: The Case of DeLorean. In Montgomery, H., and Svenson, O. (eds),Process and Structure in Human Decision Making, Wiley, Chichester, U.K..

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, F. (1976). A model of egoistical relative deprivation.Psychol. Rev. 83: 85–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L. (1975).Intrinsic Motivation, Plenum Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dailey, R. C., and Kirk, D. J. (1992). Distributive and Procedural Justice as Antecedents of Job Dissatisfaction and Intent to Turnover.Hum. Rel. 45: 305–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as a basis for distributive justice?J. Soc. Issues, 31: 137–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Early, P. C., and Lind, E. A. (1987). Procedural justice and participation in task selection: The role of control in mediating justice judgments.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 52: 1148–1160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. (1992).Local Justice, Russel Sage Foundation, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, D., and Rusbult, C. E. (1981). Exchange variables as predictors of job satisfaction, job commitment and turnover: The impact of rewards, costs, alternatives, and investments.Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf. 28: 78–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1954). A Theory of Social Comparison Processes.Hum. Rel. 7: 117–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R., and Bies, R. J. (1989). Managerial responsibilities and procedural justice.Employee Responsibilities Rights J. 2: 79–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedland, N., Thibaut, J., and Walker, L. (1973). Some determinants of the violation of rules.J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 3: 103–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1982). Countering inequity with inequity: Overrewarding generosity and underrewarding greed.Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 12: 181–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1986). Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations.J. Appl. Psychol. 71: 340–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1987). Reactions to procedural injustice in payment distributions: Do the ends justify the means.J. Appl. Psychol. 72: 55–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J., and Cohen, R. L. (1982).Equity and Justice in Social Behavior, Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, E. E., and Nisbett, R. E. (1971).The Actor and the Observer; Divergent Perceptions of the Causes of Behavior, General Learning Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (1992). Reference Points, Anchors, Norms and Mixed Feelings.Organ. Behav. Hum. Decision Process. 51: 296–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., and Thaler, R. H. (1986a). Fairness and the assumptions of economics.J. Business 59(4): 285–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., and Thaler, R. H. (1986b). Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: Entitlements in the market.Am. Econ. Rev. 76: 728–741.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K. (1987). Some determinants of reactions to procedural models for conflict resolution: A cross-national study.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 53: 898–908.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., Bond, M. H., Carment, D. W., Krishnan, L., and Liebrand, W. B. G. (1990). Effects of cultural femininity on preference for methods of conflict processing: A cross-cultural study.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 26: 373–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? In Gergen, K. J., Greenberg, M. S., and Willis, R. H. (eds.)Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 27–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., and Early, P. C. (1990). Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 59: 952–959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., and Tyler, T. R. (1988).The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice, Plenum Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J., Brickman, P., and Murray, A. (1984). Moral outrage and pragmatism: Explanations for collective action.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 20: 484–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maslach, C., and Jackson, S. E. (1981). The Measurement of Experienced Burnout.J. Occup. Behav. 2: 99–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messick, D. M. (1993). Equality, fairness and social justice, DRRC Working Paper No. 104, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messick, D. M., and Sentis, K. P. (1979). Fairness and preference.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 15: 418–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messick, D. M., and Sentis, K. P. (1983). Fairness, preference, and fairness biases. In Messick, D. M., and Cook, K. S. (eds.),Equity Theory: Psychological and Sociological Perspectives, Praeger, New York, pp. 61–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minton, J. W. (1988). Justice, satisfaction, and loyalty: Employee withdrawal and voice in the din of inequity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, NC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mobley, W. H., and Locke, E. A. (1970). The relationship of value importance to satisfaction.Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf. 5: 463–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., and Steers, R. M. (1982).Employee-Organization Linkages. The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover, Academic Press, San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, S. H. (1984). Equity and social categorization effects on intergroup allocation of rewards.Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 23: 165–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, M., and Sicoly, F. (1979). Egocentric biases in availability and attribution.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 37: 322–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaver, K. G. (1985).The Attribution of Blame: Causality, Responsibility, and Blame, Springer Verlag, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaver, K. G., and Drown, D. (1986). On causality, responsibility, and blame: A theoretical note.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50: 697–702.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard, B. H., and Lewicki, R. J. (1987). Toward General Principles of Managerial Fairness.Soc. Justice Res. 1: 161–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard, B. H., Lewicki, R. J., and Minton, J. W. (1992).Organizational Justice. The Search for Fairness in the Workplace, Lexington Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, D. G. (1986). Employee voice and employee retention.Acad. Manage. J. 29: 488–502.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S. E. (1989).Positive Illusion. Creative Self-Deception and the Healthy Mind, Basic Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J. W., and Kelley, H. H. (1957).The Social Psychology of Groups, Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J., and Walker, L. (1975).Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (1986). When does procedural justice matter in organizational settings? In Lewicki, R. J., Sheppard, B. H., and Bazerman, M. H. (eds.),Research on Negotiation in Organizations, Vol. 1, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 7–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., and Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups.Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 25: 115–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Avermaet, E. (1974).Equity: A theoretical and experimental analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of California, Santa Barbara.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walster, E., Walster, G. W., and Berschied, E. (1978).Equity: Theory and Research, Allyn & Bacon, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, B. (1974).Achievement Motivation and Attribution Theory, General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, B. (1985). “Spontaneous” causal thinking.Psychol. Bull. 97: 74–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Work and Organizational Psychology, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Christel G. Rutte

  2. Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA

    David M. Messick

Authors
  1. Christel G. Rutte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David M. Messick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rutte, C.G., Messick, D.M. An integrated model of perceived unfairness in organizations. Soc Just Res 8, 239–261 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02334810

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02334810

Key Words

Search

Navigation