Advertisement

Using Instant Messaging for Collaboration: A Study of the Relationships Among Organizational Trust, Justice, and Spirituality

  • Huang Neng-Tang
  • Lee Hui-Lin
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering book series (LNICST, volume 264)

Abstract

Enterprises must use human resource management to create the difference in the fierce competition of today’s business environment. Employees are an enterprise’s most important assets, and it is important for administrators to grasp the psychology of their staff. Modern technology provided by mobile instant messaging (IM) has created a communication revolution, creating a culture of “texting rather than talking” through the use of smart phone mobile applications, such as WhatsApp, Line, and WeChat. Therefore, it is important for researchers to consider the influence of IM on work relationships and communication. This study explores the relationships between organizational trust, organizational justice, and organizational spirituality in the context of IM communication. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze questionnaire data, showing that organizational spirituality predicted organizational trust and organizational justice. The findings suggested that organizations should utilize the benefits of IM, create an organizational justice strategy, offer better human resource management, and create an environment in which employees’ organizational spirituality can be enhanced.

Keywords

Instant messaging Organizational trust Organizational justice Organizational spirituality 

References

  1. Adams, J.S.: Inequity in social exchange. In: Berkowitz, L. (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 2, pp. 267–299. Academic Press, New York (1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashmos, D., Duchon, D.P.: Spirituality at work: a conceptualization and measure. J. Manag. Inq. 9(2), 134–145 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blau, P.M.: Exchange and power in social life. Wiley, New York (1964)Google Scholar
  4. Embrain.: Survey on utilization of smartphone functions (2014). Retrieved from https://www.trendmonitor.co.kr/tmweb/trend/allTrend/detail.do?bIdx=1193&code=0102&trendType=CKOREA&prevMonth=&currentPage=1, 14 February 2017
  5. Greenberg, J.: Organization justice: yesterday, today, and tomorrow. J. Manag. 6, 399–432 (1990)Google Scholar
  6. Liu, N.T., Ding, C.G.: General ethical judgments, perceived organizational support, interactional justice, and workplace deviance. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 23(13), 2712–2735 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Meyer, R.: Universal optimality of rank constrained matrix approximation. In: Bock, H.H., Lenski, W., Richter, M.M. (eds.) Information Systems and Data Analysis: Prospects—Foundations-Applications. Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization, vol. 4, pp. 335–342. Springer, Berlin (1994)Google Scholar
  8. Mitchell, J.I., Gagne, M., Beaudry, A., Dyer, L.: The role of perceived organizational support, distributive justice and motivation in reactions to new information technology. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28(2), 729–738 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nambudiri, R.: Propensity to trust and organizational commitment: a study in the Indian pharmaceutical sector. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 23(5), 977–986 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Reid, F.J.M., Reid, D.J.: The expressive and conversational affordances of mobile messaging. Behav. Inf. Technol. 29(1), 3–22 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Reinecke, L., Trepte, S.: Authenticity and well-being on social network sites: a two-wave longitudinal study on the effects of online authenticity and the positivity bias in SNS communication. Comput. Hum. Behav. 30, 95–102 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Robbins, S.P.: Organizational behavior, 9th edn. Prentice Hall Press, Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ (2001)Google Scholar
  13. ERupp, D, Cropanzano, R.: The mediating effects of social exchange relationships in predicting workplace outcomes from multifoci or organizational justice. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 89(1), 925–946 (2002)Google Scholar
  14. Sashittal, H.C., Berman, J., Selim, I.: Impact of trust on performance evaluations. Mid-Atlantic J. Bus. 34(2), 163–184 (1998)Google Scholar
  15. Smith, A.: U.S. Smartphone use in 2015 (2015). Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/01/us-smartphone-use-in-2015/, 14 Feb 2017
  16. Valkenburg, P.M., Peter, J.: Preadolescents’ and adolescents’ online communication and their closeness to friends. Dev. Psychol. 43(2), 267–277 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wong, Y.T., Wong, C.S., Ngo, H.Y.: The effects of trust in organisation and perceived organisational support on organisational citizenship behaviour: a test of three competing models. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 23(2), 278–293 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cohen-Charash, Y., Spector, P.E.: The role of justice in organizational a meta-analysis. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process 86(2), 278–321 (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ICST Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Technology Application and Human Resource DevelopmentNational Normal UniversityTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations