The Distributive Justice of Organizational Performance Evaluations

  • Jerald Greenberg
Part of the Critical Issues in Social Justice book series (CISJ)


Traditionally, concern about matters of justice and fairness among scientists interested in organizational behavior has focused on ways of determining equitable payment and assessing behavioral and attitudinal reactions to inequitable payment (Greenberg, 1982). This orientation toward money as the primary medium through which justice is studied is reflected not only in some of the other contributions to this volume on justice, but also in much of the organizational literature (e.g., Vecchio, 1982). At the same time, however, there also appears to be a growing recognition that matters of justice are involved in several nonfinancial exchanges taking place within organizations (see Nord, 1980). The chapter by Martin (Chapter 17, this volume) and the recent chapter by Crosby (1984) in an organizationally oriented serial represent excellent examples of this trend. Much of the present author’s recent work on procedural justice (e.g., Folger & Greenberg, 1985, Greenberg, in press-a) also reflects an appreciation for the idea that considerations of justice are involved in many forms of nonmonetary social exchange in organizations.


Performance Evaluation Procedural Justice Distributive Justice Equity Theory Ultimate Outcome 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bernardin, H. J., & Beatty, R. W. (1984). Performance appraisal: Assessing human behavior at work. Boston, MA: Kent.Google Scholar
  3. Brickman, P., & Bulman, R.. (1977). Pleasure and pain in social comparison. In J. M. Suls & R. L. Miller (Eds.), Social comparison processes (pp. 149–186). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.Google Scholar
  4. Brickman, P., Folger, R., Goode, E., & Schul, Y. (1981). Microjustice and macrojustice. In M. Lerner & S. C. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior (pp. 173–204). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  5. Carroll, S. J., & Schneier, C. E. (1982). Performance appraisal and review systems. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.Google Scholar
  6. Carroll, S. J., Jr., & Tosi, H. L. (1973). Management by objectives: Applications and research. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Crosby, F. (1984). Relative deprivation in organizational settings. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings, (Eds.) Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 6, pp. 51–94). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  8. Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. DeVries, D. L., Morrison, A. M., Shullman, S. L., & Gerlach, M. L. (1981). Performance appraisal on the line. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. Finn, R. H., & Lee, S. M. (1972). Salary equity: Its determination, analysis, and correlates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56, 283–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Folger, R., & Greenberg, J. (1985). Procedural justice: An interpretive analysis of personnel systems. In K. Rowland & G. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 3, pp. 141–183). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  12. Greenberg, J. (1977). The Protestant work ethic and reactions to negative performance evaluations on a laboratory task. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 682–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Greenberg, J. (1982). Approaching equity and avoiding inequity in groups and organizations. In J. Greenberg & R. L. Cohen (Eds.), Equity and justice in social behavior (pp. 389–435). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  14. Greenberg, J. (1984). Performance evaluations as penultimate outcomes: A preliminary study. Unpublished manuscript, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.Google Scholar
  15. Greenberg, J. (1986). Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71. Google Scholar
  16. Greenberg, J. (in press-a). Organizational performance appraisal procedures: What makes them fair? In M. Bazerman, R. Lewicki, & B. Sheppard (Eds.), Research on negotiating in organizations. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  17. Greenberg, J. (in press-b). Using diaries to promote procedural justice in performance appraisals. Social Justice Review. Google Scholar
  18. Greenberg, J., & Folger, R. (1983). Procedural justice, participation, and the fair process effect in groups and organizations. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Basic group processes (pp. 235–256). New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Greenberg, J., & Ornstein, S. (1983). High status job title as compensation for underpayment: A test of equity theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 285–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Greenberg, J., & Tyler, T. (in press). Why procedural justice in organizations? Social Justice Review. Google Scholar
  21. Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in social perception. In L. Berkowitz, (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 118–156). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  22. Klasson, C. R., Thompson, D. E., & Luben, G. L. (1980). How defensible is your performance appraisal system? Personnel Administrator, 25, 77–83.Google Scholar
  23. Latham, G. P., & Wexley, K. N. (1981). Increasing productivity through performance appraisal. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  24. Leskovec, E. (1967). A guide for discussing the performance appraisal. Personnel Journal, 46, 150–152.Google Scholar
  25. Nord, W. R. (1980). The study of organizations through a resource-exchange paradigm. In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 119–139). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sheppard, B. H. (1984). Third party conflict intervention: A procedural framework. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings, (Eds.) Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 6, pp. 141–190). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  27. Tornow, W. W. (1971). The development and application of an inout-outcome moderator test on the perception and reduction of inequity. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 6, 614–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vecchio, R. P. (1982). Predicting worker performance in inequitable settings. Academy of Management Review, 7, 103–110.Google Scholar
  29. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  30. Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity: Theory and research. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  31. Wexley, K. N., & Latham, G. P. (1981). Developing and training human resources in organizations. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jerald Greenberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Management and Human ResourcesOhio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations