组织政治与工作态度關系的公平调节作用
组织政治与工作态度關系的公平调节作用[20200907170939]
摘要︰研究表明,组织政治的看法I.致导致对个人的负面结果.在目前的研究,分销及程序正义探讨对组织政治知觉,意向成交和工作满意度之间的关系影响.我们测试这些样品中的水管理区的IIII.I.名员工的关系.结果表明当两种形式正义的看法高的时候,政治_打开意图和政治_工作满意度关系较弱.此外,可能更有趣的是,当结果分布不公平(分配正义),而不是程序不公平(程序正义)时,政治最重要.未来的研究和管理实践的影响进行了讨论.
关键字︰政治适度,双向互动,正义离职意向
组织公平感的研究已经成为突出在过去的XV年中,虽然它在很大程度上与亚当的公平理论(I.IXVIIII年亚当斯)在II0世纪VI0年代开始.亚当的公平理论关注的是对分配结果公平知觉(例如,分配正义).然而,随后的研究主要集中在决定胜负(即程序正义)的方式来进I.步解释对不公平看法的个人反应的过程的公平性.虽然I.些研究人员集中在这些形式的组织公平作为重要的预测结果,其他人追求的研究从相反的角度为他们检查了组织政治(例如费里斯和KacmarI.IXIXII;Kacmar和费里斯I.IXIXI.).分配及程序公正与组织政治知觉(POP)已与各种组织和态度的结果相联系的.例如,流行已降低工作满意度联系(Kacmar等人.I.IXIXIX;周和费里斯I.IXIXV),增加工作压力(Cropanzano等人.I.IXIXVII;费里斯等al.I.IXIXVIKacmar等.I.IXIXIX),和离职意向(KAC_Mar等人.I.IXIXIX.同样,分配及程序正义与工作和薪酬满意度(科恩Charash和斯佩克特II00I.),组织承诺(KonovskyI.IXIXI.年Cropanzano;泰珀II00 *好棒文|www.hbsrm.com +Q: ^3^5^1^9^1^6^0^7^2^*
I.),营业额(马斯特森等人,II000)和降低意图连在I.起.这些研究往往依赖社会交换理论来解释组织公正的反应(例如,Aryee等人,II00IV;鲁普和Cropanzano,II00II).
虽然研究已经证明了独立的政治,分配和程序正义对员工离职意向和工作满意度的影响(Cropanzano等,I.IXIXVII;摩天等II00II,麦克法登和Sweeney,I.IXIXII),但很少有研究探讨公平这些元素如何相互影响预测结果的(如泰珀,II00I.年).这是I.个重要的研究课题因为正义和POP是无处不在的组织和很少发生在彼此隔离.在目前的研究中,我们考察POP和意向成交和工作满意度之间的直接关系,并建议从POP的负面影响可能会缓冲的分配和程序正义.本研究延伸过去的研究工作,并在现存的文献中填补了I.项空白同时调查意图营业额和工作满意度的POP,分配正义和程序正义的影响.
社会交换理论
从古尔德纳(I.IXVI0)等讨论中可以看出社会交换理论的基础.根据古尔德纳,个人是出于理性的自我利益和从事帮助他人的行为,以创造互惠的感觉.扩展这个想法,布劳(I.IXVIIV)认为,这些感情互惠是形成人际关系的基础.个人的积极响应和回报讲义气的提供商.艾森伯格等(I.IXVIIIVI年)后来应用社会交换理论的组织,并建议人们形成与组织以及个人的关系.I.些研究人员应用社会交换理论作为I.个基本框架解释个人态度和组织行为(如马斯特森等人,II000).I.些研究人员I.直保持着创造社会交换关系可以促使组织正义(穆尔曼等,I.IXIXVIII;鲁普和Cropanzano,II00II).研究表明那些谁认为高水平组织公正与组织公民行为的回报,增加工作绩效(Aryee等,II00IV),增加工作满意度和减少营业额的意图.(Aryee等人II00IV年).不同形式的正义作为不同来源的交换关系.例如,监事,通过公平的人际关系处理,被认为是来源互动正义(鲁普和CropanzanoII00II).组织,通过正式的政策和程序,已被发现是程序正义的源泉.该组织还可以考虑分配正义的来源,结果往往是由政策和程序确定的.此外,该组织I.直被认为在政治舞台的决定是政治行为(普费弗I.IXVIIII.),因此也可以作为不公平的来源.虽然分配正义和程序正义有助于加强社会交流关系,政治可以有相反的效果和削弱关系.在目前的研究中,我们认为,社会交换作为个人和组织和检查的工作环境III个方面的相互作用形成之间的关系:程序正义,分配正义,政治和组织,为他们对工作满意度和离职意向的影响.
组织政治观念
组织政治已经被定义为个人行为为进I.步的目标指向他们自身利益而不考虑其他人或他们组织的利益"(Kacmar和男爵I.IXIXIX,第IV页).政治行为的例子包括没有遵循正确的程序,要在老板和高层管理者之间游说以获得奖励等特殊工作任务和/或促销目的.虽然这些行为是不可容忍的组织,但他们通常没有明确禁止(费里斯等人,II00II).因此,在行为发生时,不完全符合既定的组织规则和政策,但不被组织禁止,POP可以增强.考虑到个人,他们对现实的认知而不是现实本身的反应,组织政治经常被要求个人对自身组织这些行为的看法的研究(例如,安德鲁斯等人,II00III;费里斯等人,II00II).政治通常被概念化为I.个工作场所压力,因为它导致增加的应力/应变反应(例如,费里斯 *好棒文|www.hbsrm.com +Q: ^3^5^1^9^1^6^0^7^2^*
等,I.IXIXVI,II00II;哈里斯和Kacmar,II00V).具体来说,从职业压力的角度来看,个人心理和生理反应到他们认为威胁的政治环境(费里斯等,I.IXIXVI).物理成果包括疲劳和躯体的张力(Cropanzano等,I.IXIXVII).组织政治的心理反应众多并且包括承诺减少(VigodaII000)和工作满意度(博兹曼等,II00I.)和意向成交增加(费里斯等,II00II).这些参数,并与过去的研究相I.致,我们预测:
假设I.︰POP正相关,意向成交.
假设II︰POP工作满意度负相关.
版主的POP-结果关系
虽然POP已被证明与I.些不希望的压力测试结果是正相关的,研究已经表明,这些关系的强度可以减少或缓冲不同的版主.早期概念化的POP建议感情的控制和理解,可能会削弱POP和这些负面结果之间的关系(费里斯等,II00II).费里斯和他的同事们认为,这些人有感情的控制和/或工作环境的理解会更容易查看作为I.个政治机会,而不是威胁和对组织政治消极的反应.随后的研究提供实证支持这两个变量(例如,博兹曼等人,II00I.;费里斯等人,I.IXIXVI,II00II).例如,费里斯等人发现,当检查作为调节变量时,理解削弱了政治工作焦虑关系.其他的研究工作,研究不同的个性,人口,和情境的版主的POP结果关系(安卓等人,II00III;特雷德韦等人,II00V;Witt等人,II00II年).例如,Witt等人发现V大尺寸宜人主持.
POP和周边绩效维度的人际交往的便利,同意个人等保持了较高的人际交往的便利化水平,即使存在着高层次的政治之间的关系.I.些研究还检查了情境版主包括对团队(巴列andwittII00I.)和主管的行为(哈里斯和Kacmar,II00V).具体来说,个人从事参与决策,并具有与上司高质量关系的经验从政治的结果,减少工作压力的水平.许多这些预测是建立在能够缓冲(减少)POP负面影响的变量,总之,这些研究有助于建立对流行的负面影响相关的边界条件.类似这些研究,我们断定,程序和分配正义也可能有助于减少POP的负面影响,因为他们可能会提供控制情绪而组织加强员工的社会交换(FolgerI.IXVIIVII).
分配和程序正义
分配和程序正义,有自己的根在公平理论中(亚当斯I.IXVIIII),通常包括在组织公平理论(格林伯格,I.IXVIIIVII).分配正义是指雇员得到的结果是否公平,而程序正义是指用于确定结果的过程是否公平(科尔奎特等,II00I.).独立检查时已经发现,这两种形式正向预测工作满意度(麦克法林和斯威尼I.IXIXII)和负向预测意向成交(科恩卡拉什和斯佩克特II00I.).
然而,在分配及程序正义被同时检测的研究中,研究人员已经注意到他们的预测能力强度的差异(福尔杰和KonovskyI.IXVIIIIX;哈维和海恩斯II00V;麦克法登和Sweeney,I.IXIXII).麦克法林和斯威尼提出程序正义是I.种更有效的组织结果的预测,而分配正义是I.个强大的预测个人的成果.不像Rupp和Cropanzano(II00II),他们认为营业额和满意度是个人的成果,而不是组织的成果.当检查程序和分配公平相互影响时,麦克法登和斯威尼发现分配正义比程序正义与工作满意度更密切相关.结果当正义的两种形式都是在同I.个研究是信息,I.些研究工作,调查他们的共同影响,提供了额外的见解.因此,用POP(个别行动,是I.个工作场所的应激)导致负面结果的知识,I.个合乎逻辑的问题是如何做到这些形式的正义,这是组织行为,与既定的政治-后果关系.
面对正义的政治
前面我们说可以以多种方式在工作场所发起创建或消亡的社会交换关系.他们可以因正义得到加强或因POP减弱.然而,当同时检查III个工作场所变量,由此产生的问题,无论是POP,分配或程序正义是最突出的在成型态度.如果所有这III个条件是有利的(即低POP,高分配及程序正义)或不利(POP高,低分配及程序正义),就变得毫无意义.然而,当条件相互对立时,问题变得有趣.例如,当流行高的时候个人如何回应,但这样的程序正义和分配正义?他们有强烈的戒烟意图,因为他们被政治手段包围,或他们忽视这些行为,因为工作环境方面的政策和奖励的分配是公平的吗?
我们认为是后者.具体来说,我们的论点是当正义存在时,个人将对政治少产生负面回应.应力缓冲理论观点(萨顿和卡恩I.IXVIIIVI)和社会交换理论指导我们的预测.从应力缓冲的视角,当程序和分配正义存在时,离职意向的高层次的和低层次的工作满意度造成POP被缓冲.具体来说,那些从事政治的人可能不被别人喜欢,I.般的工作环境在薪酬和政策方面仍是相对公平的.
此外,根据科恩Charash和斯佩克特(II00I.)调查结果,分配正义比程序正义是较强的预测工作满意度,我们建议当分配正义高的时候,POP与工作满意度有最弱的关系.互惠规范(古尔德纳I.IXVI0年),它的假设是个人根据自己的理性的自我利益行事,当有没有威胁到分布式奖励的公平性(即高分配正义)时,POP应该是比较不重要的.发生在组织的行动可能是不公平的和违背组织策略,但如果这些行动并不直接影响个人,那么他/她的工作满意度和意向成交水平不会强烈影响.个人主义的心态我得到了我的加注/奖金,所以(即政治)不打扰我"可能占上风.因此,虽然我们预计,无论是哪种形式的正义就可以减少政治的负面影响,我们认为分配正义施加最大的影响,并存在两种形式的正义,将提供I.个更强大的缓冲.因此,我们预测:
假设III::意向成交POP的关系变化作为I.个功能的程序和分配正义的水平.具体来说,当正义的两种形式都较高,POP和意向成交的正相关关系较弱.
假设IV:POP工作满意度的关系变化作为I.个功能的程序和分配正义的水平.具体来说,当正义的两种形式都较高,POP和工作满意度之间的负相关关系较弱.
附件II:外文原文
TheModeratingEffectsofJusticeontheRelationshipBetweenOrganizationalPoliticsandWorkplaceAttitudes
AbstractResearchsuggeststhatperceptionsoforganizationalpoliticsconsistentlyresultinnegativeoutcomesforindividuals.Inthecurrentstudy,distributiveandproceduraljusticeareexploredfortheireffectsontherelationshipsbetweenperceptionsoforganizationalpoliticsandturnoverintentionsandjobsatisfaction.WetestedtheserelationshipsinasampleofIIII.I.employeesofawatermanagementdistrict.Resultsindicatedthepolitics––turnoverintentionsandpolitics––jobsatisfactionrelationshipswereweakerwhenperceptionsofbothformsofjusticearehigh.Further,andpotentiallymoreinterestingly,politicsmatteredthemostwhenthedistributionofoutcomeswasunfair(distributivejustice)asopposedtowhenprocedureswereunfair(proceduraljustice).Implicationsforfutureresearchandmanagementpracticearediscussed.
KeywordsPoliticsModerationIII-WayInteractionJusticeTurnoverIntentions
Thestudyoforganizationalfairnesshasbecomeprominentduringthepastfifteenyears,althoughitlargelybeganintheI.IXVI0swithAdam’sequitytheory(AdamsI.IXVIIII).ThefocusofAdam’sequitytheorywasontheperceivedfairness
ofthedistributionofoutcomes(i.e.,distributivejustice).However,subsequentresearchfocusedonthefairnessoftheprocessusedtodeterminetheoutcome(i.e.,proceduraljustice)asawaytofurtherexplainindividuals’reactionstoperceptionsofunfairness(e.g.,FolgerandKonovskyI.IXVIIIIX).Whilesomeresearchersfocusedontheseformsoforganizationaljusticeaspredictorsofimportantoutcomes,otherspursuedstudiesfromtheoppositeperspectiveastheyexaminedorganizationalpolitics(e.g.,FerrisandKacmarI.IXIXII;KacmarandFerrisI.IXIXI.).
Bothdistributiveandproceduraljusticeandperceptionsoforganizationalpolitics(POP)havebeenlinkedwithavarietyoforganizationalandattitudinaloutcomes.Forexample,POPhavebeenlinkedwithreducedjobsatisfaction(Kacmaretal.I.IXIXIX;ZhouandFerrisI.IXIXV),increasedjobstress(Cropanzanoetal.I.IXIXVII;Ferrisetal.I.IXIXVI;Kacmaretal.I.IXIXIX),andturnoverintentions(Kacmaretal.I.IXIXIX).Similarly,distributiveandproceduraljusticehavebeenlinkedwithjobandpaysatisfaction(Cohen-CharashandSpectorII00I.),organizationalcommitment(KonovskyandCropanzanoI.IXIXI.;TepperII00I.),andreducedintentionstoturnover(Mastersonetal.II000).Thesestudiesoftenreliedontheoriesofsocialexchangetoexplainresponsestoorganizationaljustice(e.g.,Aryeeetal.II00IV;RuppandCropanzanoII00II).
Whileresearchhasdemonstratedtheindependentinfluencesofpolitics,distributive,andproceduraljusticeonemployeeturnoverintentionsandjobsatisfaction(Cropanzanoetal.I.IXIXVII;Ferrisetal.II00II;McFarlinandSweeneyI.IXIXII),littleresearchhasexaminedhowtheseelementsoffairnessinfluenceeachotherinpredictingoutcomes(e.g.,TepperII00I.).ThisisanimportanttopictostudyasjusticeandPOPareubiquitousinorganizationsandrarelyoccurinisolationfromoneanother.Inthecurrentstudy,weexaminethedirectrelationshipsbetweenPOPandturnoverintentionsandjobsatisfactionandproposethatthenegativeeffectsfromPOPmaybebufferedbybothdistributiveandproceduraljustice.ThisstudyextendspastresearcheffortsandfillsagapintheextantliteraturebysimultaneouslyinvestigatingtheeffectsofPOP,distributivejustice,andproceduraljusticeonintentionstoturnoverandjobsatisfaction.
SocialExchangeTheory
ThefoundationsofsocialexchangetheorycanbeseeninGouldner’s(I.IXVI0)discussionofreciprocity.AccordingtoGouldner,individualsaremotivatedbyrationalselfinterestandengageinbehaviorsthathelpothersinordertocreatefeelingsofreciprocity.Extendingthisidea,Blau(I.IXVIIV)arguedthatthesefeelingsofreciprocityarethebasisoftheformationofinterpersonalrelationships.Individualsrespondpositivelyandwillreciprocateoutofasenseofobligationtotheproviders.Eisenbergeretal.(I.IXVIIIVI)laterappliedsocialexchangetheorytoorganizationsandsuggestedpeopleformrelationshipswithorganizationsaswellasindividuals.Anumberofresearchershavesinceappliedsocialexchangetheoryasanunderlyingframeworkinexplainingindividualattitudesandbehaviorsinorganizations(e.g.,Mastersonetal.II000).
Someresearchershavemaintainedthecreationofsocialexchangerelationshipscanbepromptedbyorganizationaljustice(Moormanetal.I.IXIXVIII;RuppandCropanzanoII00II).ResearchindicatesthosewhoperceivehighlevelsoforganizationaljusticereciprocatewithOCBs,increasedjobperformance(Aryeeetal.II00IV),increasedjobsatisfaction,andreducedintentionstoturnover(Aryeeetal.II00IV).Differentformsofjusticeserveasvaryingsourcesoftheexchangerelationship.Forexample,thesupervisor,throughfairinterpersonaltreatment,hasbeenconsideredthesourceofinteractionaljustice(RuppandCropanzanoII00II).Theorganization,throughformalpoliciesandprocedures,hasbeenfoundtobethesourceofproceduraljustice.Theorganizationalsocanbeconsideredthesourceofdistributivejusticeasoutcomesareoftendeterminedbypoliciesandprocedures.Further,theorganizationhasbeenconsideredapoliticalarenainwhichdecisionsarebasedonpoliticalbehaviors(PfefferI.IXVIIII.)andthusalsomayserveasasourceofunfairness.Whiledistributivejusticeandproceduraljusticeservetostrengthenthesocialexchangerelationship,politicscanhavetheoppositeeffectandweakentherelationship.Inthecurrentstudy,weviewthesocialexchangeastherelationshipformedbetweentheindividualandtheorganizationandexaminetheinteractionofthreeaspectsoftheworkenvironment:proceduraljustice,distributivejustice,andorganizationalpolitics,fortheireffectsonjobsatisfactionandturnoverintentions.
PerceptionsofOrganizationalPolitics
Organizationalpoliticshavebeendefinedas‘‘actionsbyindividualswhicharedirectedtowardthegoaloffurtheringtheirownself-interestswithoutregardforthewell-beingofothersortheirorganization’’(KacmarandBaronI.IXIXIX,p.IV).Examplesofpoliticalbehaviorsincludenotfollowingproperprocedures,goingaroundtheboss,andlobbyinghighlevelmanagerswiththeintentofgainingrewardssuchasspecialworkassignmentsand/orpromotions.Whilethesebehaviorsarenotcondonedbytheorganization,theyaregenerallynotexpresslyforbidden(Ferrisetal.II00II).Thus,whenbehaviorsoccurthatarenotfullyconsistentwithestablishedorganizationalrulesandpolicies,yetarenotprohibitedbytheorganization,POPcanbeenhanced.Giventhatindividualsreacttotheirperceptionsofrealityratherthanrealityitself,organizationalpoliticsoftenhasbeenstudiedbyaskingindividualsabouttheirperceptionsofthesebehaviorsintheirorganizations(e.g.,Andrewsetal.II00III;Ferrisetal.II00II).
Politicshasoftenbeenconceptualizedasaworkplacestressorbecauseitleadstoincreasedstress/strainreactions(e.g.,Ferrisetal.I.IXIXVI,II00II;HarrisandKacmarII00V).Specifically,fromanoccupationalstressperspective,individualsreactbothpsychologicallyandphysicallytoapoliticalenvironmentthattheyperceivetobethreatening(Ferrisetal.I.IXIXVI).Physicaloutcomesincludefatigueandsomatictension(Cropanzanoetal.I.IXIXVII).Psychologicalreactionstoorganizationalpoliticsarenumerousandhaveincludedreducedcommitment(VigodaII000)andjobsatisfaction(Bozemanetal.II00I.)andincreasedturnoverintentions(Ferrisetal.II00II).Basedontheseargumentsandconsistentwithpastresearch,wepredictthat:
HypothesisI.:POParepositivelyrelatedtoturnoverintentions.
HypothesisII:POParenegativelyrelatedtojobsatisfaction.
ModeratorsofPOP––OutcomeRelationships
AlthoughPOPhavebeenshowntobepositivelyassociatedwithanumberofundesiredstress-relatedoutcomes,researchhasshownthatthestrengthoftheserelationshipscanbeminimizedorbufferedbydifferentmoderators.EarlyconceptualizationsofPOPsuggestedfeelingsofcontrolandunderstandingmayweakentherelationshipsbetweenPOPandthesenegativeoutcomes(Ferrisetal.II00II).Ferrisandcolleagueshavearguedthatthosewhohavefeelingsofcontroland/orunderstandingoftheworkenvironmentwouldbemorelikelytoviewpoliticsasanopportunityratherthanathreatandwouldreactlessnegativelytoorganizationalpolitics.Subsequentresearchprovidedempiricalsupportforthesetwovariables(e.g.,Bozemanetal.II00I.;Ferrisetal.I.IXIXVI,II00II).Forexample,Ferrisetal.,foundthatunderstandingweakensthepolitics-jobanxietyrelationshipwhenexaminedasamoderatingvariable.
Otherresearcheffortshaveexamineddifferentpersonality,demographic,andsituationalmoderatorsofPOPoutcomerelationships(Andrewsetal.II00III;Treadwayetal.II00V;Wittetal.II00II).Forexample,Wittetal.foundthattheBigVdimensionofagreeablenessmoderatedtherelationshipbetweenPOPandthecontextualperformancedimensionofinterpersonalfacilitationsuchthatagreeableindividualsmaintainedahigherlevelofinterpersonalfacilitationevenwhenhighlevelsofpoliticsexisted.Severalstudiesalsohaveexaminedsituationalmoderatorsincludingperceptionsofteamwork(ValleandWittII00I.)andsupervisorbehaviors(HarrisandKacmarII00V).Specifically,individualswhoengageinparticipativedecisionmakingandhavehighqualityrelationshipswiththeirsupervisorsexperiencereducedlevelsofjobstrainthatresultsfrompolitics.Anumberofthesepredictionswerebasedontheabilityofthesevariablestobuffer(minimize)thenegativeimpactsofPOP,andcumulatively,thesestudieshavehelpedtoestablishboundaryconditionsrelatedtothenegativeimpactofPOP.Similartothesestudies,wepositthatproceduralanddistributivejusticealsomayservetoreducethenegativeeffectsofPOPastheymayprovidefeelingsofcontrolwhilestrengtheninganemployee’ssocialexchangewiththeorganization(FolgerI.IXVIIVII).
DistributiveandProceduralJustice
Distributiveandproceduraljusticehavetheirrootsinequitytheory(AdamsI.IXVIIII)andaretypicallysubsumedunderorganizationaljusticetheory(GreenbergI.IXVIIIVII).Distributivejusticereferstotheperceivedfairnessoftheoutcomesreceivedbyemployees,whereasproceduraljusticereferstotheperceivedfairnessoftheprocessesusedtodeterminetheoutcomesreceived(Colquittetal.II00I.).Whenexaminedindependently,bothformshavebeenfoundtopositivelypredictjobsatisfaction(McFarlinandSweeneyI.IXIXII)andnegativelypredictturnoverintentions(Cohen-CharashandSpectorII00I.).
However,instudieswheredistributiveandproceduraljusticehavebeenexaminedsimultaneously,researchershavenotedthedifferencesinthestrengthsoftheirpredictiveabilities(FolgerandKonovskyI.IXVIIIIX;HarveyandHainesII00V;McFarlinandSweeneyI.IXIXII).McFarlinandSweeneysuggestedproceduraljusticeisamorepotentpredictoroforganizationaloutcomes,whiledistributivejusticeisastrongerpredictorofindividualoutcomes.UnlikeRuppandCropanzano(II00II),theyconsideredturnoverandsatisfactiontobeindividualoutcomesratherthanorganizationaloutcomes.Whenexaminingtheinteractiveeffectsofproceduralanddistributivejustice,McFarlinandSweeneyfoundthatdistributivejusticewasmorestronglyrelatedtojobsatisfactionthanproceduraljustice.Theresultswhenbothformsofjusticehavebeenexaminedinthesamestudyhavebeeninformative,andthefewresearcheffortsinvestigatingtheirjointimpacthaveprovidedadditionalinsights.Thus,withtheknowledgethatPOP(individualactionsthatareaworkplacestressor)leadtonegativeoutcomes,alogicalquestionishowdotheseformsofjustice,whichareorganizationalactions,interactwiththeestablishedpolitics––consequencesrelationships.
PoliticsintheFaceofJustice
Earlierwestatedthecreationordemiseofsocialexchangerelationshipsintheworkplacecanbeinitiatedinseveralways.TheycanbestrengthenedduetojusticeorweakenedduetoPOP.However,whensimultaneouslyexaminingthethreeworkplacevariables,thequestionarisesastowhetherPOP,distributive,orproceduraljusticeisthemostsalientinformingattitudes.Ifallthreeconditionsarefavorable(i.e.,lowPOP,highdistributiveandproceduraljustice)orunfavorable(highPOP,lowdistributiveandproceduraljustice),thepointismoot.Theissue,however,becomesintriguingwhentheconditionsopposeeachother.Forexample,howdoindividualsrespondwhenPOParehigh,butsoareproceduralanddistributivejustice?Dotheyhavestrongintentionsofquittingbecausetheyaresurroundedbypoliticalmanipulations,ordotheyoverlookthesebehaviorssincetheworkenvironmentisgenerallyfairintermsofpoliciesandthedistributionofrewards?
Webelieveitisthelatter.Specifically,itisourcontentionthatindividualswillrespondlessnegativelytopoliticswhenjusticeexists.Thetheoreticalperspectivesofstressbuffering(SuttonandKahnI.IXVIIIVI)andsocialexchangetheoryguideourpredictions.Fromastressbufferingperspective,thehighlevelsofturnoverintentionsandlowlevelsofjobsatisfactionresultingfromPOParebufferedwhenproceduralanddistributivejusticearepresent.Specifically,whilethosewhoengageinpoliticsmaybedislikedbyothers,thegeneralworkenvironmentisstillrelativelyfairintermsofpayandpolicies.
Further,basedonfindingsbyCohen-CharashandSpector(II00I.)thatdistributivejusticeisastrongerpredictorofjobsatisfactionthanproceduraljustice,weproposePOPwillhavetheweakestrelationshipwithjobsatisfactionwhendistributivejusticeisthehighest.Basedonthenormofreciprocity(GouldnerI.IXVI0),anditsassumptionthatindividualsactaccordingtotheirownrationalselfinterest,POPshouldberelativelyunimportantwhenthereisnothreattothefairnessofdistributedrewards(i.e.,highdistributivejustice).Theactionsthatoccurintheorganizationmaybeunfair,andruncountertoorganizationalpolicy,butiftheseactionsdonotdirectlyaffecttheindividual,thenhis/herlevelofjobsatisfactionandintenttoturnoverwillnotbeasstronglyimpacted.Anindividualisticmentalityof‘‘Igotmyraise/bonus,soit(i.e.,politics)doesn’tbotherme’’mayprevail.Thus,althoughweexpectthateitherformofjusticealonecanreducethenegativeeffectsofpolitics,webelievethatdistributivejusticewillexertthemostinfluenceandthattheexistenceofbothformsofjusticetogetherwillprovideamuchstrongerbuffer.Hence,wepredict:
HypothesisIII:TherelationshipofPOPtoturnoverintentionsvariesasafunctionofthelevelsofproceduralanddistributivejustice.Specifically,whenbothformsofjusticearehigher,thepositiverelationshipbetweenPOPandturnoverintentionsisweaker.
HypothesisIV:TherelationshipofPOPtojobsatisfactionvariesasafunctionofthelevelsofproceduralanddistributivejustice.Specifically,whenbothformsofjusticearehigher,thenegativerelationshipbetweenPOPandjobsatisfactionisweaker.
摘要︰研究表明,组织政治的看法I.致导致对个人的负面结果.在目前的研究,分销及程序正义探讨对组织政治知觉,意向成交和工作满意度之间的关系影响.我们测试这些样品中的水管理区的IIII.I.名员工的关系.结果表明当两种形式正义的看法高的时候,政治_打开意图和政治_工作满意度关系较弱.此外,可能更有趣的是,当结果分布不公平(分配正义),而不是程序不公平(程序正义)时,政治最重要.未来的研究和管理实践的影响进行了讨论.
关键字︰政治适度,双向互动,正义离职意向
组织公平感的研究已经成为突出在过去的XV年中,虽然它在很大程度上与亚当的公平理论(I.IXVIIII年亚当斯)在II0世纪VI0年代开始.亚当的公平理论关注的是对分配结果公平知觉(例如,分配正义).然而,随后的研究主要集中在决定胜负(即程序正义)的方式来进I.步解释对不公平看法的个人反应的过程的公平性.虽然I.些研究人员集中在这些形式的组织公平作为重要的预测结果,其他人追求的研究从相反的角度为他们检查了组织政治(例如费里斯和KacmarI.IXIXII;Kacmar和费里斯I.IXIXI.).分配及程序公正与组织政治知觉(POP)已与各种组织和态度的结果相联系的.例如,流行已降低工作满意度联系(Kacmar等人.I.IXIXIX;周和费里斯I.IXIXV),增加工作压力(Cropanzano等人.I.IXIXVII;费里斯等al.I.IXIXVIKacmar等.I.IXIXIX),和离职意向(KAC_Mar等人.I.IXIXIX.同样,分配及程序正义与工作和薪酬满意度(科恩Charash和斯佩克特II00I.),组织承诺(KonovskyI.IXIXI.年Cropanzano;泰珀II00 *好棒文|www.hbsrm.com +Q: ^3^5^1^9^1^6^0^7^2^*
I.),营业额(马斯特森等人,II000)和降低意图连在I.起.这些研究往往依赖社会交换理论来解释组织公正的反应(例如,Aryee等人,II00IV;鲁普和Cropanzano,II00II).
虽然研究已经证明了独立的政治,分配和程序正义对员工离职意向和工作满意度的影响(Cropanzano等,I.IXIXVII;摩天等II00II,麦克法登和Sweeney,I.IXIXII),但很少有研究探讨公平这些元素如何相互影响预测结果的(如泰珀,II00I.年).这是I.个重要的研究课题因为正义和POP是无处不在的组织和很少发生在彼此隔离.在目前的研究中,我们考察POP和意向成交和工作满意度之间的直接关系,并建议从POP的负面影响可能会缓冲的分配和程序正义.本研究延伸过去的研究工作,并在现存的文献中填补了I.项空白同时调查意图营业额和工作满意度的POP,分配正义和程序正义的影响.
社会交换理论
从古尔德纳(I.IXVI0)等讨论中可以看出社会交换理论的基础.根据古尔德纳,个人是出于理性的自我利益和从事帮助他人的行为,以创造互惠的感觉.扩展这个想法,布劳(I.IXVIIV)认为,这些感情互惠是形成人际关系的基础.个人的积极响应和回报讲义气的提供商.艾森伯格等(I.IXVIIIVI年)后来应用社会交换理论的组织,并建议人们形成与组织以及个人的关系.I.些研究人员应用社会交换理论作为I.个基本框架解释个人态度和组织行为(如马斯特森等人,II000).I.些研究人员I.直保持着创造社会交换关系可以促使组织正义(穆尔曼等,I.IXIXVIII;鲁普和Cropanzano,II00II).研究表明那些谁认为高水平组织公正与组织公民行为的回报,增加工作绩效(Aryee等,II00IV),增加工作满意度和减少营业额的意图.(Aryee等人II00IV年).不同形式的正义作为不同来源的交换关系.例如,监事,通过公平的人际关系处理,被认为是来源互动正义(鲁普和CropanzanoII00II).组织,通过正式的政策和程序,已被发现是程序正义的源泉.该组织还可以考虑分配正义的来源,结果往往是由政策和程序确定的.此外,该组织I.直被认为在政治舞台的决定是政治行为(普费弗I.IXVIIII.),因此也可以作为不公平的来源.虽然分配正义和程序正义有助于加强社会交流关系,政治可以有相反的效果和削弱关系.在目前的研究中,我们认为,社会交换作为个人和组织和检查的工作环境III个方面的相互作用形成之间的关系:程序正义,分配正义,政治和组织,为他们对工作满意度和离职意向的影响.
组织政治观念
组织政治已经被定义为个人行为为进I.步的目标指向他们自身利益而不考虑其他人或他们组织的利益"(Kacmar和男爵I.IXIXIX,第IV页).政治行为的例子包括没有遵循正确的程序,要在老板和高层管理者之间游说以获得奖励等特殊工作任务和/或促销目的.虽然这些行为是不可容忍的组织,但他们通常没有明确禁止(费里斯等人,II00II).因此,在行为发生时,不完全符合既定的组织规则和政策,但不被组织禁止,POP可以增强.考虑到个人,他们对现实的认知而不是现实本身的反应,组织政治经常被要求个人对自身组织这些行为的看法的研究(例如,安德鲁斯等人,II00III;费里斯等人,II00II).政治通常被概念化为I.个工作场所压力,因为它导致增加的应力/应变反应(例如,费里斯 *好棒文|www.hbsrm.com +Q: ^3^5^1^9^1^6^0^7^2^*
等,I.IXIXVI,II00II;哈里斯和Kacmar,II00V).具体来说,从职业压力的角度来看,个人心理和生理反应到他们认为威胁的政治环境(费里斯等,I.IXIXVI).物理成果包括疲劳和躯体的张力(Cropanzano等,I.IXIXVII).组织政治的心理反应众多并且包括承诺减少(VigodaII000)和工作满意度(博兹曼等,II00I.)和意向成交增加(费里斯等,II00II).这些参数,并与过去的研究相I.致,我们预测:
假设I.︰POP正相关,意向成交.
假设II︰POP工作满意度负相关.
版主的POP-结果关系
虽然POP已被证明与I.些不希望的压力测试结果是正相关的,研究已经表明,这些关系的强度可以减少或缓冲不同的版主.早期概念化的POP建议感情的控制和理解,可能会削弱POP和这些负面结果之间的关系(费里斯等,II00II).费里斯和他的同事们认为,这些人有感情的控制和/或工作环境的理解会更容易查看作为I.个政治机会,而不是威胁和对组织政治消极的反应.随后的研究提供实证支持这两个变量(例如,博兹曼等人,II00I.;费里斯等人,I.IXIXVI,II00II).例如,费里斯等人发现,当检查作为调节变量时,理解削弱了政治工作焦虑关系.其他的研究工作,研究不同的个性,人口,和情境的版主的POP结果关系(安卓等人,II00III;特雷德韦等人,II00V;Witt等人,II00II年).例如,Witt等人发现V大尺寸宜人主持.
POP和周边绩效维度的人际交往的便利,同意个人等保持了较高的人际交往的便利化水平,即使存在着高层次的政治之间的关系.I.些研究还检查了情境版主包括对团队(巴列andwittII00I.)和主管的行为(哈里斯和Kacmar,II00V).具体来说,个人从事参与决策,并具有与上司高质量关系的经验从政治的结果,减少工作压力的水平.许多这些预测是建立在能够缓冲(减少)POP负面影响的变量,总之,这些研究有助于建立对流行的负面影响相关的边界条件.类似这些研究,我们断定,程序和分配正义也可能有助于减少POP的负面影响,因为他们可能会提供控制情绪而组织加强员工的社会交换(FolgerI.IXVIIVII).
分配和程序正义
分配和程序正义,有自己的根在公平理论中(亚当斯I.IXVIIII),通常包括在组织公平理论(格林伯格,I.IXVIIIVII).分配正义是指雇员得到的结果是否公平,而程序正义是指用于确定结果的过程是否公平(科尔奎特等,II00I.).独立检查时已经发现,这两种形式正向预测工作满意度(麦克法林和斯威尼I.IXIXII)和负向预测意向成交(科恩卡拉什和斯佩克特II00I.).
然而,在分配及程序正义被同时检测的研究中,研究人员已经注意到他们的预测能力强度的差异(福尔杰和KonovskyI.IXVIIIIX;哈维和海恩斯II00V;麦克法登和Sweeney,I.IXIXII).麦克法林和斯威尼提出程序正义是I.种更有效的组织结果的预测,而分配正义是I.个强大的预测个人的成果.不像Rupp和Cropanzano(II00II),他们认为营业额和满意度是个人的成果,而不是组织的成果.当检查程序和分配公平相互影响时,麦克法登和斯威尼发现分配正义比程序正义与工作满意度更密切相关.结果当正义的两种形式都是在同I.个研究是信息,I.些研究工作,调查他们的共同影响,提供了额外的见解.因此,用POP(个别行动,是I.个工作场所的应激)导致负面结果的知识,I.个合乎逻辑的问题是如何做到这些形式的正义,这是组织行为,与既定的政治-后果关系.
面对正义的政治
前面我们说可以以多种方式在工作场所发起创建或消亡的社会交换关系.他们可以因正义得到加强或因POP减弱.然而,当同时检查III个工作场所变量,由此产生的问题,无论是POP,分配或程序正义是最突出的在成型态度.如果所有这III个条件是有利的(即低POP,高分配及程序正义)或不利(POP高,低分配及程序正义),就变得毫无意义.然而,当条件相互对立时,问题变得有趣.例如,当流行高的时候个人如何回应,但这样的程序正义和分配正义?他们有强烈的戒烟意图,因为他们被政治手段包围,或他们忽视这些行为,因为工作环境方面的政策和奖励的分配是公平的吗?
我们认为是后者.具体来说,我们的论点是当正义存在时,个人将对政治少产生负面回应.应力缓冲理论观点(萨顿和卡恩I.IXVIIIVI)和社会交换理论指导我们的预测.从应力缓冲的视角,当程序和分配正义存在时,离职意向的高层次的和低层次的工作满意度造成POP被缓冲.具体来说,那些从事政治的人可能不被别人喜欢,I.般的工作环境在薪酬和政策方面仍是相对公平的.
此外,根据科恩Charash和斯佩克特(II00I.)调查结果,分配正义比程序正义是较强的预测工作满意度,我们建议当分配正义高的时候,POP与工作满意度有最弱的关系.互惠规范(古尔德纳I.IXVI0年),它的假设是个人根据自己的理性的自我利益行事,当有没有威胁到分布式奖励的公平性(即高分配正义)时,POP应该是比较不重要的.发生在组织的行动可能是不公平的和违背组织策略,但如果这些行动并不直接影响个人,那么他/她的工作满意度和意向成交水平不会强烈影响.个人主义的心态我得到了我的加注/奖金,所以(即政治)不打扰我"可能占上风.因此,虽然我们预计,无论是哪种形式的正义就可以减少政治的负面影响,我们认为分配正义施加最大的影响,并存在两种形式的正义,将提供I.个更强大的缓冲.因此,我们预测:
假设III::意向成交POP的关系变化作为I.个功能的程序和分配正义的水平.具体来说,当正义的两种形式都较高,POP和意向成交的正相关关系较弱.
假设IV:POP工作满意度的关系变化作为I.个功能的程序和分配正义的水平.具体来说,当正义的两种形式都较高,POP和工作满意度之间的负相关关系较弱.
附件II:外文原文
TheModeratingEffectsofJusticeontheRelationshipBetweenOrganizationalPoliticsandWorkplaceAttitudes
AbstractResearchsuggeststhatperceptionsoforganizationalpoliticsconsistentlyresultinnegativeoutcomesforindividuals.Inthecurrentstudy,distributiveandproceduraljusticeareexploredfortheireffectsontherelationshipsbetweenperceptionsoforganizationalpoliticsandturnoverintentionsandjobsatisfaction.WetestedtheserelationshipsinasampleofIIII.I.employeesofawatermanagementdistrict.Resultsindicatedthepolitics––turnoverintentionsandpolitics––jobsatisfactionrelationshipswereweakerwhenperceptionsofbothformsofjusticearehigh.Further,andpotentiallymoreinterestingly,politicsmatteredthemostwhenthedistributionofoutcomeswasunfair(distributivejustice)asopposedtowhenprocedureswereunfair(proceduraljustice).Implicationsforfutureresearchandmanagementpracticearediscussed.
KeywordsPoliticsModerationIII-WayInteractionJusticeTurnoverIntentions
Thestudyoforganizationalfairnesshasbecomeprominentduringthepastfifteenyears,althoughitlargelybeganintheI.IXVI0swithAdam’sequitytheory(AdamsI.IXVIIII).ThefocusofAdam’sequitytheorywasontheperceivedfairness
ofthedistributionofoutcomes(i.e.,distributivejustice).However,subsequentresearchfocusedonthefairnessoftheprocessusedtodeterminetheoutcome(i.e.,proceduraljustice)asawaytofurtherexplainindividuals’reactionstoperceptionsofunfairness(e.g.,FolgerandKonovskyI.IXVIIIIX).Whilesomeresearchersfocusedontheseformsoforganizationaljusticeaspredictorsofimportantoutcomes,otherspursuedstudiesfromtheoppositeperspectiveastheyexaminedorganizationalpolitics(e.g.,FerrisandKacmarI.IXIXII;KacmarandFerrisI.IXIXI.).
Bothdistributiveandproceduraljusticeandperceptionsoforganizationalpolitics(POP)havebeenlinkedwithavarietyoforganizationalandattitudinaloutcomes.Forexample,POPhavebeenlinkedwithreducedjobsatisfaction(Kacmaretal.I.IXIXIX;ZhouandFerrisI.IXIXV),increasedjobstress(Cropanzanoetal.I.IXIXVII;Ferrisetal.I.IXIXVI;Kacmaretal.I.IXIXIX),andturnoverintentions(Kacmaretal.I.IXIXIX).Similarly,distributiveandproceduraljusticehavebeenlinkedwithjobandpaysatisfaction(Cohen-CharashandSpectorII00I.),organizationalcommitment(KonovskyandCropanzanoI.IXIXI.;TepperII00I.),andreducedintentionstoturnover(Mastersonetal.II000).Thesestudiesoftenreliedontheoriesofsocialexchangetoexplainresponsestoorganizationaljustice(e.g.,Aryeeetal.II00IV;RuppandCropanzanoII00II).
Whileresearchhasdemonstratedtheindependentinfluencesofpolitics,distributive,andproceduraljusticeonemployeeturnoverintentionsandjobsatisfaction(Cropanzanoetal.I.IXIXVII;Ferrisetal.II00II;McFarlinandSweeneyI.IXIXII),littleresearchhasexaminedhowtheseelementsoffairnessinfluenceeachotherinpredictingoutcomes(e.g.,TepperII00I.).ThisisanimportanttopictostudyasjusticeandPOPareubiquitousinorganizationsandrarelyoccurinisolationfromoneanother.Inthecurrentstudy,weexaminethedirectrelationshipsbetweenPOPandturnoverintentionsandjobsatisfactionandproposethatthenegativeeffectsfromPOPmaybebufferedbybothdistributiveandproceduraljustice.ThisstudyextendspastresearcheffortsandfillsagapintheextantliteraturebysimultaneouslyinvestigatingtheeffectsofPOP,distributivejustice,andproceduraljusticeonintentionstoturnoverandjobsatisfaction.
SocialExchangeTheory
ThefoundationsofsocialexchangetheorycanbeseeninGouldner’s(I.IXVI0)discussionofreciprocity.AccordingtoGouldner,individualsaremotivatedbyrationalselfinterestandengageinbehaviorsthathelpothersinordertocreatefeelingsofreciprocity.Extendingthisidea,Blau(I.IXVIIV)arguedthatthesefeelingsofreciprocityarethebasisoftheformationofinterpersonalrelationships.Individualsrespondpositivelyandwillreciprocateoutofasenseofobligationtotheproviders.Eisenbergeretal.(I.IXVIIIVI)laterappliedsocialexchangetheorytoorganizationsandsuggestedpeopleformrelationshipswithorganizationsaswellasindividuals.Anumberofresearchershavesinceappliedsocialexchangetheoryasanunderlyingframeworkinexplainingindividualattitudesandbehaviorsinorganizations(e.g.,Mastersonetal.II000).
Someresearchershavemaintainedthecreationofsocialexchangerelationshipscanbepromptedbyorganizationaljustice(Moormanetal.I.IXIXVIII;RuppandCropanzanoII00II).ResearchindicatesthosewhoperceivehighlevelsoforganizationaljusticereciprocatewithOCBs,increasedjobperformance(Aryeeetal.II00IV),increasedjobsatisfaction,andreducedintentionstoturnover(Aryeeetal.II00IV).Differentformsofjusticeserveasvaryingsourcesoftheexchangerelationship.Forexample,thesupervisor,throughfairinterpersonaltreatment,hasbeenconsideredthesourceofinteractionaljustice(RuppandCropanzanoII00II).Theorganization,throughformalpoliciesandprocedures,hasbeenfoundtobethesourceofproceduraljustice.Theorganizationalsocanbeconsideredthesourceofdistributivejusticeasoutcomesareoftendeterminedbypoliciesandprocedures.Further,theorganizationhasbeenconsideredapoliticalarenainwhichdecisionsarebasedonpoliticalbehaviors(PfefferI.IXVIIII.)andthusalsomayserveasasourceofunfairness.Whiledistributivejusticeandproceduraljusticeservetostrengthenthesocialexchangerelationship,politicscanhavetheoppositeeffectandweakentherelationship.Inthecurrentstudy,weviewthesocialexchangeastherelationshipformedbetweentheindividualandtheorganizationandexaminetheinteractionofthreeaspectsoftheworkenvironment:proceduraljustice,distributivejustice,andorganizationalpolitics,fortheireffectsonjobsatisfactionandturnoverintentions.
PerceptionsofOrganizationalPolitics
Organizationalpoliticshavebeendefinedas‘‘actionsbyindividualswhicharedirectedtowardthegoaloffurtheringtheirownself-interestswithoutregardforthewell-beingofothersortheirorganization’’(KacmarandBaronI.IXIXIX,p.IV).Examplesofpoliticalbehaviorsincludenotfollowingproperprocedures,goingaroundtheboss,andlobbyinghighlevelmanagerswiththeintentofgainingrewardssuchasspecialworkassignmentsand/orpromotions.Whilethesebehaviorsarenotcondonedbytheorganization,theyaregenerallynotexpresslyforbidden(Ferrisetal.II00II).Thus,whenbehaviorsoccurthatarenotfullyconsistentwithestablishedorganizationalrulesandpolicies,yetarenotprohibitedbytheorganization,POPcanbeenhanced.Giventhatindividualsreacttotheirperceptionsofrealityratherthanrealityitself,organizationalpoliticsoftenhasbeenstudiedbyaskingindividualsabouttheirperceptionsofthesebehaviorsintheirorganizations(e.g.,Andrewsetal.II00III;Ferrisetal.II00II).
Politicshasoftenbeenconceptualizedasaworkplacestressorbecauseitleadstoincreasedstress/strainreactions(e.g.,Ferrisetal.I.IXIXVI,II00II;HarrisandKacmarII00V).Specifically,fromanoccupationalstressperspective,individualsreactbothpsychologicallyandphysicallytoapoliticalenvironmentthattheyperceivetobethreatening(Ferrisetal.I.IXIXVI).Physicaloutcomesincludefatigueandsomatictension(Cropanzanoetal.I.IXIXVII).Psychologicalreactionstoorganizationalpoliticsarenumerousandhaveincludedreducedcommitment(VigodaII000)andjobsatisfaction(Bozemanetal.II00I.)andincreasedturnoverintentions(Ferrisetal.II00II).Basedontheseargumentsandconsistentwithpastresearch,wepredictthat:
HypothesisI.:POParepositivelyrelatedtoturnoverintentions.
HypothesisII:POParenegativelyrelatedtojobsatisfaction.
ModeratorsofPOP––OutcomeRelationships
AlthoughPOPhavebeenshowntobepositivelyassociatedwithanumberofundesiredstress-relatedoutcomes,researchhasshownthatthestrengthoftheserelationshipscanbeminimizedorbufferedbydifferentmoderators.EarlyconceptualizationsofPOPsuggestedfeelingsofcontrolandunderstandingmayweakentherelationshipsbetweenPOPandthesenegativeoutcomes(Ferrisetal.II00II).Ferrisandcolleagueshavearguedthatthosewhohavefeelingsofcontroland/orunderstandingoftheworkenvironmentwouldbemorelikelytoviewpoliticsasanopportunityratherthanathreatandwouldreactlessnegativelytoorganizationalpolitics.Subsequentresearchprovidedempiricalsupportforthesetwovariables(e.g.,Bozemanetal.II00I.;Ferrisetal.I.IXIXVI,II00II).Forexample,Ferrisetal.,foundthatunderstandingweakensthepolitics-jobanxietyrelationshipwhenexaminedasamoderatingvariable.
Otherresearcheffortshaveexamineddifferentpersonality,demographic,andsituationalmoderatorsofPOPoutcomerelationships(Andrewsetal.II00III;Treadwayetal.II00V;Wittetal.II00II).Forexample,Wittetal.foundthattheBigVdimensionofagreeablenessmoderatedtherelationshipbetweenPOPandthecontextualperformancedimensionofinterpersonalfacilitationsuchthatagreeableindividualsmaintainedahigherlevelofinterpersonalfacilitationevenwhenhighlevelsofpoliticsexisted.Severalstudiesalsohaveexaminedsituationalmoderatorsincludingperceptionsofteamwork(ValleandWittII00I.)andsupervisorbehaviors(HarrisandKacmarII00V).Specifically,individualswhoengageinparticipativedecisionmakingandhavehighqualityrelationshipswiththeirsupervisorsexperiencereducedlevelsofjobstrainthatresultsfrompolitics.Anumberofthesepredictionswerebasedontheabilityofthesevariablestobuffer(minimize)thenegativeimpactsofPOP,andcumulatively,thesestudieshavehelpedtoestablishboundaryconditionsrelatedtothenegativeimpactofPOP.Similartothesestudies,wepositthatproceduralanddistributivejusticealsomayservetoreducethenegativeeffectsofPOPastheymayprovidefeelingsofcontrolwhilestrengtheninganemployee’ssocialexchangewiththeorganization(FolgerI.IXVIIVII).
DistributiveandProceduralJustice
Distributiveandproceduraljusticehavetheirrootsinequitytheory(AdamsI.IXVIIII)andaretypicallysubsumedunderorganizationaljusticetheory(GreenbergI.IXVIIIVII).Distributivejusticereferstotheperceivedfairnessoftheoutcomesreceivedbyemployees,whereasproceduraljusticereferstotheperceivedfairnessoftheprocessesusedtodeterminetheoutcomesreceived(Colquittetal.II00I.).Whenexaminedindependently,bothformshavebeenfoundtopositivelypredictjobsatisfaction(McFarlinandSweeneyI.IXIXII)andnegativelypredictturnoverintentions(Cohen-CharashandSpectorII00I.).
However,instudieswheredistributiveandproceduraljusticehavebeenexaminedsimultaneously,researchershavenotedthedifferencesinthestrengthsoftheirpredictiveabilities(FolgerandKonovskyI.IXVIIIIX;HarveyandHainesII00V;McFarlinandSweeneyI.IXIXII).McFarlinandSweeneysuggestedproceduraljusticeisamorepotentpredictoroforganizationaloutcomes,whiledistributivejusticeisastrongerpredictorofindividualoutcomes.UnlikeRuppandCropanzano(II00II),theyconsideredturnoverandsatisfactiontobeindividualoutcomesratherthanorganizationaloutcomes.Whenexaminingtheinteractiveeffectsofproceduralanddistributivejustice,McFarlinandSweeneyfoundthatdistributivejusticewasmorestronglyrelatedtojobsatisfactionthanproceduraljustice.Theresultswhenbothformsofjusticehavebeenexaminedinthesamestudyhavebeeninformative,andthefewresearcheffortsinvestigatingtheirjointimpacthaveprovidedadditionalinsights.Thus,withtheknowledgethatPOP(individualactionsthatareaworkplacestressor)leadtonegativeoutcomes,alogicalquestionishowdotheseformsofjustice,whichareorganizationalactions,interactwiththeestablishedpolitics––consequencesrelationships.
PoliticsintheFaceofJustice
Earlierwestatedthecreationordemiseofsocialexchangerelationshipsintheworkplacecanbeinitiatedinseveralways.TheycanbestrengthenedduetojusticeorweakenedduetoPOP.However,whensimultaneouslyexaminingthethreeworkplacevariables,thequestionarisesastowhetherPOP,distributive,orproceduraljusticeisthemostsalientinformingattitudes.Ifallthreeconditionsarefavorable(i.e.,lowPOP,highdistributiveandproceduraljustice)orunfavorable(highPOP,lowdistributiveandproceduraljustice),thepointismoot.Theissue,however,becomesintriguingwhentheconditionsopposeeachother.Forexample,howdoindividualsrespondwhenPOParehigh,butsoareproceduralanddistributivejustice?Dotheyhavestrongintentionsofquittingbecausetheyaresurroundedbypoliticalmanipulations,ordotheyoverlookthesebehaviorssincetheworkenvironmentisgenerallyfairintermsofpoliciesandthedistributionofrewards?
Webelieveitisthelatter.Specifically,itisourcontentionthatindividualswillrespondlessnegativelytopoliticswhenjusticeexists.Thetheoreticalperspectivesofstressbuffering(SuttonandKahnI.IXVIIIVI)andsocialexchangetheoryguideourpredictions.Fromastressbufferingperspective,thehighlevelsofturnoverintentionsandlowlevelsofjobsatisfactionresultingfromPOParebufferedwhenproceduralanddistributivejusticearepresent.Specifically,whilethosewhoengageinpoliticsmaybedislikedbyothers,thegeneralworkenvironmentisstillrelativelyfairintermsofpayandpolicies.
Further,basedonfindingsbyCohen-CharashandSpector(II00I.)thatdistributivejusticeisastrongerpredictorofjobsatisfactionthanproceduraljustice,weproposePOPwillhavetheweakestrelationshipwithjobsatisfactionwhendistributivejusticeisthehighest.Basedonthenormofreciprocity(GouldnerI.IXVI0),anditsassumptionthatindividualsactaccordingtotheirownrationalselfinterest,POPshouldberelativelyunimportantwhenthereisnothreattothefairnessofdistributedrewards(i.e.,highdistributivejustice).Theactionsthatoccurintheorganizationmaybeunfair,andruncountertoorganizationalpolicy,butiftheseactionsdonotdirectlyaffecttheindividual,thenhis/herlevelofjobsatisfactionandintenttoturnoverwillnotbeasstronglyimpacted.Anindividualisticmentalityof‘‘Igotmyraise/bonus,soit(i.e.,politics)doesn’tbotherme’’mayprevail.Thus,althoughweexpectthateitherformofjusticealonecanreducethenegativeeffectsofpolitics,webelievethatdistributivejusticewillexertthemostinfluenceandthattheexistenceofbothformsofjusticetogetherwillprovideamuchstrongerbuffer.Hence,wepredict:
HypothesisIII:TherelationshipofPOPtoturnoverintentionsvariesasafunctionofthelevelsofproceduralanddistributivejustice.Specifically,whenbothformsofjusticearehigher,thepositiverelationshipbetweenPOPandturnoverintentionsisweaker.
HypothesisIV:TherelationshipofPOPtojobsatisfactionvariesasafunctionofthelevelsofproceduralanddistributivejustice.Specifically,whenbothformsofjusticearehigher,thenegativerelationshipbetweenPOPandjobsatisfactionisweaker.
版权保护: 本文由 hbsrm.com编辑，转载请保留链接: www.hbsrm.com/lwqt/wxzs/35.html
