Beyond adherence to justice rules: How and when manager gender contributes to diminished legitimacy in the aftermath of unfair situations

Abstract

Summary Unfair situations are a reality of organizational life. Although managers are typically advised to enact justice (i.e., adhere to justice rules) to mitigate negative employee reactions to unfair situations, the subjective nature of fairness suggests that employees may still react negatively to managers, regardless of managers' adherence to justice rules. Integrating fairness theory with social role theory, we propose that prescriptive gender stereotypes can differentially influence employees' reactions toward female (versus male) managers in the aftermath of unfair situations. Across two studies, female (versus male) managers were especially likely to experience diminished legitimacy in the aftermath of unfair situations, regardless of their adherence to justice rules. Moreover, these effects were especially likely to emerge for situations that reflected isolated versus ongoing issues. In turn, diminished legitimacy prompted negative employee behaviors that can detract from managerial effectiveness (e.g., withdrawal of manager‐directed citizenship behaviors, enhanced negative gossip about the manager, and increased resistance behaviors). Theoretical and practical contributions include recognizing the importance of broadening focus beyond adherence to justice rules to understand employees' reactions and managers' experiences, acknowledging the impact of gender in the context of fairness, and highlighting that upward‐directed gender bias may contribute to the (un)intentional undermining of female managers.

Uncharted waters of justice enactment—Venturing into the social complexity of doing justice in organizations

“…Notably, these points illustrate the fact that justice enactment is more than just one agent's consideration of what is fair or not and that to fully understand justice enactment dynamics in organizations, it is necessary to include considerations of what the recipient(s) think(s) is fair. To this point, Varty et al (2021) show that employees may still assess managers negatively, regardless of managers' adherence to justice rules, when gender‐related expectations distort their overall justice perceptions. Interestingly, the same bias applies similarly to those who enact justice.…”

“…Yet, it is the interpretation of behavior, through a “sense‐making” or attributional process, that predicts the downstream consequences of a justice episode (Gollwitzer & Okimoto, 2021). Interestingly, some papers in our Special Issue at least implicitly adopt this perspective by operationalizing managers' justice enactment as followers' subjective interpretation of justice enactment (e.g., Brockner et al, 2021; Varty et al, 2021). However, intentions are often veiled and inferred (Jones & Nisbett, 1987; Ross, 1977).…”

“…When we consider managerial fairness behavior, we often fail to consider the complexities of intentions behind the behavior or that managers may not be aware of the needs and expectations of their employees, just as employees may also not always be aware of the managerial decision‐making processes and trade‐offs involved in their work (Sherf et al, 2021). The cognitive complexity of these judgments suggests that, as cognitive misers (Taylor, 1981), we may often rely on heuristics (Lind, 2001) or stereotypes (Varty et al, 2021) rather than expend the effort and resources to understand our intentions, the intentions of others, social and temporal conditions, and relative standards or norms. Future research could shed light into the organizational cues needed for employees to notice something as justice‐relevant behavior and to engage in effortful cognitive processing.…”

“…Two of the papers focus on cognitive foundations of justice enactment and specifically on how construal level influences the delivery of bad news (Holt, Bobocel, & Chen, 2021) and punishment of misconduct (van Houwelingen, van Dijke, van Hiel, & de Cremer, 2021). Two other papers highlight justice enactment as a joint process between managers and employees; one highlighting the role of upward feedback (Sherf, Gajendran, & Posner, 2021) and one the role of managers' gender in how their overall fairness is judged by employees (Varty, Barclay, & Brady, 2021). Two further papers lead us to consider the issue of power in the context of justice enactment.…”

“…The fourth paper integrates fairness theory with gender stereotypes. Specifically, Varty et al (2021) demonstrate that, in the aftermath of an unfair situation, female managers are perceived to have a lower level of legitimacy in their role than male managers, even when they have adhered to justice rules. As a consequence, female managers are more likely to become the target of negative employee reactions (e.g., withdrawal of manager‐directed citizenship behaviors and gossip), which can undermine their effectiveness as a manager.…”