Organizational Justice and Dispute Resolution: A Six-Factor Model for Workplace Mediation

Employees, Supervisors, and Workplace Mediation

“…Given the tripartite nature of interactions among parties in mediation, Nabatchi et al (2007) developed and empirically tested a theoretically driven six-factor model of organizational justice in workplace mediation. The six factors are as follows:…”

“…Interactional justice emerged as “an extension of procedural justice, [and] pertains to the human side of organizational practices, that is, to the way the management (or those controlling rewards and resources) is behaving toward the recipient of justice” (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001, p. 281). “In general, interactional justice reflects concerns about the fairness of the non-procedurally dictated aspects of interaction” (Nabatchi, Bingham, & Good, 2007, p. 151), such as the communication and personal conduct of management. As the concept of interactional justice developed, researchers identified two subcategories of interactional justice: informational justice and interpersonal justice (Colquitt, 2001; Colquitt et al, 2001; Folger & Cropanzano, 1998; Tyler & Bies, 1990).…”

“…In general, and as these examples make clear, researchers use organizational justice to explain perceptions of fairness in a two-way relationship, where one decision maker (i.e., a supervisor or management) holds authority and control over some kind of subordinate (i.e., an employee or labor). That is, the majority of organizational justice research focuses on decision-making processes that involve “an employee and a supervisor, where the supervisor is identified as the relevant authority figure” (Nabatchi et al, 2007, p. 152). In such cases, the supervisor is taking on the legitimate role as an agent for the organization; in this capacity, she or he may not be neutral, objective, or detached from the situation in which she or he is issuing a decision.…”

“…5 Workplace mediation, however, is not a dyadic decision-making process, rather it is a tripartite process. Mediation, by its very definition involves at least three participants: two disputants (e.g., a supervisor and an employee) and a third-party neutral (i.e., the mediator; for more discussion, see Nabatchi et al, 2007). In this case, the supervisor ceases to act as a decision maker (as an agent for the organization) and starts to act directly as a disputant.…”

Organizational Justice as a Predictor of Self-Perveived Work Performance: A Perspective from the Malaysian Higher Educational Institution

“…According to Pourezat and Ghoulipour (2008), distributive justice indicates fair apportionment of benefits excavated from various activities in order for each organizational member to acquire fair portion based on the amount of inputs, cooperation and capabilities. the process (Nabatchi, Bingham and Good, 2007;Nesbit, Nabatchi and Bingham, 2012). Robbins (2001) stated procedural justice means perceived justice of a process that is used to determine distribution of rewards.…”