The impact of procedural and distributive justice on satisfaction and manufacturing performance: a replication of Lindquist (1995) with a focus on the importance of common metrics in experimental design

Abstract

This paper replicates Lindquist’s (Lindquist, Journal of Management Accounting Research 7:122–147, 1995) seminal research introducing the concepts of justice to the accounting literature. We use organizational justice theory, as did he, to replicate his study and, in doing so, question some findings of partial replications and extensions done over the past 25 years. We do this because work built off his study has challenged some of his findings. These challenges, we believe, have resulted from most researchers using different research metrics than did Lindquist. Many of these extensions have also used a mental-based task, instead of a manual-based one, in their experiments. We believe this constrains the ability to draw inferences and conclusions from this subsequent research. We further believe this constraint extends to much of the experimental research in the social sciences.In our research we replicate exactly Lindquist’s (Lindquist, Journal of Management Accounting Research 7:122–147, 1995) operationalizations of voice and vote and measure dependent outcomes for four of the same conditions he investigated. In contrast to most of other follow-up studies, we find, as did Lindquist, that having a voice only leads to significantly enhanced satisfaction with high-stretch targets, as compared to having a vote only or no input. We also corroborate Lindquist’s (Lindquist, Journal of Management Accounting Research 7:122–147, 1995) result that having a voice only leads to significantly greater satisfaction with the experimental task, as compared to participants with a vote only or no input. Additionally, unlike Lindquist (Lindquist, Journal of Management Accounting Research 7:122–147, 1995), we find participants allowed only a voice significantly outperform participants with a vote only and no input. We thus support Lindquist’s findings of a fair process effect for voice and perceptions of pseudo-participation related to vote.

The Influence of Budget Participation and Budgeting Procedural Justice on Kendari City Government Management Performance with Job-Relevant Information as an Intervening Variable

“…Conversely, the lower the frequency of Budgeting Procedural Justice carried out by employees, the lower the Managerial Performance. (Lindquist, 1995) Using the theory of procedural justice can explain the uncertainty in the relationship between satisfaction and performance budgetary participation. This means the existence of procedural justice provides information regarding the clarity of the work so that it is expected to minimize mistakes and misunderstandings in work.…”

“…H6: Job-relevant Information (JRI) can mediate the influence of Budget Participation on Kendari City Management Performance (Lindquist, 1995) suggest that there must be procedural fairness in a company considering that companies have limited resources and not all budget requirements can be met, so fairness is very important in the budget allocation process. If subordinates think that the budget process is unfair, then this injustice will build a system to implement budgetary participation and play a more positive role in company performance (Sihotang, 2022).…”