Variations in Employee Performance in Response to Organizational Justice: The Sensitizing Effect of Socioeconomic Conditions

Diehl, Marjo-Riitta; Richter, Ansgar; Sarnecki, Abiola

doi:10.1177/0149206316671581

Cited by 25 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 119 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, we develop a framework to understand why and when a firm remains quiet about its philanthropic practices. Building on the literature on stakeholder management (Freeman 1984, Donaldson and Preston 1995, Jones 1995, Mitchell et al 1997, justice (Greenberg 2010, Colquitt and Zipay 2015, Diehl et al 2018, and legitimacy (Suchman 1995, Scherer et al 2013, we argue that when a firm mistreats its primary stakeholders (e.g., employees and/or investors), those stakeholders are likely to react negatively to corporate donations because of perceptions of injustice or illegitimacy, resulting in quiet giving. However, mistreated primary stakeholders with a long-term orientation favor CP, thereby alleviating concerns about backlash from publicizing CP.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Good Deeds Done in Silence: Stakeholder Management and Quiet Giving by Chinese Firms

Zhang

2021

Organization Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose a new mechanism explaining why companies may remain silent about their positive corporate behaviors, such as socially responsible activities. We examine such strategic silence in the context of corporate philanthropy. Building on and extending the literature on legitimacy and stakeholder management, we argue that when a firm mistreats primary stakeholders, it is more likely to keep quiet about its philanthropic acts to avoid backlash from stakeholders. We also propose that long-term orientation among stakeholders mitigates the positive relationship between mistreating primary stakeholders and quiet giving, which allows stakeholders to appreciate the long-term value of corporate philanthropy. Data from listed Chinese firms show that firms are more likely to give quietly when they underpay their employees and/or investors. Moreover, research and development expenditures and institutional shareholding, as indicators of stakeholder long-term orientation, attenuate this relationship.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Good Deeds Done in Silence: Stakeholder Management and Quiet Giving by Chinese Firms

Zhang

2021

Organization Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, we add to the sparse yet growing literature suggesting the need for organizational justice scholars to consider variables outside, rather than just inside, the organization that influence employees’ perceptions of fairness in their organization (cf. Diehl et al, 2018). This includes the need to consider nonmanagement sources of information that employees use to assess their organization’s fairness.…”

Section: Organization-wide Hardship: Its Contribution To the Literatumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By examining the industry-standing implications of managers’ external (vs. internal) accounts for imposing hardship, we provide a bridge between micro and macro variables that has been largely missing in theorizing and research on organizational justice dynamics (cf. Diehl et al, 2018). In highlighting this micro–macro bridge, we suggest that the long-presumed positive relationship between employees’ perception of fairness and their commitment to the organization may depend on their organization’s position in the market.…”

Section: Organization-wide Hardship: Its Contribution To the Literatumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous studies have found that employees who perceive more (rather than less) fairness in their workplace generally express attitudes and behaviors that are “more favorable to their employer” (cf. Diehl, Richter, & Sarnecki, 2018, p. 2376). Among these more favorable work attitudes is employees’ commitment to their organization, or “affective commitment” (Brockner & Higgins, 2001), which is associated with low employee turnover (Chen, Choi, & Chi, 2002; Dittrich & Carrell, 1979; Van Yperen, Hagedoorn, & Geurts, 1996).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

When Everyone Works Harder for Fewer Rewards, Is It Fair? Implications of “Organization-Wide Hardship” for Managing and Studying Organizational Fairness

Levi

Shapiro

Fried

et al. 2019

Group & Organization Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As organizations compete in an increasingly global and challenging environment, “working” often requires working harder for fewer rewards. In this article, we introduce the concept of “organization-wide hardship,” which refers to workforce-shared hardship that results from an organization’s pursuit of a strategy associated with its industry-positioning goals. We propose a model for predicting and explaining employees’ reactions to organization-wide hardship. Our analysis and model make several contributions to the justice literature. First, we highlight the importance of organization-wide hardship (associated with pay freezes or pay cuts, increased working hours, or reduced work–family balance) as a potential contributor to the experience of low fairness for all employees in the organization. Second, we argue that research on the effects of management accounts (explanations) for their decisions should be extended by considering the effects of accounts from nonmanagement sources. Third, we highlight the potentially paradoxical effects of providing external (rather than internal) accounts to employees as these likely heighten the hardship’s perceived fairness yet also heighten employees’ concern for their organization’s future and hence their intended or actual turnover. Fourth, our article’s theorizing adds a temporal (future-oriented) perspective to the largely past-oriented perspective of organizational justice–related theorizing and research. We discuss the implications of our model for organizations and leaders and scholars who aim to study employees’ reactions to organization-wide hardship.

show abstract

“…As such, it appears that a great deal of conceptual and empirical work remains to develop a better understanding of the complex interplay between multiple levels of external and organizational antecedents of workplace deviance at lower levels. In light of a recent meta-analysis investigating the moderating effects of socioeconomic conditions at the country level regarding the individual-level relationships between (in)justice and deviance (Diehl, Richter, & Sarnecki, 2018) that provided unclear findings, this point appears even more important.…”

Section: External and Organizational Factors And Their Interplay Withmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextual Undertow of Workplace Deviance by and Within Units: A Systematic Review

Götz

Bollmann

O’Boyle

2018

Small Group Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within the constellation of employee misconduct, workplace deviance possesses the somewhat distinctive feature of violating organizational norms. Yet, the burgeoning research examining the social context surrounding workplace deviance typically fails to properly account for it. Interdisciplinary research has demonstrated that within organizations (a) multiple reference groups provide descriptive and injunctive norms about (in)appropriate behavior; (b) even when embedded within the organizational hierarchy, norms are not necessarily consistent across these groups; and (c) the immediate reference group often exerts a crucial influence. Against this background, we discuss prevalent conceptualizations of workplace deviance and systematically review the literature from 1995 to 2017. We present our findings according to external and organizational, leadership, and intraunit antecedents of workplace deviance by and within units, distinguishing, in particular, unit composition, processes and emergent states, climates, and norms. We conclude with a discussion of theoretical and methodological avenues for future research.

show abstract

Variations in Employee Performance in Response to Organizational Justice: The Sensitizing Effect of Socioeconomic Conditions

Cited by 25 publications

References 119 publications

Good Deeds Done in Silence: Stakeholder Management and Quiet Giving by Chinese Firms

Good Deeds Done in Silence: Stakeholder Management and Quiet Giving by Chinese Firms

When Everyone Works Harder for Fewer Rewards, Is It Fair? Implications of “Organization-Wide Hardship” for Managing and Studying Organizational Fairness

Contextual Undertow of Workplace Deviance by and Within Units: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About