When Organizational Justice Enactment Is a Zero-Sum Game: A Trade-Offs and Self-Concept Maintenance Perspective

Camps, Jeroen; Graso, Maja; Brebels, Lieven

doi:10.5465/amp.2018.0003

Cited by 8 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 109 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, the equality principle of fairness within social comparison theory may directly explain the negative relationship of LMX differentiation on team creativity (Camps et al, 2019;Graso et al, 2020). The development of team creativity requires cooperation and information sharing among the team members.…”

Section: Leader-member Exchange Differentiation and Team Creativitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…High level of LMX differentiation makes team members comparison more salient, that is, team members are easy to perceive the differential treatment from leaders particularly under team context (Liden et al, 2006). Since the development of team creativity requires cooperation and information sharing among the team members, the presence of high LMX differentiation would lead to the perception of inequality, which is thought to destroy the harmony and cooperation within work teams (Liao et al, 2017), thus affecting team creativity (Camps et al, 2019;Graso et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

When Teamwork Works: Examining the Relationship Between Leader-Member Exchange Differentiation and Team Creativity

Lin

Cai

et al. 2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on team creativity literature and social comparison theory, we investigate how leader-member exchange (LMX) differentiation influences team creativity. Using a survey based on 91 R&D teams from Chinese companies, we observe that LMX differentiation is negatively related to team creativity (β = −0.35, p < 0.01). More importantly, we demonstrate that team behavioral integration mediates the relationship between LMX differentiation and team creativity (indirect effect size = −0.72, with 95% CI of −1.91, −0.13), and team emotional intelligence (TEI) moderates the relationship between LMX differentiation and team behavioral integration (β = 0.23, p < 0.05), such that LMX differentiation has a weaker negative influence on team behavioral integration when TEI is higher. These results provide relevant suggestions for organizational team building, management, and development.

show abstract

Section: Leader-member Exchange Differentiation and Team Creativitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When Teamwork Works: Examining the Relationship Between Leader-Member Exchange Differentiation and Team Creativity

Lin

Cai

et al. 2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our results revealed a negative effect of self-interest on fairness judgments through justice across our field studies. Although we did not specifically hypothesize a negative effect, a self-interest motive likely reduces the attention and resource investments needed to effectively and consistently engage in justice and may even highlight the utility of violating justice rules under certain circumstances (cf., Camps et al, 2019; Qin et al, 2018; Scott et al, 2009). We also observed a negative effect of a self-interest motive on fairness judgments via an attributed self-interest motive (Studies 1c & 3).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

It’s not only what you do, but why you do it: How managerial motives influence employees’ fairness judgments.

Zapata¹,

Sherf²,

Liu³

2022

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although past research demonstrates that perceived fairness leads to many benefits, it also tends to assume that fairness flows almost exclusively from justice adherence. We instead reason that when employees form fairness judgments, they consider not only the extent to which supervisors adhere to justice but also why supervisors do so. In particular, our work outlines three distinct theoretical pathways to fairness. Supervisory justice motives affect fairness judgments via supervisors' justice rule adherence (behavioral) and via employees' attributed motives (attributional), such that prosocial (self-interest) motives are positively (negatively) related to fairness judgments after controlling for justice. We also reason that people jointly consider supervisory motives and justice when forming fairness judgments (interactive), such that the relationship between prosocial (self-interest) motives and fairness judgments is more positive (negative) when justice is lower versus higher. We test our predictions across six studies, both survey and experimental. Our results support the three pathways for prosocial justice motives and the behavioral and attributional (but not interactive) pathways for self-interest justice motives. Our work suggests organizations trying to promote fairness should avoid inadvertently instilling a self-interest justice motive in their supervisors.

show abstract

“…Moreover, the uncertainty inherent in organizational change is bound to heighten stakeholders' attention to organizational justice (Lind and Van den Bos 2002). Only recently have researchers noted that maintaining fairness toward employees and other stakeholders while implementing change represents an important practical challenge that deserves further investigation (Camps et al, 2019;Sherf et al, 2019). To more fully understand (and prevent) unfair behavior in change contexts, a more nuanced perspective is necessary.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An important yet historically overlooked fact is that justice enactment 1 implies adherence to multiple justice norms (Camps et al, 2019;Graso et al, 2019), whereby different stakeholders, especially in the context of organizational change, may have divergent expectations as to which norms should be central and how these norms are to be enacted. In the context of planned change involving many stakeholders, it is difficult-even impossible-to fulfill all of these (normative) expectations simultaneously, even when managers are highly motivated to act justly.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Three Paths to Feeling Just: How Managers Grapple with Justice Conundrums During Organizational Change

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Managers tasked with organizational change often face irreconcilable demands on how to enact justice—situations we call justice conundrums. Drawing on interviews held with managers before and after a planned large-scale change, we identify specific conundrums and illustrate how managers grapple with these through three prototypical paths. Among our participants, the paths increasingly diverged over time, culminating in distinct career decisions. Based on our findings, we develop an integrative process model that illustrates how managers grapple with justice conundrums. Our contributions are threefold. First, we elucidate three types of justice conundrums that managers may encounter when enacting justice in the context of planned organizational change (the justice intention-action gap, competing justice expectations, and the justice of care vs. managerial-strategic justice) and show how managers handle them differently. Second, drawing on the motivated cognition and moral disengagement literature, we illustrate how cognitive mechanisms coalesce to allow managers to soothe their moral (self-) concerns when grappling with these conundrums. Third, we show how motivated justice intentions ensuing from specific justice motives, moral emotions, and circles of moral regard predict the types of justice conundrums managers face and the paths they take to grapple with them.

show abstract

When Organizational Justice Enactment Is a Zero-Sum Game: A Trade-Offs and Self-Concept Maintenance Perspective

Cited by 8 publications

References 109 publications

When Teamwork Works: Examining the Relationship Between Leader-Member Exchange Differentiation and Team Creativity

When Teamwork Works: Examining the Relationship Between Leader-Member Exchange Differentiation and Team Creativity

It’s not only what you do, but why you do it: How managerial motives influence employees’ fairness judgments.

Three Paths to Feeling Just: How Managers Grapple with Justice Conundrums During Organizational Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About