When Wanting To Be Fair Is Not Enough: The Effects of Depletion and Self-Appraisal Gaps on Fair Behavior

Abstract

Ensuring that managers engage in fair behaviors is critical for the effective functioning of organizations. Previous research has focused on increasing the enactment of interactional justice (i.e., justice as a dependent variable) by enhancing managers’ willingness to be fair. Drawing upon the limited strength model of self-regulation, we argue that the enactment of interactional justice may not depend solely on managers’ willingness or motivation but also on the extent to which managers have the self-regulatory resources required to engage in these behaviors. Using four experimental studies, our results indicate that the depletion of self-regulatory resources is negatively associated with the enactment of interactional justice. Furthermore, we argue that depletion can give rise to self-appraisal gaps (i.e., individuals’ ability to accurately appraise the fairness of their behavior is hampered), which can diminish the impetus to regulate fair behaviors (i.e., diminish interactional justice). Results provide support for self-appraisal gaps as an underlying explanation for why depletion can negatively affect the enactment of interactional justice. Moreover, the negative effects of depletion can be overcome by increasing managers’ awareness that they may be overestimating the fairness of their behavior. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Restructured frame‐of‐reference training improves rating accuracy

“…Restructured FOR training may also outperform typical FOR training regarding outcomes in nontraining contexts. For instance, the restructured information presentation facilitates an adoption of a common evaluation standard without an effortful process of feedback and correction, which may conserve organizational leaders' energy to regulate their behavior and subsequently increase an enactment of interactional justice between these leaders and their followers (Whiteside & Barclay, ). Compared with typical FOR training, restructured FOR training may also significantly increase perceptions of procedural justice regarding performance appraisal through the increased accessibility of the information about the appraisal criteria (Erdogan, Kraimer, & Liden, ).…”

What helps managers being fair? Predicting managers’ self-reported justice enactment during pay setting using the ability-motivation-opportunity framework

“…We have claimed that justice enactment is in essence about self-reported justice enactment, which is not to say that these are necessarily true perceptions, but neither are subordinates' justice perceptions. In an experimental study with students, Whiteside and Barclay (2018) investigated differences between self-reported and other-coded justice enactment during a layoff and noted self-appraisal gaps when students had depleted resources. In another study, it was found that the justice climate perceived by subordinates is impacted by supervisors' own perceptions of justice from their superiors, suggesting that justice enactment from supervisors towards their employees is impacted by supervisors' own treatment (Ambrose et al, 2013).…”

“…The existing studies on antecedents of self-reported justice enactment can be differentiated into two areas: those pertaining to trait-like aspects of the supervisor and those referring to how the supervisor views the subordinate. Regarding the first area, managers have been found to report higher self-reported justice enactment when they express higher moral identity (Brebels et al, 2011), view themselves as ethical leaders (Long, 2016), and have a good capacity for perspective-taking (Whiteside & Barclay, 2018). As concerns the second area, research has found managers to report higher adherence to justice rules when they rate their subordinates as having a higher need for belonging (Cornelis et al, 2013), like and trust their subordinates, and have high-quality relationships with them (Huang et al, 2017;Koopman et al, 2015;Zhao et al, 2015).…”

“…The aspects of ability, motivation, and opportunity are not unknown to the justice enactment literature. Whiteside and Barclay (2018) noted that motivation to be fair alone is not enough to act fairly; ability (in terms of having sufficient ego-resources) is also necessary. Similarly, Ambrose and Schminke (2009) argued that in order to be fair, an individual needs to recognize justice aspects and be efficacious.…”

“…As the interest in justice enactment is relatively new, limited research has been devoted to the prerequisites for managers' enacted justice (Graso et al, 2020). Recent research suggests that managers' personal characteristics are not sufficient for enactment of justice, but, rather, that managers also need to have the opportunity to act fairly, such as having access to adequate resources and organizational prerequisites (Sherf et al, 2019;Whiteside & Barclay, 2018). Based on the Ability-Motivation-Opportunity (AMO) framework (Appelbaum et al, 2000;Boxall & Purcell, 2011), we argue that managers' self-reported justice enactment is impacted by managers' ability, motivation, and opportunities during pay setting above and beyond the impact of demographic and personality variables.…”