When We Don’t See Eye to Eye: Discrepancies between Supervisors and Subordinates in Absence Disciplinary Decisions

Martocchio, Joseph J.; Judge, Timothy A.

doi:10.1177/014920639502100205

Cited by 31 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings furthermore indicate that distributive and procedural justice have unique effects on WMM attributions and therefore contribute to "perhaps the oldest debate in the justice literature concerning the independence of procedural and distributive justice" (Colquitt, 2001, p. 427). Whereas some researchers adopt a "monolithic" approach (e.g., Martocchia & Judge, 1995), combining the two into a single fairness construct, meta-analytic evidence FIGURE 4 Slopes of interaction between procedural fairness and cynicism on human resource (HR) attributions of external reporting compliance suggests that the two forms of fairness are empirically distinct (Colquitt, 2001). In our study, we found that distributive fairness moderated the organizational cynicism-cost attributions relationship, whereas procedural fairness moderated the organizational cynicismexternal attributions relationship.…”

Section: A Model Of Antecedents To Hr Attributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Information, beliefs, and motivation: The antecedents to human resource attributions

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Despite significant interest in the attributions employees make about their organization's human resource (HR) practices, there is little understanding of the antecedents of HR attributions. Drawing on attribution theory, we suggest that HR attributions are influenced by information (perceptions of distributive and procedural fairness), beliefs (organizational cynicism), and motivation (perceived relevance). We test a model through a two‐wave survey of 347 academic faculty in the United Kingdom, examining their attributions of the purpose of their institution's workload management framework. After two preliminary studies (an interview study and a cross‐sectional survey) to establish contextually relevant attributions, we find that fairness and cynicism are important for the formation of internal attributions of commitment but less so for cost‐saving or exploitation attributions. Fairness and cynicism also interact such that distributive fairness buffers the negative attributional effect of cynicism, and individuals are more likely to attribute fair procedures to external forces if they are cynical about their organization. This study furthers the application of attribution theory to the organizational domain while making significant contributions to our understanding of the HR‐performance process.

show abstract

Section: A Model Of Antecedents To Hr Attributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Information, beliefs, and motivation: The antecedents to human resource attributions

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As the theoretical basis of the organizational justice concept expanded, multiple-item measures emerged. One-factor (Martocchio & Judge, 1995;Moorman, 1991), two-factor (Sweeney & McFarlin, 1993), three-factor (Barling & Phillips, 1993), four-factor (Colquitt, 2001), and six-factor (Nabatchi, Bingham, & Good, 2007) organizational justice measures [Correction added on 05 December 2016, after first Online and Print publication: The first author's affiliation has been corrected to reflect the correct city of 'Shuwaikh' in this current version. ] have been designed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational Justice Dimensions: Validation of an Arabic Measure

Alkhadher

Gadelrab

2016

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a continued debate regarding the dimensions of organizational justice. The present project investigated the dimensionality of organizational justice and the validity of an Arabic measure of organizational justice for a Kuwaiti samples. The first study sample consisted of 1,184 Kuwaitis (619 males and 565 females) from two groups: 728 employees and 456 teachers working in the public sector. The second study sample consisted of 373 participants (190 employees and 183 teachers). The instrument items were based on a careful review of the organizational justice literature to ensure relevance to the sample culture. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) using WLSMV estimator is used. WLSMV method is more appropriate for our data because variables are measured on an ordinal scale. WLSMV is considered a less bias estimator compared with the standard maximum likelihood in case of ordinal data. CFA analyses identified the four distinctive factors of distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational organizational justice. The four‐factor model fit the data significantly better than one‐, two‐ or three‐factor models. Moreover, the study revealed that these four dimensions of organizational justice were significantly correlated with the four relevant outcomes of instrumentality, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behavior, and collective esteem. Using the Arabic version of Colquitt's () instrument (Fischer et al., ), the second study presented an evidence of concurrent validity of the new Arabic scale. The present study confirmed the four‐factor dimensionality of organizational justice. Results of the current study may raise the issue of development of scales versus translation of well‐ developed ones. Theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed.

show abstract

“…Parents share experiences such as disciplining children and overseeing their academic work (i.e. school work brought home) that differ from those of nonparents (Martocchio and Judge, 1995). Because understanding is reinforced when experiences are shared in important relationships, like the supervisor-subordinate relationship, similar parental experiences can foster shared reality (Hardin and Higgins, 1996).…”

Section: Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subordinate perceptions of family‐supportive supervision: the role of similar family‐related demographics and its effect on affective commitment

Basuil

Manegold

Casper

2016

Human Res Mgmt Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using survey data from 227 employees, we draw from shared reality theory to study subordinate perceptions of family‐supportive supervision, its antecedents and outcomes. We focus on similarity in salient subordinate and supervisor family‐related demographics as an antecedent to perceived family‐supportive supervision. As expected, female subordinates perceived more family‐supportive supervision from female supervisors than from male supervisors. Likewise, parent subordinates perceived parent supervisors, compared with nonparent supervisors, to be more family supportive. Subordinate perception of family‐supportive supervision also positively related to affective commitment – mediating the indirect positive relationship between similarity in family‐related demographics and affective commitment.

show abstract

When We Don’t See Eye to Eye: Discrepancies between Supervisors and Subordinates in Absence Disciplinary Decisions

Cited by 31 publications

References 51 publications

Information, beliefs, and motivation: The antecedents to human resource attributions

Information, beliefs, and motivation: The antecedents to human resource attributions

Organizational Justice Dimensions: Validation of an Arabic Measure

Subordinate perceptions of family‐supportive supervision: the role of similar family‐related demographics and its effect on affective commitment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About