You Really Affect Me: The Role of Social Influence in the Relationship between Procedural Justice and Turnover Intention

Abstract

This research aims to test the impact of procedural justice on employees’ turnover intention via their intention to stay or give up their positions by putting social influence in the spotlight as a mediating variable. Although the topic dealing with the relationship linking organizational justice to turnover intention has taken some wrinkles, there has been no published research, to the best of researchers’ knowledge, that integrates social influence as a mediating variable between the aforementioned relationships. A questionnaire survey was administered to 558 employees working in a renowned banking institution located in the capital city of Tunis, Tunisia. Structural equation modeling (SEM) results using AMOS software, IBM, version 23, showed that social influence partially mediated the relationship between procedural justice and turnover intention. More specifically, procedural justice has a significant negative effect on turnover intention (β = −0.30, p < 0.01) and a significant positive effect on social influence (β = +0.54, p < 0.01), which will have a significant positive effect on turnover intention (β = +0.91, p < 0.01). The results confirm that procedural justice is necessary for any organization; however, it is not enough to eliminate the turnover intention, especially with the presence of social influence. Social influence alters the judgments of those caught in its nets. This intangible aspect and power is even more enigmatic and harmful, which can lead to a change in cognitive references and behaviors. Social influence heavily affects the spontaneity of individuals and they became subject to dominant forces, which has to be properly controlled by management.

COVID-19: The effects of perceived organizational justice, job engagement, and perceived job alternatives on turnover intention among frontline nurses

“…The results from the analysis indicated that three aspects of justice (distributive, procedural, and interpersonal) significantly and positively influenced turnover intention. These findings do not agree with our hypotheses and are inconsistent with most past research studies, where distributive justice ( Akgunduz and Cin, 2015 ; Yang et al, 2021 ; Chen et al, 2022 ), procedural justice ( Kumar, 2015 ; Gharbi et al, 2022 ), and interpersonal justice ( Leineweber et al, 2020 ) were mainly observed to affect turnover intention negatively.…”

Influences of Distributive Injustice and Job Insecurity Amid COVID-19 on Unethical Pro-Organisational Behaviour: Mediating Role of Employee Turnover Intention

“…Despite this unethical behaviour, however, could benefit the organisation in the short term, it will have a negative influence on the organisation in the long term [ 7 , 9 ]. Additionally, the occurrence of this behaviour will defiantly affect the behaviour of other employees [ 34 ], which could spread this UPoB among all employees.…”

“…Turnover intention refers to the probability of an employee quitting his/her current job. Several predictors were identified for the turnover intention in hotels, including job insecurity [ 4 ] organizational justice in general [ 33 ], procedural justice [ 34 ] and distributive justice [ 4 ] in particular, sexual harassment and trust in superior [ 35 ], leadership style and organizational commitment [ 36 ], job satisfaction [ 37 ]. On the other side, turnover intention can r influence job performance [ 38 ] and the spread of deviant behaviour as well as social loafing behaviour [ 4 ].…”

The Influences of Procedural Justice on Turnover Intention and Social Loafing Behavior among Hotel Employees

“…If employees perceive unequal procedures, they could respond with a negative attitude, such as exhibiting turnover intention and social loafing behavior. In that sense, previous studies (e.g., Aliedan et al 2022;Alyahya et al 2021;Sobaih et al 2019) argued that an intention to leave is usually associated with negative outcomes, such as low job-performance levels, unethical behavior and social loafing, while pervious research results (e.g., Griffeth et al 2000;Chong et al 2021;Gharbi et al 2022) confirmed that procedural justice is a key driver for employee turnover. Additionally, it was argued that procedural justice is more important than distributive justice in determining employees' evaluations of the parties or the institution that enacted the decision (Brockner and Siegel 1996).…”