Gedrag & Organisatie - Volume 20, Issue 4, 2007

Justice research in the Netherlands

J. Syroit, H. Steensma & W. van Breukelen, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 321-326

This edition is dedicated to justice research in the Netherlands. The concepts justice, fairness and equity are introduced and the history of justice research and justice theory are described. After that, the nine contributions to this special issue are summarized. On the basis of a review of this and other recent literature we identify several trends in justice research. We conclude this introduction with an agenda for future research projects.

Justice Under Alarming Conditions

K. van den Bos, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 327-341

In this paper, I propose an alarm-system model of the justice judgment process. Specifically, I argue that the process by which justice judgments are formed may be influenced reliably by the activation of psychological systems that people use to detect and handle alarming situations. Building on this analysis, I predict that if this line of reasoning is true then presenting (vs. not presenting) alarm-related stimuli to people should lead to more extreme judgments about subsequent justice-related events than not presenting these alarming stimuli. Findings from different studies are reviewed that support this prediction. In particular, the findings indicate that after the presentation of alarming stimuli, people are strongly influenced by fair (as opposed to unfair) events, suggesting that under alarming conditions people are in need for fair treatment. In closing, I discuss the implications the model may have for both scientists and practitioners interested in the justice judgment process.

The affect-justice linkage

B.M. van Knippenberg & D. De Cremer, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 342-355

Organizational processes are largely determined by both affective processes and justice processes. However, the interplay between justice on the one hand and emotions and moods on the other hand has received little attention in the past. Fortunately, empirical studies on the relationship between justice and affect are rapidly emerging. The present paper focuses on the relation between justice and affect on three different levels: The individual level, the interpersonal level and the group level. In due course we will discuss: (1) how a person's justice perceptions may affect his or her moods or emotions and vice versa, (2) what we know about the relationship between justice and affect in dyadic relationships, (3) how emotions may affect collectively shared perceptions of justice, and (4) how justice may affect collectively shared emotions and moods in work groups and teams.

Egocentrism in the psychology of procedural justice

J.-W. van Prooijen, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 356-368

Whereas it is often assumed that reactions to decision-making procedures are based on norms, values, and moral principles, in the current contribution I suggest that reactions to decision-making procedures often are to a substantial extent shaped by egocentric concerns. Such egocentrism can be observed in various explanatory theoretical models of procedural justice effects. These models converge on the assumption that people's procedural justice judgments are based on the implications of decision-making procedures for themselves. Recent empirical studies provide evidence for two basic propositions regarding egocentrism in the psychology of procedural justice: (1) People respond more negatively to procedural injustice that happens to themselves than to procedural injustice that happens to others, and (2) an egocentric self-focus amplifies people's fairness-based responses to decision-making procedures. It is concluded that egocentric motives play a central role in the psychology of procedural justice.

Individual differences in money-grabbing: The role of entitlement, social value orientation, and misuse of power

M. Jongenelen & R. Vonk, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 369-381

This research investigates the role of individual differences in money-grabbing. Feelings of entitlement, high scores on the Misuse of Power scale and a pro-self focus were expected to lead to grabbing behaviour in high-power individuals. While playing a manager in a role-playing game, participants had the opportunity to grab more valuable points then their equal share. Results showed that pro-self participants grabbed more than pro-socials. Among the pro-self participants, feelings of entitlement led to higher Misuse of Power scores which, in turn, led to more grabbing. Entitlement en Misuse of Power had no effect on grabbing in pro-socials. It is concluded that power does not corrupt absolutely: Individual differences predict how a powerful person will behave. Implications for business settings are dealt with in the discussion.

What's left of justice issues in today's busy society?

S.L. Peters & K. van den Bos, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 382-391

In today's busy society, people have less and less time. In the current paper we argue that busy people are more influenced by egocentric issues than by issues that are justice related. Several social psychological experiments support this suggestion. Furthermore, we discuss in this paper the mechanism that may explain people's reactions to being overpaid. We suggest a two-phase model of reactions to the conflict between justice and egoism. Specifically, we propose that when people are better paid than comparable other persons, judging the advantage of receiving an advantageous outcome is quick and easy as preferences are primary. We further propose that adjusting this appraisal requires cognitive resources as it entails integrating fairness concerns with the initial preference appraisal.

The influence of interactional injustice and emotional stability on deviant behavior in organizations

M. Vos & E. Giebels, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 392-408

Workplace deviance has become an increasing concern for employees and employers all over the world. A field experiment was conducted to investigate the relationship between interactional injustice and workplace deviance and the moderating influence of emotional stability. 117 employees from a company in the service industries read a situation sketch in which half of the subjects were confronted with a interactional just situation and the other half with a interactional unjust situation. The results indicated that interactional injustice as well as emotional instability induced deviance directed to the management but not more general forms of workplace deviance. The relationships between interactional injustice and emotional stability on the one hand and deviant behavior on the other hand appeared to be partially mediated by negative affect. No support was found for an interaction between interactional injustice and emotional stability on workplace deviance.

The effects of justice on work outcomes: a longitudinal perspective

J.F. Ybema, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 409-426

A longitudinal three-wave study among 1597 employees examines how procedural and distributive justice are related to job satisfaction and burnout (emotional exhaustion). It was predicted that perceived justice and work outcomes mutually influence each other over time. In line with these predictions, distributive injustice enhanced burnout a year later, whereas burnout in turn enhanced future procedural injustice. Furthermore, procedural justice and job satisfaction mutually augmented each other: higher procedural justice enhanced job satisfaction a year later, and higher job satisfaction also enhanced future procedural justice. This research confirms the importance of justice in organizations as a means to enhance wellbeing of people at work.

Differential treatment by coaches of amateur sports teams: right or wrong?

J.W.M. van Breukelen & W. Wesselius, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 427-444

A central assumption in the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory is that leaders do not adopt a single style towards all members of their work unit, but treat the various team members differently. This may result in different kinds of working relationships between the leader and the various members ranging from formal to intense. The effects of these different LMX relationships are visible in important outcome variables such as job satisfaction and performance.

Not only in working organizations but also in the context of sports differential treatment by the coach seems a relevant topic. In this article we describe the results of a field study among the players (N = 218) of 21 amateur sports teams. Firstly, we investigated on which aspects the coaches of these teams differentiated between the various team members and how these incidents of differential treatment were experienced by the players in terms of justice and fairness. In addition, we analyzed whether the frequency and evaluation of differential treatment was related to the players' enthusiasm and to team atmosphere and team performance. Social differentiation was appreciated less than task differentiation. Especially task differentiation proved to be important for team performance.

Noise Annoyance: Decibels or Unfair Procedures? The contribution of social (in)justice theory to the explanation of noise annoyance

E. Maris, P.J.M. Stallen, H. Steensma & R. Vermunt, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 445-460

Noise annoyance is determined by acoustical (e.g., loudness, pitch) and nonacoustical variables (e.g., sensitivity, attitudes towards the source). What is the role of social nonacoustical variables (e.g., the sound management)? Three laboratory experiments (N1 = 90, N2 = 117, N3 = 76 subjects) investigating the effects of fair (i.e., 'voice'), neutral, and 'unfair' (i.e., inconsistent procedure) sound management procedures on annoyance with fifteen minutes of 50 or 70 dB A(Leq.) aircraft sound, are evaluated. Results from each experiment show that systematic differences in procedural fairness yield systematic differences in annoyance. The combined results suggest that: 1) a psychological model of noise annoyance needs to consider the social aspects of noise exposure, 2) the operation of social nonacoustical determinants depends on the perceived harmfulness of the exposure situation, arising either from the situation's acoustics or from its social implications, and 3) aviation noise policies should pay due attention to the fairness of their procedures.

De kwalificaties die mensen nodig hebben om hoogwaardig werk af te leveren, zijn constant aan verandering onderhevig. Deze veranderingen voltrekken zich met een steeds toenemende snelheid. Schnabel (2000) gebruikt in zijn sociale en culturele verkenning voor de lange termijn vijf I's om de 21ste eeuw te karakteriseren: (1) Internationalisering, (2) Individualisering, (3) Informalisering, (4) Informatisering, en (5) Intensivering. Een kenmerk van deze veranderingen is dat ze niet alleen de behoefte aan nieuwe expertise impliceren, maar tegelijkertijd nieuwe mogelijkheden om te leren creëren. De kwalificaties die nodig zijn voor een baan worden steeds complexer (denk bijvoorbeeld aan ICT-specialisten of mensen in de zorgsector), terwijl tegelijkertijd de zogenaamde 'halfwaardetijd' van deze kwalificaties korter wordt. Dit houdt in dat kwalificaties binnen relatief korte tijd alweer 'verouderd' zijn en hun toepasbaarheid en bruikbaarheid geheel of gedeeltelijk verliezen.