Testing and extending the group engagement model: Linkages between social identity, procedural justice, economic outcomes, and extrarole behavior.

2009 ◽  
Vol 94 (2) ◽  
pp. 445-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven L. Blader ◽  
Tom R. Tyler
Keyword(s):  
Social Identity ◽  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Economic Outcomes ◽  
Group Engagement ◽  
Group Engagement Model

The Group Engagement Model: Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and Cooperative Behavior

2003 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 349-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom R. Tyler ◽  
Steven L. Blader
Keyword(s):  
Social Identity ◽  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Cooperative Behavior ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Relational Model ◽  
Mediation Hypothesis ◽  
Value Model ◽  
Group Engagement ◽  
Group Engagement Model

The group engagement model expands the insights of the group-value model of procedural justice and the relational model of authority into an explanation for why procedural justice shapes cooperation in groups, organizations, and societies. It hypothesizes that procedures are important because they shape people's social identity within groups, and social identity in turn influences attitudes, values, and behaviors. The model further hypothesizes that resource judgments exercise their influence indirectly by shaping social identity. This social identity mediation hypothesis explains why people focus on procedural justice, and in particular on procedural elements related to the quality of their interpersonal treatment, because those elements carry the most social identity-relevant information. In this article, we review several key insights of the group engagement model, relate these insights to important trends in psychological research on justice, and discuss implications of the model for the future of procedural justice research.

Does procedural justice climate increase the identification and engagement of migrant workers? A group engagement model perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mladen Adamovic ◽  
Peter Gahan ◽  
Jesse Olsen ◽  
Bill Harley ◽  
Joshua Healy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Work Environment ◽  
Work Engagement ◽  
Migrant Workers ◽  
Organizational Identification ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Procedural Justice Climate ◽  
Group Engagement ◽  
Group Engagement Model ◽  
Justice Climate

PurposeMigrant workers often suffer from social exclusion in the workplace and therefore identify less with their organization and engage less with their work. To address this issue, the authors integrate research on migrant workers with research on the group engagement model to create a model for understanding and enhancing migrant worker engagement. This allows us to provide insight into how organizations can design their human resource management systems and practices to increase the work engagement of migrant workers.Design/methodology/approachThe authors conducted a survey study with over 4,000 employees from more than 500 workplaces in Australia to test the model.FindingsThe results of the multilevel analysis indicate that a procedurally fair work environment increases organizational identification, which in turn is associated with higher work engagement. The results also indicate that procedural justice climate is more important for migrant workers and increases their organizational identification and engagement.Originality/valueTo increase work engagement of migrant workers, organizations can establish a procedurally fair work environment in which cultural minorities experience unbiased policies and procedures, are able to express their opinions and participate in decision-making.

Procedural justice and voice: a group engagement model

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (7) ◽  
pp. 491-503
Author(s):  
Changchun Xiang ◽  
Chenwei Li ◽  
Keke Wu ◽  
Lirong Long
Keyword(s):  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Interactional Justice ◽  
Employee Voice ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Moderated Mediation Model ◽  
High Level ◽  
Group Engagement ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Uncertainty Management Theory ◽  
Group Engagement Model

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact on employee voice from formal vs informal sources of procedural justice: group responsiveness and interactional justice, and to test how this impact may vary according to employees’ traditionality. Design/methodology/approach Dyadic data were collected from 261 employees and their supervisors. Results of the analyses offered support for the hypothesized moderated mediation model where group responsiveness and interactional justice would influence employee voice through enhanced organization-based self-esteem, and where such influence would be moderated by traditionality. Findings The findings showed that when there was a high level of group responsiveness, low traditionalists spoke up more, but when there was a high level of interactional justice, high traditionalists spoke up more. Originality/value By adopting the group engagement model, this study presented an alternative to the conventional perspective from uncertainty management theory about justice and voice, and tended to the neglect of fairness as an antecedent of voice by investigating how employees’ engagement in voice can be affected by their experience with different sources of procedural fairness information.

Interactional Justice and Employee Silence: The Roles of Procedural Justice and Affect

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 837-852 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liang Huang ◽  
Wenfeng Huang
Keyword(s):  
Negative Affect ◽  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Positive Affect ◽  
Interactional Justice ◽  
Moderating Effect ◽  
Influence Mechanism ◽  
Employee Silence ◽  
Group Engagement ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Group Engagement Model

In order to explore further the contingent influence mechanism of interactional justice on employee silence, we investigated how procedural justice moderates the interactional justice– silence relationship directly and indirectly through affect, drawing on the group engagement model and affect theories. We analyzed data collected from a survey completed by 272 Chinese subordinate–supervisor dyads and found that procedural justice strengthened the interactional justice–silence relationship both directly and indirectly through positive affect, and that positive affect had a stronger moderating effect on the interactional justice–silence relationship than did negative affect. However, negative affect did not mediate the moderating effect of procedural justice on the interactional justice–silence relationship. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Does Procedural Justice Increase the Inclusion of Migrants? A Group Engagement Model Perspective

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 (1) ◽  
pp. 15725 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mladen Adamovic ◽  
Peter Gahan ◽  
Jesse E. Olsen ◽  
Bill Harley ◽  
Joshua Healy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Group Engagement ◽  
Group Engagement Model

Ethnic Identity, Procedural Justice, and Offending: Does Procedural Justice Work the Same for Everyone?

2015 ◽  
Vol 63 (10) ◽  
pp. 1314-1336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle McLean
Keyword(s):  
Ethnic Identity ◽  
Longitudinal Study ◽  
Social Identity ◽  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Juvenile Delinquents ◽  
Potential Interaction ◽  
Social Identities ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Two Measures ◽  
The Relationship

Identity judgments are central to the theoretical arguments of procedural justice theory. Perceptions of procedural injustice have been argued to compromise an individual’s social identity and contribute to disengagement from group values and norms. Thus, it is important to clarify the relationship between perceptions of procedural justice and specific facets of social identities, such as ethnic identity. This study attempts to evaluate the relationship between these concepts by examining the potential interaction effect between procedural justice and ethnic identity on two measures of offending, self-report and number of arrests, in a longitudinal study of serious juvenile delinquents.

scholarly journals How is the State Perceived as Fair? A Literature Review of Social Identity-Based Procedural Justice in the National Context

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 138
Author(s):  
Andina Mega Larasati ◽  
Joevarian Hudiyana ◽  
Hamdi Muluk
Keyword(s):  
National Identity ◽  
Social Identity ◽  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Group Identification ◽  
The State ◽  
National Context ◽  
Legal Compliance ◽  
Domains Of Life ◽  
Identity Based

Justice is relevant in various domains of life, including the state. The social identity-based procedural justice theories (Group Value Model and Group Engagement Model) emphasize the importance of procedural justice from the authority in signaling the group’s inclusion and respect, thus increasing individuals’ cooperation and compliance. This article aims to critically review published literature using the two models in a national context, of which there were inconsistent findings regarding the role of group identification. Three issues are underlying this inconsistency. First, both models could be applied when national identity was salient, such as legal compliance (to taxation and traffic law). Second, perceived police legitimacy is a better mediator when the national identity was not salient (e. g. cooperation in counter-terrorism and crowd policing). Third, the effect of procedural justice depends on the motivation to secure identity (which is generally higher among minority/marginalized groups). As both models are strongly bound by context, the author suggests controlling police-national identity prototypicality on studies about police procedural justice, attitude toward outgroup and relational identification with the police on studies involving intergroup conflict, and uncertainty about membership status on studies toward minority groups. Hopefully, this article could contribute references and encourage related studies in Indonesia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document