Fairness in the Classroom: Lessons Learned from Organizational Justice Research

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deanna Geddes
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Justice ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Justice Research

Challenges for an Organizational Justice Research Agenda

2017 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Carolina Moliner ◽  
Vicente Martínez-Tur ◽  
Russell Cropanzano
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Justice ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Justice Research

How do people judge fairness in supervisor and peer relationships? Another assessment of the dimensions of justice

2019 ◽  
Vol 73 (12) ◽  
pp. 1632-1663 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marion Fortin ◽  
Russell Cropanzano ◽  
Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet ◽  
Thierry Nadisic ◽  
Hunter Van Wagoner
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Organizational Justice ◽  
Peer Relationships ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Informational Justice ◽  
Justice Research ◽  
Four Dimensions ◽  
Follow Up Studies ◽  
Theoretical Considerations

The ultimate goal of organizational justice research is to help create fairer workplaces. This goal may have been slowed by an inattention to the criteria that workers themselves use to ascertain what they believe is fair. Referred to as ‘justice rules’, these were originally determined by theoretical considerations and organized in four dimensions (distributive, procedural, interpersonal and informational justice). There have been few attempts to investigate how far these classical norms represent fairness experiences and concerns in modern workplaces, especially in the context of working with peers. In a person-centric study, we investigate which rules people use when judging the fairness of interactions with supervisors and peers. This allows us to identify 14 new justice rules that are not taken into account by traditional measures. When subjected to factor analysis in follow-up studies, the enlarged set of rules suggests a more parsimonious structure for organizational justice, with only three dimensions apiece for supervisor and peer justice. We term these factors relationship, task, and distributive justice. Furthermore, we find that the resulting model of justice rules is a good predictor of attitudes in relation to supervisors and peers and can provide additional insights into how to understand and manage justice.

Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow

1990 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 399-432 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerald Greenberg
Keyword(s):  
Distributive Justice ◽  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Organizational Justice ◽  
Equity Theory ◽  
Historical Overview ◽  
Justice Research ◽  
New Directions ◽  
History Of ◽  
Justice Judgments ◽  
Future Work

The present article chronicles the history of the field of organizational justice, identifies current themes, and recommends new directions for the future. A historical overview of the field focuses on research and theory in the distributive justice tradition (e.g., equity theory) as well as the burgeoning topic of procedural justice. This forms the foundation for the discussion offive popular themes in contemporary organizational justice research: (a) attempts to distinguish procedural justice and distributive justice empirically, (b) the development of new conceptual advances, (c) consideration of the interpersonal determinants of procedural justice judgments, (d) new directions in tests of equity theory, and (e) applications of justice-based explanations to many different organizational phenomena. In closing, a plea is made for future work that improves procedural justice research methodologically (with respect to scope, setting, and scaling), and that attempts to integrate and unify disparate concepts in the distributive and procedural justice traditions.

Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.

2001 ◽  
Vol 86 (3) ◽  
pp. 425-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason A. Colquitt ◽  
Donald E. Conlon ◽  
Michael J. Wesson ◽  
Christopher O. L. H. Porter ◽  
K. Yee Ng
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Justice ◽  
Justice Research ◽  
Analytic Review
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document