Indian Journal of Industrial Relations: Economics & Social Dev.

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Overall Justice Perceptions & Voice Behavior- A Social Exchange Perspective


Affiliations
1 Research Scholar, India
2 Professor of Psychology in the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences IIT Bombay, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Employees’ ideas and suggestions are a crucial resource for organizations. Employees are often unable to offer their suggestions for various reasons. This study examines the relationship of overall justice perceptions (OJP) on promotive as well as prohibitive voice behavior t hrough t he soc i al ex change lens. This enables us to examine voice behavior as a reciprocal action to OJP. A survey was conducted with 106 employees from various organizations. The findings of the survey show OJP is positively related to prohibitive voice behavior, but not to promotive voice behavior. This indicates t hat when employees perceive organizations to be fair, they tend to express concerns regarding the organization’s development but are less likely to give constructive suggestions to make processes easier.



Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Ambrose, M.L., Wo, D.X.H & Griffith, M.D. (2015), “Overall Justice: Past, Present and Future”, in Cropanzano, R. and Amrose, M.L (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Justice in the Workplace, Oxford University Press, New York.

  • Ambrose, M.L. &Schminke, M. (2009), “The Role of Overall Justice Judgments in Organizational Justice Research: A Test of Mediation”,Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 491-500. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ a0013203

  • Bies, R. & Shapiro, D. (1988), “Voice and Justification: Their Influence on Procedural Fairness Judgments”,The Academy of Management Journal, 31(3): 676-85.

  • Blau, P. M. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, New York, Wiley.

  • Chamberlin, M., Newton, D. &LePine, J. (2017), “A Meta-analysis of Voice and its Promotive and Prohibitive Forms: Identification of Key Associations, Distinctions, and Future Research Directions”,Personnel Psychology, 70: 11-71.

  • Chou, S.Y. & Barron, K. (2016), “Employee voice Behavior Revisited: Its Forms and Antecedents”, Management Research Review, 39 (12) :1720-37,https://doi.org/10.1108/ MRR-09-2015-0199

  • Cheung, Ho Kwan & Li, S. (2014), How We Should Speak: Comparing Effects of Promotive and Prohibitive Voices, Unpublished article, The Pennsylvania State University.

  • Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001), “Justice at The Millennium: A Meta-analytic Review of 25 Years of Organizational Justice Research,”Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3): 425-45.

  • Conner, M. & Armitage, C.J. (1998), “Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Review and Avenues for Further Research”,Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28: 1429-64, doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01685.x

  • Detert, J.R. & Edmondson, A.C. (2011), “Implicit Voice Theories: Taken-for-Granted Rules of Self-Censorship at Work”,Academy of Management Journal, 54: 461-88. http:/ /dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2011.61967925

  • Dyne, L. V., Ang, S. and Botero, I. C. (2003), “Conceptualizing Employee Silence and Employee Voice as Multidimensional Constructs”, Journal of Management Studies, 40: 1359-92.doi:10.1111/1467-6486.00 384

  • Dyne, L.V., Cummings, L. L.& McLean Parks, J. (1995), “Extra-role Behaviors: in Pursuit of Construct and Definitional Clarity”, Research in Organizational Behavior, 17: 21585.

  • Folger, R. (1977). “Distributive and Procedural justice: Combined impact of voice and improvement on Experienced Inequity”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(2): 108-19.http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ 0022-3514.35.2.108

  • Greenberg, J. (2001), “Studying Organizational Justice Cross culturally: Fundamental Challenges”, International Journal of Conflict Management, 12(4): 365-75.

  • Hassan, A. (2002), “Organizational Justice as a Determinant of Organizational Commitment and Intention to Leave”,Asian Academy of Management Journal, 7 (2): 55-66.

  • Hsiung, H.H. (2012) “Authentic Leadership and Employee Voice Behavior: A Multi-Level Psychological Process”, Journal of Business Ethics, 107: 349-61.

  • Johnson, R. & Lord, R. (2010), “Implicit Effects of Justice on Self-Identity”,The Journal of Applied Psychology, 95: 681-95

  • Liang, J., Farh, C.I.C. &Farh, J.L. (2012), “Psychological Antecedents of Promotive and Prohibitive Voice: A Two-Wave Examination”, Academy Management Journal, 55: 71-92.

  • Lind, E. A. (1994), “Procedural Justice and Culture: Evidence for Ubiquitous Process Concerns”,Zeitschrift fur Rechtssoziologie, 15: 24-36.

  • Lind, E.A. (1995a), “Justice and Authority in Organizations”,in. R. Cropanzano and K.M. Kacmar (Eds.), Politics, Justice and Support: Managing the Social Climate of Work Organizations. West port , CT, Qurorum.

  • Lind E. A. (1995b), Social Conflict and Social Justice: Some Lessons from the Social Psychology of Justice. Leiden, the Netherlands: Leiden University Press.

  • Lind, E. A. (2001), “Fairness Heuristic Theory: Justice Judgments as Pivotal Cognitions in Organizational Relations”,in J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in Organization Justice, Stanford University Press.

  • Makens, M. (2016), Employee Voice: The Roles of Organizational Identification, Informational Justice and Power Distance, PhD Dissertation, Universidade Catolica Portuguesa.

  • Moorman, R. H. (1991), “Relationship Between Organizational Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: Do Fairness Perceptions Influence Employee Citizenship?” Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6): 84555, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/00219010.76.6.845

  • Morrison, E.W. & Milliken, F.J. (2000), “Organizational Silence: A Barrier to Change and Development in a Pluralistic World”, Academy of Management Review, 25: 706-25.

  • Morrison, E.W. (2011), “Employee Voice Behavior: Integration and Directions for Future Research”, The Academy of Management Annals,5: 373-412.https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2011.574506

  • Purang, P. (2011), “Organizational Justice and Affective Commitment: The Mediating Role of Perceived Organizational Support”,Asian Academy of Management Journal, 16: 141-56.

  • Seifert, D., Sweeney, J., Joireman, J. & Throton, J (2010), “The Influence of Organizational Justice on Accountant Whistleblowing”, Accounting, Organization and Society, 35: 707-17.

  • Takeuchi, R., Chen, Z. & Cheung, S. Y. (2012), “Applying Uncertainty Management Theory to Employee Voice Behavior: An Integrative Investigation”,Personnel Psychology, 65(2): 283-323.

  • Tyler, T. R. (1989), “The Psychology of Procedural Justice: A Test of the Group-value Model”,Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(5): 830-38

  • Van Dyne, L.V., Ang, S.& Botero, I.C. (2003), “Conceptualizing Employee Silence and Employee Voice as Multidimensional Constructs”,Journal of Management Studies, 40: 1359-92.

  • Zhu, D. H. (2013), “Group Polarization on Corporate Boards: Theory and Evidence on Board Decisions about Acquisition Premiums”, Strategic Management Journal, 34:800-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2039


Abstract Views: 119

PDF Views: 0




  • Overall Justice Perceptions & Voice Behavior- A Social Exchange Perspective

Abstract Views: 119  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Shreya Shah
Research Scholar, India
Pooja Purang
Professor of Psychology in the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences IIT Bombay, India

Abstract


Employees’ ideas and suggestions are a crucial resource for organizations. Employees are often unable to offer their suggestions for various reasons. This study examines the relationship of overall justice perceptions (OJP) on promotive as well as prohibitive voice behavior t hrough t he soc i al ex change lens. This enables us to examine voice behavior as a reciprocal action to OJP. A survey was conducted with 106 employees from various organizations. The findings of the survey show OJP is positively related to prohibitive voice behavior, but not to promotive voice behavior. This indicates t hat when employees perceive organizations to be fair, they tend to express concerns regarding the organization’s development but are less likely to give constructive suggestions to make processes easier.



References