How do leaders promote cooperation? The effects of charisma and procedural fairness.

The present research examined the effect of leaders' procedural fairness and perceived charisma on an important organizational process: cooperation. Both charisma and procedural fairness were predicted to have a positive effect on cooperation, and procedural fairness and charisma were predicted to interact such that their effects are stronger alone than in conjunction. Results from a scenario experiment, a cross-sectional survey, and a laboratory experiment supported these predictions. Results from the laboratory study also showed that the interactive effect of leader charisma and procedural fairness on cooperation was mediated by their interactive effect on the sense of group belongingness. It is concluded that leader charisma and procedural fairness may engender cooperation because they appeal to relational concerns. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of trust in authority and procedural fairness on cooperation.

The present research examined the effect of procedural fairness and trust in an authority on people's willingness to cooperate with the authority across a wide range of social situations. Prior research has shown that the presence of information about whether an authority can be trusted moderates the effect of procedural fairness. If no trust information is available, procedural fairness influences people's reactions. This is not the case when information about the trustworthiness of the authority is present. In the present article, it is argued that information about whether the authority can or cannot be trusted may also moderate the effect of procedural fairness in predicting levels of cooperation. Assuming that the use of fair procedures by authorities that cannot be trusted is less influential than is the enactment of procedures by trustworthy authorities, it is predicted that trust in authority moderates the influence of procedural fairness on cooperation in such a way that procedural fairness has a positive effect on cooperation primarily when trust in authority is high. Results from 4 studies (2 experimental studies and 2 field studies) provide supportive evidence for this interaction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Cooperating when “you” and “I” are treated fairly: The moderating role of leader prototypicality.

We developed a model predicting that leaders are most effective in stimulating follower cooperation when they consistently treat all group members in a fair manner and are prototypical (i.e., representative of the group's values and norms). In support of this idea, we consistently found that group members cooperated most when prototypical leaders treated themselves as well as their coworkers fairly across a laboratory experiment and 3 cross-sectional field studies. These findings highlight the important role of others' fairness experiences and perceptions in influencing one's own reactions and also the role of leaders as representing the group's values and norms. We discuss implications for fairness theory and the leader prototypicality literature. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Disentangling role perceptions: How perceived role breadth, discretion, instrumentality, and efficacy relate to helping and taking charge.

The objective of this study was to empirically disentangle role perceptions related to organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) that have been confounded in past research, investigate their unique relationships with both an affiliative (helping) and a challenging (taking charge) form of OCB, and determine their relative importance in explaining these 2 forms of OCB. The authors also examined whether role discretion and role breadth independently moderate the procedural justice-to-OCB relationship. The authors surveyed 225 engineers in India and their direct supervisors. The results showed that 3 of the 4 facets of OCB role perception explain unique variance in either helping or taking charge, and that role breadth moderates the relationships between procedural justice and both helping and taking charge. The authors discuss implications of these findings for OCB theory and research, as well as for managerial practice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Procedural justice and status: Status salience as antecedent of procedural fairness effects.

The current article explores status as an antecedent of procedural fairness effects (the findings that perceived procedural fairness affects people's reactions, e.g., their relational judgments). On the basis of the literature, the authors proposed that salience of the general concept of status leads people to be more attentive to procedural fairness information and that, as a consequence, stronger procedural fairness effects should be found. In correspondence with this hypothesis, Experiment 1 showed stronger procedural fairness effects on people's relational treatment evaluations in a status salient condition compared with a control condition. Experiment 2 replicated this effect and, in further correspondence with the hypothesis, showed that status salience led to increased cognitive accessibility of fairness concerns. Implications for the psychology of procedural justice are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Disentangling the effects of voice: The incremental roles of opportunity, behavior, and instrumentality in predicting procedural fairness.

Many voice studies have failed to distinguish among voice opportunity, perceived voice opportunity, voice behavior, and voice instrumentality. Thus, the authors sought to clarify the roles of each in determining procedural fairness perceptions. Controlling for the effect of voice opportunity, each of the 3 remaining constructs was hypothesized to predict fairness. Furthermore, voice instrumentality was hypothesized to moderate the effect of voice behavior on fairness. Undergraduates (N=102; 81 for some analyses) participated in an orientation-week design simulation in which voice opportunity was manipulated. The results indicated significant incremental effects of perceived voice opportunity and the predicted Voice Instrumentality × Voice Behavior interaction. Fairness was lowest for individuals who were denied voice opportunity, perceived less voice opportunity, and provided high levels of noninstrumental voice behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Uncertainty management: The influence of uncertainty salience on reactions to perceived procedural fairness.

On the basis of fairness heuristic theory, it is argued in this article that people especially need fairness when they are reminded about aspects of their lives that make them uncertain. It is therefore proposed that thinking about uncertainty should make fairness a more important issue to people. The findings of 3 experiments support this line of reasoning: Asking (vs. not asking) participants 2 questions that solicited their thoughts and feelings of being uncertain led to stronger effects of perceived procedural fairness on participants' affective reactions toward the way they were treated. It is argued that these findings suggest that fairness matters to people especially when they are trying to deal with things that make them uncertain. An implication of the current findings therefore may be that fairness is important to people because it gives them an opportunity to manage uncertain aspects of their lives. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

The joint effects of personality and workplace social exchange relationships in predicting task performance and citizenship performance.

This field study examines the joint effects of social exchange relationships at work (leader-member exchange and team-member exchange) and employee personality (conscientiousness and agreeableness) in predicting task performance and citizenship performance. Consistent with trait activation theory, matched data on 230 employees, their coworkers, and their supervisors demonstrated interactions in which high quality social exchange relationships weakened the positive relationships between personality and performance. Results demonstrate the benefits of consonant predictions in which predictors and outcomes are matched on the basis of specific targets. We discuss theoretical and practical implications. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of procedural fairness and leader support on interpersonal relationships among group members.

In this article, the authors examine the impact of fair treatment by a group leader on people's relationships with and feelings toward other individual group members. Previous studies neglected procedural fairness effects on interpersonal relationships between group members. The authors hypothesized that fairness affects interpersonal relationships and feelings toward another group member only when the leader is regarded as representative and supported by the other group members. In three studies, the authors manipulated procedural fairness (no voice vs. voice) and other group member's support for the leader (full vs. mixed support for the leader). Two vignette studies supported the hypothesis. In addition, an experimental laboratory study showed that this interaction effect between procedural fairness and leader support was most pronounced among those with high belongingness needs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

When do we need procedural fairness? The role of trust in authority.

On the basis of fairness heuristic theory, the authors argue that when information about whether an authority can be trusted is not available, people will resolve the question of how they should interpret the decisions of the authority by relying on perceived procedural fairness. As a consequence, people who do not have information about authority's trustworthiness react more positively toward the outcomes of authority's decisions if the authority is using fair as opposed to unfair procedures. However, when people know that the authority either can or cannot be trusted, they are less in need of procedural fairness information, yielding less strong effects of procedural fairness on people's reactions. The findings of 2 experiments support the authors' line of reasoning. It is concluded that people especially need procedural fairness when information about an authority's trustworthiness is lacking. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Substitutes for procedural fairness: Prototypical leaders are endorsed whether they are fair or not.

This article extends research on leader procedural fairness as well as the social identity model of leadership effectiveness (SIMOL) by demonstrating that leader prototypicality can act as a substitute for procedural fairness. Although procedural fairness in general and voice in particular have been found to have a robust positive influence on leader endorsement, the authors showed in an experimental scenario study and a correlational field study that the influence of voice on leader endorsement is substantially reduced when leaders are perceived as prototypical for the group that they lead and followers are highly identified with their group. Additionally, supportive of predictions of the SIMOL, leader prototypicality interacted with follower identification in predicting leader endorsement, such that prototypicality had a positive effect on leader endorsement, which was enhanced among high identifiers. Overall, these results suggest that leaders who are attuned to their followers' group identity can afford to go it alone, for the better or the worse. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The interactive effects of belongingness and charisma on helping and compliance.

This study tests the main and interactive effects of belongingness and perceived charismatic leadership on 2 forms of organizational citizenship behavior (helping and compliance). In line with expectations, a study of 115 manager-subordinate dyads demonstrates that employees show more helping (manager rated) when they have a stronger sense of belongingness at work and more helping as well as compliance when they perceive their leader to be more charismatic (subordinate rated). Belongingness partially mediates the relationship between charisma and helping. Also, as hypothesized, belongingness and charisma have interactive effects on employees' helping and compliance. The impact of perceived charisma on these behaviors is stronger for employees with a low sense of belongingness at work than for individuals with a higher sense of belongingness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-esteem and outcome fairness: Differential importance of procedural and outcome considerations.

Results of a survey of 222 detainees in Dutch jails and police stations showed that outcome-fairness judgments of individuals with high self-esteem were more strongly related to outcome considerations than to procedural considerations, whereas outcome-fairness judgments of individuals with low self-esteem were more strongly related to procedural considerations than to outcome considerations. It was proposed that these differences were due to the fact that (a) procedures more strongly express a social evaluation than outcomes and (b) individuals with low self-esteem are more concerned with social evaluations than individuals with high self-esteem. The implications of the results for other individual-differences factors and other populations than detainees are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The role of proactive personality in job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior: A relational perspective.

Drawing from a relational approach, the authors conceptualize the quality of leader–member exchange as a mediator and procedural justice climate as a contextual moderator for understanding the role of proactive personality in job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior. Data from a sample of 200 Chinese employees within 54 work groups were used to examine the hypothesized models. Results show that having a proactive personality was associated with employees establishing a high-quality exchange relationship with their supervisors; in turn, the quality of leader–member exchange was associated with greater job satisfaction and more organizational citizenship behaviors. Additionally, the relationship between proactive personality and organizational citizenship behavior was positively moderated by procedural justice climate within the group. Implications for management theory and practice are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Procedural justice in contacts with the police: Testing a relational model of authority in a mixed methods study.

A relational model of authority (Tyler & Lind, 1992) emphasizes the role of procedural justice (the fairness of methods used to achieve outcomes) in public support for and evaluation of the police. Using both quantitative and qualitative methods, this study tested the model in the context of victim–police interactions. In-depth interviews were conducted with 110 people who had reported a crime (personal or property) to the police in the previous year. Quantitative findings supported the predictions that higher perceived antecedents of procedural justice would be associated with higher perceived legitimacy (obligation to obey the law), outcome fairness, and satisfaction with the contact. Antecedents of procedural justice were a stronger predictor of outcome fairness and satisfaction than the realization of a desired outcome, and a stronger predictor of legitimacy than criminal history. Qualitative findings supported these results. It appears that procedural justice has the potential for helping to motivate individuals with criminal history to obey the law. Implications for evaluation of police performance are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Justice, citizenship, and role definition effects.

A limitation of the organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) literature is that theory and empirical evidence suggest that some employees define OCBs as part of their job. A theoretical framework that addresses this problem is tested in this article. The framework focuses on 2 effects: a role enlargement effect (i.e., employees with more favorable attitudes define OCB as inrole behavior, which, in turn, results in greater citizenship) and a role discretion effect (i.e., the relationship between employees' attitudes and their citizenship will be stronger among employees who define OCB as extrarole behavior). In tests of this framework with 2 independent samples of supervisor–subordinate dyads, role definition were found to moderate several relationships between procedural justice and OCB, providing support for the role discretion effect. Implications for OCB theory and research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Servant leadership, procedural justice climate, service climate, employee attitudes, and organizational citizenship behavior: A cross-level investigation.

This study tests the influence of servant leadership on 2 group climates, employee attitudes, and organizational citizenship behavior. Results from a sample of 815 employees and 123 immediate supervisors revealed that commitment to the supervisor, self-efficacy, procedural justice climate, and service climate partially mediated the relationship between servant leadership and organizational citizenship behavior. Cross-level interaction results revealed that procedural justice climate and positive service climate amplified the influence of commitment to the supervisor on organizational citizenship behavior. Implications of these results for theory and practice and directions for future research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A longitudinal analysis of organizational fairness: An examination of reactions to tenure and promotion decisions.

Most organizational justice research takes a cross-sectional approach to examining the relationship between perceived fairness and individuals' attitudes. This study examines the effect of procedural and distributive justice over time. It is suggested that individuals acquire more information and experience with procedures and outcomes over time. These changes in information and experience affect the influence of procedural and distributive justice on organizational attitudes. Faculty perceptions of tenure and promotion decisions were assessed 3 times (preallocation, short-term postallocation, long-term postallocation) over a 2-year period. Results generally supported the hypotheses. Procedural justice was most influential prior to and soon after outcome decisions were made. Distributive justice was most influential 1 year later. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance: The role of affect and cognitions.

To investigate the role of affect and cognitions in predicting organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and workplace deviance behavior (WDB), data were collected from 149 registered nurses and their coworkers. Job affect was associated more strongly than were job cognitions with OCB directed at individuals, whereas job cognitions correlated more strongly than did job affect with OCB directed at the organization. With respect to WDB, job cognitions played a more important role in prediction when job affect was represented by 2 general mood variables (positive and negative affect). When discrete emotions were used to represent job affect, however, job affect played as important a role as job cognition variables, strongly suggesting the importance of considering discrete emotions in job affect research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Why managers should care about fairness: The effects of aggregate justice perceptions on organizational outcomes.

This work examines the aggregation of justice perceptions to the departmental level and the business-unit level, the impact of these aggregate perceptions on business-unit-level outcomes, and the usefulness of the distinction between procedural and interpersonal justice at different levels of analysis. Latent variables analyses of individual-level and department-level data from 4,539 employees in 783 departments at 97 hotel properties showed that the 2 justice types exercise unique paths of impact on employees' organizational commitment and thus on turnover intentions and discretionary service behavior. Business-unit-level analyses further demonstrate paths of association between aggregate justice perceptions, aggregate commitment levels, and the business-unit-level outcomes of employee turnover rates and customer satisfaction ratings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)