13.05.2017 Views

BUS272 TB

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Chapter 4 Theories of Motivation 149<br />

EXHIBIT 4-13 Model of Organizational Justice<br />

Distributive Justice<br />

Definition: perceived fairness of outcome<br />

Example: I got the pay raise I deserved.<br />

Procedural Justice<br />

Definition: perceived fairness of process<br />

used to determine outcome<br />

Example: I had input into the process<br />

used to give raises and was given a<br />

good explanation of why I received<br />

the raise I did.<br />

Informational Justice<br />

Organizational Justice<br />

Definition: overall perception<br />

of what is fair in the workplace<br />

Example: I think this is a fair<br />

place to work.<br />

Definition: perceived truthfulness of<br />

explanations for decisions<br />

Example: The raise I received was lower<br />

than I had hoped, but my manager<br />

explained that department cutbacks<br />

were the reason.<br />

Interpersonal Justice<br />

Definition: perceived degree to which<br />

one is treated with dignity and respect<br />

Example: When telling me about my<br />

raise, my supervisor was very nice<br />

and complimentary.<br />

theory suggests, employees tend to perceive their outcomes are fairest when they are<br />

distributed equitably.<br />

Does the same logic apply to teams? At first glance, it would seem that distributing<br />

rewards equally among team members is best for boosting morale and teamwork—that<br />

way, no one is favoured more than another. A recent study of National Hockey League<br />

teams suggests otherwise. Differentiating the pay of team members on the basis of their<br />

inputs (how well they performed in games) attracted better players to the team, made<br />

it more likely they would stay, and increased team performance. 81<br />

The way we have described things so far, it would seem that distributive justice and<br />

equity are gauged in a rational, calculative way as individuals compare their outcome–<br />

input ratios to others. But the experience of justice, and especially injustice, is often not<br />

so cold and calculated. Instead, people base distributive judgments on a feeling or an<br />

emotional reaction to the way they think they are being treated relative to others, and<br />

their reactions are often “hot” and emotional as well. 82<br />

Although employees care a lot about what outcomes are distributed (distributive<br />

justice), they also care a lot about how outcomes are distributed. While distributive<br />

justice looks at what outcomes are allocated, procedural justice examines how<br />

outcomes are allocated. 83 What makes procedures more or less fair? There are several<br />

factors. For one, employees perceive that procedures are fairer when they are given a say<br />

procedural justice The perceived<br />

fairness of the process used to determine<br />

the distribution of rewards.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!