ارائه الگوی پایبندی مدیران به قوانین عدالت سازمانی: تبین نقش محوری عوامل فردی و موقعیتی در سازمان‌های دولتی استان فارس

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت دولتی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم تحقیقات، تهران، ایران

2 استاد تمام گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران

3 استاد تمام گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم تحقیقات، تهران، ایران

10.22111/jmr.2019.4742

چکیده

     در سال‌های اخیر رویکرد جدید در تحقیقات عدالت سازمانی به بررسی پایبندی مدیران به عدالت در سازمان توجه دارد. این پژوهش به صورت کمّی انجام گرفته است. روش پژوهش از جنبۀ هدف آن، توصیفی و از نظر هدفمندی مطالعه بنیادی است. در مقاله حاضر، ارائه الگوی پایبندی مدیران به عدالت سازمانی (با رویکرد فردی و موقعیتی) در سازمان‌های دولتی مورد بررسی قرار گرفته است. داده‌های مورد نیاز برای این پژوهش با روش نمونه‌گیری خوشه‌ای از 356 مدیر سازمان‌های دولتی استان فارس و با استفاده از پرسشنامه جمع‌آوری  شده است. به منظور تحلیل داده‌ها در این پژوهش، از روش معادلات ساختاری و نرم‌افزار اسمارت پی ال اس  استفاده شده است. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که پنج عامل فردی‌:(آگاهی به عدالت، قضاوت عادلانه، انگیزۀ عدالت، خودکارآمدی عدالت و  شخصیت عدالت) و سه عامل موقعیتی (سازمانی، مدیریتی و ویژگی‌های زیردستان) در پایبندی مدیران به عدالت سازمانی شناسائی شدند. همچنین، نتایج مطالعه نشان داد که عوامل فردی ازاهمیت بیشتری نسبت به عوامل موقعیتی برخورداراست. در بین عوامل فردی، عامل انگیزشی عدالت وآگاهی به عدالت و در بین عوامل موقعیتی عامل سازمانی، مهم‌ترین عوامل پایبندی مدیران به عدالت سازمانی می‌باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Providing a Pattern of Adherence of Managers to Organizational Justice rules: Investigating the Role of Individual and Situational Factors (in Public Organizations of Fars Province)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Nahid Radmanesh 1
  • Abolhasan Faghihi 2
  • Kramollah Daneshfard 3
1 Ph.D Student, Department of Management, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Professor, public Management, University of Allameh Tabataba'i , Iran
3 Professor, Department of Management, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Abstract
In recent years, a new approach on the organizational justice investigations is underway, addressing the adherence of managers to justice in the organization. This research was carried out quantitatively .The research methodology considering the purpose is descriptive, and considering the subjects of the study is a fundamental research. The present article is to design a model for adherence of managers to organizational justice (focusing on individual and situational features) in governmental organizations. The data for this study was collected through cluster sampling from 356 managers of governmental organizations in Fars province. The structural equation method was used for the analysis of data using Smart Plus software. The findings reveal that there are five personal factors (justice awareness, justice judgment, justice motivation, justice self-efficacy and justice personality) and three situational factors (organizational, managerial and subordinates characteristics) relating to manager’s adherence to organizational justice. Moreover, the results show that personal factors were more important than the situational ones. Among the 5 dimensions, the main dimensions of individual factors, motivation of justice and justice awareness, and among the three dimensions of the situation, the organization factors have the most importance in adherence to the rules of justice by managers.
Introduction
Organizational justice is recognized as a moral or religious decision, fair and legal)Pekurinen et al,2017( .Organizational justice is a major attitude for employees and organizations(Swalhiet al, 2017). Initial research in the field of organizational justice focuses more on employee responses to justice in the organization, and extensive research in this field has greatly enhanced the literacy of organizational justice. Hundreds of studies show that adherence or violation of organizational justice forms the attitudes and behavior of employees in the workplace (Colquitt et al., 2001).When employees believe that behaviors are fair in the organization, positive attitudes and behaviors such as trust, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, job performance, citizenship behavior and positive organizational behaviors appear (Khan and Rashid, 2015) and in contrast to the perception of injustice, it creates negative attitudes toward work and organization, which results in the external and objective factors of destructive and deviant behaviors (Yildiz and Alpkan, 2015).When employees believe that they are treated unfairly, negative attitudes and behaviors such as desertion, theft, vandalism and deviant behaviors in the workplace increases (Ambrose et al, 2002).
Research Methodology
The present study is a philosophical study of fundamentalism positivism paradigm and is a quantitative study.This research is descriptive in terms of purpose. The research method is a survey, the most important advantages of which are the ability to generalize the results. Also, the method of doing this research is based on confirmatory factor analysis. Data were collected through archival studies and standard questionnaire and researcher-made questionnaire.
The statistical population of this study is the managers of various levels of management (directorate, deputy and supervisor) in 34 government agencies under the current budget of Fars province. In this research, cluster sampling method was used. In this way, governmental organizations of Fars province were divided into four sub-systems of economic, political, cultural and administrative according to the classification of Pirezat (2017, p. 261-266) and then distributed randomly among the managers of selected organizations. The sample size needed to run the survey was 384 people. In order to ensure that the questionnaire was completed, all 410 questionnaires were distributed to all managers. A total of 384 questionnaires were received (93% return ratio). Of the 356 complete and correct questionnaires, 359 questionnaires were selected and analysed.
Findings
The results of the analysis show the confirmatory factor of individual factors, each of the 5 dimensions related to the individual factors confirmed and the coefficients indicate that the identified dimensions have a high correlation with the relevant variable (individual factors) and can well explain the main level. Also, among 16 components and 56 indicators identified for individual factors, according to the significant number of "ability of a person to adhere to the rules of justice" among the indicators of self-efficacy of justice "endurance compliance with the rules of justice" among the relevant indicators The personality of justice was rejected and finally 54 indicators were identified for oversized agents DU confirmed.
The factor analysis confirms the positional factors that all three dimensions related to organizational factors are confirmed and the obtained coefficients show that the identified dimensions have a high correlation with their respective variables (situational factors) and can well explain the main level.
Finally, the factor analysis confirms the adherence of managers to the rules of justice, which both the individual factors and the status factor associated with the adherence of managers to the laws of justice are confirmed and the coefficients show that identified components have high correlation with the variable of adherence to the rules of justice and they have been able to explain the variable.
Discussion and Results
The findings of the study indicate that, the identification of 8 individual dimensions and situational factors that affects the adherence of managers to the rules of the organization's justice. Calculating and analyzing the indicators of fitness, the present research model showed that designing a model to form the individual factors of adherence of managers to the rules of justice, including awareness of justice, fair judgment, motivation of justice, self-efficacy of justice and the personality of justice, and the collected data is well-fitted. Besides motivation for justice, awareness to justice at the individual level, is of paramount importance for adhering to the laws of justice. Some of the individual factors in this study are based on findings from studies by Eib et al. (2015), Johnson et al. (2014), Blair and Chen (2012), Ambersaws and Schmink (2009),  Greenberg (2006) Associates (2006). In order to adhere to the rules of justice, it is first necessary to identify managers with issues related to justice, and apply norms and rules of justice on issues, and that the motive for fair behavior must be stronger than other motives and that managers have the skills to conduct fair behavior and have a fair character.
On the other hand, the factors of the status of adherence of managers to the rules of justice, including organizational, managerial and subordinate characteristics, are well suited to the collected data and organizational factors are most important for adherence to the rules of justice. Some of the situational factors in this study are consistent with the findings of the studies of Eib (2015), Scott et al. (2014, 2009), Ambersaws and Schmechan (2009), Freischwhee and Kleeb (2008). The adherence of managers to the rules of justice in the organization is made even better if people who are familiar with the rules of justice have the right to motivate others and have a personality, to be elected and hired in the organization, and by teaching the issues of justice to managers, the five components of individual factors affecting the adherence of administrators to the rules Justice can be strengthened and ultimately, by creating a fair atmosphere, the adherence of managers to the rules of justice in the organization can be supported.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Adherence of administrators to the rules of justice
  • Justice Judgment
  • justice motivation
  • justice awareness
  • justice self-efficacy
  • justice personality
1-Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2001). Are flexible organizations the death knell for the future of procedural justice? In: R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace Ⅱ: From theory to practice (pp. 229-244). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

2-Ambrose, M. L., Seabright, M. A., & Schminke, M. (2002). Sabotage in the workplace: The role of organizational injustice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 947-965.

3-Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2009a). Assessing roadblocks to justice: A model of fair behavior in organizations. In J. J. Martocchio & H. Liao (Eds.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management (Vol. 28, pp. 219-263): Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

4-Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2009b). The role of overall justice judgments in organizational justice research: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 491-500

5-Baumert, A. & Schmitt, M. (2016). Justice sensitivity. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of Social Justice Theory and Research (pp. 161-180). Springer

6-Barrett-Howard, E., & Tyler, T. (1986). Procedural justice as a criterion in allocation decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 296-304

7-Blader, S. L., & Chen, Y.-R. (2012). differentiating the effects of status and power: A justice perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(5), 994-1014.

8-Blakely, G., Andrews, M., & Moorman, R. (2005). The moderating effects of equity sensitivity on the relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 259-273.

9-Carlsmith, K. M., Darley, J. M., & Robinson, P. H. (2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 284-299.

10-Colella, A., Paetzold, R. L., Zardkoohi, A., & Wesson, M. J. (2007). Exposing pay secrecy. Academy of Management Review, 32, 55-71.

11-Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425-445.

12-Colquitt, J. A., Noe, R. A., & Jackson, C. L. (2002). Justice in teams: Antecedents and consequences of procedural justice climate. Personnel Psychology, 55, 83-109.

13-Dietz, J., Robinson, L. S., Folger, R., Baron, R. (2017). The Impact of Community Violence and an Organization’s Procedural Justice Climate on Workplace Aggression. The Academy of Management Journal, 46(3):317-326 

14-Eib, C., Bernhard-Oettel, C., Näswall, K., & Sverke, M. (2015). The interaction between organizational justice and job characteristics: Associations with work attitudes and employee health cross-sectionally and over time. Economic and Industrial Democracy. ISSN 0143-831X, E-ISSN 1461-7099, Vol. 36, no 3, p. 549-582

15-Ghosh, D., Sekiguchi, T., and Gurunathan, L. (2017). Organizational embeddedness as a mediator between justice and in-role performance. J. Bus. Res. 75, 130–137. Doi. 101016/j. burrs: 2017.02.013

16-Greenberg, J. (1990). Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of pay cuts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 561-568.

17-Greenberg, J. (2006). Losing sleep over organizational injustice: Attenuating insomniac reactions to underpayment inequity with supervisory training in interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 58--69.

18-Grojean. M., Resick, C., Dickson, M., & Smith, D. (2004). Leaders, values, and organizational climate: Examining leadership strategies for establishing an organizational climate regarding ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 55, 223-241.

19-Folger, R. (2001). Fairness as denounce. In: S. W. Gilliland, D. D. Steiner & D. P. Skarlicki (Eds), Research in social issues in management (Vol. I, pp. 3-33). New York: Information Age Publishing.

20-Folger, R., & Bies, R. J. (1989). Managerial responsibilities and procedural justice. Employee and Rights Journal, 2, 79-89.

21-Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (2001). Fairness theory: Justice as accountability. In: J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 1-55). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

22-Folger, R., & Skarlicki, D., P. (1998). When tough times make tough bosses: Managerial distancing as a function of layoff blame. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 79-87

23-Frisque, D. A., & Kolb, J. A. (2008). The effects of an ethics training program on attitude, knowledge, and transfer of training of office professionals: A treatment-and control group design. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 9, 35-53.

24-Jiang, Z., Gollan, J., Brooks, G. (2015), Relationships between organizational justice, organizational trust and organizational commitment: across-cultural study of China, South Korea and Australia, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015. 1128457, 1-32.

25-Johnson, R. E., Lanaj, K., & Barnes, C. M. (2014). The good and bad of being fair: Effects of procedural and interpersonal justice behaviors on regulatory resources. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(4), 635-650.

26-Judge, T., Locke, E., & Durham, C. (1997). The dispositional causes of job satisfaction: A core evaluations approach. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 151-187.

27-Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development. San Francisco: Harper &. Row.

28-Khan, S. K., & Rashid, M. Z. A. (2015). The Mediating Effect of Organizational Commitment in the Organizational Culture, Leadership and Organizational Justice Relationship with Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Study of Academicians in Private Higher Learning Institutions in Malaysia. International Journal of Recent Advances in Organizational Behavior and Decision Sciences (IJRAOB), 1(2), 335-359.

29-Korsgaard, M. A., Roberson, L., & Rymph, R. D. (1998). What motivates fairness? The role of subordinate assertive behavior on manager's interactional fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(5), 731-744. 

30-Lce, J., &. Peccei, R. (2007). Perceived organizational support and affective commitment: the mediating role of organization-based self-esteem in the context of job insecurity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 661-685.

31-Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum Press.

32-Leventhal, G. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? In: K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg &. R. H. Willis (Eds), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27-55). New York: Plenum.

33-Liao, H., &. Rupp, D. (2005). The impact of justice climate and justice orientation on work outcomes: A cross-level multifocal framework. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 242-256.

34-Myyry, L., &. Helkarna, K. (2002). Moral reasoning and the use of procedural justice rules in hypothetical and real-life dilemmas. Social Justice Research, IS, 373--391.

35-Pekurinen, V. M., Välimäki, M., Virtanen, M., Salo, P., Kivimäki, M., and Vahtera, J. (2017). Organizational justice and collaboration among nurses as correlates of violent assaults by patients in psychiatric care Psychiatry. Serv. 68, 490–496.doi: 10.1176 / appi. ps.201600171

36-Pourezat, A .S. & Seyedrezaei, M .Y. (2017).Valuation of government and state performance (pp.261-266). Samat publication. (In persion)

37-Rest, J. R. (1986). Moral development: Advances in research and theory. New York: Praeger.

38-Schminke, M., Arnaud, A., Taylor, R. (2014). Ethics, Values, and Organizational Justice: Individuals, Organizations, and Beyond. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(3).

39-Schminke, M., Johnson, M., Rice, D. (2015). Justice and Organizational Structure: A Review, The Oxford Handbook of Justice in the Workplace

40-Sheeran, P., & Orbell, S. (2000). Self-schemas and the theory of planned behavior. Europel11l Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 533-550.

41-Scott, B. A., Colquitt, J. A., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2007) Justice as a dependent variable: Subordinate charisma as a predictor of interpersonal and informational justice perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1597-1609.

42-Scott, B. A., Colquitt, J. A., & Paddock, E. L. (2009). An actor-focused model of justice rule adherence and violation: The role of managerial motives and discretion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 756–769.

43-Scott, B. A., Garza, A., Conlon, D., & Kim, Y. J. (2014). Why do managers act fairly in the first place? A daily investigation of "hot" and "cold" motives and discretion. Academy of Management Journal, 57(6), 1571-1591.

44-Schminke, M., Johnson, M., Rice, D. (2015). Justice and Organizational Structure: A Review,  The Oxford Handbook of Justice in the Workplace.

45-Swalhi, A., Swalhi, A., Zgoulli, S., Zgoulli, S., Hofaidhllaoui, M., and Hofaidhllaoui, M. (2017). The influence of organizational justice on job performance: the mediating effect of affective commitment. J. Manage. Dev. 36, 542–559

46-Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33, 261-289. V

47-Yildiz, B., & Alpkan, L. (2015). A theoretical model on the proposed predictors of destructive deviant workplace behaviours and the mediator role of alienation. Social and Behavioural Sciences, 210, 330-338

48-Yukl, G., & Falbe, C. M. (1991). The importance of different power sources in downward and lateral influence attempts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 132-140