Saudi Electronic University Organizational Behavior Discussion

Employees can judge the fairness of an authority’s decision-making along four dimensions:
distributive justice, procedural justice, interpersonal justice, and informational justice. Discuss.
Chapter 7
Trust, Justice, and Ethics
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Class Agenda
Trust defined
Types of trust
Using justice to gauge trust
Using ethics to gauge trust
How important is trust?
Application
©McGraw-Hill Education.
An Integrative Roadmap
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Trust Defined
The willingness to be vulnerable to an authority based
on positive expectations about the authority’s actions
and intentions
• Trust = willing to be vulnerable
• Risk = actually becoming vulnerable
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Figure 7-1 Factors That Influence Trust Levels
Jump to Appendix 1 long image description
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Disposition-Based Trust
Trust Propensity
• A general expectation that the words, promises, and
statements of individuals and groups can be relied upon
• Which is more damaging in organizational life: being too
trusting or being too suspicious?
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Cognition-Based Trust
Trustworthiness
The characteristics of a trustee that inspire trust are:
• Ability
• Benevolence
• Integrity
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Figure 7-3 Types of Trust Over Time
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Jump to Appendix 3 long image
description
Justice
Trustworthiness can sometimes be difficult to judge,
especially early in work relationships.
Justice-relevant acts can serve as behavioral evidence
of trustworthiness.
• Distributive justice
• Procedural justice
• Interpersonal justice
• Informational justice
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Table 7-2 Distributive and Procedural Justice
Distributive Justice Rules
Description
Equity vs. equality vs. need
Are rewards allocated according to the proper norm?
Procedural Justice Rules
Description
Voice
Do employees get to provide input into procedures?
Correctability
Do procedures build in mechanisms for appeals?
Consistency
Are procedures consistent across people and time?
Bias Suppression
Are procedures neutral and unbiased?
Representativeness
Do procedures consider the needs of all groups?
Accuracy
Are procedures based on accurate information?
Sources: J.S. Adams, “Inequity in Social Exchange,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2, ed. L. Berkowitz (New York: Academic Press, 1965), pp. 267-99; R.J. Bies and J.F. Moag, “Interactional Justice:
Communication Criteria of Fairness,” in Research on Negotiations in Organizations, Vol. 1, ed. R.J. Lewicki, B.H. Sheppard, and M.H. Bazerman (Greenwich CT: JAI Press, 1986), pp. 43-55; G.S. Leventhal, “The Distribution
of Rewards and Resources in Groups and Organizations,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol.9, ed. L. Berkowitz and W. Walster (New York: Academic Press, 1976), pp. 91-131; G.S. Leventhal, “What
Should Be Done with Equity Theory? New Approaches to the Study of Fairness in Social Relationships,” in Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research, ed. K. Gergen, M. Greenberg, and R. Willis (New York: Plenum
Press, 1980), pp. 27-55; and J. Thibaut and L. Walker, Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1975).
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Figure 7-4 Combined Effects of Distributive and
Procedural Justice
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Jump to Appendix 4 long image
description
Table 7-2
Interpersonal and Informational Justice
Interpersonal Justice Rules
Description
Respect
Propriety
Do authorities treat employees with sincerity?
Do authorities refrain from improper remarks?
Informational Justice Rules
Description
Justification
Truthfulness
Do authorities explain procedures thoroughly?
Are those explanations honest?
Sources: J.S. Adams, “Inequity in Social Exchange,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2, ed. L. Berkowitz (New York: Academic Press, 1965), pp. 267-99; R.J. Bies and J.F. Moag, “Interactional Justice:
Communication Criteria of Fairness,” in Research on Negotiations in Organizations, Vol. 1, ed. R.J. Lewicki, B.H. Sheppard, and M.H. Bazerman (Greenwich CT: JAI Press, 1986), pp. 43-55; G.S. Leventhal, “The Distribution of
Rewards and Resources in Groups and Organizations,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol.9, ed. L. Berkowitz and W. Walster (New York: Academic Press, 1976), pp. 91-131; G.S. Leventhal, “What Should Be
Done with Equity Theory? New Approaches to the Study of Fairness in Social Relationships,” in Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research, ed. K. Gergen, M. Greenberg, and R. Willis (New York: Plenum Press,
1980), pp. 27-55; and J. Thibaut and L. Walker, Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1975).
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Figure 7-5 The Effects of Justice on Theft
During a Pay Cut
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Jump to Appendix 5 long image
description
Ethics
1 of 7
The degree to which the behaviors of an authority are in
accordance with generally accepted moral norms.
©McGraw-Hill Education.
•
Unethical behavior
•
“Merely ethical” behavior
•
“Especially ethical” behavior
Figure 7-6 The Four-Component Model of
Ethical Decision Making
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Jump to Appendix 6 long image
description
Photos: (top): ©Siede Preis/Getty Images; (bottom): ©C Squared Studios/Getty Images.
Table 7-3 The Dimensions of Moral Intensity
General Dimension: Potential for Harm
Specific Effect
Description
Magnitude of
consequences
How much harm would be done to other people?
Probability effect
How likely is it that the act will actually occur and that the assumed
consequences will match predictions?
Temporal
immediacy
How much time will pass between the act and the onset of its consequences?
Concentration of
effect
Will the consequences be concentrated on a limited set of people, or will they
be more far-reaching?
General Dimension: Social Pressure
Specific Effect
Description
Social consensus
How much agreement is there that the proposed act would be unethical?
Proximity
How near (in a psychological or physical sense) is the authority to those who will
be affected?
Sources: Adapted from T.M. Jones, “Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model,” Academy of Management Review 16 (1991), pp 366-95; and A. Singhapakdi, S.J. Vitell, and K.L.
Kraft, “Moral Intensity and Ethical Decision-Making of Marketing Professionals,” Journal of Business Research 36 (1996), pp. 245-55
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Figure 7-8 Effects of Trust on
Performance and Commitment
Sources: K.T. Dirks and D.L. Ferrin, “Trust in Leadership: Meta-Analytic Findings and Implications for Research and Practice,” Journal of Applied
Psychology 87 (2002), pp. 611–28; and J.A. Colquitt, B.A. Scott, and J.A. LePine, “Trust, Trustworthiness, and Trust Propensity: A Meta-Analytic Test
of Their Unique Relationships with Risk Taking and Job Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92 (2007), pp. 909–27.
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Next Time
Chapter 8: Learning and Decision Making
©McGraw-Hill Education.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment