TYPES OF ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE
TYPES OF ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE
Previous research has identified distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice as four important justice types (Colquitt, 2001). Because the specific rules of each of these four types of justice are important to the predictions we make in this chapter, we review the most salient rules for each.
Distributive Justice
Distributive justice involves the fairness of outcomes. Depending on how outcomes are allocated, distributive justice is derived from three rules: equity, equality, or need.
Equity Distributive justice in the form of equity is derived from equity theory
(Adams, 1965), and is based on the idea that outcome allocations reflect input contributions. Equity theory suggests that individuals evaluate the extent to which their outcomes are proportionate to their contributions, rela- tive to relevant comparison others (Adams, 1965). Inequity is perceived if the ratio of outcomes to inputs is greater or less than a salient comparison other. Using an equity-based allocation system, employees who work longer hours or are more productive believe they should receive greater outcomes (e.g.,
O RGANIZATIONAL J USTICE ACROSS H UMAN R ESOURCE M ANAGEMENT D ECISIONS 153 pay, benefits, etc.) than employees who work fewer hours or are less produc-
tive. A practical example of equity involves performance-based pay systems. In these systems, better performing employees are paid more and poorer performing employees are paid less. Evidence shows that people feel distress in proportion to experienced inequity; those perceiving greater inequity feel more distress (Walster, Walster, & Berscheid, 1978). Further, equity in distribution validates individuals’ feelings of group membership and, at the organizational level, allows organizations to efficiently and effectively produce (Folger, Sheppard, & Buttram, 1995).
Multiple early researchers focused on equity, including Adams (equity theory, 1965), Homans (distributive justice theory, 1961) and Stouffer and colleagues (relative deprivation theory, Stouffer, Suchman, DeVinney, Star, & Williams, 1949). Walster et al. noted in 1978 that equity is widely applic- able to business relationships. According to Leventhal (1976), organizations use equity as a distribution rule because (1) the business community defines this as the appropriate allocation rule, (2) they are weeding out inferior workers, (3) organizations believe an equitable system is a profitable one, (4) they are trying to avoid conflict. Greenberg (1982) reviewed all three types of distributive justice, concluding that use of equity as a distribution rule is by far the most common type studied by organizational researchers.
Equality Beyond equity, Deutsch (1975) identified two more types of distributive
justice that are important at the institutional level: equality and need. Equal- ity allocations are those in which all individuals have an equal allocation or chance at the outcome. Use of equality in certain distributions allows organizations to retain employees (Folger et al., 1995; Sheppard, Lewicki, & Minton, 1992). For example, many companies offer all employees of a particular category the same benefit package. Despite this common use of equality, little research exists regarding the equality rule of distributive justice.
Need The third distributive allocation method, need, involves allocating outcomes
on the basis of special needs. At the individual level, organizational allocation based on need allows organizations to fulfill member needs so that they can focus on organizational rather than personal goals (Folger et al., 1995; Scheppard et al., 1992). The use of certain family-friendly employee policies (e.g., maternity leave, Grover, 1991) is a practical example of allocation according to the distributive rule of need. Similar to the equality rule, little research exists on the need rule of distributive justice.