Match!

Leader-member exchange, group- and individual-level procedural justice and reactions to performance appraisals

Published on Sep 1, 2016in Human Resource Management2.93
· DOI :10.1002/hrm.21724
Shaun Pichler20
Estimated H-index: 20
(CSU: California State University),
Arup Varma26
Estimated H-index: 26
(LUC: Loyola University Chicago)
+ 3 AuthorsArti Sharma1
Estimated H-index: 1
View in Source
Abstract
Previous research has established that relationships with authority figures and procedural justice perceptions are important in terms of the way in which employees react to organizational procedures that affect them. What is less clear are the reasons why exchange quality with authorities is related to perceptions of process fairness and the role of procedural justice climate in this process. Results indicate that individual-level perceptions of procedural justice, but not performance ratings, partially mediate the relationship between exchange quality and reactions to performance appraisals, and that procedural justice climate is positively related to perceptions of procedural justice and appraisal reactions. These results support a more relational than instrumental view of justice perceptions in organizational procedures bound by exchange quality with an authority figure. Our study suggests that it is essential for managers to actively monitor and manage employee perceptions of process fairness at the group and individual levels.
Figures & Tables
  • References (42)
  • Citations (4)
References42
Newest
#1Kristopher J. Preacher (Vandy: Vanderbilt University)H-Index: 47
#2James P. Selig (UNM: University of New Mexico)H-Index: 13
473 CitationsSource
130 CitationsSource
#1James M. LeBreton (Purdue University)H-Index: 31
#2Jenell L. Senter (WSU: Wayne State University)H-Index: 2
1,382 CitationsSource
#1Kristopher J. Preacher (KU: University of Kansas)H-Index: 47
#2Andrew F. Hayes (OSU: Ohio State University)H-Index: 41
15k CitationsSource
#1Joelle D. Elicker (University of Akron)H-Index: 8
#2Paul E. LevyH-Index: 35
Last.Rosalie J. Hall (University of Akron)H-Index: 27
view all 3 authors...
120 CitationsSource
#1Quinetta M. Roberson (Cornell University)H-Index: 18
#2Jason A. Colquitt (UF: University of Florida)H-Index: 43
129 CitationsSource
#1Hui Liao (RU: Rutgers University)H-Index: 27
#2Deborah E. Rupp (UIUC: University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign)H-Index: 36
381 CitationsSource
#1Paul E. Levy (University of Akron)H-Index: 35
#2Jane R. Williams (IUPUI: Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis)H-Index: 10
438 CitationsSource
#1Mark G. Ehrhart (SDSU: San Diego State University)H-Index: 25
649 CitationsSource
#1David P. MacKinnon (ASU: Arizona State University)H-Index: 60
#2Chondra M. Lockwood (ASU: Arizona State University)H-Index: 10
Last.Jason Williams (ASU: Arizona State University)H-Index: 29
view all 3 authors...
3,653 CitationsSource
Cited By4
Newest
Source
#1Hasan Evrim AriciH-Index: 1
#2Huseyin Arasli (EMU: Eastern Mediterranean University)H-Index: 15
Last.Boshra Hejraty Namin (University of Stavanger)
view all 4 authors...
Source
#1Sára Csillag (Budapest Business School)H-Index: 2
Source
2 CitationsSource