Clearly, this is an exciting outcome and comes with a pay raise, increased responsibilities, and prestige. Let’s assume that you just found out you are getting a promotion. For example, if an employee finds out the main reason behind a pay gap is gender related, the person may react to the situation by taking legal action because sex discrimination in pay is illegal in the United States.įigure 5.8 Dimensions of Organizational Justice Sometimes it may be necessary to consider taking legal action as a potential outcome of perceived inequity. Other options include changing the comparison person (e.g., others doing similar work in different organizations are paid only minimum wage) and leaving the situation by quitting (Schmidt & Marwell, 1972). At the same time, research shows that those feeling inequity sometimes resort to stealing to balance the scales (Greenberg, 1993). Increasing one’s outcomes can be achieved through legitimate means such as negotiating a pay raise. Research shows that people who perceive inequity reduce their work performance or reduce the quality of their inputs (Carrell & Dittrich, 1978 Goodman & Friedman, 1971). If the lower paid person puts forth less effort, the perceived inequity would be reduced. The person experiencing a perceived inequity may also reduce inputs or attempt to increase outcomes. If that person can be made to work harder or work on more complicated tasks, equity would be achieved.
If the other person brings more to the situation, getting more out of the situation would be fair. Another option would be to have the referent increase inputs. For example, we may justify the situation by downplaying our own inputs (I don’t really work very hard on this job), valuing our outcomes more highly (I am gaining valuable work experience, so the situation is not that bad), distorting the other person’s inputs (the new hire really is more competent than I am and deserves to be paid more), or distorting the other person’s outcomes (she gets $14 an hour but will have to work with a lousy manager, so the situation is not unfair). Oftentimes, the situation may be dealt with perceptually by altering our perceptions of our own or the referent’s inputs and outcomes. The theory outlines several potential reactions to perceived inequity. For example, another person may look at the same scenario and decide that the situation is fair because the newcomer has computer skills and the company is paying extra for those skills. Different people may look at the same situation and perceive different levels of equity. We should emphasize that equity perceptions develop as a result of a subjective process. The new person does not have any experience here (referent’s inputs) but will be paid $14 an hour. I am paid $10 an hour for this (outcomes). In the prior example, however, the person may reason as follows: I have been working here for 6 months. There may also be other, more peripheral outcomes, such as acknowledgment or preferential treatment from a manager. For the hourly wage employee in our example, the $10 an hour pay rate was a core outcome. Outcomes are the perceived rewards someone can receive from the situation. In the previous example, the person’s hard work loyalty to the organization amount of time with the organization and level of education, training, and skills may have been relevant inputs. She is the editor-in-chief of journal of Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. Her work has appeared in scholarly publications such as Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences, Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, and Psychological Science, and has been featured in media outlets such as the Harvard Business Review, New York Times, Business Week, Wall Street Journal, the Huffington Post, and BBC.Inputs are the contributions people feel they are making to the environment. Her research is organized around four conceptual themes that involve understanding 1) the dynamic nature of moral decision-making and 2) how individuals psychologically experience everyday moral encounters, 3) charitable giving and receiving with an interest in how the delivery of aid impacts recipients, and 4) the complexity and challenges of managing ethnic and gender diversity for organizations. Maryam is an organizational psychologist who seeks to make theoretical and practical contributions at the intersection of management and psychology. Maryam Kouchaki is a Professor of Management and Organizations at Kellogg School of Management.
0 kommentar(er)
