Site Loader

There are different models about organizational
justice include two, three and four factor model, though most of the studies
have been done based on three factor model (e.g., DeConinck, 2010; Liljegren
& Ekberg, 2010). Two factor model which was proposed by Greenberg (1990)
and supported by Sweeney and McFarlin (1993) involves distributive
and procedural justice. Four factor model divides interactional justice to
two sub-dimensions include interpersonal and informational justice. Colquitt
(2001) believed that this model compared to the previous ones, is match
with the data better.

Although, the aspects of justice are different, but
they are correlated to each other (DeConinck, 2010). Some meta-analysis studies
indicate that there are high correlations between distributive and procedural
justice (Colquitt et al, 2001; Hauenstein, McGonigle, & Flinder, 1997). Folger
and Cropanzano (2001) as the leading researchers in justice studies, emphasized
that the outcome, the interactions, and the procedure are all characteristics of
a single event, not essentially separate from each other and the interaction of
them affects people attitudes, emotions and behaviours (Holbrook, 1999). Consistent
with this idea, Cropanzano and Ambrose (2001) introduced the concept of
“Monistic Perspective,” which addresses a single event can be seen both a
process and outcome, depends on the context. They believe that we cannot see
them as the separate constructs, because fair procedures get most of their
importance from their beneficial outcomes.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Gold and Shaw (1998) believed that people show an
average of the three types of unfairness (i.e., an outcome, a procedure, or an
interaction) as the cause of a given problem instead of referring to just one
of them, indicating that a single focus is probably inadequate to reflect
reality. Interestingly, this high correlation of three dimensions have been
replicated in Parker and Kohlmeyer (2005) study.

 

Ethical/unethical
behaviour in the organizations

During this 20 years, researches on unethical
behaviour in the organizations significantly have been increased (O’Fallon and
Butterfield 2005; Kish-Gephart et al. 2010). Particularly, after 2008 global
financial crisis we are seeing a huge academic and practical interests on
ethical studies in academic or business institutes (e.g., Kapner 2012; Schnebel
and Bienert 2004; Trevin˜o and Nelson 2004)

Variety and extension of the news about unethical
behaviours, regardless of the effect of media, in the financial sector,
business world, politics, and religion indicates that unethical behaviour is a
serious problem for organizations, economies, and society as a whole (see
Cropanzano and Stein 2009; De Cremer et al. 2010; Trevin˜o et al. 2006).

Most of the studies on ethical/unethical behaviour
have focused on two streams, the first stream is about unethical behaviours (stealing,
lying, cheating, and counterproductive work behaviour; e.g., Chang 1998;
Peterson 2002) and the second one is ethical behaviours that exceeds moral
minimums (e.g., whistle-blowing; Trevin˜o and Youngblood 1990). There is also a
third stream which is about ethical behaviours reliant on moral standards
(e.g., obeying the law; e.g., Wimbush et al. 1997).

Ethical behaviour is guided by the rules and codes of
conducts, which
are more right, fair and moral than bad (Beauchamp and Bowie, 2000; Brown et
al. 2005; Hunt
and Vitell, 1986; Lewis, 1985, p. 381). In the organizations, employees’
individual characteristics such as knowledge, values, attitudes and ethical
sensitivity and factors relevant to the organizational situation such as company’s
ethical climate and values within an ethical context, are believed to
contribute to ethical behaviour (Low et al., 2000; McClaren, 2000). Unethical behaviours
refers to those which violate moral norms accepted by a larger community such
as organization (Velasquez 2005; Kaptein 2008). Unethical behaviour in the
organizations could be only counterproductive behaviours such as theft (Greenberg
1990), but sometimes it is broader than a counterproductive behaviour and it
may bring harm (Marcus and Schuler, 2004; Fox et al. 2001; Thau, Aquino, &
Poortvliet, 2007). In spite of damaging the organization,
counterproductive behaviour is not always unethical (Kaptein 2008). For
instance, disobeying orders or stealing things from the organization to
evidence organizational corruption might be ethical and in line with the law (Jacobs,
Belschak & Den Hartog, 2014).

Post Author: admin

x

Hi!
I'm Erica!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out