| The Role of Fairness and Privacy in Electronic Performance Monitoring and Control Systems: Some Preliminary Findings |
| | Alge, Bradley J. | Ohio State U., Columbus | alge.3@osu.edu | (614)-292-0772 |
| | In an effort to track employee activities, organizations are increasingly relying on electronic performance monitoring and control systems.
Critics argue that such systems can be unfair and invasive to employees. Despite these concerns, there has been relatively little systematic
research examining the role of fairness or privacy in understanding the effects of electronic performance monitoring and control systems.
Moreover, the nature of the relationship between fairness and privacy attitudes is unclear. Adopting an organizational justice and
organizational privacy framework, a laboratory study investigated whether procedural variation in electronic performance monitoring impacts
fairness and privacy attitudes. Students were randomly assigned to one of eight experimental conditions representing a
2 (information relevance) x 2(voice) x 2 (consistency), factorial design. The setting simulated a "telework" environment whereby students
performed computer-based activities using telecommunications technologies in what they perceived to be a real organization. It was
hypothesized that privacy sensitive procedures would impact both fairness and privacy attitudes, whereas privacy insensitive procedures
would impact only fairness attitudes.
As predicted, both information relevance and voice impacted perceived invasions of privacy and procedural justice. Perceived invasions of
privacy completely mediated the effects of information relevance on procedural justice, and partially mediated the effects of voice as predicted.
Consistency, although it did not relate to privacy as predicted, also did not relate to procedural justice judgments. The findings are
encouraging for stimulating new directions in organizational justice and organizational privacy research.
|
| | Keywords: Performance monitoring; Fairness; Privacy |
| Cutting Off Your Nose to Spite Your Face? Why Graduates Damage the Reputational Rankings of Their Alma Maters |
| | Cable, Daniel M. | U. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill | dan_cable@unc.edu | (919)-962-6145 |
| | Parsons, Charles K. | Georgia Institute of Technology | charles.parsons@mgt.gatech.edu | (404)-894-4921 |
| | Economic self-interest and self-enhancement theory predict that graduates will maximize their Alma Maters’ reputational rankings. However, some graduates denigrate their alma maters’ reputations when surveyed by the external media (e.g., Business Week). We conducted a longitudinal investigation of 161 graduates from one university and predicted their intentions to badmouth their school to the external media. Results suggested that graduates badmouthed their alma maters when they perceived the quality of the university’s professors, social life, and library resources to be poor. Results also suggested that graduates may use badmouthing to “punish” their alma maters when they perceive the fairness of job search processes and outcomes to be low, highlighting the role of career offices in universities’ reputational rankings. |
| | Keywords: Justice; School reputation |
| A Construct Validation of a Measure of Organizational Justice |
| | Colquitt, Jason A. | U. of Florida | colquitt@pilot.msu.edu | 517-353-6428 |
| | This study provides evidence of construct validity for a new measure of organizational justice. Items were generated by strictly following the seminal works in the justice literature. A confirmatory factor analysis supported a four-factor solution with distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice as distinct dimensions. This solution fit the data significantly better than a two or three-factor solution which employed larger interactional or procedural justice dimensions. Structural equation modeling results also demonstrated predictive validity for the justice dimensions, and all models were cross-validated in an independent sample. |
| | Keywords: justice; fairness; measurement |
| Managing Recipient Responses to Performance Evaluation: The Influence of Multiple Justice Mechanisms |
| | Holbrook, Robert Leonard | U. of Central Arkansas | holbrook@mail.uca.edu | (501)-450-5359 |
| | A study of hospital employees examined the effect of three justice-related mechanisms – outcome favorability (distributive), opportunity for voice (procedural), and explanations for a decision (interactional) – on recipients’ responses to performance evaluation. Results indicate that all three mechanisms were instrumental in producing more positive responses. Follow-up analyses suggested that the type of explanation accompanying a performance evaluation was more important than the presence (vs. absence) of an explanation. Explanation type determined the general direction of responses. Performance-based (internal) explanations produced the most positive responses while nonperformance-based (external) explanations produced the least positive responses. Implications for managerial practice are discussed.
|
| | Keywords: justice; performance; evaluation |
| Cruising for Justice: Determinants of Distributive and Interactional Justice in Extended Service Encounters |
| | Conlon, Donald E. | Michigan State U. | Conlon@pilot.msu.edu | 517-432-3519 |
| | Van Dyne, Linn | Michigan State U. | vandyne@pilot.msu.edu | 517-432-3512 |
| | Milner, Morgan | Michigan State U. | milnermo@pilot.msu.edu | 517-432-1878 |
| | We combine questionniare data on cruise vacations with measures of the structural and social apsects of ships, external evaluations, and passenger demographics to predict passengers' distributive and interactional justice judgments. While ship characteristics and external evaluations predict both forms of justice, crew characteristics and interactions predict only interactional justice. |
| | Keywords: SWervice ; Justice |