Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Hypocrisies of Fairness: Towards a More Reflexive Ethical Base in Organizational Justice Research and Practice

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite becoming one of the most active research areas in organizational behavior, the field of organizational justice has stayed at a safe distance from moral questions of values, as well as from critical questions regarding the implications of fairness considerations on the status quo of power relations in today’s organizations. We argue that both organizational justice research and the managerial practices it informs lack reflexivity. This manifests itself in two possible hypocrisies of fairness. Managers may apply organizational justice knowledge but fail to increase the actual levels of fairness in employment relations. Researchers, on the other hand, may claim to promote fairness through their work while actually providing managers with tools that enable or even encourage them to feed the hypocrisy of fairness identified above. As␣part of our argument, we identify three types of mechanisms managers may use to influence and manage the formation of fairness perceptions. We consider how the exercise of power is related to the potential application of organizational justice knowledge across individual, interpersonal and social levels. Our approach makes power dynamics and moral implications salient, and questions the purely subjectivist view of justice researchers that deliberately discards normative aspects. The questions opened up by considering alternative mechanisms for creating fairness perceptions have led us to formulate a research agenda for organizational justice research that takes multiple stakeholder interests, power dynamics and ethical implications into account. We believe that the fields of organizational justice and normative justice can benefit from combined research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams J. S. (1963) Toward an Understanding of Inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 67:422–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams J. S. (1965) Inequity in Social Exchange In: Berkowitz L. (ed) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 2 Academic Press, New York, pp. 267–299

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams J. S., Freedman S. (1976) Equity Revisited: Comments and Annotated Bibliography. In: Berkowitz L., Walster L. (eds) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 9 Academic Press, New York, pp. 43–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Alverson M., Deetz S. (1996) Critical Theory and Postmodernism Approaches to Organisation Studies In: Clegg S. R., Hardy C., Nord W. R. (eds) Handbook of Organization Studies. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 191–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose M. L., Cropanzano R (2003) A Longitudinal Analysis of Organizational Fairness: An Examination of Reactions to Tenure and Promotion Decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology 88(2):266–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armenakis A. A. (1988) A Review of Research on the Change Typology In: Pasmore W., Woodman R. (eds) Research in Organizational Change and Development. 2 JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn, pp. 163–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachrach P., Baratz M. S. (1963) Decisions and Nondecisions – An Analytical Framework. American Political Science Review 57:641–651

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J.: 1986, ‘Identifying Principles of Interactional Justice: The Case of Corporate Recruiting’, in R. J. C. Bies (ed.), Moving Beyond Equity Theory: New Directions in Research on Justice in Organizations. Symposium at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Chicago, IL

  • Bies R. J. (1987) The Predicament of Injustice: The Management of Moral Outrage In: Cummings L. L., Staw B. M. (eds) Research in Organizational Behavior. 9 JAI, Greenwich, CT, pp. 289–319

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies R. J., Moag J. (1986) Interactional Justice: Communication Criteria of Fairness In: Lewicki R., Sheppard B., Bazerman M. (eds) Research on Negotiation in Organizations. 1 JAI Press, Greenwich, pp. 43–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies R. J., Shapiro D. L. (1987) Interactional Fairness Judgments: The Influence of Causal Accounts. Social Justice Research 1(2):199–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bies R. J., Shapiro D. L. (1988) Voice and Justification: Their Influence on Procedural Fairness Judgments. Academy of Management Journal 31:676–685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bies R. J., Tyler T. R. (1993) The “Litigation Mentality” in Organizations: A Test of Alternative Psychological Explanations. Organization Science 4:352–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bies R. J., Tripp T. M. (1995) Beyond Distrust: “Getting Even” and the Need for Revenge In: Kramer R. M., Tyler T. R. (eds) Trust in Organizations. Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 246–260

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies R. J., Tripp T. M. (2001) A Passion for Justice: The Rationality and Morality of Revenge In: Cropanzano R. (ed) Justice in the Workplace: From Theory to Practice. 2 Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 197–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies R. J., Tripp T. M. (2002) Hot Flashes, Open Wounds: Injustice and the Tyranny of its Emotions In: Gilliland S. W., Steiner D. D., Skarlicki D. P. (eds) Emerging Perspectives on Managing Organizational Justice. IAP, Greenwich, pp. 203–221

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies R. J., Shapiro D. L., Cummings L. L. (1988) Causal Accounts and Managing Organizational Conflict: Is It Enough To Say It’s Not My Fault? Communication Research 15:381–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bird F., Waters J. (1989) The Moral Muteness of Managers. California Management Review 32(1):73–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau P. M. (1964) Exchange and Power in Social Life Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J.: 2006, ‘Why It’s So Hard to Be Fair’, Harvard Business Review March 122–129

  • Cohen-Charash Y., Spector P. E. (2001) The Role of Justice in Organizations: A Meta-Analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 86(2):278–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt J. A., Greenberg J. (2001) Doing Justice to Organizational Justice: Forming and Applying Fairness Judgments In: Gilliland S. W., Steiner D. D., Skarlicki D. P. (eds) Theoretical and Cultural Perspectives on Organizational Justice. IAP, Greenwich, Connecticut, pp. 217–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano R., Greenberg J. (1997) Progress in Organizational Justice: Tunnelling Through the Maze In: Cooper C. L., Robertson I. T. (eds) International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 12 Wiley, Chichester, pp. 317–372

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano R., Rupp D. (2002) Some Reflections on the Morality of Organizational Justice. In: Gilliland S. W., Steiner D. D., Skarlicki D. P. (eds) Emerging Perspectives on Managing Organizational Justice. IAP, Greenwich, pp. 225–278

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano R., et␣al. (2001) Moral Virtues, Fairness Heuristics, Social Entities and Other Denizens of Organizational Justice. Journal of Vocational Behavior 58(2):164–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl R. A. (1957) The Concept of Power. Behavioural Science 2:201–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch M. (1975) Equity, Equality, and Need: What Determines Which Value Will Be Used As The Basis For Distributive Justice? Journal of Social Issues 31:137–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson T., Werhane P. H. (2002) Introduction to Ethical Reasoning In: Donaldson T., Werhane P. H., Cording M. (eds) Ethical Issues in Business. 7th edition Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, pp. 1–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez-Dols J. M. (2002) Perverse Justice and Perverse Norms: Another Turn of the Screw In: Ross M., Miller D. T. (eds) The Justice Motive in Everyday Life. University Press, Cambridge, pp 79–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnis J. (1980) Natural Law and Natural Rights Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger R. (1977) Distributive and Procedural Justice: Combined Impact on “Vice” and Improvement on Experienced Inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35:108–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. and R. Cropanzano: 1998, Organizational Justice and Human Resource Management. In: Whetter D.␣(ed.) (Foundations for Organizational Science; Sage Publications, London)

  • Folger R., Cropanzano R. (2001) Fairness Theory: Justice as Accountability In: Greenberg J., Cropanzano R. (eds) Advances in Organizational Justice. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, pp. 1–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox A. (1974) Beyond Contract: Work, Power and Trust Relations Faber and Faber, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman M. (1962) Capitalism and Freedom University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaventa J. (1980) Power and Powerlessness. Quiescence and Rebellion in an Appalachian Valley. University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg J. (1987) A Taxonomy of Organizational Justice Theories. Academy of Management Review 12(1):9–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg J. (1988) Equity and Workplace Status: A Field Experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology 73:606–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg J. (1990) Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. Journal of Management 16(2):399–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg J. (1994) Using Socially Fair Treatment to Promote Acceptance of a Work Site Smoking Ban. Journal of Applied Psychology 79:288–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg J. (2001) The Seven Loose Can(n)ons of Organizational Justice In: Greenberg J., Cropanzano R. (eds) Advances in Organizational Justice. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, pp. 245–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg J., R. L. Cohen (1982) Why Justice? Normative and Instrumental Interpretations. In: Greenberg J., Cohen R. L. (eds) Equity and Justice in Social Behavior. Academic Press, New York, pp. 437–469

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg J., Wiethoff C. (2001) Organizational Justice as Proaction and Reaction: Implications for Research and Application In: Cropanzano R. (ed) Justice in the Workplace: From Theory to Practice. 2 Lawrence Erlbaum, Wahwah, NJ, pp. 271–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton G. G., Biggart N. W. (1985) Why People Obey: Theoretical Observations on Power and Obedience in Complex Organizations. Sociological Perspective 28:3–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman A. O. (1970) Exit, Voice and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbes, T.: 1947 (1651) Leviathan, ed. M. Oakeshott (Basil Blackwell, Oxford)

  • Homans G. C. (1961) Social Behaviour: Its Elementary Forms Routledge and Kegan Paul, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer L. T., Kiewitz C. (2005) Organizational Justice: A Behavioral Science Concept with Critical Implications for Business Ethics and Stakeholder Thoery Business Ethics Quarterly 15(1):67–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelsen, H.: 2000 (1953), Was ist Gerechtigkeit? (Reclam, Stuttgart)

  • Kipnis D. (1972) Does Power Corrupt? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 24(1):33–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konow, J.: 2003, ‘Which Is the Fairest One of All? A␣Positive Analysis of Justice Theories’, Journal of Economic Literature XLI (December), 1188–1239

  • Kulik C. T., Ambrose M. L. (1992) Personal and Situational Determinants of Referent Choice Academy of Management Review 17(2):212–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal G. S., Karuza J., Fry W. R. (1980) Beyond Fairness: A Theory of Allocation Preferences In: Mikula G. (ed) Justice and Social Interaction. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 167–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind E. A. (2001) Fairness Heuristic Theory: Justice Judgments as Pivotal Cognitions in Organizational Relations In: Greenberg J., Cropanzano R. (eds) Advances in Organizational Justice. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, pp. 56–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Lukes, S.: 2005 (1974), Power – A Radical View, 2nd edn. (Palgrave, Hampshire)

  • MacCoun R. J. (2005) Voice, Control, and Belonging: The Double-edged Sword of Procedural Fairness. Annual Review of Law and Social Sciences 1:171–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marx, K.: 1929, Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, eds. E. Paul and C. Paul (International Publishers, New York)

  • McFarlin D. B., Sweeney P. D. (2001). Cross-Cultural Applications of Organizational Justice In: Cropanzano R. (ed) Justice in the Workplace: From Theory to Practice. 2 Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 67–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J. S.: 1940 (1861), Utilitarianism, Liberty, and Responsive Government (J. M. Dent, London)

  • Nozick R. (1974) Anarchy, State, and Utopia Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Overbeck J. R., Park B. (2001) When Power Does Not Corrupt: Superior Individuation Processes Among Powerful Perceivers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81(4):549–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paterson J. M., Green A., Cary J. (2002) The Measurement of Organizational Justice in Organizational Change Programmes: A Reliability, Validity and Context-Sensitivity Assessment Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 75:393–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer J., Langton N. (1993) The Effects of Wage Dispersion on Satisfaction, Productivity, and Turnover Among College Administrators. Industrial and Labor Relations Review 45:753–763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer J., Fong C. (2002) The End of Business Schools? Less Success than Meets the Eye. Academy of Management Learning and Education 1(1):78–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Philips R. A. (1997) Stakeholder Theory and a Principle of Fairness. Business Ethics Quarterly 7(1):51–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J. (1971) A Theory of Justice Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro D. L. (1991) The Effects of Explanations on Negative Reactions to Deceit. Administrative Science Quarterly 36:614–630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard B. H., Lewicki R. J., Minton J. W. (1992) Organizational Justice: The Search for Fairness in the Workplace Lexington Books, Lexington, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer M. (1993) Fairness in Personnel Selection Avebury, Andershot, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon R. (1992) Corporate Roles, Personal Values: An Aristotelian Approach to Business Ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly 2:317–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taris T. (2000) A Primer in Longitudinal Data Analysis Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut J., Walker L. (1975) Procedural Justice Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos K., Lind E. A., Wilke H. A. M. (2001) The Psychology of Procedural and Distributive Justice Viewed from the Perspective of Fairness Heuristic Theory. In: Cropanzano R. (ed) Justice in the Workplace. 2 Erlbaum, Mahway, NJ, pp. 49–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos K., et␣al. (1998) Evaluating Outcomes by Means of the Fair Process Effect: Evidence for Different Processes in Fairness and Satisfaction Judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74:1493–1503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson G. W. (2003) Ideology and the Symbolic Construction of Fairness in Organizational Change. Journal of Organizational Change Management 16(2):154–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werhane, P. H. and S. Freedman: 1999, ‘Business Ethics: The State of the Art’, International Journal of Management Research March, 1–16

  • Zohar D. (1995) The Justice Perspective of Job Stress. Journal of Organizational Behavior 15:487–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marion Fortin.

Additional information

Marion Fortin (Ph.D., Trinity College Dublin) is Lecturer in Organisational Behaviour at the Durham Business School, Durham University. Marion previously worked in the financial industry and also was a visiting scholar at the Stern School, NYU. Marion’s main research interest lies in the role of justice judgments in the workplace. Her current and past research projects also involve issues of organizational change, power mechanisms, and the role of emotions in organizations.

Martin R. Fellenz (Ph.D., The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) is Lecturer in Organisational Behaviour at the School of Business, University of Dublin, Trinity College. His research interests include organizational justice, organizational transformation and change, teaching and learning, and the development of theory and theory schools. He regularly contributes to executive education programs in a variety of countries and consults with leading international public, private and not-for-profit organizations on matters of leadership, management development, and organizational transformation.

A previous version of this paper was originally presented at the IESE Business School, University of Navarra, for the 14th International Symposium on Ethics, Business and Society: “Towards a Comprehensive Integration of Ethics Into Management: Problems and Prospects”. May 18–19, 2006).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fortin, M., Fellenz, M.R. Hypocrisies of Fairness: Towards a More Reflexive Ethical Base in Organizational Justice Research and Practice. J Bus Ethics 78, 415–433 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9330-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9330-z

Keywords

Navigation