Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Multidimensionality in Organizational Justice-Trust Relationship for Newcomer Employees: a Moderated-Mediation Model

  • Published:
Current Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Justice-trust relationship has been well acknowledged in the organizational behavior research so far. However, the existing research on justice-trust paid little attention to the process-dynamics of trust formation in the newcomer employees (Colquitt and Rodell in Academy of Management Journal, 54(6), 1183–1206, Colquitt and Rodell 2011; Schoorman et al. in Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 344,354, Schoorman et al. 2007). The present study intends to unfold the trust formation phenomena of the newcomer employees where organizational justice perception leads to trust through organizational trustworthiness. Interactions between the dimensions of organizational justice perception and trustworthiness towards trust are the focal point of the study. We further propose that a moderated mediation model explains the trust formation phenomena comprehensively. Findings suggests that supervisor referent interpersonal justice moderates the indirect relationship between organizational justice and trust. Procedural and interactional justice also have significant relationships with trust through all the three dimensions of trustworthiness. The results indicated a full mediation for procedural justice and a partial mediation for interactional justice. The findings have important theoretical implications for uncertainty management, and psychological contract fulfillment theory.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. OJ was formed as second order factor from all the three dimensions of justice. The moderated-mediation effects were separately checked for OPJ and OIJ dimensions of OJ and were found to be significant for both OPJ and OIJ through benevolence and integrity.

References

  • Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the relationship between organizational justice and work outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(3), 267–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., & Corley, K. G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34(3), 325–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 1(1), 43–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. NewYork: Wiley.

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment (Vol. 17). New York: Sage Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A. (2008). Two decades of organizational justice: Findings, controversies, and future directions. The Sage handbook of organizational behavior, 1, 73–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., & Rodell, J. B. (2011). Justice, trust, and trustworthiness: A longitudinal analysis integrating three theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 54(6), 1183–1206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, 874–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Foa, U. G., & Foa, E. B. (1980). Resource theory: Interpersonal behavior as exchange. In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 77–94). New York: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. M., & Sumanth, J. J. (2009). Mission possible? The performance of prosocially motivated employees depends on manager trustworthiness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 927–944.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1986). Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2), 340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 9–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J., & Wiethoff, C. (2001). Organizational justice as proaction and reaction: Implications for research and application. Justice in the Workplace: From theory to Practice, 2, 271–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. A., & Martens, M. L. (2009). The mediating role of overall fairness and the moderating role of trust certainty in justice–criteria relationships: The formation and use of fairness heuristics in the workplace. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(8), 1025–1051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kernan, M. C., & Hanges, P. J. (2002). Survivor reactions to reorganization: Antecedents and consequences of procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(5), 916.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kong, D. T., & Barsness, Z. I. (2016). Perceived managerial (remote leader) trustworthiness as a moderator for the relationship between overall fairness and perceived supervisory (direct leader) trustworthiness. Current Psychology, 1-15.

  • Konovsky, M. A., & Pugh, S. D. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 656–669.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lavelle, J. J., Rupp, D. E., & Brockner, J. (2007). Taking a multifoci approach to the study of justice, social exchange, and citizenship behavior: The target similarity model. Journal of Management, 33, 841–866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, G. S. (1976). The distribution of rewards and resources in groups and organizations. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 9, 91–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? (pp. 27–55). Springer, US.

  • Lewicki, R. J., Wiethoff, C., & Tomlinson, E. (2005). What is the role of trust in organizational justice? In J. Greenberg & J. Colquitt (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice: Fundamental questions about fairness in the workplace (pp. 247–270). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A. (2001). Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational behavior (pp. 56–88). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., & Van den Bos, K. (2002). When fairness works: Toward a general theory of uncertainty management. Research in Organizational Behavior, 24, 181–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in crosssectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Patil, A. (2006). Common method variance in IS research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science, 52(12), 1865–1883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (1999). The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust for management: A field quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(1), 123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., & Gavin, M. B. (2005). Trust in management and performance: Who minds the shop while the employees watch the boss? Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 874–888.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. W. (1990). The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 12 (pp. 43–72). Greenwich: JAI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (2001). Affective commitment to the organization: The contribution of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 825.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ring, P. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1992). Structuring cooperative relationships between organizations. Strategic Management Journal, 13(7), 483–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S. L., & Morrison, E. W. (1995). Psychological contracts and OCB: The effect of unfulfilled obligations on civic virtue behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 289–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S. L., & Morrison, E. W. (2000). The development of psychological contract breach and violation: A longitudinal study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 525–546. doi:10.1002/1099-1379 (200008)21:5_525::AID-JOB40_3.0.CO;2-T.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S. L., & Rousseau, D. M. (1994). Violating the psychological contract: Not the exception but the norm. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 245–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, C. C., Chang, C.-H., Johnson, R. E., & Levy, P. E. (2009). Perceptions of the organizational context and psychological contract breach: Assessing competing perspectives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 202–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M. (1990). New hire perceptions of their own and their employer’s obligations: A study of psychological contracts. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, 389–400. doi:10.1002/job.4030110506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E., & Cropanzano, R. (2002). The mediating effects of social exchange relationships in predicting workplace outcomes from multifoci organizational justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 925–946.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 344–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serva, M. A., Fuller, M. A., & Mayer, R. C. (2005). The reciprocal nature of trust: A longitudinal study of interacting teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(6), 625–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanock, L. R., & Eisenberger, R. (2006). When supervisors feel supported: Relationships with subordinates' perceived supervisor support, perceived organizational support, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 689.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. R., & Conrey, F. R. (2009). The social context of cognition. In P. Robbins & M. Aydede (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of situated cognition (pp. 454–466). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. In Utility, probability, and human decision making (pp. 141–162). Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos, K. (2001). Uncertainty management: The influence of uncertainty salience on reactions to perceived procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 931.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos, K., Wilke, H. A., & Lind, E. A. (1998). When do we need procedural fairness? The role of trust in authority. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(6), 1449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., Bommer, W. H., & Tetrick, L. E. (2002). The role of fair treatment and rewards in perceptions of organizational support and leader-member exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 590.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. In An attributional theory of motivation and emotion (pp. 159–190). US: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indian Institute of Management Raipur, GEC Campus, Sejbahar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 492015, India

    Shashank Mittal &  Shubham

  2. Indian Institute of Management Sambalpur, Silicon West, P.O. Sason,, Sambalpur, Odisha, 768200, India

    Atri Sengupta

Authors
  1. Shashank Mittal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shubham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Atri Sengupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shashank Mittal.

Ethics declarations

Declaration

We state that the manuscript is an original work and it has not been submitted to nor published anywhere else. We didn’t receive any financial assistance for conducting this research. Data were collected from private enterprises. However, we have disguised the name of the companies for maintaining the confidentiality. The authors have approved the paper and met the criteria for authorship as suggested by this esteemed journal.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mittal, S., Shubham & Sengupta, A. Multidimensionality in Organizational Justice-Trust Relationship for Newcomer Employees: a Moderated-Mediation Model. Curr Psychol 38, 737–748 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-017-9632-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-017-9632-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation