Colakoglu, Culha & Atay (2010) indicated that perceived organizational support have a great positive impact on job satisfaction, normative, affective and constant commitment; job satisfaction have a great positive impact on affective normative and constant commitment accordingly. Additional to this, job satisfaction also play mediating role amongst organizational perceived support and organizational commitment.
Concluding from the Brazil cultural values and theory of social identity, Casper, Harris, Bianco & Wayne (2011) revealed that the association of two directions the conflict between work & family such as the interference of work in the family commitment and vise-versa, and supervisor perceived support with affective and constant organizational
…show more content…
Study revealed that there interpersonal trust have positive impact on organizational commitment and co-worker support, however, the organizations support have positive relationship only with co-worker support.
Wang (2014) conducted research study to examine the co-relation between perceived supervisor support and organizational citizenship behavior while considering organizational commitment is mediating variable. Study revealed that the existence of supervisor support enhance organizational citizenship behavior and this possibility greatly exist, via employees job satisfaction and organizational commitments. The association among perceived supervisor support and organizational commitment have greatly exist in the employees for long period of
…show more content…
Distributive Justice which is referred as the fairness of outcomes in distributions or allocations (Adams, 1965), Procedural Justice is referred to as the fairness of the procedures or the means used to determine the outcomes (Thibaut & Walker, 1975) and a third type is Interactional Justice which is deemed to be an extension of procedural justice.
Distributive Justice. Distributive justice was the only type of organizational justice till 1975. Based on Adam’s equity theory (1965), distributive justice was referred to as the people’s perceptions of fairness of the outcomes they receive relative to their contributions and also to the outcomes and contributions of others. Outcomes like pay or performance appraisal were noted by the employees and efforts that were made. Distributive justice focuses on outcomes, when unfairness is seen regarding any outcome, it affects the emotions of the employees.
Procedural Justice. It refers to “the perceived fairness of the process or procedures used to determine organizational outcomes” (Folger & Greenberg, 1985). Individuals in organizations want to control what happens to them and also the procedures used to make decisions so that to know their worth in an organization. It relates to the fairness of the procedures used by an organization in allocating and distributing rewards and the voice given to employees in the distribution process (Folger & Cropanzano, 1998; Colquitt,
The principle of justice is to treat others equitably and fairly. Often confused with entitlement, it is providing quality and comparable care to individuals equally. One example of the principle of justice in society is the recent Affordable Care Act attempt to meet the healthcare needs of the
By definition justice means the quality of being just or fair. The issue then stands, is justice fair for everyone? Justice is the administration of law, the act of determining rights and assigning rewards or punishments, "justice deferred is justice denied.” The terms of Justice is brought up in Henry David Thoreau’s writing, “Civil Disobedience.”
Wolf et. al. (2015) described procedural justice as police decisions that are viewed as fair when citizens are given the opportunity to express their views during officers’ decision-making processes. Research by Tyler (2014) identified procedural justice is a method of attaining legitimacy.
Fairness Doctrine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2011, January 15). Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved February 4, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine
...you will find many different types of justice from distributive, to retributive and compensatory. There are not different types of justice. You do not make an idea more just by adding justice to the end of it. Justice is the intention to conform to truth and fairness.
According to Boyd (2015), “Restorative justice could mean different things to different people and many organizations claim to be practitioners of restorative justice” (p.328). Restorative takes a different approach of understanding a problem and how to find a suitable solution. For example, it creates the idea that the court system should treat everyone the same. No one should be marginalized base on his or her race, gender, and sexual orientation. Everyone should deserve to have equal rights. According to Spielthenner (2015), Formal Justice is the “Treatment of persons is formally just if they are treated equally if they are equals and their treatment is proportionate to their inequality if they are
Trust in leadership will be positively related to job performance, OCBs, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, goal commitment and belief in information and will be negatively related to intension to
Justice claim-making argue how things ought to be. The first type of justice claim-making is distributive and there are three dimensions of distributive which are, vulnerability, need, and responsibility. The concepts of distributive justice are significant to environmental justice claim-making. The second type is procedural justice, where procedures and decisions are being made whenever there is an act of participation in decision-making for a fair process. The last type is justice as recognition, it is often social categorizations as to who is respected and valued or recognized and who is
The are certain words in the English language that are extremely difficult to define therefore to give them meaning, is to enter a fierce debate among thinkers. How does one define a word that is so abstract and whose definition and purpose varies so extensively from nation to nation, language to language, and person to person? One can only hope to grasp the concept of such words, before another person comes up with a slightly more adequate definition than the one currently leading the pack. The reason the definition these words vary as much as they do is simply because their meanings are bottom-line based on opinion. One of these such words is justice. However, many would agree that justice requires a form of equilibrium where every bad action has a reaction, people follow agreed upon rules and laws that are absent of bias towards any particular group, and that these rules as well as justice itself must be moral-based whether religious or natural.
Justice usually has been used with reference to a standard of rightness, Fairness is the quality of making judgments that are free from discrimination. People should strive to practice fairness. Fairness comes from the Old English faeger, meaning "pleasing or attractive." The word is also used to describe physical beauty.
When I think about the word justice what to my mind comes fairness, and the willingness to be treated fairly. It does not matter where we are, who we are with or what we are doing, we want to be treated equally. There is no way we can accept harsh treatment just because of our gender, skin color, or cloths we are wearing. It is completely unfair to be paid less just because you are a different gender, or be treated differently just because you are a different color. Despite all other factors, being treated equally is what almost every one of us is seeks for. We have the right to feel that each and every one of us merits identical and fair treatment. Justice is about fairness and equal treatment. Furthermore, as Kirk in his study defines justice “the process or result of using laws to fairly judge and punish crimes and criminals” (pg.3). That’s why justice it is easily used interchangeably with a word such is fairness, and that’s why every individual in a given society should behave justly despite the circumstances he/she might be surrounded at different periods.
Of course I looked “justice” up in the dictionary before I started to write this paper and I didn’t find anything of interest except of course a common word in every definition, that being “fair”. This implies that justice would have something to do with being fair. I thought that if one of the things the law and legal system are about is maintaining and promoting justice and a sense of “fairness”, they might not be doing such a spiffy job. An eye for an eye is fair? No, that would be too easy, too black and white. I could cite several examples where I thought a judge’s or jury’s ruling was not fair, but I won’t because frankly, we’ve all seen those.
Justice can be defined as, valuing the diversity and challenging the injustice in society while human rights refer to, benefits an individual enjoys by virtual of being a human being. Justice is said to exist when all citizens share a general humanity and, therefore, experience equitable treatment, fair community resource sharing and human right support. According to justice citizens are not supposed to be discriminated, nor their well being or welfare prejudiced or constrained on the lines of gender, religion, age, belief, race, political affiliation and even sexuality.
There is no one definition for procedural fairness. However, it is generally accepted that in order to be fair in a legal sense, the common law rules of natural justice, freedom from bias on the part of the decision maker and a meaningful and informed participation by the person in the proceedings, must be followed throughout the process .
In its narrow sense, which he names as the particular justice, justice is fairness and to be unjust is to act ‘graspingly’. Justice is concerned with those goods, such as money, safety or suffering, that are gained or in which we can obtain some advantage relative to other people. To be unjust is to seek to gain more than one’s fair share of something good or avoid one’s fair share of something bad. Justice is the principle that each person receives their ‘due’.