Fairness is in the eye of the beholder: what organisations need to know about organisational justice to support successful hybrid working

This article was written by Olivia Olivarius, Acting Head of Insights and Jenny Robinson, Senior Behaviour Scientist at the FSCB.

Line managers are experiencing multiple challenges arising from the post-pandemic evolution in working models¹.   Discussions at a FSCB member roundtable² indicate that many line managers have been faced with making difficult decisions around how to implement organisational policies on flexibility in working locations, hours and work patterns.

Research suggests that when it comes to returning to the office, there is a mismatch between employee and employer preferences and employees have been complaining of a lack of consultation³. Clearly it is a challenge for any organisation to develop a policy that meets the requirements of teams – one size does not fit all⁴. So, how can hard-pressed line managers make decisions that are fair to employees?

The FSCB believes that help to address this issue lies in the concept of Organisational Justice, as highlighted in our Future of Workplaces Report⁵.

Organisational Justice – What is it and why is it important?

Organisational justice refers to employees’ perceptions of social and interpersonal fairness within their workplace⁶. These perceptions influence attitudes and behaviours, which can subsequently impact outcomes such as, such innovation⁷, increased learning behaviour⁸, organisational trust⁹, ethical behaviour¹⁰, organisational commitment¹¹ and work performance¹². Unjust organisational environments have been linked with workplace disruption, sabotage, vandalism¹³, increased absenteeism¹⁴, moral disengagement (when employees depart from restraint from behaving unethically)¹⁵, burnout¹⁶ and heavy drinking¹⁷.

Types of organisational justice

There are 4 types of perceived fairness within organisational settings:

• distributive justice – this is the perception of the fairness of decision outcomes, such as promotion opportunities, pay, positive performance appraisals
• procedural justice – this is the perception of fairness within the processes that lead to outcomes, for example performance calibration or procedures for allocating promotional opportunities
• interpersonal justice – this is the perception (positive or negative) of interpersonal interactions and treatments during the decision-making process
• information justice – relates to perception of adequacy, reasonableness and honesty of the explanations given to justify a decision

How can line managers affect employee perceptions of fairness in evolving working models?

When it comes to new working models, creating a climate of fairness is a top priority. By taking insights from the concept of organisational justice, this can support managers to navigate the practical implementation of evolving working models within their teams.

18

Getting hybrid working policies and procedures right will be an iterative process for most organisations. FSCB is an expert in supporting organisations to implement (and evaluate) evidence- based interventions to address a range of organisational challenges, including those related to hybrid working.

¹ https://financialservicescultureboard.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Future-of-Workplaces-Summary-Report.pdf² https://financialservicescultureboard.org.uk/fscb-non-member-summary-future-of-workplaces-now-roundtable-and-member– knowledge-exchange/

³ https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/fundamentals/relations/flexible-working/flexible-hybrid-working-practices#gref

⁴ Davis, M.C., Hughes, H.P.N., Rees, S.J., Wu, C., Gritt, E., Collis, C., & Fang, L. (2022) Where is your office today? A research-led guide to effective hybrid working. Leeds, UK: University of Leeds.

⁵ https://financialservicescultureboard.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Future-of-Workplaces-Summary-Report.pdf ⁶ Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. The Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.2307/257990

⁷ Simmers, C. A., & McMurray, A. J. (2019). Organisational justice and managing workplace innovation: How important are formal procedures? International Journal of Innovation Management, 23(03), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1142/s1363919619500269

Pan, X., Chen, M., Hao, Z., & Bi, W. (2018). The effects of organizational justice on positive organizational behavior: Evidence from a large- sample survey and a situational experiment. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02315

⁸ Walumbwa, F. O., Cropanzano, R., & Hartnell, C. A. (2009). Organizational justice, voluntary learning behavior, and job performance: A test of the mediating effects of identification and leader-member exchange. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(8), 1103–1126. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.611

⁹ Niazi, A. and Hassan, H., (2016) Effect of justice on employee performance in the banking sector of Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS), 10(3), pp.735-752.

¹⁰ Pan, X., Chen, M., Hao, Z., & Bi, W. (2018). The effects of organizational justice on positive organizational behavior: Evidence from a large-sample survey and a situational experiment. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02315

¹¹ Pan, X., Chen, M., Hao, Z., & Bi, W. (2018). The effects of organizational justice on positive organizational behavior: Evidence from a large-sample survey and a situational experiment. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02315 Keyvanar, M., Shahpouri, S. and Oreyzi, H.R. (2014) Relationship among organizational justice, work engagement and positive organizational behavior of nurses via mediation of their personal career goals. Iran Journal of Nursing, 27(88), pp.22-33.

¹² Pan, X., Chen, M., Hao, Z., & Bi, W. (2018). The effects of organizational justice on positive organizational behavior: Evidence from a large-sample survey and a situational experiment. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02315

¹³ Ambrose, M.L., Seabright, M.A. and Schminke, M., (2002) Sabotage in the workplace: The role of organizational injustice. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 89(1), pp.947-965.

¹⁴ Mingzheng, W., Xiaoling, S., Xubo, F. and Youshan, L., (2014) Moral identity as a moderator of the effects of organizational injustice on counterproductive work behavior among Chinese public servants. Public Personnel Management, 43(3), pp.314-324.

¹⁵ Beunza, D., (2019) Taking the Floor. In Taking the Floor. Princeton University Press.

¹⁶ Elci M, Erdilek Karabey M & Akyuz B (2015). Investigating the Mediating Effect of Ethical Climate on Organiastional Justice and Burnout: A Study on Financial Sector. Social and Behavioural Sciences 207 587-597

¹⁷ Kouvonen, A., Kivimäki, M., Elovainio, M., Väänänen, A., De Vogli, R., Heponiemi, T., Linna, A., Pentti, J. and Vahtera, J., (2008) Low organisational justice and heavy drinking: a prospective cohort study. Occupational and environmental medicine, 65(1), pp.44-50.

¹⁸ Greenberg, J. and Folger, R., (1983). Procedural justice, participation, and the fair process effect in groups and organizations. In Basic group processes (pp. 235-256). Springer, New York, NY.

Bies, R.J. and Moag, J.F. (1986) Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. Research on negotiation in organizations, 1, pp.43- 55.

Leventhal, G.S., (1980) What should be done with equity theory? In Social exchange (pp. 27-55). Springer, Boston, MA.

Leventhal, G. S., Karuza, J., & Fry, W. R. (1980). Beyond fairness: A theory of allocation preferences. In G. Mikula (Ed.), Justice and social interaction (pp. 167-218). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Bobocel, D.R. and Farrell, A.C., (1996) Sex-based promotion decisions and interactional fairness: Investigating the influence of managerial accounts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(1), p.22.

Greenberg, J., (1990) Looking fair vs being fair-managing impressions of organizational justice. Research in organizational behavior, 12, pp.111-157.

Greenberg, J., (1993) Stealing in the name of justice: Informational and interpersonal moderators of theft reactions to underpayment inequity. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 54(1), pp.81-103.

Greenberg, J., (1994) Using socially fair treatment to promote acceptance of a work site smoking ban. Journal of Applied psychology, 79(2), p.288.