Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Joint Effects of Justice Climate, Group Moral Identity, and Corporate Social Responsibility on the Prosocial and Deviant Behaviors of Groups

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

Abstract

Pulling from theories of social exchange, deonance, and fairness heuristics, this study focuses on the relationship between overall justice climate and both the prosocial and deviant behaviors of groups. Specifically, it considers two contextual boundary conditions on this effect—corporate social responsibility (CSR) and group moral identity. Results from a laboratory experiment are presented, which show a significant effect for overall justice climate and a two-way interaction between overall justice climate and CSR on group-level prosocial and deviant behaviors, and a marginally significant interaction of group moral identity with overall justice climate on group deviance. The implications of contextual influences on workplace ethics and justice are discussed.

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
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. These findings are not surprising, given the research on temporary employees (e.g., Slattery et al. 2010) and the effect of organizational characteristics on their attitudes.

  2. We did not propose a two-way interaction between CSR and moral identity because we are most concerned with the effect of overall justice climate on group behaviors and the role that these contextual factors have on group reactions to their experiences of fairness. While CSR is a manifestation of third-party justice, which group moral identity could be argued to moderate, CSR will always be contextualized by the group’s experience of fairness. Studying a situation in which CSR is perceived without first-party group experience of fairness would not be representative of organizational settings.

  3. It should also be noted that there are factors, in addition to unreliability in a single item that will affect r wg. As LeBreton and Senter (2008) and Cohen et al. (2001) note, r wg values are highly contingent on the number of items and the number of judges. As our manipulation check had one item and 2–4 raters, we believe that such issues might have affected our r wg. Even when homogeneity is present in a group, analyses using a single item might not indicate homogeneity (see Cohen et al. 2001, for simulation data on this matter). When examining a single item measure with 10 raters, Cohen and colleagues showed that 90 % of all values obtained were zero or negative, and that r wg values above .217 would suggest some homogeneity for a measure with the previously mentioned characteristics. LeBreton and Senter (2008) also note that r wgs above .3 indicate weak agreement, as opposed to a lack of agreement. In light of all of this evidence, both theoretical and empirically simulated, we feel comfortable with our value of .34, alongside our additional analyses.

  4. ANOVA was chosen as the analytic framework based on the interval nature of our dependent variables (i.e., every unit increase is the same distance from the previous point). For completeness, however, we also ran our analyses using an ordinal regression, and the results were largely consistent with what is reported herein.

References

  • Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aguilera, R., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 836–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M. L., & Arnaud, A. (2005). Are procedural justice and distributive justice conceptually distinct? In J. Greenberg & J. Colquitt (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice (pp. 59–84). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2007). Examining justice climate: Issues of fit, simplicity, and content. In F. Dansereau & F. J. Yammarino (Eds.), Research in multi-level issues (Vol. 6, pp. 397–413). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.

  • Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2009). The role of overall justice judgment in organizational justice research: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 491–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K., & Freeman, D. (2009). Moral identity in business situations: A social-cognitive framework for understanding moral functioning. In D. Narvaez & D. K. Lapsley (Eds.), Personality, identity, and character: Explorations in moral psychology (pp. 375–395). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K., Freeman, D., Reed, A., Lim, V. K. G., & Felps, W. (2009). Testing a social-cognitive model of moral behavior: The interactive influence of situations and moral identity centrality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(1), 123–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K., McFerran, B., & Laven, M. (2011). Moral identity and the experience of moral elevation in response to acts of uncommon goodness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(4), 703–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K., & Reed, A. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1423–1440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K., Reed, A., Thau, S., & Freeman, D. (2007). A grotesque and dark beauty: How moral identity and mechanisms of moral disengagement influence cognitive and emotional reactions to war. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(3), 385–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K., Thau, S., & Bommer, W. (2008). How employee race moderates the relationship between non-contingent punishment and organizational citizenship behaviors: A test of the negative adaptation hypothesis. Social Justice Research, 21(3), 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barclay, L. J., Whiteside, D. B., & Aquino, K. (2014). To avenge or not to avenge? Exploring the interactive effects of moral identity and the negative reciprocity norm. Journal of Business Ethics, 121, 15–28.

  • Bies, R. J. (1987). The predicament of injustice: The management of moral outrage. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9, 289–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M., & Tajfel, H. (1973). Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3(1), 27–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blasi, A. (1980). Bridging moral cognition and moral action: A critical review of the literature. Psychological Bulletin, 88(1), 1–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blasi, A. (1983). Moral cognition and moral action: A theoretical perspective. Developmental Review, 3, 178–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B., & Shabana, K. M. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 85–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, D. (1998). Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 234–246.

  • Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A., Doveh, E., & Eick, U. (2001). Statistical properties of the r wg(J) index of agreement. Psychological Methods, 6, 297–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A. (2004). Does the justice of the one interact with the justice of the many? Reactions to procedural justice in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(4), 633–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Noe, R. A., & Jackson, C. L. (2002). Justice in teams: Antecedents and consequences of procedural justice climate. Personnel Psychology, 55(1), 83–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Judge, T. A., & Shaw, J. C. (2006). Justice and personality: Using integrative theories to derive moderators of justice effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100(1), 110–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Rodell, J. B., Long, D. M., Zapata, C. P., Conlon, D. E., & Wesson, M. J. (2013). Justice at the millennium, a decade later: A meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect-based perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(2), 199–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., & Shaw, J. C. (2005). Measuring organizational justice. In J. Greenberg & J. A. Colquitt (Eds.), The handbook of organizational justice (pp. 113–152). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., Goldman, B., & Folger, R. (2003). Deontic justice: The role of moral principle in workplace fairness. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(8), 1019–1024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (1973). The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal, 16(2), 312–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeCelles, K. A., DeRue, D. S., Margolis, J. D., & Ceranic, T. L. (2012). Does power corrupt or enable? When and why power facilitates self-interested behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(3), 681–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Beaman, A. L., Fraser, S. C., & Kelem, R. T. (1976). Effects of deindividuation variables on stealing among Halloween trick-or-treaters. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33(2), 178–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrhart, M. G. (2004). Leadership and procedural justice climate as antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 57(1), 61–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellemers, N., & van den Bos, K. (2012). Morality in groups: On the social-regulatory functions of right and wrong. Social and Personality Compass, 6(12), 878–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epitropaki, O. (2013). A multi-level investigation of psychological contract breach and organizational identification through the lens of perceived organizational membership: Testing a moderated-mediated model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 65–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, R., Duffy, M. K., & Shaw, J. D. (2011). The organizational socialization process: Review and development of a social capital model. Journal of Management, 37(1), 127–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. (2001). Fairness as deonance. In S. W. Gilliland, D. D. Steiner, & D. P. Skarlicki (Eds.), Research in social issues management (pp. 3–33). New York: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (2001). Fairness theory: Justice as accountability. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 1–55). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R., Cropanzano, R., & Goldman, B. (2005). What is the relationship between justice and morality? In J. Greenberg & J. A. Colquitt (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice (pp. 215–245). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galbreath, J. (2010). Drivers of corporate social responsibility: The role of formal strategic planning and firm culture. British Journal of Management, 21(2), 511–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, P. C. (2005). The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Management Review, 30(4), 777–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1990). Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of paycuts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(5), 561–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo, J., Rupp, D. R., Weiss, H., & Trougakos, J. (2011). Organizational justice: A person-centric approach. In S. Gilliland, D. Steiner, & D. Skarlicki (Eds.), Emerging perspectives on organizational justice and ethics (research in social issues in management) (Vol. 7, pp. 3–32). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardy, S. A., & Carlo, G. (2005). Identity as a source of moral motivation. Human Development, 48(4), 232–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henning, J. B., & Jones, D. A. (2013). Volunteer programs in the corporate world. In J. B. Olson-Buchanan, L. L. K. Bryan, & L. F. Thompson (Eds.), Using industrial–organizational psychology for the greater good: Helping those who help others (pp. 110–147). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1986). Fairness and the assumptions of economics. In R. M. Hogarth & M. W. Reder (Eds.), Rational choice: The contrast between economics and psychology (pp. 101–116). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kickul, J. (2001). When organizations break their promises: Employee reactions to unfair processes and treatment. Journal of Business Ethics, 29, 289–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozlowski, S. W., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kristof, A. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49, 1–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, K. W., Rupp, D. E., & Young, E. (2008). HPWS, justice climate, and organizational effectiveness: A multilevel investigation. Paper presented at the 68th annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Anaheim, CA.

  • LeBreton, J. M., & Senter, J. K. (2008). Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 11(4), 815–852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E. M., Park, S.-Y., & Lee, H. J. (2013). Employee perception of CSR activities: Its antecedents and consequences. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1716–1724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, C. P., Baruch, Y., & Shih, W.-C. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and team performance: The mediating role of team efficacy and team self-esteem. Journal of Business Ethics, 108(2), 167–180.

    Article  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 justice (pp. 56–88). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., Kray, L., & Thompson, L. (1998). The social construction of injustice: Fairness judgments in response to won and others’ unfair treatment by authorities.  Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 75, 1–22.

  • Lind, E. A., Kray, L., & Thompson, L. (2001). Primacy effects in justice judgments: Testing predictions from fairness heuristic theory. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 85, 189–210.

  • Liston-Heyes, C., & Ceton, G. (2009). An investigation of real versus perceived CSP in S&P-500 firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(2), 283–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, D. M. (2014). A review of the literature on ethical climate and culture. In B. Schneider & K. M. Barbera (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational climate and culture. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, D. M., Aquino, K., Greenbaum, R. L., & Kuenzi, M. (2012). Who displays ethical leadership, and why does it matter? An examination of antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 151–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, G. H., & Judd, C. M. (1993). Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114(2), 376–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, E. W., & Robinson, S. L. (1997). When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 226–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mossholder, K. W., Bennett, N., & Martin, C. L. (1998). A multilevel analysis of procedural justice context. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(2), 131–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, K., Hattrup, K., Spiess, S.-O., & Lin-Hi, N. (2012). The effects of corporate social responsibility on employees’ affective commitment: A cross-cultural investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1186–1200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naumann, S. E., & Bennett, N. (2000). A case for procedural justice climate: Development and test of a multilevel model. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 881–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naumann, S. E., & Bennett, N. (2002). The effects of procedural justice climate on work group performance. Small Group Research, 33(3), 361–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, J., & Aquino, K. (2011). A model of third parties’ morally motivated responses to mistreatment in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 36(3), 526–543.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. W., & Konovsky, M. (1989). Cognitive versus affective determinants of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 157–164.

  • Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441.

    Article  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, 89(5), 879–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Priesemuth, M., Arnaud, A., & Schminke, M. (2013). Bad behavior in groups: The impact of overall justice climate and functional dependence on counterproductive work behavior in work units. Group and Organization Management, 38(2), 230–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, A., Aquino, K., & Levy, E. (2007). Moral identity and judgments of charitable behaviors. American Marketing Association, 71(1), 178–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, S. J., & Ceranic, T. L. (2007). The effects of moral judgment and moral identity on moral behavior: An empirical examination of the moral individual. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1610–1624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberson, Q. M. (2006a). Justice in teams: The activation and role of sensemaking in the emergence of justice climate. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100(2), 177–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberson, Q. M. (2006b). Justice in teams: The effects of interdependence and identification on referent choice and justice climate strength. Social Justice Research, 19(3), 323–344.

    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(2), 202–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contract in organizations. Employee responsibilities and rights journal, 2(2), 121–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E. (2003). Testing the moral violations component of fairness theory: The moderating role of value preferences. Paper presented at the 18th annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Orlando, Florida.

  • Rupp, D. E. (2011). An employee-centered model of organizational justice and social responsibility. Organizational Psychology Review, 1(1), 72–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E., Bashshur, M. R., & Liao, H. (2007a). Justice climate past, present, and future: Models of structure and emergence. Research in Multilevel Issues, 6, 357–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E., Bashshur, M., & Liao, H. (2007b). Justice climate: Consideration of source, target, type, specificity, and emergence. Multi-Level Issues in Organization and Time, 6, 439–459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E., & Bell, C. M. (2010). Extending the deontic model of justice: Moral self-regulation in third-party responses to injustice. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(1), 89–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E., Ganapathi, J., Aguilera, R. V., & Williams, C. A. (2006). Employee reactions to corporate social responsibility: An organizational justice framework. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(4), 537–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E., McCance, A. S., & Grandey, A. (2007c). A cognitive-emotional theory of customer injustice and emotional labor. In D. DeCremer (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of justice and affect (pp. 199–226). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E., & Paddock, E. L. (2010). From justice events to justice climate: A multi-level temporal model of information aggregation and judgment. In B. Manniz, M. Neal, & E. Mullen (Eds.), Research on managing groups and teams: Fairness and groups (Vol. 13, pp. 239–267). Bingley, UK: JAI Emerald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E., Shao, R., Jones, K., & Liao, H. (2014). The utility of a multifoci approach to the study of organizational justice: A meta-analytic investigation into the consideration of normative rules, moral accountability, bandwidth-fidelity, and social exchange. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 123, 159–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E., Shao, R., Thornton, M. A., & Skarlicki, D. (2013). Applicants’ and employees’ reactions to corporate social responsibility: The moderating effects of first-party justice perceptions and moral identity. Personnel Psychology, 66(4), 895–933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E., & Thornton, M. A. (2014). The role of employee justice perceptions in influencing climate and culture. In B. Schneider & K. M. Barbera (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational climate and culture. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(2), 224–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40(3), 437–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B., Smith, D. B., & Goldstein, H. W. (2000). Attraction–selection–attrition: Toward a person–environment psychology of organizations. In W. B. Walsh, K. H. Craik, H. Kenneth, & R. H. Price (Eds.), Person–environment psychology: New directions and perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inferences. Berkeley, CA: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simons, T., & Roberson, Q. (2003). Why managers should care about fairness: The effects of aggregate justice perceptions on organizational outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 432–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skarlicki, D. P., & Kulik, C. (2005). Third party reactions to employee mistreatment: A justice perspective. In B. Staw & R. Kramer (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 26, pp. 183–230). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skarlicki, D. P., & Rupp, D. E. (2010). Dual processing and organizational justice: The role of rational versus experiential processing in third-party reactions to workplace mistreatment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 944–952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skarlicki, D. P., van Jaarsveld, D. D., & Walker, D. D. (2008). Getting even for customer mistreatment: The role of moral identity in the relationship between customer interpersonal injustice and employee sabotage. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1335–1347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slattery, J. P., Selvarajan, T. T., Anderson, J. E., & Sardessai, R. (2010). Relationship between job characteristics and attitudes: A study of temporary employees. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(6), 1539–1565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, S., & Rupp, D. E. (2009). Angry, guilty, and conflicted: Injustice toward coworkers heightens emotional labor through cognitive and emotional mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 429–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanaland, A. J. S., Lwin, M. O., & Murphy, P. E. (2011). Consumer perceptions of the antecedents and consequences of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 102, 47–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1(2), 149–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Austin & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tekleab, A. G., Takeuchi, R., & Taylor, M. S. (2005). Extending the chain of relationship among organizational justice, social exchange, and employee reactions: The role of contract violations. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 146–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian, Z., Wang, R., & Yang, W. (2011). Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 101, 197–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilcsik, A., & Marquis, C. (2013). Punctuated generosity: How mega-events and natural disasters affect corporate philanthropy in US communities. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(1), 111–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turillo, C. J., Folger, R., Lavelle, J. J., Umphress, E. E., & Gee, J. O. (2002). Is virtue its own reward? Self-sacrificial decisions for the sake of fairness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89(1), 839–865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115–191). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Bos, K. (2001). Fundamental research by means of laboratory experiments essential for a better understanding of organizational justice. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58(2), 254–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2001). The psychology of own versus others’ treatment: Self-oriented and other-oriented effects on perceptions of procedural justice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(10), 1324–1333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1997). Procedural and distributive justice: What is fair depends on what comes first than on what comes next. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 95–104.

  • Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organizational Science, 16(4), 409–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitman, D. S., Caleo, S., Carpenter, N. C., Horner, M. T., & Bernerth, J. B. (2012). Fairness at the collective level: A meta-analytic examination of the consequences and boundary conditions of organizational justice culture. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(4), 776–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winterich, K., Mittal, V., & Aquino, K. (2013). When does recognition increases charitable behavior? Toward a moral identity-based model. Journal of Marketing, 77(3), 121–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, J., Mossholder, K. W., & Peng, T. K. (2007). Procedural justice climate and group power distance: An examination of cross-level interaction effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 681–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellars, K. L., Tepper, B. J., & Duffy, M. K. (2002). Abusive supervision and subordinates’ organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(6), 1068–1076.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, L., & Gowan, M. A. (2012). Corporate social responsibility, applicants’ individual traits, and organizational attraction: A person–organization fit perspective. Journal of Business Psychology, 27(3), 345–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara, P., & Suárez-Acosta, M. A. (2014). Employees’ reactions to peers’ unfair treatment by supervisors: The role of ethical leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 122, 537–549.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank James LeBreton and Carolyn Jagacinski for their guidance and feedback this study. We also thank Hannah Kaplan, Elizabeth Rayburn, Christie Byrne, Elizabeth Gorski, Brittany Helmer, Jordyn Mason, Megan Rake, Amanda Shapiro, Dasol Kim, Mason Burns, Gabe Elkin, and Drew Mallory for assistance with various aspects of this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, 703 Third Street, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

    Meghan A. Thornton & Deborah E. Rupp

Authors
  1. Meghan A. Thornton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Deborah E. Rupp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deborah E. Rupp.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Thornton, M.A., Rupp, D.E. The Joint Effects of Justice Climate, Group Moral Identity, and Corporate Social Responsibility on the Prosocial and Deviant Behaviors of Groups. J Bus Ethics 137, 677–697 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2748-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2748-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation