Skip to main content
Log in

Employees' Perceptions of the Distributive Justice of Pay Raise Decisions: A Policy Capturing Approach

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

Abstract

An examination was made of the factors that contribute to employee perceptions of the distributive justice of compensation outcomes and how employees differ in their perceptions. A sample of 414 employees of a large public university was used to assess what distributive rules are associated with employees' perceptions of the fairness of pay raise decisions. The results found that employees evaluated the fairness of pay raise decisions differently. A cluster analysis identified three groups of employees who differed in their perceptions, and one-way analysis of variance highlighted a number of demographic and attitudinal factors by which these groups were distinguished.

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Alves, W. M., & Rossi, P. H. (1978). Who should get what? Fairness judgments of the distribution of earnings. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 541–564.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartol, K. M. & Martin, D. C. (1989). Effects of dependence, dependency threats, and pay secrecy on managerial pay allocations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(1), 105–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J. (1987). The predicament of injustice: the management of moral outrage. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 289–319). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31(3), 137–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, G. C. & Meeker, B.F. (1986). Achieving fairness in the face of competing concerns: The different effects of individual and group characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 754–760.

    Google Scholar 

  • England, G. W. (1967). Organizational goals and expected behavior of American managers. Academy of Management Journal, 10, 107–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R., & Buttram, R. T. (1993). What does it mean to be fair?: A framework for capturing the multiple facets of fairness. Tulane University A. B. Freeman School of Business Working Paper Series 93–OBHR-04.

  • Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 115–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Welbourne, T. (1991). Compensation strategies in the global context. Human Resource Planning, 14, 29–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, P. S. (1974). An examination of referents used in the evaluation of pay. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 12(2), 170–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graves, L. M. & Karren, R. J. (1992). Interviewer decision processes and effectiveness: An experimental policy-capturing investigation. Personnel Psychology, 45, 313–340.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16, 399–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grover, S. L. (1991). Predicting the perceived fairness of parental leave policies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(2), 247–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. A., & Jackson, J. E. (1977). Statistical methods for social scientists. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harder, J. W. (1992). Play for pay: Effects of inequity in a pay-for-performance context. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 321–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hays, W. L. (1988). Statistics (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegtvedt, K. A. (1989). Fairness conceptualizations and comparative worth. Journal of Social Issues, 45(4), 81–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heneman, H. G. III, & Schwab, D. P. (1985). Pay satisfaction: Its multidimensional nature and measurement. International Journal of Psychology, 20, 129–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heneman, R. L. (1992). Merit pay: Linking pay increases to performance ratings. New York: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobson, C. J., & Gibson, F. W. (1983). Policy capturing as an approach to understanding and improving performance appraisal: A review of the literature. Academy of Management Review, 8, 640–649.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, P. (1985). A guide to econometrics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keppel, G. (1982). Design and analysis (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27–55). New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFarlin, D. B., & Sweeney, P. D. (1992). Distributive and procedural justice as predictors of satisfaction with personal and organizational outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 626–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fossum, J. A. & Fitch, M. K. (1985). The effects of individual and contextual attributes on the sizes of recommended salary increases. Personnel Psychology, 38, 587–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, G. S., Karuza, J., & Fry, W. R. (1980). Beyond fairness: A theory of allocation preferences. In G. Mikula (Ed.), Justice and social interaction: Experimental and theoretical contributions from psychological research (pp. 167–218). New York: Hans Huber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milkovich, G. T., & Newman, J. M. (1993). Compensation (4th ed.). Homewood: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milligan, G. W. (1980). An examination of the effect of six types of error perturbation on fifteen clustering algorithms. Psychometrika, 45, 325–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mook, D. G. (1983). In defense of external validity. American Psychologist, 38, 379–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Langton, N. (1993). The effect of wage dispersion on satisfaction, productivity, and working collaboratively: Evidence from college and university faculty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 382–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, J. L. & Mueller, C. W. (1986). Handbook of organizational measurement. Marshfield, MA: Pitman Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravlin, E. & Meglino, B. (1987). Effects of values on perception and decision making: A study of alternative work values measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 666–673.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 49, 437–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuster, J. R., & Zingheim, J. K. (1992). The new pay. New York: Lexington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherer, P. D., Schwab, D. P., & Heneman, H. G., III. (1987). Managerial salary-raise decisions: A policy capturing approach. Personnel Psychology, 40, 27–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney, P. D., & McFarlin, D. B. (1993). Workers' evaluations of the “ends” and the “means”: An examination of four models of distributive and procedural justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55(1), 23–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tornblom, K. Y. (1992). The social psychology of distributive justice. In K. Scherer (Ed.), The nature and administration of justice: Interdisciplinary approaches. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, D., Dawis, R., England, G., & Lofquist, L. (1967). Manual for Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (No. 22). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dulebohn, J., Martocchio, J.J. Employees' Perceptions of the Distributive Justice of Pay Raise Decisions: A Policy Capturing Approach. Journal of Business and Psychology 13, 41–64 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022919032383

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022919032383

Keywords

Navigation