Procedural justice is generally thought of as a unidimensional construct. In this article, it is argued that in the performance appraisal context procedural justice can be conceptualized as two-dimensional: system procedural justice and rater procedural justice. Regression results from a study of one organization in Turkey support this distinction. Due process characteristics and employee characteristics were differentially related to two dimensions of procedural justice. Specifically, perceived validity of performance criteria, knowledge of performance criteria, and organizational level of employees were related to system procedural justice, whereas perceived performance feedback and fair hearing were each positively related to rater procedural justice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
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.
Ball, G. A.
, Trevino, L. K., & Sims, H. P., Jr. (1994). Just and unjust punishment: Influences on subordinate performance and citizenship. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 299-322.
4.
Barling, J.
, & Phillips, M. (1993). Interactional, formal, and distributive justice in the workplace: An exploratory study. Journal of Psychology, 127, 649-656.
5.
Bies, R. J.
, & Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 43-55). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
6.
Bretz, R. D.
, Milkovich, G. T., & Read, W. (1992). The current state of performance appraisal research and practice: Concerns, directions, and implications. Journal of Management, 18, 321-352.
7.
Byrne, D.
(1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
8.
Cropanzano, R.
, & Folger, R. (1991). Procedural justice and worker motivation. In R. M. Steers & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Motivation and work behavior (5th ed., pp. 131-143). New York: McGraw-Hill.
9.
Dulebohn, J. H.
, & Ferris, G. R. (1999). The role of influence tactics in perceptions of performance evaluations’ fairness. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 288-303.
10.
Evans, E. M.
, & McShane, S. L. (1988). Employee perceptions of performance appraisal fairness in two organizations. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 20, 177-191.
11.
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.
12.
Folger, R.
, Konovsky, M. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1992). A due process metaphor for performance appraisal. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 14, pp. 129-177). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
13.
Greenberg, J.
(1986). Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 340-342.
14.
Inderrieden, E. J.
, Keaveny, T. J., & Allen, R. E. (1988). Predictors of employee satisfaction with the performance appraisal process. Journal of Business and Psychology, 2, 306-310.
15.
Jeanquart-Barone, S.
(1996). Implications of racial diversity in the supervisor-subordinate relationship. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 935-944.
16.
Konovsky, M. A.
, & Cropanzano, R. (1991). Perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor of employee attitudes and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 698-707.
17.
Korsgaard, M. A.
, Schweiger, D. M., & Sapienza, H. J. (1995). Building commitment, attachment, and trust in strategic decision-making teams: The role of procedural justice. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 60-84.
18.
Landy, F. J.
, Barnes, J. L., & Murphy, K. R. (1978). Correlates of perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 751-754.
19.
Landy, F. J.
, & Farr, J. L. (1980). Performance rating. Psychological Bulletin, 87-87, 72-107.
20.
Lansberg, I.
(1984). Hierarchy as a mediator of fairness: A contingency approach to distributive justice in organizations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14, 124-135.
21.
Lerner, M. J.
, & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1030-1051.
22.
Levy, P. E.
, & Williams, J. R., (1998). The role of perceived system knowledge in predicting appraisal reactions, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 53-65.
23.
Lind, E. A.
, Kanfer, R., & Earley, P. C. (1990). Voice, control and procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 952-959.
24.
Lind, E. A.
, & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
25.
Lott, B.
, & Lott, A. J. (1986). Likability of strangers as a function of their winner/loser status, gender and race. Journal of Social Psychology, 126, 503-511.
26.
Moorman, R. H.
(1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship?Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 845-855.
27.
Moorman, R. H.
, Blakely, G. L., & Niehoff, B. P. (1998). Does perceived organizational support mediate the relationship between procedural justice and organizational citizenship behavior?Academy of Management Journal, 41, 351-357.
28.
Skarlicki, D. P.
, Ellard, J. H., & Kelln, B. R. C. (1998). Third-party perceptions of a layoff: Procedural, derogation, and retributive aspects of justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 119-127.
29.
Skarlicki, D. P.
, & Folger, R. (1997). Retaliation in the workplace: The roles of distributive, procedural and interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 434-443.
30.
Skarlicki, D. P.
, & Latham, G. P. (1996). Increasing citizenship behavior within a labor union: A test of organizational justice theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 161-169.
31.
Skarlicki, D. P.
, & Latham, G. P. (1997). Leadership training in organizational justice to increase citizenship behavior within a labor union: A replication. Personnel Psychology, 50, 617-633.
32.
Sweeney, P. D.
, & McFarlin, D. B. (1997). Process and outcome: Gender differences in the assessment of justice. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 83-98.
33.
Tang, T. L. P.
& Sarsfield-Baldwin, L. J. (1996). Distributive and procedural justice as related to satisfaction and commitment. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 61, 25-31.
34.
Taylor, M. S.
, Masterson, S. S., Renard, M. K., & Tracy, K. B. (1998). Managers’ reactions to procedurally just performance management systems. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 568-579.
35.
Taylor, M. S.
, Tracy, K. B., Renard, M. K., Harrison, J. K., & Carroll S. J. (1995). Due process in performance appraisal: A quasi-experiment in procedural justice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 495-523.
36.
Thibaut, J.
, & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
37.
Tsui, A. S.
, & O’Reilly, C. A. III (1989). Beyond simple demographic effects: The importance of relational demography in superior-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 402-423.
38.
Tyler, T. R.
(1994). Psychological models of the justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 850-863.
39.
Wanous, J. P.
, Reichers, A. E., & Hudy, M. J. (1997). Overall job satisfaction: How good are single item measures?Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 247-252.
40.
Wesolowski, M. A.
, & Mossholder, K. W. (1997). Relational demography in supervisor-subordinate dyads: Impact on subordinate job satisfaction, burnout, and perceived procedural justice. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 351-362.
41.
Williams, J. R.
, & Levy, P. E. (2000). Investigating some neglected criteria: The influence of organizational level and perceived system knowledge on appraisal reactions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 14, 501-513.
