WORKPLACE JUSTICE: EMPLOYEES' AGGRESSION AND

WORKPLACE JUSTICE: Employees' Aggression and Resistance as Perceived Unfairness.

WORKPLACE JUSTICE: Employees' Aggression and Resistance As Perceived Unfairness

Abstract

Proposes that organizational fairness is a psychological mechanism that can mediate employee resistance to change. Focuses on resentment-based resistance as a subset of all possible resistance behaviors. Uses referent cognitions theory to explain why organizational change not only increases employees' sensitivity to fairness, but also why change is frequently perceived as a loss. Recent theoretical and empirical research is presented that suggests if researchers and managers focus on the effects of any one of these three types of justice (i.e. distributive, procedural or interactional justice), they might fail to address resistance adequately. Examines how the three forms of justice interact to predict resistance to change, and provides some implications of this interaction effect for change managers.

1. Introduction

Workplace resistance has been a concern among managerial writers (Taylor, 1947) and organizational psychologists (e.g. Lewin, 1951; Plant, 1987) for over 50 years. Resistance has been defined as employee behavior that seeks to challenge, disrupt, or invert prevailing assumptions, discourses, and power relations (Collinson, 1994). Scholars (e.g. Jermier et al., 1994) have concluded, however, that resistance is a response to managerial control. Responses to unfairness appear to be particularly acute when organizations change (Cobb et al., 1995; Novelli et al., 1995). This is not surprising given that under conditions of threat, people tend to engage in hypervigilance, in which every social interaction becomes scrutinized for hidden meaning and sinister purpose (Janis, 1983). Baron et al. (1996) reported that organizational change (e.g. restructuring, reengineering) is related to a heightened sensitivity about fairness.

Organizational justice applied to organizational change

Justice research has also focussed on the employees' perceptions of the quality of the interpersonal treatment received during the enactment of organizational procedures, commonly labeled interactional justice (Bies, 1986). It includes various actions displaying social sensitivity, such as when supervisors treat employees with respect and dignity (e.g. listening to a subordinate's concerns, providing adequate explanations for decisions, demonstrating empathy for the other person's plight). Mikula et al. (1990) reported that a considerable proportion of perceived injustices did not concern distributional or procedural issues in the narrow sense, but instead referred to the manner in which people were treated interpersonally during interactions and encounters. Bensimon (1994) reported that disgruntled workers who became violent in response to organizational downsizing did so not because they were demoted, fired, or laid off, but due to the dehumanizing way the action was carried out.

Recent advances in justice theory

Morris and Raben (1995) proposed that employees resist change based on rational arguments of whether the current state is more appropriate. Since the status quo is more familiar to them, and because it came to be for certain reasons, it is often considered to be in some sense legitimate. The past serves as a referent for current expectations. In contrast, suggested changes are usually not completely understood or developed.

These examples illustrate that, based on a comparison of a person's actual experience of change to ...