Si Hyun Kim, Giacomo Laffranchini, Maria Fernanda Wagstaff and Wonho Jeung
The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between congruence between employee and employer psychological contract fulfillment and commitment. The authors further…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between congruence between employee and employer psychological contract fulfillment and commitment. The authors further studied how the relationship is moderated by distributive justice.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors conducted polynomial regression analyses with response surface methodology on two Korean samples.
Findings
Congruence between employee and employer psychological contract fulfillment was positively related to affective commitment and occupational commitment. Distributive justice moderated these relationships.
Research limitations/implications
The main limitation was common method bias as a result of the cross-sectional nature of the study designs.
Practical implications
Employers must be vigilant not only with regard to fulfilling employees’ psychological contracts but also to doing this fairly.
Originality/value
The authors studied the interaction effect of distributive justice on the relationship between psychological contract congruence and commitment in Korea.
Details
Keywords
María Fernanda Wagstaff, Adrienne Collela, María del Carmen Triana, Alexis Nicole Smith and Marla Baskerville Watkins
Drawing from social dominance theories and conceptualizations of paternalism, the purpose of this paper is to define and develop a measure of subordinates’ perceptions of…
Abstract
Purpose
Drawing from social dominance theories and conceptualizations of paternalism, the purpose of this paper is to define and develop a measure of subordinates’ perceptions of supervisor paternalism (SPSP).
Design/methodology/approach
The authors assess the validity of the measure using Hinkin’s (1998) scale development steps.
Findings
The authors found evidence of the convergent and discriminant validity of the measure of subordinates’ perceptions of supervisor paternalism drawing from three different samples. Participants in the study were also able to differentiate a low from a high paternalism condition using the measure of paternalism. Finally, as expected, the interaction between a supervisor’s benevolence and control was significantly associated with subordinates’ perceptions of supervisor paternalism.
Research limitations/implications
The authors provide evidence for the validity of a measure of subordinates’ perceptions of supervisor paternalism while controlling for various status signals represented by demographic variables. Results may have been influenced by common method variance. However, there is no theoretical reason to expect any such interactions. Additionally, as the authors limited the data collection to the USA, the authors caution against generalizing beyond that context.
Practical implications
The authors provide validity and reliability evidence for a unidimensional measure that is short and easy to administer in future research to further examine the consequences of perceptions of supervisor paternalism.
Social implications
Defining and measuring subordinates’ perceptions of supervisor paternalism is important to society given the potential adverse consequences of these perceptions. Because paternalistic relationships pervade many supervisor-subordinate interactions, both subordinates and supervisors can become more sensitive to the consequences of such interactions by understanding the conditions under which supervisor paternalism manifests itself.
Originality/value
Conceptually, in this study, the authors build on prior research and define supervisor paternalism from a social dominance perspective. Empirically, the authors contribute a statistically valid and reliable unidimensional measure.
Details
Keywords
María Fernanda Wagstaff, María del Carmen Triana, Abby N. Peters and Dalila Salazar
The purpose of this paper is to examine alleged perpetrators' reactions to being accused of discrimination.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to examine alleged perpetrators' reactions to being accused of discrimination.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper examines how the mode of confrontation as well as the perpetrator's status relate to the alleged perpetrator's state of anger and the likelihood of providing a justification to the victim. To test the hypotheses, the authors conducted an experimental design using an organizational scenario.
Findings
The mode of confrontation predicts the likelihood of providing a justification to the victim. The paper also found that both anger and the likelihood of providing a justification for a charge of discrimination are higher when the mode of confrontation is indirect and the alleged perpetrator is the supervisor.
Research limitations/implications
An organizational scenario limits the realism of the study such that results may not generalize to actual organizational settings (Stone, Hosoda, Lukaszewski and Phillips). In addition, the response rate was low. Nevertheless, a full understanding of issues related to reactions to alleged discrimination will depend upon research conducted in a variety of settings under a variety of conditions.
Practical implications
It is unlikely that direct confrontations will be instrumental in correcting misperceptions of discriminatory behavior. Organizations need to provide training on how to manage confrontation episodes as an opportunity to mitigate perceived mistreatment.
Originality/value
Which mode of confrontation is best? Indirect confrontation is associated with a higher likelihood of the alleged perpetrator providing a justification for a charge of discrimination, particularly when the alleged perpetrator is the supervisor. However, anger is also higher when supervisors are confronted indirectly about allegations of discrimination.