Composition of Dyads as a Factor in the Outcomes of Workplace Justice: Two Field Assessments

Abstract

Although procedural justice in the workplace has been a topic of increasing interest (e.g., ; , ; ; ; ; ), it has received surprisingly little empirical attention. Existing research on workplace justice, however, does lead to a disquieting conclusion: There may be systematic differences in workplace justice outcomes that are associated with the genders of involved employees (e.g., ; ; ). Systematic differences based on gender in outcomes of disputes or disciplinary actions between employees and organizations may have critical consequences. Larwood and colleagues, for example, commented on this aspect of disciplinary action: Presumably, any evaluation which results in either sex being judged more harshly than the other will place that group at a disadvantage with respect to future personnel decisions. Ideally, organizations will judge dispute or disciplinary cases on their merit and the gender of employees involved will not affect outcomes. There is some evidence, however, that this is apparently not the case. Rosen and Jerdee conducted a simulation designed to determine the influence of appellants' gender and the type of appeal on managers' evaluations of grievances. They concluded that male employees may have considerably more flexibility than female employees as to choice of appeal for “restitution of organizational inequities” (1975: 445). In another experiment (), subjects taking the role of personnel managers examined vignettes in which hypothetical employees had made rather substantial errors in judgment and indicated their preference for one of four disciplinary outcomes—discharge, transfer, suspension, or demotion. It was reported that managers would more readily take disciplinary action against women than men. Rosen and…