Social Justice through Workplace Fairness: Impact on Well-being & Success

Workplace Fairness: Catalyst for Motivation and Well-being

This article discusses how justice at work is vital to employee motivation, health, and well-being. Justice in the workplace is more known as “workplace fairness,” and it has three critical drivers, which are distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. In distributive justice, personnel want to sense that distribution is fair and equitable. Procedural contains decisions about the dispersal of results, resources, and rights.

Interactional is based on how you treat employees; they need to be considered with dignity, respect, and kindness. When workers feel that they are not treated fairly, they react negatively, which damages their incentive and well-being. Responses vary depending on the individual, and they range from whether an employee sees someone being treated unfairly or if it is themselves in the situation. How leaders manage this can create more negativity or fix the problem depending on how they try to solve the problem.

Unfairness’s Toll on Well-being and Organizational Health

Unfairness can actually take a substantial toll on the emotional, physical, and psychological well-being of personnel and can contribute to serious illnesses. The article states, “Supervisor unfairness has been linked to medically certified sickness absences, coronary heart disease, and cardiovascular deaths.” It has a greater impact on personnel than most of us even think about; it has a superior effect on employee exhaustion and stress.

It also hurts establishments because staff stop performing well and will call out sick more often. A biased and unhealthy work atmosphere will agonize a loss of capacity as top players explore other possibilities and find an improved workstation. Investigation demonstrates that administrators affect employees insight into workplace justice to a far superior degree than the association itself. Leadership progress plays an essential role in constructing a working society that encourages employees, endorses their well-being, and drives sturdy presentation.

For establishments to have healthy, energetic, and dynamic teams, guaranteeing a workplace must be significant. Many associations might not see that they are being unfair to people unless someone brings it up to them or when workers don’t perform as well as they used to. It is imperative that managers talk to all their staff individually to see where they are at and if they feel like they have plenty on their plate as opposed to other co-workers or if they feel like they are being treated unfairly. It is best to catch it on time so they can find a solution where both parties benefit instead of losing a good employee due to the absence of communication or understanding.

References:

1. Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2003). The Group Engagement Model: Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and Cooperative Behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(4), 349-361.
2. Cropanzano, R., & Ambrose, M. L. (2001). Procedural and Distributive Justice Are More Similar Than You Think: A Monistic Perspective and a Research Agenda. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in Organizational Justice (pp. 119-151). Stanford University Press.
3. Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the Dimensionality of Organizational Justice: A Construct Validation of a Measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386-400.
4. Elovainio, M., Kivimäki, M., & Vahtera, J. (2002). Organizational Justice: Evidence of a New Psychosocial Predictor of Health. American Journal of Public Health, 92(1), 105-108.
5. Skarlicki, D. P., & Folger, R. (1997). Retaliation in the Workplace: The Roles of Distributive, Procedural, and Interactional Justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 434-443.
6. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands-Resources Model: State of the Art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-328.
7. Barling, J., & Griffiths, A. (2003). A History of Research on Psychological Contract Violation: A New Framework and Agenda for Future Research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(5), 537-560.
8. Greenberg, J. (1993). The Social Side of Fairness: Interpersonal and Informational Classes of Organizational Justice. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the Workplace: Approaching Fairness in Human Resource Management (pp. 79-103). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9. Liu, L., & Hu, J. (2013). Organizational Justice and Job Performance: A Mediated Multilevel Model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(4), 571-587.
10. Piccolo, R. F., & Colquitt, J. A. (2006). Transformational Leadership and Job Behaviors: The Mediating Role of Core Job Characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 327-340.