期刊文献+

互动公正对员工绩效与主管承诺的影响及其机制 被引量:6

Effects and its Mechanisms of Interactional Justice on Performance and Supervisory Commitment
下载PDF
导出
摘要 采用问卷调查法和结构方程建模技术探讨互动公正对员工绩效与主管承诺的影响及其机制。通过分析215份员工和其直接主管的配对数据,结果发现:(1)互动公正通过主管认知信任的部分中介作用正向影响员工的任务绩效,即一方面直接影响员工的任务绩效,另一方面通过认知信任间接影响员工的任务绩效;(2)互动公正通过主管情感信任的完全中介作用正向影响员工的进谏行为;(3)互动公正通过主管认知信任和情感信任的完全中介作用正向影响员工的主管承诺。 In recent years, along with thorough studies in social exchange and leader - member exchange theory, interactional justice has become an important research topic in the field of managerial psychology. Previous studies have indicated that interactional justice had significant effects on organizational citizenship behavior and job satisfaction. (Stecher & Rosse, 2005; Chiaburu, 2007). Meanwhile, some scholars believe that interactional justice can affect those variables, because trust plays an important role between them (Wong, Ngo, & Wong, 2006). McAllister (1995) believes that trust consists of cognitive trust and affective trust. There is sufficient empirical evidence available to suggest that their relationships with subsequent outcomes might differ (Yang, Mossholder, & Peng, 2009). Based on the past studies, we found that scholars pay limited attention to the impacts of interactional justice on task and contextual performance (particularly, voice behavior). Importantly, past findings were controversial in terms of whether and how interactional justice affects employee's performance and which role trust plays between interactional justice and task performance and voice behavior. In addition, previous findings indicated that interactional justice influenced employee's commitment to organization (Leow & Khong, 2009). However, it is unknown in terms of whether and how interactional justice affects employee's commitment to supervisors and which role trust plays between interactional justice and supervisory commitment. In order to answer these questions, this paper used scales and structural equation modeling. Scales included Interactional Justice Scale, Supervisory Cognitive Trust Scale, Supervisory affective Trust Scale, Task Performance Scale, Voice Behavior Scale and Supervisory Commitment Scale. For these scales, analysis of reliability indicated that internal consistency c, coefficient was . 88, . 82, . 85, . 90, . 85, and . 87, respectively, which indicates good reliability. For validity, confirmatory factor analysis of employees and supervisors' data showed that these models fit the data, which indicates good construct validity. Data were obtained from 215 full - time employees of sixteen companies in Shanghai and Shenzhen. To avoid the effects of common method bias, we collected employees'data regarding interactional justice, trust and performance separately (performance data were rated by employee's direct leaders). All the data were analyzed with SPSS 15.0 and Amos 7.0, and the main statistical methods were correlation analysis and structural equation modeling. Based on the data from a total of 215 matched supervisor - subordinate dyads, the results indicated that : ( 1 ) supervisory cognitive trust partially mediated the relationship between interactional justice and task performance ; (2) supervisory affective trust fully mediated the relationship between interactional justice and voice behavior; ( 3 ) supervisory cognitive trust and affective trust fully mediated the relationship between interactional justice and supervisory commitment. Our conclusion is that interactional justice may influence employee's performance and attitude, the mechanism of influence may be supervisory trust. The present study contributes to our understanding of the relationships between interactional justice, performance and supervisory commitment by explaining in more detail the psychological mechanism involved. The results of this study have theoretical as well as practical implications. Further studies need to explore the relationships between supervisory distributive justice, supervisory procedural justice and employee's attitude and behavior, and their mediating, moderating variables.
出处 《心理科学》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2013年第1期164-169,共6页 Journal of Psychological Science
基金 上海师范大学校级人文社科项目(批准号:A-3131-12-002028) 国家社会科学基金(批准号:07BSH053)的资助
关键词 互动公正 信任 任务绩效 进谏行为 主管承诺 interactional justice, trust, task performance, voice behavior, supervisory commitment
  • 相关文献

参考文献23

  • 1段锦云,王重鸣,钟建安.大五和组织公平感对进谏行为的影响研究[J].心理科学,2007,30(1):19-22. 被引量:84
  • 2李宁,严进.组织信任氛围对任务绩效的作用途径[J].心理学报,2007,39(6):1111-1121. 被引量:102
  • 3李秀娟,魏峰.组织公正和交易型领导对组织承诺的影响方式研究[J].南开管理评论,2007,10(5):82-88. 被引量:24
  • 4韦慧民,龙立荣.主管认知信任和情感信任对员工行为及绩效的影响[J].心理学报,2009,41(1):86-94. 被引量:61
  • 5周明建,宝贡敏.主管承诺理论研究述评[J].心理科学进展,2005,13(3):356-365. 被引量:21
  • 6Aryee, S. , Budhwar, P. S. , & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a medi- ator of the relationship between organizational justice and work out- comes : Test of a social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 267 - 285.
  • 7Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. ]. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmidt, W. C. Borman, A. Howard, A. Kraut, D. IIgen, B. Schneider, & S. Zedeek (Eds.), Personnel Selection in Organiza~ tions. San Francisco: Jossey - Bass , 71 98.
  • 8Byrne, Z. S. , & Cropanzano, R. (2000). To which source do l attribute this fairness? Differential effects of multi -foci justice on organization- al work behaviors. Paper presented at the 15the Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orle- ans, LA.
  • 9Chen, Z. X. (2001). Further investigation of the outcomes of loyalty to supervisor: Job satisfaction and intention to stay. Journal of Manage- rial Psychology, 16,650 - 660.
  • 10Chen, Z. X. , Tsui, A. S. , & Farh, J. L. (2002). Loyahy to supervi- sor vs. organizational commitment: Relationship to employee per- formanee in China. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psy- chology, 75,339 - 356.

二级参考文献151

共引文献278

同被引文献106

引证文献6

二级引证文献26

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部