期刊文献+

上司人际公平如何影响员工工作结果:有中介的调节效应 被引量:6

The Effects of Interpersonal Justice on Followers' Job Satisfaction and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Roles of Trust in Supervisor and Supervisory Power
原文传递
导出
摘要 本文探讨了上司的人际公平怎样影响员工工作满意度和人际层面组织公民行为,以及这种影响何时更强或更弱。通过对237名在职人员调查,结果发现:(1)员工的上司信任在人际公平与工作满意度、人际层面组织公民行为之间具有部分和完全中介作用;(2)上司权力对人际公平效应具有调节作用:当上司权力较高时,人际公平显著影响员工对他的信任,进而影响工作满意度和人际层面组织公民行为;而当其权力较低时,人际公平的影响不明显。 A great deal of previous research has showed that interpersonal justice demonstrated by supervisors generally has positive effects on employees’ job satisfaction and citizenship behaviors that are directed at individuals(OCBI). To figure out how and when these effects happen, the current study examines the relationship between employees’ perceptions of interpersonal justice and job consequences by focusing on the mediating role of employees’ trust in supervisor as well as the moderating role of supervisor’s power. As social exchange theory postulates, employees build a social exchange relationship with their leaders. This type of relationship requires the exchange parties to trust and affiliate with each other. Employees’ trust can be motivated by interpersonal fairness demonstrated by their supervisors. We hypothesize that employees’ trust in their supervisors mediates the relationship between interpersonal justice and job satisfaction and OCBI. Moreover, according to fairness theory, a supervisor’s power is associated with accountability for the(un)fairness. High supervisory power means disproportionately possessing more resources, which enables a supervisor to treat others differently. This implies high-power supervisors are more accountable for their own interpersonal justice, while low-power supervisors are less likely to be responsible for the interpersonal justice because they may not be considered as actually controlling but instead as just following orders from higher bosses. Trust as a result of interpersonal justice is expected only when a supervisor has high power. Therefore, we predict a moderated mediation model in which for high-power supervisors, interpersonal justice has indirectly(via employees’ trust in supervisor) impact on followers’ job satisfaction and OCBI, but for low-power supervisors, these effects do not exist.In this study, measurements of employees’ perception of interpersonal justice, trust in supervisor, supervisor’s power, job satisfaction and OCBI were obtained by means of a survey. 237 working adults(109 males, 128 females) from various fields who have a stable supervisor filled out the questionnaire. The average age was 31.09 years(SD = 6.91), and the average time spent on co-working with their own supervisor was 2.78 years(SD = 1.86). Using the hierarchical linear regression analysis, we examined an integrative model that combined employees’ perception of interpersonal justice, trust in supervisor, supervisor’s power, job satisfaction and OCBI. The results show that(1) Employees’ trust in their supervisors partially mediates the relationship between their perception of interpersonal justice and job satisfaction, and completely mediates the linkage between interpersonal justice and OCBI. Moreover,(2) Supervisor’s power moderates the mediating effects, specifically, supervisor-focused interpersonal justice has more impact on followers when supervisors have high(vs. low) power over their followers. The study seeks to extend the literature integrating interpersonal justice and power in a number of ways. First, few prior work has concerned with the joint effects of supervisor-focused interpersonal justice and supervisory power. This study demonstrates how supervisory power moderates the interpersonal justice effects. Based on the fairness theory, we suggest that employees’ trust for a supervisor is a function of how much they think the supervisor should take responsibility for the interpersonal fairness. Specifically, high-power(vs. low-power) leaders are more accountable for their own justice effects. Second, we develop a moderated mediation model to demonstrate how the interaction between interpersonal justice and supervisory power exerts influence on employees’ job satisfaction and OCBI. It is through the mediating role of trust in their supervisor.
出处 《心理科学》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2016年第3期679-685,共7页 Journal of Psychological Science
基金 新世纪优秀人才支持计划(NCET-10-0382) 国家自然科学青年基金(71202153)的资助
关键词 人际公平 上司权力 上司信任 工作满意度 组织公民行为 interpersonal justice supervisory power trust in supervisor job satisfaction organizational citizenship behavior
  • 相关文献

参考文献26

  • 1陈景刚.(2006).国企员工组织信任知觉、公平感与组织公民行为关系研究.西南交通大学硕士学位论文.
  • 2林帼儿,陈子光,钟建安.组织公平文献综述及未来的研究方向[J].心理科学,2006,29(4):1016-1018. 被引量:38
  • 3凌玲.(2008).组织信任对工作满意度和组织承诺关系影响的实证研究:重庆大学硕士学位论文.
  • 4王喜彦.(2013).知识型员工的权力距离对组织公平与组织认同关系的调节绣毋研究.吉林大学硕士学位论文.
  • 5温忠麟,张雷,侯杰泰.有中介的调节变量和有调节的中介变量[J].心理学报,2006,38(3):448-452. 被引量:798
  • 6Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2003). Organization structure as a moderator of the relationship between procedural justice, interactional justice, perceived organizational support, and supervisory trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 295-305.
  • 7Aquino, K., Tripp, T. M., & Bies, R. J. (2006). Getting even or moving on? Power, procedural justice, and types of offense as predictors of revenge, forgiveness, reconciliation, and avoidance in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 653-668.
  • 8Byrne, Z. S., Pitts, V. E., Wilson, C. M., & Steiner, Z. J. (2012). Trusting the fair supervisor:. The role of supervisory support in performance appraisals. Human Resource Management Journal, 22, 129-147.
  • 9Cheung, M. F. Y. (2013). The mediating role of perceived organizational support in the effects of interpersonal and informational justice on organizational citizenship behaviors, leaderstffp and Organization Development Journal, 34, 551-572.
  • 10Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the Dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure.. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386-400.

二级参考文献37

  • 1温忠麟,张雷,侯杰泰,刘红云.中介效应检验程序及其应用[J].心理学报,2004,36(5):614-620. 被引量:8578
  • 2温忠麟,侯杰泰,张雷.调节效应与中介效应的比较和应用[J].心理学报,2005,37(2):268-274. 被引量:3370
  • 3Baron R M, Kenny D A. The moderator - mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1986, 51 (6) : 1173 - 1182
  • 4James L R, Brett J M. Mediators, moderators and tests for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1984,69 (2) : 307 - 321
  • 5Chang L, Liu H, Wen Z, Fung K, Wang Y, Xu Y. Mediating teacher liking and moderating authoritative teaehering on Chinese adolescents'perceptions of antisocial and prosocial behaviors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2004, 96( 2 ) : 369 - 380
  • 6Bollen K A. Structural equations with latent variables. New York:Wiley, 1989
  • 7MacKinnon D P, Warsi G, Dwyer J H. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1995, 30(1): 41-62
  • 8Colquitt,J.A.On the dimensionality of organizational justice:A construct validation of a measure.Journal of Applied Psychology,2001,86:386-400
  • 9Colquitt,J.A.,Conlon,D.E.,Wesson,M.J.,Porter,C.O.& Ng,K.Justice at the millennium:A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.Journal of Applied Psychology,2001,86:425-445
  • 10McFarlin,D.B.& Sweeney,P.D.Distributive and procedural justice as predictors of satisfaction with personal and organizational outcomes.Academy of Management Journal,1992,35:626-637

共引文献834

同被引文献99

二级引证文献14

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