Search

Purpose: This research evaluates how reward and punishment behaviors are related to employee satisfaction, and how perceptions of justice mediate the effects of these behaviors. This study also seeks to examine the connection between some boundary conditions and the efficacy of reward and punishment behaviors. Design/Methodology/Approach: Data were collected using questionnaires, and hypotheses were tested using a sample of 3,065 managers from 41 business units. Findings: We found that contingent financial and social rewards were positively related to fairness and satisfaction, whereas punishment behaviors exert a negative influence. Findings reveal that high-trust propensity and low-pay level strengthen the positive influence of rewards on distributive justice, whereas high role ambiguity increases the positive effect of reward behaviors and the negative influence of non-contingent punishment (NCP) on superior satisfaction. Implications: This study provided evidence that using contingent rewards is more effective in promoting positive attitudes at work than using contingent punishments. Our findings add to the evidence that organizations would benefit from encouraging their managers to use financial and social rewards and reducing the administration of NCP among performing employees. Originality/Value: This study represents a first attempt to examine an integrated model of the effects of reward and punishment behaviors. It also contributes to this field by empirically evaluating the impact of individual and situational boundary conditions in the efficacy of these leader behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using theories of social comparison and influence as a lens through which to view the operation of justice in teams, this study explores the effects of interdependence and group identification on referent choice and justice climate strength. 372 undergraduate students participated in a laboratory experiment with two levels each of team interdependence, procedural treatment, and outcome favorability. The results showed that members of highly interdependent teams were more likely to make intergroup justice comparisons and that group identification partially mediated this relationship. Interdependence was also related to variability in team climate perceptions, with group identification as a mediator between interdependence and procedural justice climate strength. Overall, the findings highlight interdependence and social identity as contextual variables that influence the emergence of team-level justice perceptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]