A multilevel study of the relationship between organizational justice and affective commitment. The moderating role of organizational size and tenure
| Published date | 29 July 2014 |
| Pages | 654-671 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-05-2013-0073 |
| Date | 29 July 2014 |
| Author | Marc Ohana |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Global HRM |
A multilevel study of the
relationship between
organizational justice and
affective commitment
The moderating role of organizational size
and tenure
Marc Ohana
Kedge Business School, Talence, France
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the moderating role of organizational size and
individual tenure on the relationship between organizational justice and organizational affective
commitment. Based on the literature on organizational justice and justice climate, this paper tests
whetherthe role of justiceclimate, measured atthe organizationallevel, is affectedby these organizational
and individual characteristicsin determining individual organizational affective commitment.
Design/methodology/approach – Data on 20,936 employees from 1,496 companies that were
included in the 2004 Workplace Employment Relationships Survey were used.
Findings – Hierarchical linear modeling analysis shows that the importance of the justice climate
extends beyond its effect on individual perceptions. Moreover,whereas the organization size does not
influence the justice climate – affective commitment relationship, organizational tenure moderates it.
Originality/value – This study shows the impact of justice climate on affective commitment beyond
the effect of individual justice. It also examines organizational (organization size) and individual
characteristics (tenure) as possible moderators, constructs rarely considered in studies on justice
climate.
Keywords Commitment, Size, Organizational tenure, Quantitative, Organizational justice,
Justice climate
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Over the last two decades, many artic les have shown that perceptions of organizational
justice, i.e. employee judgments about whether their work situation is fair, influence
attitudes and behaviors. For instance, numerous studies have examined the relationship
between organizational justice and affective commitment (Cohen-Charash and Spector,
2001; Colquitt et al., 2001).
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm
Received 7 May 2013
Revised 16 December 2013
Accepted 11 February 2014
Personnel Review
Vol. 43 No. 5, 2014
pp. 654-671
rEmeraldGroup PublishingLimited
0048-3486
DOI 10.1108/PR-05-2013-0073
The author thanks Micki Kacmar, David Patient, and Mohamed Ikram Nasr for their helpful
comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript. Of course, any er rors are the authors’
responsibility. The author also acknowledges the Department of Trade and Industry, the
Economic and Social Research Council, the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service and
the Policy Studies Institute as the originators of the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations
Survey Data, and the Data Archive at the University of Essex as the distributor of the data. The
National Centre for Social Research was commissioned to conduct the su rvey fieldwork on behalf
of the sponsors. None of these organizations bears any responsibility for the author’s analysis
and interpretations of the data.
654
PR
43,5
However, the potential impact of justice climate, defined as justice perceptions at
the group[1] level, has largely been neglected (Liao and Rupp, 2005). This oversight
is surprising for several reasons. First, the context in which these relationships are
observed, i.e. the work environment, is highly important to organizational behaviors
because it impacts the potential attitudinal consequences of individual perceptions
( Johns, 2006; Antonakis and Liden, 2009; Rousseau and Fried, 2001). Second, calls from
leading researchers for more multi-level studies have placed g reat importance on the
study of climates beyond their individual components (Rousseau, 1985; Klein et al.,
1994; Kozlowski and Klein, 2000). Finally, past research has revealed the role of justice
climate in determining attitudes and behaviors (Spell and Arnold, 2007; Mossh older
et al., 1998; Liao and Rupp, 2005; Roberson and Colquitt, 2005). For example, Liao and
Rupp’s(2005) study examines theimpact of procedural, interpersonal, and informational
justice climateson various attitudesand behaviors. However, the results of thisstudy are
mixed as theydo not evidence any stronglink between justice climate andorganizational
affective commitment.
The present study extends the existing research on organizational justice and
organizational affective commitment by examining the relationships between these
variables and by including justice climate as an additional variable. In this paper, we
investigate two principal questions. The first question is connected to the role played
by organizational justice climate: to what degree do es justice climate affect individual
organizational affective commitment? The second question explores the effects of
contextual and individual variables, such as employee tenure and organization size, on
the relationship between justice climate and individual affectivecommitment. W hereas
there is a sizeable literature on the justice climate – outcomes relationship, research on
the boundary conditions of this relationship is scarcer (Kuenzi and Schminke, 2009).
As situational characteristics can alter the contagion process of justice climate, it is
crucial to explore any potential moderating effect in order to precisely understand the
phenomenon (Degoey, 2000). Indeed, researchershave called for more studies integrating
moderators in the justice literature at the individual level (from Cropanzano et al., 2001
or Ambrose and Schminke, 2003 to Shao et al., 2013, for example), as they can have
a huge impact on the individual justice – outcomes relationship (Colquitt et al., 2001).
Other authors also point out the necessity to study boundary conditions of the justice
climate – outcomes relationship (Lin and Leung, 2013). This paper contributes to this
literature by studying moderating variables of the multi-level relationship between justice
and attitudinal outcomes. Tenure can be one of the significant moderating variables
since individual characteristics can moderate the justice climate – outcomes relationship
(Mayer et al., 2007). Size may also be a moderating variable, as it was shown that
group size can influence attitudes and behaviors (Cohen et al., 2012), and several
authors pointed out the potential effect of organization size as a boundary condition
of the justice climate – outcomes relationship (Li and Cropanzano, 2009; Whitman
et al., 2012).
The present study makes theoretical and practical contributions. It contributes to
organizational justice theory by clarifying the role of the justice climate in determining
affective commitment. More precisely, it empirically examines the boundary
conditions of the justice climate – individual affective commitment relationship by
using cross-sectional data from a large representative survey of employees in Great
Britain. Likewise, our study contribu tes to practice by discussing the fundamental
roles of individual and collective justice perceptions in determining attitudes toward
work.
655
The moderating
role of
organizational
size and tenure
To continue reading
Request your trial