Aubri Robinson and Dr. Sheli Sillito, Department of Organizational Leadership and Strategy

The purpose of our research project was to determine the influence of managerial fairness in the context of dispute resolution and negotiation. We aimed to identify whether managers’ relational self-construal (RSC), whether they define themselves in terms of their close relationships with others, leads to more positive outcomes in social contexts, including higher fairness ratings from subordinates and higher self-perceived fairness. Through our studies, we explored potential moderators (e.g., context) and mediators (e.g., affect) of the RSC-fairness relationship within organizations and manager-employee relationships. Our findings expected to inform research on negotiation improvement and organizational fairness. Through our study of negotiations within created and controlled settings, although we did not finish our project, we are continuing to contribute to the current focus on managerial fairness within organizational justice.

We conducted our studies in the Marketing and Behavioral Lab in the Marriott School. Participants consisted of graduate and undergraduate students enrolled in Organizational Behavior, Marketing, Rec Management, or Information Systems classes; extra credit was granted for participation. Participants were asked to read a role for a workplace negotiation or dispute resolution. The example role played was quantified and designed to illustrate Pareto optimality (getting the “best” outcome) and the differences between compatible, trade-off or integrative, and distributive issues.

Prior to the role plays, participants completed a measure of RSC. Following the negotiation, a post-survey was administered, comprised of questions related to how the dispute resolution went. In sum, the study measured RSC and examined outcomes in negotiation and explored potential moderators and mediators of the relationship between RSC and negotiation. Data gathered through questionnaires, interviews, and observations altogether provided a richer understanding of organizational justice. We analyzed the data primarily through general linear models, such as analysis of covariance and linear regression.

My mentor and I analyzed specific dispute resolution behaviors related to the manager-employee interaction. We meet together in person to work on our analyses.

While work is still to progress so specific moderators and mediators cannot be published yet, we have found the influence of managerial fairness in the context of dispute resolution and negotiation to be significant. Managers’ RSC led to both negative and positive outcomes in social contexts. The positive outcomes, such as higher fairness rating from subordinates and higher self-perceived fairness, were observed in the majority. Occasional instances, however, proved the opposite effect: negative outcomes in social contexts were present as a result of RSC within dispute resolutions and negotiations. Our findings thus far accent the importance of identifying and understanding fairness resolutions to improve negotiations within the organizational setting.

As our research is not finished, further work needs to be continued to study the effect of RSC in dispute resolutions and negotiations because of its importance in the organizational setting. Negotiations are crucial and commonplace within an organization and emerging evidence suggests that managers themselves are a source of justice [1]; nevertheless, little work in the fairness literature had previously been done in relation to the manager or agent of the behavior (see [2] for notable exceptions). It has been found that a manager’s fairness is one of the most influential experiences of an employee, yet there is sparse focus on research which examines potential influences on managerial fairness behaviors or what drives the fairness of managers (e.g., RSC). Researchers have stressed the importance of applying knowledge of the self-concept and associated self-regulatory processes to the organizational justice literature ([3] and [4]). The manager-to-subordinate relationship is vital to a well-functioning organization: interactions that subordinates have with their managers are evidenced to be more influential than the employee’s experience with fairness of the organization at large. Justice and fairness are a maintenance tool to signal inclusion to employees [5]. Thus, managers high in RSC will be motivated to include and signal inclusion to close others through interacting in a fair manner. Engaging in such behavior forms and cultivates satisfying social relationships which are particularly important to managers with high RSC. Once existing fairness resolutions are identified and understood, researchers can push toward changes and improvements in negotiations, and support for better organizational settings.

Once research is completed, we aim to publish our findings. The Academy of Management (AOM) is the most recognized and attended association for management professors worldwide. We plan to write our paper and present it at the 2013 AOM conference in Orlando. By presenting, we will receive valuable feedback that will help us polish our draft before submitting for publication to the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, a top tier academic journal.

References

1. Cobb, A.T., Vest, M. & Hills, F. (1997). Who delivers justice? Source perceptions of procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 1020-1040.
2. Patient, D.L. & Skarlicki, D.P. (2005). Why managers don’t always do the right thing when delivering bad news: The roles of empathy, self-esteem, and moral development, in interactional fairness. In S. Gilliland (Ed.) What motivates fairness in organizations? (pp. 149-178). Information Age Publishing.
3. Brockner, J., DeCremer, D., van den Bos, K. & Chen, Y. (2005). The influence of interdependent self-construal on procedural fairness effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 96, 155-167.
4. Johnson, R.E., Selenta, C. & Lord, R.G. (2006) When organizational justice and the self-concept meet: consequences for the organization and its members. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99, 157-201.
5. Tyler, T.R., & Bies, R.J. (1990). Beyond formal procedures: the interpersonal context of procedural justice. In J.S. Carroll (Ed.) Applied social psychology and organizational settings. 77-98. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Cobb, A.T. & Frey, F.M. (1996). The effects of leader fairness and pay outcomes on superior/subordinate relations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 1401-1426.