IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v122y2014i2p253-268.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Righting the Wrong for Third Parties: How Monetary Compensation, Procedure Changes and Apologies Can Restore Justice for Observers of Injustice

Author

Listed:
  • Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet
  • Marion Fortin
  • Miguel-Angel Canela

Abstract

People react negatively not only to injustices they personally endure but also to injustices that they observe as bystanders at work—and typically, people observe more injustices than they personally experience. It is therefore important to understand how organizations can restore observers’ perceptions of justice after an injustice has occurred. In our paper, we employ a policy capturing design to test and compare the restorative power of monetary compensation, procedure changes and apologies, alone and in combination, from the perspective of third parties. We extend previous research on remedies by including different degrees of compensation and procedural changes, by comparing the effects of sincere versus insincere apologies and by including apologies from additional sources. The results indicate that monetary compensation, procedure changes, and sincere apologies all have a significant and positive effect on how observers perceive the restoration of justice. Insincere apologies, on the other hand, have no significant effect on restoration for third parties. Procedural changes were found to have the strongest remedial effects, a remedy rarely included in previous research. One interpretation of this finding could be that observers of injustice prefer solutions that are not short sighted: changing procedures avoids future injustices that could affect other people. We found that combinations of remedies, such that the presence of a second remedy strengthens the effect of the first remedy, are particularly effective. Our findings regarding interactions underline the importance of studying and administering remedies in conjunction with each other. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet & Marion Fortin & Miguel-Angel Canela, 2014. "Righting the Wrong for Third Parties: How Monetary Compensation, Procedure Changes and Apologies Can Restore Justice for Observers of Injustice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 122(2), pages 253-268, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:122:y:2014:i:2:p:253-268
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-013-1762-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10551-013-1762-7
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-013-1762-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, "undated". "Third Party Punishment and Social Norms," IEW - Working Papers 106, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    2. Turillo, Carmelo Joseph & Folger, Robert & Lavelle, James J. & Umphress, Elizabeth E. & Gee, Julie O., 2002. "Is virtue its own reward? Self-sacrificial decisions for the sake of fairness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 839-865, September.
    3. Baron, Robert A., 1988. "Attributions and organizational conflict: The mediating role of apparent sincerity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 111-127, February.
    4. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gächter, 2002. "Altruistic punishment in humans," Nature, Nature, vol. 415(6868), pages 137-140, January.
    5. Dirks, Kurt T. & Kim, Peter H. & Ferrin, Donald L. & Cooper, Cecily D., 2011. "Understanding the effects of substantive responses on trust following a transgression," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 87-103, March.
    6. Marcello Pagnini & Paola Rossi & Valerio Vacca, 2017. "Introduction," Economic Notes, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, vol. 46(3), pages 409-410, November.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:7:p:543-553 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Cohen-Charash, Yochi & Spector, Paul E., 2001. "The Role of Justice in Organizations: A Meta-Analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 278-321, November.
    9. Cojuharenco, Irina & Patient, David & Bashshur, Michael R., 2011. "Seeing the "forest" or the "trees" of organizational justice: Effects of temporal perspective on employee concerns about unfair treatment at work," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 17-31, September.
    10. William P. Bottom & Kevin Gibson & Steven E. Daniels & J. Keith Murnighan, 2002. "When Talk Is Not Cheap: Substantive Penance and Expressions of Intent in Rebuilding Cooperation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(5), pages 497-513, October.
    11. Blader, Steven L. & Wiesenfeld, Batia M. & Fortin, Marion & Wheeler-Smith, Sara L., 2013. "Fairness lies in the heart of the beholder: How the social emotions of third parties influence reactions to injustice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 62-80.
    12. De Cremer, David, 2010. "To pay or to apologize? On the psychology of dealing with unfair offers in a dictator game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 843-848, December.
    13. Steven L Blader & Batia M Wiesenfeld & Marion Fortin & Sara L Wheeler-Smith, 2013. "Fairness lies in the heart of the beholder: How the social emotions of third parties influence reactions to injustice," Post-Print halshs-00862149, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cugueró-Escofet, Natalia & Fitó, Àngels & Rosanas, Josep Mª, 2016. "Integrating justice and trust in MCS: How to generate goal congruence and long term fairness coherent with the firm's mission," IESE Research Papers D/1145, IESE Business School.
    2. Onyeka K. Osuji & Ugochukwu L. Obibuaku, 2016. "Rights and Corporate Social Responsibility: Competing or Complementary Approaches to Poverty Reduction and Socioeconomic Rights?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 329-347, June.
    3. Nicholas DiFonzo & Anthony Alongi & Paul Wiele, 2020. "Apology, Restitution, and Forgiveness After Psychological Contract Breach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 53-69, January.
    4. Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet & Josep M. Rosanas, 2020. "The Relative Role of the Intellectual and Moral Virtues in Sustainable Management Decisions: The Case of Practical Wisdom and Justice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-21, February.
    5. Warren Cook & Kristine M. Kuhn, 2021. "Off-Duty Deviance in the Eye of the Beholder: Implications of Moral Foundations Theory in the Age of Social Media," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(3), pages 605-620, September.
    6. Rasim Serdar Kurdoglu, 2020. "The Mirage of Procedural Justice and the Primacy of Interactional Justice in Organizations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 495-512, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet & Marion Fortin, 2014. "One Justice or Two? A Model of Reconciliation of Normative Justice Theories and Empirical Research on Organizational Justice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(3), pages 435-451, October.
    2. Russell S. Cropanzano & Sebastiano Massaro & William J. Becker, 2017. "Deontic Justice and Organizational Neuroscience," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(4), pages 733-754, September.
    3. Ben Gilbert & Alexander James & Jason F. Shogren, 2018. "Corporate apology for environmental damage," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 51-81, February.
    4. Gasparotto, Lisiane Santos & Pacheco, Natália Araujo & Basso, Kenny & Corte, Vitor Francisco Dalla & Rabello, Gisele Costa & Gallon, Shalimar, 2018. "The role of regulation and financial compensation on trust recovery," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 10-16.
    5. Kähkönen, T. & Blomqvist, K. & Gillespie, N. & Vanhala, M., 2021. "Employee trust repair: A systematic review of 20 years of empirical research and future research directions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 98-109.
    6. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, "undated". "Third Party Punishment and Social Norms," IEW - Working Papers 106, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    7. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2004. "Social norms and human cooperation," Macroeconomics 0409026, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Tobias Hahn & Noël Albert, 2017. "Strong Reciprocity in Consumer Boycotts," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 509-524, October.
    9. Sherf, Elad N. & Venkataramani, Vijaya, 2015. "Friend or foe? The impact of relational ties with comparison others on outcome fairness and satisfaction judgments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 1-14.
    10. Jeff Galak & Rosalind M Chow, 2019. "Compensate a little, but punish a lot: Asymmetric routes to restoring justice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-27, January.
    11. Janne Doorn & Marcel Zeelenberg & Seger M. Breugelmans, 2018. "An exploration of third parties’ preference for compensation over punishment: six experimental demonstrations," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 333-351, October.
    12. Christian Thöni, 2014. "Inequality aversion and antisocial punishment," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 529-545, April.
    13. Angelsen, Arild & Naime, Julia, 2024. "The mixed impacts of peer punishments on common-pool resources: Multi-country experimental evidence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    14. Christine Clavien & Colby J Tanner & Fabrice Clément & Michel Chapuisat, 2012. "Choosy Moral Punishers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-6, June.
    15. Cason, Timothy N. & Mui, Vai-Lam, 2015. "Rich communication, social motivations, and coordinated resistance against divide-and-conquer: A laboratory investigation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 146-159.
    16. Cubitt, Robin P. & Drouvelis, Michalis & Gächter, Simon & Kabalin, Ruslan, 2011. "Moral judgments in social dilemmas: How bad is free riding?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 253-264.
    17. Wang, Cynthia S. & Sivanathan, Niro & Narayanan, Jayanth & Ganegoda, Deshani B. & Bauer, Monika & Bodenhausen, Galen V. & Murnighan, Keith, 2011. "Retribution and emotional regulation: The effects of time delay in angry economic interactions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 46-54, September.
    18. Andras Molnar & Shereen J. Chaudhry & George Loewenstein, 2020. ""It's Not about the Money. It's about Sending a Message!" Unpacking the Components of Revenge," CESifo Working Paper Series 8102, CESifo.
    19. Cameron, Lisa & Chaudhuri, Ananish & Erkal, Nisvan & Gangadharan, Lata, 2009. "Propensities to engage in and punish corrupt behavior: Experimental evidence from Australia, India, Indonesia and Singapore," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(7-8), pages 843-851, August.
    20. Leibbrandt, Andreas & López-Pérez, Raúl & Spiegelman, Eli, 2023. "Reciprocal, but inequality averse as well? Mixed motives for punishment and reward," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 91-116.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:122:y:2014:i:2:p:253-268. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.