IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/irjman/v36y2017i3p206-220n1001.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Equity versus equality norms of justice and organisational commitment: the moderating role of gender

Author

Listed:
  • Ramamoorthy Nagarajan

    (School of Business Administration, Department of Management and Marketing, University of Houston-Victoria, Houston, United States of America)

  • Stringer Donna

    (School of Business Administration, Department of Management and Marketing, University of Houston-Victoria, Houston, United States of America)

Abstract

In the current study, using a sample of 467 employees from Ireland, we examined the effects of distributive justice perceptions, based on equity versus equality principles, on two forms of employee commitment: affective and normative. Furthermore, we also tested whether employees’ gender moderated the relationships between these two distributive justice perceptions and the two forms of commitment. Results indicated that equity perceptions positively influenced both forms of commitment and equality perceptions positively influenced only normative commitment. Additionally, results revealed that women reported greater affective and normative commitments than men when equity perceptions were higher than when they were lower. Gender did not moderate the relationship between equality perceptions and normative commitment. Women, however, reported lower affective commitment than men when equality perceptions were lower; there were no differences between men and women on affective commitment when equality perceptions were higher. Implications are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramamoorthy Nagarajan & Stringer Donna, 2017. "Equity versus equality norms of justice and organisational commitment: the moderating role of gender," The Irish Journal of Management, Sciendo, vol. 36(3), pages 206-220.
  • Handle: RePEc:vrs:irjman:v:36:y:2017:i:3:p:206-220:n:1001
    DOI: 10.1515/ijm-2017-0008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ijm-2017-0008
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ijm-2017-0008?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Linz, Susan J., 2004. "Motivating Russian workers: analysis of age and gender differences," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 261-289, July.
    2. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    3. Jeffrey Pfeffer, 2007. "Human Resources from an Organizational Behavior Perspective: Some Paradoxes Explained," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(4), pages 115-134, Fall.
    4. Claudia Schusterschitz & Willi Geser & Elisabeth Noehammer & Harald Stummer, 2011. "Securely Attached, Strongly Committed? On the Influence of Attachment Orientations on Organizational Commitment," Zeitschrift fuer Personalforschung. German Journal of Research in Human Resource Management, Rainer Hampp Verlag, vol. 25(4), pages 335-355.
    5. Peng, Kelly Z. & Ngo, Hang-Yue & Shi, Junqi & Wong, Chi-Sum, 2009. "Gender differences in the work commitment of Chinese workers: An investigation of two alternative explanations," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 323-335, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. KonShik Kim & Tack-Hyun Shin, 2019. "Additive Effects of Performance- and Commitment-Oriented Human Resource Management Systems on Organizational Outcomes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-21, March.
    2. Ming Jia & Zhe Zhang, 2013. "Critical Mass of Women on BODs, Multiple Identities, and Corporate Philanthropic Disaster Response: Evidence from Privately Owned Chinese Firms," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(2), pages 303-317, December.
    3. Bremer, Diedrich & Lüdtke, Jan-Philipp & Richter, Ansgar & Schäfer, Utz, 2009. "Who disciples the CFO? An assessment of stakeholder power in corporate governance," MPRA Paper 15782, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Barbara Su, 2023. "Banking practices and borrowing firms’ financial reporting quality: evidence from bank cross-selling," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 201-236, March.
    5. Yeon‐Koo Che & Kathryn E. Spier, 2008. "Strategic judgment proofing," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(4), pages 926-948, December.
    6. Klapper, Leora F. & Love, Inessa, 2004. "Corporate governance, investor protection, and performance in emerging markets," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 10(5), pages 703-728, November.
    7. Hartarska, Valentina M. & Nadolnyak, Denis A., 2012. "Financing Constraints and Access to Credit in Post Crisis Environment: Evidence from New Farmers in Alabama," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124882, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Hasan, Iftekhar & Lozano-Vivas, Ana, 2002. "Organizational Form and Expense Preference: Spanish Experience," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 135-150, April.
    9. Fabbri, Daniela & Menichini, Anna Maria C., 2016. "The commitment problem of secured lending," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(3), pages 561-584.
    10. Sang Cheol Lee & Mooweon Rhee & Jongchul Yoon, 2018. "Foreign Monitoring and Audit Quality: Evidence from Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    11. Lu, Yao & Zhan, Shuwei & Zhan, Minghua, 2024. "Has FinTech changed the sensitivity of corporate investment to interest rates?—Evidence from China," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    12. DEGEORGE, François & DING, Yuan & JEANJEAN, Thomas & STOLOWY, Hervé, 2005. "Does Analyst Following Curb Earnings Management?," HEC Research Papers Series 810, HEC Paris.
    13. Xueyan Dong & Jingyu Gao & Sunny Li Sun & Kangtao Ye, 2021. "Doing extreme by doing good," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 291-315, March.
    14. Gerry Gallery & Emerson Cooper & John Sweeting, 2008. "Corporate Disclosure Quality: Lessons from Australian Companies on the Impact of Adopting International Financial Reporting Standards," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 18(3), pages 257-273, September.
    15. Baarda, James R., 2003. "Current Law & Economics Debates: Tools for Assessing Fundamental Cooperative Changes?," 2003 Annual Meeting, October 29 31802, NCERA-194 Research on Cooperatives.
    16. Khémiri, Wafa & Noubbigh, Hédi, 2020. "Size-threshold effect in debt-firm performance nexus in the sub-Saharan region: A Panel Smooth Transition Regression approach," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 335-344.
    17. Shaikh, Ibrahim A. & O'Brien, Jonathan Paul & Peters, Lois, 2018. "Inside directors and the underinvestment of financial slack towards R&D-intensity in high-technology firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 192-201.
    18. Calcagno, R. & Renneboog, L.D.R., 2004. "Capital Structure and Managerial Compensation : The Effects of Renumeration Seniority," Discussion Paper 2004-120, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    19. Maha Faisal Alsayegh & Rashidah Abdul Rahman & Saeid Homayoun, 2020. "Corporate Economic, Environmental, and Social Sustainability Performance Transformation through ESG Disclosure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-20, May.
    20. Preet Singh & Chitra Singla, 2016. "Executive Stock Options: Will it Work as a Good Governance Mechanism in all Scenarios?," Working Papers id:10985, eSocialSciences.

    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:vrs:irjman:v:36:y:2017:i:3:p:206-220:n:1001. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.