Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Fairness in Communication
Fairness in Communication
Preface
xiii
xiv
ORGANIZATIONAL
JUSTICE
m o o t . W h e n p e o p l e i n t e r a c t , however, t h e y b e g i n t o t r e a t o n e a n o t h e r in
c e r t a i n ways. T h e y m i g h t , for e x a m p l e , d e r o g a t e each o t h e r (i.e., t a k e a w a y
s o m e o n e ' s social s t a t u s o r self-respect) o r t h e y m i g h t t r e a t e a c h o t h e r r e s p e c t fully (i.e., assign each o t h e r positive s t a t u s ) . S o m e t r a n s a c t i o n s a n d o t h e r t y p e s
of i n t e r a c t i o n s a r e j u d g e d t o be v i r t u o u s o r fair, w h e r e a s o t h e r s a r e n o t
" p r o p e r " a n d are unfair. W h e n we say t h a t s o m e o n e has t r e a t e d u s "unfairly,"
w e m e a n t h a t h e o r she h a s v i o l a t e d s o m e ethical s t a n d a r d ( s ) r e g a r d i n g m o r a l
b e h a v i o r . T h a t p e r s o n h a s n o t t r e a t e d us as w e believe p e o p l e " s h o u l d " b e
treated.
F r o m this i n t r o d u c t i o n , it is p r o b a b l y clear w h e r e p h i l o s o p h e r s a n d social
scientists diverge. Ethical p h i l o s o p h e r s a r e i n t e r e s t e d in p r o v i d i n g prescriptive
o r normative
d e f i n i t i o n s of justice. Loosely, w e c a n say t h a t t h e y give u s
g u i d a n c e as t o h o w w e s h o u l d b e h a v e ( D o n a l d s o n 8c D u n f e e , 1994; W a t e r m a n ,
1988). P h i l o s o p h e r s a t t e m p t t o d e v e l o p s t a n d a r d s a n d "first p r i n c i p l e s " t h a t
allow us t o m a k e ethical d e c i s i o n s . O f c o u r s e , t h i s e n t e r p r i s e defines justice
w i t h r e s p e c t t o s o m e p h i l o s o p h i c a l system. T h e s a m e act can b e seen as m o r e
o r less fair, d e p e n d i n g o n w h i c h p h i l o s o p h i c a l system o n e utilizes. For t h i s
r e a s o n , p e o p l e v a r y in w h a t t h e y see as ethical b e h a v i o r ( H o s m e r , 1995; J o n e s ,
1 9 9 1 ) . For e x a m p l e , R o k e a c h ( 1 9 7 3 ) a r g u e d t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s w h o v a l u e b o t h
e q u a l i t y a n d f r e e d o m t e n d t o view w i d e gaps b e t w e e n t h e rich a n d t h e p o o r
as unfair. T h e y d o n o t like it w h e n a relatively s m a l l n u m b e r of p e o p l e c o n t r o l
a d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e a m o u n t of t h e available w e a l t h . T h e s e i n d i v i d u a l s often
prefer d e m o c r a t i c socialism as a m e a n s of rectifying w h a t t h e y see as a n
"unfair" income distribution. O n the other hand, those w h o have strong
v a l u e s for f r e e d o m b u t less for e q u a l i t y are m o r e o r i e n t e d t o w a r d f r e e - m a r k e t
c a p i t a l i s m . W i d e variability in i n c o m e s is n o t u n f a i r in this p h i l o s o p h i c a l
w o r l d v i e w b e c a u s e e q u a l i t y is a s e c o n d a r y v a l u e . For p e o p l e w i t h this o r i e n t a t i o n , a lack of justice can result from g o v e r n m e n t r e s t r i c t i o n s a n d "confisc a t i o n " of t h e i r w e a l t h t h r o u g h taxes. Justice, in this p h i l o s o p h i c a l s e n s e , refers
t o t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h a given a c t i o n , o u t c o m e , o r c i r c u m s t a n c e is in a l i g n m e n t
w i t h a c e r t a i n ethical p a r a d i g m ( H o s m e r , 1995).
If this b o o k w e r e a b o u t p h i l o s o p h i c a l views o n justice, t h e c o n t e n t w o u l d
focus o n a p p l i e d ethical p r i n c i p l e s , p e r h a p s even a t o u c h of t h e o l o g y . It w o u l d
p r o b a b l y n o t b e e m p i r i c a l , a l t h o u g h it m i g h t b e i n f o r m e d b y d a t a (cf. D o n a l d s o n & D u n f e e , 1994; R a n d a l l & G i b s o n , 1990). H o w e v e r , w e h a v e offered
t h e r e a d e r this d e f i n i t i o n of justice o n l y b y w a y of c o n t r a s t . F o r social a n d
o r g a n i z a t i o n a l scientists, justice is defined p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l l y . T h a t is, a n act
is " j u s t " b e c a u s e s o m e o n e t h i n k s it is j u s t a n d r e s p o n d s a c c o r d i n g l y . T h i s
d e f i n i t i o n is subjective a n d socially c o n s t r u c t e d . As o n e m i g h t i m a g i n e , t w o
o r m o r e p e o p l e can d i s a g r e e . Justice, t h e n , is a p e r c e p t u a l c o g n i t i o n . P e o p l e
perceive a c e r t a i n e v e n t . T h e y t h e n m a k e j u d g m e n t s r e g a r d i n g t h a t e v e n t a n d
s t o r e t h e m in m e m o r y . Justice is a m e a n s b y w h i c h i n d i v i d u a l s m a k e sense o u t
Preface
xv
xvi
ORGANIZATIONAL
JUSTICE
Why Justice?
All of t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s p o i n t t o t h e p e r v a s i v e n e s s of j u s t i c e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s in h u m a n e n d e a v o r s . H o w e v e r , n o n e of t h e m specifies w h y t h i s is so.
W e are m u c h like t h e p r o v e r b i a l fish w h o , h a v i n g n e v e r b e e n a n y w h e r e else,
fails t o see t h a t it is in t h e water. Because w e often t h i n k in fairness t e r m s , we
h a v e difficulty i m a g i n i n g h o w it c o u l d b e o t h e r w i s e . We can u n d e r s t a n d w h y
justice is i m p o r t a n t by r e m e m b e r i n g t h a t fairness c o n c e r n s itself w i t h w h a t
t h i n g s get allocated a n d h o w these a l l o c a t i o n s take place. T h u s , to say t h a t
justice m a t t e r s is m o r e o r less s y n o n y m o u s w i t h m a i n t a i n i n g t h a t p e o p l e care
a b o u t h o w t h e y a r e t r e a t e d b y o t h e r s . T h e r o o t s of j u s t i c e can b e f o u n d in o u r
i n c l i n a t i o n t o affiliate w i t h o t h e r p e o p l e .
W i t h t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s in m i n d , w e are n o w r e a d y t o a n s w e r t h e " w h y "
q u e s t i o n . T h i s preface will a p p r o a c h t h e m a t t e r b r o a d l y , d i v i d i n g o u r a r g u m e n t i n t o f o u r s e c t i o n s . First, w e discuss w h y p e o p l e live a n d w o r k in g r o u p s .
W e e m p h a s i z e t h a t social collectives, in t h e b r o a d e s t sense of t h a t t e r m ,
p r o v i d e Homo sapiens w i t h a v a r i e t y of a d v a n t a g e s . S e c o n d , given t h e a d v a n tages of g r o u p living, it s e e m s likely t h a t g r e g a r i o u s n e s s h a d clear s u r v i v a l
v a l u e . O n t h e basis of this, we will a r g u e t h a t sociability is b u i l t i n t o t h e h u m a n
p s y c h e . N a t u r e h a s e n d o w e d h u m a n s w i t h a set o f i n c l i n a t i o n s o r n e e d s t h a t
o t h e r p e o p l e a r e helpful in fulfilling. T h i r d , w e will e x a m i n e h u m a n n e e d s in
m o r e detail. G e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g , h u m a n n e e d s can b e o r g a n i z e d i n t o t w o
b r o a d c a t e g o r i e s . O n e set of n e e d s is e c o n o m i c o r q u a s i - e c o n o m i c . For
e x a m p l e , p e o p l e r e q u i r e shelter, food, a n d so o n . A n o t h e r set is s o c i o e m o -
xvii
Preface
t i o n a l . For e x a m p l e , p e o p l e t e n d t o b e d e s i r o u s of s t a t u s a n d a s e n s e o f d i g n i t y .
S u c h n e e d s d r a w u s t o o t h e r s . F o u r t h , w e discuss h o w i n d i v i d u a l i n c l i n a t i o n s
t u g p e o p l e i n t o social g r o u p s as a m e a n s of fulfilling t h e i r n e e d s . C o n s e q u e n t l y , m o s t of u s seek o u t o t h e r s , b u t w e t e n d t o d o s o t o fulfill o u r o w n
objectives. As s u c h , o u t c o m e s in t h e g r o u p n e e d t o b e n e g o t i a t e d . Justice
p r o v i d e s t h e vehicle b y w h i c h these n e g o t i a t i o n s can o c c u r .
1
xviii
ORGANIZATIONAL
JUSTICE
Preface
xix
XX
ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE
T h e s i t u a t i o n c a n b e u n d e r s t o o d t h u s : If o u r c o m r a d e s a r e n o t helpful t o
u s , t h e n w e a r e m o r e likely to seek a n e w set of associates. Likewise, if w e a r e
n o t helpful t o o u r c o m r a d e s , t h e n t h e y will b e m o t i v a t e d t o a b a n d o n u s . T h e y
d e p e n d o n u s to give t h e m respect. For t h i s r e a s o n , each p e r s o n c a n n o t b e
o v e r l y d e m a n d i n g of o t h e r s . E v e r y o n e s h o u l d s h o w at least a m o d i c u m o f
c o n c e r n for t h e n e e d s of his o r h e r p e e r s . Ultimately, successful collectives a r e
b a s e d o n a g r a n d c o m p r o m i s e e v e r y o n e agrees t o k e e p h i s / h e r p e r s o n a l
self-interest partially in check so t h a t s o m e t h i n g is left for o t h e r m e m b e r s of
the group.
Justice n o r m s d e v e l o p as g u i d e l i n e s for fair i n t e r a c t i o n a n d r u l e s b y w h i c h
e x c h a n g e s a r e m a d e . In t h e act of f r a m i n g n o r m s , social g r o u p s d e c i d e w h a t
is " r i g h t " a n d "ethical." T h e s e n o r m s h e l p u s t o r e g u l a t e b o t h o u r o w n
b e h a v i o r a n d t h e b e h a v i o r of o t h e r s . For e x a m p l e , w e k n o w t h a t if w e take t o o
b i g a p o r t i o n o f t h e profits for o u r s e l v e s , we risk t h e d i s d a i n o f o u r c o w o r k e r s .
Justice m a k e s us a w a r e of t h o s e b o u n d a r i e s . F u r t h e r m o r e , j u s t i c e affords u s a
sense of predictability. W h e n w e have clear rules, w e k n o w h o w d e c i s i o n s are
m a d e a n d w h a t o u t c o m e s w e are a p t to receive in t h e l o n g r u n . In a fair s y s t e m ,
for e x a m p l e , w e a r e likely t o b e less u p s e t w h e n a p a r t i c u l a r t r a n s a c t i o n d o e s
n o t g o o u r way. T h i s affords us m o r e c o n f i d e n c e t h a t o u t c o m e s will b e
d i s t r i b u t e d a d e q u a t e l y in t h e future.
Of c o u r s e , it is difficult t o m o n i t o r s o m e t r a n s a c t i o n s , a n d it is n o t always
easy t o k n o w w h e t h e r y o u a r e b e i n g t r e a t e d fairly. A d d e d t o t h e s e c o n c e r n s is
a n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t fact: M e m b e r s of a g r o u p h a v e a n i n c e n t i v e t o c h e a t . T h i s
is b e c a u s e "free r i d i n g , " if u n d e t e c t e d , allows t h e c h e a t e r t o m a x i m i z e his o r
h e r benefits w i t h o u t e n d a n g e r i n g his o r h e r f u t u r e . Justice n o r m s offer a
p a r t i a l s o l u t i o n . S o u n d fairness p r i n c i p l e s c a n p r o v i d e clearer s t a n d a r d s b y
w h i c h a p e e r ' s b e h a v i o r can b e e v a l u a t e d . T h i s c o u l d m a k e it easier t o d e t e c t
free r i d e r s .
In s u m , o t h e r p e o p l e are t h e a v e n u e b y w h i c h i n d i v i d u a l s fulfill m a n y of
t h e i r n e e d s . Justice p r o v i d e s us w i t h a system for g e t t i n g o u r n e e d s m e t in a n
o r d e r l y a n d fair way. O n c e g r o u p m e m b e r s agree o n t h e r u l e s of fairness ( n o
m e a n t a s k ) , t h e n e v e r y o n e n e e d o n l y a b i d e b y t h e m . D o i n g so m e a n s t h a t y o u
c a n a d d r e s s t h e n e e d s of o t h e r s w h i l e o t h e r s a r e a d d r e s s i n g y o u r p e r s o n a l
i n t e r e s t s . W e shall d e m o n s t r a t e this m a t t e r m o r e explicitly in o u r n e x t s e c t i o n .
Preface
xxi
i n t i m a t e l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h h o w p e o p l e relate to o n e a n o t h e r in e x c h a n g e
s i t u a t i o n s . A n y o u t c o m e assigned b y a g r o u p o r i n d i v i d u a l , b e it m o n e y o r
s t a t u s , c a n b e j u d g e d w i t h respect t o fairness. Because t h e s e a r e i m p o r t a n t
r e a s o n s t h a t p e o p l e a r e d r i v e n t o affiliate, justice is critical for u n d e r s t a n d i n g
interpersonal relationships a n d g r o u p processes (Greenberg, 1988a). We can
say, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t justice involves at least t w o o r m o r e a c t o r s a n d s o m e
c a t e g o r y of r e s o u r c e . We can define t h e s e t e r m s b r o a d l y . T h e a c t o r s n e e d n o t
b e i n d i v i d u a l p e o p l e b u t can b e social u n i t s , s u c h as o r g a n i z a t i o n s o r e v e n
n a t i o n s . Likewise, t h e r e s o u r c e s c a n b e e c o n o m i c o r s o c i o e m o t i o n a l . T h e
i n t e r a c t i o n s t h a t take place a r e g o v e r n e d b y s o m e r u l e s o r p r o c e d u r e s , f o r m a l
a n d explicit as well as i n f o r m a l a n d tacit. For e x a m p l e , a n o r g a n i z a t i o n selects
a m o n g j o b a p p l i c a n t s o n t h e basis of i n t e r v i e w s . In this case, t h e t w o a c t o r s
are t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d t h e i n d i v i d u a l w h o has a p p l i e d for a n e w j o b . T h e
o u t c o m e is w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e j o b w a s o b t a i n e d . T h e p r o c e s s refers, in p a r t ,
t o t h e m a n n e r in w h i c h t h e i n t e r v i e w s w e r e c o n d u c t e d .
T h i s e x a m p l e u n d e r s c o r e s a n i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t of c o n t e m p o r a r y j u s t i c e
t h e o r i e s . T h e p e r s o n w h o is seeking a j o b actually h a s t o m a k e m u l t i p l e fairness
j u d g m e n t s . H e o r she c a n e v a l u a t e t h e fairness of t h e o u t c o m e ( W a s it r i g h t
t h a t I d i d n o t get this n e w job?) a n d t h e fairness of t h e p r o c e s s ( W e r e
i n t e r v i e w s c o n d u c t e d in t h e r i g h t m a n n e r t o r e n d e r a d e c i s i o n ? ) . T h e first
j u d g m e n t refers t o d i s t r i b u t i v e j u s t i c e , w h e r e a s t h e s e c o n d refers t o p r o c e d u r a l
justice. In a d d i t i o n t o p r o c e d u r a l a n d d i s t r i b u t i v e justice, t h e r e is a t h i r d
c a t e g o r y o r f o r m of f a i r n e s s i n t e r a c t i o n a l j u s t i c e t h a t refers t o i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r e a t m e n t received at t h e h a n d s of o t h e r s (Bies, 1987b; Bies 8c M o a g ,
1986; G r e e n b e r g , 1988c). It is often identified w i t h , o r seen as closely r e l a t e d
t o , p r o c e d u r a l j u s t i c e (e.g., G r e e n b e r g , 1990c; Tyler 8c Bies, 1990).
Distributive Justice
D i s t r i b u t i v e j u s t i c e is t h e p e r c e i v e d fairness of t h e o u t c o m e s o r a l l o c a t i o n s
t h a t a n i n d i v i d u a l receives. It c a n cause w o r k e r s t o l o w e r t h e i r j o b p e r f o r m a n c e ( G r e e n b e r g , 1988b; Pfeffer 8c L a n g t o n , 1993), e n g a g e in w i t h d r a w a l
b e h a v i o r s (Pfeffer 8c Davis-Blake, 1992; S c h w a r z w a l d , Koslowsky, 8c Shalit,
1992), c o o p e r a t e less w i t h t h e i r c o w o r k e r s (Pfeffer 8c L a n g t o n , 1993), r e d u c e
w o r k q u a l i t y ( C o w h e r d 8c Levine, 1992), steal ( G r e e n b e r g , 1990c), a n d e x p e r i e n c e stress ( Z o h a r , 1995). To state t h e m a t t e r starkly, d i s t r i b u t i v e injustice
causes a b o u t e v e r y p e r n i c i o u s c r i t e r i o n ever c h r o n i c l e d b y o r g a n i z a t i o n a l
scientists!
W h e n p e o p l e r e n d e r a d i s t r i b u t i v e justice j u d g m e n t , t h e y are e v a l u a t i n g
w h e t h e r a n o u t c o m e is a p p r o p r i a t e , m o r a l , o r ethical. M a k i n g t h i s d e c i s i o n is
t r i c k i e r t h a n it m a y a p p e a r , for t h e r e is s e l d o m a n objective s t a n d a r d of
r i g h t e o u s n e s s . To d e c i d e if s o m e t h i n g is fair, p e o p l e m u s t g e n e r a t e a b e n c h -
xxii
ORGANIZATIONAL
JUSTICE
Procedural Justice
W h e n social scientists refer t o p r o c e d u r a l justice, t h e y a r e still i n d i c a t i n g a n
e v a l u a t i o n o r subjective j u d g m e n t . H o w e v e r , in this case it is a n a p p r a i s a l of
t h e p r o c e s s b y w h i c h a n a l l o c a t i o n d e c i s i o n is ( o r w a s ) m a d e . As a n a r e a of
i n q u i r y , p r o c e d u r a l justice e m e r g e d o n t h e s c e n e m o r e r e c e n t l y t h a n d i s t r i b u tive j u s t i c e , a l t h o u g h it h a s n o w b e e n s t u d i e d for s o m e t i m e . Folger a n d
G r e e n b e r g ( 1 9 8 5 ) w e r e t h e first m a j o r r e s e a r c h e r s t o a p p l y p r o c e d u r a l fairness
t o w o r k s e t t i n g s . Since t h a t t i m e , t h e r e h a s b e e n a veritable flood o f p r o c e d u r a l
j u s t i c e r e s e a r c h . T h i s w o r k h a s h a d i m p o r t a n t practical i m p l i c a t i o n s . E v i d e n c e
n o w s h o w s t h a t w h e n p e o p l e believe t h a t d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s are
u n j u s t , t h e y s h o w less c o m m i t m e n t t o t h e i r e m p l o y e r s , m o r e theft, h i g h e r
t u r n o v e r i n t e n t i o n s , lower p e r f o r m a n c e , a n d fewer helpful c i t i z e n s h i p b e h a v iors (for r e c e n t reviews, see C r o p a n z a n o 8c G r e e n b e r g , 1997; Tyler 8c S m i t h ,
in p r e s s ) . P e o p l e care a b o u t h o w t h e y a r e t r e a t e d , a n d t h e s e p r o c e d u r a l j u s t i c e
perceptions d o m u c h to shape their relationships with their employers. For
t h i s r e a s o n it is i m p o r t a n t for u s t o a r t i c u l a t e m o r e clearly t h e a t t r i b u t e s of
fair d e c i s i o n p r o c e d u r e s .
Preface
xxiii
of'Thibaut
and Walker
(1975)
T h e s t u d y o f p r o c e d u r a l justice g r e w o u t of T h i b a u t a n d W a l k e r ' s ( 1 9 7 5 )
w o r k in t h e m i d - 1 9 7 0 s . T h i b a u t a n d Walker w e r e i n t e r e s t e d in u n d e r s t a n d i n g
d i s p u t a n t s ' r e a c t i o n s t o v a r i o u s f o r m s of legal p r o c e e d i n g s . T h e y d i v i d e d
d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n i n t o t w o stages: a p r o c e s s stage in w h i c h e v i d e n c e w a s
p r e s e n t e d a n d a d e c i s i o n stage in w h i c h a t h i r d p a r t y r e n d e r e d a v e r d i c t .
T h i b a u t a n d Walker w e r e i n t e r e s t e d in a c i r c u m s t a n c e i n v o l v i n g t h r e e i n d i v i d u a l s : t w o d i s p u t a n t s a n d a t h i r d - p a r t y d e c i s i o n m a k e r s u c h as a j u d g e .
G e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g , t h e d i s p u t a n t s w e r e willing to forgo d e c i s i o n c o n t r o l if
t h e y w e r e a l l o w e d t o r e t a i n p r o c e s s c o n t r o l . In o t h e r w o r d s , p a r t i c i p a n t s saw
t h e r e s o l u t i o n p r o c e s s as fair a n d w e r e c o n t e n t e d w i t h t h e r e s u l t s if t h e y w e r e
given a sufficient c h a n c e t o p r e s e n t t h e i r cases. T h i s w a s t e r m e d voice (Folger,
1977). We s h o u l d n o t u n d e r s t a t e t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f voice in t h e s t u d y of
p r o c e d u r a l j u s t i c e . T h i b a u t a n d Walker (1975) l a u n c h e d a n area o f i n q u i r y
t h a t c o n t i n u e s t o t h e p r e s e n t d a y (e.g., S h a p i r o & Brett, 1 9 9 3 ) .
Leventhals
Six Attributes
of Fair
Procedures
Interactional Justice
I n t e r a c t i o n a l j u s t i c e refers t o t h e q u a l i t y of t h e i n t e r p e r s o n a l t r e a t m e n t
received b y an i n d i v i d u a l . C e r t a i n k i n d s o f t r e a t m e n t a r e likely t o b e p e r c e i v e d
as fair, w h e r e a s o t h e r s a r e seen as unfair. I n t e r a c t i o n a l justice w a s i n t r o d u c e d
xxiv
ORGANIZATIONAL
JUSTICE
as a n i n d e p e n d e n t , t h i r d t y p e of fairness c o n t r a s t e d w i t h b o t h p r o c e d u r a l
a n d d i s t r i b u t i v e justice (Bies, 1987b; Bies 8c M o a g , 1986). N o w a d a y s , i n t e r a c t i o n a l j u s t i c e is f r e q u e n t l y t r e a t e d as an a s p e c t o r c o m p o n e n t of p r o c e d u r a l
justice (e.g., C r o p a n z a n o 8c G r e e n b e r g , 1997; G r e e n b e r g , 1990c; Tyler 8c Bies,
1990), a l t h o u g h s o m e h a v e called this s c h e m e i n t o q u e s t i o n ( G r e e n b e r g ,
1993a). It is a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d m a t t e r t o c o n c e p t u a l i z e i n t e r a c t i o n a l j u s t i c e as
a n a s p e c t of p r o c e s s if d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s are c o n c e p t u a l i z e d t o i n c l u d e p r o c e s s e s o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n (e.g., h o w t h e d e c i s i o n is e x p l a i n e d ) . Also, at least s o m e r e s e a r c h h a s f o u n d t h a t r a t i n g s of
p r o c e d u r a l a n d i n t e r a c t i o n a l fairness a r e h i g h l y c o r r e l a t e d (e.g., K o n o v s k y 8c
C r o p a n z a n o , 1991). In s u c h a classification s c h e m e , p r o c e d u r a l j u s t i c e h a s t w o
a s p e c t s : a s t r u c t u r a l o r f o r m a l c o m p o n e n t ( r e p r e s e n t e d b y L e v e n t h a P s six
a t t r i b u t e s a n d r e l a t e d w o r k ) a n d a social c o m p o n e n t ( r e p r e s e n t e d b y i n t e r actional justice).
W h e t h e r c o n s i d e r e d i n d e p e n d e n t l y o r as p a r t o f t h e p r o c e d u r e s , i n t e r a c t i o n a l j u s t i c e itself can b e t h o u g h t of as h a v i n g at least t w o c o m p o n e n t s
( B r o c k n e r 8c Wiesenfeld, 1996; C r o p a n z a n o 8c G r e e n b e r g , 1997). T h e first
s u b p a r t is interpersonal sensitivity. Fair t r e a t m e n t s h o u l d b e p o l i t e a n d r e s p e c t ful. T h e r e c i p i e n t s of insensitive t r e a t m e n t are p r o n e t o p o o r a t t i t u d e s , c o n flict, a n d l o w p e r f o r m a n c e (e.g., B a r o n , 1993; Bies 8c M o a g , 1986). T h e s e c o n d
s u b p a r t o f i n t e r a c t i o n a l justice i n c l u d e s explanations
o r social accounts. Exp l a n a t i o n s tell t h e r e c i p i e n t w h y s o m e t h i n g u n f o r t u n a t e o r u n t o w a r d o c c u r r e d . T h e y p r o v i d e a r a t i o n a l e . I n d i v i d u a l s a r e m u c h m o r e t o l e r a n t o f an
u n f a v o r a b l e o u t c o m e w h e n a n a d e q u a t e justification is p r o v i d e d (Bies 8c
S h a p i r o , 1988; S h a p i r o , 1991; S h a p i r o , B u t t n e r , 8c Barry, 1994).