Interactional Justice in Relation to Turnover Intention: How Power Distance Moderates?
Introduction
Retaining competitive employees in a dynamic labour market is one of the responsibilities of the human resource department. Almost all organizations aim to maximize profit, and along with this primary goal is to reduce cost. One way of reducing cost is to retain employees and reduce employee withdrawal. To reduce employee withdrawal, the organization must be able to point out reasons why an employee intent to leave the organization. And, one of the possible reasons is the perception of interactional injustice.
The literature on employee-employer relations show that employees expect the organization to treat them with respect, dignity, honesty and to extend equal treatment to all employees (Janssensm Sels & Van den Brande, 2003 as cited in Ladebo, Awotunde, & AbdulSalaam-Saghir, 2006 p.206). Employees assess this treatment subjectively. What is fair treatment on one employee may not be viewed as fair by other employees. And, these perceptions of interactional justice play a vital role in the determination of employees’ work behaviour and attitudes (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Colquitt, Conlon, Wesson, Porter, & Yee Ng, 2001 as cited in Ladebo, Awotunde, & AbdulSalaam-Saghir, 2006 p. 206).
Interactional justice refers to the quality of treatment employees experience in their interactions with authorities, particularly authorities enacting formal organizational procedures (Bies & Moag, 1986; Colquitt et al,. 2001 as cited in Chiaburu, 2007 p. 211). Usually these authorities are the supervisors who act as a mediator between the organization and its employees (Rego & Cunha, 2012 p. 408). Supervisors can treat their subordinates respectfully, politely, and professionally. On the other hand, they can also treat them disrespectfully, discourteously and unprofessionally. Supervisors can provide their subordinates with information and explanation regarding a certain organizational situation or decision. However, they can also withhold these
Retaining competitive employees in a dynamic labour market is one of the responsibilities of the human resource department. Almost all organizations aim to maximize profit, and along with this primary goal is to reduce cost. One way of reducing cost is to retain employees and reduce employee withdrawal. To reduce employee withdrawal, the organization must be able to point out reasons why an employee intent to leave the organization. And, one of the possible reasons is the perception of interactional injustice.
The literature on employee-employer relations show that employees expect the organization to treat them with respect, dignity, honesty and to extend equal treatment to all employees (Janssensm Sels & Van den Brande, 2003 as cited in Ladebo, Awotunde, & AbdulSalaam-Saghir, 2006 p.206). Employees assess this treatment subjectively. What is fair treatment on one employee may not be viewed as fair by other employees. And, these perceptions of interactional justice play a vital role in the determination of employees’ work behaviour and attitudes (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Colquitt, Conlon, Wesson, Porter, & Yee Ng, 2001 as cited in Ladebo, Awotunde, & AbdulSalaam-Saghir, 2006 p. 206).
Interactional justice refers to the quality of treatment employees experience in their interactions with authorities, particularly authorities enacting formal organizational procedures (Bies & Moag, 1986; Colquitt et al,. 2001 as cited in Chiaburu, 2007 p. 211). Usually these authorities are the supervisors who act as a mediator between the organization and its employees (Rego & Cunha, 2012 p. 408). Supervisors can treat their subordinates respectfully, politely, and professionally. On the other hand, they can also treat them disrespectfully, discourteously and unprofessionally. Supervisors can provide their subordinates with information and explanation regarding a certain organizational situation or decision. However, they can also withhold these