Journal of Digital Convergence (디지털융복합연구)

The Society of Digital Policy and Management (한국디지털정책학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on Moderate Effecting of LMX on the Relationships between Appraisal Justice and Organization Commitment

고과공정성이 조직몰입에 미치는 영향에 있어서 상사-부하간 교환관계의 조절효과에 관한 연구

  • Enkh-Otgon., D. (Dept. of Business School, Kumoh National Institute of Technology) ;
  • Jeon, Dong-Cheol (Dept. of Techno-Business School, Kumoh National Institute of Technology)
  • Received : 2014.09.22
  • Accepted : 2014.12.20
  • Published : 2014.12.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper aims to examine the moderate effects of LMX on the relationships between appraisal justice and organization commitment. Additionally, This study is to identify the influences of appraisal justice on the organization commitment in the organization. To accomplish these purposes, the main factors of the appraisal justice such as distributive justice, procedural justice and interactional justice were found from the previous studies. This study used the statistical techniques such as descriptive analysis, reliability analysis, discriminant analysis, factor analysis, correlation analysis, multi regression analysis, and hierarchical regression analysis. The following are the summary of hypothesis test: First, all three justice factors are essential to enhance the level of organizational commitment in appraisal about employee of enterprises. Second, interactional justice among factors of appraisal justice have differential influence on organization commitment by LMX.

조직 내에서 구성원들이 직무수행과정을 통해서 경험하게 되는 공정 및 불공정의 느낌을 반영하는 고과공정성은 오늘날 구성원들의 행동, 의사결정의 방향, 행동수준을 결정하는 주요 요인으로 받아지고 있다. 그리고 직무수행과정 중에 맺게 되는 인간관계, 특히 상사-부하간의 교환관계는 직무와 함께 구성원들의 태도 및 행동 형성에 매우 중요한 요소로 부각되어 지고 있다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 연구의 실질적 가치와 기업의 실무적 가치를 높이기 위해 고과공정성과 조직몰입에 대한 관계와 그 관계에서의 상사-부하간의 교환관계의 조절효과를 분석 규명하고자 하는데 그 목적이 있다. 분석결과, 고과공정성은 조직몰입에 긍정적인 영향을 미치며, 고과공정성의 하위 변수 중 상호작용공정성과 조직몰입사이에서 LMX의 조절효과가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 결과는 학술적 실무적으로 시사하는 바가 클 것으로 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. "Effect of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions," Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 32, pp. 115-130, 1989. https://doi.org/10.2307/256422
  2. Bies, R. J. & Moag, J. S. "Interactional Justice : Communication criteria Fairness. In R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman(eds.)," Research on negotiation in organizations, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Vol. 1, pp. 43-55, 1986.
  3. Jae Kwon Jeon, Lays the psychological causes of conflict and misunderstanding within the organization, LG Business Insight, p1, 2010.
  4. Kelly, R. E. "In praise of follwer" Harvard Business Review, November-December, pp. 142-148, 1988.
  5. In Chyul Park, An Empirical Study on Leadership Pattern for the Organization Effectiveness, Graduate School of Chosun University, 2004.
  6. Greenberg, J., "Reactions to procedural injustice in payment distributions : Do the means justify the ends?" Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.72, pp. 55-71, 1986b.
  7. Konovsky, M. A., Folger, R. & Cropanzano, R., Relative Effects of procedural and distributive justice on employee attitudes, representative, Research in social psychology, Vol. 17, pp. 15-24, 1987.
  8. McFarlin D. B. & Sweeney, P. D., Distributive and Procedural Justice as Predictors of Satisfaction with personal and organizational outcomes, Academy of Management journal Vol. 35, pp. 626-637, 1992. https://doi.org/10.2307/256489
  9. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W. & Steers, R. M., Employee-Organizational Linkages: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover, New York; Academic Press, pp. 61-89, 1982.
  10. Alexander, S. & M. Ruderman, The role of procedural and distributive justice in organizational behavior, Social justice research, Vol 1, pp. 177-198, 1987. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01048015
  11. Moorman, R. H., Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: do Fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship: Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 76, pp. 845-855, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.76.6.845
  12. Tang, Thomas Li-ping & Sarsfield-Baldwin, Linada, J. Distributive and Procedural justic as Related to satisfaction and commitment, Sam Advances management Journal, Vol. 61, pp. 25-31, 1996.
  13. Sarminah Samad, Percedural and distributive justice: Differential Effects on Employee's work outcome, the business review, Cambridge, pp. 212-217, 2006.
  14. Thibaut, J. & Walker, L., Procedural Justice : A Psychology Analysis, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1975.
  15. Lind, E. A. & Tyler, T. R., The social psychology of procedural justice, NewYork: Plenum, 1988.
  16. Greenberg, J., "Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow", Journal of Management, Vol. 16, p. 405, 1990.
  17. Materson, S. S., K. Lewis, B. M. Goldman, & M. Taylor, "Integrating Justice & Social Exchange: The Differing Effects of Fair Procedures & Treatment of Work Relationship," Academic of Management Journal, Vol. 43, No. 4, pp. 738-748, 2000. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556364
  18. Liden, Robert C.; Wayne, Sandy J.; Sparrowe, Raymond T., An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 85, pp. 407-416, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.3.407
  19. Bies, R. J., Beyond "voice": The influence of decision-maker justification and sincerity on perocedural fairness judgments, Representative Reserarch in Social Psychology, Vol. 17, pp. 3-14, 1987.
  20. Bies, R. J., Shapiro, D. L., & Cummings, L. L., Causal accounts and managing conflict: Is it enough to say it's not my fault? Communication Research, Vol. 15, pp. 381-399, 1988. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365088015004003
  21. Mansour-Cole, D. M. & Scott, S. G., Hearing it through the grapevine; the influence of source, leader-relations and legitimacy on survivors' fairness perceptions, personnel psychology, Vol. 51, pp. 25-67, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1998.tb00715.x
  22. Pillai, R. & Eric S. Williams, Performance beyond expectations: a study of transformational leadership, fairness perceptions, job satisfaction, commitment, trust, and organizational citizenship behavior, Paper presented at the meeting of the national academy of management, Cincinnati, OH, 1996.
  23. Duarte, N. T., Goodson, J. R., & Klich, N. R., Effects of dyadic and duration on performance appraisal, Academy of management journal, Vol. 37, pp. 499-521, 1994. https://doi.org/10.2307/256698
  24. Kinicki, A. & Vecchio, R., Influences on the quality of supervisor-subordinate ralations: The role of time pressure, organizational commitment and locus of control. journal of organizational behavior, Vol. 15, pp. 75-82, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030150108
  25. Epitropaki O. & Maritin R., A Longitudinal study of the role of implicit leadership theories on leader-member exchanges and employee outcomes, journal of applied psychology, Vol. 90, pp. 659-676, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.659
  26. Graen, G, B. & Uhl-Bien, M., Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange(LMX) theory of leadership over 25years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 231, 1995.
  27. Nunnally, Psychometric theory (1st ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967