Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A study on Determinants of Organization Justice Perception
of Bank Employees
*Dr. Nidhi,
Assistant Professor, M.D.U Center for Professional and Allied Studies, Gurugram, Haryana,
India. [email protected]
**Krishna Kumari (Corresponding Author),
Research Scholar, M.D.U Center for Professional and Allied Studies, Gurugram, Haryana,
India. [email protected]
Abstract
Organization justice is the term refers to the fairness of Organization decisions, process and
behavior towards employees. It is an important aspect for human resource management and
Organization psychology. Organization justice concept becomes more critical to understand in
service industry specifically in banking. This research aims to explore the factors that define the
Organization justice perception of employees in banking. Data collected through questionnaire
methods from public and private sector banks in Gurugram. Result of exploratory factor analysis
shows that Distributive justice, Procedural justice and Interpersonal and informational justice
were four factors that define Organization justice perception of bank employees. Along with that
Organization justice perception was compared between public and private bank employees.
Key words:- Organization justice, Human resource management, fairness, Organization
psychology, Perception.
Journal of Information and Computational Science
Volume 9 Issue 9 - 2019
ISSN: 1548-7741
www.joics.org466
1. Introduction
Banking industry in India has gone tremendous transformation in recent years. Banking structure
in currant scenario is characterized as fast growing, dynamic and complex structure. High usage
of technology and presence of different banking product like ATM, online Fund transfer, credit
and debit cards facilities, retail banking as well as corporate banking has create pressures over
human resource of banks. Banking industry requires more committed work force today. It has
been seen that service sector employee’s commitment, especially in bank based on perception of
person-Organization fit, employee are committed to Organization when they found similarity
between their own value and Organization work culture (Nazir, 2005). However banking work
forces face many problems like high job stress from their high work load, management pressure,
mental depression, long working hours, work deadlines and poor working condition etc.
(Rahman et al, 2013). Bank employees were generally dissatisfied with decisions and processes
of banks such as performance assessment system, promotion, career development, superiors’
behavior and employee welfare facilities (Karim, Islam and Mahmud, 2014). All these aspect
collectively represent employees’ perception towards Organization justice.
Organization justice refers to an individual’s subjective perception of the fairness of outcomes
distribution, the fairness of procedures used to determine outcomes distribution, the quality of
interpersonal treatment received when procedures are implemented, and the adequacy of
information conveyed about why procedures were used a certain way or how outcomes were
determined (Bell, Ryan and Wiechmann, 2004). Organization justice perception arise from varies
Organization function such as hiring, rewards system, conflict management layoffs, and
performance management (Cropanzano, Bowen, and Gilliland, 2007). Organization justice is
most interested topic for researcher from last decade. It is one of the concepts that help to explain
the employees’ perception of Organization ideology towards outcomes distribution, procedural
fairness and superior subordinate interaction. The term “Organizational justice” was first used by
French (1964) in his reserach and Greenberg (1990) was the one who used Organization justice
to express people’s perception of fairness at workplace. Organization justice perception affects
the individual behavioral outcomes in Organization. It is one of the important aspect of total
Organization behaviors that define employee job satisfaction (Baah, 2014; Akram et al, 2016;
Okocha Friday and Anyanwu 2016), turnover intention (Alexander et al, 1983; McAuliffe et al,
2009), Organization citizenship behavior (Lim and Loosemore, 2016; Chan and Lai, 2017) and
Organization commitment (Jayarathna and Weerakkody, 2016; Abouraia and Othman, 2017).
The absence of Organization justice leads to worst outcomes for Organization. Organization
injustice leads to moral disengagement among employees that further enhance deviant work
behaviors in employees (Hystad, Mearns and Eid, 2014). Thus it is almost necessary to know
what factors in banks constitute employees’ Organization justice perception. Hence the current
study aims to find factors structure for Organization justice in banks.
Journal of Information and Computational Science
Volume 9 Issue 9 - 2019
ISSN: 1548-7741
www.joics.org467
2. Literature review
The concept of justice was explained by many researchers including Ginsberg (1963) who
defined, “justice in border sense consists the ordering of human relation in accordance with the
general principle that impartially applied”. In his explanation justice was concerns with
problems of balance and adjustment. Perceived equity was the basis of justice in Organization in
terms of rewards allocation. Equity theory of Adams (1965) describes when people were in
social exchange in Organization, they compare their input/output ratio with other similar person.
People perceive equity when found their ratio equal to the ration of other person. An unequal
ratio of input/output represent inequity and that could be due to underpaid or overpaid compare
to other similar person. Underpaid people felt anger and distress and overpaid people feel guilt.
Adams, (1965) also explained that fair distribution of rewards such as pay based on equity and
equality represent distributive justice in Organization. Study conducted by Elovainio et al (1979)
found Organization justice perception significantly depends on decision-making and managerial
procedures. That means along with outcomes justice, procedure fairness was also important for
justice perception. Earlier Alexander et al, (1983) found workplace fairness perception
significantly depends on distributive and procedural justice. Greenberg (1986) also found both
procedural and distributive justice were important for conceptualization of fairness at workplace.
Organization justice theories also explain how person deal with justice, Greenberg (1987)
classified Organizational justice theories into reactive and proactive process-content theories.
Reactive theories tells how people react to unfair outcomes and process and proactive theories
explains what people do to overcomes unfair outcomes and what process they used to achieve
justice. Jerald Greenberg (1990) found both distributive and procedural justice were independent
measure of Organization justice, distributive justice arise when employee feels outcomes
satisfaction and procedural justice achieved when employee have system satisfaction. Later on
Bies and Mong (1986) introduced third type of justice called “Interaction Justice” and described
it as the social side of justice. He described respect and propriety was the prime determinants of
interpersonal justice. Singer, (1993) defined “Interactional justice refers to the quality of
interpersonal treatment an individual receive in the process of resource allocation”. The overall
dimensionality of Organization justice has been define by Colquitt (2001), who conceptualized
Organizational justice as the multidimensional construct that include distributive justice,
procedural justice, interpersonal justice and informational justice. Baah (2014) explained the
Informational justice was concern with explanation or the justification provided by the decision
makers that why outcomes were distributed in a certain way. Tatum et al, (2003) explained
justice at Organization in terms of structural justice and social justice. Structural justice was
explained as structural element of Organization that involved employee in decision making and
provide fair distribution of outcomes and social justice was described as employee’s perception
that Organization provide information to them and concern for their wellbeing. Kim et al, (2004)
explained that in Organization setting justice refers to workplace fairness. Cropanzano, Bowen
and Gilliland (2007) described “Organization justice is a personal evaluation about the ethical
and moral standing of managerial conduct”. Agarwal and Bose (2004) revels that Organization’s
Journal of Information and Computational Science
Volume 9 Issue 9 - 2019
ISSN: 1548-7741
www.joics.org468
work climate contributes to justice perception among employees. (Bhal and Gulati, 2004)
explained workplace relationship between leader and member based on social exchange helps to
enhance justice perception among employees. Eberlin and Tatum (2008) study revels leadership
and decision making style of mangers in Organization significantly contribute to the justice
perception. Cropanzano, Bowen, and Gilliland, (2007) revels that Organization justice
perception among employee arise from various Organization function such as hiring, rewards
system, conflict management layoffs, and performance management. Karkoulian , Assaker and
Hallak (2016) found Organization justice perception depends on employee’s fair performance
assessment. Chan and Lai (2016) explained justice perception at Organization depends on
Organization’s communication system. Tamta and Rao (2017) found Organization justice
worked as mediator role in the relation between emotional intelligences of employee and
knowledge sharing behavior in Organization. That implies Organization justice enhances
employees knowledge sharing behavior.
3. Research objectives
Present research is focused on Organization justice perception of banking employees. The study
has following research objectives.
1. To find the determinants of Organization justice perception among bank employees.
2. To find the difference of Organization justice perception in public sector and private
sector bank employees.
4. Research methodology
This is an exploratory cum descriptive study. Determinates of Organization justice has been
explore in banking sector. This research is comparative in nature as the Organization justice
perception of public bank and private banks was also compared. First of all exploratory factor
analysis has been applied on data and then two sample t test used to find significant difference
between public and private banks.
4.1.Sample
Sample of this study were bank employees in the city of Gurugram. Employees from the public
banks and private banks were participated in research. Sample was totally based on the
availability of time with respondent in bank. All respondent were contacted personally by
researcher in their bank branch. Total 130 questionnaires were distributed by researcher to
employees of different banks and explained the purpose of research. After that 102 complete
filled and valid questionnaires were received. Respond rate were 78.46percent percent of sample.
There were 60 public bank employees and 42 private bank employees in final data.
Journal of Information and Computational Science
Volume 9 Issue 9 - 2019
ISSN: 1548-7741
www.joics.org469
4.2.Instruments
For the collection of data this study has used self structured questionnaire. Questionnaires had
two parts, first part has questions related to employee demographic and second part has questions
related to Organization justice. To measure Organization justice all the variables were identified
through review of literature. Responses were collected on five point likert scale where strongly
disagree score 1, disagree=2, natural=3, agree=4 and strongly agree=5.
5. Analysis
This study had first objective to explore the determinants of Organization justice in banking
sector. Study use exploratory factor analysis to find the dimension of Organization justice.
Before applying the factor analysis the initial sample adequacy has been checked through Kaiser-
Meyer-Olkin test. Table 1 shows that sample is adequate for factor analysis as the value is of
KMO was .813 that was near to 1.00.
Table 1: KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .813
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 2.443E3
df 190
Sig. .000
Table 2 shows the result of rotated component matrix. Through exploratory factor analysis there
were four factors identified. This paper uses the varimax factor rotation and principle component
method. This method identified the factors and components based on their relative significance.
That mean the most significant factor was identified first and then next and so on. Table 2
express that first factor include variables OJ11,OJ12,OJ13,OJ14 and OJ15 The second
significant factor identified with inclusion of variables such as OJ5, OJ6, OJ7, OJ8, OJ9 and
OJ10. In the same way variables namely OJ16, OJ17, OJ18, OJ19 and OJ20 makes third
significant factor and lastly OJ1, OJ2,OJ3 and OJ4 makes fourth factor.
Journal of Information and Computational Science
Volume 9 Issue 9 - 2019
ISSN: 1548-7741
www.joics.org470
Table 2 : Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1 2 3 4
OJ1 .798
OJ2 .895
OJ3 .626
OJ4 .870
OJ5 .786
OJ6 .745
OJ7 .910
OJ8 .830
OJ9 .603
OJ10 .864
OJ11 .918
OJ12 .949
OJ13 .935
OJ14 .900
OJ15 .881
OJ16 .899
OJ17 .918
OJ18 .903
OJ19 .694
OJ20 .661
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 6 iterations.
Table 3 shows the percent of variance explained by each factor. Based on the finding of factor
analysis the first factor identified was interpersonal justice. Interpersonal justice was most
significant determinants of Organization justice as it explained 23percent variance in
Organization justice of bank. Second determinates of Organization justice was found procedural
justice with 21percent variance, third significant factor was informational justice with 19percent
variance and the last factor distributive justice explained 15 percent variance in Organization
justice in bank.
Journal of Information and Computational Science
Volume 9 Issue 9 - 2019
ISSN: 1548-7741
www.joics.org471
Table 3: percent of variance explained by each factors
Serial
no.
Factors percent of variance explained by
each factors
Cumulative percent of
variance
1. Interpersonal
justice
23.442 23.442
2. Procedural justice 21.604 45.046
6. Informational
justice
19.744 64.790
7. Distributive justice 15.081 79.871
The second objective of the study was to find the difference of Organization justice perception
among public sector and private sector bank employees. Study uses independence t test. Table 4
shows the result of group statistics. This table explained the mean difference between public
sector and private sector bank based on four Organization justice component that were
distributive justice, procedural justice and interpersonal justice and informational justice. It was
found that distributive justice was lower in public banks than private bank as the mean of
distributive justice was 2.5917 in public sector banks and 3.5595 in private sector banks.
Procedural justice mean was also lower in public bank than private bank as the public bank has
3.3861 mean for procedural justice and private bank has 3.9048 mean. Mean of interpersonal
justice was also lower in public banks than private banks. Public bank has mean 3.5700 and
private bank has mean 3.9048 that higher than public banks. And finally informational justice of
public sector bank was 3.5133 and for private sector bank it was 3.7619. That means information
justice was also low in public bank as compare to private banks.
Table 4: Group Statistics
Employment N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Distributive
justice
Public Bank 60 2.5917 .88654 .11445
Private Bank 42 3.5595 1.00275 .15473
Procedural
justice
Public Bank 60 3.3861 .86057 .11110
Private Bank 42 3.9048 .67389 .10398
Interpersonal
justice
Public Bank 60 3.5700 .87436 .11288
Private Bank 42 3.9048 .87818 .13551
Informational
justice
Public Bank 60 3.5133 .84722 .10938
Private Bank 42 3.7619 .66880 .10320
Journal of Information and Computational Science
Volume 9 Issue 9 - 2019
ISSN: 1548-7741
www.joics.org472
In order to find the significant difference between public and private bank towards the four
components of Organization justice study uses the independent sample t test. Table 5 shows the
result of t test. It was found that there were significant difference of distributive justice and
procedural justice between public banks and private banks. P value of distributive justice was
0.000 and procedural justice was 0.010 that were less than 0.05. Thus due to P<0.05 the
difference was statistically significant. But the P value of interpersonal justice (0.06) and
informational justice (0.116) were that was greater than 0.05, hence so significant difference of
interpersonal justice and informational justice in public sector and private sector was found.
Table 5: Independent sample t test
F Sig. t Df
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
Determinants
of
Organization
Justice
Distributive
justice
Equal variances
assumed 1.796 .183
-
5.140 100 .000 -.96786 .18830
Procedural
justice
Equal variances
assumed 1.414 .237
-
3.266 100 .001 -.51865 .15881
Interpersonal
justice
Equal variances
assumed 1.279 .261
-
1.900 100 .060 -.33476 .17623
Informational
justice
Equal variances
assumed 1.030 .313
-
1.586 100 .116 -.24857 .15673
6. Conclusion and discussion
This study aims to explore the determinants of Organization justice in banking sector. Through
exploratory factor analysis it was found that Organization justice perception was conceptualized
through four components that were distributive, procedural and interpersonal justice and
informational justice. Result of this study support to previous research that has define
Organization justice on the basis of four factor model that include distributive, procedural,
interpersonal and information justice(Colquitt, 2001; Walsh, 2003). However previous research
Journal of Information and Computational Science
Volume 9 Issue 9 - 2019
ISSN: 1548-7741
www.joics.org473
of on bank employee, also found three factor model of Organization justice that included
distributive justice, procedural justice and interactional justice (Usmani and Jamal, 2013)
Another objective of study was to find weather the values of Organization justice perception
components are significantly differs in public and private bank or weather employees of public
and private bank employees’ perception significantly difference towards Organization justice.
Through analysis it was found that out of the four components of Organization justice,
employee’s perception towards distributive justice and procedural justice was significantly
differs in public and private banks. The mean value of distributive justice and procedural justice
was higher among private bank employees than public bank employees. Second the procedural
justice was also considered better in private banks than public banks. But study has found no
significant difference of interpersonal and informational justice perception in public and private
bank. Employees of both banks perceived interpersonal and informational justice are good and
their seniors treat then with respect, dignity and politeness. Also employees of both banks
perceived they received adequate information from their seniors. Interpersonal justice was most
significant factor of Organization justice in bank.
Thus Organization justice in bank is based on four component distributive, procedural and
interpersonal justice and informational justice. Distributive justice based on fair distribution of
pay and rewards. Private bank employees perceive higher distributive justice because of good
salary compare to public banks. Also the decision making, growth and promotion decision were
considered more fair and free of bias in private bank than public banks. Future research need to
explore whether the perception of Organization justice among bank employees significantly
differs based on gander, employee age and employee job position in bank.
7. References
1. Alexander, S., and Ruderman, M.,(1983) The Influence of Procedural and Distributive
Justice on Organizational Behavior.PUB DATEqt.ug 83NOTEllp.
2. Bies. R. J., and Shapiro, D.L.,(1988) Voice and Justification: Their Influence on
Procedural Fairness Judgments The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 31, No. 3
(Sep., 1988), pp. 676-685
3. Colquitt, J.A., & Shaw, J.C. (2005). How should Organizational justice be measured? In
J. Greenberg & J. Colquitt (Eds.), The handbook of Organizational justice (pp. 113-
152). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mawheh: New Jersey.
4. Ginsberg, M., (1963) The Concept of Justice Philosophy, Vol. 38, No. 144 (Apr., 1963),
pp. 99-116
5. Singer, M., (1993) the appivcation of Organization justice theories to selection fairness
research, new zealand journal of psychology, 1993,22,32-45
6. Tatum, B. C., Eberlin, R., Kottraba, C., & Bradberry, T. (2003). Leadership,
decision making, and Organizational justice. Management Decision, 41(10), 1006–
1016.
Journal of Information and Computational Science
Volume 9 Issue 9 - 2019
ISSN: 1548-7741
www.joics.org474
7. Agarwal, M., and Bose, S., (2004) Organizational Climate for Perceptions of Procedural
'Fairness' in Human Resource Practices and Role Efficacy Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations, Vol. 40, No. 2 (Oct., 2004), pp. 176-196
8. McAuliffe, Eilish and Manafa, Ogenna Uzoma and Maseko, Fresier and Bowie, Cameron
and White, Emma, Understanding Job Satisfaction Amongst Mid-Level Cadres in
Malawi: The Contribution of Organizational Justice (May 2009). Reproductive Health
Matters, Vol. 17, No. 33, pp. 80-90, May 2009. Available at SSRN:
https://ssrn.com/abstract=1488216
9. Bhal, K.T., and Gulati, N., (2004) Leader Member Exchange and Perceived Justice: The
Mediating Impact of Voice Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 40, No. 1 (Jul.,
2004), pp. 1-16
10. Eberlin, R.J., and Tatum, B.C., (2008),"Making just decisions: Organizational justice,
decision making, and leadership", Management Decision, Vol. 46 Iss 2 pp. 310 – 329
11. Elovainio, M., Archana Singh-Manoux, Jane E Ferrie, Martin Shipley, DavidGimeno,
Roberto De Vogli, Jussi Vahtera, Marianna Virtanen, Markus Jokela, Michael GMarmot
and Mika(1979) Kivimäki Organizational justice and cognitive function in middle-aged
employees: the Whitehall IIstudy Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
(1979-), Vol. 66, No. 6 (June2012), pp. 552-556
12. Chan, S. H. J., and Lai, H. Y. I., (2017) Understanding the link between communication
satisfaction, perceived justice and Organizational citizenship behavior Journal of
Business Research 70 (2017) 214–2
13. Akram, T., et al.(2016) The effect of Organizational justice on knowledge sharing: An
empirical evidence from the Chinese telecommunication sector. Journal of Innovation &
Knowledge (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2016.09.002
14. Sigurd W. Hystad, Kathryn J. Mearns and Jarle Eid(2014) Moral disengagement as a
mechanism between perceptions of Organizational injustice and deviant work behaviours
Safety Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ssci Safety Science 68 (2014)
138–145 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
15. Benson T.H. Lim , Martin Loosemore(2016) The effect of inter-Organizational justice
perceptions on Organizational citizenship behaviors in construction projects Available
online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect International Journal of Project
Management 35 (2017) 95–106 Received 25 November 2015; received in revised form 26
October 2016; accepted 27 October 2016
16. Karkoulian, S., Assaker, G., and Hallak, R., (2016) An empirical study of 360-degree
feedback, Organizational justice, and firm sustainability Journal of Business Research 69
(2016) 1862–1867
17. Greenberg, J., (1990) Organization justice: yesterday, today and tomorrow. Journal of
management 1990, Vol.16, no.2., 399-432
Journal of Information and Computational Science
Volume 9 Issue 9 - 2019
ISSN: 1548-7741
www.joics.org475
18. Cropanzano, R., Bowen, D. E., and Gilliland, S. W.,(2007) The Management of
Organizational Justice A R T I C L E S Academy of Management Perspectives November
2007
19. Bell, B. S., Ryan, A. M., & Wiechmann, D. (2004). Justice expectations and applicant
perceptions [Electronic version]. Retrieved [insert date], from Cornell University, School
of Industrial and Labor Relations site: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/hrpubs/7/
20. Hystad, S. W., Mearns, K. J., and Eid, J., (2014) Moral disengagement as a mechanism
between perceptions of Organizational injustice and deviant work behaviours
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.03.012 0925-7535/_ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights
reserved. Safety Science 68 (2014) 138–145
21. Walsh, M. B., (2003) PERCEIVED FAIRNESS OF AND SATISFACTION WITH
EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate
Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The
School of Human Resource Education and Workforce Development
22. Okocha, Friday, B., and Anyanwu, S. A. C., (2016) ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE AND
EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION: A STUDY OF SELECTED BANKS IN PORT HARCOURT
International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences
| ISSN: 2488-9849 Vol. 2, Issue 9 (September 2016)
23. Baah, K.D., (2014) Organizational antecedents and perception of fairness in policy
implementation among employee in the banking sector of Ghana vol. 8(18), pp. 816-831,
28 SEPTEMBER 2014 DOI: 10.5897/AJBM2012. 1384 Article Number: 06962AB47694
ISSN 1993-8233 Copright © 2014 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article
http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM
24. Akram, M. U., Hashim, M., Khan, M. K., Zia, A., Akram, Z., Saleem, S., and Bhatti,
M., (2015) Impact of Organizational Justice on Job Satisfaction of Banking Employees in
Pakistan Global Journal of Management and Business Research: Administration and
Management Volume 15 Issue 5 Version 1.0 Year 2015 ISSN: 2249-4588 & Print ISSN:
0975-5853
25. Akram, U., Khan, M.K., Yixin, Q., Bhatti, M. H., Bilal, M., Hashim, M., Akram, Z.,
(2016) Impact of Organizational Justice on Job Satisfaction of Banking Employees
European Journal of Business and Management www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1905 (Paper)
ISSN 2222-2839 (Online) Vol.8, No.16, 2016 55
26. Usmani, S., and Jamal. S., (2013) Impact of Distributive Justice, Procedural Justice,
Interactional Justice, Temporal Justice, Spatial Justice on Job Satisfaction of Banking
Employees Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 2(1) 351 2013 Society of Interdisciplinary
Business Research (www.sibresearch.org)
27. Rahman, M. H., Kamruzzaman, M., Haque, M. E., Mamun, M. A. A. and Molla, M. I.,
(2013) Perceived Intensity of Stress Stressors: A Study on Commercial Bank in
Journal of Information and Computational Science
Volume 9 Issue 9 - 2019
ISSN: 1548-7741
www.joics.org476
Bangladesh Asian Business Review, Volume 3, Number 3/2013 (Issue 5) ISSN 2304-2613
(Print); ISSN 2305-8730 (Online) 0
28. Karim, M. M., Islam, M. J., and Mahmud, M. A. L., (2014) Job Satisfaction of
Employees in Banking Sector: A Case Study on Janata Bank Limited European
Journal of Business and Management www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1905 (Paper) ISSN 2222-
2839 (Online) Vol.6, No.17, 2014 70
29. Abouraia, M. K., and Othman, S. M., (2017) Transformational Leadership, Job
Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, and Turnover Intentions: The Direct Effects
among Bank Representatives American Journal of Industrial and Business Management,
2017, 7, 404-423 http://www.scirp.org/journal/ajibm ISSN Online: 2164-5175 ISSN
Print: 2164-5167 DOI: 10.4236/ajibm.2017.74029 April 24, 2017
30. Nazir, N. A. (2005) Person-Culture Fit and Employee Commitment in Banks VIKALPA ,
VOLUME 30, NO 3 , JULY - SEPTEMBER 2005
31. French, W. (1964), The personnel management process: Human resources
administration. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
32. Yasodara Jayarathna, S. M. D and Weerakkody, W. A. S (2016) Impact of Decision
Making, Reward Management on Job Performance: Mediation of Job Satisfaction: A
Case of a Private Banks in Sri Lanka. European Journal of Business and Management
www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1905 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2839 (Online) Vol.8, No.32, 2016 65
33. Greenberg, J., (1986)Determinants of Perceived Fairness of Performance Evaluations
Journal of Avolied Psychology Colpyright 1986 by the Amexican Psycholosical
Amociaticm, inc. 1986, Vol. 71, No. 2, 340-342 0021-9010/86/$00.75
34. Greenberg, J., (1987). A Taxonomy of Organizational Justice Theories Academy of
Management Review Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 9-22
35. Colquitt, J. A., (2001) On the Dimensionality of Organizational Justice: A Construct
Validation of a Measure Journal of Applied Psychology 2001, Vol. S6, No. .O8ft-4W>
Copyright 2001 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 002I-9010/01/S5.00
DOI: 10.1037//0021-9010.86.3.386
36. Kim, J. Y. Moon, J. Han, D. Tikoo, S. 2004. Perceptions of justice and employee
willingness to engage in customer-oriented behavior. Journal of service marketing.
18(4): 267-275
37. Niehoff, B. P. -Moorman, R. H.(1993), “Justice as a Mediator of the Relation-ship
Between Methods of Monitoring and Organizational Citizenship Be-havior”, Academy of
Management Journal,Vol. 36, No. 5, p. 527–556.
38. Tamta. V., and Rao, M. K., (2017) Linking Emotional Intelligence to Knowledge Sharing
Behaviour: Organizational Justice and Work Engagement as Mediators Global Business
Review 18(12):097215091771308 DOI: 10.1177/0972150917713087
Journal of Information and Computational Science
Volume 9 Issue 9 - 2019
ISSN: 1548-7741
www.joics.org477