RUcore: Rutgers University Community Repository
The relationship between organizational structure and procedural fairness perceptions
Descriptive
TypeOfResource
Text
TitleInfo
(ID = T-1)
Title
The relationship between organizational structure and procedural fairness perceptions
SubTitle
the positioning of the Equal Employment Opportunity compliance function in organizations
TitleInfo
(ID = T-2);
(type = alternative)
Title
Positioning of the Equal Employment Opportunity compliance function in organizations
Identifier
(displayLabel = );
(invalid = )
ETD_1933
Identifier
(type = hdl)
http://hdl.rutgers.edu/1782.2/rucore10002600001.ETD.000051752
Language
(objectPart = )
LanguageTerm
(authority = ISO639-2);
(type = code)
eng
Genre
(authority = marcgt)
theses
Subject
(ID = SBJ-1);
(authority = RUETD)
Topic
Public Administration (SPAA)
Subject
(ID = SBJ-2);
(authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Affirmative action programs
Subject
(ID = SBJ-3);
(authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Organizational behavior
Abstract
This study examines the effects of organizational structure on perceptions of procedural fairness; replicating and extending the findings of Schminke, Ambrose, and Cropanzano (2000). This analysis uses their dimensions of organizational structure: centralization (participation in decision making and hierarchy of authority), size, and formalization to assess whether the placement of the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) compliance function influences employees’ perceptions of fairness. I predict that organizational placement will influence employee perceptions of procedural fairness.
The following questions were explored in this study: 1) Does the EEO reporting structure within organizations affect employees’ perceptions of procedural fairness? 2) Does organizational structure influence employees’ perceptions of procedural fairness? 3) Does the EEO reporting structure within organizations affect the procedural fairness perceptions of EEO personnel? 4) Does organizational structure influence the procedural fairness perceptions of EEO personnel?
Employees in New Jersey governmental departments, agencies, and state entities were surveyed to provide the data for this analysis. Seventeen (17) State of New Jersey departments and agencies were identified for participation in this study. Of the 17 organizations that were contacted, 5 were unable to participate, 12 expressed an interest/willingness to participate, and 7 organizations actually completed surveys for a participation rate of 41%. The total number of completed surveys from EEO employees and employees within their respective organizations was 108. There were 25 respondents who were employed by their organization’s EEO unit or office, and 83 respondents were not employed in their organization’s EEO unit or office.
Utilizing a one-factor model, Likert-type items were used to examine employee perceptions of procedural fairness. Based on consistent correlations between procedural justice and distributive justice in the organizational justice research, the use of procedural fairness was the sole justice measure. I used Colquitt’s (2001) and Tyler and Schuller’s (1990) procedural justice measures for two respondent groups 1) EEO employees, and 2) organization employees. I hypothesize that the closer or more direct the EEO compliance function is positioned to the organization’s CEO the more positive the employees’ perceptions of fairness. The data indicate that both the EEO personnel and organization employees perceive higher levels of procedural fairness when the EEO office is placed higher in the hierarchy. Further, the results indicate that organizational structure reflected by the dimensions of centralization, size, and formalization influences fairness perceptions for EEO personnel and organization employees.
The following questions were explored in this study: 1) Does the EEO reporting structure within organizations affect employees’ perceptions of procedural fairness? 2) Does organizational structure influence employees’ perceptions of procedural fairness? 3) Does the EEO reporting structure within organizations affect the procedural fairness perceptions of EEO personnel? 4) Does organizational structure influence the procedural fairness perceptions of EEO personnel?
Employees in New Jersey governmental departments, agencies, and state entities were surveyed to provide the data for this analysis. Seventeen (17) State of New Jersey departments and agencies were identified for participation in this study. Of the 17 organizations that were contacted, 5 were unable to participate, 12 expressed an interest/willingness to participate, and 7 organizations actually completed surveys for a participation rate of 41%. The total number of completed surveys from EEO employees and employees within their respective organizations was 108. There were 25 respondents who were employed by their organization’s EEO unit or office, and 83 respondents were not employed in their organization’s EEO unit or office.
Utilizing a one-factor model, Likert-type items were used to examine employee perceptions of procedural fairness. Based on consistent correlations between procedural justice and distributive justice in the organizational justice research, the use of procedural fairness was the sole justice measure. I used Colquitt’s (2001) and Tyler and Schuller’s (1990) procedural justice measures for two respondent groups 1) EEO employees, and 2) organization employees. I hypothesize that the closer or more direct the EEO compliance function is positioned to the organization’s CEO the more positive the employees’ perceptions of fairness. The data indicate that both the EEO personnel and organization employees perceive higher levels of procedural fairness when the EEO office is placed higher in the hierarchy. Further, the results indicate that organizational structure reflected by the dimensions of centralization, size, and formalization influences fairness perceptions for EEO personnel and organization employees.
PhysicalDescription
Form
(authority = gmd)
electronic resource
Extent
xiii, 128 p. : ill.
InternetMediaType
application/pdf
InternetMediaType
text/xml
Note
(type = degree)
Ph.D.
Note
(type = bibliography)
Includes bibliographical references (p. 120-127)
Note
(type = statement of responsibility)
by Charlie M. Williams
Name
(ID = NAME-1);
(type = personal)
NamePart
(type = family)
Williams
NamePart
(type = given)
Charlie M.
NamePart
(type = date)
1960
Role
RoleTerm
(authority = RULIB);
(type = )
author
DisplayForm
Charlie M. Williams
Name
(ID = NAME-2);
(type = personal)
NamePart
(type = family)
Olshfski
NamePart
(type = given)
Dorothy
Role
RoleTerm
(authority = RULIB);
(type = )
chair
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
DisplayForm
Dorothy Olshfski
Name
(ID = NAME-3);
(type = personal)
NamePart
(type = family)
Caprio
NamePart
(type = given)
Raphael
Role
RoleTerm
(authority = RULIB);
(type = )
internal member
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
DisplayForm
Raphael J Caprio
Name
(ID = NAME-4);
(type = personal)
NamePart
(type = family)
Riccucci
NamePart
(type = given)
Norma
Role
RoleTerm
(authority = RULIB);
(type = )
internal member
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
DisplayForm
Norma M Riccucci
Name
(ID = NAME-5);
(type = personal)
NamePart
(type = family)
Stark
NamePart
(type = given)
Evan
Role
RoleTerm
(authority = RULIB);
(type = )
internal member
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
DisplayForm
Evan Stark
Name
(ID = NAME-1);
(type = corporate)
NamePart
Rutgers University
Role
RoleTerm
(authority = RULIB);
(type = )
degree grantor
Name
(ID = NAME-2);
(type = corporate)
NamePart
Graduate School - Newark
Role
RoleTerm
(authority = RULIB);
(type = )
school
OriginInfo
DateCreated
(point = );
(qualifier = exact)
2009
DateOther
(qualifier = exact);
(type = degree)
2009-10
Place
PlaceTerm
(type = code)
xx
RelatedItem
(type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Rutgers University Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier
(type = RULIB)
ETD
RelatedItem
(type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Graduate School - Newark Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier
(type = local)
rucore10002600001
Location
PhysicalLocation
(authority = marcorg);
(displayLabel = Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey)
NjNbRU
Identifier
(type = doi)
doi:10.7282/T3R211MG
Genre
(authority = ExL-Esploro)
ETD doctoral
Back to the top
Rights
RightsDeclaration
(AUTHORITY = GS);
(ID = rulibRdec0006)
The author owns the copyright to this work.
Copyright
Status
Copyright protected
Notice
Note
Availability
Status
Open
Reason
Permission or license
Note
RightsHolder
(ID = PRH-1);
(type = personal)
Name
FamilyName
Williams
GivenName
Charlie
Role
Copyright holder
Telephone
Address
Email
ContactInformationDate
RightsEvent
(ID = RE-1);
(AUTHORITY = rulib)
Type
Permission or license
Label
Place
DateTime
Detail
AssociatedEntity
(ID = AE-1);
(AUTHORITY = rulib)
Role
Copyright holder
Name
Charlie Williams
Affiliation
Rutgers University. Graduate School - Newark
AssociatedObject
(ID = AO-1);
(AUTHORITY = rulib)
Type
License
Name
Author Agreement License
Detail
I hereby grant to the Rutgers University Libraries and to my school the non-exclusive right to archive, reproduce and distribute my thesis or dissertation, in whole or in part, and/or my abstract, in whole or in part, in and from an electronic format, subject to the release date subsequently stipulated in this submittal form and approved by my school. I represent and stipulate that the thesis or dissertation and its abstract are my original work, that they do not infringe or violate any rights of others, and that I make these grants as the sole owner of the rights to my thesis or dissertation and its abstract. I represent that I have obtained written permissions, when necessary, from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis or dissertation and will supply copies of such upon request by my school. I acknowledge that RU ETD and my school will not distribute my thesis or dissertation or its abstract if, in their reasonable judgment, they believe all such rights have not been secured. I acknowledge that I retain ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use all or part of this thesis or dissertation in future works, such as articles or books.
Back to the top
Technical
ContentModel
ETD
MimeType
(TYPE = file)
application/pdf
MimeType
(TYPE = container)
application/x-tar
FileSize
(UNIT = bytes)
1064960
Checksum
(METHOD = SHA1)
84b520e1a81f2d795753163a534ec58ad0c89463
Back to the top
Statistical Profile