The role of justice in development of temporary teams : evidence from the high-tech industry

• Autorzy: Rogala Piotr , Bartniczak Bartosz , Brzozowski Tomasz , Kusterka-Jefmańska Marta , Moczulska Marta , Panasiewicz Agnieszka , Płachciak Adam , Zaremba-Warnke Sabina

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.37055/nsz/188843

Warianty tytułu

PL

Rola sprawiedliwości w rozwoju zespołów tymczasowych na przykładzie branży high-tech

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Justice is a category that significantly impacts corporate performance. It has been shown in many scientific publications that it affects, among other things, the motivation and commitment of employees, shapes the atmosphere in the workplace and influences employee performance. However, research has yet to be done on the effect of justice on the effectiveness of temporary teams (set up for a limited time to solve a problem or carry out a project), even though such teams are now a common form of teamwork. This study is intended to fill an identified research gap. Its purpose is to determine whether justice affects the effectiveness of temporary teams in an organisation and, if so, whether all types of justice affect that effectiveness to the same extent. A main hypothesis was formulated: All kinds of justice (procedural, distributive, interpersonal and informational) have the same effect on the effectiveness of the temporary work team. The modified Colquitt scale was used. Differences in the impact between types of justice on the effectiveness of teams have been assessed using the U-Mann-Whitney test. The paper uses the results of a survey conducted among 110 managers from high – tech industry with experience with temporary teams. Based on their information, it has been established that justice has a significant impact on the effectiveness of temporary teams, and the importance of different types of justice varies. The most important in this respect is informational justice. Interpersonal and distributive justice is slightly less important (there is no statistically significant difference between them). Procedural justice ranked third. Based on the results of the research, it can be pointed out that managers should pay attention to the perception of fairness of temporary team members. Above all, they should take care of the communication aspects, including in particular, the sharing of crucial information with employees of this type of team.

PL

Sprawiedliwość jest kategorią, która znacząco warunkuje wyniki firmy. W wielu publikacjach naukowych wykazano, że sprzyja ona m.in. motywacji i zaangażowaniu członków organizacji, kształtuje atmosferę w miejscu pracy i pozytywnie wpływa na wydajność pracowników. Do tej pory nie przeprowadzono jednak badań nad związkiem sprawiedliwości z efektywnością zespołów tymczasowych (tworzonych na określony czas w celu rozwiązania problemu lub realizacji projektu), mimo że takie zespoły są obecnie powszechną formą pracy zespołowej. Opisane badanie ma przyczynić się do wypełnienia zidentyfikowanej luki badawczej. Za cel przyjęto ustalenie, czy sprawiedliwość wpływa na efektywność tymczasowych zespołów w organizacji, a jeśli tak, to czy wszystkie rodzaje sprawiedliwości oddziałują na tę efektywność w takim samym stopniu. Sformułowano hipotezę główną: wszystkie rodzaje sprawiedliwości (proceduralna, dystrybucyjna, interpersonalna i informacyjna) mają taki sam wpływ na efektywność tymczasowego zespołu roboczego. W badaniach ankietowych wykorzystano zmodyfikowaną skalę Colquitta. Różnice wpływu między rodzajami sprawiedliwości na efektywność zespołu ustalono za pomocą testu U Manna-Whitneya. W badaniu ankietowym wzięło udział 110 menedżerów z branży zaawansowanych technologii, mających doświadczenie w pracy z zespołami tymczasowymi. Ustalono, że sprawiedliwość ma istotny wpływ na efektywność zespołów tymczasowych, a znaczenie poszczególnych jej rodzajów jest zróżnicowane. Najważniejsza pod tym względem okazała się sprawiedliwość informacyjna. Nieco mniejsze znaczenie miała sprawiedliwość interpersonalna oraz dystrybucyjna (nie ma między nimi statystycznie istotnej różnicy). Sprawiedliwość proceduralna uplasowała się zaś na trzecim miejscu. Na podstawie wyników badań można wskazać, że menedżerowie powinni zwracać uwagę na poczucie sprawiedliwości członków zespołu tymczasowego. Przede wszystkim muszą oni dbać o aspekty komunikowania się, w tym szczególnie udostępniać kluczowe informacje pracownikom tego rodzaju zespołów.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

justice; types of justice; temporary team; teamwork; high-tech

PL

sprawiedliwość; typy sprawiedliwości; zespół tymczasowy; praca zespołowa; high-tech

• Wydawca: Wojskowa Akademia Techniczna im. Jarosława Dąbrowskiego
• Czasopismo: Nowoczesne Systemy Zarządzania
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: T. 18, nr 4
• Strony: 69--88
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 68 poz., wykr., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Rogala Piotr

• Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0956-1758

autor

Bartniczak Bartosz

• Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1299-049X

autor

Brzozowski Tomasz

• Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7140-1205

autor

Kusterka-Jefmańska Marta

• Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6773-6157

autor

Moczulska Marta

• University of Zielona Góra, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1390-2914

autor

Panasiewicz Agnieszka

• Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4643-2664

autor

Płachciak Adam

• Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7560-1538

autor

Zaremba-Warnke Sabina

• Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9005-5763

Bibliografia

• [21] Adams, J. S., 1965. Inequity in Social Exchange, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2.
• [22] Akgün, A. E., Keskin, H., Byrne, J. C., 2010. Procedural Justice Climate in New Product Development Teams: Antecedents and Consequences, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 27, No. 7.
• [23] Bakhshi, A., Kumar, K., Rani, E., 2009. Organizational justice perceptions as predictor of job satisfaction and organisation commitment, International Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 9, No. 4.
• [24] Barsky, A., Kaplan, S. A., 2007. If You Feel Bad, It’s Unfair: A Quantitative Synthesis of Affect and Organizational Justice Perceptions, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92, No. 1.
• [25] Belbin, R. M., 2012. Team roles at work, London: Routledge.
• [26] Bennis, W. G., 1965. Beyond Bureaucracy: Will Organization Men Fit the New Organization?, Philadelphia: Trans-Action.
• [27] Brockner, J., Siegel, P., 1996. Understanding the interaction between procedural and distributive justice: The role of trust, [in:] Kramer, R. M., Tyler, T. R. (Eds.), Trust in organisations, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
• [28] Burke, C. M., Morley, M. J., 2016. On temporary organizations: A review, synthesis and research agenda, Human Relations, Vol. 69, No. 6.
• [29] Chang, H., Son, S. Y., Pak, J., 2020. How Do Leader – Member Interactions Influence the HRM - Performance Relationship? A Multiple Exchange Perspective, Human Performance, Vol. 33, No. 4.
• [30] Clercq, D. D., Pereira, R., 2021. “Hey everyone, look at me helping you!”: A contingency view of the relationship between exhibitionism and peer-oriented helping behaviors, Australian Journal of Management, Vol. 46, No. 4.
• [31] Cohen-Charash, Y., Spector, P. E., 2001. The Role of justice in organisations: A meta-analysis, Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 86, No. 2.
• [32] Colquitt, J. A., 2001. On the dimensionality of organisational justice: A construct validation of a measure, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86, No. 3.
• [33] Colquitt, J. A., Greenberg, J., Zapata-Phelan, C. P., 2005. What is organisational justice? A historical overview, [in:] Greenberg, J., Colquitt, J. A. (Eds.), Handbook of organisational justice, Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• [34] Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., Ng, K. Y., 2001. Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organisational justice research, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86, No. 3.
• [35] Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Rodell, J. B., Long, D. M., Zapata, C. P., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., 2013. Justice at the millennium, a decade later: A meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect-based perspectives, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 98, No. 2.
• [36] Cropanzano, R., Molina, A., 2015. Organizational Justice, [in:] Wright, J. D. (editor-in-chief), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 17, Oxford. Elsevier.
• [37] Cugueró-Escofet, N., Fortin, M., 2014. One justice or two? A model of reconciliation of normative justice theories and empirical research on organisational justice, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 124, No. 3.
• [38] Danik, L., 2015. Inter-firm relationship quality vs. perceived cultural differences, „International Journal of Management and Economics”, Vol. 45, No. 1 (March).
• [39] Dillow, C., 2007. The End of Politics: New Labour and the Folly of Managerialism, Harriman House: Hampshire.
• [40] Ellis, K. M., Reus, T. H., Lamont, B. T., 2009. The effects of procedural and informational justice in the integration of related acquisitions, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 30, No. 2.
• [41] Fischer, R., Ferreira, M. C., Jiang, D., Cheng ,B., Achoui, M. M., Wong, C. C., Baris,, S., Mendoza S., Van Meurs, N., Achmadi, D., Hassan,, A., Zeytinoglu G., Dalyan, F., Harb, C., Darwish, D. D., Assmar, E. M., 2011. Are Perceptions of Organizational Justice Universal? An Exploration of Measurement Invariance Across Thirteen Cultures, Social Justice Research, Vol. 24, No. 4.
• [42] Folger, R., Konovsky, M. A., 1989. Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 32, No. 1.
• [43] Georgalis, J., Samaratunge, R., Kimberley, N., Lu, Y., 2014. Change process characteristics and resistance to organisational change: The role of employee perceptions of justice, Australian Journal of Management, Vol. 40, No. 1.
• [44] Goodmann, R. A., Goodmann, L. P., 1976. Some Management Issues In Temporary Systems: A Study of Professional Development and Manpower – The Theater Case, Administrative Science Quarterly, No. 21(3).
• [45] Grabher, G., 2004. Temporary architectures of learning: Knowledge governance in project ecologies, Organisation Studies, Vol. 25, No. 9.
• [46] Greenberg, J., 1990. Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow, Journal of Management, Vol. 16, No. 2.
• [47] Gupta, V., Kumar, S., 2012. Impact of performance appraisal justice on employee engagement: a study of Indian professionals, Employee Relations, Vol. 35, No. 1.
• [48] Hantula, D. A., 2015. Job Satisfaction: The Management Tool and Leadership Responsibility, Journal of Organizational Behaviour Management, Vol. 35, No. 1-2.
• [49] Hargadon, A. B., 2002. Transitory institutions: Fieldwork on the Phenomenology of Groups and Group Membership, Toward Phenomenology of Groups and Group Membership, Vol. V.
• [50] Hauenstein, N. M. A., Mcgonigle, T., Flinder, S. W., 2001. A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Procedural Justice and Distributive Justice: Implications for Justice Research, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, Vol. 13.
• [51] Herr, R. M., Almer, C., Bosle, C., Fisher, J. E., 2020. Associations of Changes in Organizational Justice with Job Attitudes and Health – Findings from a Prospective Study Using a Matching-Based Difference-in-Difference Approach, The International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, Vol. 27.
• [52] Hubbell, A. P., Chory‐Assad, R. M., 2005. Motivating factors: perceptions of justice and their relationship with managerial and organisational trust, Communication Studies, Vol. 56, No. 1.
• [53] Ismail, A., Zainol, N. A. M., Husain, H. A., Ibrahim, N., Ismail, Y., 2021. Power distance as a moderator in the relationship between organisational justice and job satisfaction, International Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 28, No.1.
• [54] Khan, S., 2021. Do workplace contextual factors engender abusive supervision?, Australian Journal of Management, Vol. 46, No. 1.
• [55] Lanzara, G. F., 1983. Ephemeral Organisations in Extreme Environments: Emergence, Strategy, Extinctions, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 20, No. 1.
• [56] Le Roy, J., Bastounis, M., Minibas-Poussard, J., 2012. Interactional Justice and Counter-productive Work Behaviours: The Mediating Role of Negative Emotions, Social Behaviour and Personality an International Journal, Vol. 40, No. 8.
• [57] Leavitt, H. J., 2005. Top down: Why hierarchies are here to stay and how to manage them more effectively, Boston: Harvard Business Press.
• [58] Lundin, R. A., Söderholm, A. A., 1995. Theory of the Temporary Organization, Scandinavian Journal of Management, No. 1.
• [59] Macko, M., 2009. Poczucie sprawiedliwości organizacyjnej a zachowania pracowników, Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Nauk Społecznych UAM.
• [60] Mandryk, I., 2017. The Impact of Procedural and Distributive Justice upon Organization Commitment of Age-Diversified Employees. Research Results, Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska, Vol. LI, No. 3.
• [61] March, J. G., 1995. The Future, Disposable Organisations and the Rigidities of Imagination, Organization, Vol. 1.
• [62] Mawhinney, T. C., 1984. Philosophical and Ethical Aspects of Organizational Behavior Management, Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, Vol. 6, No. 1.
• [63] Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., Dechurch, L. A., 2009. Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 94, No. 2.
• [64] Miles, M. B., 1959. Learning to Work in Groups, New York: Teachers College Press.
• [65] Outlaw, R., Colquitt, J. A., Baer, M. D., Sessions, H., 2019. How fair versus how long: An integrative theory-based examination of procedural justice and procedural timeliness, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 72.
• [66] Packendorff, J., 1994. Temporary Organizing: Integrating Organization Theory and Project Management, [in:] Lundin, R. A., Packendorff, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the IRNOP Conference on Temporary Organisations and Project Management, Umeå: Umeå Business School, Department of Business Administration.
• [67] Przęczek, C., Rosiński, J., Manko, B. A., 2020. Research Review in Organizational Justice, Journal for Perspectives of Economic Political and Social Integration. Journal for Mental Changes, Vol. 26, No. 1-2.
• [68] Raja, U., Sheikh, R. A., Abbas, M., Bouckenooghe, D., 2018. Do procedures really matter when rewards are more important? A Pakistani perspective on the effects of distributive and procedural justice on employee behaviours, Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée, Vol. 68, No. 2.
• [69] Sahlin-Andersson, K., Söderholm, A. (Eds.), 2002. Beyond project management: New perspectives on the temporary-permanent dilemma, Malmo: Liber.
• [70] Saunders, C. S., Ahuja, M. K., 2006. Are all distributed teams the same? Differentiating between temporary and ongoing distributed teams, Small Group Research, Vol. 37, No. 6.
• [71] Saunders, M. N. K., Thornhill, A., 2004. Trust and mistrust in organisations: an exploration using an organisational justice framework, European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, Vol. 13.
• [72] Silva, M. R., Caetano, A., 2016. Organizational Justice Across Cultures: A Systematic Review of Four Decades of Research and Some Directions for the Future, Social Justice Research, Vol. 29, No. 3.
• [73] Söderlund, J., 2004. Building theories of project management: past research, questions for the future, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 22, No. 3.
• [74] Springer, A., 2011. Wybrane czynniki kształtujące satysfakcję pracownika, Problemy Zarządzania, Vol. 4, No. 9.
• [75] Swalhi, A., Zgoulli, S., Hofaidhllaoui, M., 2017. The influence of organisational justice on job performance: The mediating effect of affective commitment, Journal of Management Development Vol. 36, No. 4.
• [76] Sydow, J., Staber, U., 2002. The institutional embeddedness of project networks: the case of content production in German television, Regional Studies, Vol. 36, No. 3.
• [77] Szewc, J., 2013. Selected success factors of virtual teams: Literature review and suggestions for future research, International Journal of Management and Economics, Vol. 38, No. 1 (June).
• [78] Turek, D., 2011. Sprawiedliwość organizacyjna w przedsiębiorstwie, Kwartalnik Nauk o Przedsiębiorstwie, Vol. 1.
• [79] Turner, J. R., Miterev, M., 2019. The Organizational Design of the Project-Based Organization, Project Management Journal, Vol. 50, No. 4.
• [80] Turner, J. R., Müller, R., 2003. On the nature of the project as a temporary organisation, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 21, No. 1.
• [81] Tyler, R., Blader, S., 2003. The group engagement model: Procedural justice, social identity and cooperative behaviour, Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 7.
• [82] Unterhitzenberger, C., Bryde, D. J., 2019. Organizational Justice, Project Performance, and the Mediating Effects of Key Success Factors, Project Management Journal, Vol. 50, No. 1.
• [83] Umair, T., Javaid, M. F., Amir, H., Luqma, M. K., 2016. Effect of perceived appraisal fairness on job satisfaction, Journal of Applied Environmental and Biological Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 2.
• [84] Weatherly, N. R., 2021. The Ethics of Organizational Behaviour Management, Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, Vol. 41, No. 3.
• [85] WEI, S., KE, W., LADO, A. A., Liu, H., 2020. The Effects of Justice and Top Management Beliefs and Participation: An Exploratory Study in the Context of Digital Supply Chain Management, The Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 166.
• [86] Zapata, F., Kosheleva, O., Kreinovich, V., 2017. Are Permanent or Temporary Teams More Efficient: A Possible Explanation of the Empirical Data, Journal of Innovative Technology and Education, Vol. 4, No. 1.
• [87] Zapata-Phelan, C. P., Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Livingston, B., 2009. Procedural justice, interactional justice, and task performance: The mediating role of intrinsic motivation, Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 108.
• [88] Zimmermann-Pepol, M., Gregorczuk, K., 2016. Wymiary sprawiedliwości na gruncie filozofii prawa. Problematyka sprawiedliwości wczoraj–dziś–jutro, Gdańskie Studia Prawnicze, t. XXXV.

Uwagi

Błędne liczbownie bibliografii.