IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i3p1841-d742811.html

How Should We Distribute Rewards in Social Sustainable Organizations? Investigating Individual Preferences for Justice Allocation Norms

Author

Listed:
  • Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet

    (Faculty of Economics and Business Studies, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (Spain), 08035 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Marion Fortin

    (TSM-Research (UMR CNRS 5303), University of Toulouse Capitole, Toulouse CEDEX 9, 31042 Toulouse, France)

Abstract

The fair allocation of scarce resources is an important ethical and practical problem for sustainable organizations. Research has typically focused on the perceived equity of distributions to the neglect of alternative justice norms governing allocation, such as equality or need. In the present paper, we address this gap by considering people to differ in their preferences for allocation norms. In four studies, we developed and validated an instrument that captures individual preferences for equity of input, equity of output, equality, need, and status. Our data suggest that people differentiate between these five allocation norms and that they are consistent in their preferences over time. We present recommendations for research and organizational practice, which can benefit from a deeper understanding of employees’ and other stakeholders’ preferences for specific allocation norms. Finally, considering different norm choices also links organizational-psychological research on organizational justice and social sustainability with philosophical debates about value choices in organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet & Marion Fortin, 2022. "How Should We Distribute Rewards in Social Sustainable Organizations? Investigating Individual Preferences for Justice Allocation Norms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-23, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:3:p:1841-:d:742811
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1841/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1841/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Konow, 2003. "Which Is the Fairest One of All? A Positive Analysis of Justice Theories," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(4), pages 1188-1239, December.
    2. Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet & Josep M. Rosanas, 2020. "The Relative Role of the Intellectual and Moral Virtues in Sustainable Management Decisions: The Case of Practical Wisdom and Justice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-21, February.
    3. Corgnet, Brice & Sutan, Angela & Veszteg, Róbert F., 2011. "My teammate, myself and I: Experimental evidence on equity and equality norms," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 347-355, August.
    4. Stephen Devereux, 2002. "Can Social Safety Nets Reduce Chronic Poverty?," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 20(5), pages 657-675, November.
    5. Rupp, Deborah E. & Shao, Ruodan & Jones, Kisha S. & Liao, Hui, 2014. "The utility of a multifoci approach to the study of organizational justice: A meta-analytic investigation into the consideration of normative rules, moral accountability, bandwidth-fidelity, and social exchange," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 159-185.
    6. Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet & Marion Fortin, 2014. "One Justice or Two? A Model of Reconciliation of Normative Justice Theories and Empirical Research on Organizational Justice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(3), pages 435-451, October.
    7. Cropanzano, Russell & Stein, Jordan H., 2009. "Organizational Justice and Behavioral Ethics: Promises and Prospects," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 193-233, April.
    8. Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet & Pilar Ficapal-Cusí & Joan Torrent-Sellens, 2019. "Sustainable Human Resource Management: How to Create a Knowledge Sharing Behavior through Organizational Justice, Organizational Support, Satisfaction and Commitment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-20, September.
    9. Phyllis A. Siegel & Donald C. Hambrick, 2005. "Pay Disparities Within Top Management Groups: Evidence of Harmful Effects on Performance of High-Technology Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 259-274, June.
    10. Robert Prasch & Falguni Sheth, 1999. "The Economics and Ethics of Minimum Wage Legislation," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(4), pages 466-487.
    11. Treviño, Linda Klebe & Weaver, Gary R., 2001. "Organizational Justice and Ethics Program “Follow-Through”: Influences on Employees’ Harmful and Helpful Behavior," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(4), pages 651-671, October.
    12. Ernst Fehr & Helen Bernhard & Bettina Rockenbach, 2008. "Egalitarianism in young children," Nature, Nature, vol. 454(7208), pages 1079-1083, August.
    13. Victor Lau & Yin Wong, 2009. "Direct and Multiplicative Effects of Ethical Dispositions and Ethical Climates on Personal Justice Norms: A Virtue Ethics Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(2), pages 279-294, December.
    14. Pickett, Kate E. & Wilkinson, Richard G., 2015. "Income inequality and health: A causal review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 316-326.
    15. Laurie Barclay & Michael Bashshur & Marion Fortin, 2017. "Motivated cognition and fairness: Insights, integration, and creating a path forward," Post-Print halshs-01698338, HAL.
    16. Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet & Josep M. Rosanas, 2020. "Practical Wisdom for Sustainable Management and Knowledge Sharing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-17, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bertoli, Paola & Grembi, Veronica & Morelli, Massimo & Rosso, Anna Cecilia, 2023. "In medio stat virtus? Effective communication and preferences for redistribution in hard times," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 105-147.
    2. Momeni, Fatemeh, 2021. "Voluntary and mandatory provision of common-pool resources with heterogeneous users," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 785-813.
    3. Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet & Josep M. Rosanas, 2020. "Practical Wisdom for Sustainable Management and Knowledge Sharing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-17, May.
    4. Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet & Josep M. Rosanas, 2020. "The Relative Role of the Intellectual and Moral Virtues in Sustainable Management Decisions: The Case of Practical Wisdom and Justice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-21, February.
    5. Russell S. Cropanzano & Sebastiano Massaro & William J. Becker, 2017. "Deontic Justice and Organizational Neuroscience," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(4), pages 733-754, September.
    6. Lauren E. Aydinliyim, 2022. "The Case for Ethical Non-compete Agreements: Executives Versus Sandwich-Makers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(3), pages 651-668, January.
    7. Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2016. "Equity and bargaining power in ultimatum games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 144-165.
    8. Azouz, Ali & Antheaume, Nicolas & Charles-Pauvers, Brigitte, 2021. "An Ethnography of Fairness Perceptions among Non-Family Employees: Does Religion Matter?," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 12(3).
    9. Xile Yin & Siyu Chen & Dahui Li & Feng Zhang, 2021. "Social norms for fairness and board voting behavior: An experimental investigation," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 110-133, March.
    10. Peter E. Mudrack & E. Sharon Mason, 2019. "Utilitarian Traits and the Janus-Headed Model: Origins, Meaning, and Interpretation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 227-240, April.
    11. Angus Robson, 2026. "Justice in Leadership," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 204(1), pages 183-197, February.
    12. Marion Fortin & Thierry Nadisic & Chris M. Bell & Jonathan R. Crawshaw & Russell Cropanzano, 2016. "Beyond the Particular and Universal: Dependence, Independence, and Interdependence of Context, Justice, and Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 137(4), pages 639-647, September.
    13. Leineweber, Constanze & Peristera, Paraskevi & Bernhard-Oettel, Claudia & Eib, Constanze, 2020. "Is interpersonal justice related to group and organizational turnover? Results from a Swedish panel study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    14. Brocas, Isabelle & Carrillo, Juan D. & Combs, T. Dalton & Kodaverdian, Niree, 2019. "The development of consistent decision-making across economic domains," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 217-240.
    15. David Fairris & Gurleen Popli & Eduardo Zepeda, 2008. "Minimum Wages and the Wage Structure in Mexico," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 66(2), pages 181-208.
    16. Gantner, Anita & Horn, Kristian & Kerschbamer, Rudolf, 2016. "Fair and efficient division through unanimity bargaining when claims are subjective," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 56-73.
    17. Hoffmann, Magnus & Kolmar, Martin, 2017. "Distributional preferences in probabilistic and share contests," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 120-139.
    18. Falch, Ranveig, 2021. "How Do People Trade Off Resources Between Quick and Slow Learners?," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 5/2021, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    19. Drouvelis, Michalis & Powdthavee, Nattavudh, 2015. "Are happier people less judgmental of other people's selfish behaviors? Experimental survey evidence from trust and gift exchange games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 111-123.
    20. Fabian Kosse & Thomas Deckers & Pia Pinger & Hannah Schildberg-Hörisch & Armin Falk, 2020. "The Formation of Prosociality: Causal Evidence on the Role of Social Environment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(2), pages 434-467.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:3:p:1841-:d:742811. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.