International Journal of Management and Social Sciences Research (IJMSSR) ISSN: Volume 2, No. 3, March 2013

Transcription

1 93 Investigating the Relationship between Organizational Justice and withdrawal Behaviour among the Employees of Ardabil Technical & Vocational Training Organization Shabnam SehBaradar, Department of Management, Germi Branch, Islamic Azad University, Gemri, Iran Habib Ebrahimpour (PhD), Department of Management, Germi Branch, Islamic Azad University, Gemri, Iran Mohammad Hasanzadeh (PhD), Department of Management, Germi Branch, Islamic Azad University, Gemri, Iran ABSTRACT The nature of this study is correlation. We determined the amount of the sample size with the used of Cochran sampling method which the statistical sample is 130 of these organization employees which have been selected through the simple random sampling method. To gathering of data, we used two questionnaires. In order to analyze the data resulted from collected questionnaires deductive and descriptive statistical methods are used, and to display some statistical data we used column diagram and in deductive level to test the hypothesis of the research we used multiple correlation coefficients and regression. The analysis revealed that there is a highly significant negative relationship between organizational and. There is also a highly significant negative relationship between the factors of, i.e. procedural, interactive and informative, and the. The analysis and interpretation earned through regression shows that all factors of organizational do play a vital role in determining the. Keywords Organizational, factors of organizational (procedural, distributive, interactive, and informative INTRODUCTION Of in the workplace has dramatically increased in recent years (Zhang & et al, 2009). Over & et al (2004) due to the extent of the impact of fairness,, understanding the effects of attention of many researchers in the organization of human resources, organizational behavior and organizational psychology/industrial has attracted. Organizational is related to employees' perspective of whether or not they are treated with fairness? (Abu Elanain, 2010). The overall organizational theory and research in the three main wave forms is evaluated. First wave centered on distributive, procedural, a second wave of communication is based on and the third wave (Azgoli, 2005). At least three types of based on evidence from experts and scholars have been accepted. These three dimensions or aspects of fairness in dealing with one another, the Creator overall fairness in the workplace are perceived (Golparvar and Nadi, 2011). Distributive : the perceived fairness of organizational outcomes back (Forrt and Sue Lowe, 2008). Procedural : procedural refers to the fairness of the procedures used to obtain the allocation decisions and outcomes (Olson et al, 2006). Relational : the quality of the people is felt by every person who goes (Afjeh, 2007, p 332). Employee withdrawal from an organization can take many behavioral forms, including turnover, absenteeism, and lateness. It may also be psychological, however, i.e., loss of job involvement. Previous research has placed little emphasis on the nature of the relationships that exist among these withdrawal forms, although it is reasonable to assume that they would be empirically related. Two tenable but conflicting possibilities regarding such relationships can be delineated. Withdrawal comes in two forms: psychological (or neglect) and physical (or exit). Psychological withdrawal consists of actions that provide a mental escape from the work environment (Fisher, 2004). When an employee is engaging in psychological withdrawal, the lights are on, but nobody s home. Some business articles refer to psychological withdrawal as warm-chair attrition, meaning that employees have essentially been lost even though their chairs remain occupied. Psychological withdrawal comes in a number of shapes and sizes. The least serious is daydreaming, when an employee appears to be working but is actually distracted by random thoughts or concerns. Socializing refers to the verbal chatting about non-work topics that goes on in cubicles and offices or at the mailbox or vending machines. Looking busy indicates an intentional desire on the part of the employee to look like he or she is working, even when not performing work tasks. Sometimes employees decide to reorganize their desks or go for a stroll around the building, even though they have nowhere to go. (Those who are very good at managing impressions do such things very briskly and with a focused look on their faces!) When employees engage in moonlighting, they use work time and resources to complete something

2 94 other than their job duties, such as assignments for another job (Lim, 2002). Perhaps the most widespread form of psychological withdrawal among white collar employees is cyberloafing using Internet, , and instant messaging access for their personal enjoyment rather than work duties. Physical withdrawal consists of actions that provide a physical escape, whether short term or long term, from the work environment. Physical withdrawal also comes in a number of shapes and sizes. Tardiness reflects the tendency to arrive at work late (or leave work early) (Blau, 1994). Of course, tardiness can sometimes be unavoidable, as when employees have car trouble or must fight through bad weather, but it often represents a calculated desire to spend less time at work (Hamper, 1991). Long breaks involve longer-than-normal lunches, soda breaks, coffee breaks, and so forth that provide a physical escape from work. For example, employees would routinely take turns covering for one another on the assembly line for half a shift so that they could spend several hours sleeping in their cars or at home, running errands, or even drinking beer at local bars. Sometimes such breaks stretch into missing meetings, which means employees neglect important work functions while away from the office. As a manager, you d like to be sure that employees that leave for lunch are actually going to come back, but sometimes, that s not a safe bet! Absenteeism occurs when employees miss an entire day of work. 68 Of course, people stay home from work for a variety of reasons, including illness and family emergencies. There is also a rhythm to absenteeism. For example, employees are more likely to be absent on Mondays or Fridays (Fichman, 1988). Moreover, streaks of good attendance create a sort of pressure to be absent, as personal responsibilities build until a day at home becomes irresistible (Martocchio & Jimeno, 2003). That type of absence can sometimes be functional, because people return to work with their batteries recharged (Nicholson & Johns, 1985). Group and departmental norms also affect absenteeism by signaling whether an employee can get away with missing a day here or there without being noticed (Campion, 1991). These issues aside, a consistent pattern of absenteeism, month in and month out, is a symptom of the kind of low commitment that concerns most managers. Should absenteeism (in the form of missed classes) concern instructors as well? See our OB for Students feature to find out. Finally, the most serious form of physical withdrawal is quitting voluntarily leaving the organization. As with the other forms of withdrawal, employees can choose to turn over for a variety of reasons. The most frequent reasons include leaving for more money or a better career opportunity; dissatisfaction with supervision, working conditions, or working schedule; family factors; and health (Lee & Mitchell, 1984). Note that many of those reasons reflect avoidable turnover, meaning that the organization could have done something to keep the employee, perhaps by offering more money, more frequent promotions, or a better work situation. Family factors and health, in contrast, usually reflect unavoidable turnover that doesn t necessarily signal a lack of commitment on the part of employees. Fig. 1, Psychological and Physical Withdrawal

3 95 Most of the previous research in this area has focused only on the relationship between absenteeism and turnover (e.g., Kerr, Koppelmeir & Sullivan, 1951; Hill & Trist, 1955; Argyle, Gardner, & Cioffi, 1958). Lyons' (1972) review concluded that the relationship between these two forms of withdrawal was positive and that there was tentative support for the notion that there is a progression of withdrawal, absenteeism being the lesser, and turnover the more serious, form. Men and Heidari (2009) in a study entitled "Relationship between organizational and organizational citizenship behavior" came to the conclusion that organizational and organizational citizenship behavior of its components and its components are positive and significant correlation. The application of organizational and how to use it to increase organizational citizenship behavior of employees is essential. Yılmaz & Taşdan (2009) study as "organizational 1-1 There is a relationship between procedural and and organizational citizenship behavior in primary schools in Turkey" did. Results of the study showed that teachers 2-1 There is a relationship between distributive and with positive perceptions of organizational, organizational citizenship behavior, respectively. 3-1 There is a relationship between interaction and Background, gender, education, organizational citizenship behavior was effective teachers. The only record of 4-1 There is a relationship between informational and organizational, perceived organizational perceptions of their effectiveness but on the basis of gender and educational level did not change between METHODOLOGY perceived organizational and organizational citizenship behavior, there was a positive relationship. Klendauer & Deller (2009) study entitled "Organizational and managerial commitment to the integration of the companies' conduct. Results of the assessment tool and can be trusted to act as a moderating variable. Moorman (1991) study entitled "The relationship between perceptions of and fairness and citizenship behaviors - Enterprise" did. Morrison (2001) in order to prove the importance of employee perceptions of fairness and spur growth model is then tested it. He has shown that when using the 178 school coach coaches a greater sense of distributive and procedural training in their own schools, higher commitment and behavior show. Important that students, teachers and teachers' perceptions of were more positive factors more than the coach or teacher expressed. The researchers noted that their study was based on perceptions can affect organizational and individual outcomes. The main purpose this study is determines the relationship between organizational components and counterproductive behavior. And we have tried to answer this question: are there relationship between organizational components and counterproductive behavior in Ardabil Technical & Vocational Training Organization? RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS In this paper we have one main hypothesis and four secondary hypotheses. The statistical way of analysis of hypotheses is two ways, H 1 is acceptance of hypothesis and H 0 is rejecting of hypothesis. In other words, it means that H 1 has positive meaning and H 0 has negative meaning. 1- There is a relationship between organizational and The nature of this study is correlation. We determined the amount of the sample size with the used of Cochran sampling method which the statistical sample is 130 of these organization employees which have been selected through the simple random sampling method. To gathering of data, we used two questionnaires. Organizational standards Questionnaire, a 25 item scale according to Hoff and Moorman, (1993), and counterproductive behavior questionnaire, a 13 item according to Colquitt (2010) theory, all the reliability and validity of measures has examined. Questionnaires reliability was estimated by calculating Cronbach s Alpha via SPSS software that is shown in the table 1. Table1. Results of questionnaires reliability from SPSS software Variables Cronbach's Alpha Organizational 0.89 Counterproductive Behavior 0.80 In order to analyze the data resulted from collected questionnaires deductive and descriptive statistical methods are used, and to display some statistical data we used column diagram and in deductive level to test the hypothesis of the research we used multiple correlation coefficients and regression. The analysis has performed with SPSS. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION Table 2 reports descriptive statistics including means and standard deviation for samples.

4 96 Table 2: Means and standard deviations for variables Variable Statistical characteristics mean SD organizational procedural distributive interaction informational Physical withdrawal Psychological withdrawal Withdrawal (overall) Subsequently, multiple correlation analysis has been done in order to determine the relationship between relationship organizational as independent variables and as dependent variable. The correlation analysis result between these variables is shown in table 3. Table 3- multiple correlation coefficients of variables procedural 1 2 distributive.420 ** 1 3 interaction.412 **.314 ** 1 4 informational.286 **.417 **.448 ** 1 5 Physical ** ** ** ** 1 withdrawal 6 Psychological ** ** ** **.801 ** 1 withdrawal 7 Withdrawal (overall) ** ** ** **.929 **.970 ** 1 8 organizational.382 **.598 **.874 **.687 ** ** ** ** 1 P<0/05* & P<0/01** According to table 3, the results show that relationship organizational and their dimensions are all There is a negative significant relationship between distributive and (r= ). significantly and negative related with withdrawal There is a negative significant relationship between behavior. Strong negative correlation was found between interaction and (r= ). organizational and (r= - There is a negative significant relationship between 0/717). According to above results, we can confirm H 1 and informational and (r= - reject H 0. Also we can say that with alpha value (0.001) 0.380). results are: Table 4, shows the results of the mean scores of There is a negative significant relationship between respondents according to gender, marital status, education procedural and (r= ). level, work experience and positions with organizational variables and

5 97 Table 4, the results of the mean scores of respondents Characteristic According to table 4 results, Male and Single peoples believe that their organizations have more organizational in contrast of Female and Married. Also, with increasing work experiences, organizational has been less. There is less believed to organizational among Low literate peoples and there is more believed to organizational among Associate degree peoples. Single peoples have more in contrast of Married. And MA degree persons have less withdrawal behavior. After wards, multivariable regression analysis has also been used to analyze the relationship between the dependent variables and independent variables (table5). Moreover, multivariable regression analysis shows the following results Table 5. Multivariable regression analysis Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Withdrawal Regression analysis shows that dimensions of organizational explain 25 percent of withdrawal behavior. Table 6 shows the Summary data variance analysis of relationship between relationship organizational as independent variables and as dependent variable. Table 6, Summary data variance analysis Model Sum of Chi df Mean F Sig. All Regression Remaining Total According to table 6, Total regression model is significant (Sig ). It means that total of Predictor variables explain and predict the criterion variable (withdrawals behavior). In the next table kind of predictor variables are determined in explaining of.

6 98 Table 7, predicting of according to organizational dimensions Model Non- Standardized Standardized t sig coefficients coefficients B Standard Beta error constant distributive procedural interaction informational organizational The results of table 7 show all the components of organizational are significant in explaining the withdrawal behavior. Fig. 2, Results of structural equation modeling Chi square value (X 2 ) for model fitting is (with degrees of freedom 32) and the p-value has obtained p= And it indicates acceptable model fitness. RMSEA value is equal and smaller than It indicates acceptable model fitness according our opinion. The structural equation model indicates that employees' perceptions of organizational have a direct effect on employee. In other words, with employee's perceptions from in organization will be reduced employee's. The findings show that there is a relationship negative organizational and their dimensions with. Finding is according to Diana West (2006); Collins Wherley Valerie (2004) and Brockner.J.et al (1995) results. According to research results, we suggest that: Facilities distribution system Optimizing design and implementation, and deployment, Adjustment mechanism for periodic measures of job satisfaction. Review the present organizational structure and presenting suitable models according to organization requirements, Integration of automated HR systems, Selecting the systematic process and prepare the best people for key positions and critical. REFERENCES [1] Abu Elanain H. M. (2010). Testing the direct and indirect relationship between organizational and work outcomes in a non-western context of the UAE. Journal of Management Development, 29(1): 5-27.

7 99 [2] Afjeh AS. (2002). Philosophical principles and theories of leadership and organizational behavior. Tehran: Publication of the book painting arts university. [3] Azgoli M. (2005). History of theory and research on organizational. Misbah Journal, 46: [4] Bennett RJ, Robinson SL. (2003). The past, present and future of workplace deviance research. In Greenberg J (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science (2nd ed., pp ). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. [5] Blau, G. Developing and Testing Taxonomy of Lateness Behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology 79 (1994), pp [6] Campion, M.A. Meaning and Measurement of Turnover: Comparison of Alternative Measures and Recommendations for Research. Journal of Applied Psychology 76 (1991), pp [7] Colquitt JA, Conlon DE,Wesson MJ, Porter CO, Ng KY. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A metaanalytic review of 25 years of organizational research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, [8] Fichman, M. (1988), Motivational Consequences of Absence and Attendance: Proportional Hazard Estimation of a Dynamic Motivation Model. Journal of Applied Psychology 73(1988), pp [9] Fisher, A. (2004), Turning Clock- Watchers into Stars. Fortune, March 22, 2004, p. 60. [10] Forret M, Sue Love M. (2008). Employee perceptions and coworker relationships. [11] Golparvar M, M Nadi. (2011). Cultural values and fairness: Organizational, job satisfaction and turnover. Journal of Cultural Studies, 3 (9): [12] Hamper, B. (1991), Rivethead: Tales from the Assembly Line. New York: Warner Books, [13] Hoff C. Barnard L, Frey. W. (2008). Good computing: a pedagogically focused model of virtue in the practice of computing (part 1). Journal of Information, Communication & Ethics in Society, 6( 3): [14] Lee, T.W.; and T.R. Mitchell., (1984), An Alternative Approach: The Unfolding Model of Voluntary Employee Turnover. Academy of Management Review 19 (1984), pp [15] Lim, V.K.G., (2002), The IT Way of Loafing on the Job: Cyberloafing, Neutralizing, and Organizational Justice. Journal of Organizational Behavior 23 (2002), pp [16] Martocchio, J.J.; and Jimeno D.I., (2003), Employee Absenteeism as an Affective Event. Human Resource Management Review 13 (2003), pp [17] Moorman R.H. (1991). Relationship between organizational and organizational citizenship behaviours: do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76 (6): [18] Nicholson, N.; and Johns G., (1985) The Absence Climate and the Psychological Contract: Who s in Control of Absence? Academy of Management Review 10 (1985), pp [19] Olson B. J, Nelson D. L, Parayitam S. (2006), Managing aggression in organizations: what leaders must know? Journal: Leadership & Organization Development, 27(5): [20] Yılmaz K, Taşdan M. (2009), Organizational citizenship and organizational in Turkish primary schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(1): [21] Zhang L, Nie T, Luo Y. (2009), Matching organizational with employment modes: Strategic human resource management perspective. Journal of Technology Management, 4(2):