Search results

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate whether perceptions of distributive, procedural and interactional justice can explain the frequently reported low organizational commitment of managers in corporate mergers. Specifically, it aims to examine whether each of the justice dimensions is significantly and uniquely related to affective commitment, which of the justice dimensions has the strongest relationship with the criterion, and whether instrumental evaluations or trust might function as a mediator.Design/methodology/approachA total of 128 managers from 37 companies completed a questionnaire. They had been involved in domestic or European mergers or acquisitions, which varied in the application of fairness rules.FindingsAlthough each fairness dimension correlated positively with affective commitment, only interactional justice showed a unique relationship with it. Results indicate that both instrumental evaluations and trust can function as a mediator.Research limitations/implicationsBecause of the cross‐sectional design, conclusions about the causal order of the variables cannot be drawn.Practical implicationsThe authors recommend that top managers should pay extra attention to timely, candid and specific internal communication with thorough and reasonable explanation of decisions, as well as the respectful treatment of managers. Moreover, the results indicate that managers reacted positively to fairness because it conveys positive relational signals, and because one can gain personal advantages through fair outcomes and processes.Originality/valueThe organizational justice approach has not yet been applied, to the authors' knowledge, in quantitative field studies of mergers. Furthermore, this paper offers a contribution to the literature on fairness heuristic theory.

This study empirically examines the construct of emotional Intelligence (EI) cross-culturally. Participants ( N = 200) from Germany ( N = 100) and India ( N = 100) completed the Emotional Intelligence Scale, NEO-Five Factor Personality Inventory (Form-S) and Hofstede's Value Survey (Module 94). The major objectives of the study were to examine cross-culturally (a) the factor structure of EI, and (b) the construct of EI as distinct from personality. Results revealed different factor structures for these two cultures, and the construct of EI failed to correlate with the dimensions of personality. Implications of the findings for leadership in a specific culture as well as across different cultures are discussed.