Aharon Tziner1 , Mihai Felea2 , Cristinel Vasiliu2
1Netanya Academic College, Schools of Behavioral Studies and Business Administration, Netanya, Israel ,2Bucharest Academy of Economics Studies, Bucharest, Rumania
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship of ethical climate factors, organizational justice dimensions, and LMX. The research was conducted drawing upon the responses of 716 employees in Romania to survey questionnaires. As expected, the three types of organizational justice were highly interrelated.Furthermore, all types of ethical climate were interconnected. In addition, we found that egoisticethical climate was negatively related significantly to the three types of organizational justice; the principle and benevolent ethical climate was found to relate to the three dimensions of organizational justice and LMX. Unexpectedly, we revealed that a division of the egoistic ethical climate into two separate sub-factors provided further insights into the relationships with organizational justice and LMX.
Resumen
El objetivo de este trabajo es investigar la relación de los factores de clima ético, las dimensiones de justicia organizacional y el intercambio líder-subordinado (LMX). La investigación se llevó a cabo a partir de las respuestas a cuestionarios de encuesta de 716 empleados rumanos. Como se esperaba, los tres tipos de justicia organizacional estaban muy relacionados entre sí. Además estaban interconectados todos los tipos de clima ético. Por otra parte se vio que el clima ético egoísta se relacionaba negativamente de un modo significativo con los tres tipos de justicia organizacional; se observó que el clima ético benevolente y de principios se relacionaba con las tres dimensiones de la justicia organizacional y el LMX. Contra pronóstico, descubrimos que dividir el clima ético egoísta en dos sub-factores distintos permitía desentrañar mejor las relaciones con la justicia organizacional y el LMX.
Adams, 1963, Allen et al., 2007, Asgart et al., 2008, Bandura, 1999, Bauer and Green, 1996, Bell and Schokkaert, 1992, Bies, 1987, Blau, 1965, Colquitt et al., 2002, Cropanzano et al., 2002, Dickson et al., 2001, Elci and Alpkan, 2009, Folger and Cropanzano, 1998, Furst and Cable, 2008, Gomez and Rosen, 2001, Graen and Uhl-Bien, 1995, Guest and Conway, 2002, Kim and Miller, 2007, Lee, 2001, Leventhal, 1976, Liden and Maslyn, 1998, Liden et al., 2000, Liden et al., 1993, Martin and Cullen, 2006, Morgan, 1987, Peterson, 2002, Podsakoff et al., 2003, Rawls, 1999, Ritzman and Tomaskovic-Devey, 1992, Rohel, 1997, Schein, 2007, Sheppard et al., 1992, Simha and Cullen, 2012, Sturges and Guest, 2004, Sweetland and Hoy, 2000, Thibaut and Walker, 1975, Tyler and Bies, 1990, Tziner et al., 2010, Uhl-Bien, 2003, Vandenberg and Stanley, 2009, Victor and Cullen, 1988a, Victor and Cullen, 1988b, Wayne et al., 2002, Yammarino and Naughton, 1992 and Yukl and Fu, 1999.
Copyright © 2024. Colegio Oficial de la Psicología de Madrid