Search

Announcements of a work site smoking ban were made to 732 clerical workers. The presentations differed in the amount of information given about the need for the ban and the degree of interpersonal sensitivity shown over the personal impact of the ban. Immediately after the announcement, questionnaires were completed to assess participants' acceptance of the ban. High amounts of information thoroughness and of social sensitivity, given separately, enhanced acceptance of the ban, but their combined effects were even greater. Although heavy smokers were least accepting of the ban, they showed the greatest incremental gain in acceptance after exposure to thorough information presented in a highly sensitive manner. By contrast, nonsmokers' acceptance of the ban was uniformly unaffected by the way it was presented to them. Regardless of how much they smoked, all participants recognized the procedural fairness associated with giving thorough information in a socially sensitive manner.

Employee theft rates were measured in manufacturing plants during a period in which pay was temporarily reduced by 15%. Compared with pre- or postreduction pay periods (or with control groups whose pay was unchanged), groups whose pay was reduced had significantly higher theft rates. When the basis for the pay cuts was thoroughly and sensitively explained to employees, feelings of inequity were lessened, and the theft rate was reduced as well. The data support equity theory's predictions regarding likely responses to underpayment and extend recently accumulated evidence demonstrating the mitigating effects of adequate explanations on feelings of inequity.

There can be little doubt about the existence of certain trappings of success in organizations—physical symbols (cf . Good sell, 1977 ) reflecting the organizational status of job incumbents (Steele, 1973). Indeed, previous research has confirmed that certain indicators of status demarcation (cf. Konar & Sundstrom, 1985) , such as large offices (Langdon, 1966), carpeting (Joiner, 1976) , and proximity to windows (Halloran, 1978), are recognized as rewards symbolizing one's high standing in an organizational status hierarchy. Although these environmental rewards typically are associated with relatively highstatus individuals, thereby reinforcing the social order of organizations (Edelman, 1978), there are some occasions in which the status of th e jo b incumbent and th e physical symbols associated with that status are not matched (Wineman, 1982). Such instances may be recognized as cases of status inconsistency, (cf. Stryke r & Macke, 1978) and, as such, reactions to them may be explained by equity theory (e.g., Adams, 1965; Walster , Walster, & Berscheid, 1978).

Middle managers from three organizational samples responded to an open-ended questionnaire in which they described the determinants of particularly fair or unfair performance appraisals. By Qsort procedure, the responses were categorized and combined to yield seven distinct determinants of fairness in performance evaluations. Ratings of the perceived importance of these determinants were factor analyzed, revealing two distinct factors---procedural determinants and distributive determinants. The implications of the reported determinants are discussed with respect to existing research and theory on justice in organizations.