The Relationship of Social Network and the Organizational Justice Strategies in Campus Media News Gathering
Chao, Chih-Yang1
Department of Industrial Education and Technology National Chunghua University of Education
Chunghwa, Taiwan, R.O.C. cychao@cc.ncue.edu.tw
Yen, Chia-Sung2
Department of Communication National Chung Cheng University Min-Hsiung, Chia-yi, Taiwan, R.O.C.
teljsy@ccu.edu.tw
Yang, Shih-Chun3
Department of Industrial Education and Technology National Chunghua University of Education
Chunghwa, Taiwan, R.O.C. yaksbee@gmail.com
Tin, I-Hsieng4
Department of Information Management, National University of Kaohsiung.
700, Kaohsiung University Rd., Nanzih District, 811. Kaohsiung, Taiwan, R.O.C.. iting@nuk.edu.tw
Abstract- It is important to perform teamwork with high organizational
justice. When some unfair events happen, it is counterproductive not only to the performance of the organization, but to organizational efficacy as well. Presses are time-conscious organizations, but they have to face the difficulty of resource distribution. The main purpose of this study is to examine organizational justice in presses. Because presses are so different from other organizations, there must be some kinds of important elements composing their organizational justice.
uncertainty of those events. If presses emphasize too much on the equity of distribution, it is possible that they may miss the deadline, or even lose the news. So presses seem to need another kind of evaluation to appraise their organizational justice. In this study, we expect to use the techniques of social network analysis to know if campus media crew would have an easy way to pass the examination set by editors if journalists are known very much by their managers. The analysis results will then be used to construct a mechanism of how the editing policy goes when journalists are good friends of editors. We hope that it would be as useful as the people who work in REAL media. Furthermore, we expect that finding how students perform when they face the assignments of news gathering, and what strategies to do justice in this media could affect students’ self-efficacy.
Keywords - organizational justice, human resource management,
organization behavior, equity theory, social network analysis, learning performance, self-efficacy
INTRODUCTION
According to many studies, the operation of human resources in a business relies on the system design inside the organization. Whether the system is fair and just is pivotal to human resource management in an organization. A fair and just system is helpful for the interaction and resource sharing among the members, enhancing cohesion and efficiency at the same time.
Media is an industry which races against time. Reporters use the word “deadline” to describe that if they can’t finish work in time, it seems that their organization is just like facing “death”. With the development and progress of technology, Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) are widely used among medium, which not only accelerates the presentation of content, but gives rise to some administrative transformations in response to that acceleration as well. For example, electronic news platform, claimed to be instrumental in communication, indicates the sources of articles, main points that they would like to present, and even become a platform for reporters to communicate with each other.
Different from other organizations, presses value deadline highly. Many businesses can have a meeting before carrying on a plan, and decide how to execute after in-depth discussion. Nonetheless, since reporters face many unexpected events, the supervisor may not always take organizational justice into account when assigning works, or if the supervisor insists on organizational justice, the performance and efficiency in the organization may thus be negatively affected. The subject of this study is campus media, in an attempt to explain the relationship between organizational justice and campus media management.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Organizational justice referred to the extent to which people perceive organizational events as being fair [1]. In organizations, justice was thought to be related to the antecedents and consequences of the procedures used to determine outcomes and the fairness of outcome allocations [2]. Even though there are still debates over types of justice, it is widely regarded that organizational justice takes three major forms: distributive justice, procedural justice, and interactional justice.
A. Distributive justice: It was considered to be the first justice dimension and referred to employee perceptions of specific outcomes [3]. For example, the perceived fairness of decision outcomes such as pay [1]. Distributive justice was promoted by following appropriate norms (e.g., equity, equality, or need) to allocate resources [4]. It was more than a ranking system of, for example, an individual’s economic or social compensation for their work contributions, but rather it attempted to precisely quantify the relative equity of the comparison [5].
B. Procedural justice: It referred to employee perceptions of whether the process used to make the decision was fair itself [6]; namely, the perceived fairness of the procedures used to make decisions. Procedural justice was fostered by the use of certain procedural rules such as granting voice in the decision-making processes (i.e., process control) and making decisions in a consistent, accurate, and correctable manner which
suppresses bias [7][8] . Unlike distributive justice perceptions that focused on outcomes, the perspective of procedural justice was on the perceived fairness of the processes used to render decision [5]. As part of Thibaut and Walker’s procedural justice theory [8], procedural justice perceptions arising from work was thought to be fundamental to personnel research and practice [9]. Folger and Greenberg [10] believed that procedural justice was best understood and studied from within an organizational context.
C. Interactional justice: It referred to employee perceptions of whether organizational agents implement procedures fairly by treating individuals respectfully and by explaining decisions adequately [11]; that is, the perceived fairness of how decisions are made by authority figures [1]. Interactional justice had an interpersonal component, fostered by dignified and respectful treatment , and an informational component, fostered by adequate and honest explanations [1][12][13].
The MNM suggested that people concerned about justice because it helped to satisfy their needs. David M. Mayer, Mary Bardes, and Ronald F. Piccolo[14] found that organizational justice was positively related to job satisfaction.
Another study dimension of organizational justice was to focus on the relationship between justice and product efficiency. Many studies had found that positive organizational justice could improve internal communication, thus optimizing organizational performance [15]. Justice was the reflection of contemporary society and the right way towards improving organizational efficiency [16]. Justice was the purpose itself and guidance for other operations [17]. Justice was not only important for an organization but for the well being of all workers [18]. As a result, justice was an important factor in an organization due to its impact on work effectiveness [19]. In addition, justice was a social phenomenon which not only affected the social life of employees but their professional activities [20].
Many studies had proved that crews’ perception of justice could improve their work attitude and behaviors [21][22][23][24][25][26]. In campus, most studies of organizational justice emphasized on teachers and
students. Robbins and Jeffords indicated that students majoring in management education long concerned about the fairness of procedures used, as well as the outcomes and treatment they received in the classroom [27]. Geist and Hoy suggested that teacher’s trust towards the organization provided various advantages such as encouraging cooperation, reducing conflict and dissatisfaction and building teachers’ self confidence [28].
The research of Stephanie L. Guy proposed that school leaders might influence students’ achievement through the governance structure established within the school, supervision and support from the instructional program, thus creating a positive school climate that defined the school's mission [29]. A significant positive relationship was found between organizational justice and academic press. Robbins and Jeffords indicated that procedural justice was the only prominent predictor of overall course evaluations in the research of classroom justice and management education [27].
When employees felt unfairly treated, it would have a negative effect on their organizational commitment, job performance and employee satisfaction, thus reducing their willingness to assist their coworkers [30] . Moreover, they might engage in deviant behaviors like sabotage in the workplace [31].
Previous researchers especially pointed out the influence of justice on the output and efficiency in an organization. Sweeney and McFarlin mentioned the distributive justice in an organization in fact could predict individual output efficiency [32]; in other words, the efficiency of individuals depended on the soundness of distributive justice. As for the procedural justice, it affected organizational commitment of individuals, and in turn, influenced their output based on their perception of organizational justice, possibly for the reason that they perceived whether their organization treated them fairly or not in terms of procedural justice. Given this, if employees deemed the procedures in their organization were just, they would still work hard to stand themselves out even though they were not content with present job.
and behavior relationships may exist between the [33], and here's behavior under the definition of who is included individuals, organizations, events or objects. Each behavior in the community is treated as a node on the network (node), while the node with the node places the way to connect it straight up, to express the relationship between nodes, which are combinations of nodes and lines into the graphics is the social network structure. Through social network analysis, we can try to understand the relationships of the target state actors and characteristics, and to understand these relationships affect the individual or organization [34] [33] [35]. In social network research has three elements must be noted, these include: actors (actors), joint (ties), relationships (relationship), actors in the definition of a network of people and things as the main network; joint (ties) for the actors and to establish a relationship between actors must be through some kind of way (path) to reach directly or indirectly, to establish the relationship, and the link unit that is commonly known as such, jointly and severally according to their "strength "Even into contact with strong ties (Strong Tie, Weak Tie), and so analysis of the sub-groups (Subgroups); relationship (relationship) for the network link between a particular type, means between two actors as The existence of a relationship with each other and influence each other, and different types of relationships or relationship content will affect the network show a different face [35]. Through social network analysis to describe the social network indicator diagram constructed between data description, the most important indicators include:
1. Network size (size): representative of the nodes in the network architecture or quantity of the total number of links.
2. Network diameter (diameter): representative of the two nodes in the network architecture between the up link by volume is the diameter. 3. Network density (density): on behalf of the network are closely
inter-individual level.
4. Central (centrality): used to measure the individual's influence over the size, can detect an individual access to resources, control of resources, the possibility of the structural properties. The central measure is divided into degree centrality (degree centrality), close to the central (closeness centrality) and betweenness centrality (betweenness centrality), three forms of degree centrality is using
networks central region, we can see the size of individual control; close to the center is the measurement of individual and other individuals in close proximity degree, a value close to the center of the higher, faster to get the message on behalf of individuals, betweenness centrality is a measure one node exists in any of the other two nodes on the path of an important level [36] [37].
Social network analysis of the data collection method is that all research-related information collected after the completion, by sampling different from the traditional way, to explore the intersection between people's patterns, identified actors social network information, and understand the characteristics of actors relationships. The study try by this method to classify the campus media executives and reporters of the network of relationships, and understand the network of relationships with the newsgate-keepers for news review the relationship between the mechanisms.
From the above overview, we may find that current research on organizational justice focuses on whether “justice” can boost members’ morale in an organization or not. This paper, as a result, selects campus media, which simulates media framework in Taiwan, as subjects, and aims to examine following research questions:
(1) Whether the overall work efficiency will be lower or not if the soundness of organizational justice is taken into account?
(2) Whether student media workers’ self-efficacy will decline or not if organizational justice is taken into account?
(3) Whether digital information platform can elevate student media workers’ achievements as well as their consciousness of organizational justice or not?
METHODOLOGY
The subject of this research is a group of juniors in department of communication at a national university in Taiwan. These students took a media practice course, which divided them into different groups according to the current framework in media industry within Taiwan, including editors-in-chief, associate editors, editors, interview directors and reporters. Students performed their interview and writing works,
presented news story in form of text, and published online on a weekly basis. So far there are 54 people in that campus media group, from which 40 people took a part in the real news production, 14 are indoor office workers responsible for such works as website maintenance, visual arts design of web pages, broadcasting and so on.
In this course, apart from doing his work, each student had to hand in a work report as feedback. To serve as a reference for the instructor to adjust teaching, the work report may include difficulties they encountered while doing interview, interaction problems between reporters and cadre members and so forth.
The design methodology for this study includes both content analysis and depth(in-depth) interview. First, students taken this course had to compose a work report every week, on which researcher would later employ the content analysis. The researcher had collectively read 355 work reports from past 7 weeks (yet some students fail to submit it on time) and then identified the problems about organizational justice in campus media from the bunch. The interview outline of this study will be presented after fixing the abovementioned problems.
There are 7 objects, including 1 editor-in-chief, 2 interview directors and 4 reporters, involved in this in-depth interview, and they are randomly selected by category. The student reporters of the campus media are divided into four branches which covering political, social, life, sport and recreation issues. Each branch contains 6 to 8 reporters, from which the researcher randomly chooses 1 reporter. Furthermore, 2 interview directors, each director within 4 branches, are selected in accordance with the principle of proportionality. To understand the administrative aspects, either the editor-in-chief or the associate editor has to participate in the interview.
Therefore, the total number of interviewees in this in-depth interview is 7. The idea of this interview is mainly about organizational justice and organizational management, and it takes approximately 30 minutes. To prevent the interviewees from feeling stressed or disturbed by other external elements, the interview takes place in the researcher’s laboratory and they won’t be informed of the research topic and orientation in advance. Throughout the interview, the researcher can figure out whether
the website background system of this campus media is applicable for editing, interview and communication.
Aiming to avoid meaning distortions due to the transcript of the interview, the interview record is first transcribed by a student and a teacher who are familiar with the course. Next, the third person helps guarantee that there is no difference between the interview record and the transcript. While interviewing, the researcher has strived to record interviewees’ every eye contact and body language to avoid errors.
RESEARCH RESULTS AND FINDINGS
This research contains 355 work reports from students and 54 of which have mentioned about the equity and justice concerning the operation of campus media. The average number of words regarding equity and justice is 255, approximately one-third, in every work report. After finishing analyzing the content of students’ work reports, the researcher then proceeds to conduct in-depth interviews with 3 cadre members(naming A, B, C) and 4 reporters(naming D, E, F, G).
First, in conducting social network analysis, first we must
first establish the relationship matrix and graphics. In this
study, a National University's campus in Taiwan, and practical
courses set up by the media, for example, each node on campus are all
members of the media, the relationship between members of
the response is based on press release is
being returned. If members have more than three or more
response relationship, the value of their relationship as that of 1; if no
response relationship between community member
members, represented by the 0, 0 and 1 values which constitute a
matrix, then through converted into a matrix relationship between
social network mapping chart, as shown in Figure 1, we can see the result of the relationship between members of each other.
Figure1: Relationship between members of the campus media.
Size Density Distance
12 0.7879 0.631
Table1: Analysis of social network indicators in campus media.
In this study, we use social network analysis software UCINET 6 for data analysis, the results archive into Table 1. According to Table 1, the social
network size of 12, that is to discuss response and there
are interactions related to the number of 12, through
the social network density, can see that the network between members of
the close level of 0.7879, close level also refers to
the associated members of each other, the greater the closely as sociated, the greater the degree.
Other research results are as follows:
A. Even though the reporters think highly of equity and justice in campus media, the fact that the reporters are classmates with cadre members limits them from behaving bureaucratically, thus causing difficulties in administration. Moreover, the equity issue will be emphasized more often.
…In my opinion, we might as well make sure that everyone has the chance to be a cadre member so they would have nothing to complain about. (Work report No. 38)
Some cadre members don’t think that job assignment should be totally based on the organizational justice in order to operate the student media.
can put up with a little violation such as giving someone a favor, that’s fine with me. (Interviewee C)
Sometimes when the cadre members of the campus media are working, they have to consider about their relationship with others. That’s why they may give the job to those they are close with.
…The stuff art editor is working right now should have been assigned to the production team. But I will ask the engineer to do it because of our personal friendship. I want to find someone I can trust so that my work can be done sooner. (Interviewee A)
Some interviewees believe that in emergencies, flaws in justice are accepted in order to save time and meet the deadline, though cadre members should provide explanations for the event afterwards to avoid distrust among students.
…they should explain their considerations afterwards, not everyone was there after all. But it’s not necessary to gather all the students to take a vote on this issue, I can accept it!
(Interviewee D)
The findings of the interviews show that considering organizational justice will indeed reduce the student media’s work effectiveness and the overall operational efficiency.
B. Whether the overall work efficiency will be lower or not if the soundness of organizational justice is taken into account? According to the interviews, a student’s attitude toward curriculum, instead of the organizational justice, turns out to be the main factor in determining one’s learning efficacy.
…I would regard justice as the minimum standard for reporters. But if you are asking better performance, you have to encourage them according to their individual differences. (Interviewee B)
Some cadre members think that some injustices are systematically inevitable. Diligent students will try their best to overcome injustices while students escaping their lessons are the major complainer of the
flaws in justice.
…I think responsible people will always do things as perfectly as possible while those reluctant to make efforts will merely criticize when their rights are violated. (Interviewee A)
C. Whether digital information platform can elevate student media workers’ achievements as well as their consciousness of organizational justice or not? The result of interviews shows that students think the digital platform lacks the immediacy badly, which is why the platform fails to help improve students’ perception of organizational justice.
…It seems that the platform does not work as effectively as expected. Not everyone will pay attention to it. For those who don’t bother to read the posts, how could they receive the new information? (Interviewee G)
CONCLUSION & DISCUSSION
The results showed that networks of relationships does the media for campus interviews and press releases have an impact on the upload process, the majority of the students were exhibited by the test is the more interpersonal networking frequent interaction will become
more frequent, so the manuscript by the speed will be accelerated. The
microscopic discussion of organizational justice is focused on individual member of the organization, and the macroscopic part is focused on how the strategic alliance works, which is not included in the present study. The three dimensions of organizational justice proposed in this research are “procedural justice,” “distributive justice,” and “interactional justice.” Previous studies mostly apply an integrative thinking to the organizational justice and emphasize that the organizational justice has positive effects on the businesses. However, the present study based on campus media finds that, in fact, the implementation of organizational justice doesn’t necessarily have positive effect on campus media nor improve individual worker’s self-efficacy. The main reason is that the characteristics of media are different from those of general organizations’.
Related researches often include the “leadership style” of an organization as one of the variables, but given that the subjects of this research are
students taking the campus media course instead of full time job workers, and that the ranks in campus media, such as managers and workers, do not exist actually, “leadership style” is not included in the present research. Furthermore, applying the theory of leadership style to the on-line media generates limited results which is only for media educators’ reference.
REFERENCES
[1] H. S. Kim, “A multilevel study of antecedents and a mediator of employee-organization relationships,” Journal of public relations research, vol. 19, pp. 167-197, April 2007. [2] R. Folger, R. Cropanzano, Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage, 1998.
[3] J. Greenberg, J. A. Colquitt (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2005
[4] J. A. Colquitt, J. Greenberg, “Organizational justice: A fair assessment of the literature.” In J. Greenberg (Eds.), Organizational behavior: The state of science. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., pp. 165-210, 2003.
[5] A. L. Casas, Jr., P. Cooke, W. Secrest, D. Eckstein, “Human resources professionals’ justice perceptions and organizational justice”, 2007.
[6] N. D. Cole, G. P. Latham, “Effects of training in procedural justice on perceptions of disciplinary fairness by unionized employees and disciplinary subject matter experts”. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.82, pp. 699-705, 1997.
[7] G.S. Leventhal, “What should be done with equity theory?”, In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. G. Willis (Eds.). Social exchange: Advances in theory and research, pp. 27-55, New York: Plenum, 1980.
[8] J. W. Thibaut, L. Walker, “Procedural justice: A psychological perspective”. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 1975.
[9] R. Cropanzano, Z. S. Byrne,D. R. Bobocel, D. E. Rupp, (2001). “Moral virtues, fairness heuristics, social entities, and other denizens of organizational justice”. Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol.58, pp. 164-209, 2001.
[10] R. Folger, J. Greenberg, “Procedural justice: An interpretive analysis of personnel systems”. In K. Rowland & G. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personal and human resources management, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, vol.3, pp. 141-183, 1985.
[11] R. Folger, R. Cropanzano, “Organizational justice and human resource management”. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage, 1998.
[12] R. J. Bies, “Interactional injustice: The sacred and the profane”. In J. Greenberg & Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice, Stanford University Press, pp. 89–118, 2001.
[13] R. J. Bies,J. E. Moag, (1986). “Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness”. In R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman(Eds.). Research on negotiations in organizations, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. vol.1, pp.43-55, 1986.
[14] D. M. Mayer, M. Bardes, R. F. Piccolo, “Do servant-leaders help satisfy follower needs? An organizational justice perspective”. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, vol.17, pp. 180-197, April, 2008.
[15] M. A. Konovsky, “Understanding procedural justice and its impact on business organizations”. Journal of Management, vol. 26, pp. 489-511, July, 2000.
[16] J. Greenberg, “Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The 87hidden cost of pay cuts”. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 75, pp. 561-568, 1990.
[17] C. D. Beugre. “Analyzing the effects of perceived fairness on organizational commitment and workplace aggression”. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Tory, New York.
[18] W. L. Poole, “Intersections of organizational justice and identity under the new policy direction: Important understandings for educational leaders”. International Journal of Leadership in Education, vol.11, pp 23-42. January, 2008.
[19] B. H. Sheppard, R. J. Lewicki, J. W. Minton, “Organizational justice: The search of fairness in the workplace”. New York: Lexington Books, 1992.
[20] C.D. Beugre, “Managing Fairness in Organizations”. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc., 1998.
[21] R. H. Moorman, “Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship?” Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 76, No.6, pp. 845-855,1991.
[22] J. Barling, M. Phillips, “Interactional, Formal, and Distribution Justice in the Workplace: A Exploratory Study”, Journal of Psychology Interdisciplinary & Applied, vol.127, issue6, p. 649–656, 1993.
[23] J. L. Farh, P. C. Earley, S. C. Lin, “Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese society”. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 42, pp. 421-444, 1997.
[24] D. P. Skarlicki, R. Folger, “Retaliation in the workplace: The roles of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice”. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 82, No. 3, pp. 434-443, 1997.
[25] R. H. Moorman, B. P. Niehoff, “Does perceived organizational support mediate the relationship between procedural justice and organizational citizenship behavior”. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 41, No.3, pp. 351-357, 1998.
[26] D. P. Skarlicki, R. Folger, “Personality as a moderator in the relationship between fairness and retaliation”, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 42, No.1, pp.100-108, 1999. [27] T. L. Robbins, B. C. Jeffords, 2009）. “Practising what we preach: Justice and ethical
instruction in management education”. Ethics and Education, vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 93–102, 2009. [28] J. Geist, K. Hoy, (2003). “Cultivating a culture of trust: Enabling school structure, teacher professionalism, and academic press”. Journal of Educational Management, vol. 28, No.6, pp. 421-434, 2003.
[29] S. L. Guy, （2007）. “Organizational justice perceptions in virginia high schools: A study of its relationship to school climate and faculty trust. William and Mary in Virginia, U.K.: College of William and Mary in Virginia Press, 2007.
[30] M. Ambrose, (2002). Contemporary justice research: A new look at familiar questions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 89, pp. 803‐812, 2002.
[31] M. Ambrose, M. Seabright, M. Schminke, “Sabotage in the workplace: The role of organizational justice”. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 89, pp. 947–965, 2002.
[32] P. D. Sweeney, D. B. McFarlin, (1992). “Distributive and procedure justice as predictors of satisfaction with personal and organizational outcome”. Academy of Management Journal, vol.35, No 3, 626-637, 1992.
[33]. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G. and Freeman, L. C. (2002)” Ucinet forWindows: Software for Social Network Analysis.” Harvard, MA: AnalyticTechnologies. [34]. Freeman, L., “Centrality in Social Networks: I. Conceptual Clarification,” Social
Networks,1979.
[35]. Wasserman, Stanley Faust, Katherine. (1994). “Social Network Analysis : Methods and Applications.”New York: Cambridge University Press.
[36]. Mitchell, J. C. (1969). “Social networks and urban
[37]. Scott, J. (2002), “Social Network Analysis: Critical Concepts in Sociology,” New York, Routledge.
