International Academy Journal of Management Annals

International Academy Journal of Management Annals

Volume 6, Issue 2, PP 84-95, ISSN: 2382-9017, December, 2022
DOI: 272142562626
Double Blind Peer Reviewed International Research Journal
https://arcnjournals.org, [email protected]
©Academic Science Archives (ASA)

Interactional Justice and Employee Engagement of

Insurance Firms in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria
AdaGeorge, Precious, Dr. I. Wechie and Dr. Okpara, E.N.
Department of Management, Faculty of Management Sciences, Rivers State University, Nkpolu-
Oroworukwo, Port Harcourt, Nigeria

Abstract: This study addressed the relationship between interactional justice and employee engagement
of insurance firms in Port Harcourt, Rivers State. The study adopted a cross-sectional survey in its
investigation of the variables. Primary data was generated through structured questionnaire. The
population for the study comprised of an accessible population of 154 staff of selected insurance
establishments within Rivers State, Nigeria. The sample size of 111 was determined using calculated
using the Taro Yamane’s formula for sample size determination. The reliability of the instrument was
achieved by the use of the Cronbach Alpha coefficient with all the items scoring above 0.70. The
hypotheses were tested using the Spearman’s Rank Order Correlation Coefficient with the aid of
Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 23.0. The tests were carried out at a 95% confidence
interval and a 0.05 level of significance. The finding revealed that there is a significant relationship
between interactional justice and employee engagement of insurance firms in Port Harcourt, Rivers
State. Therefore, the study concludes that the practice of interactional justice by insurance firms in Port
Harcourt, Rivers State positively enhances employee engagement. Hence, the study recommends that
relationships within the workplace should be structured to allow for reciprocal respect and mutual
understanding of roles and positions. As such relationships should be transformative and based on
mutual respect and value for significant others within the organization.

Keywords: Interactional Justice, Employee Engagement, Dedication, Absorption, Vigour

© 2022. AdaGeorge, Precious, Dr. I. Wechie and Dr. Okpara, E.N. This is a research/review paper, distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 Unported License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0, permitting all non-commercial use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

INTRODUCTION
Employee engagement is currently drawing a lot of interest among various professionals,
practitioners and consultants in the business world (Saks, 2006). It has evolved to become one of
the most popular concepts in the field of organizational behaviour and management; forming a
fundamental factor and feature of employee survey instruments utilized in the generation of
social or management related data (Bailey, Madden, Alfes & Fletcher, 2017). Its interest grows
as a result of its key contributions to and implications for workplace relationships and the
organization as a whole. This is as the past decade has seen a surge in academic research on the
concept of engagement which has been lauded as the key to an organization’s effectiveness,

[email protected] 84
 International Academy Journal of Management Annals

competitiveness and a driver for an organization’s bottom-line performance (Macey &

Schneider, 2008; Saks & Gruman, 2014).
In one of the first empirical investigations on the possible predictors as well as consequences of
employee engagement within organizations, Saks (2006) observed that employee engagement
significantly impacts on workers satisfaction, employee commitment, lower turnover and also
organizational citizenship behaviour. Employee engagement is essential to employee
productivity and involvement. Employees who are high on their engagement scales tend to
contribute to more and in substantial degrees to their organizations. Their levels of task
performance and organizational citizenship behaviour will increase in line with their engagement
which further results in competitive advantages for organizations (Rich, Lepine & Crawford,
2010). Similarly, Harter, Schmidt and Hayes (2002) affirmed that from their meta-analysis study
which was carried out in 36 organizations that employee engagement is related to meaningful
organizational results comprising of internal and external customer satisfaction, service quality,
profit, employee retention and trust. Employee engagement can therefore be considered a factor
for the overall success of the organization as it results in improved business outcomes and higher
levels of employee productivity (Gruman & Saks, 2011; Alvi & Abbasi, 2012)
The conceptualization and meaning of the employee engagement construct has been varied
among different scholars and schools of thought and to date there is no generally accepted or
consensus on what engagement actually implies (Macey & Schneider, 2008; Saks & Gruman,
2014). This is as different constructs of employee engagement can be considered as distinct from
one another and have been advanced to capture or illustrate the fundamental features or aspects
employee engagement (Shuck, Adelson & Reio, 2016). Following the early works of Kahn
(1990) on the concept of engagement as it relates to the work role, several researchers have
developed several varieties of engagement constructs which cover mainly: work engagement, job
engagement, organizational engagement, intellectual or social engagement and, the subject of
this study, employee engagement sometimes as distinct and separate constructs or as components
of one or the other (Macey & Schneider, 2008; Shuck et al., 2016).
Kaplan and Norton (2004) noted that the transition of business activities and functions from the
industrial age to informational age has made organizations across the world increasingly
dependent upon the human capital which in turn best flourish when dealt with fair and just way.
Consistently high engagement by the employees in this competitive environment is a key to
achieving the coveted success for the business. As such Employers and managers today are,
therefore, more concerned with the attitude employees hold about their organizations. In this
sense, organizational justice has been considered of great interest from different quarters such as
from industrial psychology, behavioural management and human resource management as a
means of endearing organizations to their employees and ultimately making the organizations
more effective in terms of employee productivity (Cropanzano & Greenberg, 1997).
In this regard, organizational justice contributes and serves as a medium to infuse amongst the
employees a sense of belongingness, oneness and loyalty to ensure whether every member of an
organization is satisfied with and accepts the pattern of distribution of reward (distributive
justice), process of distribution (procedural justice) and with the top-down interpersonal
communication (interactional justice). Organizational justice has thus been addressed as a
significant factor in understanding and influencing workers behaviour within the context of an
organization (Hartman, et al., 1999). Understanding the different dimensions of employee
[email protected] 85
 International Academy Journal of Management Annals

engagement and the ways these are expressed such that they enhance the productivity of the
organization is imperative for the survival and success of the organization (Ngodo, 2008). In this
context, organizational justice has been regarded as one of the prime factors influencing the
engagement of employees.
Though in the western and other developed parts of the world, there exists large number of
studies have been produced which have focused on the effect of interactional justice on
employee engagement (Gruman & Saks, 2011; Alvi & Abbasi, 2012), however, very little
empirical studies have been conducted within the context of Nigeria. This is as there exist
significant dissimilarities and contextual factors which contribute to the distinct features of each
context.
Based on the foregoing, this study departs from previous studies as it extends the research on the
variables by testing hypotheses on workers within Insurance firms in Port Harcourt. This is as,
over the last two decades, labour and workplace related issues in Nigeria has gained increasing
importance in the world economic scene, due to its steady rise as well as opening up of its
markets, following liberalization and reforms of several sectors initiated in the early 2000s
(Budhwar & Varma, 2011). As one might expect, the liberalization of the Nigerian economy and
the resultant growth in competition among service firms has led to significant changes in
managerial policies and procedures, especially those related to human resource functions
(Budhwar & Sparrow, 1998; Sparrow & Budhwar, 1997). These development and features
necessitate the need for a study of this nature and form as a means of understanding and the role
or significance of the relationship between the variables of the study within such a context.
Hence, the purpose of this paper therefore was to examine the relationship between interactional
justice and employee engagement in insurance firms in Port Harcourt. The specific objectives of
the study included to:
i. Examine the relationship between interactional justice and dedication in insurance firms in Port
Harcourt?
ii. Examine the relationship between interactional justice and vigour in insurance firms in Port
Harcourt?
iii. Determine the relationship between interactional justice and absorption in insurance firms in Port
Harcourt?
Interactional Justice Employee Engagement

Dedication

Vigour

Absorption

Figure 1: conceptual model for the relationship between interactional justice and employee engagement

Source: Desk Research (2022)

[email protected] 86
 International Academy Journal of Management Annals

LITERATURE REVIEW
Theoretical Foundation
Equity Theory
Equity theory suggests that overpaid workers avoid any inequity reduction techniques that result
in (a) negative consequences to self-esteem or physical wellbeing or (b) devaluation of a good
job outcome such as job satisfaction or monetary compensation. The preferred method is a
psychological justification involving a higher valuation of one’s job inputs as indicated by the
results of the study (Perry, 1993). When employees are not satisfied with their job they react
negatively. This is consistent with what Adams has predicted in which workers who feel
inequitably underpaid may respond by raising their outcomes.

In a study of a manufacturing plant setting, some employees were temporary underpaid by

receiving a pay cut without any explanation. While employees experienced a 15% reduction in
pay, they reported feelings of underpayment and stole over twice as much compared to when
they felt equitably paid. It is possible that the pay cut produced anger and frustration for
employees, which motivated the act of theft. It is also possible that the act of theft was used as a
mean to restore equity. On the other side, when employees were provided with direct and honest
explanation, the feeling of underpayment inequity was reduced in comparison to the group who
did not receive any explanation (Greenberg, 1990). Berkowitz (1987) studied pay perceptions
and satisfaction among a random sample of employed men. They found that the more the
employees strongly believed their pay was fair; the more satisfied they were with their earnings.
In fact, pay equity was a strong predictor of pay satisfaction (Berkowitz, 1987). The idea that the
perceived fairness of one’s pay is a better predictor of pay satisfaction, then the absolute amount
of pay received is in keeping with the evidence showing that the concept of pay fairness and pay
satisfaction are strongly related (Scarpello, 1988).

According to equity theory people can readdress states of inequity cognitively, for instance,
altering their beliefs about the outcomes they received from their jobs. Equity theory asserts that
workers who are underpaid financially may be able to re-establish overall level of equity by
convincing themselves that they are well compensated with respect to other outcomes. A study
on 114 salaried clerical workers, whose pay was reduced, felt that they were inequitably
underpaid (Greenberg, 1989). Their pay cut created an underpayment inequity. In this case the
employees followed two approaches. First, enhanced the perceived importance of other
outcomes (work environment). Second, exaggerate the perceived level of these outcomes needed
to establish equity.

The equity theory further tells us that cognitive revaluation of a situation will minimize the
distressing effect of inequity (Greenberg, 1989). Heneman’s (1985) review showed that pay
satisfaction effects on overall levels of employee engagement and also has a big effect on
behaviours such as turnover, absenteeism, and the effort exerted on the job. However,
overpayment does not produce these results, usually underpayment does that consistently
(Mowday, 1987).

[email protected] 87
 International Academy Journal of Management Annals

Interactional Justice
The focus of research on justice gradually moved away from legal procedures towards
organisational procedures. One of the reasons for this was that in organisations a variety of
situations lend themselves to the use of procedures. Variations in these procedures and outcomes
occur with organisational decisions, for example, regarding selection and salaries (Nowakowski
& Conlon, 2005). The application of justice theory to organisations has made evident certain
issues in terms of procedures and outcomes. For example, in the same company the same
supposedly fair procedure could create very different employee reactions, depending on the way
in which different managers implement and enforce the procedure. Bies and Moag (1986)
initially referred to this aspect of justice as interactional justice

Employee Engagement
Employee engagement is a relatively new concept in the academic community but has been
heavily promoted by consulting companies (Wefald & Downey 2009). Scholars and practitioners
in the HRM field tend to agree that the fundamental concept of engagement may help explain
behaviour at work, but they present different definitions of it. Thus, while the concept of
employee engagement seems on the surface to be compelling, the concept lacks clarity in its
definition. Using Kahn’s (1990) seminal work as the point of departure, the concept of
engagement was first introduced by him to explain how people are personally engaged and
disengaged at work. He defined ‘job engagement’ as ‘the harnessing of organisational members’
selves to their work roles where people express themselves physically, cognitively, and
emotionally during role performances’ (Kahn 1990, p. 694). This definition clarified the concept
of engagement as the manifestation of being ‘present at work’. Being ‘present at work’ requires a
particular mental state.

In order to be engaged, an individual has to think, feel and act on their job. In other words, this
mental state constitutes a driving force which requires physical, cognitive and emotional
resources. These resources can be enhanced in certain psychological conditions: meaningfulness
(feeling that one is receiving a return on the investment of the self in the work role performance),
safety (a sense of being able to show and employ oneself without fear of negative consequences
to one’s self-image or status at work) and availability (a sense of possessing the physical,
emotional and psychological resources needed for investing oneself in the work role). These
psychological conditions serve as the mechanism by which individuals connect to their role
performance. In contrast, disengagement refers to withdrawal from the work role. The dominant
contribution by Kahn (1990) is the identification of the conditions in which engagement would
be likely to exist.

Maslach and Leiter (1997) reintroduced the concept of engagement as an energetic state of
involvement that is posited to be the opposite of burnout. Engaged employees who are seen as
energetic and take their work as a challenge appear as the opposite to burnt-out employees who
are stressed and see their work as demanding (Bakker, Schaufeli, Leiter & Taris 2008). Maslach
and Leiter (1997) added to their argument by asserting that, if an employee is not engaged, he or
she will be more likely to move to the other end of the continuum and experience burnout.
The state of engagement is characterised as having high energy (as opposed to exhaustion), high
involvement (as opposed to cynicism) and efficacy (as opposed to lack of efficacy). Gonzalez-
Roma, Schaufeli, Bakker and Lloret (2006) supported this view and further characterised it by

[email protected] 88
 International Academy Journal of Management Annals

activation, identification and absorption. Activation refers to having a sense of energy,

identification is a positive relationship towards work, and absorption is being fully immersed in
one’s job.
Dedication
The first element of employee engagement is dedication. This refers to being strongly involved
in one’s work and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride and
challenge (Schaufeli et al. 2002). Being dedicated to one’s job includes motivated acts such as
working hard and giving the best that one can at work. Work not only seems to be important but
also requires self-disciplined behaviour, as demonstrated by following rules, taking the initiative
to solve a problem at work and exceeding one’s personal job requirements (Van Scotter &
Motowidlo 1996). A person who is dedicated to work is veritably engaged to his or her job.

Vigour
The first element of employee engagement, vigour, is a positive affective response to an
employee’s interactions with the elements of the job as well as the environment. The concept of
vigour is drawn from the view that individuals share a basic motivation to obtain, retain and
protect the things that they value, such as resources (in this case, energetic resources) (Hobfoll
1989). Energetic resources refer to physical strength, emotional energy and cognitive liveliness.
According to Schaufeli et al. (2002), vigour is characterised by high levels of energy and mental
resilience while working, the willingness to invest effort in the work and persistence even in the
face of difficulties. Vigour relates to psychological capacities for exercising will power and
developing alternative ways to achievement, optimism in expecting future success, and resilience
to persist in the pursuit of goals. A person who is vigorous at work distinctly represents an
engaged employee.

Absorption
The third element of employee engagement is absorption. This describes the feeling of
contentment while performing work. Absorption represents a state of being fully concentrated on
and happily engrossed in work, a state in which time passes quickly and one has difficulty in
detaching oneself from work. This domain of employee engagement concerns the hedonic aspect
of work. For a person to be engaged, he or she should enjoy the work and find pleasure in
performing it. Thus, a happy and focused employee embodies an engaged employee. A study
using 30 in-depth interviews confirmed that absorption is a relevant aspect of engagement
(Schaufeli & Bakker 2001). The study argued that this facet of engagement relates to individual
efficacy through having the confidence to be absorbed and the resilience to be persistently
absorbed in a task.

Interactional Justice and Employee Engagement

Employees seek justice when communicating with their managers. Interactional justice, based on
peer-to-peer relationships, is the perception of justice among employees that is concerned with
informing employees of the subjects of organizational decisions, as well as about attitudes and
behaviours to which employees are exposed to during the application of organizational decisions
(Cohen-Charash and Spector, 2001). In other words, it expresses the quality of attitude and

[email protected] 89
 International Academy Journal of Management Annals

behaviours to which employees are exposed during the practice of (distributive and procedural)
operations by managers (Greenberg, 1993).
It is stated that interactional justice is composed of two sub-dimensions, interpersonal justice and
informational justice (Cropanzano et al., 2007). Interpersonal justice points at the importance of
kindness, respect and esteem in interpersonal relations, particularly in the relationships between
employees and managers. Informational justice, on the other hand, is about informing employees
properly and correctly in matters of organizational decision making.
According to Cojuharenco and Patient (2013), employees focus on job results when they
consider justice in the workplace, and they are likely to focus on the methods of communication
and reciprocal relationships within the organization when they consider injustice. If the
interactions of managers or manager representatives with employees occur in a just way,
employees will respond with higher job performance (Cropanzano et al., 2007). Interactional
justice can lead to strong interpersonal interactions and communication over time (Cropanzano et
al., 2007). According to social exchange theory, the positive or negative effect of employee-
administration relationships on job performance stems from interactional justice (Cohen-Charash
and Spector, 2001).
According to this theory, if employees are satisfied with their relationships with the
administration, apart from their formalized roles, they will volunteer to acquire additional roles,
which will increase their contextual performance. Some scholars, who argue that it is expensive
and time-consuming to motivate employees with financial incentives alone, highlight
interactional justice as another way to increase employee productivity (Cropanzano et al., 2002;
Rupp and Cropanzano, 2002; Cropanzano et al., 2007). According to Lind and Tyler (1988),
employees have concerns about their relationships with management on the basis of interactional
justice.
From the foregoing discourse, the study hypothesized thus:
Ho1: There is no significant relationship between interactional justice and dedication in
insurance firms in Port Harcourt
HO2: There is no significant relationship between interactional justice and vigour in insurance
firms in Port Harcourt
HO3: There is no significant relationship between interactional justice and absorption in
insurance firms in Port Harcourt?

METHODOLOGY
The study adopted a cross-sectional survey in its investigation of the variables. Primary data was
generated through structured questionnaire. The population for the study comprised of an
accessible population of 154 staff of selected insurance establishments within Rivers State,
Nigeria. The sample size of 111 was determined using calculated using the Taro Yamane’s
formula for sample size determination. The reliability of the instrument was achieved by the use
of the Cronbach Alpha coefficient with all the items scoring above 0.70. The hypotheses were
tested using the Spearman’s Rank Order Correlation Coefficient with the aid of Statistical
Package for Social Sciences version 23.0. The tests were carried out at a 95% confidence interval
and a 0.05 level of significance.

[email protected] 90
 International Academy Journal of Management Annals

DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

Table 1: Correlation Matrix for Interactional Justice and Employee Engagement
Interaction Dedication Vigour Absorption
Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .431** .545** .540**
Interaction Sig. (2-tailed) . .000 .000 .000
N 92 92 92 92
Correlation Coefficient .431** 1.000 .477** .607**
Dedication Sig. (2-tailed) .000 . .000 .000
N 92 92 92 92
Spearman's rho
Correlation Coefficient .545** .477** 1.000 .488**
Vigour Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 . .000
N 92 92 92 92
Correlation Coefficient .540** .607** .488** 1.000
Absorption Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .
N 92 92 92 92
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Source: Research survey, 2022

The result for this hypothetical statement indicates that there is a significant relationship between
the variables. The evidence shows that at a rho = .431 and a P < 0.05, interactional justice
enhances dedication. Consequently, the hypothesis is considered as false and therefore rejected
based on the lack of statistical evidence to prove otherwise. Also, the result for this hypothetical
statement indicates that there is a significant relationship between the variables. The evidence
shows that at a rho = .545 and a P < 0.05, interactional justice plays a significant role in driving
vigour. Consequently, the hypothesis is considered as false and therefore rejected based on the
lack of statistical evidence to prove otherwise. Finally, the result for this hypothetical statement
indicates that there is a significant relationship between the variables. The evidence shows that at
a rho = .540 and a P < 0.05, interactional justice impacts significantly on absorption.
Consequently, the hypothesis is considered as false and therefore rejected based on the lack of
statistical evidence to prove otherwise.

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
The result from the analysis indicates contrary to the hypothesis of no significant relationship.
The result of the analysis indicates that there is a significant level of moderation by
organizational culture on the relationship between organizational justice and employee
engagement in the insurance firms in Port Harcourt. The evidence suggests that organizational
culture enhances and significantly influences the extent to which expressions of justice impact on
the engagement levels of the staff of the insurance firms. The evidence corroborates the findings
of Romualdas and Vida (2006) who argued that organizational culture contributes substantially
with regards to the interpretations of systems and organizational features or attributes. In this
sense organizational culture is a unifying platform that harmonizes the organizations position
with that of its individual members.
Furthermore, Yafang (2011) affirmed in his study that organizational culture provides the
necessary framework and mental path in which work relationships are designed and in which
actions or expressions such as organizational justice. The implications of this finding are that

[email protected] 91
 International Academy Journal of Management Annals

organizational culture determines and the adoption and sustainability of the justice system of the
organization, the way they are expressed and of course the way they are also interpreted. Culture
also presents the organization with a well-established format that guides the design of its justice
systems based on its values, belief systems and behaviour or actions that are considered as
norms.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Therefore, the study concludes that the practice of interactional justice by insurance firms in Port
Harcourt, Rivers State positively enhances employee engagement.
Hence, the study recommends that relationships within the workplace should be structured to
allow for reciprocal respect and mutual understanding of roles and positions. As such
relationships should be transformative and based on mutual respect and value for significant
others within the organization.
REFERENCES
Abbasi, A. S., & Alvi, A. K. (2012). Impact of organizational justice on employee engagement in
banking sector of Pakistan. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 12(5), 643-649.
Abbasi, A. S., & Alvi, A. K. (2012). Impact of organizational justice on employee engagement in
banking sector of Pakistan. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 12(5), 643-649.
Bailey, C., Madden, A., Alfes, K., & Fletcher, L. (2017). The meaning, antecedents and
outcomes of employee engagement: A narrative synthesis. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 19(1), 31-53.
Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W.B., Leiter, M.P. & Taris, T.W. (2008). Work engagement: an
emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Work and Stress, 22(3), 187-200.
Berkotiz (1987). Pay, equity, job gratification, and comparisons in pay satisfaction. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 72, 544-551.
Bies, R.J., & Moag, J.F. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. J.
Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds), Research on negotiations in
organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 43-55). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Budhwar, P. S., & Sparrow, P. R. (1998). National factors determining Indian and British HRM
practices: an empirical study. In Management and International Review (pp. 105-121).
Gabler Verlag, Wiesbaden.
Budhwar, P. S., & Varma, A. (2011). Emerging HR management trends in India and the way
forward. Organizational Dynamics, 40(4), 317-325.
Cohen-Charash, Y. & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: a meta-
analysis’. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 278–321.
Cojuharenco, I., & Patient, D. (2013). Workplace fairness versus unfairness: Examining the
differential salience of facets of organizational justice. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 86(3), 371-393.

[email protected] 92
 International Academy Journal of Management Annals

Cropanzano, R. and Greenberg, J. (1997) Progress in Organizational Justice: Tunneling through

the Maze. In: Cooper, C.L. and Robertson, I.T., Eds., International Review of Industrial
and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 12, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 317-372.
Cropanzano, R., Bowen, D. E., & Gilliland, S. W. (2007). The management of organizational
justice. Academy of Management Perspectives, 21(4), 34-48.
Cropanzano, R., Prehar, C. A., & Chen, P. Y. (2002). Using social exchange theory to
distinguish procedural from interactional justice. Group Organization Management, 27(3),
324–351. DeConinck
Gonzalez-Roma, V., Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B. & Lloret, S. (2006). Burnout and work
engagement: independent factors or opposite poles? Journal of Vocational Behaviour,
68(1), 165-174
Greenberg, J. (1989). Cognitive reevaluation of outcomes in response to underpayment
inequity. Academy of management journal, 32(1), 174-184.
Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of
Management, 16(2), 399-432.
Greenberg, J. (1993). The social side of fairness: interpersonal and informational classes of
organizational justice, In Cropanzano R. (ed.), justice in the workplace: Approaching
fairness in human resource management, 79–103. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee
engagement. Human Resource Management Review, 21(2), 123-136.
Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee
engagement. Human Resource Management Review, 21(2), 123-136.
Heneman, H. G. (1985). Pay satisfaction. Research in Personnel and Human Resources
Management, 3, 115-139.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2002). Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General
Psychology, 6(4), 307.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at
work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692-724.
Kaplan, R. S., Kaplan, R. E., & Norton, D. P. (2004). Strategy maps: Converting intangible
assets into tangible outcomes. Harvard Business Press.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New
York:Plenum
Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and
organizational Psychology, 1(1), 3-30.
Maslach, C. & Leiter, M. (1997). The truth about burnout. Jossey-Bass Publ.

[email protected] 93
 International Academy Journal of Management Annals

Mowday, R. T. (1987). Equity theory predictions of behaviour in organizations. In R. M.

Pritchard, R. D. (1969). Equity theory: A review and critique. Organizational Behaviour
and Human Performance, 4, 176-211.
Ngodo, O.E. (2008) Procedural justice and trust: The link in the transformational leadership
organisational outcomes relationship. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 4(1),
82-100.
Nowakowski, J.M., & Conlon, D.E. (2005). Organizational justice: Looking back, looking
forward. International Journal of Conflict Management, 16 (1), 4 – 24.
Perry, L. S. (1993). Effects of inequity on job satisfaction and self-evaluation in a national
sample of African-American. Journal Social Psychology, 13(4), 565-574.
Rich, B. L., Lepine, J. A., & Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects
on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617-635.
Romualdas G & Vida V. (2006). Analysis of organizational culture dimensions impacting
performance. Journal of Business Economics and Management ,7 (4), 201-211.
Rupp, D. E., & Cropanzano, R. (2002). The mediating effects of social exchange relationships in
predicting workplace outcomes from multifoci organizational justice. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 925–946.
Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 6(1), 19-38.
Saks, A. M., & Gruman, J. A. (2014). What do we really know about employee
engagement? Human Resource Development Quarterly, 25(2), 155-182.
Scarpello, V. (1988). Pay satisfaction and pay fairness: are they the same? Paper presented at the
meeting of the society for industrial, organizational psychology, Dallas, TX.
Schaufeli, W. B. & Bakker, A. B. (2001). Work and well-being: towards a positive approach in
occupational health psychology. Gedrag & Organisatie, 14, 229- 253.
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B. & Van Rhenen, W. (2009). How changes in job demands and
resources predict burnout, work engagement, and sickness absenteeism. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 30(7), 893-917.
Shuck, B., Adelson, J. L., & Reio Jr, T. G. (2017). The employee engagement scale: Initial
evidence for construct validity and implications for theory and practice. Human Resource
Management, 56(6), 953-977.
Van Scotter, J., & Motowidlo, S. (1996). Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as separate
facets of contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), 525-531.
Wefald, A. J. & Downey, R. G. (2009a). Construct dimensionality of engagement and its relation
with satisfaction. Journal of Psychology, 143(1), 91-111.

[email protected] 94
 International Academy Journal of Management Annals

Yafang, T. (2011). Relationship between organizational culture, leadership behavior and job
satisfaction. Journal of Services Research, 23 (2), 126-140.

[email protected] 95