The aim of this research was to determine whether organizational justice determines the level of resilience of academic staff as well as the institution, and whether different aspects of organizational justice are related to the resilience of academic staff and the higher education institution. The study included 206 participants, academics from various universities in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The results imply the existence of a statistically significant correlation between organizational justice and the level of academic staff resilience. However, a hierarchical regression analysis showed that staff resilience is determined by distributive justice (β=0.252, t=3.708, p=000), while procedural justice (0.693) and interactive justice (0.848) are not significant predictors of academic staff resilience. The results also imply that there is a statistically significant relationship between organizational justice (distributive, interactive and procedural justice) and the resilience of the higher education institution (robustness, agility and integrity). In addition, the results of the hierarchical regression suggest that organizational resilience with its all three dimensions is determined by distributive justice as an organizational justice segment, while robustness as an organizational resilience segment is determined by procedural justice, which is not the case when other organizational justice segments are taken into account. The paper provides an overview of the obtained results with an emphasis on the importance of organizational justice and resilience.
Keywords: organizational justice, staff resilience, higher education institution resilience, academic staff.
References
1.
Slišković A i B, I., U A. Slišković K, Burić I, Adorić VĆ, I. Tucak Junaković MN. Zbirka psihologijskih skala i upitnika. Svezak. 9:7–13.
2.
Lengnick-Hall CA, Beck TE. Adaptive Fit Versus Robust Transformation: How Organizations Respond to Environmental Change. Journal of Management. 2005;31(5):738–57.
3.
Leto A, Dautbegović A. Teachers’ Perception of Distributive Organizational Justice and Exposure to Stress in the Academic Context. Društvene i humanističke studije (Online). 2023;8(1(22)):525–44.
4.
Leventhal GS. What Should Be Done with Equity Theory? Social Exchange. 1980. p. 27–55.
5.
March J. How Decisions Happen in Organizations. Human-Computer Interaction. 1991;6(2):95–117.
6.
March JG. The Evolution of Evolution. Evolutionary Dynamics of Organizations. 1994. p. 39–50.
7.
Markovic M. Uloga interpretacijskog procesa u razvoju emocionalnog odgovora na povredu psihološkog ugovora / The Role of The Interpretation Process in The Development of An Emotional Response to A Psychological Contract Breach. Journal of the Faculty of Philosophy in Sarajevo / Radovi Filozofskog fakulteta u Sarajevu, ISSN 2303-6990 on-line. (25):237–73.
8.
Marković M. Psihološki ugovor: implikacije za praksu upravljanja ljudskim potencijalima u visokoobrazovnom kontekstu.
9.
Silvernail KD, Graso M, Salvador RO, Miller JK. Perceived fairness of faculty governance: a study of 51 countries. Higher Education. 2021;82(3):615–33.
10.
Kantur D. Measuring Organizational Resilience: A Scale Development. Pressacademia. 2015;4(3):456–456.
11.
Sutcliffe KM i TJV. Organizing for Resilience. Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline. :94–110.
12.
Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics.
13.
R. T, Well-Being. Resilience and a new psychological contract.
14.
Tardif M, Lessard C. Teaching Work: Elements for a Theory of Teaching as a Profession of Human Interactions.
15.
Thibaut JW i W, L. Procedural justice: A psychological analysis.
16.
Windle G. What is resilience? A review and concept analysis. Reviews in Clinical Gerontology. 2011;21(2):152–69.
17.
Zaluški K. Doživljaj pravednosti profesora i kolega u predviđanju angažiranosti studenata.
18.
Adams JS. Inequity In Social Exchange. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 1965. p. 267–99.
19.
Jakopec A, Sušanj Z. Effects of (Mis)Alignment Between Supervisory and Organizational Justice. Drustvena istrazivanja. 2014;23(4):615–37.
20.
Hasanagić A. Priručnik za studente o korištenju SPSS programa namjenjen ta statističke obrade podataka.
21.
Greenberg J. The social side of fairness: Interpersonal and informational classes of organizational justice. In: Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management.
22.
Galinec V. Pravednost u organizacijskom i akademskom kontekstu. Društvene znanosti- psihologija rada. Završni rad Sveučilište Josipa Jurja Strossmayera Filozofski fakultet Osijek.
23.
Flach FF. Resilience: The Art of Being Flexible.
24.
Dundar T, Tabancali E. The Relationship between Organizational Justice Perceptions and Job Satisfaction Levels. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2012;46:5777–81.
25.
Duchek S. Organizational resilience: a capability-based conceptualization. Business Research. 2020;13(1):215–46.
26.
Cropanzano R, Prehar CA, Chen PY. Using Social Exchange Theory to Distinguish Procedural from Interactional Justice. Group & Organization Management. 2002;27(3):324–51.
27.
Coutu DL. How resilience works. Harvard Business Review. 80:46–5.
28.
Colquitt JA. Organizational Justice. The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Psychology, Volume 1. p. 526–47.
29.
Colquitt JA, Conlon DE, Wesson MJ, Porter COLH, Ng KY. Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology. 86(3):425–45.
30.
Bies RJ, Moag JF. Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. Research on Negotiations in Organizations. 1:43–55.
31.
Bento F, Giglio Bottino A, Cerchiareto Pereira F, Forastieri de Almeida J, Gomes Rodrigues F. Resilience in Higher Education: A Complex Perspective to Lecturers’ Adaptive Processes in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Education Sciences. 11(9):492.
32.
Bartle SA i H, B.C. Organizational justice and work outcomes: A meta-analysis. In: Annual meeting of the Society for industrial and organizational psychology.
33.
Brammer MS. Faculty Resilience in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature. Online Journal of Complementary & Alternative Medicine. 5(2).
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
