Procedural Justice
3
Predicting Satisfaction and Outcome Acceptance with Decision-Making Processes:
The Role of Procedural Justice
[T]o seem to be just to the disappointed participant, to retain his allegiance, this must surely
be one of the more difficult tests that a decision-making system can undergo. (Thibaut &
Walker, 1975, p. 68)
Among challenges facing public participation efforts in organizational decision making is
finding ways to maintain and enhance the perceived credibility and legitimacy of the decision-
making process. If participants view the process as biased or unjust, for example, research shows
they are less likely to be satisfied with the procedures (e.g., Thibaut & Walker, 1975) and those
in charge of the procedures (e.g., Colquitt, 2001; Lauber & Knuth, 1999, Phillips, 2002; Thibaut
& Walker, 1975). They are also less accepting of the outcomes (Tyler, 1994; Weiner, Alexander,
& Shortell, 2002). Other consequences include reduced commitment to the organization
(Colquitt, 2001; Fuller & Hester, 2001; McFarlin & Sweeney, 1992) and decreased voluntary
behaviors on the organization’s behalf (Colquitt, 2001; Tyler, Degoey, & Smith, 1996).
Moreover, “poor” participation may be worse than no participation at all: Research has
documented a “frustration effect” showing that people whose participation is limited often see
decisions as less just than people who have had no opportunity to participate (Folger, Rosenfield,
Grove, & Corkran, 1979). The ever-present risk that frustrated individuals may lose interest, or
even heart, and stop turning out to participate merits additional consideration, given its potential
to limit an organization’s ability to make informed judgments based on representative input, as
well as leave individuals viewing their participation as meaningless.
As Thibaut and Walker’s (1975) opening quote illustrates, this challenge is underscored
when competing interests are at stake or decisions disappoint participants. Examples include
Convention