[雙語翻譯]薪酬滿意度外文翻譯--公正認(rèn)知和對(duì)薪酬滿意度組成部分的滿意度

1、5700 英文單詞， 英文單詞，3.3 萬英文字符，中文 萬英文字符，中文 9900 字文獻(xiàn)出處： 文獻(xiàn)出處：Jawahar I M, Stone T H. Fairness perceptions and satisfaction with components of pay satisfaction[J]. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2011, 26(4): 297-312.Fairness

2、 perceptions and satisfaction with components of pay satisfactionI.M. Jawahar，Thomas H. StoneAbstractPurpose – The purpose of this paper is to integrate two streams of research and investigate the associations of differe

3、nt forms of justice perceptions on attitudinal reactions to four components of compensation: pay level, pay raises, benefits, and structure and administration In doing so, it responds to calls for more primary studies li

4、nking interactional justice perceptions to pay satisfaction.Design/methodology/approach – In total, 151 technology professionals employed at an international consulting company were surveyed to investigate hypotheses. St

5、ructural equation modeling was used to test the model.Findings – As hypothesized, distributive justice was related to satisfaction with pay level, procedural justice to satisfaction with benefits, raises and pay structur

6、e and administration, and informational justice to pay level and structure and administration.Research limitations/implications – The primary limitations of this research are the cross-sectional research design and a sin

7、gle source of survey data.Practical implications – Since pay dissatisfaction is significantly related to numerous employee outcomes and attitudes toward pay meditate the relationship between compensation and work outcome

8、s, understanding the role of perceived justice may facilitate managers’ ability to influence pay satisfaction. HR policies and managers’ behaviors can influence pay satisfaction as much or more than actual pay (distribut

9、ive justice). For example, results for informational justice suggest pay satisfaction can be increased by clearly and candidly explaining and communicating the organization’s procedures and processes.Originality/value –

10、This paper is the first to examine associations between the four-factor justice model and components of pay satisfaction and demonstrate that informational justice adds additional explained variance for pay level, raises

11、, and structure and administration.Keywords：Pay, Employee attitudes, Job satisfaction, CompensationAlthough the perception of fairness is important to all human resource decisions and processes (Cohen-Charash and Spector

12、, 2001; Jawahar, 2007; Thurston and McNall, 2010), it is particularly important to compensation decisions, such as pay, pay raises and benefits. Indeed, perceived fairness of compensation, the procedures used to make com

13、pensation-related decisions, and the manner in which compensation-related information is communicated play an integral role in shaping reactions to critical elements of the compensation system (Milkovich and Newman, 2008

14、; Nelson et al., 2008). Yet, the literatures on attitudinal reactions pertaining to compensation and fairness perceptions have evolved independently (Williams et al., 2006). Even though most would readily acknowledge tha

15、t fairness is important to compensation decisions, research examining how fairness perceptions relate to reactions to components of pay is relatively scarce.Pay and satisfaction with pay is of great importance to employe

16、es (Society for Human importance of procedural fairness to human resource management processes including performance appraisal (Greenberg, 1986) and selection (Gilliland, 1994).Bies and Moag (1986) introduced the constru

17、ct of “interactional justice” to examine the “social side of justice.” Some researchers who adhere to the relational model of justice treat interactional justice as a component of procedural justice (Tyler and Blader, 20

18、00; Tyler and Lind, 1992). Others treat it as a third form of justice, independent of procedural and distributive justice (Bies, 2001; Bies and Moag, 1986). According to Bies and Moag, interactional justice consists of t

19、wo elements:(1) informational justice– whether the reasons underlying the resource allocation decision are clearly, truthfully, and adequately explained to the affected parties; and(2) interpersonal justice – whether tho

20、se responsible for implementing the decision treat the affected individuals with dignity and respect. Greenberg (1993, 1994) suggested that interpersonal justice primarily alters reactions to decision outcomes because su

21、pervisor sensitivity can make people feel better about an unfavorable outcome.Informational justice primarily alters reactions to procedures as explanations provide the information needed to evaluate structural aspects o

22、f the process. Colquitt (2001) tested Greenberg’s assertion and found support for a four-factor model in two separate samples. Consistent with Greenberg’s (1993) proposal, Colquitt identified distributive justice, proced

23、ural justice, interpersonal justice, and informational justice as the four factors comprising the construct of organizational justice (see also Ambrose, 2002; Bies, 2001; Judge and Colquitt, 2004; Jawahar, 2007; Kernan a

24、nd Hanges, 2002; Thurston and McNall, 2010).Integration and hypotheses developmentDistributive justice and satisfaction with pay componentsResearch on distributive justice has established that fairness of outcomes (Adams

25、, 1965; Greenberg, 1988) is very important to people and that distributive justice is related to person or individual-referenced outcomes (Colquitt et al., 2001; Folger and Konovsky, 1989; McFarlin and Sweeney, 1992; Swe

26、eney and McFarlin, 1993). Satisfaction with pay level and satisfaction with pay raises are person-referenced outcomes. Previous studies reported a positive relationship between distributive justice and satisfaction with

27、pay level (e.g. Cohen-Charash and Spector, 2001; Miceli and Mulvey, 2000). The Cohen-Charash and Spector (2001) meta-analysis found distributive justice more highly correlated (weighted mean correlations 0.62 v.0.48) wit

28、h pay satisfaction than procedural justice. Tremblay, et al. (2000) measured distributive justice with regard to pay broken down into justice based on needs, internal equity and external equity and reported that distribu

29、tive justice accounted for 26 per cent of the variance in pay level satisfaction.Others have operationalized distributive justice as “pay comparisons” and reported a link between distributive justice and satisfaction w

30、ith pay level (Williams et al., 2008). In their meta-analysis, Williams et al. (2007) found distributive justice strongly related to satisfaction with pay level (r = 0.79).The concept of basing pay on performance is ingr

31、ained in American organizations (Gomes-Mejia and Welbourne, 1991). Indeed, in their meta-analysis, Williams et al. (2006) found employee perceptions of performance-reward contingency was strongly related to pay level sat