Revisiting the Old Debate: Sector Difference in Procedural Justice

• In Event: Bureaucratic Effectiveness in Comparative Context

Abstract

Sector differences between public and private organizations have been debated for a long time among public management scholars (Rainey et al. 1986; Baldwin 1987; Kurland and Egan 1999; Perry and Rainey 1988; Jurkiewicz et al. 1998). On the basis of previous research, there are institutional differences between public and private organizations, relationships with employee work attitudes and behavior should also exhibit different relationships. Differences in organizational structures associated with public-versus private-sector organizations may have implications for organizational justice (Kurland and Egan 1999). Recent empirical research have recognized that the organizational justice differs depending on the organizational context and environment in which it is assessed (Leventhal 1980). Where distributive justice focuses on outcomes received, procedural justice diagnoses the process by which these outcomes are distributed. Therefore, rules and regulations attributed mostly to public organizations should enhance procedural justice perceptions because they ensure democratic processes and accountabilities (Downs 1967; Kaufman 1977; Goodsell 1985; Jurland and Egan 1999). Although scholars have accumulated large amounts of studies, very few cross-national studies have been conducted (Bullock et al. 2015). This may be one reason for inconsistency in results of previous studies. To fill this gap, we conduct a cross-national/-regional study of European countries utilizing novel survey data of 85,000 citizens covering 206 regions in 24 European countries: the 2013 European Quality of Government Index (EQI) (Charron et al. 2015). We compare citizens’ perceptions of procedural justice in public and private organizations. One of the advantages of the data set is that it allows researchers to test sub-national variation. The preliminary findings reveal that there exist statistically significant sector difference. Such differences are associated with macro-institutional factors, including characteristics of national bureaucracy and the degree of NPM reform. This study also aims to examine cross-national differences in the individual-level outcomes (i.e., procedural justice). Results of previous public and private sector management studies suggest that there exists cross-national variation in the types and levels of public and private sector employees’ work attitudes (i.e., organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behavior). Such variation can be explained by both individual-level factors and macro-level economic and cultural factors (Meyer et al. 2012, Fischer and Mansell 2009, Randall 1993). Therefore, this study aims to contribute to our understanding of cross-national variation in the forms and levels of employee citizens’ perceptions of procedural justice in public and private organizations in the 24 European countries and tests how such variation is linked with certain characteristics of bureaucracy and the degree of NPM reform using the European Quality of Government Index (EQI). This study contributes not only to the literature on sector differences but also to the comparative public management literature.

Authors

• Kohei Suzuki, Leiden University

• Hyunkang Hur, Indiana University, Kokomo