Content uploaded by Kemalettin Eryeşil
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kemalettin Eryeşil on Jan 10, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 12
ISSN: 2222-6990
543
www.hrmars.com
The Effect of Organizational Justice on Organizational
Cynicism and Turnover Intention: A Research on the
Banking Sector
Mehtap ÖZTÜRK
Res. Ass., Selcuk University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Konya, Turkey
Email: mehtapfindik@selcuk.edu.tr
Kemalettin ERYEŞİL
Res. Ass., Selcuk University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Konya, Turkey
Email: kemalettineryesil@selcuk.edu.tr
Aykut BEDÜK
Ass. Prof., Selcuk University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Konya, Turkey
Email: abeduk@hotmail.com
DOI: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v6-i12/2517 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v6-i12/2517
Abstract
The aim of this study is to identify the effect of organizational justice on the relationship
between organizational cynicism and turnover intention. In this regard, a field study has been
conducted banking employees in the province of Konya. The data used in the study was
obtained via questionnaire method. Data were analysed by SPSS (22.0) and descriptive
statistics, analyses of regression were performed to achieve results. The findings of the study
revealed that there is a negative and statistically significant relationship between organizational
justice and organizational cynicism. Besides this, there is a negative and statistically significant
relationship between organizational justice and turnover intention.
Keywords: Organizational justice, organizational cynicism, turnover intention.
1. INTRODUCTION
The notion of fairness, or justice, has become an increasingly important concept in the
social psychology. Efforts to explain the impact of justice on effective organizational functioning
have come under the rubric of organizational justice research (Greenberg, 1987, 1990).
Research on organizational justice has demonstrated that concerns about fairness can affect
the attitudes and behaviors of employees (Colquitt & Greenberg, 2003). Organizational justice
refers to the extent to which employees perceive workplace procedures, interactions and
outcomes to be fair in nature. Turnover intention has been found to have an inverse
relationship to organizational justice. The relationship between turnover intention and
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 12
ISSN: 2222-6990
544
www.hrmars.com
organizational justice have been supported in several studies (Aryee et al., 2002; DeConnick and
Stilwell, 2004; Loi et al., 2006). Despite these findings, little examination has been made of the
impact of organizational justice on organizational cynicism and turnover intention. The purpose
of the present study examined the relationship between organizational justice, organizational
cynicism and turnover intention. The subsequent section of this article reviews existing
research on before organizational cynicism and turnover intention linking both to
organizational justice. Specific hypotheses are also presented.
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1. Organizational Justice
Organizational justice is essentially based on the equity theory developed by Adams.
Equity theory focuses on individuals’ view of fairness about decisions of distribution within the
organization, and on individuals’ reaction to the unfair circumstances within the organization
(Mowday and Colwell, 2003). Moreover organizational justice is the perceiving of justice
appearing in the mind of the employee regarding the practices in the workplace (Greenberg,
1990). According to Colquitt (2001) and Greenberg and Colquitt (2005), organizational justice is
expressed in three dimensions which are distributive justice, procedures justice and interaction
justice. Distributive justice is a perceived justice of an employee that faces work related results
like awards, duties and responsibilities. These results occur at the end of his work as a
comparison of his contributions to work and the results of other employees (Greenberg, 1990).
Distributive justice perception relates to if earnings within the organization is suitable, right and
moral (Folger and Cropanzano, 1998). It is about results of fair distribution faced by employees
(Andersson et al, 2007). Distributive justice refers to the degree of fairness as noticed by
individuals about the distribution, to the overall organization, of the organizational results such
as income, premium, promotion and social rights (Folger and Konovsky, 1989; Dailey and
Delaney, 1992; Cohen and Spector, 2001). The emphasis is on procedural justice, which
contrasts with the emphasis on distributive justice in previous works (Nowakovski and Conlon,
2005). Procedural justice refers to views on the fairness employed in decision-making by the
organization (Scandura, 1999). Procedural justice is termed a signal of emotional, cognitive and
behavioral reactions, such as organizational participation, to the organization (Cohen and
Spector, 2001). Interaction justice as a concept points to the nature of relations between
individuals. It is defined as a third type justice, different from procedural justice and distribution
justice, showing that attitudes must be founded on moral and ethical values. It has been
expressed that attitudes of this nature will bring mutual sensitivity along (Folger and
Cropanzano, 1998).
2.2. Organizational Cynicism
The word of cynicism has been derived from the words of “Zynismus” formerly and
“Kynismus” later on. Nietzsche also used cynicism as “Cynismus” in the 19th century. In the
English literature this word is used as “Cynicism” (Shea, 2009: 2). Cynicism is an attitude of
being pessimistic about secret and undisclosed purposes of people and explaining the events in
a disappointed way; a tendency of caring about the others and managing the business just as a
tool for protecting and improving their benefits (Moutner, 1997: 119; Tokgöz and Yılmaz, 2008:
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 12
ISSN: 2222-6990
545
www.hrmars.com
285). Anderson and Bateman (1997) named a person as “cynical” who believes in that people
solely look after their own interests and value their own interests above everything and accepts
everyone as self-seeker accordingly and named the thought describing this situation as
“cynicism” (Anderson and Bateman, 1997: 449-469; Altınöz et al, 2011: 289). Besides definitions
explaining cynicism as a personal property and feeling of individual, in many researches
cynicism is defined as a negative attitude towards changing environmental factors (Anderson
and Bateman, 1997: 450). Individuals can show these negative attitudes towards their
organization as well as changes in their environment. In this respect, the concept of
organizational cynicism is developed. Organizational cynicism is negative attitude of the
individual to the organization (Dean et al, 1998: 345). This negative attitude comes up with the
emergence of the faith of lack of integrity towards the organization in which person works
(Abraham, 2000: 270).
Although many definitions were produced about cynicism, one of the most commonly
used definitions is that of Dean et al. (1998). According to Dean et al. (1998), the concept of
organizational cynicism is negative attitudes that employee develops about his/her organization
that employ him/her and these attitudes are handled in three dimensions (Dean et al, 1998:
345). According to the cognitive dimension of organization cynicism, individuals showing cynical
attitudes have some certain beliefs. Accordingly, organizations lack a solid understanding of
organizational principles and official rules are ignored by employees. In these organizations,
there are no such criteria as honesty, sincerity and justice. Relations are carried out depending
on the individual interest and there is no confidence in the other employees in the organization
(Balıkçıoğlu, 2013: 23). The affective dimension is the second dimension of organizational
cynicism. This dimension of the organizational cynicism involves strong emotional reactions
such as disrespect, anger, annoyance and embarrassment (Yüksel, 2015: 16). For example,
cynical employees can feel anger and indignation towards their organization and they can hold
in disrespect their organizations (Ahmadı, 2014: 25). According to the behavioral dimension,
individuals having cynical attitudes make pessimistic predictions about the future events within
the organization. They can act in a negative way and most of the time they can behave in a way
that humiliate the other people (Kalağan, 2009: 48). In this dimension, these cynical people use
humour and sarcastic humour to express their cynical attitudes. Thus, with their cynical
attitudes, these people can mock with the organizational purposes, can rewrite their job
descriptions and can make insulting comments.
2.3. Turnover Intention
The concept of turnover intention is expressed as “the conscious and deliberate decision
and intention about leaving the organization” (Bartlett, 1999: 70). Turnover intention is defined
as a conscious and deliberate willingness to leave the organization. According to Jaros (1997),
turnover intention reflects the continuous and also general cognitive arousal toward leaving the
organization This arousal states whether or not the employee thinks of leaving, searching for
the opportunity of another employment, and the way of turnover intention (Ceylan ve Bayram,
2006: 106). Turnover intention, in case that the employees are unsatisfied from the work
conditions, is defined as the subversive and active actions they showed (Çarıkçı and Çelikkol,
2009: 160). Considering that the cost of managerial mistakes conducted to keep well –trained
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 12
ISSN: 2222-6990
546
www.hrmars.com
and effective employees in hand, Mobley (1977) pioneered to the research trying to
understand why humans leave their jobs (Çakar and Ceylan, 2005: 57). Mobley (1977) stated
that dissatisfaction caused the thought of leaving. Turnover intention stands out as one of the
withdrawal behaviors of employees and is defined as “being alienated of the individual from
the organization and his/her coming to the search for a new job”(Martin, 1979: 316; Mobley,
1982: 112; Moore, 2000: 145; Marsh and Mannari, 1977: 58).
3. METHODOLOGY
In forming the dataset of this study, survey method is conducted on the banking sector
in Konya. The data of the study was collected via face–to-face interviews with the respondents
by means of a standard questionnaire, prepared considering Likert scale. The item in the scales
were scored as 1=“I definitely agree with” and 5 = “I definitely disagree with”. In the study, in
the determination of employees who will be included in the convenience sampling method,
used in the similar studies (Cui et al., 2003; Zhou, 2004) was preferred. Since convenience
sampling enable to quickly access to large amount of data, it is a favorable method. In the
study, organizational justice is assessed with the scale developed by Niehoff and Moorman
(1993) and in order to determine the levels of organizational cynicism of the employees is
assessed with the scale developed by Dean et al. (1998). Turnover intention is assessed with the
scale developed by Singh et al. (1996).
In calculation of sample size, the method of Yazıcıoğlu and Erdoğan (2004: 50) was
utilized. The authors calculated the number of survey that is necessary to be done as 217 for
confidence value of α = 0.05 and sample error of 0,05, in case that the rate of observing and
non- observing is accepted as equal and there is a sample size of 500 people. In this context, the
rate of questionnaire that is necessary to be returned is about 44%. In the banking sector in
which the study is carried out, 425 employees and as a result of application that is made, 256
questionnaires that are suitable for assessment were obtained. In this context, the return rate
obtained is about 60,2% and it can be said that it has the power to represent the main mass.
The hypotheses developed in the scope of study are put in order as follows. Data collection
started at the end of January, 2016 and lasted 2 months. As of December, 2015 (BRSA, 2016),
the number of employees working at private commercial banks was approximately 217,504
employees. Given the difficulties of reaching all employees throughout Turkey, data were only
collected from the branches located in Konya. Data obtained from questionnaires was analyzed
through the SPSS statistical packet software (v.22). The items reliabilities were tested through
Cronbach’s Alpha analysis and proposed relations and hypotheses were tested through
regression analyses. This study, which aims to determine relationships between organizational
justice, organizational cynicism and turnover intention on the employees of a banking sector in
the province of Konya. In direction of this aim the hypotheses developed in the scope of study
are put order as follow:
H1: There is a negative and statistically significant relationship between organizational
justice and organizational cynicism.
H2: There is a negative and statistically significant relationship between organizational
justice and turnover intention.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 12
ISSN: 2222-6990
547
www.hrmars.com
72% of those participating in the study is male, and 28% is female. 82% of the
participants were university graduates. Most ranged in age from 25-35 years (48.5%), followed
by 35-45 years (23%), and 18-25 years (21.8%). As for employment tenure, most participants
had 1-5 years of work experience (41.2%); followed by 6-10 (29.1%), and 11–15 (13.9%).
Table 1. Reliability Analysis Results of Scales
Scale
Item
Number
Cronbach’s
α
Organizational Cynicism
13
.833
Organizational
Justice
Interaction
Justice
8
18
.935
Distributive
Justice
6
Procedures
Justice
4
Turnover Intention
4
.836
Cronbach’s Alpha was used in order to determine the reliability levels of the scales. It
can be seen that the Cronbach’s Alpha level of the questionnaires were confident at high
degree (0,60>α>0,80). According to Table 1, both scales had Alpha values higher than 0.70
which is the accepted reliability value in the literature.
Table 2. Correlation Analysis Results
Scale
Mea
n
Std.
Dev
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
Organizationa
l Cynicism
2.54
.64
1
-.357*
-.077
-.155
-.255*
.472*
*
2
Interaction
Justice
3.42
.84
-.357*
1
.610*
*
.631*
*
.907*
*
-
.373*
*
3
Distributive
Justice
2.97
.78
-.077
.610*
*
1
.673*
*
.856*
*
-.234
4
Procedures
Justice
2.93
.82
-.155
.631*
*
.673*
*
1
.831*
*
-.168
5
Organizationa
l Justice
3.16
.71
-.255
.907*
*
.856*
*
.831*
*
1
-.324*
6
Turnover
Intention
2.28
.89
.472*
*
-
.373*
*
-.234
-.168
-.324*
1
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 12
ISSN: 2222-6990
548
www.hrmars.com
Note: **p<.001, *p<.05.
When Table 2 is examined, it can be said that the answers of participants associated
with each dimension predominantly range in the high level. In other words, the level of
organizational cynicism is low level. While the scores of the dimension of organizational justice
which is interaction justice, distributive justice, procedures justice are at high level in the
context of scale. And also, the level of turnover intention is low level. According to the results
of the correlation analysis, a negative and significant relationship has been determined
between organizational cynicism and interaction justice (r = -0.357, p <0.05), and there is a and
significant relationship has been determined between organizational cynicism and turnover
intention (r = 0.472, p <0.05). Moreover, negative and significant relationship has been
determined between interaction justice and turnover intention (r=-0.373, p<0.05). Besides this
there is positive and significant relationship between organizational cynicism and turnover
intention (r=0.472, p<0.05).
Table 3. Regression Analysis Results of Organizational Justice, Organizational Cynicism and
Turnover Intention
Depent Variable
Independent
Variable
β
B
Std.
Error
t
R2
∆R2
F
Organizational
Cynicism
Interaction
Justice
-
.378*
-
.498
.048
-
7.928
0.159
0.152
24.903*
Distributive
Justice
.177*
.217
.054
3.297
Procedures
Justice
.01
.013
.053
0.197
Turnover
Intention
Interaction
Justice
-
.419*
-
.441
.066
-6.64
.150
.143
23.260*
Distributive
Justice
-.08
-
.091
.075
-
1.213
Procedures
Justice
.15
.163
.074
2.223
Note: *p<.05.
When the results of regression analysis were examine that organizational justice has an
effect on organizational cynicism and the levels of organizational justice accounted for the
variance on organizational cynicism in the rate of 15,9%. In addition it was concluded that the
model put forward was statistically significant (p<0,05) and that organizational justice
negatively affected the organizational cynicism (R2=0.159). So H1 is fully supported.
Furthermore, from Table 3, it can be seen that there is negative and statistically significant
relationship between organizational justice and turnover intention (R2=0.150). In addition, it
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 12
ISSN: 2222-6990
549
www.hrmars.com
was concluded that the model put forward was statistically significant (p<0,05). In this case it is
observed that H2 is provided. It Therefore, it can be concluded that organizational justice has
effect on the relationship between organizational cynicism and turnover intention. According to
these results, all the hypothesis are accepted.
CONCLUSION
In this study, the effect of the organizational justice, organizational cynicism and
turnover intention on banking services sector in Konya was examined. The results of research
suggested that organizational justice were negatively associated organizational cynicism and
turnover intention. The study has several limitations that should be underlined. The present
study was conducted in a single country setting in Turkey, the generalization power of the
results of study remains weak. In terms of the studies carried out in the future, the study can be
restudied with a larger sample. The present research can be conducted in other countries of the
world and the result can be compared. It is necessary to take into consideration that the study
was evaluated through the data belonging to a certain time slice. Since this study was carried
out only in the province Konya, when the questions, whose answers are searched for and the
hypotheses are taken into consideration, it can be said that realizing a longitudinal study as
method of data collecting is a more appropriate approach.
REFERENCES
Abraham, R. (2000). Organizational Cynicism Bases and Consequences. Genetic, Social
and General Psychology Monographs, 126 (3), 269-292.
Ahmadı, F. (2014). Örgütsel Sinizmin Örgütsel Bağlılık Üzerindeki Etkisinin İncelenmesi:
Atatürk Üniversitesi Çalışanları Üzerine Bir Araştırma, Master Thesis, Atatürk Üniversitesi,
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Erzurum.
Altınöz, M., Çöp, S. & Sığındı, T. (2011). Algılanan Örgütsel Bağlılık Ve Örgütsel Sinizm
İlişkisi: Ankara’daki Dört Ve Beş Yıldızlı Konaklama İşletmeleri Üzerine Bir Araştırma, S.Ü., Sosyal
ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 15(21), 285-316.
Anderson, L.M. & Bateman T. (1997). Cynicism in the Workplace: Some Causes and
Effects, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol: 18, 449-469.
Anderson-Straberg, T.,Sverke, M. & Hellgren, J. (2007). “Perceptions of Justice in
Connection with Individualized Pay Setting”, Economic and Industrial Democracy.
Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the relationship
between organizational justice and work outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 23, 267–285.
Balıkçıoğlu, S. (2013). Antalya Bölgesi Konaklama İşletmeleri Çalışanlarının Örgütsel
Sinizm Tutumları İle Bağlılık İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma, Master Thesis, Mustafa Kemal
Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Hatay.
Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency (BRSA). (2016). Financial Markets Report
2016. Retrieved from:
https://www.bddk.org.tr/WebSitesi/turkce/Raporlar/TBSGG/TBSGG.aspx.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 12
ISSN: 2222-6990
550
www.hrmars.com
Cohen, Y.C. & Spector P.E. (2001). The Role of Justice in Organizations: A Meta-
Analysis.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 86, No. 2, 278-321.
Colquitt, J. A. (2001) On the Dimensionality of Organizational Justice: A Construct
Validation of a Measure, Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(2):386-400.
Colquitt, J. A., & Greenberg, J. (2003). Organizational justice: A fair assessment of the
state of the literature. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science,
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 165–210.
DeConinck, B. J. & Stilwell, C.D. (2004). Incorporating Organizational Justice, Role States,
Pay Satisfaction and Supervisor Satisfaction in A Model of Turnover Intentions. Journal of
Business Research, 57, 225–231.
Dailey, R.C. & Delaney, K.J. (1992). Distributive and Procedural Justice as Antecedents of
Job Dissatisfaction and Intent toTurnover, Human Relations, Vol. 45, No. 3, 305–317.
Dean Jr., J. W., Brandes, P. & Dharwadkar, R. (1998). Organizational Cynicism, Academy
of Management Reviews, 23 (2), 341-352.
Folger, R. & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational Justice and Human Resource
Management, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Folger, R. & Konovsky, M.A. (1989). Effects of Procedural and Distributive Justice on
Reactions to Pay Raise Decisions, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 32, No. 1, p.115-130.
Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow, Journal of
Management, Vol.16, 399-432.
Kalağan, G. (2009). Araştırma Görevlilerinin Örgütsel Destek Algıları İle Örgütsel Sinizm
Tutumları Arasındaki İlişki, Master Thesis, Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
Antalya.
Loi, R., Hang-Yue, N. & Foley, S. (2006). “Linking Employees’ Justice Perceptions To
Organizational Commitment and Intention to Leave: The Mediating Role of Perceived
Organizational Support”. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 79, 101–120.
Moutner, T. (1997). Dictionary of Philosophy, Penguin Reference Books.
Mowday, R.T. & Colwell, K.A. (2003). Employee Reactions to Unfair Outcomes in
theWorkplace: The Contributions of Equity Theory to Understanding Work Motivation. In
Porter, G. Bigleyand R. Steers (Eds.), Motivationand Work Behavior, 65-113, Boston: McGraw-
HillIrwin.
Niehoff, B. P. & Moorman, R. H. (1993). Justice as a Mediator of the Relationship
between Methods of Monitoring and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. The Academy of
Management Journal, 36 (3), 527-556.
Nowakowski, J.,& Conlon, D. (2005). Organizational Justice: Looking Back, Looking
Forward, International Journal of Conflict Management, 16, 4-29.
Scandura, T.A. (1999). Rethinking Leader-Member Exchange: An Organizational Justice
Perspective. Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 10, No. 1, 25-40.
Shea, L. (2009). The Cynic Enlightenment Diogenes in the Salon, The Johns Hopkins
University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 12
ISSN: 2222-6990
551
www.hrmars.com
Singh, J., Verbeke, W. & Rhoads, G. K. (1996). “Do Organizational Practices Matter in
Role Stress Processes? A Study of Direct and Moderating Effects for Marketing-Oriented
Boundary Spanners”, Journal of Marketing, 60: 69-86.
Tokgöz, N. & Yılmaz, H. (2008). Örgütsel Sinizm: Eskişehir ve Alanya’daki Otel
İşletmelerinde Bir Uygulama, Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8, 2, 283-305.
Yüksel, H. (2015). Örgütsel Sinizm ve Bağlılık Arasındaki İlişki: İlk ve Ortaokul
Öğretmenleri Üzerinde Bir Araştırma, Master Thesis, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri
Enstitüsü, İzmir.
Yazıcıoğlu, Y., Erdoğan, S. (2004). SPSS Uygulamalı Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri, Detay
Yayıncılık, Ankara.
