The influence of organisational justice and ethical leadership on employees’ innovation behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to explore the influence of organisational justice (including distributional justice, procedural justice and interactional justice) and ethical leadership on employees’ innovation behaviour and to analyse the role of ethical leadership in regulating the relationship between organisational justice and employees’ innovation behaviour. Design/methodology/approach This paper explores the key factors affecting employees’ innovation behaviour from three forms of organisational justice (distributional justice, procedural justice and interactional justice) and ethical leadership. The questionnaire survey method is used to survey Chinese industrial workers. A total of 323 valid questionnaires are collected, and the model is verified by SmartPLS. Findings The study found that distributional justice and interactional justice in organisational justice had a significant positive influence on employees’ innovation behaviour. Ethical leadership had a significant positive influence on employees’ innovation behaviour and interactional justice. At the same time, ethical leadership has a significant regulatory effect on the relationship between interactional justice and employees’ innovation behaviour. The study also found that procedural justice had a significant positive influence on distributional justice and interactional justice. Research limitations/implications This paper is limited to industrial workers in Hubei, China, and the research objects need further expansion. In terms of research methods, future research will use other laboratory research methods, combining experimental environments with real-world situations, enhancing the scientific nature of research methods and increasing the credibility of research results. Practical implications In management practice, organisations can take various measures to improve the interaction level of employees, improve employees’ perception of organisational distribution justice by establishing a scientific distribution system, give full play to the role of ethical leadership, implement more ethical management and stimulate employees' innovation behaviour. Originality/value This research theorises the relationship between distributional justice, interactional justice and employees' innovation behaviour and enriches the research system of employees' innovation behaviour. At the same time, it examines the regulatory effect of ethical leadership on the relationship between interactional justice and employees' innovation behaviour, which helps enrich the mechanism of ethical leadership affecting employees' innovation behaviour path. It clarifies the mechanism of the interaction among distributional justice, procedural justice and interactional justice and expands the research theory of organisational justice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".