MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229068661 · doi:10.1108/ejim-08-2021-0421

The influence of organisational justice and ethical leadership on employees’ innovation behaviour

2022· article· en· W4229068661 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Innovation Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteractional justiceEconomic JusticeProcedural justiceCredibilityOrganizational justicePublic relationsPerceptionPsychologySociologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceOrganizational commitment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it