Original Research

Organisational justice rules as determinants of black and white employees' fairness perceptions of personnel selection techniques

Angela de Jong, Delene Visser
SA Journal of Industrial Psychology | Vol 26, No 1 | a696 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v26i1.696 | © 2000 Angela de Jong, Delene Visser | This work is licensed under CC Attribution 4.0
Submitted: 26 June 2000 | Published: 26 June 2000

About the author(s)

Angela de Jong, Rand Afrikaans University, South Africa
Delene Visser, Rand Afrikaans University, South Africa

Full Text:

PDF (8MB)

Share this article

Bookmark and Share

Abstract

The diversity of the South African population may lead to opinions that test fairness is not a pure empirical problem, but requires certain subjective value judgements. The aim of this study was to identify applicants' underlying reasons for evaluating a selection technique as being fair/unfair. These fairness perceptions were analysed by means of the organisational justice theory. The total sample consisted of 328 mature university students (M = 30,6) all of whom had work experience. The analyses comprised two sets of comparisons. The first set involved Black (uninformed) and White (uninformed) groups. The second comparison involved informed versus uninformed black students. Exposure to the subjects Strategic Personnel Management and/or undergraduate Industrial Psycohology, in which the nature and value of various selection techniques are studied, constituted the variable'being informed'. It was hypothesised that the Black (uninformed) and the White (uninformed) groups would perceive the value of the 11 justice rules for the total fairness perception across the ten selection techniques differently. Substantial support was found for this hypothesis. The same hypothesis was investigated for the Black (informed) and the Black (uninformed) groups, but no significant differences were found to support the latter hypothesis. The implications of these findings are discussed in terms of South African selection practices.

Opsomming
Die diversiteit van die Suid-Afrikaanse bevolking mag daartoe lei dat persepsies van die billikheid van verskillende personeelkeuringtegnieke op n verskeidenheid van subjektiewe waarde-oordele gegrond word. Dit is die doel van hierdie ondersoek om die onderliggende redes waarvolgens kandidate keuringtegnieke as billik/onbillik evalueer, te identifiseer. Die kandidate se billikheidpersepsies van tien keuringtegnieke is aan die hand van die organisatoriese billikheidteorie ontleed. Die steekproef het bestaan uit 328 volwasse universiteitstudente (M = 30,6 jaar) wat almal oor werkervaring beskik het. Die ontledings het twee stelle vergelykings behels. Die eerste stel het Swart (oningeligte) en Wit (oningeligte) groepe vergelyken die tweede het oningeligte versus ingeligte swart studente vergelyk. Blootstelling aan die vakke Strategiese Personeelbestuur en/of voorgraadse Bedryfsielkunde, waarin die aard en nut van verskeie keuringtegnieke behandel word, het die veranderlike 'ingeligtheid' gespesifiseer. Die hipotese is gestel dat die Swart (oningeligte) en Wit (oningeligte) groepe die waarde wat hulle aan die 11 billikheidreels ten opsigte van die billikheid van die keuringtegnieke heg, verskillend sal evalueer. Die resultate het hierdie hipotese gesteun. Dieselfde hipotese is ondersoek vir die Swart (ingeligte) en Swart (oningeligte) groepe, maar geen beduidende verskille is gevind om die laasgenoemde hipotese te ondersteun nie. Die implikasies van hierdie bevindinge word bespreek in terme van keuringpraktyke in Suid-Afrika.


Keywords

Personnel selection techniques; Organisational justice theory; Fairness perceptions; Personeelkeuringtegnieke; Organisatoriese billikheidteorie; Billikheidpersepsies

Metrics

Total abstract views: 2116
Total article views: 1916

 

Crossref Citations

1. Fairness Reactions to Personnel Selection Methods: An international comparison between the Netherlands, the United States, France, Spain, Portugal, and Singapore
Neil Anderson, Carlijn Witvliet
International Journal of Selection and Assessment  vol: 16  issue: 1  first page: 1  year: 2008  
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2008.00404.x