Perceived Fairness in Goal Setting Scale

Abstract

The Perceived Fairness in Goal Setting scale is a concise psychological measure developed by Roberson, Moye, and Locke in 1999. Comprising three items, this scale is designed to assess the extent to which employees perceive that fair procedures are utilized during the establishment of their performance goals. While perceptions of procedural justice often encompass both fairness in process and opportunities for influencing outcomes, this specific instrument strictly focuses on the procedural aspects inherent in the Goal Setting process, distinguishing it from broader measures of justice.

Keywords

Procedural Justice, Goal Setting, Organizational Behavior, Employee Perception, Fairness, Work Satisfaction, Roberson Moye Locke, Likert-type scale, Applied Psychology.

Authors

Quinetta M. Roberson, N. A. Moye, Edwin A. Locke.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the scale is to provide researchers and practitioners with an efficient metric for gauging employee beliefs regarding the impartiality and equity of the formal processes used by management to define work objectives. Understanding these perceptions is crucial because the perceived fairness of procedures (or process control) often mediates the relationship between participation in decision-making and subsequent psychological outcomes, such as satisfaction.

By focusing specifically on procedures, the scale isolates the justice component derived from the method of goal assignment, rather than the difficulty or desirability of the goal itself. This focus allows organizations to diagnose specific managerial shortcomings related to transparency, consistency, and employee voice during the crucial phase of performance management.

Construct

The scale measures the psychological construct of Perceived Fairness in Goal Setting, which is operationalized as a domain-specific measure of procedural justice. Procedural justice refers to the perceived fairness of the means or processes utilized to arrive at a decision or outcome. In this context, the construct captures the employee’s subjective assessment of whether the rules, policies, and methods used to set performance targets are unbiased, consistent, accurate, and ethical.

The three items collectively capture the employee’s overall judgment of the procedural integrity of the Goal Setting system within their organization. High scores indicate a strong belief in the fairness of the goal establishment process, which is generally linked to higher organizational commitment and positive work attitudes.

Validity

The scale demonstrates empirical support for its construct Validity as evidenced by its relationships with related organizational variables. Roberson et al. (1999) reported that the perceived fairness of goal-setting procedures correlated positively and significantly with both perceived participation and task satisfaction among employees. This finding aligns with established theories of organizational justice, which posit that fair processes enhance satisfaction and engagement.

The positive correlation with perceived participation confirms that the scale measures a construct closely linked to employee involvement, while the correlation with task satisfaction suggests practical relevance in predicting positive work outcomes. This pattern of correlations supports the scale’s utility in mediating the relationship between involvement and satisfaction.

Reliability

The internal consistency of the Perceived Fairness in Goal Setting scale is exceptionally high. The initial study by Roberson, Moye, and Locke (1999) reported a Cronbach’s Coefficient alpha of .94. This high value suggests that the three items comprising the scale are highly intercorrelated and reliably measure a single, unified construct.

A Coefficient alpha above .90, especially for a measure with only three items, indicates excellent internal consistency, confirming that the scale is a highly reliable instrument for assessing procedural fairness perceptions in organizational contexts.

Factor Analysis

While the original source content does not explicitly detail the factor analysis performed, the brevity of the scale (three items) coupled with the exceptionally high Coefficient alpha (.94) strongly suggests that the scale is unidimensional. It is highly probable that a principal components analysis or confirmatory factor analysis would confirm a single-factor structure, where all three items load strongly onto the intended construct: Perceived Fairness in Goal Setting.

Instrument

Test Type: Attitudinal Survey / Self-Report Questionnaire

Format: Three items utilizing a 9-point Likert-type scale.

Language Available: English (Inferred from publication context)

Population Group: Employees in organizational settings

Age Group: Adult (Working population)

Population Details: Typically applicable to employees subject to formal performance Goal Setting procedures.

Test Methodology: Administration via standard psychological survey methods, either paper-and-pencil or electronically.

Keywords

Organizational Justice, Performance Management, Employee Attitudes, Procedural Fairness, Scale Development, Applied Psychology, Work Environment, Roberson, Validity, Reliability.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided.

Correspondence Address: Not provided.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The scale was developed and published in 1999. Specific details regarding permissions for commercial use or associated fees are not specified in the original source, though the items were reprinted in the source text with permission from the publisher (Journal of Applied Psychology).

Researchers intending to use the scale should consult the primary source publication or contact the authors or the American Psychological Association (APA), the publisher of the Journal of Applied Psychology, regarding formal usage permissions.

Reference’s

Roberson, Q. M., Moye, N. A., & Locke, E. A. (1999). Identifying a missing link between participation and satisfaction: The mediating role of procedural justice perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(4), 585-593.

Items of the Perceived Fairness in Goal Setting scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Responses are obtained using a 9-point Likert-type scale where 1 = not at all and 9 = extremely.

1. How fair were the procedures used to set your goals?
2. How fair were the procedures used to determine your goal?
3. To what extent do you consider the goal-setting process to be fair?