Procedural Fairness Standards in Pay Scales

Abstract

The Procedural Fairness Standards in Pay scale is a comprehensive measure developed by Jones, Scarpello, and Bergmann (1999) designed to assess the criteria or comparison standards utilized by employees when evaluating the fairness of organizational processes related to pay decisions. This 29-item scale is structured around five distinct dimensions, capturing both interpersonal and formal aspects of procedural justice in compensation systems.

The five dimensions measured are: Supervisory Support (the extent to which supervisors advocate for employee pay interests), Accuracy (the quality and consistency of performance information used in decisions), Process Control (the opportunity for employees to influence the decision process), Justification (the adequacy of explanations provided for decisions), and Bias Suppression (the degree of neutrality in decision-making). The developers also combined four of these dimensions (excluding Process Control) to create a robust Non-Control Index of procedural fairness.

Keywords

Procedural fairness, Organizational psychology, Pay satisfaction, Compensation, Supervisory support, Accuracy, Bias suppression, Organizational commitment, Job evaluation, Likert scale.

Authors

Jones, F. F., Scarpello, V., Bergmann, T.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Procedural Fairness Standards in Pay scale is to operationalize the specific standards employees use to judge the fairness of compensation procedures within an organization. It moves beyond general perceptions of fairness to isolate the specific managerial behaviors and organizational characteristics that contribute to employee judgments regarding the equity and transparency of pay processes.

By assessing these five distinct dimensions, researchers and practitioners can identify specific areas where procedural improvements are necessary, thereby enhancing employee trust, increasing organizational commitment, and mitigating negative reactions associated with compensation decisions.

Construct

The scale measures the psychological construct of Procedural Justice as applied specifically to organizational pay administration. This construct refers to the perceived fairness of the processes, rules, and methods used to determine outcomes, rather than the fairness of the outcomes themselves (distributive justice).

The five measured dimensions—Supervisory Support, Accuracy, Process Control, Justification, and Bias Suppression—represent the key components necessary for employees to perceive the pay procedure as equitable, consistent, and transparent. The distinction between the Process Control dimension (focusing on employee voice and input) and the Non-Control Index (focusing on supervisory conduct and decision quality) highlights the multifaceted nature of perceived fairness in pay systems.

Validity

The validity of the Procedural Fairness Standards in Pay scale is supported by robust correlational evidence demonstrating positive relationships between the dimensions and key organizational outcomes. All five factors—Supervisory Support, Accuracy, Justification, Bias Suppression, and Process Control—were found to be positively correlated with each other, suggesting they measure related yet distinct aspects of the procedural fairness construct.

Specifically, the Process Control dimension was positively correlated with employee judgments of fairness regarding job evaluation, pay raises, and performance appraisal. Furthermore, all individual non-control dimensions (Supervisory Support, Accuracy, Justification, Bias Suppression) and the composite Non-Control Index were positively correlated with crucial employee attitudes, including pay satisfaction, supervisor satisfaction, and organizational commitment (Jones et al., 1999).

Reliability

Internal consistency reliability for the scale dimensions was assessed using Cronbach’s coefficient alpha. The results demonstrated high levels of reliability across all subscales, indicating strong internal consistency within each factor:

• Supervisory Support: α = .92
• Accuracy: α = .96
• Justification: α = .91
• Bias Suppression: α = .81
• Process Control: α = .92

The combined Non-Control Index, which aggregates Supervisory Support, Accuracy, Justification, and Bias Suppression, also demonstrated exceptional reliability with a coefficient alpha of .95 (Jones et al., 1999).

Factor Analysis

The scale is structurally defined by five distinct factors that were empirically derived: Supervisory Support (9 items), Accuracy (7 items), Process Control (6 items), Justification (4 items), and Bias Suppression (4 items). The identification of these factors confirms a multi-dimensional structure underlying employee perceptions of procedural fairness in compensation.

The original research by Jones et al. (1999) validated combining the four non-control factors into a single index. This structure suggests that while Process Control operates somewhat independently (representing employee voice), the remaining four dimensions largely capture the organization’s adherence to fairness standards independent of the employee’s direct opportunity for input.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire, Psychological scale

Format: 29 items distributed across five subscales, utilizing a 5-point Likert-type scale.

Language Available: English (Original Study)

Population Group: Employees/Workers

Age Group: Adults (Working population)

Population Details: The scale is designed for use within organizational settings to assess subordinates’ perceptions of procedural justice regarding pay administration.

Test Methodology: Respondents indicate their level of perceived accuracy on a 5-point scale where 1 = not at all accurate and 5 = very accurate.

Keywords

Pay fairness, Industrial/Organizational Psychology, Employee attitudes, Supervisory behavior, Compensation procedures, Justification, Bias suppression, Procedural Justice.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A

Correspondence Address: N/A

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The scale was published in 1999 by Jones, Scarpello, and Bergmann. The items were originally published in the Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. Permissions for reproduction and use should be sought from the copyright holder of the journal publication.

Reference’s

Jones, F. F., Scarpello, V., & Bergmann, T. (1999). Pay procedures—What makes them fair? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72(2), 129-145.

Items of the Procedural Fairness Standards in Pay scale

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

Responses are obtained on a 5-point Likert-type scale where 1 = not at all accurate and 5 = very accurate.

Supervisor support items:

These items are introduced with “In administrating the pay plan, my supervisor … “

1. Represents my pay interests to other management
2. Represents my pay interests with upper management
3. Is concerned about the amount of pay that I receive
4. Backs me up when he/she feels I have legitimate complaints about my pay
5. Is concerned that my work group gets its fair share of the pay budget
6. Is frank and candid with me about pay issues
7. Is honest and ethical in dealing with me about my pay
8. Is truthful and honest about pay issues that affect me
9. Applies the same standards to everyone when making pay decisions

Accuracy items:

These items are introduced with “In administrating the pay plan, my supervisor … “

10. Becomes familiar with my performance before evaluating it
11. Uses relevant information to appraise my performance
12. Obtains accurate information to appraise my performance
13. Uses consistent standards when evaluating my performance
14. Frequently observes my performance
15. Explains the reason for my performance appraisal
16. Considers my complaints about performance appraisals

Process control items:

These items are introduced with “The opportunity I had to express my opinion to [organization] administration about … “

17. The way pay is allocated within [the organization]
18. The pay for my job
19. My pay raises
20. My benefit package

These items are introduced with “In administrating the pay plan, my supervisor … “

21. Allows me to express opinions about pay decisions
22. Gets my input before making a recommendation about my pay raise

Justification items:

These items are introduced with “In administrating the pay plan, my supervisor … “

23. Answers questions about my pay and benefits
24. Answers my questions about my pay and benefit procedures
25. Lets me know about changes in pay procedures that may affect my pay
26. Explains the reason(s) for the size of my pay raise

Bias suppression items:

27. Allows personal motives or bias to influence performance appraisal ratings (R)
28. Is influenced by things that should not be considered in his/her pay decisions (R)
29. Shows a real interest in trying to be fair in his/her pay decisions
30. Does not show favoritism in his/her pay decisions Items denoted with (R) are reverse