Friend or foe? The impact of relational ties with comparison others on outcome fairness and satisfaction judgments

What is it about?

Although employees work side-by-side with co-workers, it is rare that all have exactly the same outcomes, even when the work is identical. Sometimes one employee gets a bigger bonus. Sometimes, a colleague does. How will employees judge whether such situations are fair? Equity theory suggests that if employees evaluate their co-workers’ inputs—the work itself (for example, effort)—as equal, they will judge unequal outcomes, even those that favor themselves, to be less fair. In this study, we examined whether such fairness perceptions change depending on the relationship the employee has with the co-worker. In other words, we asked: do perceptions of fairness change if the co-worker is a friend or a foe? Our results suggest that perceptions of fairness change depending on the nature (the valence) of the relationship. Specifically, if a friend gets a better outcome, for example, a bigger bonus, a typical employee judges it to be more fair than if an enemy gets a better outcome. Likewise, if the employee’s own outcome or bonus is bigger than a co-worker’s, the employee thinks it is fairer if that co-worker is an enemy rather than a friend. Additionally, the study finds that employees’ feelings of happiness, guilt, and anger differ after these situations of inequity occur based on the distribution, but also based on these friend or foe relationships.

Featured Image