Collectivism as a moderator of responses to organizational justice: implications for leader‐member exchange and ingratiation

By B. Erdogan, R. Liden. 2006

242 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fccbcd8f8527e08d25c4324f414e4793a523b4e3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

1. D. van Knippenberg
2. David de Cremer
3. Janaki Gooty
4. D. Skarlicki
5. Barbara van Knippenberg
6. John Antonakis
7. D. Rupp
8. Ruodan Shao

In Social Psychology

1. D. van Knippenberg
2. Russell S. Cropanzano
3. David de Cremer
4. Barbara van Knippenberg
5. John Antonakis
6. Janaki Gooty
7. D. Skarlicki
8. Q. Qu

In Sociology and Political Science

1. D. van Knippenberg
2. Russell S. Cropanzano
3. David de Cremer
4. Barbara van Knippenberg
5. D. Rupp
6. Janaki Gooty
7. Francis J. Yammarino
8. D. Skarlicki

Citations in the corpus

• The Leader–Member Exchange Relationship (2016, background): “…LMX differentiation rest on the core LMX ideas of preferential treatment, access and availability of resources, better rewards, and challenging assignments for those in better quality relationships within a highly differentiated workgroup (e.g., Erdogan & Liden, 2006; Henderson et al., 2008, 2009).”
• Employee Justice Across Cultures (2013, background): “Erdogan and Liden (2006), for example, investigated whether collectivism moderates the relationship between justice perceptions and leader–member exchange (LMX) among 100 Turkish employees.”
• Considering context in psychological leadership research (2009, background): “Similarly, collectivists, who focus most on what is best for the group rather than themselves personally, are less concerned about the quality of their LMX relationships than are individuals working in ‘individualistic’ cultures (Erdogan & Liden, 2006).”
• Interactional justice, leader–member exchange, and employee performance: Examining the moderating role of justice differentiation (2017, background): “Extant research points to a positive relationship between interactional justice and LMX (e.g., Cropanzano, Prehar, & Chen 2002; Erdogan & Liden 2006; Masterson, Lewis, Goldman, & Taylor 2000).”
• Supervisor–Subordinate Guanxi: Developing a Three-Dimensional Model and Scale (2009, methodology): “Consistent with Erdogan and Liden (2006) and Pellegrini and Scandura (2006), who identified one underlying dimension for LMX, we aggregated the LMX items into one scale.”
• Leadership and fairness: The state of the art (2006, background): “Erdogan and Liden (2006) and Erdogan, Liden, and Kraimer (2006) show that the relationship between leader interactional fairness and LMX is contingent on collectivism: Stronger effects are found in more collectivistic cultures.”
• Organizational justice: New insights from behavioural ethics (2013, background): “While justice seems to matter to people all over the world, individuals from different nations do not always respond identically (Brockner et al., 2001; Erdogan and Liden, 2006; Shao et al., 2013).”