Online Access: www.absronline.

org/journals

Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management

Journal
Volume 4, Issue 2 e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Pages: 48-62 May 2016 p-ISSN: 2310-0079

Organizational Justice Effect on Job Outcomes: Moderating Effect

of Islamic Work Ethics

Durkhanai1, Saif ul Amin2*, Sammandar Khan2

1University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan.

2COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan.

The study focuses and analyzes a model that shows the relationship between procedural
justice, distributive justice, work engagement, organization citizenship behavior and Islamic
work ethics. Organization justice, work engagement and organization citizenship behavior
has extensively been researched previously but the role of Islamic work ethics as a
moderating variable between organization justice and job outcomes has been considered in
this study, as this aspect has not been researched yet. The study proposes that Islamic work
ethics act as a moderator in the relations between organizational justice dimensions
(procedural justice, distributive justice) and work outcomes (work engagement and
organization citizenship behavior).
Potential and practicing employees were surveyed by using questionnaire as data collection
tool. A sample of 140 employees employed in private and public universities were considered
for this survey. Data collected from the sample was analyzed, the concluded results shows
positive effect of procedural justice and distributive justice on work engagement and
organization citizenship behavior. A positive relationship exists between organizational
justice and Islamic work ethics that moderate the predictor (procedural justice, distributive
justice) and criterion (work engagement and organization citizenship behavior).

Keywords: Organizational justice, Job outcomes, Islamic work ethics, Procedural justice,
distributive justice, Work engagement, Organization citizenship behavior.

*
Corresponding author: Saif ul Amin,
COMSATS University, Department of Management Sciences, Pakistan.
E-Mail: saifulaminawan@gmail.com

48
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62
INTRODUCTION
Organization Justice
Justice theory within organizational context has
been the focus of a large number of researches.
Employees working in organizations expect fair
treatment of procedures and outcomes. If treatment
is not up to the expectations of employees, it can
give rise to negative emotional feelings (Lind,
2001b). To avoid such negative consequences that
arise because of injustice, researchers worked to
explore the relationship between dimensions of
organizational justice and job outcomes (Colquitt et
al, 2001). Organizational justice has three
dimensions; distributive justice (DJ) that includes
work related outcomes (Adams, 1965), procedural
justice (PJ) that includes procedures which
determine work related out comes and interactional
justice that includes treatment with employees.
Much attention is given to the concept of
organizational justice because of its impact on work
or job oriented consequences (Cohen-Charash, &
Spector, 2001). Consequences might be in the form
of job satisfaction, organization citizenship behavior
(OCB) (Skarlicki, & latham, 1996) and work
engagement (WE) (Kahn, 1990). Work engagement
is the attachment of employees to their work roles
and to express themselves physically, emotionally
and cognitively involve during their work
performance. Organization citizenship behavior is
discretionary behavior that is not specified by duties
and roles assigned to employees. Organizational
justice gives rise to justice and trust perception
which in turn gives rise to sense of reciprocation
which is social exchange. Work ethics have also
been under focus of many researchers in Europe and
North America with main focus on Protestant Work
Ethics proposed by Weber (1958). Islamic work
ethics thus emerged as distinct domain of research
by researchers (Ali, 1992; Yousef, 2000a). IWE has
been originated from Quran (Holly book of the
Muslims) and Sunnah (sayings and practices of
Holly Prophet Muhammad PBUH) (Yousef, 2000a).
This study is significant in providing detailed
understandings of Islamic codes and ethics for
increasing work outcomes in the context of
organizational justice.
Research Questions
 Does Islam and Islamic codes of life make
employees feel more engaged in their work?
 Does Islam and Islamic codes of life make
employees perform tasks other than their
assigned duties?
 Is there any organization justice effect on work
engagement and organizational citizenship
behavior?
Objectives of the study
 To explore impacts of Islamic work ethics on
organizational justice dimensions (distributive
justice and procedural justice) and job outcome
(Work engagement and organization citizenship
behavior).
 To broaden the perception of fairness and IWE
by analyzing the effect of OJ on job outcomes
under the influence of IWE.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Organizational justice is concept related to work
place fairness. This concept has been under focus
because it fits relation between important
individuals and organization outcomes.
Organization justice consists of three dimensions
(Colquitt, 2001), distributive justice, and procedural
justice. Distributive justice is one of the major
dimensions of organizational justice and is
considered an ancient form of justice. Distributive
49
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62
justice is related to the perception of employees
related to outcomes (Adams, 1965). Procedural
justice is related to the process or means used to get
outcomes. It involves the means, process and
systems which defined pay, wages and other
outcomes related to workplace being fair or not
(Leventhal, 1980). Outcomes might also be in the
form of promotions or budget related allocation
(Cohen-Charash, & Spector, 2001).
The issues of justice has been under focus as many
employees negotiate about it that is whether
employees get outcomes fairly (Distributive justice)
and whether the procedures used by organizations
to give outcomes are fair or not (Procedural justice)
(Tyler, 1989). Early organizational justice literature
argues that distributive justice determine economic
value of outcomes like raise in pay or not (Folger,
& Cropanzano, 1998). Procedural justice is
relations based and determine self-linked motives
like giving voice to others and using fair procedures
(Folger, & Cropanzano, 1998), commitment to
employees and groups (Tyler, 1999) without
considering their culture differences. That’s why it
has been concluded that distributive justice
determine economic benefits, however procedural
justice determine socio-emotional benefits
(Cropanzano, & Ambrose, 2001), because of this
difference both types of justice are considered
separate. . It has been observed that procedural
justice and its affect is observed when outcomes are
unfavorable or unfair (Brockner, & Wiesenfeld,
1996). When outcomes are favorable employees
feel satisfied but when outcomes are unfair then
procedural justice is use to determine those
outcomes that are to be analyzed, which might give
rise to negative response of people to these
outcomes (Brockner, & Wiesenfeld, 1996).
Distributive and procedural justice is closely related
to attitude and behavior of employees. Distributive
justice is about satisfaction whereas procedural
justice is about commitment and trust upon
supervisor (Folger, & Konovsky, 1989). Moreover
it is generally argued that distributive justice relates
to personal outcomes that are job satisfaction and
procedural justice relates to institutions and plays an
important role in employee contribution evaluation
(Lind, & Tyler, 1998). Procedural justice can be
used to alleviate the unfavorable outcome, negative
effects and behavioral outcomes (Brockner, &
Wiesenfeld, 1996).
Work Engagement and Organization Justice
Employees work engagement has been the focus of
researchers from past many years. Initial
contribution to work engagement literature was
made by Kahn (1990) who has been known as “the
academic parent of employee engagement work”.
According to Kahn (1990) engagement can be
defined as “the harnessing of organization
members’ selves to their work role by which they
employ and express themselves physically,
cognitively and emotionally during work
performances’. Another most accepted definition
states that work engagement is “a positive,
fulfilling, work-related state of mind characterized
by vigor, dedication and absorption”. Vigor means
high energy and mental flexibility at work place,
open heartedly and willingly putting efforts in one’s
work and determination though there is a difficult
situation. Dedication means having sense of
importance, excitement, motivation, honor and
challenge. While absorption means doing one’s job
with concentration and interest. One is immersed in
work to the extent that time passes so quickly and
leaving work without completion becomes difficult
for him/her.
Kahn (1990) suggests that three psychological
conditions are important for engagement that is
meaning fullness, safety and availability. Workers
would be engaged in their work when there is
physiological meaningfulness of their job or work
to them, they feel safe and they are psychologically
available at a time of performing the job. In
empirical study to test Khan’s model three
psychological conditions; meaningfulness, safety
50
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62
and availability are essential in relation with work
engagement.
Social Exchange Theory (SET) (Cropanzano, &
Ambrose, 2001) gives theoretical basis for the
employee being more committed or less committed
with organization and their work. Social exchange
is defined as Subjective, relationship oriented
interaction between employers and employees
characterized by an exchange by social-emotional
benefits, a long term focus and open ended
commitments. This frame work was given to
understand leader-follower relationship and factors
of commitment. According to this theory two
parties interact with each other which create scene
of obligation to reciprocate to trust, loyalty and
commitment of others (Cropanzano, & Ambrose,
2001). Organizational justice represents perception
of employee’s fairness at workplace which in return
administrator social exchange relationship.
According to Moorman (1991), procedural justice
positively affects organization engagement. Another
study conducted by Kahn (1990) conclude that both
distributive and procedural justice influence WE
equally like positive procedural justice perception
leads to greater absorption where as positive
distributive justice perception leads to greater
dedication and vigor. Other study argues that
procedural justice has relationship with employee
engagement and strongly related to work
satisfaction, organization committed and OCB
whereas distributive justice has positive relation
with employee engagement. Procedural justice has
importance to predict vigor but does not exhibit
significance in predicting absorption and dedication.
Hypothesis 1a
Distributive justice is positively related to work
engagement.
Hypothesis 1b
Procedural justice is positively related to work
engagement.
Organization Citizenship Behavior and job
outcomes
OCB is voluntary behavior of employees for
effectiveness of the organization that go beyond the
duties or roles assigned to them (Organ, 1990).
Many studies concluded that organizations having
more committed employees are engaged in OCB
creation (Moorman, 1991). OCB can have many
different orientations like workers oriented OCB
which include helping coworkers who might be
facing heavy workload, supervisor oriented OCB
which means to be helpful to supervisor in time of
difficulty and customers oriented OCB too that
include being helpful to customers. Two categories
of OCB are designed by Tyler (1989). One is OCBI,
which means organization citizenship behavior that
will be beneficial for individuals. Second type is
OCBC which means organization citizenship
behavior that will be beneficial for whole of
organization. Recent research evaluates OCB effect
in increasing retention of employees (Mackensie et
al., 1993).
OCB has been the focus of research as a
consequence of organizational justice. Previously
conducted research explain OCB related to
employees from social exchange aspect (Organ,
1988), thus employees with more social exchange
relationship shows more trust in organization and
sense of reciprocity towards organization, so
perform voluntary behaviors for that organization
beyond their assigned roles and duties.
Organizational justice has also been conceptualized
from social exchange theory thus it can be
considered that SET support OJ and OCB up on
which research has been conducted (Aryee et al.,
2002; Karriker et al., 2008).
For instance with respect to distributive justice if an
organization will have fair output and reward
system employees will perceive an organization
being fair thus employees will voluntarily show
more interest towards it then self-interest (Lind &
Tyler, 1989). According to the group value model
51
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62
(Tyler, & Lind, 1992) employees feel respected in
organization and consider themselves with pride
and dignity being a member of the organization
when decisions and treatment with them are fair
(Tyler, & Lind, 1992) such feelings of respect and
pride make employees act favorable towards an
organization in the form of OCB (Tyler et al., 1996;
Lind, & Tyler, 2001). Employees also feel
motivated towards philanthropic, selfless and
humane behavior for organization in exchange of
fair treatment (Skarlicki, & Latham, 1996).
Hypothesis 2a
Distributive justice is related to organization
citizenship behavior.
Hypothesis 2b
Procedural justice is related to organization
citizenship behavior.
Islamic Work Ethics and job outcomes
Ethics are principles that differentiate between right
and wrong. It is crucial for organizations,
government, academic institutions and general
public to be fully aware of ethical and moral
dimensions of business activities (Crane, & Matten,
2007). Ethics has its conceptual roots in Weber’s
theory (1958) of protestant work ethics that was the
major focus of Western business ethics researchers
(Yousef, 2000a). Recently a new concept of IWE
has been brought under focus to study Islamic
ethical practices in businesses world (Ali, 1988).
This new concept and its principles got rise from
Quran and Sunnah (Yousef, 2000a; Ali, & Al-
Owaihan, 2008). Quran and Sunnah serve as the
valid source of principles to be followed for each
era and individual who embraced Islam (Beekum, &
Badami, 2005).
Religion Islam provides a complete and valid
ethical system that is for all spheres of life including
economic and social spheres (Rice, 1999). It not
only focuses on individual but also on collective
lives of followers (Beekun, 1997). IWE has its base
in Islamic Law, these laws are over lasting and
universal thus is not confined to particular
individual, field or society (Syed, & Ali, 2010).
Islamic modes of life reveals that productive work
has to be performed, link between IWE and
organization justice has been mentioned at several
places in Quran (Abeng, 1997a). Quran says ‘‘and
he who does righteous deeds and he is a believer, he
will neither have fear of injustice nor deprivation’’
(20:112) and ‘‘for those who were believers and
they did righteous deeds, are the Gardens as
accommodation for their deeds’’ (32:19). Prophet
Muhammad (PBUH) said, hard work clears the sins
of people and the best food which a person eats is
the one he eats out of his work (Ali, 1992).
Teachings of Islam focus on being loyal, hard
worker and have dignity (Ali, 1992). In Islam
workers and labors who work hard for their lives
are considered important for the society well-being
(Ali, 1992). Quran says ‘‘for all people, there are
ranks according to their deeds’’ (6:132) ‘‘and man
has nothing except that for which he strives’’
(53:39). Therefore Islam stress up on hard work
and forbids from being useless or being involved in
unproductive activities (Abeng, 1997b). Therefore
work has numerous benefits to keep balance in
some one’s life and society (Ali, 1988). According
to IWE perspective it is obligatory to be involved in
economic activities and life without work is
meaning less (Yousef, 2000a). IWE at work is
source of achievement, success and satisfaction.
Moderating role Of IWE
IWE plays an important moderating role between
justice types and job outcomes because it focuses on
kindness and justice (Yousef, 2000a). IWE is
individual based concept that’s why it is argued that
individuals who are strong believer of IWE will
show reaction even in absence of organization
fairness. People who are strong believer of IWE
will not bother much if there is absence of
distributive and procedural justice.
FIGURE 1 HERE
52
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62
As previously discussed low perception of
distributive and procedural justice in organization
results in low work commitment and OCB but
employees that are strong believer of IWE will have
less or no effect of injustice perception on
outcomes. As IWE argues that everybody is morally
obliged to fulfill work related goals even in the
absence of fair distribution of rewards and fair
procedures. Quran says ‘‘and he who does righteous
deeds and he is a believer, he will neither have fear
of injustice nor deprivation’’ (20:112). It is argued
that individuals who strongly follow IWE do not
even bother for low organizational justice as
Muslims have moral obligations towards work
(Bouma et al., 2003). Research conducted on
religion suggests that religious beliefs influence
intrinsic and extrinsic work values of an individual
(Parboteeah et al., 2009).As IWE is an important
part of Muslim religious beliefs and values,
employees having high IWE will show high level of
work commitment and OCB even when distributive
and procedural justice is perceived low.
Hypothesis 3a
IWE will moderate the positive relationship
between distributive justice and work engagement.
Hypothesis 3b
IWE will moderate the positive relationship
between distributive justice and organization
citizenship behavior.
Hypothesis 3c
IWE will moderate the positive relationship
between procedural justice and work engagement.
Hypothesis 3d
IWE will moderate the positive relationship
between procedural justice and organization
citizenship behavior.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
To conduct this research private and public
organization of Pakistan especially KP regions are
taken as sample. Sampling method for the current
research was non probability convenience sampling.
Data has been gathered from employees working in
private and public university. Total 160
questionnaires were distributed among targeted
respondents out of which 141 questionnaires has
been completely and positively filled.
The study is cross sectional as data was collected at
one period of time. The questionnaire begins with
demographic variables and comprise of 28 items.
There are two independent (DJ and PJ), two
dependent (WE and IWE) and one moderating
variable (IWE). 5 point Likert scale has been used
in questionnaire. Statistical Package for Social
Sciences (SPSS) has been used as analysis tool and
different tests like regression, correlation coefficient
were run upon the data.
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
Distribution of demographic
Table 1 shows the frequency distribution of
demographic variables like gender, age, experience
and tenure of the respondents. Table shows that the
majority precipitants are males. The majority
respondents of the age group 26-35 of whole
sample. According to working experience, most of
the participants having experience within range of
1-10 years.
TABLE 1 HERE
Number of respondents having qualification of
graduation, master, and other (M.Phil./PHD,
intermediate, Diploma etc...) are 34, 59, and 48
respectively.
Relationship of work engagement and
organization justices
Regression coefficient “R” value is .557 (see table
2) which means there is 55% relationship between
dependent and independent variable.
TABLE 2 HERE
53
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62
The coefficient of determination “R2” value is .31
which means there is 31% of variation in WE due to
change in DJ and PJ. Other factor adjusted R square
is actually R2 adjusted to population. It tells
variation occurring in DV due to population and has
value less then R square. Its value is .30 that means
30% variation in DV for population.
TABLE 3 HERE
In table 3 regression coefficient of DJ= 0.067 and of
PJ= 0.483 which means that with a percent increase
in distributive justice, work engagement will
increase 6% whereas with one percent increase in
procedural justice WE will increase by 48%. The
value of T for DJ and PJ are 1.28 and 5.96 which
show insignificant relationship between DJ and WE
but significant relationship between PJ and WE at
0.000.
Organizational Justice and Organization
Citizenship Behavior
In table 4 R= 0.305 which means that 30% of the
relationship exist between OJ and OCB, coefficient
of determination “R2” = 0.093 or 93% which means
there is 93% variation in OCB is due to change in
OJ.
TABLE 4 HERE
In table 5 regression coefficient of DJ is 0.19 or
19% and of PJ is 0.22 or 22% which means that
with one percent change in DJ, OCB change by
19% and one percent change in PJ bring 22%
change in OCB.
TABLE 5 HERE
The value of T for DJ and PJ are 3.65 and 2.68
which show significance at .000 thus insure the
acceptance of alternate hypothesis that there is
positive relationship between OJ and OCB.
Regression Analysis of Interaction-1 (DJ*IWE),
interaction-2 (PJ*IWE) and WE
Regression coefficient “R”= .646 (see table 6)
which means that there is 64% relationship between
DV and IV. Coefficient of determination “R2”=
.418 which means 41% of variation is explained in
WE by interaction 1 and interaction 2.
TABLE 6 HERE
For interaction 1 table 7 illustrate regression
coefficient value is .036 which means there is 3%
moderating effect of IWE between distributive
justice and WE. There is less and positive
moderating effect of IWE between DJ and WE.
TABLE 7 HERE
For interaction 2 regression coefficients is .115
which makes 11% moderating effect of IWE
between procedural justice and WE establish
significant relationship.
Regression Analysis of interaction-1 (DJ*IWE),
interaction-2 (PJ*IWE) and OCB
R=0.415 which shows that (see table 8) there is
41% relationship between predictors and OCB.
Coefficient of determination value illustrate that
17% of variation is explained by interaction terms
in OCB.
TABLE 8 HERE
For interaction 1 coefficient of regression is 42%
and there is significant moderating effect of IWE
between distributive justice and OCB.
TABLE 9 HERE
For interaction 2 coefficient of regression is 93%
and there is significant moderating effect of IWE
between procedural justice and OCB (see table 9).
TABLE 10 HERE
Table 10 shows beta and significance values before
and after introducing moderating variable. It shows
that relationship between WE and DJ is
insignificant and positive (B=0.067, ns) thus reject
the alternate hypothesis 1a whereas relationship
between WE and procedural justice is positive and
significant (B=0.483, p<0.05) thus accepting the
alternate hypothesis 1b.
54
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62
Relationship between DJ, OCB (B=0.196, p<0.05)
and PJ, OCB (B=0.222, P<0.05) is positive and
significant so support alternate hypothesis 2a and
2b. After introducing moderating variable in
relation with WE in form of interaction1 (DJ*IWE)
and interaction2 (PJ*IWE) results are (B1=0.036,
B2=0.115, P<0.05) significant thus support
hypothesis 3a and 3b. Results of interaction1
(B=0.042,p<0.05) and interaction2 (B=0.093,
P<0.05) with OCB are also supporting hypothesis
3c and 3d.
Discussion
The results reveals that distributive justice has
insignificant relationship with WE whereas
procedural justice has significant relationship with
WE which means that employees feel engaged in
their jobs assigned to them when procedures are fair
but decision outcomes play no contribution in
keeping employees engaged. Results further reveals
that that there is significant positive relationship
between DJ and OCB which means that employees
having perception of distributive justice will show
discretionary behavior when employees have
perception of distributive justice. Results further
show positive and significant relationship between
PJ and OCB thus ensure that fair procedures in
organization will lead in discretionary behavior by
employees. Furthermore IWE moderate a
significant role between DJ and WE thus employees
who believe in IWE will be engaged in their work
when DJ is present however according to previous
findings DJ has insignificant relationship with WE
but when employees are believers of Islamic work
ethics then they will be engaged in work. Results
illustrate positive and significant moderating effect
of IWE between PJ and WE. Findings further
illustrate that IWE moderate relationship between
DJ, OCB and PJ, OCB significantly that is IWE
leads to more organization citizenship behavior by
employees.
Conclusion
Results conclude that employees feel engaged in
their work and perform organization citizenship
behavior when they believe in Islamic codes of
conduct. Islam focuses on earning one's living by
using decent means. Islam preaches to work with in
perspectives of morals and Islamic principles.
Islamic codes of conduct motivate workers to earn
for livings with passion, dignity, honesty and
loyalty. IWE prioritize work as it nurture personal
growth and social relationships. It motivate for legal
earning and dedication towards work. It obligate its
followers to get engaged in economic activities and
avoid being idle and lazy therefore individuals who
follow IWE will have more satisfaction and good
performance then non followers of IWE. The
conducted research indicate that organizations
having fair procedures will make employees more
engaged in their job however both fair rewards and
fair procedures encourage organization citizenship
behavior thus employee perform activities other
than their required tasks. IWE moderate the
relationship between justice types, work
engagement and OCB thus employees who are
followers and believers of Islamic codes of life are
more engaged in their job and perform discretionary
behavior even in the absence of organization justice
as Islam preach honesty, loyalty and commitment to
work. The results thus support afore mentioned
research questions that employees will feel more
engaged in their tasks when they will have trust on
leaders and managers who represent the
organizations. Trust perception thus gives rise to
perception of justice among the subordinates which
ultimately motivate them to perform other than
targeted and compulsory tasks allocated to
subordinates. Islam and its codes of life however
teach to be loyal, honest and dedicated towards
one’s work. Islam also teaches to be cooperative to
others who require your help at the time of need.
IWE thus strengthen the relationship between
justice in the organization, commitment to one’s
own work and being cooperative.
Recommendations
55
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62
This study is very useful for managers and leaders
to understand business units and personnel working
in the Islamic world. This study gives review to
employee engagement and performing organization
citizenship behavior in presence if Islamic work
ethics. Managers are substantial components for
running business units for which they must have
knowledge of all effecting impacts upon employees.
The study provides detailed knowledge of Islamic
work ethics in supporting work engagement and
OCB. Managers dealing with Muslim employees of
multinational firms in Islamic world can make use
of Islamic ethic codes to make employees more
committed and engaged. Teachings of Islam are
applicable to all spheres of life in every context so
by giving training and delivering proper lectures
IWE concept can be enhanced among employees as
Muslims make 22.5% of the world population and
represent one of the major customers in the market.
REFERENCES
Abeng, T. (1997a). Business ethics in Islamic
context: Perspectives of a Muslim business
leader. Business Ethics Quarterly, 7(3), 47–54.
Abeng, T. (1997b). Business ethics in Islamic
context: Perspectives of a Muslim business
leader. Business Ethics Quarterly, 7(3), 47–54.
Adams, S. J. (1965). Inequity in social exchange.
Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz
(Ed.) Advances in experimental social
psychology, 2, 267–299). New York, NY:
Academic Press.
Ali, A. (1988). Scaling an Islamic work ethic. The
Journal of Social Psychology, 128(5), 575–
583.
Ali, A. (1992). The Islamic work ethic in Arabia.
The Journal of Psychology, 126(5), 507–519.
Ali, J. A., & Al-Owaihan, A. (2008). Islamic work
ethic: A critical review. Cross Cultural
Management: An International Journal, 15(1),
5–19.
Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002).
Trust as a mediator of the relationship between
organizational justice and work outcomes.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23 (3),
267-285.
Beekun, R. I. & Badawi, J.A. (2005). Balancing
ethical responsibility among multiple
organizational stakeholders: The Islamic
perspective. . Journal of Business Ethics, 60(2),
131–145.
Beekun, R. (1997). Islamic Business Ethics.
Herndon, VA: The International Institute of
Islamic Thought.
Bouma, G., Haidar, A., Nyland, C., & Smith, W.
(2003). Work, religious diversity and Islam.
Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources,
41(1), 51–61.
Brockner, J. & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An
integrative framework for explaining reactions
to decisions: interactive effects of outcomes
and procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 120,
189-208.
Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P.E. (2001). The
role of justice in organizations. A meta-
analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 86, 278–321.
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., &
Porter, L. H. (2001). Justice at the millennium:
A meta-analytic review of 25 years of
organizational justice research. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 86, 425–445.
Crane, A. & Matten. D. (2007). Business ethics:
Managing corporate citizenship and
sustainability in the age of globalization.
Cropanzano, R., & Ambrose, M. L. (2001).
Procedural and distributive justice is more
similar than you think: A monistic perspective
and a research agenda. In J. Greenberg & R.
56
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62
Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational
justice (pp. 119-151). Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998).
Organizational justice and human resource
management. NY: Sage.
Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of
procedural justice and distributive justice of
reactions to pay raise decisions. Academy of
Management Journal, 32, 115-130.
Kahn, W. A. (2001) Psychological conditions of
personal engagement and disengagement at
work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4),
692-724.
Karriker, J. H. & Williams, M. L. (2009).
Organizational justice and organizational
citizenship behavior: a mediated multifocal
model. Journal of Management, 35(1), 112-
135.
Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with
equity theory? New approaches to the study of
fairness in social relationship. In K. J. Gergen,
M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social
exchange: Advances in theory and research
(pp. 27–55). New York: Plenum.
Lind, E.A. (2001b). Thinking critically about justice
judgment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58,
220–226.
Lind, E. A & Tyler, T. R. (2001). Fairness heuristic
theory: justice judgments as pivotal cognitions
in organizational relations Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 20(1), 4 – 13.
MacKenzie, S. B, Podsakoff, P. M., & Fetter R.
(1993). The impact of organizational
citizenship behavior on evaluations of
salesperson performance. J Mark, 57(1), 70 –
80.
Moorman, R.H. (1991). Relationship between
organizational justice and organizational
citizenship behaviors: do fairness perceptions
influence employee citizenship? Journal of
Applied Psychology, 76(6), 845-855.
Organ, D. W. (1990). The motivational basis of
organizational citizenship behavior. Research
in Organizational Behavior, 43-72.
Parboteeah, K. P. Paik, Y., & Cullen, J. B. (2009).
Religious groups and work values: A focus on
Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Islam.
International Journal of Cross Cultural
Management, 9, 51–67.
Rice, G. (1999). Islamic ethics and the implications
for business. . Journal of Business Ethics, 18,
345–358.
Skarlicki, D. P. & Latham, G. P. (1996). Increasing
citizenship behavior within a labor union: A
test of organizational justice theory. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 8, 161-169.
Syed, J. & Ali, A. J. (2010). Principles of
employment relations in Islam: A normative
view. Employee Relations. 32(5), 454–469
Tyler, T.R. (1999). Why people cooperate with
organizations: an identity-based perspective.
Research in Organizational Behavior, 21, 201-
246.
Tyler, T.R. and Lind, E.A. (1992). A relational
model of authority in groups. Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology, 115-190.
Tyler, T. R., Degoey, P. & Smith, H., (1996).
Understanding why the justice of group
procedures matters: a test of the psychological
dynamics of the group-value model. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 73(5), 913-
930.
Tyler, T. R. (1989). The psychology of procedural
justice: a test of the group value model.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
57, 333-344.
Dyne, V. L., Graham, J. W., & Dienesch, R. M.
(1994). Organizational citizenship behavior:
57
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62

construct redefinition, measurement, and

validation. Academy of Management Journal,
765-802.
Weber, M. (1958). The protestant ethic and the
spirit of capitalism. New York: Scribner.
Yousef, D. A. (2000a). Organizational commitment
as a mediator of the relationship between
Islamic work ethic and attitudes toward
organizational change. Human Relations, 5,
513–537.

APPENDIX

Figure 01

Conceptual Model of moderating role of Islamic work ethics between organizational justice and job
outcomes

Islamic Work Ethics

Distributive Justice OCB

Procedural Justice Work Engagement

58
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62

Table 1:

Distribution of demographic
Frequency Percent
Gender
Male 076 53.9
Female 065 46.1
Age
15-25 046 32.6
26-35 068 48.2
Above 36 year 026 18.4
Experience
Below 10 year 118 83.7
Above 10 year 023 16.3
Sector
Public 085 60.3
Private 056 39.7
Education
Graduation 034 24.1
Master 059 41.8
Other 048 34.1
Source: Durkhanai, 2015.

Table 2
Model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .557 .310 .300 .61

Predictors: (Constant), Mean DJ, Mean PJ.
Source: Durkhanai, 2015.

59
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62

Table 3

Coefficients
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients

Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.

(Constant) 2.130 .232 9.179 .000

Mean DJ .067 .053 .016 1.280 .203
Mean PJ .483 .081 .494 5.960 .000

a. D.V: Mean WE.

Source: Durkhanai, 2015.

Table 4
Model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .305a .093 .080 .62973

a. Predictors: (Constant), Mean PJ, Mean DJ.
b. Dependent Variable: Mean OCB.
Source: Durkhanai, 2015.
Table 5
Coefficients
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients

Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.

(Constant) 3.899 .237 16.481 .000

Mean DJ .196 .054 .347 3.654 .000
MeanPJ .222 .083 .255 2.683 .008
a. D.V: Mean OCB
Source: Durkhanai, 2015.

Table 6
Model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .646a .418 .409 .56741

a. Predictors: (Constant), Interaction 2, Interaction 1.
b. Dependent Variable: Mean WE.
Source: Durkhanai, 2015.

60
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62

Table 7
Coefficients
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients

Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.

(Constant) 2.180 .180 12.100 .000

Interaction 1 .036 .013 .207 2.792 .006
Interaction 2 .115 .017 .502 6.993 .000

a. D.V: Mean WE
Source: Durkhanai, 2015.

Table 8
Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .415a .172 .160 .60161

a. Predictors: (Constant), Interaction 2, Interaction 1.
b. Dependent Variable: Mean OCB.
Source: Durkhanai, 2015.

Table 9

Coefficients
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients

Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.

(Constant) 3.392 .191 17.760 .000

Interaction 1 .042 .014 .276 3.118 .000
Interaction 2 .093 .018 .472 5.326 .000
a. D.V: MeanOCB
Source: Durkhanai, 2015.

61
Entrep. innov. manag. j.
p-ISSN: 2310-0079, e-ISSN: 2311-1836
Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 48-62

Table 10
Over all Regression Analysis and Interpretation
ORGANIZATION CITIZENSHIP
WORK ENGAGEMENT
BEHAVIOUR

Beta Sig Beta Sig

DJ .067 .203 .196 .000

PJ .483 .000 .222 .008
Interaction1 .036 .006 .042 .002
Interaction 2 .115 .000 .093 .000
Source: Durkhanai, 2015.

62