International Management Review Vol. 7 No.

1 2011

Does Organizational Justice Influence Job Satisfaction and Self-Perceived

Performance in Saudi Arabia Work Environment?
Abdallah M. Elamin
King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

Nasser Alomaim
Al-Imam Muhammed Ibn Saud Islamic University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[Abstract] The purpose of this paper was to examine the influence of organizational justice perceptions on
job satisfaction, and self-perceived performance in the Saudi Arabia. Using a self-administered
questionnaire, 793 employees, both Saudi and foreign workers working in different organizations, in
Saudi Arabia were randomly selected and surveyed. Correlation and regression analyses were used to
examine the data. The study revealed that perceptions of organizational justice influence job satisfaction
for both Saudi employees, and foreign workers. For the Saudi employees, none of the justice dimensions
showed a relationship with self-perceived performance. For the foreign workers, all the justice
dimensions have significantly influenced self-perceived performance. While the distributive justice was
the best predictor of self-perceived performance for foreign workers, the procedural justice showed a
negative effect on it. The results were discussed in the light of the literature, and the context of the Saudi
Arabian work environment.

[Keywords] justice; satisfaction; performance; Saudi Arabia; foreign workers

Introduction
Increasing attention has been paid in recent years to the issue of organizational justice and its impacts on
organizational outcomes. The concept of justice is central to understanding a wide range of human
behaviors in the organizational setting (Hartman, et al., 1999). Organizational justice, a term coined by
Greenberg (1987) refers to employee perceptions of fairness in the workplace. It has shown to be
associated with several outcomes such as job satisfaction, work motivation (Suliman, 2007; Fernandes &
Awamleh, 2006; Cropanzano, et al., 2001; Moorman, 1991), intention to turnover (Colquitt, et al., 2001),
work performance (Suliman, 2007; Fernandes & Awamleh, 2006; Phillips, et al., 2001), commitment
(Folger & Konovsky, 1989), organizational citizenship behavior (Moorman, 1991). While there is a large
amount of research in this area in the West, little research has been conducted to assess employees’
perception of fairness in the Arab world and Saudi Arabia being no exception.
It should be noted that cross-cultural research has begun to demonstrate that while the concept of
organizational justice is important and valued across cultures, the interpretation and effect may not be
(Reithel, et al., 2007). Cross-cultural studies are very important for justice theory development as Leung
and Stephan (2001) have persuasively argued that research on organizational justice must go beyond the
Euro-American cultural boundaries if the aim is to develop more universal and generalizable theories in
justice.
This study is designed to assess the influence of organizational justice perceptions on job satisfaction
and self-perceived performance in the Saudi Arabia by focusing on the two main groups of employees
that represent the majority of workforce in Saudi Arabia namely, Saudi employees, and foreign workers
(Arab and Asian). The term organizational justice is used in this study to denote the degree to which
employees perceive the overall organizational rules, procedures and policies that are related to their work
to be fair. It encompasses three components, principally, distributive justice, procedural justice and
interactional justice. Job satisfaction is used to refer to the degree to which employees feel positively or
negatively about their jobs. It is based on assessing the job and job-related experience with some degree
of favor and disfavor (Locke, 1976). Work performance is the degree to which employees are carrying out
their jobs in a given work setting (Suliman, 2007). This study contributes to a better understanding of

38
International Management Review Vol. 7 No. 1 2011

fairness perceptions by employees in a multiculturalism society where foreigners play major role in
economic development process.

The Context
Saudi Arabia encompasses 2.25 million square kilometers with a population over 24 million. Saudi Arabia
has an oil-based economy with strong government controls over major economic activities. According to
the SAMA’s Forty Four Annual Report, 2008, the total number of workers in Saudi Arabia is 8,229,654
including 49 percent Saudi and 51 percent non-Saudi. The total number of the Saudi workforce is
4,029,955, including 3,362,712 (83.4 percent) men and 667243 (16.6 percent) women. The employed
Saudi men and women account for 76.5 percent and 12.5 percent, respectively, of the total Saudi
workforce. The total number of the foreign workforce is 4,199,699 including 3,596,778 (85.6 percent)
men and 602,921 (14.4 percent) women. The employed foreign men and women account for 85.3 percent
and 14.3 percent, respectively, of the total non-Saudi workforce.
The local Saudi labor force is largely employed by the public sector and overwhelmingly male
(Madhi & Barrientos, 2003). There are rigid boundaries in social roles and expectations for women
compared to men in Saudi Arabia and thus, there are fewer women workers in Saudi Arabia; they account
only for 15.4 percent of the total workers in Saudi Arabia (SAMA’s Forty Four Annual Report, 2008.) and
engage in sectors that are traditionally female: teaching and nursing. The foreign workers play an
important role in the Saudi economy, particularly in the oil and service sectors. Foreign workers come
primarily from other Arab and Muslim countries including many Asian. Fewer than 100,000 Westerners
work and live in Saudi Arabia. The conditions for employment among Saudi employees and foreign
workers differ vastly (Madhi & Barrientos, 2003). The work culture of Saudi Arabia has two distinct
sectors. Saudi Arabia nationals typically migrate to high paying administrative public sector work.
Saudi nationals are generally guaranteed employment and provided with government-sponsored
universal health care, generous educational scholarships and resources, and various financial privileges
(Madhi & Barrientos, 2003). These privileges are associated with the public policy of Saudization which
seeks, among other things, to provide jobs and job-related privileges to nationals to reduce the country’s
heavy dependence on foreign labors (Madhi & Barrientos, 2003; Sadi & Al-Buraey, 2009). Jobs in private
sector organizations are typically held by foreign workers from numerous countries. Most of these
individuals are temporary legal residents of Saudi Arabia and maintain their status under restrictive work
visas. Saudi Arabia is a conservative country where Islamic teachings and Arabian cultural values are
strictly followed. The country falls along a spectrum of cultural characteristics of Gulf Cooperation
Council (GCC) countries, distinctly tribal, conservative in its adherence to Islam and influenced by
significant exposure to the West (Dadfar, et al., 2003). Moreover, Saudi Arabia’s culture manifests high
power distance, high uncertainty avoidance, and collectivist characteristics along Hofestede’s (1980)
cultural dimensions (Alkhaldi & Wallace, 1999; Robertson, et al., 2001).

Organizational Justice
Organizational justice focuses on employees’ perception of fairness and is considered to be one of the
core values that organizations covet (Reithel, et al., 2007). It describes the individual’s or group’s
perception of the fairness of treatment received from an organization and their behavioral reactions to
such perceptions (Greenberg, 1993). Organizational justice is typically conceptualized with three
components: distributive, procedural, and interactional justice (Cropanzano, et al., 2001; Masterson, et al.,
2000; McDowall and Fletcher, 2004).
Distributive justice is concerned with perceptions of fairness about organizational allocations and
outcomes (Adam, 1965; Saunders, et al., 2002). Organizations convey a sense of concern for employee
well-being and their contribution to organizational success when rewards and resources are fairly
distributed (Peele III, 2007). Perceptions of distributive justice are based largely on comparisons with
others (Greenberg, 1987). At the work setting, employees are likely to use multiple referents of
comparison (Bonache, et al., 2001; Tremblay & Roussel, 2001) including comparison to other fellows
within the same organization (assessment of internal equity), to employees occupying similar jobs in

39
International Management Review Vol. 7 No. 1 2011

other organizations (assessment of external equity), and to employees performing similar jobs within the
same organization (assessment of relative equity). The result of comparison (negative or positive) is
strongly associated with the employee’s perception of, and reaction to, the system. If the comparison
result is positive, they are likely to feel positive toward the system. However, if the result is negative, they
may wish to challenge the system that has given rise to this state of affairs (Suliman, 2007). Moreover, a
number of potentially adverse behavioral reactions may follow from this perception such as reduced job
performance, embarking on the use of withdrawal behavior such as absenteeism, turnover, and reduced
cooperation (Folger & Cropanzano, 1998).
While distributive justice is concerned with perceptions of fairness about organizational allocations
and outcomes, procedural justice refers to the perceived fairness of the processes used to determine
organizational outcomes (Colquitt, et al., 2001; Folger & Konovsky, 1989). It derives from the perceived
equity of organizational policies and procedures determining resource allocation and other managerial
decisions (Peele III, 2007). Employees judge the equity of procedures by the amount of bias, the breadth
and accuracy of information gathering, number of relevant parties given voice in the decisions, ethical
standards applied, and the consistency and universality of decision implementation (Stecher & Rosse,
2005). Consistency in procedures has shown to be an important determining factor of fairness across
differing allocation situations (Greenberg, 1987). Decisions based on procedures that are perceived as fair
are more likely to be accepted by those they affect, than decisions arising from procedures that are not
perceived fair (Cropanzano & Greenberg, 1997).
Interactional justice focuses on employees’ perceptions about the fairness of the interpersonal
treatment received during implementation (Bies & Moag, 1986). It refers to the quality of interpersonal
processes and treatment of individuals (i.e. being treated with dignity and respect), as well as the extent to
which to which reasons behind the outcomes are explained (Bies & Moag, 1986). Perceptions of
interactional justice result from supervisor trust-building behaviors such as “availability, competence,
consistency, discreetness, fairness, integrity, loyalty, openness, promise fulfillment, receptivity, and
overall trust” (Deluga, 1994, p. 317). These three constructs of organizational justice will be used to study
their influence on job satisfaction and employees’ self-perceived performance in Saudi Arabia’s context.

Method
Sample
Using a self-administered questionnaire, 1000 employees, both Saudi employees and foreign workers
were randomly selected and surveyed. The participants were selected from organizations represented a
wide range of industries including banking, health care, education, manufacturing, transportation and
communication. The respondents were representing top, middle and bottom levels of management. Out of
the 1000 questionnaires distributed by the researchers, only 820 were returned, representing a response
rate of 82 percent. Nevertheless, 793 instruments out of the 820 were found to be suitable for analysis -
52.5 percent of the respondents were Saudi nationals, and 47.5 percent foreign workers.

Measures
Organizational Justice. The 20-item scale developed by Niehoff and Moorman (1993) was used to
measure distributive justice, procedural justice and interactional justice. The measure was assessed on a 5-
point scale ranging from 0 “strongly disagree” to 4 “strongly agree”. The Cronbach alpha for the 20 items
was 0.918. The 5 items were related to distributive justice (alpha value 0.786), 6 items to procedural
justice (alpha value 0.826), and 9 items for interactional justice (alpha value 0.894). An item scale for
distributive justice is “My work schedule is fair”. An item scale for procedural justice is “My supervisor
is neutral in decision making”. An example item for interactional justice measure is “My supervisor
provides explanations for the decisions related to my job”.

40
International Management Review Vol. 7 No. 1 2011

Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction was measured with a 7-item scale developed and validated by Al-Dmour and Awamleh
(2002). The measure was assessed on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 “strongly disagree” to 4 “strongly
agree”. An example of the item format is “I find that my opinions are respected at work”. The Cronbach
alpha was found to be 0.851.

Self-Perceived Performance
Self-perceived performance was measured using four-item scale developed and validated by Al-Dmour
and Awamleh (2002). The measure was assessed on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 “strongly disagree” to
4 “strongly agree”. Examples of the item format is “I consider my performance better than the average
employees in the company”, and “I always reach my targets”. The Cronbach alpha was found to be 0.735.
The scales were translated to Arabic from the English language. The Arabic version was also back
translated to English and the two versions were compared by an independent linguist to ensure
equivalence. The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients were comparable with the original scales.

Results
The SPSS version 16.0 was used to analyze data and examine data. Table 1 presents the distribution of
study sample according to the demographic and career factors as well as the sector (private, public and
joint venture). As shown in Table 1, the majority of the Saudi respondents, as well as foreign workers is
males, married, educated to the first degree or above, aged 35 years or less, and had seven years of job
tenure or less and was from middle management. Table 1 also reveals that the majority of participants
work for private organizations. As can be seen from this table, the number of foreign workers employed
by private sector was greater than the number of Saudi workers, whereas the number of the Saudi workers
employed by the public sector was greater than the number of foreign workers.

Table 1. The Description of the Study Sample

Saudi Employees Foreign workers Total
N = 416 (52%) N = 377 (47.5%) N = 793
Variables Frequ-
% Frequency % Frequency %
Demographic ency
Gender Male 280 67.3 282 74.8 562 70.9
Female 136 32.7 95 25.2 231 29.1
Marital status Married 237 57 249 66.0 486 61.3
Non-married 179 43 128 34.0 307 38.7
Education High school or less 91 21.9 49 13.0 140 17.7
Diploma 119 28.6 126 33.4 245 30.9
First degree and 206 49.5 202 53.6 408 51.5
above
Age 35 years and less 313 75.2 220 58.4 533 67.2
36 - 46 83 20.0 124 32.9 207 26.1
47 years and above 20 04.8 33 08.8 53 06.7
Career
Job tenure 7 years and less 290 69.7 240 63.7 530 66.8
8 - 13 68 16.3 84 22.3 152 19.2
14 years and above 58 13.9 53 14.1 111 14.0
Job level Top level 30 07.2 40 10.6 70 08.8
Middle level 215 51.7 210 55.7 425 53.6
Bottom level 171 41.1 127 33.7 298 37.6
Sector
Private sector 190 45.7 267 70.8 457 57.6
Public sector 154 37.0 74 19.6 228 28.8
Joint venture 72 17.3 36 09.5 108 13.6

41
International Management Review Vol. 7 No. 1 2011

Table 2 presents the correlations among all variables used in this study. As the table indicates there
was high and significant correlation among most of the variables used in this study. For Saudi
employees’ group, satisfaction showed significant positive correlation with all three concepts of
organizational justice (distributive r = 0.59, procedural r = 0.69, and interactional r = 0.74), and
significant low correlation with performance (r = 0.11). Performance failed to show any significant
correlation with all the three concepts of organizational justice. Procedural justice and interactional
justice showed a high and significant correlation (r = 0.79) whereas both distributive and procedural
justice and distributive and interactional justice showed moderate significant correlation (r = 0.39 and
r = 0.41 respectively).
For foreign workers group, satisfaction showed significant positive correlation with all three
concepts of organizational justice (distributive r = 0.63, procedural r = 0.65, and interactional r = 0.66),
and significant low correlation with performance (r = 0.19). Performance showed low correlation with
both distributive justice (r = 0.16) and interactional justice (r = 0.12), and failed to show any
significant correlation with procedural justice. Procedural justice and interactional justice showed a
high and significant correlation (r = 0.69), whereas both distributive and procedural justice and
distributive and interactional justice showed moderate significant correlation (r = 0.55 and r = 0.44
respectively).

Table 2. Inter-Correlations of Study Variables for Both Groups: Saudi Employees and Foreign Workers
(Foreign workers in parenthesis)
1 2 3 4 5
0.11* 0.59** 0.69** 0.74**
1 Satisfaction
(0.19**) (0.63**) (0.65**) (0.66**)
0.07 0.04 0.07
2 Performance
(0.16**) (0.03) (0.12*)
0.39** 0.41**
3 Distributive Justice
(0.55**) (0.44**)
0.79**
4 Procedural Justice
(0.69**)
5 Interactional Justice
Note: ** Correlation is significant at p< 0.01, *Correlation is significant at p< 0.05

Multiple Regressions
Four multiple regressions models, two for each of the groups were run in order to test the influence of
organizational justice variables.

1. Saudi employees – influence of organization justice variables on job satisfaction

Using the enter method, a significant model emerged: F (3, 412) = 271.352, p< 0.0005. The model
explains 66.2 per cent of the variance (Adjusted R² = .662). Table 3 gives information for the
predictor variables entered into model. All the three variables (distributive, procedural and
interactional) were significant predictor of job satisfaction for the Saudi employees group.

Table 3. The Unstandardized and Standardized Regression Coefficients for the Variables Entered into the
Model (Job satisfaction is dependent variable: Saudi employees)
Variable B SE B
Interactional Justice 0.31 0.03 0.43**
Distributive Justice 0.49 0.05 0.33**
Procedural Justice 0.21 0.05 0.22**
** p< 0.0005

42
International Management Review Vol. 7 No. 1 2011

2. Saudi employees – influence of organization justice variables on self-perceived performance

Using the enter method; the overall model was not significant: F (3, 412) = 0.938, p=0.422. Table 4
gives information for the predictor variables entered into model. No significant influence of any of the
three variables (distributive, procedural and interactional) on self-perceived performance for the Saudi
employees group.

Table 4. The Unstandardized and Standardized Regression Coefficients for the Variables Entered into the
Model (Performance is dependent variable: Saudi employees)
Variable B SE B
Interactional Justice 0.03 0.03 0.08
Distributive Justice 0.04 0.04 0.05
Procedural Justice -0.02 0.04 -0.05

3. Foreign workers – influence of organization justice variables on job satisfaction

Using the enter method, a significant model emerged: F (3, 373) = 185.853, p< 0.0005. The model
explains 59.6 percent of the variance (Adjusted R² = .596). Table 5 gives information for the predictor
variables entered into model. All the three variables (distributive, procedural and interactional) were
significant predictor of job satisfaction for the foreign workers group.

Table 5. The Unstandardized and Standardized Regression Coefficients for the Variables Entered into the
Model (Job satisfaction is dependent variable: Foreign workers)
Variable B SE B
Interactional Justice 0.29 0.04 0.37**
Distributive Justice 0.46 0.05 0.36**
Procedural Justice 0.25 0.06 0.20**
** p< 0.0005

4. Foreign workers – influence of organization justice variables on self-perceived performance

Using the enter method, a significant model emerged: F (3, 373) = 5.892, p = 0.001. The model
explains 3.8 per cent of the variance (Adjusted R² = .038). Table 6 gives information for the predictor
variables entered into model. All the three variables (distributive, procedural and interactional) were
significant predictor of self-perceived performance for the foreign workers group.

Table 6. The Unstandardized and Standardized Regression Coefficients for the Variables Entered into the
Model (Performance is dependent variable: Foreign workers)
Variable B SE B
Distributive Justice 0.12 0.04 0.19*
Interactional Justice 0.07 0.03 0.36*
Procedural Justice -0.11 0.06 -0.19*
* p< 0.05

Discussion
This research has examined the influence of organizational justice perceptions on job satisfaction, and
self-perceived performance in Saudi Arabia by focusing on two groups of employees, namely Saudi
employees, and foreign workers working in Saudi Arabia. The first test for each group looked at the
justice-satisfaction relationships. The result revealed that the organizational justice variables have
fairly predicted the level of job satisfaction for both groups. Correlations between employees’
organizational justice perceptions were positively and significantly related to job satisfaction for both
groups. The study’s findings indicate that organizational members from both groups who tend to show
positive feelings towards distributive, procedural justice and interactional justice are likely to report

43
International Management Review Vol. 7 No. 1 2011

higher level of job satisfaction. These findings seem to support the studies of some scholars in this
field (Lee, 2000; Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Colquitt, et al., 2001; Lambert, 2003; Robinson,
2004; Parker & Kohlmeyer III, 2005; Samad 2006; Fernandes & Awamleh, 2006; Suliman, 2007;
Nadiri & Tanova, 2009; McAuliffe, et al., 2009; Sweeney & Quirin, 2009).
The findings of this study suggested that the interactional justice was the best predictor of job
satisfaction for both groups (Saudi employees and foreign workers), followed by distributive and
finally the procedural justice. This finding has indicated that honesty, courtesy, timely feedback,
respect for rights and the chances to express viewpoints (Bies & Moag, 1986) are the most critical
components for securing a satisfied workforce in Saudi Arabia. The quality of treatment that Saudi
employees and foreign workers receive from their supervisors when policies and procedures are
implemented at the workplace (Bies & Moag, 1986; Greenberg, 1993) seemed to be the most
important predictor of their level of satisfaction. As evidenced by the global body of the literature that
the explanation of interactional justice in the workplace is grounded in social exchange and norm of
reciprocity (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). However, one possible explanation to interactional justice
as the best predictor of job satisfaction for both Saudi national and foreign workers may be grounded
in the socio-cultural setup of the Saudi context and foreign workers’ background (Arab and Asian).
Greenberg (2001) has asserted that justice is norm-based and to understand how fairness is
perceived in organizations, it is necessary to consider cultural standards, norms and values of
organizations and its people. The norms and values of people differ due to different cultural
backgrounds. Leung and Morris (2001) have argued that people perception of justice may depend on
their culture or ethnicity. Honesty, respect, courtesy were among the most important Arabian values
that reinforced by Islamic teachings. Most foreign workers participated in this study are Arab and
Asian who share common grounds with Saudi employees, interalia, religion (Islamic faith), language
and history in the case of Arab foreign workers, and above all collectivist life style.
As far as justice-self assessed performance relations were concerned, two intriguing findings
emerged. First, none of the justice variables showed a relationship with self-perceived performance for
the Saudi employees group. Second, all the three justice dimensions were significantly influenced self-
perceived performance for the foreign workers group, with a negative significant influence of
procedural justice. These two findings will be discussed below.
First, for the Saudi nationals group, the finding contradicts the extant body of literature, which
generally accepts that perceptions of justice, at all dimensions, strongly influence both affective and
behavioral responses (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Colquitt, et al., 2001). Given that all justice
dimensions were strongly related to job satisfaction, this finding has elucidated a case where the
affective responses are separated from behavioral one. The Feldman’s (1996) logic that considers
lower performance as one mechanism workers can use to restore personal feelings of equity regarding
the exchange working relationship might not be applicable in the case of Saudi employees. One
possible explanation for this finding may be related to the cultural values prevailed in Saudi Arabia.
Saudi culture is high in ‘power distance’, and more ‘collectivist’ in nature, (Hofestede, 1980).
Therefore, Saudi employees may not share the expectation of fairness that employees in a low power
distance and individualistic cultures such as Western contexts, where the association between justice
and performance is straightforward. Therefore, justice-performance relationship, if exists, it is
nonlinear and mediated with many social processes such as the effect of tribe, clan and family name.
This issue poses a new challenge to both researchers and professionals who are interested in HRM
practices in non-Western contexts.
Second, for the foreign workers group, the results conform to the findings of mainstream research
and accordingly perception of all justice dimensions influence performance (Suliman, 2007; Phillips,
et al., 2001). While perception of distributive justice was found to be the best predictor of performance
followed by interactional justice, the perception of procedural justice showed a negative effect on it.
These findings will be discussed in the light of employment practices in Saudi Arabia.

44
International Management Review Vol. 7 No. 1 2011

To recap, the foreign workers represented by the study sample came from Asian and Arab backgrounds.
Asian and Arab are belonging to collectivist culture in which people are less concerned with individual
standing or the amount that each individual receives than member of individualistic societies. Recent
studies, however, have emphasized that distributive justice is emerging as an important issue even in
collectivist societies as their management systems increase pay-for-performance and layoffs (Chang,
2002, Chang & Hahn, 2006). Although most foreign workers share with natives of Saudi Arabia a
common history, the Arabic language (the case of Arab foreign workers) and the Islamic faith, but still
treated as foreigners and they are subject to very restricted work practices and residency constraints.
The powers granted to the employer by residency laws and regulations and the absence of effective
controls over employers’ practices encourage wide-scale discrimination against foreign workers, and
infringement of their rights by unscrupulous employers (Atiyyah, 1996, Madhi & Barrientos, 2003).
Foreign workers must obtain work and residence permits which are usually valid for one year and
for a specific occupation with a local employer. Foreigners do not qualify for permanent residency or
naturalization, regardless of the length of their stay (Madhi & Barrientos, 2003). While Saudi
employees move freely between employers, foreign workers are not permitted to switch employers
without the consent of their employer or sponsor. Foreign workers in the Gulf countries, Saudi Arabia
being no exception, often complain of low wages and pay inequity. Discrimination regarding wages
and other benefits has been widely reported (Fernandes & Awamleh, 2006; Atiyyah, 1996). In Blau
(1964) and Gouldner’s (1960) terms, the social exchange relationships of foreign workers in Saudi
Arabia contain fewer touchable outcomes because their employment relationships are more restricted.
Since foreign workers receive less from organization, it seems reasonable to expect them to contribute
less in term of performance to the organization. This is very consistent with the logic used by Feldman
(1996) who suggested lower performance is one mechanism workers can use to restore personal
feelings of equity regarding the work exchange relationships (Ang, et al., 2003).
As far as the finding regarding procedural justice-performance relationship in the case of foreign
workers in Saudi Arabia is concerned, it contradicts numerous studies conducted in this area. Meta-
analytic reviews have yielded a moderately strong positive relationship between procedural justice and
task performance (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Colquitt, et al., 2001). For example, Cohen-
Charash and Spector, (2001, p. 304) have asserted that “results from field studies show that work
performance is strongly related to procedural justice, but hardly to distributive and interactional
justice.”
Similarly, Zapata-Phelan, et al. (2009) have found that while procedural justice predicted task
performance, interactional justice was not significantly related to it. The disparity of this study finding
from the mainstream literature might be explained by looking at the processes used to determine
rewards, incentives, continuous employment and so on in Saudi Arabia context. In the case of Saudi
employees the continuous employment and career progress is more dependent on government
programs and policies than on organizational procedures. However, for foreigners the situation is
completely different. In most cases it is quite common to have different inconsistent procedures
dealing with employees based on their nationalities and background including pay, leave time, career
path, performance appraisal and others.
The Saudi government has recently exerted unprecedented efforts to reduce unemployment
among the nationals, it has embarked on the Saudization program where businesses are required to
demonstrate good efforts to recruit and maintain nationals (Madhi & Barrientos, 2003). This effort for
the national employees may lessen the importance of procedural justice as they know that their
employment and promotion is generally a matter of government policy. Therefore, much more
enacting of procedures and policies will be considered as advantages for Saudi nationals employees;
however, it increases the feelings of procedural injustice of foreign workers as obviously demonstrated
by negative affect that procedural justice has shown on performance.

45
International Management Review Vol. 7 No. 1 2011

Limitations and Future Research Directions

There are several limitations of this study that should be addressed. First, this study was limited in its
scope by concentration on the influence of organization justice on only job satisfaction and self-
perceived performance. Relying only on self-perceived performance has caused a major limitation on
the study’s findings. Self-perceived performance should be supported by employee’s immediate
supervisor performance ratings. Third, common variance problem cannot be ruled out since data on
both independent and dependent variables were collected at the same time and using same
questionnaire. Fourth, the impact of cultural dimensions was not controlled in this study and may have
influenced justice perception and work-related attitudes and behaviors relationship.
To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first of its kind to examine organizational justice
perceptions and its implications for job satisfaction and self-perceived performance in the context of
Saudi Arabia. It is also the first study to compare between Saudi employees and foreign workers
regarding work attitudes and behavior. Therefore, findings of this study open interesting further
research avenues. This research suggests that there is need for considerable further investigation of
organizational justice and its impact on individual attitudes and behavior in the Saudi Arabia, and the
wider Arab context.
The relationships between justice dimensions and self-perceived performance within Saudi
employees group need further investigation. Also, worthy of scholarly attention is the negative affect
of procedural justice on self-perceived performance among foreign workers group in the Saudi Arabia
context. An in-depth examination of the mediating effects of tribe, family name, clan, and other social
groups between justice and individual attitudes and behaviors may also represent an interesting stream
of further research. In addition, this study used self-perceived performance, which is a limitation, and
it would be of great value to try to independently measure performance. We note that both Saudi
employees and foreign workers in our sample were from cultures that are historically collectivist. We
recommend future research that contrasts Saudi employees and foreign workers from cultures that
historically less similar. Of utmost importance is deeper investigation of Saudization policy and its
implications on justice perceptions, attitudes and behaviors of workforce in Saudi Arabia.

Implications
This study advances the literature pertaining to organizational justice theory by empirically
demonstrating the importance of organizational justice for developing positive work outcomes in a
non-Western developing context. It also contributes to the organization justice theory by empirically
demonstrating that in an Arab developing setting such as Saudi Arabia, the perceptions of justice
influence job satisfaction yet the strength of predictors was varied. The implication of this finding is
that the managers in Saudi Arabia need to continuously assess and develop the way they manage their
relationships with employees by paying special attentions to the importance of interpersonal treatment
at the work setting, importance of social aspects of employees’ treatment, particularly, support and
respect. As far as justice-self perceived performance relations are concerned, the implications are that
the policy makers, employers, and managers in Saudi Arabia can improve level of performance and
create more positive work environment if they address equity and fairness at one hand, and the
systems, policies and procedures that govern employment practices at the other hand.

Conclusion
There was an assertion made by Leung and Stephan (2001) that research on organizational justice
must go beyond the Euro-American cultural boundaries if the aim is to develop more universal and
generalizable theories in justice. In response to this claim, this study assessed the influence of
organizational justice perceptions on job satisfaction and self-perceived performance in the Saudi
Arabia by focusing on the two main groups of employees that represent the majority of workforce in
Saudi Arabia namely, Saudi employees, and foreign workers (Arab and Asian). Findings of this study
support the dominant views in organizational justice literature with some alternative observations.

46
International Management Review Vol. 7 No. 1 2011

References
Adam, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange, in Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, 2, 267-299, Academic Press, New York.
Al-Damour, H., & Awamleh, R. A. (2002). Effects of transactional and transformational leadership styles of
sales managers on job satisfaction and self-perceived performance of sales people: A study of
Jordanian manufacturing public shareholding companies. Dirasat: Administrative Sciences Series,
29(1), 247 – 61.
Al-Khaldi, M. A., & Wallace R. S. (1999). The influence of attitudes on personal computer utilization
among knowledge workers: the case of Saudi Arabia. Information and Management, 36(1), 185 -
204.
Ang, S., Dyne, L. V., & Begley, T. M. (2003). The employment relationships of foreign workers versus
local employees: a field study of organizational justice, job satisfaction, performance, and OCB.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(5), 561-83.
Atiyyah H. S. (1996). Expatriates acculturation in Arab Gulf countries. Journal of Management
Development, 15(5), 37-47.
Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. (1986). Interactional justice: communication criteria of fairness, in Lewicki, R.,
Sheppard, B., and Bazerman, M. (Ed.). Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 1, 43-55, JAI
Press, Greenwich, CT.
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Wiley, New York.
Bonache, J., Suutari, V., & Brewster, C. (2001). A review and agenda for expatriate HRM. Thunderbird
International Management Review, 42(1), 3-21.
Chang, E. (2002). Distributive justice and organizational commitment revisited: moderation by layoff in the
case of Korean employees. Human Resource Management, 41(2), 261-70.
Chang, E., & Hahn, J. (2006). Does pay-for-performance enhance perceived distributive justice for
collectivistic employees? Personnel Review, 35(4), 397-412.
Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: a meta-analysis. Organization
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(2), 278-321.
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C.O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the
millennium: a meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 86(3), 425-45.
Cropanzano, R., & Greenberg, J. (1997). Progress in organizational justice: tunneling through the maze, in
Cooper, C. L. and Robertson, I. T. (Ed.). International Review of Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, 12, 317-72, Wiley, New York.
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review. Journal of
Management, 31(6), 874 -900.
Cropanzano, R., Byrne, Z., Bobocel, D. R., & Rupp, D. (2001). Moral virtues, fairness heuristics, social
entities, and other denizens of organizational justice. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58(2), 164-
209.
Dadfar, A., Norberg, R., Helander, E., Schuster, S., & Zufferey, A. (2003). Intercultural Aspects of Doing
Business with Saudi Arabia. Linkoping University, Linkoping.
Deluga R. J. (1994). Supervisor trust building, leader-member exchange and organizational citizenship
behavior. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67(4), 315-26.
Devellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development: theory and applications. Applied Social Research Methods
Series, 26. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Feldman, D. C. (1996). The nature, antecedents and consequences of underemployment. Journal of
Management, 22(3), 385- 407.
Fernandes, C., & Awamleh, R. (2006). Impact of organizational justice in an expatriate work environment.
Management Research News, 29(11), 701 –12.
Flaherty, J. A., Gaviria, F. M., & Pathak, D. (1998). Developing instruments for cross-cultural psychiatry
research. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 176, 257- 62.
Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reaction to pay raise

47
International Management Review Vol. 7 No. 1 2011

decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 32(1), 115 – 30.

Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review,
25(2), 165-167.
Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review,
12(1), 9-22.
Greenberg, J. (1993). The social side of fairness: Interpersonal classes of organizational justice. In
Cropanzano, R. (Ed.), Justice in the Workplace: Approaching Fairness in Human Resource
Management, 79-103, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Greenberg, J. (2001). The seven loose can(n)ons of organizational justice. In Greenberg, J. and Cropanzano,
R. (Ed.), Advances in Organizational Justice, 245-271, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
Hartman, S. J., Yrle, A. C., Galle, W. P., Jr. (1999). Procedural and distributive justice: examining equity in
a university setting. Journal of Business Ethics, 20(4), 337 –51.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s Consequences: International differences in work-related values. CA: Sage,
Beverly Hills.
Lambert, E. (2003). The impact of organizational justice on correctional staff. Journal of Criminal justice,
31(2), 155- 68.
Lee, H. (2000). An empirical study of organizational justice as a mediator of the relationship among leader-
member exchange and job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intentions in the
lodging industry. Ph.D. dissertation, Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
university, Blacksburg, VA.
Leung, K., & Stephan, W. G. (2001). Social justice from a cultural perspective. In Matsumoto, D. (Ed.),
The handbook of culture and psychology, 375-378. Oxford University Press: New York.
Leung, K., & Morris M. W. (2001). Justice through the lens of culture and ethnicity. In Sanders, J. and
Hamilton V. L. (Ed.), Handbook of Justice Research in Law, 343-378. Springer, US.
Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In Dunnette, M. (Ed.), Handbook of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1297-1349. Sage Publications: Beverly Hills, CA.
Madhi, S. T., & Barrientos, A. (2003). Saudization and employment in Saudi Arabia. Career Development
International, 8(2), 70 -77.
Masterson, S., Lewis, K., Goldman, B. M.,& Taylor, M. S. (2000). Integrating justice and social exchange:
the differing effects of fair procedures and treatment of work relationships. Academy of
Management Journal, 43(4), 738 – 48.
McAuliffe, E., Manafa, O., Maseko, F., Bowie, C., & White, E. (2009). Understanding job satisfaction
amongst mid-level cadres in Malawi: The contribution of organizational justice. Reproductive
Health Matters, 17(33), 80-90.
McDowall, A., & Fletcher C. (2004). Employee development: An organizational justice perspective.
Personnel Review, 33(1), 8-29.
McFarlin, D. B., & Sweeney, P. D. (2001). Cross-cultural application of organizational justice. In
Cropanzano, R. (Ed.). Justice in the Workplace: From Theory to Practice, 2, 67-95. Erlbaum,
Mahwah, NJ.
Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relation between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors:
does fairness perception influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6),
845-55.
Nadiri, H., & Tanova, C. (2009). An investigation of the role of justice in turnover intentions, job
satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behavior in hospitality industry. International Journal
of Hospitality Management, 29(1), 33- 41.
Niehoff, B., & Moorman, R. H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of
monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 527-
56.
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Parker, R. J., & Kohlmeyer III, J. M. (2005). Organizational justice and turnover in large public accounting
firms: a research note. Accounting, Organization and Society, 30(4), 357- 69.
Peelle III, H. E. (2007). Reciprocating perceived organizational support through citizenship behavior.
Journal of Managerial Issues, 19(4), 554-575.

48
International Management Review Vol. 7 No. 1 2011

Phillips, J., Douthitt, E., & Hyland, M. (2001). The role of justice in team member satisfaction with the
leader and attachment to the team. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(2), 316-25.
Reithel, S. M., Baltes, B. B., & Buddhavarapu, S. (2007). Cultural differences in distributive and
procedural justice: Does a two-factor model fit for Hong Kong employees? International Journal
of Cross Cultural Management, 7(1), 61-76.
Robertson, C. J., Al-Khatib, J. A., Al-Habib, M., & Lanoue, D. (2001). Beliefs about the work in the
Middle East and convergence versus divergence of values. Journal of World Business, 36(3), 223-
44.
Robinson, K. (2004). The impact of individual differences on relationship between employee perceptions of
organizational justice and organizational outcome variables. PhD dissertation, Alliant International
University, San Diego, CA.
Sadi M. A., & Al-Buraey, M. A. (2009). A framework of the implementing process: The case of Saudization.
International Management Review, 5(1), 70 -106.
Samad, S. (2006). Procedural and distributive justice: differential effects on employees' work outcomes.
The Business Review, Cambridge, 5(2), 212-18.
Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency (SAMA) Forty-Fourth Annual Report (2008). Research and Statistics
Department, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Saunders, M. N. K., Thornhill, A., & Lewis, P. (2002). Understanding employees' reactions to the
management of change: an exploration through an organizational justice framework. Irish Journal
of Management, 23(1), 85-108.
Stecher, M. D., & Rosse, J. G. (2005). The distributive side of interactional justice: The effects of
interpersonal treatment on emotional arousal. Journal of Managerial Issues, 17(2), 229-46.
Suliman, A. M. T. (2007). Links between justice, satisfaction and performance in the workplace: A survey
in the UAE and Arabic context. Journal of Management Development, 26(4), 294-311.
Sweeney, J. T., & Quirin, J. J. (2009). Accountants as layoff survivors: A research note. Accounting,
Organizations, and Society, 34(6/7), 787-95.
Tremblay, M., & Roussel, P. (2001). Modeling the role of organizational justice: Effects on satisfaction and
unionization propensity of Canadian managers. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 12(5), 717-737.
Zapata-Phelan, C. P., Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & Livingston, B. (2009). Procedural justice, interactional
justice, and task performance: The mediating role of intrinsic motivation. Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Process, 108(1), 93-105.

49