LABOUR TURNOVER AND RETENTION STRATEGIES IN SPINNING

MILLS LOCATED IN NAMAKKAL DISTRICT, TAMILNADU

The growth of the textile industry has become a critical factor in regional business development
but it is dependent largely on the availability of human capital with required technical and non-
technical skills. The success of the textile industry is, in part, dependent on recruiting and
retaining workers with the right combinations of skills, but is threatened by high rates of staff
attrition and job-hopping. Currently, human resources managers are extremely pressured to
provide a strong contribution to the organization, based on the functions that relate to the way
how the workers are attracted, developed, appraised and maintained in the organization with high
effectiveness levels.
According to this perspective, the key point to sustainable HRM is to have effective
practices of human resources. According to Becker and Gerhart, the perspective of a resource-
based view of the firm stated that they can develop competitive advantages, creating unique
value and not easily copied by other companies. HRM practices can add rare and exceptional
value to the human resources of the firm. That is, in the resource-based premise, organizations
can gain effectiveness and competitive advantage by capitalizing on the strengths and
capabilities of its internal resources, including human resource competencies. The value creation
process of HRM at any given organization is not imitable by competitors and thus, it can be a
strategic advantage.
The growth of attrition rates has been a major concern for the last couple of decades.
Many experts believe that attrition rates can be lowered through effective hiring systems, while
others believe that the problem lies with the nature of the organizations system.

Employee Attrition in the Malaysian Service Industry: Push and Pull Factors

-- Jessica Sze-Yin Ho,

Faculty of Management,
Multimedia University, 63100 Cyberjaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
E-mail: syho@mmu.edu.my

-- Alan G Downe,
Senior Lecturer,
Department of Management & Humanities,
Universiti Teknologi Petronas, 31750 Tronoh, Perak, Malaysia.
E-mail: alan_downe@petronas.com.my

-- Siew-Phaik Loke,
Faculty of Business Management,
Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM),
Campus Sri Iskandar, 32610,
Bandar Baru Seri Iskandar, Perak, Malaysia.
E-mail: lokesp@gmail.my

The growth of the Malaysian services industry has become a critical factor in regional business
development but it is dependent largely on the availability of human capital with required
technical and non-technical skills. The success of the service industry is, in part, dependent on
recruiting and retaining workers with the right combinations of skills, but is threatened by high
rates of staff attrition and job-hopping. Using survey, focus group and interview techniques, this
study explores the factors influencing the intention to turn-over among young, well-educated
professionals within the Malaysian service industry. The results showed that there was a high
tendency for this group of young employees to switch jobs. This was motivated by both push
factors (interference with work-family-lifestyle balance, poor relations with co-workers, work
stressors, unsatisfactory supervisory relationships) and pull factors (offers of better
compensations, more interesting work, promotion opportunities, desire to return for academic
studies). The importance of human capital management in the service industry has been linked to
maximizing all employees' values to reach the firms' objectives. By identifying these push and
pull factors, it provides valuable insights to Malaysian employers to understand better what
current young workers are seeking for and to utilize more innovative strategies to attract and
retain their top talent.

Introduction

The shift from a production-based to a knowledge-based economy has been widely discussed
(Drucker, 1993; Stevens, 1996; and Switzer, 2008). Like other developed and developing
nations, Malaysia has targeted this shift as an opportunity for economic expansion (Cheng, 2001;
and Abdulai, 2004). Today, the services sector is the largest sector in the Malaysian economy,
having grown steadily for a thirty-year period and now surpassing the manufacturing sector as
the largest single component of the GDP. Although current world economic pressures have
deflated earlier growth projections, it is still estimated that the services sector may contribute up
to 59.7% to the country's GDP by 2020.

The Malaysian service industry, in addition to contributing the largest portion of the country's
GDP, is also the major generator of jobs, accounting for more than 50% of total employment for
the year 2007 (Bank Negara Malaysia, 2007). The success of the service industry, in Malaysia
and elsewhere, is largely reliant on the recruitment and retention of service industry professionals
who have the right mix of skills and attributes. Presently, however, service companies face a
looming `talent crunch', caused by both shortages and deficiencies within the world-wide
workforce (Doherty et al., 2007; Harris, 2008; and Manpower, 2008a). High employee attrition
rates have been recorded widely within the service industry and compound difficulties in
establishing a sustainable competitive advantage (Khatri et al., 2001; Anderson, 2005; and
McCabe and Savery, 2007). Attracting the right service professionals, training them and
motivating them to stay long enough in a company to recoup recruitment and training costs is an
escalating challenge for managers of service industry firms (Brooker, 2008; and Manpower,
2008b).

Employee attrition can be attributed to both push and pull factors. Push factors involve employee
intentions to switch jobs as a result of situational elements, and are usually related to job
dissatisfaction. Pull factors, on the other hand, act as driving forces that attract an individual
toward alternative work placements. The purpose of this study is to identify push and pull factors
influencing attrition among young, well-educated professionals in the context of the Malaysian
service industry. Since push and pull factors are within the control of employers (Capelli and
Hamori, 2006), suggestions for reducing employee attrition in service organizations are also
provided. The remaining of this paper is structured as follows: First, the literature relevant to the
human resources practices in the service industry particularly related to attrition intention was
reviewed. The methodology section provides the details concerning the research design,
variables and measurement for the study. Finally, the results are discussed, followed by
conclusion, implications and recommendation for future research.

Literature Review

Employee Attrition Within the Service Industry

An organization's human resources are frequently described as its most valuable assets (Coulson-
Thomas, 1993) and most companies place a high priority on retaining trained and productive
workers (Anderson, 2005). Employee performance affects the quality of customer service
(Taylor and Bain, 2003) and high turn-over in an organization results in financial loss associated
with recruitment costs and lowered productivity during the time it takes new workers to complete
the learning curve (Atchley, 1996). High attrition rates, regionally or nationally also give rise to
wage inflation, as salary levels spiral upward in an attempt to retain existing staff and attract new
ones (Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), 2007).

High attrition rates have been observed widely within the international services sector. They
have, for instance, been described as one of the most critical challenges limiting progress of the
Indian software industry (Arora et al., 2001). Within Indian call centres and KPO/BPO firms,
attrition rates range between 25% and 35% annually, with rates of up to 50-60% observed in
particular locations and companies (Raman et al., 2007). Rates have been estimated as roughly
equivalent in the UK (Taylor and Bain, 2003) and world-wide (Holland, 2008).

Characteristics of the Service Industry Workforce

Traits of the individuals who comprise the service industry talent pool have been a focus of
considerable discussion in both the popular and the professional literature. The current worker
cohort, alternately labelled `Generation Y', the `Internet Generation', the `Millenials', and
`Generation 2001' (Zemke et al., 2000) is often portrayed as made up of individuals who are
motivated mainly by their interpersonal connections, by their own values and personal work
priorities, and by a distaste for traditional `command-and-control' management styles
(Manpower, 2008b). Philips and Roper (2009) argued that the `Generation Y' workers have made
talent management much more complex because this generation enters the workplace with a new
and different set of expectations.

In fact, Zemke et al. (2000) characterized the traits of the Gen Y talent pool as both assets
(collective action, optimism, tenacity, heroic spirit, multitasking capability and technological
savvy) and liabilities (needs for supervision and structure, and inexperience with handling
complicated people issues). Hiltrop (1999) noted the desire for personal development, autonomy,
work flexibility and meaningful work. At the same time, with observed resistance to formal
appraisal systems, a general predilection toward dissatisfaction with pay, co-workers and
supervisors, and a tendency to more readily switch jobs, complexities in human resource
management are not infrequent (Manpower, 2008b).

Push Factors and Employee Attrition

Push factors create conditions that influence an employee to withdraw from the work situation.
Internal to the job, push factors evolve as a result of unhappiness, or employee mis-match, with
job requirements, interpersonal relationships or organizational values (Capelli and Hamori,
2006). In earlier studies, push factors had a negative effect on employee job satisfaction and
eventually led to a decision to leave the work environment (Atchley, 1996). Push factors most
commonly include perceived interference with work-family-lifestyle balance, poor relations with
co-workers, work stressors, unsatisfactory supervisory relationships and perceived inequity in
remuneration or work assignments (Anderson, 2005).

Given the importance of personal fulfilment to Gen Y employees (Glass, 2007), work-life
balance has emerged as a factor in employee attrition. Long working hours, work overloads,
limited leave and requirements for relocation all have the potential to interfere with employees'
home and lifestyle priorities. The consequence of this interference could either be work-family
conflict (Armstrong et al., 2007) or a work-lifestyle imbalance that eventually contributes to
voluntary turn-over (Dunne, 2007).

The relationship between work stressors and turn-over intention has been studied extensively in a
range of occupational settings (Udo et al., 1997; and Elangovan, 2001; and Firth et al., 2004) and
can likely be generalized to the service environment (Siong et al., 2006). Conflicting demands
and organizational constraints, role ambiguity, and conflict with service managers, teams and
customers, lead to job stress among client-interfacing employees (Wetzels et al., 1999; and Price,
2001). Unmanageable workloads and inadequate resources, as well as other job-related factors
increase the amount of stress at work (Price, 2001). Immediate superiors and co-workers form
the social support pillars for employees of an organization. Having an unsatisfactory relationship
with supervisors or with peers negatively impacts individuals' performance and satisfaction and
can push them to resign from their workplace (Price, 2001).

Pull Factors and Employee Attrition

In contrast to push factors, pull factors are external conditions that attract employees away from
their work, usually to another job, career or employer. Pull factors offer intrinsic or extrinsic
rewards that become available if employees quit their current jobs. Pull factors most commonly
include offers of better compensation, more interesting work, better opportunity for promotion,
and/or a desire to return to academic studies.

Attitudes toward money influence turn-over intentions (Tang et al., 2000). Taylor and Bain
(2003) found that an attractive compensation package offered by competitive firms helped lure
employees to move from their current employment.

The promise of interesting work makes a job seem more worthwhile and binds individuals to
new organizations (Cohen and Prusak, 2001). The convergence of various industries,
multinational corporations and local businesses has resulted in a `flattened world' (Friedman,
2006) and has encouraged the improvization of new forms of business operation. These new
ways of doing business virtual business, free or less restricted labor mobility and global
positioning opportunities attract employees by giving them greater opportunity to engage in
interesting work. An opportunity for promotion and career development elsewhere also
encourages staff to leave their current employment (Iverson and Deery, 2007).

According to McBey and Karakowsky (2001), research has largely supported the argument that
education is positively related to employee turn-over. It is not unexpected that, in this
knowledge-based era, skill and academic upgrades promise an individual a competitive
advantage and provide opportunities for promotion. Understanding that personal improvement
demands more time, effort, and dedication, individuals frequently tend to withdraw themselves
temporarily from the workforce in order to pursue academic studies.

Methodology

Participants

This research focuses on young, well-educated service professionals (university-and college-

educated employees), aged between 23 to 32, in jobs where primary responsibilities involved
providing services to customers, end-users or Business-to-Business (B2B) services to
manufacturing, transportation and storage, agri-business and biotechnology clients in Malaysia.

Procedure

A mix of quantitative and qualitative methods was adopted. In Phase I, randomly-selected

service-based firms throughout Malaysia were contacted by e-mail, letter or telephone, with a
request to allow employees to participate in research on employee attrition. These randomly-
selected services firms were listed in the SMI/SME Business Directory, the Federation of
Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM) directory and the Malaysian Logistics Directory. All
directories were published in the year 2007. Questionnaires were then hand-delivered to, and
collected from, participating companies where they were distributed at random to participating
employees. A total of 515 of questionnaires were returned and 13 were found unusable. The
response rate was 25% (502 out of 2,000 questionnaires).
Phase II involved the collection of qualitative data through focus groups sessions with 36 front-
line employees to validate and expand on the results obtained in Phase I. These focus groups
were held with participants, in the absence of supervisors or managers, either in company
meeting rooms or at locations away from the work-site. Focus groups used a semi-structured
format. A rough guideline was developed, comprised of topical questions aimed at stimulating
group discussion, but the facilitator encouraged participants to explore tangential issues or return
to earlier points raised. Initial questions included: "What factors encouraged you to leave
previous jobs?" and "What sort of experiences/programs have you encountered with this or other
companies that have increased your desire to continue working here?" Sessions were
summarized as qualitative data and representative comments were identified to highlight the
findings of this study. Overall, these interviews were conducted aiming to further explore causal
attributions of attrition.

Measures

Questionnaires used in Phase I assessed respondents' demographic characteristics, employment

history and future plans, and included measures of selected push and pull factors and turn-over
intent. Data regarding age, gender, highest level of education completed and length of
employment at current and previous jobs were collected as well. The respondents were also
asked to indicate reasons for leaving their last job.

Items measuring push factors included work stressors, relations with co-workers, supervisory
relationships, and job interference with work-life balance. Items measuring pull factors included
offers of better compensation, more interesting work, opportunities for promotion, and a desire to
return to academic studies. Participants rated each item on a 6-point Likert Scale, where 1 =
Disagree Very Much and 6 = Agree Very Much.

On the same questionnaire, participants also completed a 16-item subscale which measured their
intention to leave their current job. Sample items are: "I plan to work for this organization for
many years to come"; and "I am now in the process of seeking employment elsewhere and am
planning to move to another organization as soon as I get a job offer". Participants rated each
item on a 6-point Likert Scale, where 1 = Disagree Very Much and 6 = Agree Very Much. The
even-numbered scale was adopted in order to avoid a neutral or ambivalent answer choice since
odd-numbered scale, i.e., five or seven point scale permits a central which seems to be a
convenient `opt-out' for the respondents. Previous researchers such as Howat et al. (1999) Tan
(1999) and Murray and Howat (2002) have adopted a similar approach.

Analysis

Descriptive analysis was conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Solutions (SPSS)
13.0. The data presented are in a descriptive format aiming to identify factors influencing the
intention to turn-over among young, well-educated professionals within the Malaysian service
industry.

Findings
Participant Profile

A total of 502 service industry employees aged between 22 to 32 (mean age = 25.30, SD =
3.004) participated in this study, 234 of whom were male and 268 female. Most were degree
holders (58.8%) or diploma holders (41.1%). Approximately 60% were attached to jobs in sales
and marketing, while 12.4% were in customer relationship management, and 6.4% of them were
in IT services. Most were permanent full-time employees (81.5%). The majority of participants
sampled had worked in one (25.1%) or two (28%) organizations before joining their current
organization, with 17% indicating that their present position was their first job.

Participant Turn-Over Intent and Reasons for Prior Turn-Over

Approximately one third of the sample (31%) indicated that they were currently seeking a job
with other employers, while 22.8% of the sample indicated that they would remain in their
current company for `many years to come', and 12.2% indicated that they planned to work with
their current organization for the rest of their careers. Among the most recently cited reasons for
resigning from previous organizations were (in order):

Better salary and benefits elsewhere;

Few promotion opportunities;

Poor career development opportunities;

A return to their academic studies; and

Poor leadership/management.

Based on Phase I results, work-lifestyle imbalance was identified to be the most cited push factor
for employees attrition whereas better compensation and benefits from other companies were
observed to be the most attractive pull factors. Table 1 provides means and standard deviation of
push and pull factors for attrition intention.
Findings from both Phase I and Phase II of this study suggested that pull factors played a more
significant role in turn-over decisions than push factors did. With respect to push factors, it was
found that the majority of participants indicated that if work began to interfere with personal
priorities at home, attrition would be highly possible (mean = 4.15, SD = 1.38). Meanwhile, the
results from the focus group suggested that this was more likely if working hours interfered with
work-lifestyle balance rather than work-family balance as quoted by one participant, he had
decided to seek a new job because:

"The working hours were too long, 8 am-10 pm daily and sometimes weekends."

These findings were consistent with previous observations that, for Gen Y workers, there is a
strong desire for a flexible lifestyle. According to Zemke et al. (2000) and Raines (1997), the
current talent pool is committed to having a life beyond work and believed that it would be
unfair to expect them to work for more than 40 hour a week. Phillips and Roper (2009) added
that this group of employees care about family issues and values which often lead them to seek
for shorter workdays. Overall, employees tend to be more satisfied when both their professional
life and personal life are well taken care of (Earle, 2003).

The relationship with co-workers (mean = 4.09, SD = 1.24) was also observed to affect
participants' intentions to stay with, or leave, their current company. Gen Y workers look for "a
robust and engaging workplace that encourages collegiality, teamwork, and fun" (Phillips and
Roper, 2009, p. 12). In this study, it was found that the co-worker relations influence both
positively and negatively on employees' attrition intention. While employees' positive attitudes
helped strengthening the relationships between workers, negative attitudes such as perceived
self-interest created an impetus to leave the organization. Some participants indicated a dislike
for their work environment due to selfish co-workers:

"People in the company were very individualistic. They didn't bother about the others. For them,
if it was your problem, you have to settle it on your own."

Benjamin (2003) suggested that employee satisfaction is strongly associated with relationship
with co-workers. A supportive environment and a good relationship with co-workers are valuable
for employees to perform their jobs better and to reduce stress. Findings in this study revealed
that work stressor was perceived to be a push factor for employees to turnover (mean = 4.07, SD
= 1.41). Some focus group participants specifically described prior experience of leaving jobs
because their jobs are too stressful:

"The job scope given to me was unclear. I didn't know what exactly I was supposed to do."

"Whenever we would have a certain issue arising, we did not know what the best approach
would be and which proper channel we should use in order to get our issues settled."

"I was given an additional workload compared to the same job offered by other companies"

Although quantitative analysis did not show that the relationship with supervisors (mean = 3.934,
SD = 1.389) was among the leading drivers of attrition, focus group interviews revealed a range
of employee-supervisor relationship factors that had influenced participants to seek new
employment both previously and currently. Communication, mutual respect, understanding and
tolerance to mistakes, care and trust are some of the key factors for relationship buildings
(Benjamin, 2003; Goman, 2004; and Szamosi, 2006). Trust from supervisor reflects the
confidence in their subordinates' abilities and was found to have impact on employee turn-over
(Atchley, 1996; and Ratliff and Brackner, 1998). In the present study, findings from Phase II
strongly supported such notions as participants described feeling demoralized when trust from
their superior could not be obtained:

"My supervisor does not trust me and believes that I'm not capable enough to handle a certain
part of my job, therefore, oversees and micro-manages the work that I'm doing. Therefore, I
cannot be independent."

"Boss curiosity can kill you; they prefer to control rather than delegate."

While mistrust appeared to be a factor in employees' decisions to leave, a lack of guidance and
supervisors' perceived reluctance to teach was also cited as a reason for turn-over by participants.
This is because Gen Y workers expect immediate feedback from their supervisors or mentor
(Phillips and Roper, 2009). Atchley (1996) has pointed out that most superiors have their own
responsibilities and datelines to meet, so it is possible to get used to the habit of ignoring their
subordinates. This risks the loss of service professionals who begin to feel that they are neither
appreciated nor supported:
"No guidance was given by my supervisor. I was left to do work on my own. When I sought
guidance from my superior, instead of teaching me how to solve it, she just solved the problem
on her own".

Younger generation workers generally are willing to work hard only if they perceive their effort
is appreciated (Earle, 2003). Good relationship between workers and management is thus key to
leverage workers' job satisfactions (Benjamin, 2003). It is interesting to note that the level of
competency of the manager was also cited as a factor influencing employees' job satisfaction.
Several focus group participants reported their frustration and disappointment towards
incompetent managers:

"My manager is hopeless. Not only that he lacks management skills, but he also lacks the
technical skills that are required. He sometimes has problems fixing a problem and ends up
sitting on the issue, trying to resolve it on his own and leaving the other matters pending".

"I think my manager is incompetent. She lacks experience in this field (because she comes from
another industry) ... I don't think I can work for her much longer."

Specific pull factors were also observed to influence participants' decisions about whether or not
to leave jobs. Competitive or above-market compensation packages can attract talented
employees (Phillips and Roper, 2009). In this study, it was found that most respondents agreed
that better compensation is an influential factor in determining attrition intention (mean =
4.829, SD = 1.156). This is consistent with other studies that have reported that the main reason
employees initially joined organizations was for the pay (Taylor and Bain, 2000; and Tang et al.,
2000; and Booth and Hamer, 2007). Menefee and Murphy (2004) added that dissatisfaction with
pay was cited as one of the top reasons for attrition intention. Focus group interviews supported
the notion that factors related to pay and compensation contribute to the decision to leave
previous or current jobs. According to two participants:

"Better pay, better offer."

"Money is the motivator."

Some participants reported that their decision to leave a previous company was based on their
perception that salary levels offered by new employers were above industry standard. One
participant noted:

"I'm happy with my pay in this new company. A lot of friends have told me that it is actually
above industry standard."

Due to the difficulty of attracting and retaining a skilled workforce, employers have increasingly
developed incentive systems, which base compensation on employee output (Larkin, 2006).
Incentive systems are perceived to be an attractive pull factor:

"I love the commissions that I can earn. Sometimes I can get more commissions than my basic
pay. I don't even spend my basic and I still have money to save from my commissions."
"Sometimes unexpected rewards (surprises) are good. Expected rewards can be calculated and
predicted. Unexpected surprises are like sudden bonuses".

The promise of more interesting, meaningful work was ranked third among the list of pull factors
(mean = 4.631, SD = 1.299). Indeed, prior studies have demonstrated that work that is
personally simulating motivates the employees to stay (Phillips and Roper, 2009). The possibility
of promotion (mean = 4.524, SD = 1.215) was also an influential pull factor. Executives who
perceived that they have been made to wait longer for promotions are more likely to leave their
employment (Phillips and Roper, 2009). Fairis (2004) added that Gen Y employees would wait
only an average of ten months for opportunities to develop and advance in their career before
concluding that advancement was blocked and should look for another place to work. The focus
group participants in the present study stated that they were particularly attracted to jobs that
gave them the opportunity to acquire global experience. Some participants from the focus group
interviews indicated that international assignments increase employees' interests in their jobs:

"I left because this new job gives me a chance to work with other counterparts and even to be
relocated at other locations overseas."

"I really enjoy outstation assignments especially to different countries. It opens my eyes so much.
I love the exposure!"

This supported earlier findings by Zemke et al. (2000) that Gen Y employees could be
characterized as being more daring risk-takers and as more willing to accept challenging tasks.
Phillips and Roper (2009) suggested that these young workers prefer jobs that offer them
opportunities to learn and grow which include more challenging assignments. This was
supported by comments made by participants in focus group sessions:

"The challenges that the company gives us, including sales challenges and non-sales challenges,
keep us excited. We feel very positive about facing different challenges everyday".

In this study, withdrawal from work to return to academic studies did not appear to be as strong
as other pull factors (mean = 3.366, SD = 1.668). McBey and Karakowsky (2001) noted that
more highly educated workers might work part-time to keep employment opportunities open, to
keep their skills up-to-date or to remain active in their profession. The influence of part-time
study was not examined in the present study.

Conclusion

This study explored the push and pull factors influencing turn-over intention in a sample of
Malaysian service professionals. Although quantitative results indicated that pull factors were
more important drivers in moving an employee to join another organization, the importance of
push factors became more apparent during focus group sessions. These results have important
practical implications for employers and for HR practitioners wishing to reduce attrition among
professionals in a service-based organization.
Four primary push factors that identified in this study are: (1) work-family lifestyle, (2) co-
workers relationship, (3) work stressors, and (4) supervisory relationships. In addressing work-
family lifestyle imbalances, the management should provide flexible working time or place and
avoid overloading staff with work resulting them to stay-back after working hours or working on
weekends. While frequent formal/informal gatherings in an organization facilitate teams'
acquaintance with each other, managers should design and incorporate teamwork for task
accomplishment in order to make employees feel like they are a part of close-knit organization,
approximating family ties. To overcome work stress challenges, managers are encouraged not
only to provide detailed job scopes, procedures and standards to reduce confusion related to job-
roles, but also to ensure appropriate staffing levels. Stress management programs can often be
valuable for employees, but within a larger lifestyle context. To strengthen supervisory
relationships, managers can emphasize a positive and highly personalized leadership style,
heavily geared toward teaching and mentoring. Task delegation and empowerment play an
important role in building employees confidence.

Three primary pull factors identified in this study were: (1) compensation and benefits, (2)
interesting work and (3) promotional opportunities. In order to reduce attrition intention, the
current company should offer compensation schemes that will be perceived as competitive, at
least on par with other companies. Clearly defined incentive and rewards criteria play a crucial
role in motivating employees to improve both individual and organizational performance.
Promotional criteria should be clear and the development of promotion plans alongside a
transparent career path can help companies become perceived as more attractive places to stay
on. Managers should also consider providing employees with opportunities to learn skills and
procedures for career development and should offer study leave provisions, wherever possible, to
encourage training and lifelong learning.

By determining these push and pull factors for intention to turn-over among young, well-
educated professionals within the Malaysian service industry, this research has helped to
advance the understanding of what today young workers (i.e., Gen Y) are seeking from their
employers. According to Phillips and Roper (2009), employee retention is closely-related to the
performance management system of the organizations. Therefore, in an effort to address high
rates of staff attrition and job-hopping among these workers, the Malaysian employers should be
committed to provide fair compensation packages and at the same time, be more proactive in
developing creative and innovative strategies to attract and retain the best and brightest
employees. The employers should note that management flexibility, socially-connected
workplaces and consideration for the emotional needs of workers are effective in reducing staff
turn-over. All in all, lowered rates of employee attrition will positively impact on service industry
growth and the sustainability of regional and national economic development initiatives.

This study raises several issues for future research. First, further research should aim to clarify
the mechanisms through which attrition factors affect cognitive processes involved in the
decision to leave. Second, there is a need to study whether attrition occurring in large firms
differs in causality from that taking place in smaller companies. In other words, do these
identified push and pull factors hold in both large corporation and SME based employment?
Finally, the impact of specific approaches to attrition intervention also requires investigation so
that the most effective strategy for talent management can be identified.
Acknowledgment: An abridged, preliminary version of this paper was presented at the Regional
Development International Conference, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, Malaysia, November
6 and 7, 2008. The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial assistance provided by
Manpower Malaysia Ph.D, in support of this research study.

References

1. Abdulai D (2004), Can Malaysia Transit into the K-Economy: Dynamic Challenges, Tough
Choices and the Next Phase, Pelanduk.

2. Anderson J R (2005), "Managing Employees in the Service Sector: A Literature Review and
Conceptual Development", Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 501-523.

3. Armstrong D J, Riemenschneider C K, Allen M W and Reid M F (2007), "Advancement,

Voluntary Turn-Over and Women in It: A Cognitive Study of Work-Family Conflict", Information
& Management, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 142-153.

4. Arora A, Arunachalam V S, Asundi J and Fernandes R (2001), "The Indian Software Service
Industry", Research Policy, Vol. 30, No. 8, pp. 1267-1287.

5. Atchley R (1996), Frontline Workers in Long-term Care: Recruitment, Retention, and

Turnover Issues in an Era of Rapid Growth, Scholarly Commons at Miami University, Research
Paper, Online available at http://sc.lib.muohio.edu/scrippsreports/15, (December 12, 2008).

6. Bank Negara Malaysia (2007), BNM Annual Report, Kuala Lumpur, Bank Negara, Malaysia.

7. Benjamin L (2003), "Keeping Good People in Today's Labor Market", Journal of Housing and
Community Development, Vol. 60, No. 5, pp. 16-20.

8. Booth S and Hamer K (2007), "Labour Turnover in the Retail Industry: Predicting the Role of
Individual, Organisational and Environmental Factors", International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 289-307.

9. Brooker B (2008). "Getting Them is Tough: Keeping them is Tougher", Advertising Age, Vol.
79, No. 2, p. 20.

10. Capelli P and Hamori M (2006), Executive Loyalty and Employer Attributes, Instituto de
Empresa Business School Working Paper, WP 06-10, Online available at
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1011202, (June 26, 2008).

11. Cheng M Y (2001), "Competing in the Global Knowledge Economy: The Challenges for
Malaysia", in Abdulai D (Eds.), Malaysia and the K-Economy: Challenges, Solutions and the
Road Ahead, Pelanduk.

12. Cohen D J and Prusak L (2001), In Good Company: How Social Capital Makes
Organizations Work, Harvard Business School Press, MA, Boston.
13. Coulson-Thomas C (1993), "Human Resources: The Critical Success Factor", International
Journal of Manpower, Vol. 11, No. 5, pp. 34-46.

14. Doherty L, Klenert A and Manfredi S (2007), "Expanding into Asia: The Human Resource
Challenge", Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 109-121.

15. Drucker P F (1993), Post-Capitalist Society, Harper Collins, New York.

16. Dunne H (2007), "Putting Balance into Business: Work-Life Balance as a Strategy for
Avoiding Brain Drain", Strategic HR Review, Vol. 6, No. 6, pp. 28-31.

17. Earle H A (2003), "Building a Workplace of Choice: Using the Work Environment to Attract
and Retain Top Talent", Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 244-257.

18. Economist Intelligence Unit; EIU (January 16, 2007), Talent Roadblocks Greater Barrier to
Growth in Developed and Emerging Markets, Says Fifth Annual CEO Briefing Survey, EIU
Media Directory, Online available at http://www.eiuresources.com/mediadir/default.asp?
PR=1590001959, (July 25, 2008).

19. Elangovan A R (2001), "Causal Ordering of Stress, Satisfaction and Commitment, and
Intention to Quit: A Structural Equations Analysis", Leadership and Organizational
Development, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 159-165.

20. Fairis D (2004), "Internal Labor Markets and Worker Quits", Industries Relations, Vol. 43,
No. 3, pp. 573-594.

21. Firth L, Mellor D J, Moore K A and Loquet C (2004), "How Can Managers Reduce
Employee Intention to Quit?", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 170-187.

22. Friedman T L (2006), The World is Flat: The Globalized World in the Twenty-First Century,
Penguin Books, England.

23. Goman C K (2004), "Communication for Commitment", Strategic Communication

Management, Vol. 8, No. 4, p. 5.

24. Glass A (2007), "Understanding Generational Differences for Competitive Success",

Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 98-103.

25. Harris P (2008), "Calculating the Skills Shortage: Finance and It Face Daunting Challenges
as Boomers Retire", T + D: Training and Development, Vol. 62, No. 4, pp. 12-13.

26. Hiltrop J M (1999), "The Quest for the Best: Human Resource Practices to Attract and
Retain Talent", European Management Journal, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 422-430.
27. Holland B (2008), Driving Performance Improvement: Transforming the Culture of Attrition,
available at http://www.furstperson.com/pdf Furst Person,Transforming%20the %20Culture
%20of%20Attrition.pdf (October 10, 2008).

28. Howat G, Murray D and Crilley G (1999), "The Relationships Between Service Problems
and Perceptions of Service Quality, Satisfaction, and Behavioral Intentions of Australian Public
Sports and Leisure Center Customers", Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, Vol. 17,
No. 20, pp. 42-64.

29. Iverson R D and Deery M (2007), "Turnover Culture in the Hospitality Industry", Human
Resource Management Journal, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 71-82.

30. Khatri N, Chong T F and Budhwar P (2001), "Explaining Employee Turnover in an Asian
Context", Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 54-74.

31. Larkin I (2006), The Cost of High-Powered Incentives: Employee Gaming in Enterprise
Software Sales, University of California, Berkeley, Paper available at
http://www.london.edu/assets/documents/PDF/IanLarkinjobpaper.pdf (April 23, 2009).

32. Manpower (2008a), Confronting the Talent Crunch, Manpower Inc., Wisconsin.

33. Manpower (2008b), The Agenda for the New Service Workforce, Kuala Lumpur Manpower
Inc.

34. McBey K and Karakowsky L (2001), "Examining Sources of Influence on Employee Turnover
in the Part-Time Work Context", Career Development International, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 39-37.

35. McCabe V S and Savery L K (2007), "Butterflying: A New Career Pattern for Australia?
Empirical Evidence", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 103-116.

36. Menefee J A and Murphy R O (2004), "Rewarding and Retaining the Best: Compensation
Strategies for Top Performers", Benefits Quarterly, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 13-20

37. Murray D and Howat G (2002), "The Relationships Among Service Quality, Value,
Satisfaction and Future Intentions of Customers at an Australian Sports and Leisure Centre",
Sport Management Review, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 25-43.

38. Phillips D R and Roper K O (2009), "A Framework for Talent Management in Real Estate",
Journal of Corporate Real Estate, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 7-16.

39. Price J L (2001), "Reflections on the Determinants of Voluntary Turnover", International

Journal of Manpower, Vol. 22, No. 7, pp. 600-624.

40. Raines C (1997), Beyond Generation X, Crisp Publications, New York.

41. Raman S R, Budhwar P and Balasubramaniam G (2007), "People Management Issues in
Indian KPOs", Employee Relations, Vol. 29, No. 6, pp. 696-710.

42. Ratliff R L and Brackner J W (1998), "Relationships", Internal Auditor, Vol. 55, No. 1, pp.
37-41.

43. Siong Z M B, Mellor D J, Moore K A and Firth L (2006), "Predicting Intention to Quit in the
Call Centre Industry: Does the Retail Model Fit?", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 21,
No. 3, pp. 231-243.

44. Stevens C (1996, June/July), "The Knowledge-Driven Economy", OECD Observer, No. 200,
Organization for Economic and Community Development, Vol. 200, No. 1, pp. 6-10.

45. Switzer C (2008), "Time for Change: Empowering Organizations to Succeed in the
Knowledge Economy", Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 18-28.

46. Szamosi L T (2006), "Just What are Tomorrow's Sme Employees Looking For?", Education +
Training, Vol. 48, Nos. 8/9, pp. 654-665.

47. Tan S J (1999), "Strategies for Reducing Consumers' Risk Aversion in Internet Shopping",
Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 163-180.

48. Tang T L P, Kim J K and Tang D S H (2000), "Does Attitude Toward Money Moderate the
Relationship Between Intrinsic Job Satisfaction and Voluntary Turnover?", Human Relations,
Vol. 53, No. 2, pp. 213-245.

49. Taylor P and Bain P (2003), "Call Centres in Scotland and Outsourced Competition from
India", available at http://www.scotecon.net/publications/Call%20Centres%20 Scotland.pdf,
(July 9, 2008).

50. Udo G J, Guimres T and Igbaria M (1997), "An Investigation of the Antecedents of
Turnover Intention of Manufacturing Plant Managers", International Journal of Operations and
Production Management, Vol. 17, No. 9, pp. 912-930.

51. Wetzels M, de Ruyter K and Lemmink J (1999), "Role Stress in After-Sales Service
Management", Journal of Service Research, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 50-67.

52. Zemke R, Raines C and Filipczak B (2000), Generations at Work, American Management
Association, New York.

Reference # 06J-2010-01/04-02-01.
Human Resources Management Practices and Turnover Intentions: The Mediating Role of
Organizational Justice

-- Neuza Ribeiro
Professor,
Management for Sustainability Research Center - CIGS,
School of Technology and Management,
Polytechnic Institute of Leiria, Leiria,
Portugal; and is the corresponding author.
E-mail: neuza.ribeiro@ipleiria.pt

-- Ana Suzete Semedo

Researcher,
Faculty of Economics of the University of Coimbra,
Coimbra, Portugal.
E-mail: asd.semedo@gmail.com

The study shows how the satisfaction with practices of Human Resources Management (HRM)
predicts turnover intentions both directly and through the mediating role of organizational
justice. A sample comprising 462 individuals from 26 public and private organizations operating
in Cape Verde was collected. The main findings are the following: (a) Satisfaction with HRM
practices predicts four dimensions of organizational justice (distributive, procedural,
interpersonal and informational); (b) Distributive justice and interpersonal justice predict
turnover intentions; and (c) Satisfaction with HRM practices predicts turnover intentions both
directly and through the mediating role of distributive and interpersonal justice. In spite of study
limitations, the empirical evidence suggests that individuals who are more satisfied with several
HRM practices of their organizations tend to have better perceptions of organizational justice
that, in turn, implies more likely retention of talent in organizations.

Introduction

Human Resources Management (HRM) is consensually considered to be a management field,

able to bring strategic contributions to organizations (Friedman, 2007). HRM is concerned with
effectively using the assets of human resources for the attainment of organizational goals and the
continued viability and success of the organization (Wright et al., 1990, p. 4). The literature
evidences have confirmed the relationship between HRM and organizational success (Pfeffer,
1995; Huselid et al., 1997; Becker et al., 2001; Stavrou and Brewster, 2005; and Baron and
Armstrong, 2007). Indeed, a notable body of research has emerged that shows that human
resource practices collectively do contribute significantly to organizational performance
(Huselid, 1995; Huselid et al., 1997; Becker and Huselid, 1998; and Youndt and Snell, 2004).

The theoretical studies that have been conducted within the framework of HRM (Becker and
Gerhart, 1996; Bamberger and Meshoulam, 1997; Ferris et al., 1999; and Delery and Shaw,
2001) as well as empirical studies (Arthur, 1994; Huselid, 1995; Becker and Huselid, 1998; Bae
and Lawler, 2000; Guthrie, 2001; and Zacharatos et al., 2005) have not presented a precise
definition or systems of HRM practices. Although the authors have not clearly explicated what
they mean by practices of HRM, most of them seem to have an underlying conception similar to
that of the Schuler (1992, p. 27): Specific actions used by companies to attract, motivate, retain
and develop the employees.

The companies will benefit from adopting the best practices in the way they manage people
(Delery and Doty, 1996; Delery, 1998; Boxall and Purcell, 2000; Colbert, 2004; and Becker and
Huselid, 2006). In fact, to remain competitive and maximize the utility of their human resources,
it is often necessary for an organization to utilize the best practices of HRM. Recently, there is
an indication that it is not best practices that matter, but the combination of HRM practices that
fit the firm strategy. In this study, we are examining some HRM practices as selection, training,
performance appraisal, career opportunities, rewards and recognition.

Currently, human resources managers are extremely pressured to provide a strong contribution to
the organization, based on the functions that relate to the way how the workers are attracted,
developed, appraised and maintained in the organization with high effectiveness levels.
According to this perspective, the keypoint to sustainable HRM is to have effective practices of
human resources. According to Becker and Gerhart (1996), the perspective of a resource-based
view of the firm (Barney, 1991 and 1995) stated that they can develop competitive advantages,
creating unique value and not easily copied by other companies. HRM practices can add rare
and exceptional value to the human resources of the firm. That is, in the resource-based premise,
organizations can gain effectiveness and competitive advantage by capitalizing on the strengths
and capabilities of its internal resources, including human resource competencies. The value
creation process of HRM at any given organization is not imitable by competitors (Ferris et al.,
1999) and thus, it can be a strategic advantage.

HRM has become more important given its impact on the perceptions, attitudes and behaviors of
organizational members. Indeed, HRM policies may be responsible for causing judgments about
organization. Then, the perceptions that employees have of HRM practices implemented in their
companies are very important. That is, the attitudes and behaviors of individuals are affected by
the judgments they make about the justice or injustice of their experiences in the organization.

The organizational justice is a topic of huge relevance considered among researchers, because it
constitutes a basic requirement for the effective functioning of organizations and the personal
satisfaction of its members (Byrne and Cropanzano, 2001; Cropanzano, 2001; Colquitt et al.,
2005; and Greenberg and Colquitt, 2005). The perceptions of employees regarding the
organizational (in)justice strongly affect their attitudes and behaviors within the context of work.
Thus, the organizational justice plays an important role in the functioning of organizations as
well as in the satisfaction of members who work there (Cunha and Rodrigues, 2002, p. 187).

Greenberg (1990) proposed that perceptions of organizational justice are a basic requirement for
the effective functioning of organizations and the personal satisfaction of the individuals they
employ (p. 399). If we want to understand how employees form their perceptions of
organizational justice, it is important to distinguish its main dimensions. The most common
dimensions are: (1) distributive (the results or decisions made), (2) procedural (the process by
which decisions are made), and (3) interactional (the way the managers treat their subordinates)
(Greenberg and Lind, 2000; and Byrne and Cropanzano, 2001). Other conceptualizations
consider interactional justice as made up of two dimensions (Byrne and Cropanzano, 2001; and
Colquitt, 2001): (4) interpersonal justice (the dignified and respectful treatment); and (5)
informational justice (the explanation or justification of decisions).

The practices of HRM that demonstrate investment in employees and recognition of employee
contributions signal the organizations support for and commitment to its employees (Allen et al.,
2003; Gould-Williams, 2007; and Par and Tremblay, 2007). From a social exchange
perspective, it can be argued that human resource practices targeted to the needs and desires of
employees serve as an indication that the organization values their contribution and they respond
by remaining with their organization (Par and Tremblay, 2007). And, if the employees feel that
their organization is disrespectful toward them, they will wish and express the intention to leave
the organization (i.e., turnover intention).

The turnover is one of the most studied aspects in organizational dynamics, because it is a crucial
issue for all companies operating in a scenario increasingly competitive and demanding, and they
want to retain their best talent. The cost of voluntary employee turnover depends on many
factors, including the relative supply and cost of replacements, the amount of training invested in
the employee, and the performance level of the employee (Dalton et al., 1982; Boudreau and
Berger, 1985; and Hollenbeck and Williams, 1986). The turnover of talents is more likely to be
dysfunctional for the organization (Hollenbeck and Williams, 1986; Schwab, 1991; and Park et
al., 1994). Many managers fear that the employees with better skills and abilities will be those
who tend to leave, whereas those who remain will be those who cannot find other jobs (Tanova
and Holtom, 2008). Additionally, one of the most critical intangible costs is the loss of employee
morale for the employees who prefer to stay with the organization. Thus, it is important to
identify the conditions under which employees are most likely to voluntarily leave the
organization.

This paper is an answer to the challenge set by some researchers. They have called for more
investigation into the relationship between perceptions of organizational justice and turnover, and
perceptions of organizational justice and HRM practices (Cohen-Charash and Spector, 2001). We
meet Zhang and Agarwals (2009, p. 677) suggestion: research addressing the role of
perceptions of organizational justice in the relationship between HRM practices and employee
attitudes and behaviors. More specifically, we seek to explain how the satisfaction with
practices of HRM influences the turnover intentions, both directly and through the mediating role
of organizational justice.

We add incremental evidence of the importance of HRM and organizational justice as factors that
influence employee turnover. Specifically, the study focuses on how (a) satisfaction with HRM
practices predicts organizational justice; (b) organizational justice predicts turnover intentions;
and (c) organizational justice mediates the relationship between satisfaction with HRM practices
and turnover intentions. Our focus is on individual level of analysis, without aggregating the
individuals perceptions at the organizational level of analysis. The worker is the focus of
attention.

The paper is structured as follows: first, the arguments supporting the hypotheses are presented;
then the method, results and discussion are given; and finally the conclusion, listing the
limitations of the study and suggesting avenues for future research, is offered.

Formulation of Hypotheses

Satisfaction with Practices of HRM and Perceptions of Organizational Justice

The HRM practices can influence perceptions of organizational justice. For example, employees
may ask if the procedures for selection and promotion in the organization are fair, regardless of
who was selected and promoted; or, if their salary or bonus is fair considering the amount of
work they do for the organization. The perceived fairness of the procedures for employee
evaluation was also very important among employees (Landy et al., 1980). Therefore, all the
HRM practices could be regarded as either fair or unfair by members of the group or
organization.

The most common dimensions in the organizational literature are the distributive, procedural and
interactional ones (Byrne and Cropanzano, 2001). Distributive justice focuses on the perceived
fairness of allocation of resources by the organization (e.g., wages, ratings performance
evaluation, disciplinary sanctions, and profits distributed to employees). Procedural justice
represents the degree to which the processes used to make a decision are fair (Konovsky, 2000)
(e.g., the procedures used in wage increases, performance evaluation systems, recruitment and
selection process). Interactional justice is focused on the interpersonal side of organizational
practices, specifically, the interpersonal treatment and communication by managers to
employees. The latter comprises two distinct components (Colquitt, 2001). Interpersonal justice
refers to perceptions about the extent to which the authorities treat employees with sensitivity,
dignity and respect. Informational justice focuses on the perceived adequacy of explanations
provided to employees about why procedures were used or outcomes were allocated in a certain
way (e.g., superior explains to employees the decisions that can affect them).

In our study, we have used Rego and Cunha (2010). According to Colquitt et al. (2001), meta-
analysis of both interactional dimensions of organizational justice (i.e., interpersonal and
informational justice) is a relevant predictor of withdrawal behaviors. Therefore, our study uses
this last conceptualization.

Colquitt et al. (2001) found high correlations between job satisfaction and dimensions of
organizational justice. According to Assmar et al. (2005), besides the management systems,
organizational policies and practices, organizational changes, leaders behavior and disciplinary
proceedings, training programs, reward systems, recruitment and selection, and performance
appraisal can be considered as predictors of organizational justice. Ployhart et al. (1999)
demonstrated that providing job applicants with explanations for selection decisions promoted
positive views of the organization and enhanced perceptions of interactional justice. The
practices of HRM should presume respect for human beings, namely, full recognition as a
person, with same basic moral worth as any other (Hill, 2000, p. 59). Receiving respect is
regarded as an essential element of social justice. As Miller (2001) defended, justice and respect
are powerfully and inseparably linked (p. 545). Several empirical investigations showed the
importance of the link between respect and justice, namely, in organizational settings (Tyler and
Blader, 2000). For example, research on interactional justice demonstrates that people perceive a
lack of respectful treatment as unfair (Bies, 2001). Then, individuals react strongly and
negatively to perceptions of disrespect with some practices of HRM in the organizational setting.
While social exchange theory suggests a direct positive relationship between receiving valued
outcomes from the organization and reciprocation in the form of pro-organization attitudes and
behaviors (Cropanzano et al., 2002; and Wayne et al., 2002). Recent research has suggested that
the strength of this relationship is moderated by perceptions of the procedural fairness utilized by
the organization. Therefore, the first hypothesis is formed accordingly.

H1: Satisfaction with HRM practices relates positively with organizational justice
perceptions.

Satisfaction with Practices of HRM and Turnover Intentions

From a social exchange perspective, employees respond to the organizations actions by
continuing their participation in the organization. There is empirical evidence showing that good
practices of HRM improve employee retention. For example, Par and Tremblay (2007) found
that four of the five practices of HRM they examined were significantly negatively related to
turnover intentions. Based on the social exchange literature, it can be argued that practices of
HRM targeted to the needs and desires of employees serve as a signal to them that the
organization values their contribution and employees respond by remaining with the
organization.

Therefore, the existing turnover in an organization is an important indicator of the quality of

HRM implemented by the organization. The HRM practices have been equated as predictors of
turnover, although doubts persist about how these organizational practices influence individual
behavior. Stumpf and Dawley (1981) and Dreher (1982) found significant negative associations
between promotions and employee turnover. Other studies indicate that the turnover likely
depends upon the nature of an organizations financial rewards (Porter and Lawler, 1968; Steers
and Mowday, 1981; Dreher, 1982; Jackofsky, 1984; Schwab, 1991; and Gerhart and Milkovich,
1992). The HRM practices of high involvement are positively related with productivity and
retention of employees (Huselid, 1995; and Guthrie, 2001).

In this study, we address the voluntary turnover, i.e., initiative or decision of the employee being
envisaged at the level of intentions, while conscious will on the part of employees to seek
alternative employment outside the current organization (Tett and Meyer, 1993).

Gomes et al. (2010) conducted a study with workers of the Portuguese hotel sector, intending to
examine the extent to which employee satisfaction with HRM practices was associated with
turnover intentions. The results showed that satisfaction with HRM practices significantly
reduces turnover intentions. Thus, the satisfaction with how employees are managed by the
organization positively influences their relationship therewith, which in turn, leads to a reduction
in turnover intentions.

When we have a set of HRM practices of high involvement, we adopt certain attitudes and
behaviors that, in turn, promote some consequences such as lower intention to leave (Guest,
1999). Thus, satisfaction with the HRM is important to reduce turnover intentions (Allen et al.,
2003) because good practices improve the working conditions and the quality of life of the
employees. We thus propose the following hypothesis:

H2: Satisfaction with HRM practices relates negatively with turnover intentions.

Perceptions of Organizational Justice and Turnover Intentions

Almost all employees desire justice in the workplace (Greenberg and Folger, 1983). For
example, people think spontaneously about justice when they imagine that an event has
happened to them (e.g., earning less money than a colleague for the same job) rather than to
someone else (e.g., a third person earning less money than a colleague for the same job) (Ham
and van den Bos, 2008); it predicts retaliatory reactions against the source of unfair treatment or
even intentions to leave the organization. It is supposed that if employees perceive their
exchanges with organization (and leader) as fair, they reciprocate by continuing their
participation in the organization.

The intention to turnover was discussed by Adams (1965) as possible consequence of inequity.
Other studies have analyzed the role of organizational justice in turnover (Aquino et al., 1997;
and DeConinck and Stilwell, 2004). Greenberg (1987) proposed that perceptions of unfairness in
the distributive justice will lead individuals sense injustice and therefore be less productive, less
satisfied and, consequently, be more willing to quit their organizations.

The relationship between organizational justice and turnover intention can be explained by social
exchange theory (Blau, 1964). According to this theory, people tend to feel obligated to repay
favorable benefits and/or treatment offered by their organizations. One way for an employee to
repay the organization is through continued participation. In other words, individuals perceiving
a higher level of organizational justice would be less likely to seek alternate employment or leave
the organization. In Chinese organizations, researchers have found that perceptions of
organizational justice influence employee attitudes and behaviors such as job satisfaction and
turnover intention (Farh et al., 1997; and Lee et al., 2000).

Some studies show that individuals who perceive the results obtained as unfair (i.e., distributive
justice), tend to develop a set of attitudinal and behavioral responses that are organizationally
relevant, such as turnover (Dittrich and Carrell 1979; Bies and Shapiro, 1987; Hendrix et al.,
1999; and Rego, 2000). Also procedural justice explains a wide range of relevant reactions to the
effective functioning of organizations, highlighting, among other reactions, the intention to stay
in organizations or intention to leave (Rego, 2000). For example, the presence of high procedural
justice prevents individuals from developing feelings of animosity toward the organization and
makes them more likely to accept and support the organization and its decisions (Brockner,
2002). Then, they want to remain with their organization.

When outcomes are unfavorable and procedural justice is low, individuals tend to attribute the
unfavorable outcome to the organizations use of unfair procedures and judge the organization
negatively. This scenario is likely to result in resentment and a negative exchange relationship,
which makes turnover intention most likely. Referent cognition theory describes how unfair
procedures lead people to feel like they could have achieved better outcomes if the procedures
had been more fair (Folger and Cropanzano, 1998), which, again, makes turnover intention
probable.
Assmar et al. (2005) emphasized that perceptions of organizational justice are the main
predictors of the attitude of workers for certain behaviors. That is, employees have positive or
negative behaviors according to the type of treatment perceived by them (i.e., interactional
justice). If they perceive fair treatment by the company, this cognition contributes to the
maintenance of positive attitudes towards work, supervisors and organization. On the other hand,
if they feel that they are unfairly treated, such perception can promote stress at work, feelings of
dissatisfaction and lack of motivation, which result in decrease in productivity and quality of
work, absenteeism and turnover. Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:

H3: Organizational justice perceptions relate negatively with turnover intentions.

Satisfaction with Practices of HRM, Perceptions of Organizational Justice and Turnover
Intentions According to Becker and Gerhart (1996), it is important to build models that include
mediating variables, because without them, it is difficult to find and test causal relationships that
explain the observed association between HRM practices and organizational outcomes. Some
studies have responded to this call and presented models that include mediating variables (Guest,
1997; Paauwe and Richardson, 1997; Becker and Huselid, 1998; and Delery and Shaw, 2001).

This study shows how the satisfaction with HRM practices predicts turnover intentions through
the mediating role of organizational justice. Zhang and Agarwal (2009), using a Chinese sample,
demonstrated the mediating role of organizational justice in the relationship between HRM
practices and workplace outcomes (e.g., turnover intention). In fact, the HRM practices could be
regarded as either fair or unfair by members of the organization, and then they reciprocate by
continuing or not in the organization. The individual self-esteem (Rosenberg, 1965) is a useful
framework to integrate the relationship between satisfaction with HRM practices, organizational
justice and turnover intentions. Perceived violations of procedural justice have implications for
self-esteem. For example, participants experience a drop in self-esteem level when an authority
implements an unfair (rather than fair) procedure (Koper et al., 1993; and Shroth and Shah,
2000), which makes turnover intention more probable. Moreover, when employees feel satisfied
with HRM practices and perceive that practices are fair, their self-esteem increases, which, in
turn, is partially responsible for more favorable attitudes, higher identification, and less turnover
intentions.

If the procedures used in wage increases, performance appraisal systems, recruitment and
selection, for example, are seen as fair, then the procedural justice satisfies the belongingness
motive. Fair procedures are assumed to signal the symbolic message that one is accepted (Lind
and Tyler, 1988; and Thau et al., 2007), and therefore the intention to leave is less likely.

If the interpersonal treatment and the communication by managers to employees (i.e.,

interactional justice) are perceived as fair, the employees develop an affective commitment to the
organization and remain with the organization (Allen and Meyer, 1996). Then, the commitment
of individuals to the organizations can be explained as insignificant measure by their perceptions
of organizational justice (Kim and Mauborgne, 1991, 1996 and 1997; Moorman et al., 1993;
Mossholder et al., 1998; and Naumann et al., 1998), and the organizational commitment predicts
the turnover intention (Allen and Meyer, 1996; and Meyer and Allen, 1997). Therefore, the last
hypothesis is formed accordingly.
H4: Organizational justice mediates the relationship between satisfaction with HRM
practices and turnover intentions.

Methodology
Participants and Procedures
A convenience sample of 462 individuals working in 26 public and private organizations from
Cape Verde, specifically from Santiagos Island, was collected. We sought in advance to find out
if the organizations showed some kind of concern for the HRM. The selected organizations
belong to several sectors and areas of activity (trade, industry, health, services, tourism,
education and public administration). In each organization, the researchers personally contacted a
member of the top management team, seeking their cooperation and permission to query as many
employees as possible. The questionnaires were delivered and received by the researchers to
guarantee anonymity. Individuals with an organizational tenure of less than six months were not
considered for further analysis, as this was the minimum time we considered necessary to gain a
reliable impression of the organization. Females accounted for 52% and those in the age group of
between 25 and 35 years for 43%; 36.6% of the participants were working with the organization
for less than 4 years; and 26% between 5 and 9 years; and 34% had a university degree.

Measures
To reduce the common method biases (Podsakoff et al., 2003), different scale endpoints, formats,
and ranges for the predictor, criterion and mediator measures were employed. The Harman
technique (Harman, 1967) was performed to test for common method bias. If a significant
amount of common method bias exists in data, then a factor analysis (unrotated solution) of all
the variables in the model is expected to give rise to a single factor accounting for most of the
variance (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Our results showed that the data is robust to significant
common method bias errors.

Satisfaction with HRM Practices

Satisfaction with HRM practices was measured with 14 five-point items based on Kinnie et al.
(2005). The items were translated from English into Portuguese by a first translator and then
independently back-translated into English by a second translator (Brislin, 1970). Discrepancies
between the original and the back-translated versions were discussed by the translators. The final
version was discussed once again with two bilingual Portuguese scholars, and some final
adjustments were made. Respondents were asked to report the degree to which they agree or not
with each statement (from 1: strongly disagree to 5: strongly agree). Items include: I am
satisfied with the level of training I receive in my current job.

Organizational Justice
Perceptions of organizational justice were measured with the instrument validated by Rego and
Cunha (2010) in Portugal. The participants were invited to respond to the 17 items on a six-point
scale ranging from 1: completely false to 6: completely true. Items include: In general, the
rewards I receive are fair.

Turnover Intentions
Turnover intentions were measured with two seven-point items proposed by Peters et al. (1981):
I am actively looking for an opportunity to leave the organization; Within a year I hope to be
in another job in another company. The same translation process used for the satisfaction with
HRM practices was adopted. The respondents were asked to report the degree to which they
agree or not with each statement (from 1: strongly disagree to 7: strongly agree).

Measurement Validation
A Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) with maximum likelihood estimation, using Amos 19.0,
was carried out to test the distinctness of all study measures. The measurement model includes
four dimensions of organizational justice, satisfaction with HRM and turnover intentions. The
study uses the following criteria to evaluate model fit (Byrne, 2001; Kline, 2005; and Hair et al.,
2006): (a) Chi-square/degrees of freedom ratio (values below 2-3 are acceptable); (b) Root Mean
Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA; values equal to or below 0.08 are acceptable); and (c)
Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), and Comparative Fit Index (CFI, values
equal to or higher than 0.90 are acceptable). This procedure provided a good model fit of the data
(GFI = 0.90; CFI = 0.92; TLI = 0.95; RMSEA = 0.065; x2 = 736.50, df = 354, p < 0.001; and
x2/df = 2.08).

All internal consistency estimates (Cronbach Alpha) exceeded the minimum value recommended
for use in research (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). The Cronbach Alpha for HRM satisfaction
was 0.88. The Cronbach Alphas of organizational justice dimensions were as follows: 0.86
(distributive justice); 0.84 (procedural justice); 0.76 (interpersonal justice); and 0.89
(informational justice). The inter-item correlation of turnover intentions was 0.82.

Results
Table 1 depicts means, standard deviations and correlations between variables. Gender does not
relate significantly with any variables. Age correlates positively with distributive justice.
Schooling correlates positively with distributive and interpersonal justice. Organizational tenure
correlates negatively with satisfaction with HRM practices and with procedural, interpersonal
and informational justice. All organizational justice dimensions inter-correlate positively.
Satisfaction with HRM practices correlates positively with all organizational justices dimensions
and negatively with turnover intentions. All organizational justices dimensions correlate
negatively with turnover intentions.
There is partial mediation if the effect of organizational justice on turnover intentions is smaller.
When both organizational justice and satisfaction with HRM practices were considered, only
organizational justice was taken into account.

Table 4 shows the support for full mediation in predicting intention turnover for distributive and
interpersonal justice. When the justice variables enter in the regression for predicting turnover
intention, only two dimensions of organizational justice (i.e., distributive and interpersonal
justice) predict turnover intentions, and the relationship between satisfaction with HRM practices
and turnover intentions decreases (Beta decreases from 0.26, p < 0.001 to 0.06, ns).
Discussion
The satisfaction with HRM practices explains the perceptions of organizational justice. The
results of the study support Hypothesis 1. The findings suggest that if the employees feel more
satisfied with these practices, they will be more favorably predisposed to perceive the procedures
used by the company to achieve certain outcomes (procedural justice). In the same way, they
perceive as the fairest the degree of information and justification of decisions by their managers
(informational justice). Also, employees are more likely to consider as fair the treatment adopted
by their superior (interpersonal justice) and more equitable the distribution of outcomes
(distributive justice) when they feel satisfied with a set of actions by the human resources
function. The fact that the HRM policies and practices constitute organizational factors which are
potentially able to arouse employees judgments about organizational justice, is consistent with
the literature (Colquitt et al., 2001; and Assmar et al., 2005).

Regarding the turnover intentions, the results show a significant negative correlation with
satisfaction with HRM practices, suggesting that employees who feel satisfied with such
practices demonstrate less intentions to leave their organization (confirming Hypothesis 2). This
finding is consistent with past research (Huselid, 1995; Guthrie, 2001; and Gomes et al., 2010).

The results also support Hypothesis 3, concerning the influence of two dimensions of
organizational justice in turnover intentions. Employees with better perceptions of distributive
and interpersonal justice have fewer intentions to leave their organization. This finding supports
prior research on the relationship between distributive and interactional justice and turnover
intentions (Zhang and Agarwal, 2009). The possible reciprocation for unfair benefits and
unfavorable treatment by the organization is to quit. In other words, individuals who perceived
distributive and interpersonal injustice are more likely to think about leaving the organization.
Another explanation for this result comes from variables such as psychological contract
(Robinson and Morrison, 1995; and Coyle-Shapiro and Kessler, 2000). When psychological
contract breach occurs, employees perceive a discrepancy between what they were promised by
the organization and what they have received from the organization (Morrison and Robinson,
1997). It may be viewed by the employees as a signal that they are not valued by their
organization, which in turn, negatively affects their perceptions of distributive and interpersonal
justice. If they feel inequitably treated by the organization, they will be more likely to think
about leaving the organization.

Finally, the findings show that distributive justice and interpersonal justice fully mediate the
relationship between satisfaction with HRM practices and turnover intentions. When employees
are satisfied with the practices of HRM, they tend to perceive fairness in the distributed results
and the treatment offered in the organization, which means that they have intentions to stay in it.

However, in contrast to previous studies (Folger and Konovsky, 1989; and Greenberg, 1990),
procedural justice did not relate significantly to turnover intention. Two possible reasons may
explain this finding. First, given Cape Verdes situation, workers are likely to care more about
allocation outcomes (i.e., pays or rewards) than procedures used in making allocation decisions.
In other words, wages or rewards are more relevant for these workers than procedures used to
make the allocation. Second, Cape Verde, as other African countries, is considered a collectivistic
society that fosters strong relationships where everyone takes responsibility for fellow members
of their group. In this country, offence leads to shame and loss of face. When an employee
perceives a bad and unfair interpersonal relationship with the supervisor, probably the employee
thinks about leaving the organization. Then, distributive and interpersonal justice with their
emphasis on outcomes and interpersonal relationship, respectively, play a more relevant role in
employees turnover intention than does procedural justice. This finding is consistent, for
example, with Alexander and Ruderman (1987) who demonstrated that turnover intentions had a
stronger link with distributive justice than with procedural justice, and Fields et al. (2000) who
stated that the relationship of distributive justice is stronger with intent to stay. Nadir and Tanova
(2010) have also demonstrated that distributive and interactional justice are stronger predictors of
turnover intentions.

Implications for Management

The results of this study suggest that turnover intentions may be reduced by promoting HRM
satisfaction and organizational justice (i.e., distributive and interpersonal justice). Managers may
benefit from receiving training in HRM and coaching in the principles of organizational justice,
which has been shown to affect employees perceptions and behavior (Skarlicki and Latham,
1996). When employees accept the decisions as fair, they become more devoted to their
organization (Fischer, 2004). Thus, it becomes critical that managers be very sensitive to how
their HRM decisions will be perceived by their employees. It is not enough for managers to just
develop HRM procedures that are fair, but it is also very important that the end results of the
procedures are perceived as fair. These findings suggest that more attention be paid to the
perceived fairness of the HRM practices if the managers want to reduce the costs with turnover
(the relationship between turnover intentions and actual turnover is strong). This research has
provided important insights into understanding variables that influence employee willingness to
stay employed with their organizations (Hom and Griffeth, 1995). While other studies have
analyzed the HRM or organizational justice, this study is the only one to analyze them jointly in
the turnover process. The inclusion of these variables provides important implications for
expanding our understanding of turnover in organizations and creating new research
opportunities.

Limitations and Further Research Directions

There are some limitations which need to be kept in mind when interpreting the results. First, all
of the variablesindependent, mediator and dependentderive from the same source. Our
research has risks of being contaminated by common method variance. Nonetheless, there are
reasons to have faith in the completeness of these findings. We sought to control the contaminant
effects using the procedural methods proposed by Podsakoff et al. (2003) and Harmans single-
factor test that suggested that common method bias was not overly problematic. Future studies
should collect data for dependent and independent variables at separate moments. This would
reduce the respondents tendency to search for similarities in the questions and to maintain
consistency in the answers. Another limitation is that this study is non-experimental and cross-
sectional: an investigation about satisfaction, perceptions and intentions at one point in the
history of the organizations. It is likely that these variables are dynamic in their relation to other
organizational behaviors. Therefore, researchers should use longitudinal design in future studies.
A cross-sectional and single-source design makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions about the
direction of causality. It can lead to relationships that are inflated by reasoning like: I feel fairly
rewarded by my organization so I feel satisfied with their compensation policy. Although these
issues remain open for future studies, our results do provide a strong argument for the
importance of HRM satisfaction and organizational justice to the turnover intentions.

Future studies should attempt to replicate the findings of this study in order to make
generalizations on a broader scope. Also, future research should utilize structural equation
modeling to examine the relationship between HMR practices, organizational justice and
turnover intentions. Other researchers in this field can investigate how organizational justice may
influence turnover decisions and other organizational behaviors in different cultural settings.
Moreover, attention to individuals in studies of turnover in organizations is wide. In recent years,
however, there has been recognition that focusing solely on the experiences of individuals
ignores other important levels of analysis, especially the group level (Mason and Griffin, 2002;
and Oh et al., 2006). In particular, some turnover acts really manifest underlying group
processes. Therefore, future studies may focus on group processes associated with turnover (i.e.,
collective turnover).
References

1. Adams J S (1965), Inequity in Social Exchange, in L Berkowithz, (Ed.), Advances in

Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2, pp. 267-299, Academic Press, New York.

2. Alexander S and Ruderman M (1987), The Role of Procedural and Distributive Justice
in Organizational Behavior, Social Justice Research, Vol. 1, pp. 177-198.

3. Allen N J and Meyer J P (1996), Affective, Continuance, and Normative Commitment to

the Organization: An Examination of Construct Validity, Journal of Vocational Behavior,
Vol. 49, pp. 252-276.

4. Allen D, Shore L and Griffeth R (2003), The Role of Perceived Organizational Support
and Supportive Human Resources Practices in the Turnover Process, Journal of
Management, Vol. 29, pp. 99-118.

5. Aquino K, Griffeth R W, Allen D G and Hom P W (1997), Integrating Justice Constructs

into the Turnover Process: A Test of a Referent Cognitions Model, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 40, pp. 1208-1227.

6. Arthur J B (1994), Effects of Human Resource Systems on Manufacturing Performance

and Turnover, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37, pp. 670-687.

7. Assmar E, Ferreira M C and Souto S (2005), Justia Organizacional: Uma Reviso

Crtica da Literatura, Psicologia: Reflexo e Crtica, Vol. 18, pp. 443-453.

8. Bae J and Lawler J (2000), Organizational and HRM Strategies in Korea: Impact on
Firm Performance in an Emerging Economy, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43,
pp. 502-517.

9. Bamberger P and Meshoulam I (1997), Human Resource Strategy: Formulation,

Implementation and Impact, Sage Publications, Inc., California.

10. Barney J (1991), Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage, Journal of
Management, Vol. 17, pp. 99-120.
11. Barney J (1995), Looking Inside for Competitive Advantage, Academy of Management
Executive, Vol. 9, pp. 49-61.

12. Baron A and Armstrong M (2007), Human Capital Management: Achieving Added Value
Through People, Kogan Page, London.

13. Baron R M and Kenny D A (1986), The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in

Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51, pp. 1173-1182.

14. Becker B and Gerhart B (1996), The Impact of Human Resource Management on
Organizational Performance: Progress and Prospects, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 39, pp. 779-801.

15. Becker B and Huselid M (1998), High Performance Work Systems and Firm
Performance: A Synthesis of Research and Managerial Implications, in G Ferris, (Ed.),
Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, pp. 53-101, JAI Press Inc.

16. Becker B and Huselid M A (2006), Strategic Human Resource Management: Where Do
We Go From Here?, Journal of Management, Vol. 32, pp. 898-925.

17. Becker B, Huselid M and Ulrich D (2001), The Human Resources Scorecard: Linking
People, Strategy and Performance, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

18. Bies R J (2001), Interaction (In) Justice: The Sacred and the Profane, in J Greenberg
and R Cropanzano, (Eds.), Advances in Organizational Justice, pp. 89-118, Stanford
University Press, Stanford, California.

19. Bies R J and Shapiro D (1987), Interactional Fairness Judgments: The Influence on
Procedural Fairness Judgments, Social Justice Research, Vol. 2, pp. 199-218.

20. Blau P (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, Wiley, New York.

21. Boudreau J W and Berger C J (1985), Decision-Theoretical Utility Analysis Applied to

Employee Separations and Acquisitions, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 70, pp.
581-612.

22. Boxall P and Purcell J (2000), Strategy and Human Resource Management, Palgrave
Macmillan, New York.

23. Brislin R W (1970), Back-translation for Cross-Cultural Research, Journal of Cross-

Cultural Psychology, Vol. 1, pp. 185-216.

24. Brockner J (2002), Making Sense of Procedural Fairness: How High Procedural
Fairness Can Reduce or Heighten the Influence of Outcome Favorability, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 27, pp. 58-76.
25. Byrne B M (2001), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts,
Applications, and Programming, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

26. Byrne Z S and Cropanzano R (2001), The History of Organizational Justice: The
Founders Speak, in R Cropanzano, (Ed.), Justice in the Workplace: From Theory to
Practice, pp. 3-26, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

27. Cohen-Charash Y and Spector P E (2001), The Role of Justice in Organizations: A Meta-
Analysis, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 86, pp. 278-
321.

28. Colbert B A (2004), The Complex Resource-Based View: Implications for Theory and
Practice in Strategic Human Resource Management, Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 29, pp. 341-358.

29. Colquitt J A (2001), On the Dimensionality of Organizational Justice: A Construct

Validation of a Measure, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86, pp. 386-400.

30. Colquitt J A, Conlon D E and Wesson M J, Porter C O L and Ng K Y (2001), Justice at

the Millennium: A Meta-Analysis Review of 25 Years of Organizational Justice
Research, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86, pp. 425-445.

31. Colquitt J A, Greenberg J and Zapata-Phelan C (2005), What is Organizational Justice?

A Historical Overview, in J Greenberg and J Colquitt, (Eds.), Handbook of
Organizational Justice, Vol. 5, pp. 3-56, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

32. Coyle-Shapiro J and Kessler I (2000), Consequences of the Psychological Contract for
the Employment Relationship: A Large Scale Survey, Journal of Management Studies,
Vol. 37, pp. 903-930.

33. Cropanzano R (2001), Justice in the Workplace: From Theory to Practice, Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

34. Cropanzano R, Prehar C A and Chen P Y (2002), Using Social Exchange Theory to
Distinguish Procedural from Interactional Justice, Group and Organizational
Management, Vol. 27, pp. 324-351.

35. Cunha M P and Rodrigues S B (2002), Manual de Estudos Organizacionais, RH Editora,

Lisboa.

36. Dalton D R, Todor W D and Krackhardt D M (1982), Turn Over Overstated: The
Functional Taxonomy, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 7, pp. 117-123.

37. DeConinck J B and Stilwell C D (2004), Incorporating Organizational Justice, Role

States, Pay Satisfaction and Supervisor Satisfaction in a Model of Turnover Intentions,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 57, pp. 225-231.
38. Delery J E (1998), Issues of Fit in Strategic Human Resource Management: Implications
for Research, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 8, pp. 289-309.

39. Delery J E and Doty D H (1996), Modes of Theorizing in Strategic Human Resource
Management: Tests of Universalistic, Contingency, and Configurational Performance
Predictions, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39, pp. 802-835.

40. Delery J E and Shaw J D (2001), The Strategic Management of People in Work
Organizations: Review, Synthesis, and Extension, Research in Personnel and Human
Resource Management, Vol. 20, pp. 165-197.

41. Dittrich J E and Carrell M R (1979), Organizational Equity Perceptions, Employee Job
Satisfaction and Departmental Absence and Turnover Rates, Organizational Behavior
and Human Performance, Vol. 24, pp. 29-40.

42. Dreher G F (1982), The Role of Performance in the Turnover Process, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 25, pp. 137-147.

43. Farh J L, Early P C and Lin S (1997), Impetus for Action: A Cultural Analysis of Justice
and Organizational Behaviour in Chinese Society, Administrative Science Quarterly,
Vol. 42, pp. 421-444.

44. Ferris G, Whochwarter W, Buckley M, Harrell-Cook G and Frink D (1999), Human

Resources Management: Some New Directions, Journal of Management, Vol. 25, pp.
385-415.

45. Fields D, Fang M and Chiu C (2000), Distributive and Procedural Justice as Predictor of
Employee Outcomes in Hong Kong, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 21, pp.
547-562.

46. Fischer R (2004), Organizational Reward Allocation Principles: Testing Organizational

and Cross-Cultural Differences, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol. 28,
pp. 151-164.

47. Folger R and Cropanzano R (1998), Organizational Justice and Human Resource
Management, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

48. Folger R and Konovsky M A (1989), Effects of Procedural and Distributive Justice on
Reactions to Pay Raise Decisions, Academy Management Journal, Vol. 32, pp. 115-130.

49. Friedman B A (2007), Globalization Implications for Human Resource Management

Roles, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, Vol. 19, pp. 157-171.

50. Gerhart B and Milkovich G T (1992), Employee Compensation: Research and Practice,
in M D Dunnette and L M Kough, (Eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, Vol. 3, pp. 481-569, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.
51. Gomes D, Duarte A P and Neves J (2010), Satisfao com as Prticas de Gesto de
Recursos Humanos e Intenes de Turnover: Papel Mediador da Implicao
Organizacional, in E Vaz, and V Meirinhos, (Eds.), Recursos Humanos: Das Teorias s
Boas Prticas, pp. 227-241, Editorial Novembro, Porto.

52. Gould-Williams J (2007), HR Practices, Organisational Climate and Employee

Outcomes: Evaluating Social Exchange Relationships in Local Government
Organisations, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 18, pp.
1627-1647.

53. Greenberg J (1987), A Taxonomy of Organizational Justice Theories, Academy of

Management Review, Vol. 12, pp. 9-22.

54. Greenberg J (1990), Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow, Journal
of Management, Vol. 16, pp. 399-432.

55. Greenberg J and Colquitt J A (2005), Handbook of Organizational Justice, Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

56. Greenberg J and Folger R (1983), Procedural Justice, Participation, and the Fair Process
Effect in Groups and Organizations, in P Paulus, (Ed.), Basic Group Processes, pp. 235-
256, Springer-Verlag, New York.

57. Greenberg J and Lind E A (2000), The Pursuit of Organizational Justice: From
Conceptualization to Implication to Application, in C L Cooper and E A Locke, (Eds.),
Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Linking Theory with Practice, pp. 72-108,
Blackwell, Malden, MA.

58. Guest E D (1999), Human Resource Management: The Workers Verdict, Human
Resource Management Journal, Vol. 9, pp. 5-25.

59. Guthrie J (2001), High Involvement Work Practices, Turnover, and Productivity:
Evidence from New Zealand, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41, pp. 180-192.

60. Guest D (1997), Human Resource Management and Performance: A Review and
Research Agenda, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 8,
pp. 263-276.

61. Hair J F, Black W C, Babin B J, Anderson R E and Tatham R L (2006), Multivariate Data
Analysis, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

62. Ham J and van den Bos K (2008), Not Fair for Me!: The Influence of Personal
Relevance on Social Justice Inferences, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol.
44, pp. 699-705.

63. Harman H (1967), Modern Factor Analysis, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
64. Hendrix W, Robins T, Miller J and Summers T P (1999), Procedural and Distributive
Justice Effects on Turnover, Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA.

65. Hill T E (2000), Respect, Pluralism, and Justice, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

66. Hollenbeck J R and Williams C R (1986), Turnover Functionality Versus Turnover

Frequency: A Note on Work Attitudes and Organizational Effectiveness, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 71, pp. 606-611.

67. Hom P W and Griffeth W R (1995), Employee Turnover, South-Western College

Publishing, Ohio.

68. Huselid M A (1995), The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on

Turnover, Productivity, and Corporate Financial Performance, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 38, pp. 635-670.

69. Huselid M, Jackson S E and R S Schuler (1997), Technical and Strategic Human
Resource Management Effectiveness as Determinants of Firm Performance, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 40, pp. 171-188.

70. Jackofsky E F (1984), Turnover and Job Performance: An Integrated Process Model,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9, pp. 74-83.

71. Kim W C and Mauborgne R (1991), Implementing Global Strategies: The Role of
Procedural Justice, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12, pp. 125-143.

72. Kim W C and Mauborgne R A (1996), Procedural Justice and Managers In-Role and
Extra-Role Behavior: The Case of the Multinational, Management Science, Vol. 42, pp.
499-515.

73. Kim W C and Mauborgne R (1997), Fair Process: Managing in the Knowledge
Economy, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 75, pp. 65-75.

74. Kinnie N, Hutchinson S, Purcell J, Rayton B and Swart J (2005), Satisfaction with HR
Practices and Commitment to the Organization: Why One Size Does Not Fit All, Human
Resource Management Journal, Vol. 15, pp. 9-29.

75. Kline R (2005), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, Guilford Press,
New York.

76. Konovsky M A (2000), Understanding Procedural Justice and Its Impact on Business
Organizations, Journal of Management, Vol. 26, pp. 489-511.
77. Koper G, van Knippenberg D, Bouhuijs F, Vermunt R and Wilke H A M (1993),
Procedural Fairness and Self-Esteem, European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 38,
pp. 504-516.

78. Landy F, Barnes-Farrel J and Cleveland J (1980), Perceived Fairness and Accuracy of
Performance Evaluation: A Follow-Up, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 65, pp. 355-
356.

79. Lee C, Pillutla M and Law K S (2000), Power-Distance, Gender and Organizational
Justice, Journal of Management, Vol. 26, pp. 685-704.

80. Lind E A and Tyler T R (1988), The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice, Plenum
Press, New York.

81. Mason C M and Griffin M A (2002), Group Task Satisfaction: Applying the Construct of
Job Satisfaction to Groups, Small Group Research, Vol. 33, pp. 271-312.

82. Meyer J and Allen N (1997), Commitment in the Workplace, Sage Publications, London.

83. Miller D T (2001), Disrespect and the Experience of Injustice, Annual Review of
Psychology, Vol. 52, pp. 527-553.

84. Moorman R H, Niehoff B P and Organ D W (1993), Treating Employees Fairly and
Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Sorting the Effects of Job Satisfaction,
Organizational Commitment, and Procedural Justice, Employee Responsibilities and
Rights Journal, Vol. 6, pp. 209-225.

85. Morrison E W and Robinson S L (1997), When Employees Feel Betrayed: A Model of
How Psychological Contract Violation Develops, Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 22, pp. 226-256.

86. Mossholder K W, Bennett N, Kemery E R and Wesolowski M A (1998), Relationships

Between Bases of Power and Work Reactions: The Mediational Role of Procedural
Justice, Journal of Management, Vol. 24, pp. 533-552.

87. Nadir H and Tanova C (2010), An Investigation of the Role of Justice in Turnover
Intentions, Job Satisfaction, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Hospitality
Industry, Int J. Hosp. Management, Vol. 29, pp. 33-41.

88. Naumann S E, Bennett N, Bies R J and Martin C L (1998), Laid Off, But Still Loyal:
The Influence of Perceived Justice and Organizational Support, International Journal of
Conflict Management, Vol. 9, pp. 356-368.

89. Nunnally J C and Bernstein I H (1994), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York.
90. Oh H, Labianca D and Chung M G (2006), A Multilevel Model of Group Social
Capital, Academy Management Review, Vol. 31, pp. 569-582.

91. Paauwe J and Richardson R (1997), Introduction: Special Issue on HRM and
Performance, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 3, pp. 257-
262.

92. Par G and Tremblay M (2007), The Influence of High-Involvement Human Resources
Practices, Procedural Justice, Organizational Commitment, and Citizenship Behaviors on
Information Technology Professionals Turnover Intentions, Group & Organization
Management, Vol. 32, pp. 326-357.

93. Park H Y, Ofori-Dankworth J and Bishop D R (1994), Organizational and

Environmental Determinants of Functional and Dysfunctional Turnover, Practical and
Research Implications, Human Relations, Vol. 47, pp. 353-366.

94. Peters L, Jackofsky E and Salter J (1981), Predicting Turnover: A Comparison of Part-
Time and Full-Time Employees, Journal of Occupational Behaviour, Vol. 2, pp. 89-98.

95. Pfeffer J (1995), Producing Sustainable Competitive Advantage Through the Effective
Management of People, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 9, pp. 55-72.

96. Ployhart R E, Ryan A M and Bennett M (1999), Explanations for Selection Decisions:
Applicants Reactions to Informational and Sensitivity Features of Explanations, Journal
of Applied Psychology, Vol. 84, pp. 87-106.

97. Podsakoff P M, Mackenzie S B, Lee J and Podsakoff N P (2003), Common Method

Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended
Remedies, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88, pp. 879-903.

98. Porter L W and Lawler E E (1968), Attitudes and Performance, Irwin-Dorsey,

Homewood, IL.

99. Rego A (2000), Justia e Comportamento de Cidadania nas Organizaes - Uma

Abordagem Sem Tabus, Slabo, Lisboa.

100. Rego A and Cunha M P (2010), Organisational Justice and Citizenship

Behaviors: A Study in the Portuguese Cultural Context, Applied Psychology, Vol. 59, pp.
404-430.

101. Robinson S L and Morrison E W (1995), Organizational Citizenship Behaviour:

A Psychological Contract Perspective, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 16, pp.
289-298.

102. Rosenberg M (1965), Society and the Adolescent Self-image, Princeton

University Press, Princeton, NJ.
103. Schuler R S (1992), Strategic Human Resource Management: Linking the People
with the Strategic Needs of the Business, Organizational Dynamics, (Summer), pp. 18-
31.

104. Schwab D P (1991), Contextual Variables in Employee Performance Turnover

Relationships, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34, pp. 966-975.

105. Shroth H A and Shah P P (2000), Procedures: Do We Really Want to Know

Them?: An Examination of the Effects of Procedural Justice on Self-Esteem, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 85, pp. 462-471.

106. Skarlicki D P and Latham G P (1996), Increasing Citizenship Behavior Within a

Labor Union: A Test of Organizational Justice Theory, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 81, pp. 161-169.

107. Steers R M and Mowday R T (1981), Employee Turnover and Postdecision

Accommodation Processes, in L L Cummings and B M Staw, (Ed.), Research in
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 3, pp. 325-381, JAI Press, CT Greenwich.

108. Stavrou E T and Brewster C (2005), The Configurational Approach to Linking

Strategic Human Resource Management Bundles with Business Performance: Myth or
Reality?, Management Review, Vol. 16, pp. 186-201.

109. Stumpf S A and Dawley P K (1981), Predicting Voluntary Turnover and

Involuntary Turnover Using Absenteeism and Performance Indices, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 24, pp. 148-163.

110. Tanova C and Holtom B (2008), Using Job Embeddedness Factors to Explain
Voluntary Turnover in Four European Countries, The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, Vol. 19, pp. 1553-1568.

111. Tett R and Meyer J (1993), Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment,

Turnover Intention and Turnover: Path Analyses Based on Meta-Analytic Findings,
Personnel Psychology, Vol. 46, pp. 259-290.

112. Thau S, Aquino K and Poortvliet P M (2007), Self-Defeating Behaviors in

Organizations: The Relationship Between Thwarted Belonging and Interpersonal Work
Behaviors, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92, pp. 840-847.

113. Tyler T R and Blader S L (2000), Cooperation in Groups: Procedural Justice,

Social Identity, and Behavioral Engagement, Taylor & Francis, Philadelphia, PA.

114. Wayne S J, Shore L M, Bommer W H and Tetrick L E (2002), The Role of Fair
Treatment and Rewards in Perceptions of Organizational Support and Leader-Member
Exchange, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, pp. 590-598.
115. Wright P M, Rowland K and Ferris G (1990), Perspectives on Human Resource
Management in G Ferris, K Rowland and R Buckley, (Eds.), Human Resources
Management: Perspectives and Issues, pp. 4-16.

116. Youndt M A and Snell S A (2004), Human Resource Configurations, Intellectual

Capital, and Organizational Performance, Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 16, pp.
337-360.

117. Zhang H and Agarwal N C (2009), The Mediating Roles of Organizational

Justice on the Relationships Between HR Practices and Workplace Outcomes: An
Investigation in China, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol.
20, pp. 676-693.

118. Zacharatos A, Barling J and DIverson R (2005), High-Performance Work

Systems and Occupational Safety, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 90, pp. 77-93.