Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

“Equality Theory” as a Counterbalance to Equity Theory in Human Resource Management

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This conceptual paper revisits the concept of equality as a base of distributive justice and contends that it is underspecified, both theoretically and in terms of its ethical and pragmatic application to human resource management (HRM) within organizations. Prior organizational literature focuses primarily upon distributive equality of remunerative outcomes within small groups and implicitly employs an equity-based conception of inputs to define equality. In contrast, through exposition of the philosophical roots of equality principles, we reconceptualize inputs as de facto equal and consider the systemic application of distributive equality in the form of status leveling practices. Ethical ramifications of distributive equality so viewed are explored. We conclude by arguing that, to implicitly insert a stronger ethics focus into the study and practice of HRM, perhaps there should be “equality theory” competing with equity theory for recognition in managerial and scholarly discourse.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Our use of the rather mechanistic “inputs” represents an attempt to be consistent with wider justice literature. Yet, construing “inputs” as existential equality clearly enters into an ethical dimension.

  2. “Enlightenment Philosophy" casts a broad net. While we use Enlightenment philosophy to capture a significant turning point in the history of ideas, it should be noted that Rousseau, Jefferson, and Locke do not hold precisely equivalent views. Moreover, the concept of human equality precedes the Enlightenment in that it is encountered in all major religious traditions.

  3. While allocative equality need not require the existence of a sharp organizational class system, it is often linked to status structures within organizations. For instance, there can be horizontal inequalities. Jack and Jill may be co-workers of equivalent status, and Jill may be provided a large corner office, Jack a smaller office. But this horizontal inequality becomes also a vertical inequality, insofar as one outcome is deemed superior to the other. As soon as one begins to speak of an inequality (a difference) as better or worse, one then becomes superior and the other inferior, and this takes on a verticality that takes us into the realm of status—of prestige systems.

References

  • Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2009). The role of overall justice judgments in organizational justice research: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 491–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Association of University Professors. (2006). AAUP faculty gender equity indicators 2006. Washington, DC: West, M.S., & Curtis, J.W.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argryis, C. (1993). Knowledge for action: A guide to overcoming barriers to organizational change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balkan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence. Chicago, IL: Rand-McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamberger, P., & Levi, R. (2009). Team-based reward allocation structures and the helping behaviors of outcome-interdependent team members. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(4), 300–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, J. K., Beckman, S. L., & Lawrence, P. G. (2007). Workplace design: A new managerial imperative. California Management Review, 49(2), 6–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. C. (1995). New trends in rewards allocation preferences: A Sino-U.S. Comparison. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 408–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cloke, K., & Goldsmith, J. (2002). The end of management and the rise of organizational democracy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  • Colquitt, J. A., & Jackson, C. L. (2006). Justice in teams: the context sensitivity of justice rules across individual and team contexts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 36(4), 868–899.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice: A social psychological perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1986). Cooperation, conflict, and justice. In H. W. Bierhoff, R. L. Cohen, & J. Greenberg (Eds.), Justice in social relations (pp. 3–18). New York, NY: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dworkin, R. (2000). Sovereign virtue: The theory and practice of equality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckhoff, T. (1974). Justice: Its determinants in social interaction. Rotterdam: Rotterdam Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenstein, C. (2011). Sacred economics: Money, gift, and society in the age of transition. Berkeley: North Atlantic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, K. (2000). Leading self-directed work teams: A guide to developing new team leadership skills. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Florkowski, G. W., & Schuster, M. H. (1992). Support for profit sharing and organizational commitment: A path analysis. Human Relations, 45, 507–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N. (1997). Justice interruptus: Critical reflections on the “postsocialist” condition. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N. (2001). Recognition without ethics? Theory, Culture & Society, 18(2–3), 21–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N. (2008). Scales of justice: Reimagining political space in a globalizing world. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N. (2009). Feminism, capitalism and the cunning of history. New Left Review, 56, 97–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N., & Honneth, A. (2003). Redistribution or recognition?: A political-philosophical exchange. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagnon, S., & Cornelius, N. (2000). Re-examining workplace equality: The capabilities approach. Human Resource Management Journal, 10(4), 68–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhart, B., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Compensation, theory evidence, and strategic implications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16, 399–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J., & Colquitt, J. A. (2005). Handbook of organizational justice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, R. W., & Moorhead, G. (2010). Organizational behavior managing people and organizations. Mason, OH: South-Western.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, J. S., & Pierson, P. (2010). Winner-take-all politics: How Washington made the rich richer–and turned its back on the middle class. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornstein, H. A. (2002). The haves and the have nots: The abuse of power and privilege in the workplace… and how to control it. New York, NY: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaacs, J. B., Sawhill, I. V., & Haskins, R. (2008). Getting ahead or losing ground: Economic mobility in America. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

  • Iverson, K. (1995). Steel company believes egalitarian structure brings profits, interview between Iverson and David Molpus, National Public Radio morning edition, December 28, Transcript from NPR in Washington, DC.

  • Jacques, R. (1999). Developing a tactical approach to engaging with ‘strategic’ HRM. Organization, 6, 199–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, P. (2006). Whence democracy? A review and critique of the conceptual dimensions and implications of the business case for organizational democracy. Organization, 13, 245–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1785/1998). Groundwork for the metaphysics of morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Keeley, M. (1988). A social contract theory of organizations. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. E. (1986). High involvement management. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. E. (2000). Rewarding excellence. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. E. (2006). Achieving strategic excellence. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. E., & Worley, C. (2006). Built to change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazear, E. P., & Rosen, S. (1981). Rank-order tournaments as optimum labor contracts. Journal of Political Economy, 89, 841–864.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J. (1974). The justice motive: “Equity” and “parity” among children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 291–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., & Park, H. J. (1986). Effects of interactional goal on choice of allocation rule: A cross-national study. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 111–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, G. S., Michaels, J. W., & Sanford, C. (1972). Inequity and interpersonal conflict: Reward allocation and secrecy about reward as methods of preventing conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23, 88–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, L. (2011). The structure of a Rawlsian theory of just work. Journal of Business Ethics, 101, 577–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, J. (2010). The second treatise of government and a letter concerning toleration. New York, NY: Createspace Publishers (Original work published in 1689).

  • Mannix, E. A., Northcraft, G., & Neale, M. A. (1995). Equity, equality or need? The effects of organizational culture on the allocation of benefits and burdens. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63(3), 276–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marin, G. (1981). Perceiving justice across cultures: Equity vs equality in Columbia and in the United States. International Journal of Psychology, 16, 153–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. (1992). Cultures in organizations: Three perspectives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard, H., & Mehrtens, S. (1996). The fourth wave: Business in the 21st century. New York: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meindl, J. R. (1989). Managing to be fair: An exploration of values, motives and leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 252–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (11th Edn.). (2005). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.

  • Mitchell, T. R., & Scott, W. G. (1990). America’s problems and needed reforms: Confronting the ethic of personal advantage. Academy of Management Executive, 4(3), 23–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morand, D. (1995). The role of behavioral formality and informality in the enactment of bureaucratic versus organic organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20, 831–872.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morand, D. (2010). The social psychology of status leveling in organizational contexts. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 18, 76–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Coalition for the Homeless. (2009, July). How many people experience homelessness? Retrieved from http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/How_Many.html.

  • Norton, M. I., & Ariely, D. (2011). Building a better America—One wealth quintile at a time. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 9–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Toole, J. (2009). Free to choose: How American managers can create globally competitive workplaces. In H. Goldsmith (Ed.), The organization of the future 2 (pp. 49–62). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterman, P. (2001). Working in America: A blueprint for a new labor market. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perel, M. (2003). An ethical perspective on CEO compensation. Journal of Business Ethics, 48, 381–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (1994). Competitive advantage through people. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Langton, N. (1993). The effect of wage dispersion on satisfaction, productivity, and working collaboratively: Evidence from college and university faculty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 382–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Veiga, J. F. (1999). Putting people first for organizational success. Academy of Management Executive, 13(2), 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polyani, M. (2009). The tacit dimension. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press (Original work published in 1966).

  • Pratt, M. G., & Rafaeli, A. (2001). Symbols as a language of organizational relationships. Research in Organizational Behavior, 23, 93–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge, MA: Belnap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy, Y. (2004). Executive perquisites: Do they affect efficiency and shareholder value? Corporate Governance Journal, 4(6). Retrieved from http://www.academyofcg.org/archives/june-2004-ejournal.htm#article1.

  • Rehfeld, J. E. (1994). Alchemy of a leader: Combining Western and Japanese management skills to transform your company. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rifkin, J. (2004). The end of work. New York, NY: Putnam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rifkin, J. (2009). The empathic civilization. New York, NY: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, R. H. (1991). The healthy company. Los Angeles, CA: Jeremy Tarcher, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosman, K. (2011, May 19). The most awkward meeting: new elevators sort employees, foiling manners and face time. Wall Street Journal, D1, D2.

  • Rousseau, J. J. (1992). Discourse on the origins of inequality (J. R. Bush, Trans.). Hanover, NH: University Press of New England (Original work published in 1755).

  • Rousseau, D., & Arthur, M. (1999). The boundaryless human resource function: Building agency and community in the new economic era. Organizational Dynamics, 27, 6–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabbagh, C., Dar, Y., & Resh, N. (1994). The structure of social justice judgments: A facet approach. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57(3), 244–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schor, J. (1993). The overworked American: The unexpected decline of leisure. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schor, J. (2010). Plenitude: The new economics of true wealth. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P., Smith, B., Kruschwitz, N., Laur, J., & Schley, S. (2010). The necessary revolution: How individuals and organisations are working together to create a sustainable worl. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard, B. H., Lewicki, R. J., & Minton, J. (1992). Organizational justice: The search for fairness in the workplace. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. (2011). Of the 1 %, by the 1 %, for the 1 %. May: Vanity Fair.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tachibanaki, T. (1988). Internal labour markets, incentives and employment. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tosi, H. L., Werner, S., Katz, J. P., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2000). How much does performance matter? A meta-analysis of CEO Pay studies. Journal of Management, 26(2), 301–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Buren, H. J., & Greenwood, M. (2008). Enhancing employee voice: Are voluntary employer-employee partnerships enough? Journal of Business Ethics, 81, 209–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Bersheid, E. (1978). Equity: Theory and research. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, R. E. (1985). From control to commitment in the workplace. Harvard Business Review, 85, 77–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, A. S. (1986). Quality of work life at GM. In J. M. Rosow (Ed.), Teamwork: Joint labor-management programs in America (pp. 119–132). New York, NY: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. (1975). Markets and hierarchies. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yaeger, T. F., Head, Thomas C., & Sorensen, P. F. (2006). Global organization development: Managing unprecedented change. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuboff, S., & Maxmin, J. (2004). The support economy: Why corporations are failing individuals and the next episode of capitalism. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the three editors of this special issue and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David A. Morand.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Morand, D.A., Merriman, K.K. “Equality Theory” as a Counterbalance to Equity Theory in Human Resource Management. J Bus Ethics 111, 133–144 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1435-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1435-y

Keywords

Navigation