The Fairness Quotient and Why it Matters - PowerPoint Presentation

The Fairness Quotient and Why it Matters Fran Sepler, Sepler & Associates for South Dakota SHRM

Think of a Time You Were Treated Unfairly At Work What made the experience fair? How did you react? If the unfairness was not remedied quickly, how did your experience of your workplace change?

Fairness May Not Be Everything But it is close.

Employment is Not a Contract It is a covenant Organizations lay out a vision for the future Employees commit to participating in bringing about that future Employers agree to support them with compensation, benefits, training and the creation of a fair work environment. A commitment to fairness creates the trust necessary for employees to function within the covenant A lack of fairness turns the covenant back into a contract

Perceptions of Unfairness are Expensive

Caring About Fairness Matters Who Stays? Who Sues?

Sepler Research 1250 Employees Claimed sexual or racial harassment Forty percent filed charges or claims Sixty percent stayed or left without legal claims What Made the Difference?

What Didn't Matter Age Gender Race Source of perceived harassment Seriousness of harassment Duration of harassment Gender of the intervener

What Did Matter History of past victimization (self reported) Education level of the complainant Organizational reputation for fairness (as perceived by complainant) Response of the intervener.

Fairness Was the sole factor within complete control of the employer.

What Did Fairness Look Like? Listening Time Reserving Judgment Expressing Concern Expressing Gratitude Giving Information Doing Something

Understanding Fairness Distributive Fairness: Fairness of outcomes from decision making Equity Equality Need

Understanding Fairness Consistency Lack of Bias Accuracy Representation of Stakeholders Correctability Ethics Procedural Fairness: Fairness of the process used to make decisions VOICE

Understanding Fairness Interactional Fairness Appropriateness of Treatment by Those in Authority Interpersonal Fairness Informational Fairness

Even if Outcomes or Actions are Poor

When You Perceived Unfairness What was missing? What did you not get that you should have gotten?

The Tools of Fairness Explanations Voice Apologies Transparency Listening

The Effects of Informational and Interpersonal Justice on Theft During a Pay Cut 6- 18

What Creates a Perception of Fairness? The Concept of Schemas Relatively automatic based primarily on first impressions Fairness heuristics Uncertainty avoidance Am I likely to be exploited? Schema formed for individual and entity Keep it until it is jarred loose by something that doesn’t match our schema.

Unfairness Existence of an unfavorable condition Through the volitional , discretionary actions of a target person or entity Harmful actions violate an ethical principle of interpersonal conduct

Three Judgments: Accountability What would have happened if the action had not taken place? Could the actor have taken alternative steps? Should the actor have behaved the way they did?

Morality and Accountability Accidental harm arouses little moral emotion and leads people to focus on compensatory justice Intentional harms are associated with moral outrage, especially as the severity increases, predicting a focus on punitive reactions. Applies to observations of third parties.

The Fairness Quotient Operate in a manner to ensure that there is attention to all three streams of fairness perceptions when decisions are made Emphasize procedural fairness over driving for specific outcomes in employee relations matters Provide explanations when delivering bad news Describe what efforts were made to prevent the situation What were the alternatives and why weren’t they viable? Frame explanations within ethical parameters or organizational values.

Improving Your Fairness Quotient: Selection and Hiring Fairness paradox: fair processes have least predictive validity. Use hybrid approaches Communicate applicants and keep them informed if process stalls or is changed Limit pre employment testing to topics relevant to job performance

Improving Your Fairness Quotient: Compensation Procedural fairness is extremely important to satisfaction with benefits, raises and pay structure Actual compensation less important than how pay was determined Distributive justice affects satisfaction with pay level Informational justice significantly affects satistfaction with pay level, structure and administration. Managers need to convey information regarding pay level, raises and pay policies to employees in a clear, complete and timely way.

Increasing Your Fairness Quotient: Performance Appraisal Use due process principles Adequate notice of criterion Process for developing criterion inclusive Just hearing Limit feedback to actual performance Participation and appealability Supportive process Judgment based on evidence Data gathered Standards accurate Decisions made on objective criterion

Emerging Fairness Issue: Technology Mediated Relationships Rapidly changing views of what constitutes “appropriate use.” Employee monitoring becoming more widespread Principles regarding what happens to the data and how it is used Communication can be cursory, omitting sincerity (necessary to judge explanations as adequate) Multitasking can be a profound derailer for trust (the higher the rank of the multicommunicator , the more it undermines a sense of trust and fairness)

Implications for Fairness: Technology Mediated Communication Detail what is acceptable personal use and the extent to which it will be monitored Clarify what non-job information will be tracked and what expectations of privacy , if any, employees have. Align expectations of interpersonal treatment and voice in processes that are technology mediated Evaluate organizational norms regarding multicommunications and multitasking.

Emerging Fairness Issue: Flexible Scheduling Many flexible scheduling programs are promoted and punished at the same time, creating challenges to perceptions of fairness “Family friendly” scheduling creates substantial procedural and distributive fairness concerns Flexible scheduling more often available for more highly compensated and educated “I deals” are highly engaging at an individual level but create issues of distributive fairness

Back to Basics: Fairness in Employee Relations Access to Fairness Safe, supportive place to go? Is procedural fairness “baked in” to your leadership developmenf content? Intake Are supervisors trained to operationalize procedural and interactive fairness as opposed to managing outcomes? Procedural fairness trumps outcomes Voice trumps facts Do you offer conflict resolution resources that assure voice and facilitate an interest based approach without stigmatizing participants? Does everyone have access to assistive resources?

Back to Basics: Fairness in Employee Relations Are those initiatives and programs to increase fairness adequately funded, staffed and resourced? Are leaders held accountable to the use of fair process at all levels? Is fairness a visible value that is discussed in orientation and at key leadership events? Are initiatives and programs evaluated closely, and is there continuous improvement? Are all organizational initiatives scrutinized for distributive, procedural and interactional fairness?

So, How’s Your Fairness Quotient? Is fairness on your leadership radar? Do your middle managers understand the benefits of thinking of fairness first? Can you promise – and mean– that you can’t promise an outcome, but the process will be fair? Do you advocate transparency?

Good Reasons to Aspire To Fairness It builds a more resilient, engaged workforce It reduces claims and charges It costs far less than being unfair It will improve your employment brand and reputation

fransepler@sepler.com Sepler & Associates