Premium
STATUS AND ORGANIZATIONAL ENTRY: HOW ORGANIZATIONAL AND INDIVIDUAL STATUS AFFECT JUSTICE PERCEPTIONS OF HIRING SYSTEMS
Author(s) -
SUMANTH JOHN J.,
CABLE DANIEL M.
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
personnel psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.076
H-Index - 142
eISSN - 1744-6570
pISSN - 0031-5826
DOI - 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01233.x
Subject(s) - psychology , affect (linguistics) , organizational justice , perception , social psychology , job performance , selection (genetic algorithm) , personnel selection , procedural justice , economic justice , sword , cognition , applied psychology , organizational commitment , management , job satisfaction , political science , law , economics , communication , neuroscience , artificial intelligence , computer science , operating system
Despite the fact that cognitive ability tests are highly predictive of job applicants’ future performance, these tests are often viewed as procedurally unfair by both hiring managers and job applicants. In this paper, we build on existing rationales by theorizing that status—both personal and organizational—may affect individuals’ procedural justice perceptions of selection tests. In 2 quasi‐experimental studies representing 435 managers and executives across both the United States and United Kingdom, we demonstrate that status is a double‐edged sword: helpful for high‐status organizations that use demanding selection tests to choose applicants but harmful because high‐status job applicants view these selection tests as more procedurally unjust than low‐status applicants.