The Role of Instrumental and Expressive
Social Ties in Employees’ Perceptions of
Organizational Justice
Elizabeth Eve Umphress • Giuseppe (Joe) Labianca • Daniel J. Brass
Edward (Eli) Kass • Lotte Scholten
Mays School of Business, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-4221
Goizueta Business School, Emory University, 1300 Clifton Road, Atlanta, Georgia 30322
School of Management, Gatton College of Business and Economics, University of Kentucky,
Lexington, Kentucky 40506
Erivan K. Haub School of Business, Saint Joseph’s University, 5600 City Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19131
Department of Work and Organizational Psychology, University of Amsterdam,
Roetersstraat 15, 1018 WB, Amsterdam
eumphress@cgsb.tamu.edu • joe_labianca@bus.emory.edu • dbrass@uky.edu
ekass@sju.edu • l.scholten@uva.nl
Abstract
We argue that employees’ organizational justice perceptions
are, in part, influenced by whom they associate with in the
workplace. Consequently, we examine the link between dif-
ferent types of social ties and the interpersonal similarity of
employees’ perceptions of interactional, procedural, and dis-
tributive justice through a social network study in a division
of a Fortune 500 firm. We predicted and found that social ties
influence perceptions of justice to different extents, depending
on the type of justice assessed. Expressive ties were associated
with greater similarity in coworkers’ perceptions than instru-
mental ties in the most affect-inducing justice perceptions, per-
ceptions of interactional justice. Our findings suggest that the
opinions held by an individual’s coworkers influence others’
justice perceptions, especially when justice is ambiguous and
affect inducing, and that different justice perceptions may be
transmitted via different types of social ties.
(Organizational Justice; Social Networks; Instrumental and Expressive
Social Ties; Social Information Processing)
Employees’ perceptions of organizational justice and
injustice have received an increasing amount of research
attention (see Folger and Cropanzano 1998 for a review).
Employees’ perceptions of justice are associated with a
variety of important job-related behaviors and attitudes,
including job performance (Greenberg 1988, Pfeffer
and Langton 1993), expression of extra-role behaviors
(e.g., Niehoff and Moorman 1993), trust in management
(Barling and Phillips 1993), organizational commit-
ment (Barling and Phillips 1993; Brockner et al. 1990,
1994; Folger and Konovsky 1989), and organizational
deviance (Greenberg 1990).
Organizational justice researchers have focused on
individual-level perceptions of the fairness of outcomes,
the procedures by which those outcomes are decided,
and how employees are treated, by manipulating or
observing the fairness of situations in the workplace,
but few studies have investigated the effects of social
ties (i.e., relationships) on perceptions of justice. Those
studies that have investigated the effects of social ties
on justice perceptions have treated fellow coworkers
merely as potential referents whose inputs, outcomes,
and treatment can be observed and compared with one’s
own. However, some notable experimental (e.g., Lind
et al. 1998, van den Bos and Lind 2001, Wesolowski
and Mossholder 1997) and theoretical work (e.g., Folger
and Cropanzano 1998, Folger and Kass 2000) has
explored how the justice perceptions of others influ-
ence one’s own justice perceptions. Although this pre-
vious work has found support for this hypothesis, this
literature has failed to examine how different types of
social ties influence perceptions of justice and if each
of the three justice perceptions—interactional, proce-
dural, and distributive justice—are equally susceptible
to social influence. We address this gap in the liter-
ature by examining how different types of social ties
in the workplace influence employees’ interactional,
Organization Science © 2003 INFORMS
Vol. 14, No. 6, November–December 2003, pp. 738–753
1047-7039/03/1406/0738
1526-5455 electronic ISSN

E. UMPHRESS, G. LABIANCA, D. BRASS, E. KASS, AND L. SCHOLTEN Social Ties in Employees’ Perceptions
procedural, and distributive justice perceptions using
social network methodology in a division of a Fortune
500 firm.
Social ties can influence justice perceptions in a num-
ber of ways beyond simple social comparison. Justice
perceptions are not formed in isolation; rather, they are
subject to the influence of those with whom we inter-
act. People who interact with each other regularly are
more likely to have similar perceptions than people who
do not interact (Erickson 1988). The purpose of this
study was to investigate the impact of these social ties
on justice perceptions. To determine if justice percep-
tions are, indeed, influenced by coworkers, we exam-
ine the relationship between employees’ interpersonal
dyadic ties and interpersonal dyadic similarity of percep-
tions of interactional, procedural, and distributive jus-
tice. According to social information processing theory
(Salancik and Pfeffer 1978), people in ambiguous situa-
tions are more susceptible to social influence from their
social ties than in unambiguous situations. We argue
that interactional, procedural, and distributive justice
situations differ in relative ambiguity within organi-
zations and therefore are differentially affected by a
person’s social ties. We further argue that prestigious
employees—employees with whom many coworkers
report having a social tie—are more likely to influence
others’ perceptions of justice because their position
allows them the social access to influence more people
than less prestigious employees.
Certain justice perceptions have also been shown to
have a greater affective component (e.g., Bies 1987,
Folger and Cropanzano 1998) when compared with other
types of justice perceptions. That is, some justice per-
ceptions have a greater impact on employees’ moods
and emotions than other types of justice perceptions.
Consequently, social ties that are more affectively based
and provide a sense of identity, personal belonging,
and social support, such as positive expressive ties
(e.g., friendships), should influence those justice percep-
tions that are affect inducing. When individuals expe-
rience an affective or emotional response to injustice,
they are more likely to rely on positive expressive ties
than on neutral ties (e.g., acquaintances or strangers)
or negative ties (e.g., rivals or enemies) for informa-
tion and support. Alternatively, social ties that provide
cognitive resources through information-sharing, advice-
giving, and access to resources that are necessary to
accomplish a task (e.g., advice ties), may influence cog-
nitively based justice perceptions. Thus, we argue that
different types of social ties will influence different jus-
tice perceptions depending on the affective and cognitive
content of the justice perception and the relative ambi-
guity of the type of justice situation a person is trying
to assess.
This article unfolds as follows. We discuss organiza-
tional justice perceptions and how social influence has
been studied in this research stream. Next, we briefly
review social information processing and the literature
on social influence and job perceptions. Then, we pre-
dict that different social ties will influence interpersonal
similarity of perceptions of interactional, procedural, and
distributive justice based on the degree of ambiguity
and affect associated with each type of justice. Finally,
we provide analyses, results, and conclusions from the
study.
Theory and Hypotheses
Organizational Justice Perceptions
Employees’ perceptions of organizational justice are
individuals’ evaluation of whether their organization
treats its members fairly or unfairly. These percep-
tions are increasingly being viewed as having both
a cognitive and an affective component (e.g., Bies
1987, Folger and Cropanzano 1998). Organizational
justice perceptions can influence a variety of work-
place attitudes and behaviors. Perceptions of unfair
treatment lead to lower job performance (Greenberg
1988, Pfeffer and Langton 1993), lower morale, higher
turnover (Pfeffer and Davis-Blake 1992, Schwarzwald
et al. 1992), and greater retaliatory behavior toward
the organization (Greenberg 1990) than perceptions of
fair treatment. Perceptions of fair treatment, in con-
trast, breed higher satisfaction and commitment, reduced
intention to turn over, and increased helping behaviors
in organizations (see Cohen-Charash and Spector 2001,
Colquitt et al. 2001, Cropanzano and Greenberg 1997,
Folger and Cropanzano 1998 for reviews).
Increasingly, organizational justice researchers have
studied employees’ perceptions of three aspects of fair-
ness: fairness in how employees are treated, fairness
of procedures, and fairness of outcomes (Greenberg
and Folger 1983, Folger and Cropanzano 1998). Inter-
actional justice refers to an employee’s evaluation of
the perceived fairness of interpersonal treatment from
his or her own superiors (Bies and Moag 1986), and
includes an organization’s leaders treating employees
with respect, dignity, sensitivity, and sincerity. Proce-
dural justice is defined as an employee’s evaluation of
the perceived fairness of rules and processes used by
the organization to distribute outcomes to all employees
within the organization (Thibault and Walker 1975). Dis-
tributive justice refers to an employee’s perception of
Organization Science/Vol. 14, No. 6, November–December 2003 739