Moderating effect of subordinates’ overall justice in the relationship between supervisors’ overall justice and supervisors’ affective organizational commitment

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between supervisor’s overall justice and affective organizational commitment. The authors further study how this relationship is moderated by subordinates’ overall justice. Design/methodology/approach: The authors conducted hierarchical regression analyses on a sample of supervisor–subordinate matched data. Findings: Supervisors’ overall justice was positively related to supervisors’ affective organizational commitment, and subordinates’ overall justice moderated these relationships. Research limitations/implications: The main limitation of the study was its cross-sectional nature. Practical implications: Results emphasized the importance of the interaction between supervisors’ and subordinates’ perceived overall justice, which suggests that employers should focus on treating all individuals fairly in the workplace. Originality/value: The study contributes to the organizational justice literature by providing empirical evidence using a supervisor–subordinate matched sample, suggesting that overall justice is important to understanding individuals’ affective organizational commitment. Using fairness heuristic theory, the study explores the interaction effect of subordinates’ overall justice on the relationship between supervisors’ overall justice and affective organizational commitment.