




































 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Effect of Employees Perceptions of Procedural Justice on 

Employee Commitment in Health Sector Non- Governmental 

Organizations in Kenya 

Patrick M. Gichira, Dr Susan M. Were, Dr George O. Orwa 



European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

27 

 

 

Effect of Employees Perceptions of Procedural Justice on Employee 

Commitment in Health Sector Non-Governmental Organizations in 

Kenya 

 

1*Patrick M. Gichira 

Post Graduate Student: School of Human Resources 

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture & Technology 

2Dr Susan M. Were 

Lecturer, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture & Technology 

2Dr George O. Orwa 

Lecturer, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture & Technology 

 

Abstract 

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to establish the effect of employees‟ perceptions of 

procedural justice on employee commitment in health sector non-governmental organizations 

in Kenya. 

Methodology: The study adopted descriptive and correlational research designs with a 

statistical sample of 195 employees responsible for key result areas in 17 health sector Non- 

Governmental Organizations. Justice perceptions were measured using Colquitt‟s four 

construct model comprising of distributive, procedural, interpersonal and informational 

justice while organizational commitment was measured through Meyer‟s three component 

model comprising of affective, continuance and normative commitment. Inferential statistics 

comprising of correlation, multiple linear regression models and ANOVA analysis were 

applied `to establish the relationship between the independent and dependent variables. 

Qualitative data was analyzed through the use of questionnaires. 

Results: Based on the findings, the study concluded that procedural justice perceptions have 

a positive influence on affective commitment and normative commitment. 

Unique contribution to theory, practice and policy: Managers and other leaders should be 

aware that the fairness of procedures used in allocating rewards and the voice afforded 

employees in the allocation process are as important as the fairness of the allocation of 

rewards in improving level of employees‟ commitment in an organization. For organizational 

procedures to be perceived as fair, they should be applied consistently. 

Keywords: employees’ perceptions, procedural justice, employee commitment, health sector 

non-governmental organizations 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

28 

 

 

 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

1.1 Background of the Study 

Many contemporary writings on organizations emphasize the importance of core values to the 

organization (Collins & Porras, 1997). Justice in terms of fair treatment of employees is 

identified as one of those values and fairness as one of the fundamental bases of cooperative 

action in organizations (Cropanzo et al, 2007). Truth telling, promise keeping, fairness, and 

respect for the individual are some of the key guiding principles of effective people 

management in organizations (Russell, 2001). 

Justice perceptions can influence employees‟ attitudes and behaviour for good or ill, in turn 

having a positive or negative impact on their performance and the organization‟s success 

(Baldwin, 2006). Justice is therefore a basic requirement for the effective functioning of 

organizations and the personal commitment of the individuals they employ (McFarlin & 

Sweeney, 1992). Employee perceptions of organizational justice in terms of fair formal deci- 

sion-making procedures (procedural justice), fair decision outcomes (distributive justice), fair 

interpersonal treatment (interpersonal justice) and information sharing (informational justice) 

by decision makers have been found to be related to a variety of work-related attitudes and 

behaviors including commitment (Colquitt, et al, 2001, Al-Zu‟bi, 2010; Yucel, 2013; Akanbi 

& Ofoegbu, 2013). 

Organisational commitment is the bond employees experience with their organization (Folger 

& Cropanzano, 1998). Employees who are committed to their organisation generally feel a 

connection with their organization, feel that they fit in and, feel they understand the goals of 

the organisation (Cohen et al., 2001). The added value of such employees is that they tend to 

be more determined in their work, show relatively high productivity and are more proactive 

in offering their support (Konovsky, et al, 2000). Meyer & Allen (1997) conceptualized 

organizational commitment in three dimensions namely affective, continuance and normative 

commitments. 

Justice perceptions can influence employee attitudes and behaviour for good or ill, in turn 

having a positive or negative impact on individual, group and the entire organization‟s 

performance and success (Baldwin, 2006). Empirical evidence supports the notion that an 

employee‟s perception of organizational justice affects their attitude toward the organization 

(Konovsky, et al, 2000). If the perception of organizational justice is positive, individuals 

tend to be more satisfied and committed to their job (McFarlin & Sweeney, 1992). 

Organizational justice impacts on employees in organizations since they are the subject of 

work place decisions virtually every day of their organizational lives (Cohen et al., 2001). 

Some of these decisions deal with the salaries individuals earn, the projects or programmes 

they implement while others deal with work place interactions. The importance of those 

consequences causes individuals to judge the decision making they experience from a justice 

perspective (Colquitt, 2001). According to Baldwin (2006) the term organizational justice 

refers to the extent to which employees perceive workplace procedures, interactions, and 

outcomes to be fair in nature. He concluded that these perceptions can influence attitudes and 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

29 

 

 

 

behaviours of the employees. Cropanzano, Bowen and Gilliland (2007) defined it as a 

personal evaluation about the ethical and moral standing of managerial conduct. 

Current literature on organizational justice identifies four different constructs; distributive 

justice, procedural justice, interpersonal justice and informational justice (Colquitt, 

Greenberg, & Zapata- Phelan, 2005). Distributive justice is the justice of an employee which 

he perceives as a result of comparing the commitments he makes to his work and the 

outcomes of these such as rewards, duties and responsibilities, compared to the commitments 

the other employees make and the outcomes of them (Colquitt,2001). 

Procedural justice implies that, while evaluating the fairness of the organizational decisions, 

employees are not only interested in what these decisions are but also with the processes 

which determine these decisions (Folger & Cropanzano, 1998). Interpersonal justice refers to 

people‟s perceptions of the fairness of the manner in which they are treated by those in 

authority during the enactment of organizational procedures (Lind & Bos, 2002) while 

informational justice refers to people‟s perceptions of the fairness of the information used as 

the basis for making a decision (Gurbuz & Mert, 2009). Each of these forms of justice has 

been found to have different effects on employee commitment (Colquitt, et al., 2005). 

1.2 Problem Statement 

Employees are the subject of decisions virtually every day of their organizational lives 

(Colquitt, 2001). In organizational settings, justice is not always administered through fair 

allocation of employment resources, provision of clear and adequate explanations for 

decisions made and employees are not always treated with dignity and respect during the 

implementation of policies and procedures (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Frontela, 

2007). 

Adoption of effective human resource management (HRM) practices in many Non- 

Governmental organizations (NGOs) is often low in the list of management priority (Batti, 

2014) because NGO organizations discourages investment in human resource capacities and 

staff retention measures due to the short term nature of the projects, funding constraints and 

subsequent short term employment practices. This in turn leads to negative justice 

perceptions and commitment. (Padaki, 2007). 

In a study carried out by Frontela (2007) in Kenya and other developing countries, the 

researchers found that irrespective of the affiliation, mission, size and extent of operations, 

problems of low morale and low motivation of staff were prevalent in NGOs. These are all 

indicators of antecedents and outcomes of commitment (Wright, & Kehoe, 2008). They point 

to a possible absence of organizational justice and low employee commitment. 

Organizational justice research has predominately involved employees from Western 

countries, particularly the U.S. (McFarlin & Sweeney, 2001). As such, the current thinking 

regarding reactions to organizational justice may not generalize to employees from societies 

that have cultural and economic characteristics which differ significantly from those 

commonly found in North American and Western European societies. In addition, in their 

meta-analytical review of literature on commitment in organizations in the period 1988 to 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

30 

 

 

 

2011, Iqbal et al (2012) found out that most of the research studies published was conducted 

at the industry or firm level as the unit of analysis. Furthermore, the organization and 

management of NGO sector has received relatively little attention from researchers (Lewis, 

2005). There is therefore a paucity of information regarding the importance of fairness and 

employee reactions to organizational justice from different contexts especially Africa and 

particularly the Health sector NGOs in Kenya. Given this lack of information, the study 

sought to establish the effect of employees‟ perceptions of procedural justice on employee 

commitment in health sector non-governmental organizations in Kenya. 

1.3 Research Objectives 

To establish the effect of employees perceptions of procedural justice on employee 

commitment in health sector non-governmental organizations in Kenya. 

 

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW 

2.1 Theoretical Review 

2.1.1 Organizational Commitment Theories 

Scholars have offered many differing views and theories regarding employee commitment 

towards the employer organization. The key emerging themes indicate that in general, 

commitment is made up of investments, reciprocity, social identity, and lack of alternatives 

(Brum, 2007). The investment approach states that it is an employee‟s investment and 

anticipation of a future pay off that serves to tie them closer to the organization. Reciprocity, 

in contrast, indicates that it is the employee‟s obligation to pay off their debt to the 

organization that will lead to greater commitment (Barrett & O‟Connell, 2001). The 

identification argument specifies that commitment can grow as a result of an employee‟s 

social identity becoming increasingly embedded in their employment (Blau & Boal, 1987). 

Lastly, the lack of alternatives element states that the more specific an employee‟s skills 

become to a particular organization the less likely they will leave (Scholl, 1981). 

The main theories on organizational commitment relevant to the study are Side Bet theory, 

Theory of Reciprocity and Meyer & Allen‟s Three-Component Model of Organizational 

Commitment. 

Side- Bet Theory 

According to Becker‟s side bet theory, the relationship between an employee and the 

organization is founded on behaviours bounded by a contract of economic gains. Employees 

are committed to the organization because they have some hidden vested investments or side- 

bets. These side-bets are valued by the individual because of the accrual of certain costs that 

render disengagement difficult. Becker argued that over a period of time certain costs accrue 

that make it more difficult for the person to disengage from a consistent pattern of activity, 

namely, maintaining membership in the organization. Accordingly, the threat of losing these 

investments, along with a perceived lack of alternatives to replace or make up for their loss, 

commits the person to the organization (Griffin & Hepburn, 2005). 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

31 

 

 

 

Becker went on to clarify that side bets can be centred on time, effort, pay, benefits, and so 

on. The greater the investment in any of these “side bets”, the more likely the employee will 

remain with an organization. Due to the perceived cost of leaving being too high, side bets 

can serve to actually increase the employee‟s intent to remain in an organization (Liou & 

Nyhan, 1994). 

Several elements must exist in order for commitment to be achieved through a “side bet”. 

One such element is that the individual is aware that a “side bet” was made. Another is that 

the choices that were made regarding a particular decision have an effect on other potential 

decisions. The “side bet” philosophy states that an investment is made today with the 

expectation that the benefit will be achieved at some future point (Scholl, 1981). 

Theory of Reciprocity 

Employees have specific desires and expectations. When an organization seeks to meet and 

exceed these desires and expectations through reciprocity, then the likelihood of improving 

commitment is enhanced. The premise behind reciprocity is that an employee will help the 

organization because the organization helped them. Under the norm of reciprocity, employees 

with strong perceptions of organizational support would therefore feel obligated to repay the 

organization in terms of organizational commitment (Steers, 1977). Brum (2007) argues that 

employees may view some human resource outcomes as a “gift”. Training is one such 

practice that employees may view as a “gift”. The result of this “gift” is that employees exert 

more effort, become more productive, and have a greater sense of debt to the organization. 

The “gift” also has the potential to make employees feel like “insiders” into the organization. 

An “insider” is likely to be more committed and devoted to the organization and the idea of 

“gift” and “insider” parallels closely to the concept of reciprocity (Brum, 2007). 

Meyer & Allen Multi-dimension Theory 

This theory proposes that organizational commitment is experienced by an employee as three 

simultaneous mind-sets encompassing affective, normative, and continuance organizational 

commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1990). The three forms of organizational commitment are 

characterized by three different mindsets – desire, obligation, and cost. According to the 

model, employees with a strong affective commitment stay because they want to, those with 

strong normative commitment stay because they feel they ought to, and those with strong 

continuance commitment stay because they have to do so (Jaros, 1997). The three-component 

conceptualization of organizational commitment is currently regarded as the dominant model 

in organizational commitment research (Solinger, 2008). 

2.2 Empirical Review 

Leventhal (1980) proposed six criteria for a procedure to be perceived as fair. These include 

consistency, bias suppression, and accuracy of information in decision making, correctability, 

representativeness and ethicality based on conformity to personal ethical or moral values. 

Wiesenfeld et al., (2007), added bias suppression, accuracy and overall fairness as the 

defining criteria for procedural justice.Procedural justice may foster commitment because 

people infer that it is an antecedent of fair outcomes. According to Thibaut and Walker 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

32 

 

 

Employee Commitment 

 Affective 
 Continuance 

 Normative 

Procedural Justice 

 Voice 
 Consistency 

 Ethics 

 

(1975) procedural justice theory, the amount of control people have over decisions and 

processes influences their perceptions of fairness. According to Thibaut and Walker (1975) 

fair procedures are valuable because they allow individuals‟ control over outcomes. 

The most widely accepted attitudinal conceptualisation of organizational commitment is that 

by (Mowday et al., 1979). They define organizational commitment as the relative strength of 

an individuals‟ identification with, and involvement in a particular organization and identify 

three characteristics of organizational commitment: (i) a strong belief in and acceptance of 

the organization‟s goals and values, (ii) a willingness to exert a considerable effort on behalf 

of the organization and (ii) a strong intent or desire to remain with the organization. 

This multi-dimensional approach suggests that organizational commitment develops because 

of the interaction of all these three components. The approach is supported by several studies 

(O‟Reilly & Chatman (1986). The present study is based on Meyer and Allen‟s 

multidimensional construct with its three dimensions of organizational commitment. 

Affective commitment is linked to a favourable working environment and relationships 

(Bayer, 2009). Antecedents of affective commitment .include job characteristics such as task 

significance, autonomy, identity, skills variety and feedback concerning employee job 

performance, perceived organizational support or dependence (the feeling that the 

organization considers what is in the best interest of employees when making decisions that 

affect employment conditions and work environment), and the degree to which employees 

are involved in the goal-setting and decision-making processes (Prabhakart & Ram, 2011). 

Meyer & Allen (1997) correlates affective commitment with work experiences where 

employees experience psychologically comfortable feelings, (such as approachable 

managers) and increasing their sense of competence (such as feedback). According to Beck 

and Wilson (2000), the development of affective commitment involves recognizing the 

organization‟s worth and internalising its principles and standards. 

In a study conducted in 2013 to examine the relationship between organizational justice and 

affective commitment on health employees in Turkey, the researchers found that justice 

perceptions play an imperative and antecedent role in the formation of affective commitment 

(Akpmar & Tas, 2013). 

2.3 Conceptual Framework 

 

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

33 

 

 

 

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 

The study adopted descriptive and correlation research design. The study population was 17 

Nairobi based health sector NGOs registered with HENNET while the target population was 

497 employees with supervisory responsibilities. The sampling frame for this study 

comprised of 85 health sector non-governmental organizations based within Nairobi County 

and its environs. The register of Health Sector NGOs maintained by Health NGOs Network 

Secretariat (HENNET) was used to randomly generate the study sample. The study adopted 

stratified sampling technique due to homogeneity of the population. Based on the nature of 

the study population, proportionate stratified sampling was used to establish the number of 

respondents from each of the 17 HENNET member NGOs headquartered in Nairobi. The 

study sought to measure employee perceptions using a five point multiple choice ordinal 

Likert rating scale measurement. Primary data was collected using self-administered 

questionnaires. The raw data collected using questionnaires were edited and coded for 

analysis using IBM Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 20.0. The study‟s 

likert-type data was described and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics 

comprising of correlation and linear regression. Findings on quantitative data were presented 

using statistical techniques such as tables, pie charts and bar graphs. Qualitative data was 

presented descriptively. 

 

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 

4.1 Response Rate 

The study conducted a survey using a self-administrated questionnaire which was 

administered to 195 sampled respondents. 131 valid questionnaires were returned 

representing a response rate of 67 percent. A response rate of above 50% is considered 

adequate in social science research (Mugenda & Mugenda, 2008; Babbie, 2002). The study‟s 

response rate of 67% was therefore considered adequate for analysis and conclusion. 

Table 2: Response Rate 
 

Total number of 
questionnaires distributed 

Total number of valid 
questionnaires returned 

Response rate (%) 

 
195 

 
131 

 
67 

4.2 Demographic Characteristics 

4.2.1 Gender of Respondents 

The gender of the respondents is presented in figure 2 of the 131 valid responses, 53 percent 

of the respondents were male while 47 percent were female. This suggests that the study 

solicited information from a gender balanced perspective. According to Kothari (2008) a ratio 

of at least 1:2 in either gender representation in a study is representative enough. 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

34 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2: Gender of Respondents 

4.2.2 Response by Job Category 

The study targeted various categories of employees as shown on table 3. From the 

demographic data, 14% were administrative staff, 29% programme staff, 22% 

adviser/professional staff, 29% manager level, and 5% director level staff. 

Table 3: Response by Job Category 
 

Employee Category Frequency Percentage (%) 

Administrative Assistant 18 14 

Programme staff 37 29 

Adviser/Professional 29 22 

Manager 37 29 

Director 6 5 

Total 127 100 

4.2.3 Response by Number of Staff Supervised 

During the study, it was found out that staffs responsible for key performance results in this 

sector do not necessarily have other employees reporting to them due to the nature of the 

organization structures applied or the way work arrangements are designed with outsourcing 

being a key element. Those without internal supervisory responsibilities but responsible for 

key result areas were reported to have quality assurance, oversight or technical backstopping 

responsibilities over outsourced activities. 

As shown on figure 3, 33% of the respondents reported that they had no direct supervisory 

responsibilities, 21% supervised more than five employees while another 23% supervised 

three to five employees and another 5% more than 5 employees. 

Female 
47% Male 

53% 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

35 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3 Number of Staff Supervise 

4.2.4 Response by Period Worked with Current Employer 

In terms of length of service (table 4), 37% of the respondents indicated that they have 

worked for the current organization for a period not exceeding two years, 28% for up to four 

years, 22% for up to 6 years while only 12% had worked with the same organization for a 

period in excess of six years. This finding is in line with the project based nature of 

employment in the NGO sector where employment duration is tied to project or funding 

cycles (NGO Bureau, 1999). 

Table 0: Response by Period Worked With Current Employer 
 

Period worked Frequency Percentage (%) 

0-2 years 49 37 

3-4 years 36 28 

5-6 years 29 22 

7-8 years 4 3 

9-10 years 5 4 

10 or more years 8 6 

Total 131 100 

4.2.5 Response by Age 

Figure 4 shows the age distribution in the sample size. Five percent of the respondents were 

aged 25 years or less, 29% were aged between 26-30 years, 40% between 31-40 years, 19% 

between 41-50 and 7 percentages between 51-60 years. 

5 and above 
23% None or indirect 

33% 

3-5 employees 
23% 1-3 employess 

21% 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

36 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4: Response by Age 

4.2.6 Response by Level of Education 

Majority of the respondents (46 %) were either first degree holders or hold professional 

qualifications; 34% hold a post graduate degree; 18% are diploma holders and two percent 

were of secondary education level. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 5: Response by Level of Education 

4.2.7 Response by Type of Employment 

As shown in figure 5 majority of the respondents (83%) were employed on term contract 

basis while 17% had open ended contracts. This employment practice would appear to be in 

line with the project nature of work in the development sector (Lewis & Kanji, 2009). 

60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 

0 

25 or less 
years 

26-30 years 31-40 years 41-50 years 51-60 years 

YEARS 

Secondary school Diploma 

Post graduate 
(Masters) 

34% 

2% 18% 

Degree/Professional 
qualification 

46% 

Fr
eq

u
en

cy
 (

%
) 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

37 

 

 

 

 

Figure 6: Response by Type of Employment 

Results shows that project and management level staff (25.4% and 24.6% respectively 

comprised of the highest number of employees employed on contract terms. 

4.3 Descriptive Statistics 

Procedural justice refers to employees‟ perceptions of fairness in the means and processes 

used to determine the amount and distribution of resources (Saks, 2006). Higher perceptions 

of procedural justice by employees are more likely to reciprocate with greater organizational 

commitment and an employees‟ positive evaluation of their supervisor (McFarlin & 

Sweeney, 1992). 

Table 5: Perceptions on Procedural Justice 

Procedural Justice Very 

little 

extent 
(%) 

Little 

extent 

(%) 

Some 

extent 

(%) 

Great 

extent 

(%) 

Very 

great 

extent 
(%) 

Total 

(%) 

Able to express views and feelings during 
decision implementation 

9 14 32 35 10 100 

Able to influence decision outcomes 15 20 37 18 10 100 

Procedures applied consistently 9 19 41 26 5 100 

Procedures been free of bias 12 12 44 26 6 100 

Procedures based on accurate information 10 14 43 28 5 100 

Able to appeal the outcome arrived 30 23 25 20 2 100 

Procedures uphold 10 12 35 31 12 100 

Average % 14 16 37 26 7 100 

Majority of the respondents perceptions on procedural justice fall under the “to some extent” 

level of agreement. As shown on table 4.13, 32% indicated that they have been able to 

contribute in the decision implementation, 37% have been able to influence decision 

outcomes, 41% of the respondents agreed that to some extent, procedures are applied 

consistently; procedures are free of bias (44%), procedures are based on accurate information 

Open ended 
contract 

17% 
 
 

 
Fixed contract 

83% 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

38 

 

 

 

(43%) and the procedures upheld work place ethical and moral standards (35%). However, 

majority of respondents (30%) reported that they are only able to appeal the outcome arrived 

at by those procedures to a very little extent. These findings show that employee justice 

perceptions also depend on the organization‟s adherence to procedural justice rules 

(Leventhal, 1980; Thibaut & Walker, 1978). 

4.4 Inferential Statistics 

4.4.1 Influence of Procedural Justice Perceptions on Affective Commitment 

The study assessed the influence of procedural justice perception on affective commitment. 

The study employed the use of linear regression model to ascertain this relationship. The 

findings are given below. 

Table 6: Model Summary-Procedural Justice on Affective Commitment 
 

Model R R 

Square 

Adjusted R 

Square 

Std. Error of the Estimate 

1 .339 .115 .106 .927 

a. Predictors: (Constant), 
 

b. Dependent Variable: Affective commitment Index  

The statistic, F = 2.185, p< 0.05 indicates that procedural justice perceptions is a good 

predictor of variations in affective commitment. The coefficient of determination explains the 

percentage of variation in the dependent variable that is explained by unit change in the 

dependent variable. The linear regression model result showed indicated that that 11.5% % 

change of affective commitment is explained procedural justice perceptions. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 7: ANOVA- Procedural Justice on Affective Commitment 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

39 

 

 

 

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 

Regression 13.147 7 1.878 2.185 .040 

Residual 101.410 118 .859   

Total 114.557 125    

a. Dependent Variable: Affective Commitment Index 

b. Predictors: (Constant), ethical and moral standards, influence outcome, procedures 

consistency, outcome arrived, express views and feelings, procedures accuracy, procedures 

free of bias, 

Table 8: Coefficient- Procedural Justice Affective Commitment 
 

 

Model Unstandardized 

Coefficients 

Standardized 

Coefficients 

t Sig. Collinearity 

Statistics 
 

  

B Std. 

Error 

Beta Tolerance VIF 

 

(Constant) 1.381 .302  4.570 .000  

Express .121 

feelings 

.127 .138 .949 .034 .356 
2.807 

Outcome -.016 

arrived 

.118 -.020 -.138 .891 .367 
2.728 

Procedures .136 

consistency 

.131 .143 1.039 .030 .394 
2.537 

Procedures -.009 

free of bias 

.159 -.010 -.055 .956 .249 
4.024 

Procedures -.078 

accuracy 

.164 -.083 -.477 .634 .250 
3.997 

Outcome .040 
arrived 

.081 .049 .493 .623 .763 
1.311 

Ethical and .159 .121 .184 1.317 .019 .384 

moral 

standards 

a. Dependent Variable: Affective Commitment Index 

2.605 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

40 

 

 

 

The results of the regression model revealed that, express feelings, procedures, consistency 

and ethical and moral standards had a significant relationship with affective commitment. 

This can be shown by the p<0.05. the remaining constructs had an insignificant relationship 

with affective commitment since their p-value was >0.05. 

The findings of this study are consistent with those of Leventhal (1980) who proposed six 

criteria for a procedure to be perceived as fair. These include consistency, bias suppression, 

and accuracy of information in decision making, correctability, representativeness and 

ethicality based on conformity to personal ethical or moral values. 

Wiesenfeld et al., (2007), also added bias suppression, accuracy and overall fairness as the 

defining criteria for procedural justice. According to Thibaut and Walker (1975) procedural 

justice theory, the amount of control people influenced over decisions and processes their 

perceptions of fairness. According to Thibaut and Walker (1975) fair procedures are valuable 

because they allow individuals‟ control over outcomes. 

4.4.2 Influence of Procedural Justice Perceptions on Continuance Commitment 

The study further assessed the relationship between procedural justice perception and 

continuance commitment. The results for regressions model used are given below. 

Table 9: Model Summary-Procedural Justice on Continuance Commitment 
 

Model R R Square Adjusted R 

Square 

Std. Error of the 

Estimate 

1 .238a .057 .001 1.016 

a. Predictors: (Constant), ethical and moral standards, influence outcome, procedures 

consistency, outcome arrived, express views and feelings, procedures accuracy, procedures 

free of bias, 

b. Dependent Variable: Continuance Commitment Index 

The statistic, F = 2.185, p> 0.427 indicates that procedural justice perceptions is not a good 

predictor of variations in continuance commitment. The coefficient of determination explains 

the percentage of variation in the dependent variable that is explained by unit change in the 

dependent variable. The model summary results revealed that procedural justice perceptions 

account for 5.7% of the variations in continuance commitment. 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

41 

 

 

 

Table 10: ANOVA- Procedural Justice on Continuance Commitment 
 

Model 
 

Sum of Squares df Mean 

Square 

F Sig. 

1 Regression 7.297 7 1.042 1.011 .427b 

 
Residual 121.697 118 1.031 

  

 
Total 128.994 125 

   

a. Dependent Variable: : Continuance Commitment Index 

b. Predictors: (Constant), ethical and moral standards, influence outcome, procedures 

consistency, outcome arrived, express views and feelings, Procedures accuracy, procedures 

free of bias, 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

42 

 

 

 

Table 11: Coefficients-Procedural Justice on Continuance Commitment 
 

Model Unstandardized 

Coefficients 

Standardized 

Coefficients 

t Sig. Collinearity 

Statistics 

 

 B Std. 

Error 

Beta   Tolerance VIF 

(Constant) 1.732 .331  5.232 .000   

Express 

views and 

feelings, 

-.154 .139 -.166 - 

1.106 

.271 .356 2.807 

Influence 

outcome 

.021 .129 .024 .165 .869 .367 2.728 

Procedures 
consistency 

-.052 .144 -.052 -.363 .717 .394 2.537 

Procedures 

free of bias, 

.149 .175 .153 .854 .395 .249 4.024 

Procedures 

accuracy, 

-.037 .180 -.037 -.204 .839 .250 3.997 

Outcome 

arrived 

.117 .088 .136 1.326 .187 .763 1.311 

Ethical and 

moral 

standards, 

.142 .132 .155 1.071 .287 .384 2.605 

a. Dependent Variable: Continuance Index     

The findings showed that all the variables under procedural justice perception had 

insignificant relationship with continuance commitment. The findings of this study contradict 

those of Leventhal (1980) who proposed six criteria for a procedure to be perceived as fair. 

These include consistency, bias suppression, and accuracy of information in decision making, 

correctability, representativeness and ethicality based on conformity to personal ethical or 

moral values. Wiesenfeld et al., (2007), also added bias suppression, accuracy and overall 

fairness as the defining criteria for procedural justice. 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

43 

 

 

 

4.4.3 Influence of Procedural Justice Perceptions on Normative Commitment 

Finally, the study sought to find the relationship between procedural justice perception and 

normative commitment. The study sought to find out whether the variables under procedural 

independently influenced normative commitment. 

Table 12: Model Summary-Procedural Justice on Normative Commitment 
 

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 

1 .540a .292 .249 .708 

a. Predictors: (Constant), ethical and moral standards, influence outcome, procedures 

consistency, outcome arrived, express views and feelings, procedures accuracy, procedures 

free of bias, 

b. Dependent Variable: Normative Commitment Index 

The findings in the model summary revealed that procedural justice perception constructs 

accounted for 29.2% of the variation in normative commitment. The results of F-statistics 

given in Table 13 further indicate that procedural justice perception constructs are good 

predictors of normative commitment given of p<0.05. 

Table 13: ANOVA- Procedural Justice on Normative Commitment 
 

Model Sum of 

Squares 

df Mean 

Square 

F Sig. 

1 Regression 23.995 7 3.428 6.830 .000b 

 
Residual 58.220 116 .502 

  

 
Total 82.215 123 

   

a. Dependent Variable: Normative Commitment Index 

b. Predictors: (Constant), ethical and moral standards, influence outcome, procedures 
consistency, outcome arrived, express views and feelings, Procedures accuracy, procedures 
free of bias, 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

44 

 

 

 

Table 14: Coefficients-Procedural Justice on Normative Commitment 
 

Model Unstandardized 

Coefficients 

Standardized 

Coefficients 

t Sig. Collinearity 

Statistics 

 

 B Std. 

Error 

Beta   Tolerance VIF 

(Constant) 1.669 .233  7.173 .000   

Express 

views and 

feelings 

-.198 .100 -.262 - 

1.985 

.050 .351 2.847 

Influence 

outcome 

.210 .091 .297 2.309 .023 .369 2.709 

Procedures 
consistency 

.319 .102 .397 3.126 .002 .379 2.637 

Procedures 

free of bias 

-.204 .122 -.260 - 

1.668 

.098 .251 3.988 

Procedures 

accuracy 

-.050 .126 -.062 -.398 .691 .253 3.951 

Outcome 

arrived 

.090 .063 .129 1.444 .152 .759 1.318 

Ethical and 

moral 

standards 

.252 .093 .344 2.700 .008 .377 2.652 

The findings of the regression model above indicate that Express views and feelings, 

Influence outcome, Ethical and moral and Procedures consistency were found to have a 

positive and significant relationship with normative commitment. These constructs had a p- 

value of less than 0.05. The finding further revealed that Procedures accuracy, Outcome 

arrived and Procedures free of bias were found to have an insignificant relationship with 

normative commitment. 

The findings of this study concur with those of Leventhal (1980) who proposed six criteria 

for a procedure to be perceived as fair. These include consistency, bias suppression, and 

accuracy of information in decision making, correctability, representativeness and ethicality 

based on conformity to personal ethical or moral values. Wiesenfeld et al., (2007), also added 

bias suppression, accuracy and overall fairness as the defining criteria for procedural justice. 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

45 

 

 

 

4.4.4 Overall Influence of Procedural Justice Perception on Organisational 

Commitment 

The overall regression model was conducted to test the overall influence of procedural justice 

perception on organisational commitment. The results of the overall model are presented and 

discussed below. 

Table 15: Overall Model Summary 
 

Model Summary  

R .366a 

R Square 0.134 

Adjusted R Square 0.127 

Std. Error of the Estimate 0.56506 

F-Statistics 19.692 (p=0.000) 

The model summary result indicates that procedural justice perception accounted for 12.7% 

of the variation in organisational commitment. The findings of ANOVA further revealed that 

the model adapted to link procedural justice perception and organisational commitment was 

statistically significant (F=19.692, p=0.000). The findings imply that procedural justice 

perceptions are good predictors of organisational commitment. 

Table 16: Overall Regression Coefficient 
 

 B Std. Error Beta t Sig. 

 

(Constant) 
 

2.037 
 

0.173 

  

11.789 
 

0 

 
Procedural Justice Percpetion 

 
0.248 

 
0.056 

 
0.366 

 
4.438 

 
0 

a Dependent Variable: overall Commitment    

The regression results show that, procedural justice perception had Beta value of 0.248 and p- 

value of 0.000. This value is less than the conventional value of 0.05 adopted in this study. 

Therefore, these results imply that procedural justice perception had a significant relationship 

with organisational commitment. The findings of this study concur with those of Leventhal 

(1980) who proposed six criteria for a procedure to be perceived as fair. These include 

consistency, bias suppression, and accuracy of information in decision making, correctability, 

representativeness and ethicality based on conformity to personal ethical or moral values. 

Wiesenfeld et al., (2007), also added bias suppression, accuracy and overall fairness as the 

defining criteria for procedural justice. 

4.3.6 Hypothesis testing 

The null hypothesis being tested in this study was; H0: Perceptions of procedural justice have 

no statistically significant effect on employee commitment in health sector non-governmental 

organizations in Kenya. This hypothesis was rejected at level of significance of 0.05, which, 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

46 

 

 

 

therefore, imply that Perceptions of procedural justice have a statistically significant effect on 

employee commitment in health sector non-governmental organizations in Kenya. Therefore, 

the optimal model was; 

Organisational Commitment =2.037+0.248 (procedural justice perceptions) + ℮ 

 

5.0 DISCUSSION CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

5.1 Discussion 

Procedural justice refers to an employee‟ perceptions of fairness in the means and processes 

used to determine the amount and distribution of resources (Saks, 2006). Higher perceptions 

of procedural justice by employees are more likely to reciprocate with greater organizational 

engagement and an employees‟ positive evaluation of their supervisor (McFarlin & Sweeney, 

1992). 

The basic tenet of procedural justice – a voice in the development of an outcome - enhances 

the perceived fairness in the workplace independent of the effects of its implementation 

(Greenberg, 2002). An organization that provides knowledge to employees about procedures 

demonstrates regard for employees concerns. Decision-making processes that are unclear to 

employees violate procedural fairness and trust thereby damaging the employer-employee 

relationship. 

The study findings show that perceptions of procedural justice are more important than 

perceived distributive justice when explaining employees‟ organizational commitment. 

Procedural justice perceptions were shown to positively influence affective commitment and 

normative commitment. 

5.2 Conclusions 

Based on the findings, the study concluded that procedural justice perceptions have a positive 

influence on affective commitment and normative commitment. 

5.3 Recommendations 

The findings from the study showed that though positive, procedural justice has a low 

explanatory power on affective and normative commitment and none on continuance 

commitment. Procedural fairness perceptions were rated by respondents as average. The 

findings suggest that employees‟ commitment with an organization could be significantly 

increased by enhancing organizational fairness, particularly procedural justice. 

Managers and other leaders should therefore be aware that the fairness of procedures used in 

allocating rewards and the voice afforded employees in the allocation process are as 

important as the fairness of the allocation of rewards in improving level of employees‟ 

commitment in an organization. For organizational procedures to be perceived as fair, they 

should be applied consistently. Fair procedures should guarantee that like cases are treated 

alike. Secondly, those carrying out the procedures must be seen to be impartial and neutral. 

Unbiased decision-making should lead to a fair and accurate conclusion. Decision makers 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

47 

 

 

 

should be seen to want to treat people fairly and take the viewpoint and needs of interested 

parties into account. If employees trust the decision makers, they are more likely to view the 

decision-making process as fair. Thirdly, those directly affected by the decisions should have 

a voice and representation in the process. 

Having representation affirms the status of group members and inspires trust in the decision- 

making system. This is especially important for operational staff whose voices often go 

unheard. Finally, the processes that are implemented should be transparent. Decisions should 

be reached through open procedures, without secrecy or deception. 

Therefore, to increase employees‟ organizational commitment, NGO leaders and managers 

should first improve the procedural justice and hence increase overall levels of perceived 

justice by involving employees in the procedures used in making decisions and allocating 

rewards. Procedural justice can be fostered further through employee involvement which 

gives them a voice during a decision-making process, influence over the outcome or by 

adherence to fair process criteria, such as consistency, lack of bias, correctability, 

representation, accuracy, and ethicality. 

5.4 Areas for Further Research 

There is a need to undertake further studies in order to widen the generalizability of the 

findings and also establish reasons for the variations in the findings on the low influence of 

justice perceptions in the NGO sector in Kenya compared to the strong influence reported in 

studies conducted in other sectors in the rest of the world. Such studies are also likely to 

identify what are, if any, the other factors which influence employee commitment in the NGO 

sector. 

 

REFERENCES 

Adams, J. S. (1965). „Inequity in social exchange‟. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in 
Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic Press, 2, 267–99. 

Akanbi, P.A., & Ofoegbu, O.E. (2013). Impact of perceived organizational justice on 

organizational commitment of a food and beverage firm in Nigeria. International 

Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3 (14), 207-218 

Bartlett, K. (2001). The relationship between training and organizational commitment: A 

study in the health care field. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12(4), 335- 

352. 

Batti,  R.C.(2014).  Human  Resource  Management  Challenges  Facing  Local  NGOs. 

Humanities and Social Sciences, 2 (4). 

Bayer, L. (2009). The investment model and organizational commitment: Predicting 

workplace behaviours. Haverford: Haverford College. 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

48 

 

 

 

Becker, H. S. (1960). Notes on the concept of commitment. American Journal of Sociology, 

66, 33-42. 

Berg, B. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (4th Ed.). Boston: 

Pearson Education. 

Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria for justice. In 

B. Sheppard (Ed.), Research on negotiation in organizations, 1, Greenwich, CT: JAI 

Press, 43–55 

Blau, G. J., & Boal, K. B. (1987). Conceptualizing how job involvement and organizational 

commitment affect turnover and absenteeism. The Academy of Management Review, 

12(2): 288-300. 

Brown, M.W & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, 

Long JS, editors. Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1993. 

pp. 136–162. 

Browning, V. (2006). The relationship between HRM practices and service behaviour in 

South African service organizations. International Journal of Human Resource 

Management, 17, 1321-1338. 

Brum, S. (2007). What impact does training have on employee commitment and employee 

turnover? University of Rhode Island. Schmidt Labor Research Center Seminar 

Research Series. 

Buchanan, B., (1974). Building organizational commitment: The socialization of managers in 

work organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19, 533-546 

Bulut, C & Culha, O (2010). The effects of organizational training on organizational 

commitment. International Journal of Training and Development, 14(4), 309-322. 

Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1733320 

Caldwell, D.F., Chatmun, J. A. & O‟ReiIIy C. A. (1990). Building organizational 

commitment: A multifirm study. Journal of Occupational Psychology. 63, 245-261 

Cascio, W. F. (2003). Changes in workers, work, and organizations. In W. Borman, R. 

Klimoski, & D. Ilgen (Eds.), Handbook of psychology, volume 12: Industrial and 

organizational psychology: 401-422. New York: John Wiley. 

Chang, E. (2005). Employees‟ overall perception of HRM effectiveness. Human Relations, 

58(4), 523-544. 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/
http://ssrn.com/abstract%3D1733320


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

49 

 

 

 

citizenship behaviour within a labour union: A test of organizational justice theory. Journal 

of Applied Psychology, 81,161-9. 

Clason, D. L., & Dormody, T. J. (1994). Analyzing data measured by individual Likert-type 

items. Journal of Agricultural Education, 35(4), 31- 35. 

Coetzee, M. (2005). The fairness of affirmative action: An organizational justice perspective. 

Unpublished PhD Thesis. University of Pretoria, Pretoria. 

Cohen-Charash, Y. and Spector, P. E. (2001). „The role of justice in organizations: a meta- 

analysis‟. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 278–321. 

Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation 

of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386-400. 

Colquitt, J. A., & Greenberg, J. (2003). Organizational justice: A fair assessment of the state 

of the literature. Organizational behavior: The state of the science, 159-200. 

Colquitt, J. A., & Shaw, J. C. (2005). How should organizational justice be measured? In J. 

Greenberg & J. A. Colquitt (Eds.). The handbook of organizational justice (pp. 113– 

152). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 

Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the 

millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. 

Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425-445. 

Colquitt, J. A., Greenberg, J., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2005). What is organizational justice? 

A historical overview. In J. Greenberg & J. A. Colquitt (Eds.). The handbook of 

organizational justice (3–56). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 

Greenberg, J., & Scott, K. S. (1996). Why do workers bite the hands that feed them? 

Employee theft as a social exchange process. Research in Organizational Behaviour, 

18, 111-156. 

Greenberg, J., & Wiethoff, C. (2001). Organizational justice as proaction and reaction: 

Implications for research and application. Justice in the workplace: From theory to 

practice, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 

Griffin, M.L. & Hepburn, J. (2005). Side-bets and reciprocity as determinants of 

organizational commitment among correctional officers. Journal of Criminal Justice, 

33 (6), 611-625. 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/


European Journal of Human Resource 

ISSN 2520-4697 (Online) 

Vol.1, Issue 1 No.1, pp26-50, 2017 

www.ajpojournals.org 

50 

 

 

 

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In 

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand 

Oaks, CA: Sage. 105-117 

Kothari, C, R. (2008). Research methodology, methods and techniques. (2nd Ed.). New 

Delhi: New Age International. 

Kumar, R, (2005) Research Methodology-A Step-by-Step Guide for 

Beginners,(2nd.ed.),Singapore, Pearson Education. 

Lamba, S. & Coudhary, N. (2013). Impact of HRM practices on organizational commitment 

of employees. International Journal of Advancements in Research & Technology, 2 

(4). 

Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? In Gergen, K. J, 

Greenberg, M. S. & Willis, R. H. (Eds.), Social Exchange: Advances in theory and 

research, New York: Plenum. 27– 55. 

Minbaeva, D. B. (2005). HRM practices and MNC knowledge transfer. Personal Review, 

Vol.34, (1): 125-144. 

Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., Lee, T. W., Sablynski, C. J., & Erez, M. (2001). Why people 

stay: Using job embeddedness to predict voluntary turnover. The Academy of 

Management Journal, 44 (6), 1102-1121 

Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational 

citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? 

Journal of Applied Psychology, 76,(6), 845-855. 

Quarles R. (1994). An examination of promotion opportunities and evaluation criteria as 

mechanism for affecting internal auditor commitment, job satisfaction and turnover 

intentions Journal of Managerial Issues 6: 176 194 

Raza, K., Adnan R., Nosheen, Qadir., M., & Rana, A. (2013). Relationship between 

distributive justice, procedural justice and organizational commitment: An empirical 

analysis on public sector of Pakistan. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 16, 

878-883. 

Rodgers, J. L. and Nicewander, W. A. (1988). Thirteen ways to look at the correlation 

coefficient. American Statistician, 42, 59-66. 

Rubin A. and Babbie, E. 2010. Essential Research Methods for Social Work. 2nd ed. Belmont 

(Calif.): Brooks/Cole: Cengage Learning. 

http://www.ajpojournals.org/

