Dominance analysis of two measures of organizational justice

Purpose - This article aims to examine the criterion-related validity of two sets of commonly used measures of organizational justice. Design/methodology/approach - Regression-based dominance analysis is used on self-report data provided by 214 working college students. Findings - The three-dimension measure of organizational justice by Moorman was compared to the four-dimension measure of Colquitt in the prediction of Colquitt's own outcomes. Results suggest that Moorman's measures may dominate Colquitt's measures on some outcomes. Practical implications - Practitioners are urged to give renewed consideration to Moorman's scales when predicting outcomes, as it appears that this three-factor measure of organizational justice may outperform the four-factor measure in some instances. Social implications - Organizations may find Moorman's parsimonious representation of justice more useful than Colquitt's version for explaining the nuances of perceptual differences regarding fairness and justice in the workplace. Originality/value - This study is, to the authors' knowledge, the first to compare Colquitt's measures of justice with Moorman's measures on a subscale-by-subscale basis.