Involving Information System Users in Defining System Requirements: The Influence of Procedural Justice Perceptions on User Attitudes and Performance

This study incorporates the theoretical framework of procedural justice into the information system (IS) user participation research paradigm. In a field setting, 726 subjects representing 59 local newspaper sites took part in a fully randomized, longitudinal experiment. Four increasing levels of participation concerning specifying system requirements were manipulated: mute, voice, choice, and voice plus choice. As the participation level increased, procedural justice judgments increased correspondingly. Perceptions of control over the development process, satisfaction with the outcome, and objective measures of performance increased from the mute to voice conditions, were unchanged from the voice to choice conditions, and increased again as participation was manipulated at the highest level—voice plus choice. The rich contextual field setting in which this experiment was conducted, combined with strong attitudinal and performance results, encourage researchers to integrate the psychology of procedural justice into the study of IS user participation.

[1]  Blake Ives,et al.  User Involvement and MIS Success: A Review of Research , 1984 .

[2]  Thomas Marshall,et al.  A Review of the Influence of User Involvement on System Success , 1988, ICIS.

[3]  William J. Doll,et al.  The Measurement of End-User Computing Satisfaction , 1988, MIS Q..

[4]  Kailash Joshi,et al.  The Measurement of Fairness or Equality Perceptions of Management Information Systems Users , 1989, MIS Q..

[5]  J. Greenberg,et al.  Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow , 1990 .

[6]  Henri Barki,et al.  Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use , 1994 .

[7]  James A. Senn,et al.  Essential Principles of Information Systems Development , 1978, MIS Q..

[8]  E. A. Locke,et al.  Participation in decision making: When should it be used? , 1986 .

[9]  Graham C. Low,et al.  Exploring Individual User Satisfaction Within User-Led Development , 1993, MIS Q..

[10]  Kailash Joshi,et al.  An Investigation of Equity as a Determinant of User Information Satisfaction , 1990 .

[11]  John Thibaut,et al.  The Relation between Procedural and Distributive Justice , 1979 .

[12]  C. R. Franz,et al.  ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT, USER INVOLVEMENT, AND THE USEFULNESS OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS* , 1986 .

[13]  Blake Ives,et al.  An empirical study of the impact of user involvement on system usage and information satisfaction , 1986, CACM.

[14]  Henri Barki,et al.  Measuring User Participation, User Involvement, and User Attitude , 1994, MIS Q..

[15]  P. Earley,et al.  Voice, control, and procedural justice : instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments , 1990 .

[16]  M. Lerner,et al.  The Justice Motive in Social Behavior , 1981 .

[17]  G. Leventhal.  What Should Be Done with Equity Theory , 1980 .

[18]  Ephraim R. McLean,et al.  Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable , 1992, Inf. Syst. Res..

[19]  William J. Doll,et al.  A Congruence Construct of User Involvement , 1991 .

[20]  P. Christopher Earley,et al.  Procedural justice and participation in task selection: The role of control in mediating justice judgments. , 1987 .

[21]  W. Doll,et al.  A discrepancy model of end-user computing involvement , 1989 .

[22]  R. Folger.  Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of voice and improvement on experienced inequity. , 1977 .

[23]  J. Thibaut,et al.  Preference for Modes of Dispute Resolution as a Function of Process and Decision Control. , 1978 .

[24]  Jerald Greenberg,et al.  Reactions to procedural injustice in payment distributions: Do the means justify the ends? , 1987 .

[25]  Henri Barki,et al.  Rethinking the Concept of User Involvement , 1989, MIS Q..