nach oben

Social Justice Research

Erschienen in:

14.06.2021

Getting Ratees to Accept Performance Feedback: A Relational Approach

verfasst von: Zainab Baloch, Muhammad Zahid Iqbal, Malik Ikramullah, Jan-Willem van Prooijen, Tamania Khan

Erschienen in: Social Justice Research | Ausgabe 3/2021

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This paper seeks to understand the association between ratees’ relational justice perceptions and their feedback acceptance, both directly and through leader–member exchange (LMX). The paper also examines the moderated mediation effect of supervisory trust. The paper presents the findings of two studies. Study 1 utilized two data sets collected through an online survey from 280 part-time students working full-time (Sample 1) and 292 working professionals (Sample 2) in Pakistan. Study 2 utilized data collected from N = 167 students recruited for a scenario-based experiment that manipulated whether a manager was fair or unfair. Results revealed that relational justice positively predicted feedback acceptance in Studies 1 and 2. LMX positively mediated the above-mentioned relationship in both studies. As expected, supervisory trust negatively moderated the relational justice–feedback acceptance relationship in Study 2. The present study contributes to performance management theory and practice by illuminating that raters can stimulate performance partnership by employing a relational justice approach that increases the likelihood that employees accept performance feedback.

Vorheriger Artikel Legitimacy of Authority and Protest Actions in Response to Collective Disadvantages

Nächster Artikel The “Economic Battle” Now and Then: (E)valuation Patterns of Distributive Justice in Cuban State-Socialism

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Adler, S., Campion, M., Colquitt, A., Grubb, A., Murphy, K., Ollander-Krane, R., & Pulakos, E. D. (2016). Getting rid of performance ratings: Genius or folly? A debate. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(2), 219–252. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2015.106CrossRef

Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2003). Organisation structure as a moderator of the relationship between procedural justice, interactional justice and perceived justice, perceived organizational support and supervisory trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 295–305. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.295CrossRef

Anseel, F., & Lievens, F. (2009). The mediating role of feedback acceptance in the relationship between feedback and attitudinal and performance outcomes. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17(4), 362–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2009.00479.xCrossRef

Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the relationship between organizational justice and work outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(3), 267–285. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.138CrossRef

Ashford, S. J., De Stobbeleir, K., & Nujella, M. (2016). To seek or not to seek: Is that the only question? Recent developments in feedback-seeking literature. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3(1), 213–239. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062314CrossRef

Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. F. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. J. Bies, J. F. Moag, R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiations in organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 43–55). JAI.

Blader, S. L., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). A four-component model of procedural justice: Defining the meaning of a “fair” process. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(6), 747–758. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203029006007CrossRefPubMed

Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Wiley.

Blau, P. M. (1968). Theories of organizations. Crowell Collier and Macmillan.

Boudrias, J. S., Bernaud, J. L., & Plunier, P. (2014). Candidates’ integration of individual psychological assessment feedback. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(3), 341–359. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-01-2012-0016CrossRef

Burton, J. P., Sablynski, C. J., & Sekiguchi, T. (2008). Linking justice, performance, and citizenship via leader–member exchange. Journal of Business and Psychology, 23(1–2), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-008-9075-zCrossRef

Chawla, N., Gabriel, A. S., Dahling, J. J., & Patel, K. (2016). Feedback dynamics are critical to improving performance management systems. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(2), 260–266. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2016.8CrossRef

Christensen-Salem, A., Kinicki, A., Zhang, Z., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2018). Responses to feedback: The role of acceptance, affect, and creative behavior. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 25(4), 416–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051818757691CrossRef

Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386–400. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.386CrossRef

Colquitt, J. A., & Rodell, J. B. (2011). Justice, trust, and trustworthiness: A longitudinal analysis integrating three theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 54(6), 1183–1206. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.0572CrossRef

Colquitt, J. A., & Zipay, K. P. (2015). Justice, fairness, and employee reactions. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2(1), 75–99. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111457CrossRef

Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909–927. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.909CrossRef

Colquitt, J. A., Zipay, K. P., Lynch, J. W., & Outlaw, R. (2018). Bringing “The Beholder” center stage: On the propensity to perceive overall fairness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 148, 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.08.001CrossRef

Cropanzano, R., Anthony, E. L., Daniels, S. R., & Hall, A. V. (2017). Social exchange theory: A critical review with theoretical remedies. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 479–516. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2015.0099CrossRef

Cropanzano, R., Prehar, C. A., & Chen, P. Y. (2002). Using social exchange theory to distinguish procedural from interactional justice. Group & Organization Management, 27(3), 324–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601102027003002CrossRef

Cunha, M., Vieira, D., Rego, A., & Clegg, S. (2018). Why does performance management not perform? International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 67(4), 673–692. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-11-2016-0243CrossRef

Dessler, G. (2020). Human Resource Management, 16^th Edition. Pearson Education Limited

Elicker, J. D., Levy, P. E., & Hall, R. J. (2006). The role of leader-member exchange in the performance appraisal process. Journal of Management, 32(4), 531–551. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306286622CrossRef

Erdogan, B. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of justice perceptions in performance appraisals. Human Resource Management Review, 12(4), 555–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-4822(02)00070-0CrossRef

Gewirtz, S. (1998). Conceptualizing social justice in education: Mapping the territory. Journal of Education Policy, 13(4), 469–484. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268093980130402CrossRef

Gorman, C. A., & Rentsch, J. R. (2009). Evaluating frame-of-reference rater training effectiveness using performance schema accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1336–1344. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016476CrossRef

Gouveia-Pereira, M., Vala, J., Palmonari, A., & Rubini, M. (2003). School experience, relational justice and legitimation of institutional. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 18(3), 309–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173251CrossRef

Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9, 175–208.

Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 9–22. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1987.4306437CrossRef

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage.

Harris, T. B., Li, N., & Kirkman, B. L. (2014). Leader–member exchange (LMX) in context: How LMX differentiation and LMX relational separation attenuate LMX’s influence on OCB and turnover intention. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(2), 314–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.09.001CrossRef

Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.

Hoffman, B. J., Gorman, C. A., Blair, C. A., Meriac, J. P., Overstreet, B., & Atchley, E. K. (2012). Evidence for the effectiveness of an alternative multisource performance rating methodology. Personnel Psychology, 65, 531–563. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2012.01252.xCrossRef

Ikramullah, M., Van Prooijen, J. W., Iqbal, M. Z., & Ul-Hassan, F. S. (2016). Effectiveness of performance appraisal: Developing a conceptual framework using competing values approach. Personnel Review, 45(2), 334–352. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-07-2014-0164CrossRef

Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D., & Taylor, M. S. (1979). Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(4), 349–371. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.64.4.349CrossRef

Iqbal, M. Z., Akbar, S., & Budhwar, P. (2015). Effectiveness of performance appraisal: An integrated framework. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(4), 510–533. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12050CrossRef

Iqbal, M. Z., Akbar, S., Budhwar, P., & Shah, S. Z. A. (2019). Effectiveness of performance appraisal: Evidence on the utilization criteria. Journal of Business Research, 101, 285–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.04.035CrossRef

Javed, B., Naqvi, S. M. M. R., Khan, A. K., Arjoon, S., & Tayyeb, H. H. (2019). Impact of inclusive leadership on innovative work behavior: The role of psychological safety. Journal of Management & Organization, 25(1), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2017.3CrossRef

Javed, B., Rawwas, M. Y., Khandai, S., Shahid, K., & Tayyeb, H. H. (2018). Ethical leadership, trust in leader and creativity: The mediated mechanism and an interacting effect. Journal of Management & Organization, 24(3), 388–405. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2017.56CrossRef

Jawahar, I. (2007). The influence of perceptions of fairness on performance appraisal reactions. Journal of Labor Research, 28(4), 735–754. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12122-007-9014-1CrossRef

Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101CrossRef

Kock, N. (2020). WarpPLS user manual: Version 7.0. Laredo, TX: ScriptWarp Systems.

Korsgaard, M. A., & Roberson, L. (1995). Procedural justice in performance evaluation: The role of instrumental and non-instrumental voice in performance appraisal discussions. Journal of Management, 21(4), 657–669. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639502100404CrossRef

Krings, R., Jacobshagen, N., Elfering, A., & Semmer, N. K. (2015). Subtly offending feedback. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 45(4), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12287CrossRef

Lam, L. W., Peng, K. Z., Wong, C. S., & Lau, D. C. (2017). Is more feedback seeking always better? Leader-member exchange moderates the relationship between feedback-seeking behavior and performance. Journal of Management, 43(7), 2195–2217. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315581661CrossRef

Leung, K., Su, S., & Morris, M. W. (2001). When is criticism not constructive? The roles of fairness perceptions and dispositional attributions in employee acceptance of critical supervisory feedback. Human Relations, 54(9), 1155–1187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726701549002CrossRef

Lewicki, R. J., Wiethoff, C., & Tomlinson, E. C. (2005). What is the role of trust in organizational justice? In J. Greenberg & J. A. Colquitt (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice (pp. 247–270). Mahwah, NJ: Erl-Baum.

Liden, R. C., Sparrowe, R. T., & Wayne, S. J. (1997). Leader-member exchange theory: The past and potential for the future. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 15, 47–120.

Lind, E., & Tyler, T. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. Plenum.CrossRef

Lind, E. A., & van den Bos, K. (2002). When fairness works: Toward a general theory of uncertainty management. Research in Organizational Behavior, 24, 181–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-3085(02)24006-XCrossRef

Malagueño, R., Gölgeci, I., & Fearne, A. (2019). Customer categorization, relational justice and SME performance in supermarket supply chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal., 24(3), 417–429. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-06-2018-0237CrossRef

Masterson, S. S., Lewis, K., Goldman, B. M., & Taylor, M. S. (2000). Integrating justice and social exchange: The differing effects of fair procedures and treatment on work relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 738–748. https://doi.org/10.5465/1556364CrossRef

Masterson, S. S., & Tong, N. (2015). Justice perception formation in social settings. In R. Cropanzano & M. Ambrose (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of justice in the workplace (pp. 291–308). The Oxford University Press.

Mathis, R. L., & Jackson, J. H. (2010). Human resource management (12th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Miles, J. A. (2012). Management and organization theory: A Jossey-Bass reader (Vol. 9). Hoboken: Wiley.

Mulki, J. P., Jaramillo, F., & Locander, W. B. (2006). Effects of ethical climate and supervisory trust on salesperson’s job attitudes and intentions to quit. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 26(1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.2753/PSS0885-3134260102CrossRef

Mumtaz, S., & Rowley, C. (2020). The relationship between leader–member exchange and employee outcomes: Review of past themes and future potential. Management Review Quarterly, 70(1), 165–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-019-00163-8CrossRef

Murphy, K. R. (2020). Performance evaluation will not die, but it should. Human Resource Management Journal, 30(1), 13–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12259CrossRef

Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Sage.

Nadeem, S., & de Luque, M. F. S. (2018). Developing an understanding of the human resource (HR) complexities in Pakistan with a GLOBE cultural lens. Journal of Management & Organization. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2017.79CrossRef

Nae, E. Y., Moon, H. K., & Choi, B. K. (2015). Seeking feedback but unable to improve work performance? Qualified feedback from trusted supervisors matters. Career Development International, 20(1), 81–100. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-08-2014-0107CrossRef

Nahrgang, J. D., & Seo, J. J. (2015). Leader–member exchange (LMX) theory: An introduction and overview. In T. N. Bauer & B. Erdogan (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of leader-member exchange (pp. 87–118). The Oxford University Press.

Nasr, M. I., El Akremi, A., & Coyle-Shapiro, J. A. M. (2019). Synergy or substitution? The interactive effects of insiders’ fairness and support and organizational socialization tactics on newcomer role clarity and social integration. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(6), 758–778. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2369CrossRef

Ndjaboué, R., Brisson, C., & Vézina, M. (2012). Organisational justice and mental health: A systematic review of prospective studies. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 69(10), 694–700. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2011-100595CrossRefPubMed

Niemann, J., Wisse, B., Rus, D., Yperen, N. W. V., & Sassenberg, K. (2014). Anger and attitudinal reactions to negative feedback: The effects of emotional instability and power. Motivation and Emotion, 38(5), 687–699.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended Remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879CrossRef

Rasheed, A., Khan, S. U. R., Rasheed, M. F., & Munir, Y. (2015). The impact of feedback orientation and the effect of satisfaction with feedback on in-role job performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 26(1), 31–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21202CrossRef

Razali, N. M., & Wah, Y. B. (2011). Power comparisons of Shapiro–Wilk, Kolmogorov–Smirnov, Lilliefors and Anderson–Darling tests. Journal of Statistical Modeling and Analytics, 2(1), 21–33.

Robbins, S. P., & Coulter, M. (2018). Management (14th ed.). Pearson.

Roberson, Q. M., & Stewart, M. M. (2006). Understanding the motivational effects of procedural and informational justice in feedback processes. British Journal of Psychology, 97(3), 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712605X80146CrossRefPubMed

Russo, D. S., Miraglia, M., & Borgogni, L. (2017). Reducing organizational politics in performance appraisal: The role of coaching leaders for age-diverse employees. Human Resource Management, 56(5), 769–783. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21799CrossRef

Saunders, M., & Thornhill, A. (2004). Trust and mistrust in organizations: An exploration using an organizational justice framework. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13(4), 493–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320444000182CrossRef

Scandura, T. A., & Graen, G. B. (1984). Moderating effects of initial leader–member exchange status on the effects of a leadership intervention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(3), 428–436. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.69.3.428CrossRef

Schaerer, M., Kern, M., Berger, G., Medvec, V., & Swaab, R. I. (2018). The illusion of transparency in performance appraisals: When and why accuracy motivation explains unintentional feedback inflation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 144, 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.09.002CrossRef

Schläfke, M., Silvi, R., & Möller, K. (2013). A framework for business analytics in performance management. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 62(1), 110–122. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410401311285327CrossRef

Scott, B. A., Colquitt, J. A., & Paddock, E. L. (2009). An actor-focused model of justice rule adherence and violation: The role of managerial motives and discretion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(3), 756–769. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015712CrossRef

Scott, B. A., Garza, A. S., Conlon, D. E., & Kim, Y. J. (2014). Why do managers act fairly in the first place? A daily investigation of “hot” and “cold” motives and discretion. Academy of Management Journal, 57(6), 1571–1591. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0644CrossRef

Sousa, F. H., & Vala, J. (2002). Relational justice in organizations: The group-value model and support for change. Social Justice Research, 15(2), 99–121. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019967705790CrossRef

Sparr, J. L., & Sonnentag, S. (2008). Fairness perceptions of supervisor feedback, LMX, and employee well-being at work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 17(2), 198–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320701743590CrossRef

Stone, D. L., Gueutal, H. G., & McIntosh, B. (1984). The effects of feedback sequence and expertise of the rater on perceived feedback accuracy. Personnel Psychology, 37(3), 487–506. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1984.tb00525.xCrossRef

Stone, T. H., Jawahar, I. M., Johnsen, G., & Foster, J. (2019). Cutting-edge performance management innovations: What do we know? World at Work Journal, 28(1–2), 26–44.

Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115–191). San Diego: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60283-XCrossRef

Tyler, T., & Smith, H. (1998). Social justice and social movements. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Van den Bos, K., Wilke, H. A., & Lind, E. A. (1998). When do we need procedural fairness? The role of trust in authority. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(6), 1449–1458. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.6.1449CrossRef

Van Dijke, M., Wildschut, T., Leunissen, J. M., & Sedikides, C. (2015). Nostalgia buffers the negative impact of low procedural justice on cooperation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 127, 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.11.005CrossRef

Virtanen, M., & Elovainio, M. (2018). Justice at the workplace: A review. CQ: Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics: the International Journal for Healthcare Ethics Committees, 27(2), 306–315. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180117000639CrossRef

Wallace, L. E., Stelman, S. A., & Chaffee, D. S. (2016). Ratee reactions drive performance appraisal success (and failure). Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(2), 310–314. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2016.16CrossRef

Wielsch, D. (2013). Relational justice. Law & Contemporary Problems, 76(2), 191–211.

Titel: Getting Ratees to Accept Performance Feedback: A Relational Approach
verfasst von: Zainab Baloch
Muhammad Zahid Iqbal
Malik Ikramullah
Jan-Willem van Prooijen
Tamania Khan
Publikationsdatum: 14.06.2021
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Social Justice Research / Ausgabe 3/2021
Print ISSN: 0885-7466
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-6725
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-021-00370-3

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2021

Beliefs on Sexual Violence in the Context of System Justification Theory: The Role of Hostile Sexism and Beliefs in Biological Origins of Gender Differences

Political Consequences of Income Inequality: Assessing the Relationship Between Perceived Distributive Fairness and Political Efficacy in Asia

The “Economic Battle” Now and Then: (E)valuation Patterns of Distributive Justice in Cuban State-Socialism

Legitimacy of Authority and Protest Actions in Response to Collective Disadvantages