File Name: service fairness what it is and why it matters .zip
- Exploring New Predictors of Service Fairness in a Restaurant Situation
- Donate to arXiv
- Donate to arXiv
- Why It’s So Hard to Be Fair
The idea that public services can be a source of legitimacy for fragile and conflict-affected states has been the topic of lively debate. Previous research suggests the link is not straightforward; it may depend on what citizens expect in the first place, how services are provided, or the history of state-society relations. Few studies have examined this in depth, or over time.
As very few studies have investigated banking services from fairness perspective and none of the studies have attempted to measure service fairness in Indian retail banking services context, the paper seeks to investigate service fairness in Indian retail banking services context. It attempts to validate the existing four-dimensional service fairness scale and investigates its applicability in the retail banking industry. The conceptual model depicting the relationship between service fairness, service quality and customer satisfaction was tested using SEM.
Exploring New Predictors of Service Fairness in a Restaurant Situation
The performance-management process at many companies continues to struggle, but not for lack of efforts to make things better. Of the respondents we surveyed recently , two-thirds made at least one major change to their performance-management systems over the 18 months prior to our survey. Employees still complain that the feedback they get feels biased or disconnected from their work.
Managers still see performance management as a bureaucratic, box-checking exercise. Half of the executives we surveyed told us that their evaluation and feedback systems have no impact on performance—or even have a negative effect. And certain experiments have gone awry: at some companies, eliminating annual performance reviews without a clear replacement, for example, has led employees to complain of feeling adrift without solid feedback—and some employers to reinstate the old review systems.
For additional research and insights into fairness in the organization, visit EthicalSystems. This eye-of-the-beholder aspect is critical. Our survey research showed that 60 percent of respondents who perceived the performance-management system as fair also stated that it was effective. More important, the data also crystallized what a fair system looks like.
Of course, a host of factors may affect employee perceptions of fairness, but three stood out. Our research suggests that performance-management systems have a much better chance of being perceived as fair when they do these three things:. Such factors appear to be mutually reinforcing. Among companies that implemented all three, 84 percent of executives reported they had an effective performance-management system. And while embattled HR executives and business leaders no doubt want to be fair, fairness is a somewhat vague ideal that demands unpacking.
In working with companies pushing forward on the factors our research highlighted, we have found that these require much greater engagement with employees to help them understand how their efforts matter, a lot more coaching muscle among busy managers, and some delicate recalibration of established compensation systems.
Such shifts support a virtuous cycle that helps organizations get down to business on fairness. Building a foundation of trust in performance management means being clear about what you expect from employees and specific about how their work ultimately fits into the larger picture of what the company is trying to accomplish. Give employees a say and be flexible. Connecting the dots starts with making employees at all levels feel personally involved in shaping their own goals.
Mandating goals from the top down rarely generates the kind of employee engagement companies strive for. At a leading Scandinavian insurer, claims-processing operations were bogged down by surging backlogs, rising costs, and dissatisfied customers and employees. The company formed a working group of executives, managers, and team leaders to define the key areas where it needed to improve.
Those sessions served as a blueprint: four overarching goals, linked to the problem areas, could be cascaded down to the key performance indictors KPIs at the business-unit and team level and, finally, to the KPIs of individual employees. The KPIs focused on operational measures such as claims throughput and problem solving on calls , payout measures like managing contractors and settlement closures , customer satisfaction, and employee morale and retention.
The company took a big further step to get buy-in: it allowed employees to review and provide feedback on the KPIs to assure that these fit their roles.
Managers had observed that KPIs needed to vary even for employees in roles with seemingly similar tasks; phone calling for a targeted auto claim is different from skills needed to remedy damage to a factory. So the insurer gave the managers freedom to adjust, collaboratively, the KPIs for different roles while still ensuring a strong degree of consistency. For the vast majority of traditional roles, this collaborative approach to KPI design is fairly straightforward.
For more complex roles and situations—such as when tasks are deeply interdependent across a web of contributors—it can be more challenging to land on objective measurements. Such complex circumstances call for even more frequent feedback and for getting more rigorous about joint alignment on goals.
Adapt goals as often as needed. Yet KPIs down the line are rarely adjusted. Revisiting goals throughout the year avoids wasted effort by employees and prevents goals from drifting into meaninglessness by year-end, undermining trust. Of respondents who reported that their companies managed performance effectively, 62 percent said that those organizations revisit goals regularly—some on an ad hoc basis, and some twice a year or more.
Managers are at the proverbial coal face, where the hard work of implementing the performance requirements embodied in KPIs gets done. They also know the most about individual employees, their capabilities, and their development needs. Much of the fairness and fidelity of performance-management procedures therefore rests on the ability of managers to become effective coaches.
Less than 30 percent of our survey respondents, however, said that their managers are good coaches. Start with agility. At the Scandinavian insurer, team leaders meet weekly with supervisors to determine whether KPI targets and measures are in sync with current business conditions.
Then, in coaching sessions with team members, the managers discuss and adjust goals, empowering everyone. They review the work of individual team members monthly. They keep abreast of the specifics of KPI fulfillment, with a dashboard that flashes red for below-average work across KPI components.
When employees get two red lights, they receive written feedback and three hours of extra coaching. Invest in capabilities. Building their confidence and ability to evaluate performance fairly and to nudge employees to higher levels of achievement are both musts. While the frequency of performance conversations matters, our research emphasizes that their quality has the greatest impact. One European bank transformed its performance-management system by holding workshops on the art of mastering difficult conversations and giving feedback to employees who are missing the ball.
To ready managers for impending steps in the performance-management cycle, the bank requires them to complete skill-validation sessions, moderated by HR, with their peers.
Managers receive guidance on how to encourage employees to set multiyear stretch goals that build on their strengths and passions. Make it sustainable. That required some organizational rebalancing. To break through legacy functional mind-sets and help HR directors think strategically, they went through a mandated HR Excellence training program.
Better performance conversations, along with a growing understanding of how and when to coach, increased perceived fairness and employee engagement.
Productivity subsequently improved by 15 to 20 percent. Capable coaches with better goal-setting skills should take some of the pain out of aligning compensation—and they do to an extent. However, new organizational roles and performance patterns that skew to top employees add to the challenges. Incentives for traditional sales forces remain pretty intuitive: more effort measured by client contacts brings in more revenue and, mostly likely, higher pay.
The only way, in our experience, is to carefully tinker your way to a balanced measurement approach, however challenging that may be. Above all, keep things simple at base, so managers can clearly explain the reasons for a pay decision and employees can understand them.
Yet companies that have tried this approach often struggle to help employees know where they stand, why their pay is what it is, what would constitute fair rewards for different levels of performance, and which guidelines underpin incentive structures.
Dampen variations in the middle. Cirque du Soleil manages this issue by setting, for all employees, a base salary that aligns with market rates. It also reviews labor markets to determine the rate of annual increases that almost all its employees receive. It pays middling performers fairly and consistently across the group, and the differences among such employees tend to be small. Managers have found that this approach has fostered a sense of fairness, while avoiding invidious pay comparisons.
Managers can opt not to reward truly low performers. Cirque du Soleil and others have also found ways to keep employees in the middle range of performance and responsibilities whose star is on the rise happy: incentives that are not just financial, such as explicit praise, coaching, or special stretch assignments.
Embrace the power curve for standout performers. We noted this idea in a previous article on performance management and are starting to see more evidence that companies are embracing it by giving exceptional performers outsized rewards—typically, a premium of at least 15 to 20 percent above what those in the middle get—even as these companies distribute compensation more uniformly across the broad midsection.
At Cirque du Soleil, managers nominate their highest-performing employees and calibrate pay increases and other rewards. Top performers may receive dramatically more than middle and low performers. Innovate with spot bonuses. Recognizing superior effort during the year can also show that managers are engaged and that the system is responsive.
Cirque du Soleil rewards extraordinary contributions to special projects with a payment ranging from 2 to 5 percent of the total salary, along with a letter of recognition. Digital technologies are power tools that can increase the speed and reach of a performance-management transformation while reducing administrative costs.
Sixty-five percent of respondents from companies that have launched performance-related mobile technologies in the past 18 months said that they had a positive effect on the performance of both employees and companies.
A mobile app at one global company we know, for example, makes it easier for managers and employees to record and track goals throughout the year. Employees feel more engaged because they know where they stand. The app also nudges managers to conduct more real-time coaching conversations and to refine goals throughout the year.
Does technology affect perceptions of fairness? When app-based systems are geared only to increase the efficiency of a process, not so much. However, when they widen the fact base for gauging individual performance, capture diverse perspectives on it, and offer suggestions for development, they can bolster perceived fairness.
We have found that two refinements can help digital tools do a better job. In an attempt to move away from a manager-led performance system, German e-commerce company Zalando launched an app that gathered real-time performance and development feedback from a variety of sources.
The company also found that feedback tended to be unduly positive: 5 out of 5 became the scoring norm. Digitally enabled, real-time feedback produces a welter of crowdsourced data from colleagues, and so does information streaming from gamified problem-solving apps.
That also undercuts the purpose and ultimately the benefits of digitally enabled feedback. Apps should be designed so that employees can decide which feedback they ought to share during their evaluations with managers. To broaden adoption of the system, Zalando stressed that the app was to be used only for development purposes. That helped spur intense engagement, driving 10, users to the app and 60, trials in the first few months.
Employees reacted positively to sharing and evaluating data that would help them cultivate job strengths. With that base of trust, Zalando designed a performance dashboard where all employees can see, in one place, all the quantitative and qualitative feedback they have received for both development and evaluation. The tool also shows individuals how their feedback compares with that of the average scores on their teams and of people who hold similar jobs.
The many well-intentioned performance-management experiments now under way run the risk of falling short unless a sense of fairness underpins them.
Donate to arXiv
As consumer skepticism grows, companies are forced to compete for credibility in the marketplace. The customer confidence needed for long-term loyalty can be earned only by firms that establish an image of fairness. Fairness is especially important for service firms, whose product is intangible and difficult to evaluate, forcing consumers to rely on trust. When consumers are vulnerable or disadvantaged, violation of justice principles can trigger perceptions of unfairness. Such perceptions produce intense reactions from customers, who are often driven to get even with the firm. Learn About the New eReader.
Donate to arXiv
Millions of people work in our operations and extended supply chain, helping us create the products used by billions more. For us, fairness in the workplace is about respecting, and advancing, their human rights - everywhere we operate, and in everything we do. Our guiding principle is that business can only flourish in societies in which human rights are respected, advanced and upheld. We believe respecting and promoting human rights forms the foundation for a healthy, sustainable and equitable business, and are essential for effective relationships with everyone we depend on. This is reflected throughout the Unilever Sustainable Living Plan, and in many areas of this Sustainable Living Report, including in Sustainable sourcing , Opportunities for women , and Inclusive business.
Skip to search form Skip to main content You are currently offline. Some features of the site may not work correctly. DOI: In the marketplace, consumers have fairness expectations regarding results or benefits they should receive in a service delivery situation.
The NJ Courts are using new technology and creative solutions to ensure an open door to justice. A small number of judges and court staff are working on-site each day.
Why It’s So Hard to Be Fair
We investigated the effects of outcome favorability, opportunity for voice, and demographic congruence on customer reactions to bank loan decisions. Applicants for loans engaged in a transaction with loan officers who were either congruent or incongruent with respect to race and gender. Results suggest that perceptions of outcome favorability and opportunity for voice explain significant variance in customer reactions. Customers responded more positively to unfavorable outcomes when they resulted from a race-congruent loan officer, and female customers responded more positively to low opportunity for voice from male loan officers than from female officers. Implications of the results for organizations serving customers who are diverse in race and gender are discussed.
Federal government websites often end in. The site is secure. For best printout, see the PDF version. Revised September The Fair Labor Standards Act FLSA establishes minimum wage, overtime pay, recordkeeping, and child labor standards affecting full-time and part-time workers in the private sector and in Federal, State, and local governments.
Service fairness has been conceptualized as a major part of the foodservice industry due to the intangibility of foodservice, which is difficult to be evaluated by customers. Considering this challenge, this study investigates the impacts of perceived service fairness dimensions in encouraging brand citizenship behaviors i. Based on an established framework of perceived service fairness, brand trust, brand experience and brand citizenship behavior, an exploratory conceptual model was formulated and empirically assessed.
The purpose of this paper is to extend the well-established nomological network of service quality-relationship quality-customer loyalty by introducing service fairness — a distinct service evaluation concept. A telephone survey of a random sample of customers of auto repair and maintenance services was implemented using a structured questionnaire with established scales. Data were analyzed with partial least squares path methodology, a structural equation modeling methodology.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs and how to get involved. CV ; Artificial Intelligence cs.