A new, established approach to managing misbehavior: system justification theory

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin J. Thomas ◽  
Spencer Harris

PurposeThe status quo for managing deviant workplace behavior is underperforming. The current research offers a new approach for scholars and managers in approaching these misbehaviors. Namely, we outline how system justification theory, which holds that people are motivated to rationalize and justify the systems—including workplaces—to which they belong even when those systems disadvantage them or others, offers value in explaining and addressing the prevalence of such misbehaviors and contemporary failures in managing them.Design/methodology/approachThis conceptual research explores the situated role of onlookers to patterns of workplace misbehavior, like harassment. We explore existing scholarship on why and how onlookers respond to such actions, including cultural elements, and draw parallels between those accounts and the foundational concepts of system justification theory to demonstrate an unrealized theoretical overlap valuable for its immediate applications in research.FindingsThe current paper establishes clear links between system justification theory and efforts to manage misbehavior, establishing system justifications as freezing forces in the culture of a workplace that must be unfrozen to successfully implement strategies for managing misbehavior. Further, we describe how organizational onlookers to misbehavior are subject to system justifications, which limit prescribed means of stopping these patterns of wrongdoing.Originality/valueVery limited organizational scholarship has utilized system justification theory, despite calls for such applications. Given the existing shortcomings in scholarship and management approaches to workplace misbehavior, the current research breaks from the status quo and offers an established theory as a new way to approach these misbehaviors.

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Jost ◽  
Mahzarin R. Banaji ◽  
Brian A. Nosek

Most theories in social and political psychology stress self-interest, intergroup conflict, ethnocentrism, homophily, ingroup bias, outgroup antipathy, dominance, and resistance. System justification theory is influenced by these perspectives—including social identity and social dominance theories—but it departs from them in several respects. Specifically, we argue that (a) there is a general ideological motive to justify the existing social order, (b) this motive is at least partially responsible for the internalization of inferiority among members of disadvantaged groups, and (c) paradoxically, it is sometimes strongest among those who are most harmed by the status quo. In this article, we review and integrate 10 years of research on 20 hypotheses derived from a system justification perspective, focusing especially on the phenomenon of implicit outgroup favoritism among members of disadvantaged groups (including African Americans, the elderly, and gays/lesbians) and its relation to political ideology (especially liberalism-conservatism).


2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 360-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron C. Kay ◽  
Justin Friesen

More than a decade of research from the perspective of system-justification theory (Jost & Banaji, 1994) has demonstrated that people engage in motivated psychological processes that bolster and support the status quo. We propose that this motive is highly contextual: People do not justify their social systems at all times but are more likely to do so under certain circumstances. We describe four contexts in which people are prone to engage in system-justifying processes: (a) system threat, (b) system dependence, (c) system inescapability, and (d) low personal control. We describe how and why, in these contexts, people who wish to promote social change might expect resistance.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuma Kevin Owuamalam ◽  
Mark Rubin ◽  
Russell Spears

Is support for societal systems amongst the disadvantaged driven by an (un)conscious system justification motive that is independent from self-interests? System justification theory (SJT; Jost & Banaji, 1994) is unique in its affirmative answer to this question. SJT proposes (a) that support for societal systems operates in the service of maintaining the status quo, (b) that the evidence for this system justification motive lies with the fact that members of disadvantaged groups (un)consciously support societal systems that are detrimental to their interests, and (c) that these processes are most apparent when group interests are weak. The present article reviews emerging evidence for these propositions and concludes that: (a) an unconscious manifestation of system justification is unlikely based on SJT’s “strong” dissonance-based predictions, which assumes that competing group and system motives are cognitively salient, and (b) a conscious system justification motive is also unlikely amongst the disadvantaged when group interests are weak. In addition, we suggest ways in which to explain system justification effects amongst the disadvantaged without recourse to an (un)conscious system justification motive.


2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 260-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
John T. Jost ◽  
Orsolya Hunyady

According to system justification theory, there is a psychological motive to defend and justify the status quo. There are both dispositional antecedents (e.g., need for closure, openness to experience) and situational antecedents (e.g., system threat, mortality salience) of the tendency to embrace system-justifying ideologies. Consequences of system justification sometimes differ for members of advantaged versus disadvantaged groups, with the former experiencing increased and the latter decreased self-esteem, well-being, and in-group favoritism. In accordance with the palliative function of system justification, endorsement of such ideologies is associated with reduced negative affect for everyone, as well as weakened support for social change and redistribution of resources.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanne M Watkins

There is currently extensive debate in psychological science about how to improve the field’s replicability (e.g. Lindsay, 2015). In this paper I explore the meta-scientific question of who is pushing for changes to the way research is done, and why. I aim to contribute to the debate in 2 ways: First, I use system justification theory (SJT; Jost, Banaji, & Nosek, 2004) to derive (pre-registered) hypotheses about differences between junior and senior researchers, and as a framework for reflecting on the current debate. Results show that tenured social psychologists are more likely to defend the status quo, and to perceive more costs (relative to benefits) to proposed initiatives such as direct replications and pre-registration, than are those who are untenured. Second, all materials and the data from 406 research psychologists are available on the OSF, and I invite other researchers to make full use of them.


foresight ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 362-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.E.A. Ashu ◽  
Dewald Van Niekerk

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the status quo of disaster risk reduction (DRR) policy and legislation in Cameroon. Design/methodology/approach Using a qualitative method, this paper examines historical data from sectoral administrative reports, plans, declarations, commitments and speeches, texts and peer-reviewed journals on disaster and risk management in Cameroon for the period 1967-2017. Empirical data from ten selected government sectors were used to analyze the status quo, together with quantitative data collected by using four instruments (i.e. HFA Priority 1 & 4, USAID Toolkit, GOAL Resilience Score and the Checklist on Law and DRR). Findings Findings show that Cameroon largely still practices disaster response through the Department of Civil Protection. Transparency and accountability are the sine qua non of the state, but the lack thereof causes improper implementation of DRR within development institutions. DRR is seen as an ad hoc activity, with the result that there is not effective institutional capacity for implementation. The need to develop a new national DRR framework is evident. Originality/value Analyzing the status quo of DRR in Cameroon could assist with the review and reevaluation of a new DRR framework within the Cameroonian territory.


2014 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 10-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon Q. Yang

Purpose – This study aims to ascertain the trends and changes of how academic libraries market and deliver information literacy (IL) on the web. Design/methodology/approach – The author compares the findings from two separate studies that scanned the Web sites for IL-related activities in 2009 and 2012, respectively. Findings – Academic libraries intensified their efforts to promote and deliver IL on the web between 2009 and 2012. There was a significant increase in IL-related activities on the web in the three-year period. Practical implications – The findings describe the status quo and changes in IL-related activities on the libraries’ Web sites. This information may help librarians to know what they have been doing and if there is space for improvement. Originality/value – This is the only study that spans three years in measuring the progress librarians made in marketing and delivering IL on the Web.


Significance The differing perspectives of unionists and nationalists on the creation of Northern Ireland as a political entity within the United Kingdom, together with Brexit and tensions over the Northern Ireland Protocol (NIP), have brought the contentious issue of Irish reunification onto the political agenda in Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. Impacts Scottish independence would likely increase momentum for a referendum on Irish unity. Successful implementation of the NIP, giving firms access to EU and UK markets, may support arguments for maintaining the status quo. If the UK government abandons the NIP, the adverse trade impact on Northern Irish firms could increase support for unification.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document