University of Ciego de Ávila Máximo Gómez Báez
|
ISSN: 2309-8333
|
RNPS: 2411
|13(2) |2025|
This is an Open Access article under the license CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)
Estrategia y Gestión Universitaria EGU
Scientific and technological
research article
How to cite:
Quezada-Abad, C. J., Brito-
Gaona, L. F., & Serrano-Orellana, B. J.
(2025). Organizational justice and
administrative management: an analysis
from the perspective of human talent in
university contexts.
Estrategia y Gestión
Universitaria
, 13(2), e8867.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17387077
Received: 24/03/2025
Accepted: 27/05/2025
Published: 27/10/2025
Corresponding author:
lbrito@utmachala.edu.ec
Conflict of interest:
the authors declare
that they have no conflict of interest,
which may have influenced the results
obtained or the proposed interpretations
.
Organizational justice and
administrative management: an
analysis from the perspective of
human talent in university contexts
La justicia organizacional y gestión
administrativa: un análisis desde la
percepción del talento humano en
contextos universitarios
Justiça organizacional e gestão
administrativa: uma análise a partir da
percepção do talento humano em
contextos universitários
Abstract
Introduction: the performance of organizational justice plays
a crucial role in shaping perceptions of fairness within
educational institutions, directly influencing well-being and
work commitment. Objective: to identify how administrative
management affects the perception of organizational justice
at the Technical University of Machala, considering three
dimensions: distributive, procedural, and interactional.
Method: a quantitative study was conducted with 400 faculty
members and administrative staff, yielding a Cronbach’s Alpha
of 0.99, which indicates high reliability of the collected data.
Results: perceptions of organizational justice vary across
university groups; while faculty members report more
favorable evaluations, administrative staff exhibit
significantly lower perceptions. Conclusion: on average,
67.5% of respondents indicated that administrative
management is positive across the three dimensions. This
highlights the importance of implementing and strengthening
equitable management strategies that foster a fairer and more
productive organizational environment.
Keywords: Ecuador, higher education, equity, administrative
management, organizational justice
Resumen
Introducción: el desempeño de la justicia organizacional
juega un rol importante con respecto a percepción de equidad
dentro de las instituciones educativas, influyendo
directamente en el bienestar y el compromiso laboral.
César Javier Quezada-Abad
1
Universidad Técnica de Machala
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9877-3084
cquezada@utmachala.edu.ec
Ecuador
Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona
2
Universidad Técnica de Machala
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-2780
lbrito@utmachala.edu.ec
Ecuador
Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana
3
Universidad Técnica de Machala
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9101-4541
bjserrano@utmachala.edu.ec
Ecuador
Estrategia y Gestión Universitaria
|
ISSN
: 2309-8333
|
RNPS:
2411
13(2) | July-December |2025|
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
Objetivo:
identificar cómo la gestión administrativa influye en la percepción de
justicia organizacional dentro de la Universidad Técnica de Machala,
considerando tres dimensiones: la distributiva, la procedimental y la
interaccional.
Método:
a través de un estudio cuantitativo, aplicado a 400
profesores y empleados administrativos, se obtuvo un Alfa de Cronbach de 0.99,
lo que refleja una alta confiabilidad en los datos recopilados.
Resultados:
la
percepción de justicia organizacional varía entre los distintos estamentos
universitarios, mientras que los profesores tienen una valoración más favorable,
el personal administrativo presenta una percepción significativamente menor.
Conclusión:
en promedio, el 67.5% de los encuestados indican que es positiva la
gestión administrativa en sus tres dimensiones, es por ello la importancia de
implementar y mejorar las estrategias de gestión equitativas que fomenten un
ambiente organizacional más justo y productivo.
Palabras clave:
Ecuador, educación superior, equidad, gestión administrativa,
justicia organizacional
Resumo
Introdução: o desempenho da justiça organizacional desempenha um papel
fundamental na percepção de equidade dentro das instituições de ensino,
influenciando diretamente o bem-estar e o comprometimento laboral. Objetivo:
identificar como a gestão administrativa influencia a percepção de justiça
organizacional na Universidade Técnica de Machala, considerando três dimensões:
distributiva, procedimental e interacional. Método: foi realizado um estudo
quantitativo com 400 docentes e funcionários administrativos, obtendo-se um Alfa
de Cronbach de 0,99, o que reflete alta confiabilidade dos dados coletados.
Resultados: a percepção de justiça organizacional varia entre os diferentes
segmentos universitários; enquanto os docentes apresentam avaliações mais
favoráveis, os funcionários administrativos demonstram percepções
significativamente menores. Conclusão: em média, 67,5% dos participantes
indicaram que a gestão administrativa é positiva em suas três dimensões. Isso
evidencia a importância de implementar e aprimorar estratégias de gestão
equitativas que promovam um ambiente organizacional mais justo e produtivo.
Palavras-chave:
Equador, ensino superior, equidade, gestão administrativa,
justiça organizacional
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
Introduction
Organizational justice is relevant in the dynamics of educational institutions,
as it directly influences motivation, job performance, and perceptions of equity
among members of an institution. From the equity theory proposed by Adams (1965),
it has been argued that employees evaluate justice based on their contributions and
the benefits received, establishing comparisons with their colleagues. This
perception impacts their level of satisfaction and commitment to the organization
(Greenberg, 1990).
In the university context, organizational justice emerges as an essential
factor in promoting organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Das and Mohanty
(2023) demonstrated, through an empirical study in higher education institutions,
that when employees perceive justice in the distribution of resources, institutional
procedures, and interpersonal treatment, they develop a greater willingness to
voluntarily engage in actions that transcend their contractual roles. Such behavior
strengthens collaboration, institutional commitment, and organizational efficiency,
which is particularly relevant in educational contexts where human capital is the
main asset. It is emphasized that OCB does not arise spontaneously but is deeply
influenced by perceptions of equity and legitimacy in administrative practices and
human resource management (Das & Mohanty, 2023).
Universities, as key agents of social development, must conceive human
resource management from a transformative and integrative logic, moving beyond
dichotomous approaches and embracing collaborative and interdisciplinary models.
This entails rethinking administrative management as a strategic function that
articulates resources, processes, and human relationships aimed at strengthening
institutional commitment and organizational efficiency (Carvajal-Pérez, 2021).
From a university perspective, organizational management should focus on
strengthening administrative practices that enable adequate planning, resource
utilization, and evaluation of outcomes, as elements that directly impact the sense
of equity and belonging among institutional actors. In this regard, Ramírez et al.
(2023) argue that strategically oriented administrative management enhances
organizational capabilities, fosters continuous improvement, and consolidates the
achievement of objectives through human capital as a structuring axis.
Recent literature indicates that the perception of organizational justice is
closely linked to employees' emotional experiences. Studies, such as that of Zavaleta
et al. (2024), reveal that organizational commitment significantly increases when
institutions promote a culture based on equity, transparency, and recognition. This
perspective complements classical postulates by integrating the affective dimension
of justice, highlighting its role in building healthy and sustainable work
environments.
Sora et al. (2021) analyze how the perception of organizational justice can
mitigate the negative effects of job insecurity on worker performance, particularly
depending on the type of contract. Their study shows that when employees perceive
justice in processes, decisions, and relationships within the organization, they are
more likely to maintain adequate performance, even in contexts of job uncertainty,
underscoring the value of equitable treatment in adverse times.
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
Since the establishment of the International Labour Organization (ILO) in the
early 20th century, a decisive milestone was marked in labor history by
institutionalizing global concern for workers' rights and conditions, placing social
justice at the forefront of the debate. Although significant progress has been made
in improving working conditions, fundamental challenges persist that affect the
valuation and recognition of work in various contexts, as well as the expected social
recognition in certain sectors.
Organizational justice finds its roots in the equity theory by Adams (1965),
based on the principle of social comparison. However, it was Greenberg (1990) who
formally introduced the term by referring to how workers perceive equity or inequity
in their work environment. This perception is closely linked to equity and fairness in
organizational interaction. Since the 1960s, interest in understanding how
organizational practices impact employee attitudes and behaviors has increased,
leading to the consolidation of organizational justice as a complex and
multidimensional phenomenon.
Wiseman and Stillwell (2022) provide a comprehensive and updated view of
the concept of organizational justice, proposing a clear typology that includes
distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice. They emphasize
that these dimensions depend not only on formal structures but also on everyday
practices and leadership styles. They underline that high levels of perceived justice
enhance motivation, reduce stress, and improve commitment, while its absence can
erode organizational trust.
Quispe and Paucar (2020) enrich this perspective by highlighting key
principles of scientific management, including planning, personnel selection,
control, and execution, as essential pillars for efficient organizational management.
Meanwhile, Galván-Vela (2024) emphasizes the need to maximize efficiency through
division of labor, clear authority, defined responsibility, and organizational
discipline. From this perspective, organizations are understood as social systems in
which cooperation and effective communication are crucial for achieving strategic
objectives.
In this sense, Amzulescu and Butucescu (2021) investigated how the
perception of organizational injustice can lead to counterproductive work behaviors,
noting that this link is mediated by job alienation. When employees feel that
decisions and processes in their work environment are unjust, they commonly
experience emotional disconnection from their tasks, which in turn increases
negative attitudes such as absenteeism, disinterest, or low productivity.
Recent studies have shown that weak organizational management can have
direct consequences on employee job satisfaction, especially in public institutions.
Bernales-Mendoza et al. (2022) demonstrated that deficiencies in compliance with
regulatory instruments translate into lower levels of commitment and well-being
among employees. These findings reinforce the need to strengthen organizational
structure from a systemic perspective, ensuring coherence between administrative
processes and the work experience of human talent.
University management cannot be understood outside its contextual
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
particularities. As Hill (2022) states, higher education institutions must integrate
innovation, ethics, and sustainability as pillars of their organizational model. In this
regard, university administration is called not only to manage resources but also to
create learning environments that strengthen institutional identity and enhance
human talent, recognizing their experiences and capabilities as the driving force for
institutional development.
From a strategic perspective, Gamarra et al. (2022) argue that the
effectiveness of university administrative management depends on leaders' ability
to establish strong connections with staff through clear and participatory
communication processes. This view aligns with the concept of interactional justice,
highlighting that the legitimacy of institutional decisions is strengthened when
collaborators perceive that their opinions are heard and valued within the
organizational system.
Coherent administrative management aligned with the principles of
organizational justice not only fosters staff stability and commitment but also
enhances institutional innovation capacity. As Martin et al. (2024) note, universities
that develop organizational practices based on ethics and institutional learning are
better positioned to face environmental challenges and respond effectively to
contemporary social demands.
Organizational justice has generated significant interest across various fields
of knowledge due to its key role in workplace dynamics. Numerous studies agree that
it directly influences fundamental aspects such as workers' emotional health, their
level of commitment to the institution, job satisfaction, as well as performance and
collaborative attitudes within organizations. Table 1 summarizes relevant findings
that illustrate how these perceptions of equity relate to individual and collective
performance:
Table 1
Research on organizational justice and administrative management
Authors Research findings
Adamovic (2023)
This review emphasizes that the
central objective of
organizational justice should be to create fair work
environments. It recommends that future studies focus
on combating workplace injustice through collaborations
with organizations, developing applied research that
generates sustainable structural changes.
Aliedan et al.
(2022)
Analyzes how perceptions of distributive injustice and
job insecurity, intensified during the COVID-19 pandemic,
influence unethical behaviors by employees in favor of
the organization. The study highlights tha
t these
conditions generate an increasing intention to leave the
position, acting as a mediator between the perceived
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
unjust environment and dysfunctional behaviors adopted
to protect job stability.
Cao (2022)
Examined how interpersonal injustice
within the
workplace can foster knowledge hiding behaviors among
employees. The study revealed that when individuals
perceive unfair treatment from colleagues or superiors,
they are more likely to withhold valuable information as
a form of protection or response. This effect intensifies
in contexts with high stress levels due to high-
performance work practices.
Domínguez &
Hernández (2020)
A favorable perception of organizational justice can
become a driver for innovation within nonprofit
organizations, fo
stering an environment of trust,
openness, and collaboration that enhances staff
commitment and facilitates the implementation of
significant changes for institutional benefit.
García-Rubiano et
al. (2023)
Through structural model analysis, they show that
perceptions of procedural and interpersonal justice
enhance organizational commitment. They highlight that
perceived justice is key to retaining talent and
maintaining a healthy work environment in public
institutions. They confirm that fair administrative
management increases staff motivation and sense of
belonging. The study reveals that clear communication,
meritocratic processes, and participation in decision-
making strengthen dimensions of organizational justice.
Garnica et al.
(2022)
Results showed that certain profiles, such as men, those
with stable employment, and those linked to scientific
areas, tend to manage their emotions better. Conversely,
administrative staff exhibited higher stress levels
compared to professors, who felt more capab
le of
handling their tasks, especially when balancing family
responsibilities or other activities.
Martínez-Mejía et
al. (2022)
Implicit expectations between employee and
organization, along with perceived support, influence job
burnout and the decision to stay or leave, revealing key
factors affecting staff well-being and stability.
Muala et al. (2022)
They demonstrate that perceptions of organizational
justice significantly reduce turnover intention. Their
study highlights how factors such as workplace bullying,
stress, and organizational silence mediate and moderate
this relationship. Fair and equitable management
contributes to improving the work environment and
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
talent retention in high-pressure settings like the health
sector.
Pinedo et al. (2023)
Organizational behavior becomes an essential axis for
assessing internal efficiency and collective performance,
as it directly impacts service quality, productivity, and
interaction dynamics among those within the
organization.
Rodríguez et al.
(2022)
The research demonstrated that overall organizational
justice relates negatively to work stress, and this link is
partially mediated by work-family conflict. Additionally,
it provides evidence for the need to incorporate
psychosocial well-being strategies.
Sikandar et al.
(2022)
Their study shows that perceptions of organizational
justice enhance job satisfaction and reduce turnover
intention. In multicultural contexts, interpersonal justice
plays a central role in generating collaborative and
cohesive environments.
Sora et al. (2021)
The study validates that job insecurity negatively impacts
performance, but this effect is mediated by perceptions
of organizational justice. It highlights how the type of
contract influences this relationship, providing relevant
insights for designing fairer labor policies.
Trincado-Muñoz et
al. (2020)
They highlight that organizational justice acts as a key
factor in the relationship between customer orientation
and job performance. Their research shows that when
employees perceive a fair environment, both in processes
and interpersonal treatment, they feel more motivated
to adopt customer-
centered behaviors, positively
impacting their individual performance and the overall
results of the organization.
Vera & Hinojosa
(2025)
In the university context, there is a perceived absence of
recognition for individual effort, leading to a widespread
belief that regardless of the level of commitment or
dedication, there will be no fair recognition.
Simultaneously, there is a sense that even in cases of
poor performance, no penalties will be applied. This
perception has negatively impacted staff motivation,
weakening their willingness to enthusiastically face daily
responsibilities. Consequently, increases in staff
turnove
r, a decline in service quality, and low job
satisfaction levels have been observed.
Source: Authors' own elaboration.
The results of this research highlight the decisive role that institutional
policies play in how employees perceive organizational justice, and how this
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
perception is reflected in critical factors such as commitment to the institution,
motivation, job satisfaction, organizational identification, civic attitudes in the
workplace, and reduced absenteeism. Despite the significance of these aspects, the
academic literature linking administrative management with perceptions of
organizational justice in the context of higher education remains limited. This gap
underscores the need to generate knowledge that allows for a better understanding
of how administrative practices affect the way both professors and administrative
staff experience equity in their work environment.
Organizational justice should not be viewed as an isolated construct but
rather as a reflection of an institutional culture capable of generating trust,
participation, and transparency. León and Villanueva (2025) emphasize that solid
institutions, both economically and organizationally, are those that can strategically
guide human talent toward collective development, reducing turnover and improving
institutional legitimacy through clear and equity-oriented management practices.
In the context of public organizations, strategic human resource
management emerges as a decisive factor for achieving institutional efficiency and
long-term sustainability. Various systematic studies demonstrate that appropriate
planning, coupled with policies of inclusion, continuous training, and participatory
leadership, not only enhances organizational performance but also strengthens the
perception of equity among human talent (Quisque & Contreras, 2025). These
practices contribute to generating more equitable work environments, enhance
employee commitment, and favor a greater identification with institutional values
and objectives. Integrating a strategic perspective on human resource management
is crucial for understanding the construction of perceptions of organizational justice
within public universities, where various profiles and labor expectations coexist.
Based on this, the present study aims to deepen the relationship between
administrative management and organizational justice. Specifically, it proposes to
analyze how these practices impact perceptions of justice within the Technical
University of Machala, using its three fundamental dimensions as a framework:
distributive (related to equity in resource allocation), procedural (linked to
transparency in processes), and interactional (referring to interpersonal treatment
and the quality of communication). The methodological approach adopted is based
on an empirical analysis supported by surveys administered to professors and
administrative staff, which will allow for the identification of similarities and
differences in their perceptions. From the results, the study aims to propose
institutional strategies aimed at strengthening internal equity, optimizing human
resource management, and contributing to the establishment of a just, participative,
and development-oriented organizational climate.
Methods and materials
This study adopted a quantitative approach with the objective of analyzing
the perception of organizational justice at the Technical University of Machala
during the year 2022. Data collection was conducted via structured surveys
administered to a representative sample of 400 employees, including professors and
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
administrative staff, selected from a total population of 588 workers.
The methodological design was descriptive and correlational, allowing for
the characterization of participants' perceptions and the exploration of possible
relationships between the analyzed variables. The instrument used was a structured
questionnaire built on a five-point Likert scale, specifically designed to measure
perceptions of organizational justice across three key dimensions:
• Distributive justice: Evaluated perceived equity in the allocation of
incentives, rewards, and opportunities for professional development.
• Procedural justice: Inquired about the valuation of administrative processes
in terms of transparency, impartiality, and consistency.
• Interactional justice: Explored the quality of interpersonal treatment and
communication received from management levels.
For data analysis, measures of central tendency (mean, median, and mode)
were utilized, along with tests for group comparisons, to identify possible
differences between the perceptions of professors and administrative staff.
Statistical processing was carried out using Stata software, ensuring proper
information management and rigorous analysis based on criteria for internal
consistency and methodological validity.
Regarding instrument validation, a reliability analysis was conducted based
on the results obtained from the survey. Given that the factors evaluated are
designed to capture a common response trend, which is often not directly
observable, consistent and stable measurements are essential, especially
considering the representativeness of the sample. For this purpose, the Cronbach's
alpha coefficient was employed, widely recognized as a statistical measure of
internal reliability. This coefficient estimates the degree of coherence among the
items comprising the same analytical dimension, functioning as a weighted average
of the correlations between them. Its application provided sufficient evidence to
support the internal consistency of the questionnaire, thus ensuring the robustness
of the instrument used to evaluate perceptions of organizational justice. Based on
the variances, Cronbach's alpha was calculated according to the following
relationship:
=
1
󰇩
1

󰇪
Where:
S_i^2= =Variance of each factor
S_t^2= = Total variance of the factors
k = Number
The reliability of the instrument used in this study was evaluated through
the calculation of the Cronbach's alpha coefficient, a widely accepted statistical
measure for estimating the internal consistency of Likert-type scales. This
coefficient allows for determining the extent to which items of the same construct
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
are correlated, thereby reflecting the homogeneity of the instrument. According to
the criteria proposed by Christmann and Van Aelst (2006), a value greater than 0.70
is considered statistically acceptable and evidences adequate reliability of the
measurement instrument.
The target population of the study consisted of academic and administrative
staff at the Technical University of Machala (UTMACH), with a total of 588
individuals, including professors, workers, and administrative personnel. To ensure
the representativeness of the results, minimum sample sizes were estimated: 74
surveys for the academic group and 60 for the administrative group, considering a
margin of error of 10% and a confidence level of 95%. However, to strengthen the
validity of the analysis, 250 surveys were administered to professors and 150 to
administrative personnel, achieving a total of 400 valid surveys.
The sample selection considered only individuals with over three years of
tenure within the institution as an inclusion criterion to ensure sufficient experience
in the evaluated administrative processes. This methodological decision aligns with
the statistical principle that a larger sample size reduces estimation error and
strengthens the robustness of findings. Notably, with a margin of error of 5% and a
confidence level of 99%, the formula for estimating population proportions indicated
a minimum sample size of 312 surveys. Therefore, the decision to apply 400 surveys
not only exceeds this threshold but also enhances the statistical validity of the study,
providing a solid and reliable basis for analyzing the results.
Results and discussion
Table 2 presents the processing of data obtained from the factors evaluated
in the questionnaire administered to the total sample of 400 participants. Each of
the nine factors considered (incentive programs, workplace communication,
performance evaluation, integration, working conditions, promotions, conflict
management, among others) was addressed by 100% of the respondents. This total
coverage ensures the integrity and consistency of the statistical analysis, allowing
for a comprehensive representation of perceptions regarding the various dimensions
of administrative management that influence organizational justice. The inclusion
of these factors is relevant within the university environment, as they are key
elements for assessing equity, process transparency, and the quality of labor
relations within the institutional framework.
Table 2
Data processing by factors
Factors
N
Incentives (PI)
400
Workplace communication (CL)
400
Disengagement of human talent (DTH)
400
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
Evaluation (PE)
400
Labor integration (IL)
400
Improvements for working conditions
(MCT)
400 100.0%
Promotion and career advancement
(PAL)
400 100.0%
Complaints and claims (QR)
400
Conflict management (MC)
400
Source: Authors' own elaboration.
It is observed that 89.9% of the collected data corresponds to two main
groups: professors and administrative staff. The difference in volume compared to
the next most representative group is approximately four times smaller (see Table
3), reinforcing the predominance of these two blocks in the analyzed sample. While
grouping only professors and administrative staff would exclude the remaining
10.1%, distributed across three smaller categories, this loss of information does not
compromise the robustness of the analysis, as the excluded data represent a
marginal fraction and do not alter the central trends identified in the study. This
methodological decision allows for a comparative analysis focused on the two most
relevant groups within the study population.
Table 3
Frequencies of roles by function
Function Frequency (F)
Percentage (%)
Cumulative
Professors
259
64.7
Administrative staff
101
25.2
Academic authorities
10
2.5
Administrative directors
20
5.1
Workers
10
2.5
Total
400
100.0
Source: Authors' own elaboration.
The analysis of Cronbach's alpha yielded a coefficient of 0.990 for the nine
factors evaluated in a sample of 400 participants. This result indicates a high level
of reliability in the collected data, validating the internal consistency of the scale
used. The main findings of the study concerning the three dimensions of
organizational justice allow for clear and comparative identification of the most
relevant perceptions, as well as the population groups that exhibit higher levels of
criticism. It is noted that, although the overall perception is positive, specific
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
challenges persist: in the distributive dimension, administrative staff report lower
satisfaction; in the procedural dimension, weaknesses are concentrated in the
complaint mechanisms; and in the interactional dimension, both populations agree
on the need to improve organizational communication.
Figure 1 illustrates the proportion of positive and negative responses
concerning the three evaluated dimensions of organizational justice. It is observed
that the distributive dimension received the highest percentage of favorable
perceptions (69.8%), followed by the interactional dimension (66.7%) and the
procedural dimension (66.2%). These results suggest that respondents generally
value equity in the allocation of incentives, interpersonal treatment, and the
transparency of administrative processes; however, opportunities for improvement
still exist. The obtained results are presented below:
Figure 1
Perception by dimension
Source: Authors' own elaboration.
Distributive Justice
In the distributive justice dimension, participants evaluated their
perceptions regarding three fundamental components: opportunities for promotion
and advancement, incentive programs, and improvements in working conditions.
These aspects allow for understanding how collaborators value equity in the
distribution of benefits, recognizing whether individual efforts translate into fair
rewards within the institutional environment.
Regarding promotion and advancement programs, 66.5% of participants
rated them as good or very good, while only 17.5% expressed a negative opinion.
These data suggest a predominantly positive assessment regarding professional
growth opportunities.
Concerning incentive programs, 62.25% evaluated them favorably,
highlighting their influence on staff motivation. However, 17.5% expressed some
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
dissatisfaction, indicating the need to review and strengthen certain aspects of this
component.
With respect to working conditions, such as access to infrastructure and
technological resources, 66.5% expressed a positive perception, compared to 12.25%
who voiced discontent.
Overall, the results indicate that the perception of distributive justice within
the institution is largely favorable: 69.8% of respondents rated the analyzed
programs positively. This suggests that collaborators directly associate
organizational equity with the recognition of individual effort and the fair
distribution of opportunities and benefits.
Procedural Justice
Procedural justice was analyzed based on participants' perceptions of three
key aspects related to institutional management: performance evaluation processes,
mechanisms for submitting complaints and claims, and the procedures applied in the
termination of personnel. These elements allow for an assessment of the level of
transparency, equity, and participation in the administrative decision-making
processes within the organization. Regarding performance evaluation, 76.5% of
respondents rated it as good or very good, reflecting a positive perception of the
transparency and clarity of the criteria used to measure performance. This result
suggests that the implemented processes are generally perceived as fair, objective,
and aligned with the principles of institutional equity.
Concerning complaint and claim programs, 61.25% regarded the handling of
workplace concerns and conflicts as positive, although 14.75% expressed
dissatisfaction, indicating a need to strengthen communication channels and conflict
resolution strategies.
The termination processes were rated as good or very good by 60.75% of
participants, highlighting the formality and legality of the procedure. However, 12%
expressed a negative perception.
The findings indicate that the perception of procedural justice is generally
positive, with 66.2% of favorable responses. Nonetheless, the results suggest
opportunities for improvement in communication and transparency in administrative
processes.
Interactional Justice
Interactional justice was analyzed based on participants' perceptions of
three fundamental dimensions: organizational communication, conflict
management, and workplace integration programs. Regarding organizational
communication, 69.5% of respondents rated it as good or very good, emphasizing the
effectiveness of institutional information transmission and the clarity of messages
conveyed by various hierarchical levels. However, 10.25% expressed dissatisfaction,
highlighting opportunities for improvement in communication channels and flows,
particularly regarding feedback and active participation from staff.
Conflict management received a positive evaluation of 64.25%, indicating
that the institution promotes effective mediation strategies. Nevertheless, 12%
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
believed there are still areas for improvement. Workplace integration programs were
favorably rated by 66.25%, underscoring their impact on organizational cohesion,
although 11.75% expressed negative opinions.
Interactional justice received an overall positive evaluation, with 66.7% of
favorable responses. This reflects that communication, conflict management, and
workplace integration are well-regarded aspects within the institution, although
opportunities for improvement in optimizing information flows and managing
internal conflicts have been identified.
Comparison between Professors and Administrative Staff
A comparative analysis was conducted on the perception of organizational
justice between professors and administrative staff at the Technical University of
Machala. The results indicate that, for professors, the overall perception was
positive, with a mode and median of 4 (Good) across all evaluated dimensions and
an average standard deviation of 1.02, reflecting moderate dispersion in responses
and a certain homogeneity in the group's opinion.
For administrative staff, a positive valuation was also evident, although
slightly lower than that of professors, with a mode and median of 4, but with an
average standard deviation of 1.14, indicating greater variability in perceptions
within this group.
Overall, the results reflect a predominantly favorable perception of
organizational justice within the institution. The distributive dimension was the
highest rated, suggesting that employees perceive equity in the allocation of
resources, incentives, and opportunities. However, the procedural and interactional
dimensions presented opportunities for improvement, particularly regarding internal
communication and conflict resolution mechanisms.
While the perceptions among professors and administrative staff are
generally similar, the difference in response dispersion suggests that certain aspects
of management may be interpreted or experienced differently by each group, which
opens an important space for designing differentiated improvement strategies.
General results
The study results show that the professors at the Technical University of
Machala predominantly hold a positive perception of organizational justice. In all
evaluated dimensions, the median and mode were 4 (Good), suggesting a favorable
and sustained valuation of administrative programs and processes by the professors.
Table 4
Main findings and critical groups
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
Dimension Main finding Most critical group
Distributive
Predominantly positive
perception (69.8%)
Administrative Staff
Procedural
Performance evaluation well-
rated; weaknesses in complaints
Administrative Staff
Interactional
Communication positively rated,
but with areas for improvement
Both Groups (12%
critical)
Source: Authors' own elaboration.
In terms of dispersion, the average standard deviation was 1.02, indicating
moderate variability in responses. However, slight differences were observed
between dimensions: incentive programs (1.15) and workplace communication (1.09)
exhibited greater dispersion compared to aspects such as performance evaluation
(0.92) and improvements in working conditions (0.90), where responses were more
homogeneous.
Similarly, administrative staff shared a comparable perception, albeit with
a slightly lower average rating. As in the academic group, the mode and median
remained at 4 (Good) for all dimensions, though greater response variability was
detected, with an average standard deviation of 1.14. The areas showing the most
variability in this group were incentive programs (1.25) and organizational
communication (1.20), suggesting the need to reinforce specific strategies in these
areas.
In summary, the data reflect a general consistency in the perception of
organizational justice among both groups, with a predominance of positive
evaluations. However, the differences in response dispersion between professors and
administrative staff indicate the existence of differentiated experiences that must
be addressed through adjustments in institutional management, particularly
regarding incentives, internal communication, and recognition processes. This
interpretation of the results allows for progress toward a more equitable,
transparent management tailored to the needs of different segments of the
university community.
The findings confirm that the perception of organizational justice in
university contexts is closely linked to commitment, motivation, and the satisfaction
of human talent. This correlation has been addressed in various recent studies. For
instance, García-Rubiano et al. (2023) underscore that a meritocratic
administration, based on participatory processes and clear communication,
enhances the sense of belonging and reduces the risk of employee turnover.
Likewise, the results of this study align with the assertions of Colquitt (2001)
and Wiseman and Stillwell (2022), who emphasize that the perception of justice—
across its distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational dimensions—
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
becomes a key determinant for strengthening institutional trust and reducing
organizational stress.
Research such as that by Muala et al. (2022) provides evidence that
environments perceived as just decrease the intention to resign, even in highly
pressured sectors like public health. This is achieved by reducing workplace
harassment and organizational silence, reinforcing the protective role of
institutional justice over employee well-being.
The empirical model also validates the claims made by Cao (2022), who
demonstrated that unjust management can lead to knowledge concealment within
work teams, especially in contexts with high demands. This represents a direct
threat to innovation and productivity in university settings.
Furthermore, it confirms the findings of Rodríguez et al. (2022), where the
perception of organizational justice acts as a buffer against work-family conflict and,
consequently, work stress. This mediation becomes critical in high-workload
contexts like universities, where tensions between professional and personal life are
common.
The study by Garnica et al. (2022) is also relevant, as it shows that job
profiles with greater administrative burdens experience more stress than professors.
This finding aligns with the slight difference detected in this study between
professors and administrative staff, suggesting that a more differentiated and
empathetic management approach could balance perceptions of institutional equity.
Finally, as proposed by Martínez-Mejía et al. (2022), the implicit
expectations between employees and institutions, alongside the level of perceived
support, directly impact emotional exhaustion and the decision to remain in the
organization. This underscores the need for strategies that strengthen psychosocial
ties and ensure fair practices as a transversal axis of university policy.
Conclusions
This research confirms that the perception of organizational justice,
understood as the evaluation that collaborators make of equity in institutional
processes, relationships, and decisions, is closely linked to the quality of
administrative management. In the context of the Technical University of Machala,
this relationship is expressed differently between professors and administrative
staff, highlighting that while the management model seeks to address principles of
equity and transparency, disparate perceptions persist that must be critically and
constructively addressed.
The theoretical approach adopted, grounded in Adams' equity theory and
Colquitt's organizational justice framework, allowed for an understanding that the
perception of justice is not limited to distributive equity but also involves procedural
fairness and the quality of interpersonal relationships. These findings are particularly
relevant in the university context, where trust in institutional decisions is key to
sustaining commitment, motivation, and workplace climate.
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
The research highlights the need to strengthen administrative management
based on objective criteria, participation mechanisms, and more effective
institutional communication. This implies reviewing incentive systems, improving
channels for addressing complaints and claims, and promoting close leadership
capable of building more humane and collaborative work relationships.
It is concluded that the consolidation of a culture of organizational justice is
not only desirable but also strategic for institutional strengthening. Advancing
toward this goal requires aligning strategic planning with the perceptions of human
talent, promoting administrative processes that are not only efficient but also just,
coherent, and sensitive to the realities of those who make up the university
community.
References
Adamovic, M. (2023). Organizational justice research: A review, synthesis, and
research agenda. European Management Review, 20(4), 762-782.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/emre.12564
Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In Advances in experimental social
psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267-299). Academic press.
Aliedan, M. M., Sobaih, A. E. E., Alyahya, M. A., & Elshaer, I. A. (2022). Influences
of distributive injustice and job insecurity amid COVID-19 on unethical pro-
organisational behaviour: Mediating role of employee turnover
intention. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 19(12), 7040. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127040
Amzulescu, G., & Butucescu, A. (2021). The Role of Work Alienation in the
Relationship Between Perceived Organizational Injustice and
Counterproductive Work Behaviors. Psihologia Resurselor Umane, 19(1).
https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v19i1.487
Bernales Mendoza, M. E., Farfán Pimentel, J. F., Concha Bendezú, C. J., Morales
Ayarza, J. J., & Farfán Pimentel, D. E. (2022). Gestión organizacional y
satisfacción laboral en los colaboradores de la corte de justicia de Lima,
Perú. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar, 6(5), 2555-2573.
https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v6i5.3266
Cao, Y. (2022). Effect of interpersonal injustice on knowledge hiding behavior:
moderating role of high-performance work stress. Frontiers in
Psychology, 13, 858669. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.858669
Christmann, A., y Van Aelst, S. (2006). Robust estimation of Cronbach's
alpha. Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 97(7), 1660-1674.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmva.2005.05.012
Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: a construct
validation of a measure. Journal of applied psychology, 86(3), 386.
https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.86.3.386
Das, L., & Mohanty, S. (2023). Impact of Organizational Justice on Organizational
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
Citizenship Behavior: empirical evidence from Higher Educational
Institutions. Journal of Evolutionary Studies in Business, 8(2), 32–49.
https://doi.org/10.1344/jesb2023.8.2.36704
Galván-Vela, E., Ripoll, R. R., Altamirano, M. A. S., & Rodriguez, D. M. S. (2024). El
trinomio compromiso, satisfacción y justicia organizacional en el binomio
felicidad e intención de rotar. Retos, 14(28), 187-202.
http://scielo.senescyt.gob.ec/pdf/retos/v14n28/1390-8618-retos-14-28-
00187.pdf
Garnica, M. G., Cuberos, R. C., López, J. E., y Martínez, A. M. (2022). La gestión
emocional y la autoeficacia se asocian con bajos niveles de estrés en el
profesorado universitario español: una perspectiva nacional. Bordón:
Revista de pedagogía, 74(1), 29-44.
https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=8369978
Domínguez, M. D. C. G., & Hernández, J. R. G. (2020). La justicia organizacional y
el comportamiento de ciudadanía organizacional: revisión de
literatura. Memoria Universitaria, 3(1).
https://revistas.uaz.edu.mx/index.php/MemUni/article/view/908
Gamarra Huertas, R. F., Sallca Alvarado, M., & Miranda Chávez, H. (2023). Ética
profesional y gestión administrativa municipal según la percepción de
estudiantes universitarios. Revista científica searching de ciencias humanas
y sociales, 4(1), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.46363/searching.v4i1.6
García-Rubiano, M., Toro-Tobar, R. A., Sarmiento-López, J. C., Aguilar-Bustamante,
M. C., & Pazmay-Ramos, S. G. (2023). ¿Cómo entender la justicia
organizacional en tiempos de pandemia? Relación con la disposición al
cambio. Acta Colombiana de Psicología, 26(1), 151–
165. https://doi.org/10.14718/acp.2023.26.1.10
Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and
tomorrow. Journal of management, 16(2), 399-432.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/014920639001600208
Hill, M. E. (2022). La importancia de la gestión administrativa en las instituciones de
enseñanza superior. Societas, 24(2), 244-261.
https://revistas.up.ac.pa/index.php/societas/article/view/3011
Martin Suarez, M. J., Dueñas Mayorga, M. A., & Rubio, L. A. (2024). Relationship
between Organizational Justice and Engagement for more equitable and
inspiring work environments. Revista Cubana de Salud y Trabajo, 25(2).
http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1991-
93952024000200004&lng=es&tlng=en.
Martínez-Mejía, E., Alcover, C. M., y Uribe Prado, J. F. (2022). Hacia un modelo de
relaciones de intercambio psicosocial en las organizaciones: evaluación de
la dinámica entre contrato psicológico, percepción de apoyo-traición
organizacional, burnout e intención de renuncia. Contaduría y
administración, 67(2). https://doi.org/10.22201/fca.24488410e.2022.3123
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
Muala, I. A., Al-Ghalabi, R. R., Alsheikh, G. A. A., Hamdan, K. B., & Alnawafleh, E.
A. T. (2022). Evaluating the Effect of Organizational Justice on Turnover
Intention in the Public Hospitals of Jordan: Mediated-Moderated Model of
Employee Silence, Workplace Bullying, and Work Stress. International
Journal of Professional Business Review, 7(3), e526.
https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2022.v7i3.0526
Pinedo, J. A. T., Riva-Ruiz, R., Pérez-Tello, C., & Pinchi-Vásquez, A. (2023). Cultura
organizacional y calidad de atención del servicio administrativo en una
universidad peruana. Revista Amazónica de Ciencias Económicas, 2(1), e451-
e451. https://revistas.unsm.edu.pe/index.php/race/article/view/451
Quispe Flores, R. y Paucar Sullca, S. (2020). Satisfacción laboral y compromiso
organizacional de profesores en una universidad pública de Perú. Apuntes
Universitarios, 10(2), 64–83. https://doi.org/10.17162/au.v10i2.442
Rodríguez, V., Barroilhet, J., Carrasco. R., Guzmán, A., Carvajal, C., & Galaz, D.
(2022). Rol mediador del conflicto trabajo-familia en la relación entre
justicia organizacional y estrés laboral. CES Psicología, 15(2), 113-134.
https://dx.doi.org/10.21615/cesp.5920
Sikandar, P., Aleemi, A. R., Irshad, M., & Sundus. (2022). Feeling Black & Blue yet
at Work: Physical Job Stressors and Sickness Presenteeism with the
Moderation of Organizational Justice. Sustainable Business and Society in
Emerging Economies, 4(1), 167-178.
https://doi.org/10.26710/sbsee.v4i1.2207
Sora, B., Höge, T., Caballer, A., Peiró, J. M., & Boada, J. (2021). Job insecurity and
performance: The mediating role of organizational justice in terms of type
of contract. Psicothema, 33(1), 86-94.
https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2020.205
Sora, B., Caballer, A., & García-Buades, M. E. (2021). Human resource practices and
employee wellbeing from a gender perspective: The role of organizational
justice. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 53, 37-46.
https://doi.org/10.14349/rlp.2021.v53.5
Trincado-Munoz, F., Valenzuela-Fernández, L. and Hebles, M. (2020), The role of
organizational justice in the customer orientation–performance relationship.
Academia Revista Latinoamericana de Administración, 33 (2), 277-297.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ARLA-03-2019-0086
Vera, N. I. A., & Hinojosa, D. J. M. (2025). Estudio Bibliométrico del estrés laboral y
su impacto en la productividad laboral que se origina en las organizaciones
o empresas: Bibliometric Study of work stress and its impact on labor
productivity originating in organizations or companies. Revista Científica
Multidisciplinar G-nerando, 6(1), ág-5652.
https://revista.gnerando.org/revista/index.php/RCMG/article/view/665
Wiseman, J., & Stillwell, A. (2022). Organizational justice: Typology, antecedents
and consequences. Encyclopedia, 2(3), 1287-1295.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
e8867
Yaguache, S. L. (2025). Interacciones entre justicia organizacional, cultura
organizacional y gestión del talento humano: Revisión bibliométrica. Revista
Andina de investigaciones en Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, (2), 183-
218. https://revista.uasb.edu.bo/ciencias-economicas/article/view/133
Zavaleta Rojas, María Betsabet, Chamoly Urtecho, Katheryne Mery Ashly, &
Santamaría Oblitas, Sttefany Naghely. (2024). Gestión Eficiente en el
Gobierno Local: El Rol de la Simplificación Administrativa. Podium, (45),
107-124. https://doi.org/10.31095/podium.2024.45.7
| César Javier Quezada-Abad | Luis Felipe Brito-Gaona |Bill Jonathan Serrano-Orellana |
About the main author
César Javier Quezada Abad
: He is an
Aquaculture Engineer. He holds a PhD in
Administrative Sciences from the National University of San Marcos in Lima, Peru,
and a PhD in Economic Analysis and Business Strategy from the University of La
Coruña, Spain. He also has a Master’s degree in Business Management. He is a tenured
professor at the Technical University of Machala. He has participated in national and
international courses and conferences. As a research project director, he is the
author and co
-author of several articles in indexed journal
s, as well as books and
book chapters
.
Declaration of author responsibility
César Javier Quezada Abad:
1:
Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis,
Research, Methodology, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation/Verification,
Visualization, Writing/original draft and Writing, review and editing.
Luis Felipe Brito
-Gaona 2:
Software, Verification, Writing/original draft, and
Writing, review and editing.
Bill Jonathan Serrano
-Orellana 3: Methodology, verif
ication, writing, review and
final editing.
Financing:
Special Acknowledgments: