Jeremia Allan Prasetya, Dian Wijayanti


This study aims to test the hypothesis developed by Hartmann and Slapnicar (2009). Thatis to examine the influence of subordinate participation and performance evaluation formality in the process of performance evaluation of trust through the perception of procedural fairness. This research uses a survey method, which is data retrieval through a questionnaire. Subjects in this study are all staffs in one of the University of Malang who has met the criteria. The test used Partial Least Square (PLS). Results showed that the participation of subordinates was not able to improve the perception of procedural fairness directly, but can increase trust. While, the formalities of performance evaluation, directly able to improve the perception of procedural fairness, but can not increase trust. However, if tested indirectly performance evaluation formality can increase trust through the perception of procedural fairness, whereas subordinate participation cannot improve. Conclusion, this study supports the hypothesis developed by Hartmann and Slapnicar (2009), but there are some unsupported hypotheses because of the difference of the research object, where each research object has different evaluation system according to organizational objectives.


Subordinate Participation; Performance Evaluation Formalities; Perception of Procedural Fairness; Trust

Full Text:



Agritansia, P. P., and Sholihin, M. 2011. The Attitudinal and Behavioral Effects of Nonfinancial Measures. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi XIV (pp. 1-40). Banda Aceh: IAI.

Alexander, S., and Ruderman, M. 1987. The Role of Procedural and Distributive Justice in Organizational Behavior. Social Justice Research Vol 1, 177-198.

Barclay, D., Higgins, C., and Thompson, R. 1995. The Partial Least Square (PLS) Approach to Causal Modeling, Personal Computer Adoption and Use as an Illustration. Technology Studies, Vol. 2, 285309.

Colquitt, J. A., and Jackson, C. L. 2006. Justice in Teams: The Context Sensitivity of Justice Rules. Journal of Applied Social Psychology Vol. 36, 868-899.

Desriani, N., and Sholihin, M. 2012. Pengaruh Tingkat Performance Evaluation Formalities Persepsian Terhadap Aspek Keperilakuan Manajer. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi (pp. 1-25). IAI.

Dirks, K. T., and Ferrin, D. L. 2002. Trust in Leadership: Meta-Analytic Findings and Implications. Journal of Applied Psychology Vol. 87, 611-628.

Fisher, J. G., Maines, L. A., Peffer, S. A., and Sprinkle, G. B. 2005. An Experimental Investigation of Employer Discretion in Employee Performance Evaluation and Compensation. The Accounting Review Vol. 80, 563-583.

Folger, R., and Konovsky, M. A. 1989. Effects of Procedural and Distributive Justice on Reactions to Pay Raise Decisions. The Academy of Management Journal Vol 32, 115-130.

Fornell, C., and Larcker, D. F. 1981. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research Vol. 18, 39-50.

Harris, J., and Durden, C. 2012. Management Accounting Research: An Analysis of Recent Themes and Direction for the Future. Journal of Applied Management Accounting Research, 21-42.

Hartmann, F., and Slapnicar, S. 2009. How Formal Performance Evaluation Affect Trust between Superior and Subordinate Managers. Accounting, Organization and Society, 34, 722-737.

Hartmann, F., and Slapnicar, S. 2012. The Perceived Fairness of Performance Evaluation: The Role of Uncertainty. Management Accounting Research, 1733.

Hopwood, A. G. 1972. An Empirical Study of the Role of Accounting Data in Performance Evaluation. Journal of Accounting Research, 10, 156-182.

Konovsky, M. A., and Pugh, S. D. 1994. Citizenship Behavior and Social Exchange. Academy of Management Journal Vol. 37, 656-669.

Langevin, P., and Mendoza, C. 2013. How Can Management Control System Fairness Reduce Managers’ Unethical Behaviours. European Management Journal, 31, 209-222.

Laschinger, H. S., Finegan, J., and Shamian, J. 2001. The Impact of Workplace Empowerment and Organizational Trust on Staff Nurses’ Work Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment. Health Care Management Review Vol. 26, 7-23.

Lau, C. M., and Buckland, C. 2001. Budgeting the Role of Trust and Participation: A Research Note. ABACUS(3), 369-388.

Lau, C. M., and Moser, A. 2008. Behavioral Effect of Nonfinancial Performance Measures: The Role of Procedural Fairness. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 55-71.

Lau, C. M., and Sholihin, M. 2005. Financial and Nonfinancial Performance Measure: How They Affect Job Satisfaction. British Accounting Review, 43, 389-413.

Lau, C., and Tan, S. L. 2006. The Effects of Procedural Fairness and Interpersonal Trust on Job Tension in Budgeting. Management Accounting Research Vol. 17, 171-186.

Libby, T. 1999. The Influence of Voice and Explanation on Performance in a Participative Budgeting Setting. Accounting, Organization and Society, 24, 125137.

Magner, N., and Welker, R. B. 1994. Responsibility Center Managers’ Reaction to Justice in Budgetary Resource Allocation. Advances in Management Accounting Vol. 3, 237-253.

Sitkin, S. B., and George, E. 2005. Managerial Trust-Building Through the Use of Legitimating Formal and Informal Control Mechanisms. International Sociology Vol. 20, 307-338.

Stanley, B., and Magner, N. 2007. Budgetary Fairness, Supervisory Trust, and the Propensity to Create Budgetary Slack: Testing a Social Exchange Model. Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research Vol. 10, 159-182.

Whitener, E. M., Brodt, S. E., Korsgaard, M. A., and Werner, J. M. 1998. Managers as Initiators of Trust: An Exchange Relationship Framework for Understanding Managerial Trustworthy Behavior. The Academy of Management Review Vol. 23, 513-530.

Wijayanti, D. 2013. Pengaruh Proses Performance Evaluation Terhadap Komitmen Tujuan, Keadilan Procedural, dan Kinerja. Wahana Jurnal Ekonomi, Manajemen, dan Akuntansi Vol. 16, 89-104.



  • There are currently no refbacks.