Equity Theory Constructs in a Romanian Cultural Context

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21184
• Author: Carmen Buzea
• Published date: 01 December 2014
• Date: 01 December 2014

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY, vol. 25, no. 4, Winter 2014 © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.21184 421

ARTICLES

Equity Theory Constructs

inaRomanian Cultural Context

Carmen Buzea

This study explores how Romanian employees understand and describe

equity theory constructs. We conducted 87 interviews to identify employee

perceptions in relation to: (a) contribution that is worth rewarding, (b)

expected rewards in return for contribution, (c) referent person selected

for comparison in order to evaluate the fairness of employee–employer

exchange, and (d) the dominant strategy to reduce inequity. Results show

that Romanian employees expect to be rewarded fi rst for their personal

features and second for their work behavior. The nonfi nancial rewards,

mainly appreciation and recognition, have similar importance as fi nancial

reward. When they evaluate the exchange with the organization, Romanian

employees choose not to compare with others or to compare with their

own performance standards. The preferred strategy to reduce inequity is

to cognitively distort inputs and outcomes, by lowering the value of work

effort and maximizing the occupational status. Implications for human

resource development practice and future research are considered.

Key Words: equity, Romania, employee–employer exchange, reward, work

behavior

Within the discourse of organizational theories, scholars considered Adams’s

equity theory (1963, 1965) soon after its publication to be “among the more

useful middle-range theories of organizational behavior” (Weick, 1966,

p.439). Equity theory states that employees evaluate the ratio between their

contributions (inputs) and rewards (outcomes), compared with the input–

outcome ratio of a referent person or group (referent other). If inequality

occurs (inequity), the person making the comparison is motivated to restore

the balance, applying various different strategies (reactions to inequity). Since

high performance is achieved by well-motivated people (Beardwell, Holden,

& Claydon, 2004), equity theory offers a useful linkage between HRD prac-

tice and employees’ performance (Armstrong, 2009). Adams’s conceptual

422 Buzea

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq

framework is particularly useful for HRD practitioners when designing career

and development systems, since both internal and external equity play a key

role in effective manpower planning, promotion, potential appraisal, train-

ing, and performance guidance. The effectiveness of the equity theory for HR

practice has been pointed out by authors investigating the fairness of HR pro-

cedures, work motivation assessment, performance management processes,

total reward schemes, or job design (Armstrong, 2009; Beardwell et al., 2004;

Forray, 2006; Foster, 2010).

The fi ve constructs of Adams’s model (inputs, outcomes, referent other,

equity, and reaction to inequity) have been the subject of criticism and refor-

mulation (e.g., Goodman, 1974; Pritchard, 1968; Ronen, 1986; Summers &

DeNisi, 1990; Walster, Berscheid, & Walster, 1973). Equity theory gener-

ated an impressive amount of research (reviews in Ambrose & Kulik, 1999;

Greenberg, 1990) in which scholars concluded that, although there are some

limitations, the basic propositions of the theory are generally well supported

(Greenberg, 1990; Miner, 2003).

The need to examine equity theory constructs in non-Western cultures

was advocated soon after the theory was published (Gergen, Morse, & Bode,

1974; Weick, Bougon, & Maruyama, 1976). More recently, authors pointed

out the paucity of theoretical and empirical studies based on the equity model

in non-U.S. contexts (Bolino & Turnley, 2008; Kilbourne & O’Leary-Kelly,

1994; Morris & Leung, 2000), along with a broader call to scholars from the

fi eld of international HRM to investigate work motivation processes and the

fairness of HR procedures across cultures (e.g., Sanchez-Marín, 2008). In line

with the need for empirical research on the cultural variation of equity theory

constructs, this article reports on a study conducted in Romania, an eastern

European, ex-Communist country. The aim of the study is to examine the

cultural applicability of equity theory constructs in Romania and to suggest

developments that might increase the relevance of the theory for HRD practice

in this cultural context.

Cultural Variation of Equity Theory Constructs

The main assumption underlying the cultural variation of equity theory con-

structs is the direct link between culture and the individuals’ conceptualiza-

tion and behavior, meaning that people may have different perceptions of

equity, depending on their exposure to a particular cultural context (Hansen

& Brooks, 1994). Adams (1963) noted the cultural and historical determi-

nation of inequity, arguing that inequity is culturally bounded. In a recent

study, Bolino and Turnley (2008) developed a conceptual framework to iden-

tify ways in which the cultural context infl uences the conceptualization of

equity theory constructs. Bolino and Turnley (2008) use the value-orientation

model of culture proposed by Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck (1961) to develop

several hypotheses that assume that equity theory construct conceptualization