October 24, 2012

MU0012 [Employee Relations Management] Set2 Q3

Q.3 Write note on organizational justice.

Ans: 


Organisational Justice

Organisational Justice is the main factor of citizenship behaviour and its related outcomes are satisfaction, and commitment towards work. It also focuses on employee’s equality in outcomes such as payment and the procedures to determine those outcomes. Organisational justice builds trust in employee, which in turn gets displayed in citizenship behaviour.

The concept of justice differs based on the people’s cultural values. The people with collectivistic cultures differ from the people with individualistic cultures, in terms of equity and equality.

With good organisational justice, you can have more positive outcomes from an employee in the workplace. If employees are treated with full justice, they follow all the rules and regulations of an organisation. They will be more committed towards work, have more trust in organisation, and feel more satisfied with the justice they receive.

The term organizational justice was coined by Greenberg (1987) and is defined as an individual’s perception of and reactions to fairness in an organization. Justice or fairness refers to the idea that an action or decision is morally right, which may be defined according to ethics, religion, fairness, equity, or law. People are naturally attentive to the justice of events and situations in their everyday lives, across a variety of contexts (Tabibnia, Satpute, & Lieberman, 2008). Individuals react to actions and decisions made by organizations every day. An individual’s perceptions of these decisions as fair or unfair can influence the individual’s subsequent attitudes and behaviors. Fairness is often of central interest to organizations because the implications of perceptions of injustice can impact job attitudes and behaviors at work. Justice in organizations can include issues related to perceptions of fair pay, equal opportunities for promotion, and personnel selection procedures.

Overview
Organizational justice is conceptualized as a multidimensional construct. The four proposed components are distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice. Research also suggests the importance of affect and emotion in the appraisal of the fairness of a situation as well as one’s behavioral and attitudinal reactions to the situation (e.g., Barsky, Kaplan, & Beal, 2011). A myriad of literature in the industrial/organizational psychology field has examined organizational justice as well as the associated outcomes. Perceptions of justice influence many key organizational outcomes such as motivation (Latham & Pinder, 2005) and job satisfaction (Al-Zu’bi, 2010).

Corporate Social Responsibility
A concept related to organizational justice is corporate social responsibility (CSR). Organizational justice generally refers to perceptions of fairness in treatment of individuals internal to that organization while corporate social responsibility focuses on the fairness of treatment of entities external to the organization. Corporate social responsibility refers to a mechanism by which businesses monitor and regulate their performance in line with moral and societal standards such that it has positive influences on all of its stakeholders (Carroll, 1999). Thus, CSR involves organizations going above and beyond what is moral or ethical and behaving in ways that benefit members of society in general. It has been proposed that an employee’s perceptions of their organization’s level of corporate social responsibility can impact that individual’s own attitudes and perceptions of justice even if they are not the victim of unfair acts (Rupp et al., 2006).

Roots in Equity Theory
The idea of organizational justice stems from Equity Theory (Adams, 1963, 1965), which posits that judgments of equity and inequity are derived from comparisons between one’s self and others based on inputs and outcomes. Inputs refer to what a person perceives to contribute (e.g., knowledge and effort) while outcomes are what an individual perceives to get out of an exchange relationship (e.g., pay and recognition). Comparison points against which these inputs and outcomes are judged may be internal (one’s self at an earlier time) or external (other individuals).

Type of Organisational Justice
Organisations focus on three specific forms of justice. They are:
• Procedural Justice – Procedural justice is identified by the equality of processes that helps to determine the type of outcomes used, the way they are distributed, and to whom the outcomes are given. Some of the organisational procedural justice includes freedom from bias, accuracy, consistency, and correction of errors.
• Distributive Justice – Distributive Justice is identified by the reasonable employees in an organisation that recognise the actual outcomes they obtain. Issues may arise if the employee experiences something negative in the workplace that cannot be prevented. Issues may also arise if they do not get the same outcome they expected to have or when the outcomes are inadequate. 
• Interactional Justice – Interactional justice is identified by the awareness of equality in the procedural treatment of others. Issues may arise if the employees are judged wrongly and denied of respect or privacy.A low level of interactional justice can be related to possibility of sexual harassment. Recent study shown that differences in personality and aggressive behaviour of an individual effect the way they react to the inequality in the organisation. Employees’ perception of procedural justice is determined by re-organising their performance rating. With this rating system, employees’ view of organisational justice increases.  


Organisational Misconduct
Organisational misconduct has now been recognised as the matter of serious social and economic concern. It has also been estimated that the annual cost of corporate crime, is much greater than ordinary crime. Organisational misconduct are typically hidden, hence their scope and nature are not very clear. Thus, investigations remains limited to self-report surveys.

Basic Organisational Liability Standards
There are three basic organisational liability standards to deal with agent misconduct. These liabilities are called duty-based liability regimes that identify the presence of internal work structure, to determine if the organisation has met its duty of care or not. The three basic Organisational liability standards are:
• Strict vicarious liability
• Negligence
• Composite Regimes Compliance

(1)Strict vicarious liability
This liability is imposed when organisational staff conducts some punishable crime, despite many warnings given to them by the organisation, to stop the harm. The basic idea behind strict vicarious liability is to incorporate all of the costs, associated with their activities. This leads to appropriately priced organisation’s products and delivery of the finest amount of services.
Strict vicarious liability systems compel the organisations to implement the most favourable level of internal organisational enforcement and prevention technique. When the organisation starts to cover up all the costs of any damage it causes, this technique helps to reduce the frequency of the harm. The rate of the harm is reduced up to the point such that, reduction equals the benefits.

(2)Negligence
This liability is imposed when organisational staff conducts some punishable crime and the organisation fails to provide standard of care. This clearly states that organisation was not able to avoid the harm. This in turn implies that, they failed to observe industry standards with regards to various operating methods.

Negligence-based Organisational Liability Systems do not compel organisations to implement level of organisational enforcement and production. As this liability fails to cover up all the cost of their harmful conduct, it is considered as inferior to strict liability regimes.

(3)Composite Regimes Compliance
This liability regime is imposed by combining liabilities of both strict vicarious liability and negligence. Composite Liability Regimes assign liability, based on strict liability standard, however approves this allocation of liability based on a negligence standard.

Proposed Models of Organizational Justice
Three different models have been proposed to explain the structure of organizational justice perceptions including a two factor model, a three factor model, and a four factor model. Many researchers have studied organizational justice in terms of the three factor model (e.g., DeConinck, 2010; Liljegren & Ekberg, 2010) while others have used a two factor model in which interpersonal justice is subsumed under procedural justice while yet some other studies suggest a four factor model best fits the data (Colquitt, 2001). Greenberg (1990) proposed a two-factor model and Sweeney and McFarlin (1993) found support for a two-factor model composed of distributive and procedural justice. Through the use of structural equation modeling, Sweeney and McFarlin found that distributive justice was related to outcomes that are person-level (e.g., pay satisfaction) while procedural justice was related to organization-level outcomes (e.g., organizational commitment).

The accuracy of the two-factor model was challenged by studies that suggested a third factor (interactional justice) may be involved. Bies and Moag (1986) argue that interactional justice is distinct from procedural justice because it represents the social exchange component of the interaction and the quality of treatment whereas procedural justice represents the processes that were used to arrive at the decision outcomes. Generally researchers are in agreement regarding the distinction between procedural and distributive justice but there is more controversy over the distinction between interactional and procedural justice (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001). Colquitt (2001) demonstrated that a four-factor model (including procedural, distributive, interpersonal, and informational justice) fit the data significantly better than a two or three factor model. Colquitt’s construct validation study also showed that each of the four components have predictive validity for different key organizational outcomes (e.g., commitment and rule compliance).

The Role of Affect in Organizational Justice Perceptions
One of the key constructs that has been shown to play a role in the formation of organizational justice perceptions is affect. The precise role of affect in organizational justice perceptions depends on the form of affectivity being examined (emotions, mood, disposition) as well as the context and type of justice being measured. Affect may serve as an antecedent, outcome, or even a mediator of organizational justice perceptions.

A recent article (Barksy, Kaplan, & Beal, 2011) provides a model that explains the role of affect and emotions at various stages of the appraisal and reaction stages of justice perception formation and illustrates that injustice is generally an affect laden and subjective experience. Affect and emotions can be part of the reactions to perceived injustice, as studies have shown that the more injustice that is perceived, the higher degrees of negative emotions are experienced. In addition, affect can act as a mediator between justice perceptions and actions taken to redress the perceived injustice. Affect plays this role in Equity Theory such that negative affective reactions act as a mediator between perceptions and actions, as emotional reactions to justice motivate individuals to take action to restore equity.

A recent meta-analysis by Barsky and Kaplan (2007) condenses many studies on this topic and explains that state and trait level affect can influence one’s perceptions of justice. The findings of Barsky and Kaplan show that both state and trait level negative affect can act as antecedents to justice perceptions. State and trait level negative affect are negatively associated with interactional, procedural, and distributive justice perceptions. Conversely, positive state and trait affectivity was linked to higher ratings of interactional, procedural and distributive justice.

Based on the research regarding the central role of affect in justice perceptions, Lang, Bliese, Lang, and Adler (2011) extended this research and studied the idea that sustained clinical levels of negative affect (depression) could be a precursor to perceptions of injustice in organizations. Lang et al. (2011) tested longitudinal cross-lagged effects between organizational justice perceptions and employee depressive symptoms and found that depressive symptoms do lead to subsequent organizational justice perceptions. Thus, affect can serve as an antecedent to justice perceptions in this instance.

Antecedents of Organizational Justice Perceptions

Employee Participation
One antecedent to perceptions of organizational justice is the extent to which employees feel that they are involved in decision-making or other organizational procedures. Higher levels of justice are perceived when employees feel that they have input in processes than when employees do not perceive that they have the opportunity to participate (Greenberg & Folger, 1983; Bies & Shapiro, 1988). The opportunity or ability to participate in decision making improves an individual’s perceptions of procedural justice, even when the decision is unfavorable to the individual (Bies & Shapiro, 1988). In addition, other studies have shown that employee input is related to both procedural and interpersonal justice perceptions (Kernan & Hanges, 2002).

Communication
A second antecedent to organizational justice perceptions is organizational communication with employees. Communication has been shown to be related to interpersonal and informational justice perceptions (Kernan & Hanges, 2002). The quality of communication by an organization or manager can improve justice perceptions by improving employee perceptions of manager trustworthiness and also by reducing feelings of uncertainty (Kernan & Hanges, 2002). It is important that the information provided be accurate, timely, and helpful in order for the impact on justice perceptions to be positive (Schweiger & DeNisi, 1991).

Justice Climate
Perceptions of organizational justice can be influenced by others, such as co-workers and team members. Recent research suggests that team level perceptions of justice form what is called a ‘justice climate’ which can impact individuals’ own views of justice (Li & Cropanzano, 2009). Employees working within a team may share their perceptions with one another which can lead to a shared interpretation of the fairness of events (Roberson & Colquitt, 2005). Research findings show that individuals can “learn” justice evaluations from team members and these can lead to homogeneity of justice perceptions within teams, creating a strong justice climate (Roberson & Colquitt, 2005). Thus, group-level perceptions of justice can be conceptualized as an antecedent to individuals’ justice perceptions.

Outcomes of Organizational Justice Perceptions
Employees’ perceptions of injustice within the organization can result in a myriad of outcomes both positive and negative. Outcomes are affected by perceptions of organizational justice as a whole or by different factors of organizational justice. Commonly cited outcomes affected by organizational justice include trust, performance, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs), counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs), absenteeism, turnover, and emotional exhaustion.

Trust
The relationship between trust and organizational justice perceptions is based on reciprocity. Trust in the organization is built from the employee’s belief that since current organizational decisions are fair, future organizational decisions will be fair. The continuance of employee trust in the organization and the organization continuing to meet the employee’s expectations of fairness creates the reciprocal relationship between trust and organizational justice (DeConick, 2010). Research has found that procedural justice is the strongest predictor of organizational trust (Hubbell & Chory-Assad, 2005; Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001). A positive relationship between an employee and supervisor can lead to trust in the organization (Karriker & Williams, 2009).

Performance
The impact of organizational justice perceptions on performance is believed to stem from Equity Theory. This would suggest that when people perceive injustice they seek to restore justice. One way that employees restore justice is by altering their level of job performance. Procedural justice affects performance as a result of its impact on employee attitudes. Distributive justice affects performance when efficiency and productivity are involved (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001). Improving justice perceptions improves productivity and performance (Karriker & Williams, 2009).

Job Satisfaction & Organizational Commitment
Job satisfaction was found to be positively associated with overall perceptions of organizational justice such that greater perceived injustice results in lower levels of job satisfaction and greater perceptions of justice result in higher levels of job satisfaction (Al-Zu’bi, 2010). Additionally, organizational commitment is related to perceptions of procedural justice such that greater perceived injustice results in diminished commitment while greater perceived justice results in increases commitment to the organization (DeConick, 2010; Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001).

Organizational Citizenship Behavior
Organizational citizenship behaviors are actions that employees take to support the organization that go above and beyond the scope of their job description. OCBs are related to both procedural justice (DeConick, 2010; Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Karriker & Williams, 2009) and distributive justice perceptions (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Karriker & Williams, 2009). As organizational actions and decisions are perceived as more just, employees are more likely to engage in OCBs. Karriker and Williams (2009) established that OCBs are directed toward either the supervisor or the organization depending on whether the perception of just stems from the supervisor or the organization. Additionally, a relationship was found between interpersonal justice and OCBs; however, this relationship was not mediated by the source of justice perceptions (Karriker & Williams, 2009).

Counterproductive Work Behaviors
Counterproductive work behaviors are “intentional behaviors on the part of an organizational member viewed by the organization as contrary to their legitimate interests” (Zohghbi-Manrique de Lara & Verano-Tacoronte, 2007, p.716). Increased judgments of procedural injustice can lead to employee unwillingness to comply with an organization’s rules (Zohghbi-Manrique de Lara & Verano-Tacoronte, 2007; Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001). However, the relationship between perceived procedural injustice and CWBs is mediated by perceived normative conflict, which is the extent to which employees perceive conflict between the norms of their workgroup and the rules of the organization. If the perceptions of procedural injustice result in perceived normative conflict, CWBs will occur (Zohghbi-Manrique de Lara & Verano-Tacoronte, 2007).

Absenteeism & Withdrawal
Absenteeism, or non-attendance, is another outcome of perceived injustice related to Equity Theory (Johns, 2001). Failure to receive a promotion is an example of a situation in which feelings of injustice may result in an employee being absent from work without reason. Johns (2001) found that when people saw both their commitment to the organization and the organization’s commitment to them as high absenteeism is diminished. Additionally, withdrawal, or leaving the organization, is a more extreme outcome stemming from the same Equity Theory principles. Distributive justice perceptions are most strongly related to withdrawal (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001).

Emotional Exhaustion
Emotional exhaustion, which related to employee health and burnout, is related to overall organizational justice perceptions. As perceptions of justice increase employee health increases and burnout decreases (Liljegren & Ekberg, 2009). Distributive, procedural, and interactional justice perceptions are able to capture state specific levels of emotional exhaustion which fade over time; however, overall organizational justice perceptions give the most stable picture of the relationship between justice perceptions and emotional exhaustion over time (Liljegren & Ekberg, 2009).

No comments:

Post a Comment

Labels

1st Sem (common) Subjects (150) 1st Sem BBA (10) 2nd Sem (common) Subjects (70) 2nd Sem BBA (10) 3rd Sem Banking Management (30) 3rd Sem BBA (8) 3rd Sem core/common subjects (37) 3rd Sem Environmental Management (2) 3rd Sem Event Management (8) 3rd Sem Finance Management (113) 3rd Sem HEALTH SERVICE MANAGEMENT (HSM/HCS) (65) 3rd Sem Human Resource Management (98) 3rd Sem Information Systems Management (8) 3rd Sem International Business (34) 3rd Sem Marketing Management (129) 3rd Sem Operations Management (8) 3rd Sem Project Management (103) 3rd Sem Retail Operations Management (8) 3rd Sem Supply Chain Management (SCM) (16) 3rd Sem Total Quality Management (TQM) (16) 4th Sem Banking Management (38) 4th Sem core/common subjects (65) 4th Sem Event Management (8) 4th Sem Finance Management (8) 4th Sem HEALTH SERVICE MANAGEMENT (HSM/HCS) (21) 4th Sem Human Resource Management (104) 4th Sem Information Systems Management (8) 4th Sem International Business (12) 4th Sem Marketing Management (8) 4th Sem Operations Management (37) 4th Sem Project Management (56) 4th Sem Retail Operations Management (8) 4th Sem Supply Chain Management (SCM) (8) 4th Sem Total Quality Management (TQM) (8) BBA101 - Communication Skills (2) BBA101 Set1 (1) BBA101 Set2 (1) BBA102 - Organization Behaviour (2) BBA102 Set1 (1) BBA102 Set2 (1) BBA103 - Business Environment (2) BBA103 Set1 (1) BBA103 Set2 (1) BBA104 - Quantitative Techniques in Business (2) BBA104 Set1 (1) BBA104 Set2 (1) BBA105 - Computer Fundamentals (2) BBA105 Set1 (1) BBA105 Set2 (1) BBA201 - Research Methods (2) BBA201 Set1 (1) BBA201 Set2 (1) BBA202 - Business Strategy (2) BBA202 Set1 (1) BBA202 Set2 (1) BBA203 - Financial Accounting (2) BBA203 Set1 (1) BBA203 Set2 (1) BBA204 - Marketing Management (2) BBA204 Set1 (1) BBA204 Set2 (1) BBA205 - Management Information Systems (2) BBA205 Set1 (1) BBA205 Set2 (1) BBA301 - Legal and Regulatory Framework (2) BBA301 Set1 (1) BBA301 Set2 (1) BBA302 - Human Resource Management (2) BBA302 Set1 (1) BBA302 Set2 (1) BBA303 - Quality Management (2) BBA303 Set1 (1) BBA303 Set2 (1) BBA304 - Advertising and sales (2) BBA304 Set1 (1) BBA304 Set2 (1) Differences between Managers and Leaders (1) EM0001 - Fundamentals of Environment (2) EM0001 Set1 (1) EM0001 Set2 (1) ET0001 - Human resource management for events (2) ET0001 Set1 (1) ET0001 Set2 (1) ET0002 - Corporate Event Project Management (2) ET0002 Set1 (1) ET0002 Set2 (1) ET0003 - Event marketing and management (2) ET0003 Set1 (1) ET0003 Set2 (1) ET0004 - Event Finance Management (2) ET0004 Set1 (1) ET0004 Set2 (1) ET0006 - Event Risk Management (2) ET0006 Set1 (1) ET0006 Set2 (1) ET0007 - Entrepreneurship (2) ET0007 Set1 (1) ET0007 Set2 (1) ET0008 - Special Events (2) ET0008 Set1 (1) ET0008 Set2 (1) ET0009 - Event Management for Tourism (2) ET0009 Set1 (1) ET0009 Set2 (1) IB0010 - International Financial Management (9) IB0010 Set1 (7) IB0010 Set2 (2) IB0011 - International Marketing (9) IB0011 Set1 (2) IB0011 Set2 (7) IB0012 - Management of Multinational Corporations (8) IB0012 Set1 (7) IB0012 Set2 (1) IB0013 - Export-Import Management (8) IB0013 Set1 (7) IB0013 Set2 (1) IB0015 - Foreign Trade of India (6) IB0015 Set1 (3) IB0015 Set2 (3) IB0016 - International Logistics and Distribution Management (2) IB0016 Set1 (1) IB0016 Set2 (1) IB0017 - International Business Environment and International Law (2) IB0017 Set1 (1) IB0017 Set2 (1) IB0018 - Export Import Finance (2) IB0018 Set1 (1) IB0018 Set2 (1) MA0036 - Financial Systems and Commercial Banking (14) MA0036 Set1 (7) MA0036 Set2 (7) MA0037 - Banking Related Laws and Practices (12) MA0037 Set1 (6) MA0037 Set2 (6) MA0038 - Banking Operations (2) MA0038 Set1 (1) MA0038 Set2 (1) MA0039 - Retail Banking (2) MA0039 Set1 (1) MA0039 Set2 (1) MA0040 (1) MA0041 - Merchant Banking and Financial Services (5) MA0041 Set1 (3) MA0041 Set2 (2) MA0042 - Treasury Management (14) MA0042 Set1 (7) MA0042 Set2 (7) MA0043 - Corporate Banking (9) MA0043 Set1 (5) MA0043 Set2 (4) MA0044 - Institutional Banking (10) MA0044 Set1 (8) MA0044 Set2 (2) MB0038 - Management Process and Organization Behavior (24) MB0038 Set1 (16) MB0038 Set2 (9) MB0039 - Business Communication (24) MB0039 Set1 (15) MB0039 Set2 (9) MB0040 - STATISTICS FOR MANAGEMENT (24) MB0040 Set1 (15) MB0040 Set2 (9) MB0041 - Financial Management and Accounting (24) MB0041 Set1 (15) MB0041 Set2 (9) MB0042 - Managerial Economics (30) MB0042 Set1 (15) MB0042 Set2 (15) MB0043 - Human Resource Management (24) MB0043 Set1 (15) MB0043 Set2 (9) MB0044 - PRODUCTION and OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT (16) MB0044 Set1 (8) MB0044 Set2 (8) MB0045 - Financial Management (9) MB0045 Set1 (7) MB0045 Set2 (2) MB0046 - Marketing Management (10) MB0046 Set1 (8) MB0046 Set2 (2) MB0047 - MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS (15) MB0047 Set1 (8) MB0047 Set2 (7) MB0048 - OPERATIONS RESEARCH (10) MB0048 Set1 (8) MB0048 Set2 (2) MB0049 - Project Management (10) MB0049 Set1 (8) MB0049 Set2 (2) MB0050 - Research Methodology (20) MB0050 Set1 (10) MB0050 Set2 (10) MB0051 - Legal Aspects of Business (17) MB0051 Set1 (13) MB0051 Set2 (4) MB0052 - Strategic Management and Business Policy (30) MB0052 Set1 (15) MB0052 Set2 (15) MB0053 - International Business Management (35) MB0053 Set1 (19) MB0053 Set2 (16) MF0010 - Security Analysis and Portfolio Management (39) MF0010 Set1 (21) MF0010 Set2 (18) MF0011 - Mergers and Acquisitions (24) MF0011 Set1 (14) MF0011 Set2 (10) MF0012 - Taxation Management (25) MF0012 Set1 (16) MF0012 Set2 (9) MF0013 - Internal Audit and Control (25) MF0013 Set1 (16) MF0013 Set2 (9) MF0014 (1) MF0015 - International Financial Management (2) MF0015 Set1 (1) MF0015 Set2 (1) MF0016 - Treasury Management (2) MF0016 Set1 (1) MF0016 Set2 (1) MF0017 - Merchant Banking and Financial Services (2) MF0017 Set1 (1) MF0017 Set2 (1) MF0018 - Insurance and Risk Management (2) MF0018 Set1 (1) MF0018 Set2 (1) MH0051 - Health Administration (15) MH0051 Set1 (5) MH0051 Set2 (10) MH0052 - Hospital Organisation Operations and Planning (26) MH0052 Set1 (12) MH0052 Set2 (14) MH0053 - Hospital and Healthcare Information Management (11) MH0053 Set1 (3) MH0053 Set2 (8) MH0054 - Finance Economics and Planning in HCS (13) MH0054 Set1 (10) MH0054 Set2 (3) MH0055 (1) MH0056 - Public Relations and Marketing for Healthcare Organisation (6) MH0056 Set1 (3) MH0056 Set2 (3) MH0057 - Management of Healthcare Human Resources (5) MH0057 Set1 (2) MH0057 Set2 (3) MH0058 - Legal Aspects in Healthcare Administration (5) MH0058 Set1 (3) MH0058 Set2 (2) MH0059 - Quality Management in HCS (5) MH0059 Set1 (3) MH0059 Set2 (2) MI0014 (1) MI0033 - Software Engineering (2) MI0033 Set1 (1) MI0033 Set2 (1) MI0034 - Database Management System (2) MI0034 Set1 (1) MI0034 Set2 (1) MI0035 - Computer Network (2) MI0035 Set1 (1) MI0035 Set2 (1) MI0036 - BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE TOOLS (2) MI0036 Set1 (1) MI0036 Set2 (1) MI0038 - Enterprise Resource Planning (2) MI0038 Set1 (1) MI0038 Set2 (1) MI0039 - eCommerce (2) MI0039 Set1 (1) MI0039 Set2 (1) MI0040 - Technology Management (2) MI0040 Set1 (1) MI0040 Set2 (1) MI0041 - Java and Web Design (2) MI0041 Set1 (1) MI0041 Set2 (1) MK0010 - Sales Distribution and Supply Chain Management (33) MK0010 Set1 (17) MK0010 Set2 (16) MK0011 - Consumer Behaviour (31) MK0011 Set1 (16) MK0011 Set2 (15) MK0012 - Retail Marketing (42) MK0012 Set1 (20) MK0012 Set2 (22) MK0013 - Market Research (23) MK0013 Set1 (12) MK0013 Set2 (11) MK0014 (1) MK0015 - Service Marketing And Customer Relationship Management (2) MK0015 Set1 (1) MK0015 Set2 (1) MK0016 - Advertising Management and Sales Promotion (2) MK0016 Set1 (1) MK0016 Set2 (1) MK0017 - eMarketing (2) MK0017 Set1 (1) MK0017 Set2 (1) MK0018 - International Marketing (2) MK0018 Set1 (1) MK0018 Set2 (1) ML0010 - Warehousing and Supply Chain Management (2) ML0010 Set1 (1) ML0010 Set2 (1) ML0011 - Buying and Merchandising (2) ML0011 Set1 (1) ML0011 Set2 (1) ML0012 - Store Operations (2) ML0012 Set1 (1) ML0012 Set2 (1) ML0013 - Retail IT Management (2) ML0013 Set1 (1) ML0013 Set2 (1) ML0014 (1) ML0015 - Services Marketing and Customer Relationship Management (2) ML0015 Set1 (1) ML0015 Set2 (1) ML0016 - Advertising Management and Sales Promotion (2) ML0016 Set1 (1) ML0016 Set2 (1) ML0017 - Mall Management (2) ML0017 Set1 (1) ML0017 Set2 (1) ML0018 - Project Management in Retail (2) ML0018 Set1 (1) ML0018 Set2 (1) MU0010 - Manpower Planning and Resourcing (31) MU0010 Set1 (16) MU0010 Set2 (15) MU0011 - Management and Organizational Development (20) MU0011 Set1 (10) MU0011 Set2 (10) MU0012 - Employee Relations Management (22) MU0012 Set1 (11) MU0012 Set2 (11) MU0013 - Human Resource Audit (25) MU0013 Set1 (15) MU0013 Set2 (10) MU0014 (1) MU0015 - Compensation Benefits (24) MU0015 Set1 (14) MU0015 Set2 (10) MU0016 - Performance Management and Appraisal (27) MU0016 Set1 (12) MU0016 Set2 (15) MU0017 - Talent Management and Employee Retention (24) MU0017 Set1 (12) MU0017 Set2 (12) MU0018 - Change Management (29) MU0018 Set1 (9) MU0018 Set2 (20) OM0010 - Operations Management (2) OM0010 Set1 (1) OM0010 Set2 (1) OM0011 - Enterprise Resource Planning (2) OM0011 Set1 (1) OM0011 Set2 (1) OM0012 - Supply Chain Management (2) OM0012 Set1 (1) OM0012 Set2 (1) OM0013 - Advanced Production and Operations Management (2) OM0013 Set1 (1) OM0013 Set2 (1) OM0014 (1) OM0015 - Maintenance Management (6) OM0015 Set1 (3) OM0015 Set2 (3) OM0016 - Quality Management (11) OM0016 Set1 (8) OM0016 Set2 (3) OM0017 - Advanced Production and Planning Control (11) OM0017 Set1 (3) OM0017 Set2 (8) OM0018 - Technology Management (9) OM0018 Set1 (7) OM0018 Set2 (2) PM0010 - Introduction to Project Management (26) PM0010 Set1 (14) PM0010 Set2 (12) PM0011 - Project Planning and Scheduling (25) PM0011 Set1 (14) PM0011 Set2 (11) PM0012 - Project Financing and Budgeting (26) PM0012 Set1 (14) PM0012 Set2 (12) PM0013 - Managing Human Resources in Projects (26) PM0013 Set1 (13) PM0013 Set2 (14) PM0014 (1) PM0015 - Quantitative Methods in Project Management (14) PM0015 Set1 (8) PM0015 Set2 (6) PM0016 - Project Risk Management (14) PM0016 Set1 (7) PM0016 Set2 (7) PM0017 - Project Quality Management (14) PM0017 Set1 (7) PM0017 Set2 (7) PM0018 - Contracts Management in Projects (14) PM0018 Set1 (7) PM0018 Set2 (7) Project (1) QM0010 - Foundations of Quality Management (4) QM0010 Set1 (2) QM0010 Set2 (2) QM0011 - Principles and Philosophies of Quality Management (4) QM0011 Set1 (2) QM0011 Set2 (2) QM0012 - Statistical Process Control and Process Capability (4) QM0012 Set1 (2) QM0012 Set2 (2) QM0013 - Quality Management Tools (4) QM0013 Set1 (2) QM0013 Set2 (2) QM0014 (1) QM0015 - ISO/QS 9000 Elements (2) QM0015 Set1 (1) QM0015 Set2 (1) QM0016 - Managing Quality in the Organization (2) QM0016 Set1 (1) QM0016 Set2 (1) QM0017 - Quality Management System (2) QM0017 Set1 (1) QM0017 Set2 (1) QM0018 - Quality Development Methods (2) QM0018 Set1 (1) QM0018 Set2 (1) SC0001 - Supply Chain Management (4) SC0001 Set1 (2) SC0001 Set2 (2) SC0002 - Outsourcing (4) SC0002 Set1 (2) SC0002 Set2 (2) SC0003 - Food Supply Chain Management (4) SC0003 Set1 (2) SC0003 Set2 (2) SC0004 - Inventory Management (4) SC0004 Set1 (2) SC0004 Set2 (2) SC0006 - Global Logistics and Supply Chain Management (2) SC0006 Set1 (1) SC0006 Set2 (1) SC0007 - Category Management in Purchasing (2) SC0007 Set1 (1) SC0007 Set2 (1) SC0008 - Purchasing and Contracting for Projects (2) SC0008 Set1 (1) SC0008 Set2 (1) SC0009 - Supply Chain Cost Management (2) SC0009 Set1 (1) SC0009 Set2 (1) SMU BBA Subjects (1) SMU MBA/PGDBA Subjects (1)

Visitor Count (since Jan 2019)