This post draws on key ideas from W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne (INSEAD)
People accept a decision that goes against their interests, and commit to carrying it out, when they believe the process that led to it was fair. Fair process rests on three principles: Engagement, Explanation and Expectation clarity (the "three E's"), sometimes detailed in 5 E’s: Engagement and framing, Exploration and Elimination, Explanation and expectations, Action and execution, Evaluation & Learning.
Process fairness drives commitment, not just outcome fairness
Kim and Mauborgne studied strategic decision-making between headquarters and subsidiary managers in multinationals. Managers carried out decisions willingly, beyond what was required, when they judged the process fair, even when the decision went against them. When the process felt unfair, they complied at best and quietly undermined the decision at worst. The idea builds on procedural-justice research (Thibaut & Walker, 1970s).
A fair process signals that people's ideas count (intellectual recognition) and that they are respected as individuals (emotional recognition). In Return, when voluntary cooperation is offered, people offer trust, share knowledge and go beyond formal requirements. An unfair process produces resentment, withheld effort and departures.
Three key principles: engagement, explanation and expectation clarity
Engagement: When involved in the decisions that affect them by asking people for their input and letting them challenge one another's ideas and assumptions, we observe that better decisions are made with ownership and respect.
Explanation: When we explain why the final decision was made, including why some views were overruled, we are likely to generate trust in leaders' intentions, even when one's own ideas were rejected.
Expectation clarity: To reduce politics and fear, but also to get people focused on the work, a good practice consists in clarifying the new rules of the game such as new targets, what people will be measured on, consequences of falling short.
What fair process is not
Fair process does not expect consensus or workplace democracy. Leaders still decide; fair process governs how decisions are reached and communicated.
It is not about harmony neither. The aim is the best decision plus commitment to execute it, which often means hard decisions.
Fair process is not optional when the outcome is negative. It matters most then: with an unfavourable outcome, the process determines acceptance (Brockner et Al., 1994).
References
Kim, W.C. & Mauborgne, R, “Fair process: managing in the knowledge Economy,” Harvard Business review, July-August 1997
Thibaut, J. & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Brockner, J. et al. (1994). “Interactive effect of procedural justice and outcome negativity on victims and survivors of job loss.” Academy of Management Journal, 37(2), 397–409.