Volume 9, Issue 9, September– 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24SEP313

Fairness and Performance of Employees in the

Hospitality Industry: A Study of Umah’s
Hotel & Resort
Udom E. Akankpo
Department of Sociology
University of Port Harcourt

Abstract:- The objective of the study is to evaluate the task cum objective of this study is to examine the role of
effect of fairness on employee job performance in management and the fair implementation of this treaty.
hospitality industry. The research was carried out using
purposive sampling techniques of all the sixty-one (61) The concept ‘fairness’ is also known as organizational
employees of Umah’s Hotel & Resort, since the justice. The origin of the clause ‘fairness’ dated back to
respondents span across the managerial, supervisory and 1954 as was used in the treaty, Friendship, Commerce and
junior staff of the company. Findings show that eighty Navigation (FCN) between United States and Germany
percent (80%) of the respondents indicate that duties in (Dolzer, 2005). The term equally refers to the extent to
the organization are not assigned based on religion or which employees perceive workplace procedures,
tribe. On equal reward system, 91% of the respondents interactions and outcomes to be fair in nature (Baldwin,
are of the opinion that there is equal reward on pay and 2006). Three types of organizational justice have been
other incentives in the company. Based on the findings it highlighted; distributive (outcomes being distributed
is recommended that fair practices be adopted for proportionally to inputs), procedural (decision process
successful increased performance, efficiency and high leading to a particular outcome) and interactional (treatment
employee output. Management should improve received by those working in an organization) (Baldwin,
communication, distribution of objectives and training of 2006).
members and motivate staff for efficiency.
Performance (job performance/actual performance)
Keywords:- Fairness, Fair Practices, Employee according to Mangkunegara and Anwar (2013) cited in
Performance, Management. Nazwirman (2019) means the work performance or actual
achievement by someone. Employee performance is the
I. INTRODUCTION peculiar amount of work accomplished by an employee in
accordance with the duties assigned to him. In general, high
The industrial revolution of the 18 th century created a performance is needed in an organization to achieve its
multicultural workforce, with people of varying cultural, goals, deliver the products and services they specialized in,
ethnic and racial background. Modern labour force any thus numerous factors are required to be in place to achieve
organization may have, is simply a reflection of numerous it, including fairness.
parameters that are not homogeneous. This include different
job experiences, age, gender, educational qualification, Umah’s Hotel & Resort as a business unit was
background etc. Hence, there is an increase of what Bhat incorporated with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC)
(2016) calls ‘workforce diversity’. Therefore, today’s in April, 2017. It is located at Igbo-Etche, Rivers State,
human resource manager has a lot to do in creating an Nigeria. Its field of business in the tourism industry covers
environment devoid of negative diversity. To guard against lodging, events centre, gym, club, swimming pool, bush and
unfair treatment in the workplace, the United Nations pool bar, restaurant, general entertainment and ware-house
through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and food delivery services. The hotel has 61 employees in
adopted sets of principles to discredit tyranny, nine (9) business units. The study dealt with two variables
discrimination and contempt in the workplace. Article 23 which include fairness and employee performance. The data
states that, (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice for this research is limited to the employees’ perception of
of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work fairness and their performance in the organization. This
and to protection against unemployment. (2) Everyone, study was conducted with the goal of assessing and aiding
without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for the improvement of local work climate and increase work
equal work. (3) Everyone who works has the right to just performance among employees.
and favourable remuneration, ensuring for himself and his
family, an existence worthy of human dignity and  Statement of the Problem
supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social The problem of this study is that organizations have
protection. (4) Everyone has the right to form and join trade been losing great/valuable members of staff through
unions for the protection of his interests (WHO, 2017). The resignation, termination and re-employment. There have

IJISRT24SEP313 www.ijisrt.com 167

Volume 9, Issue 9, September– 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24SEP313

also been several complaints and accusations from many II. LITERATURE REVIEW
employees from their previous organizations on issues of
unfair treatment to their persons. This is because every Social Identity Theory (SIT) as proposed by Henri
organization is made up of a number of different persons Tajfel and John Turner in 1971 is adopted for the study.
and groups of employees with varying interest. There are This framework is used to review studies on fairness,
numerous limitations relative to the management of focusing on the impact of employee performance relating to
companies and organizations, including unfair treatment of group behaviour. Social Identity Theory (SIT) is the study
workers. This practice is common place in any workforce. In of the interplay between personal and social identities.
all, employees are the backbone, and the most valuable Hence, SIT predict the circumstances of thought under as
assets an organization can inherit in achieving higher individuals or as group members. The minimal-group
productivity. Therefore, being fair or unfair is highly studies of SIT in 1970 showed categorization of individuals
dependent on the principles and practices of management in into groups to make them think of themselves and others in
the organization. The questions are; is fairness possible in terms of group membership instead of as separate
the face of racism, ethnicity, power, religion and other individuals. Thus, SIT came out of group membership
factors? What method of collaboration between groups of focused to instill meaning in social situations. Group helps
people can best obtain a balance in the system? However, people to identify who they are and how to relate with
concerning fairness and employee performance, there are no others. SIT was developed to connect cognitive processes
known research-based evidences within organizations in and behavioural motivation.
Port Harcourt along this line. Hence, this study is intended
to fill this gap and give feedback about the effect of fairness The root of the theory has an impact on its applications
and employee performance in Umah’s Hotel & Resort. in organizations (both public and private), as it relates to the
way employees are treated in the workplace. According to
 Aim and Objectives Lind and Tyler (1988), organizational fairness affects
The main objective of the study is to evaluate the effect employees’ economic and psychological health by meeting
of fairness and performance of employees in the hospitality their socio-economic needs in the organization (e.g., the
industry: A study of Umah’s Hotel & Resort. More need for control, self-esteem and inclusion). In conjunction
specifically, the study seeks to: with the afore mentioned, Hassan (2013) study provided
evidence that fair treatment can improve public employees’
 Assess how management roles affect fairness practices trust in their management, increase job satisfaction, enhance
in the organization. motivation, reduce urge to leave firm, and reduce payment
 Determine if fairness practices in the organization aid of union fees. It implies therefore that; good social
employee’s performance. integration of workers has the leverage to increase
 Ascertain the relationship between fairness practices and performance of employees in the workplace.
employee performance in the organization.
A study by Saari and Judge (2004), claims that well-
 Research Questions being and satisfaction among workers are their
To guide the study, the following research questions performances and contributions they create for the company.
were formulated. According to Bowen, Gilliland and Folger (1999), workers
esteem, how they are contending with and among their
 How do management roles affect fairness practices in the colleagues is important, because employees do not have
organization? opportunity to information on technical, financial, legal and
 To what extent do fairness practices in the organization strategic decisions designed by management. They further
aid employees’ performance? noted that, unfair organizations, do not energized employees
 What is the relationship between fairness practices and about their work and association with the organization.
employee performance in the organization? Stressing that, fairness impact on subordinates’ job
satisfaction and positive implications on organizational
 Hypotheses productivity.
The following hypotheses were tested in this study.
Abratt and Kleyn (2012), study revealed that being
treated fairly have impact on employees as a quality
 HO1: Management roles have no significant effect on
being fair with the employees in the organization. standard has on an organization’s reputation. Implying that,
if the workforce is treated fairly, they work, and bond
 HO2: Fairness practices by the management does not
themselves with the company and generate positive
significantly aid employee performance.
information about it. Bowen, Gilliland and Folger (1999)
 HO3: There is no significant relationship between fair
further observed that, fair treatment bestows to employee
practices and employee performance in the organization.
commitment. Treating customers fairly impact on workers’
motivation and fulfillment. Jung and Yoon (2013), study
shows that 40% to 80% of customer’s happiness and
devotion depend on their relationship with the employees. In
the public service, the study of Van Dijke, De Cremer and
Mayer (2010), proved that if public employees perceive

IJISRT24SEP313 www.ijisrt.com 168

Volume 9, Issue 9, September– 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24SEP313

procedural fairness to be high, the more likely they are to efficient teamwork can be measured by individual worker
infer that they are valued by their organization. and workplace performance. Dike, Anetoh, Obiezekwe and
Eboh (2021) study recommended fair and reasonable
Chi and Gursoy (2009) stress that, when employees are procedures in order to establish a good communication
pleased and committed to their work they stay with the firm system with workers for better decision-making and
even under low turnover with better performance, and are organizational relations.
ready to pull and develop new employees. They added that,
workers’ contentment plays a pivotal role in organization, as Fairness, sometimes referred to as organizational
a way to achieve financial gains and that “taking care of justice, often is the acceptable methods of actions, including
employees can be defined as providing batter pay, ongoing rewards, and associations with officials in the workplace
training, and making employees feel secure”. Satisfied accessed to be fair. Fairness is classified into three for the
workers are motivated and tend to work harder in unity purpose of measurement, namely; interactional, procedural
beyond expectations, offering better services, contributing to and distributional justice. Proper management of fairness in
higher customer demands. Fairness and fair treatment, an industry will promote increased productivity.
according to Moorman, Niehoff and Organ (1993), mean
fidelity to work, averting problems with other employees, Performance is the work efforts of an employee at an
communicating decisions, actions and refraining from industry to achieve a recognizable productivity. According
complaint about the organization. Wilson, Valarie, Mary to Dike et al. (2021) employee performance is the quality
and Swayne (2008), argue that service culture is granting and quantity of output done by workers for the fulfilment of
internal and external customers good service. The study of firm’s objectives. In most organizations, performance is
Daramola and Daramola (2019) demonstrated that merit, focused on targets as an obligation to grow. Generally,
raises and bonuses are the main factors of performance- performance indices vary from group to group, but the
based pay that influenced the effectiveness of performance. essence is growth and productivity in the workplace.

Fujishiro (2005) work on fairness and employee well- The hospitality industry is an arm of the business
being, suggests that unfair practices act as an occupational sector known as the travel and tourism industry. Its aim is
deformation, detrimental to workers’ health and fitness. He the provision of products and services to trippers. To
suggests that, fair practices impact on employee health over Merriam-Webster (2023) dictionary, hospitality is defined as
job control, social support, and aspects of work orientation ‘the business of providing services to guests in hotels,
(i.e., workload, pay), and regressive responses (i.e., restaurants, bars, etc.’. Hospitality is considered the art of
smoking, alcohol consumption). Kivimäki, Ferrie, Head, offering good gesture and attending to the basic satisfaction
Shipley, Vahtera and Marmot (2004), Whitehall 11 study of of strangers and visitors, as it relates to food, drinks, and
7-years of London civil workers, show support for the effect lodging. It is simply playing host to a visitor.
of organizational justice on health and well-being.
Hotels are usually classified upon location, size,
Janssen, Katzmarzyk and Ross (2004) examined clientele, services offered etc. by this, the Umah’s hotel and
distributive justice and procedural justice interaction effect, resort by features, facilities and services may be classified as
and found that high levels of job demands, with high job- three-star hotel. Located at a standard locality, with
related anxiety and burnout exist only when distributive adequate parking space for cars. It has over 20 rooms, with
justice and procedural justice were both perceived as low. attached bath rooms, tubs of hot and cold water. All rooms
With two types of organizational justice, the level of are air-conditioned with furniture and furnishings in
demands was not associated with anxiety or burnout. It standard rooms design. Provided are round the clock
implies that fair procedures in the organization may protect reception, room intercom, dinning/restaurant, bars (bush,
health of employees especially those exposed to high job pool, club), kitchen maned by experienced chefs on
demands and who normally perceived compensation as not intercontinental and African traditional dishes, clean and
fair. Job and compensation may be difficult to change, but hygienic environment. Members of staff are always
fair procedures may be achieved. All these studies reviewed courteous in clean smart uniform, including valet laundry
demonstrated that organizational injustice is associated with services. Housekeeping is at its peak, with quality cutlery
employee well-being. and glassware, also are a variety of standard linen, duffel,
towels etc.
The work of Colenso (2000) shows that teamwork can
enhance quality productivity, ingenuity and workers’ III. METHODOLOGY
gratification. Robbins and Finley (1996) study on barriers to
team development, discovered that team failure is due to The research was carried out using ex-post-facto
unsuitable, perplexed goals, questionable roles, poor design and purposive sampling techniques because all
decision making, conflicts, poor feedback, low reward members of the population were sampled. The population of
systems, no team trust and lack of change. In all, Oakland the study consists of 61 employees of Umah’s Hotel &
(1993); Jackson and Madsen (2004), support the fact that, Resort. The respondents span across the managerial and
absence of training or ill-equipped team composition junior staff of the company. The main instrument used for
produce skill gaps, that decreases team performance. While the study is a questionnaire tagged: “Questionnaire on
Ingham, Teare, Scheuing and Armistead (1997) suggest that, Fairness and Employee Performance” (QFEP) with three

IJISRT24SEP313 www.ijisrt.com 169

Volume 9, Issue 9, September– 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24SEP313

sub-sections, namely; management roles and fairness analysis. Frequency counts and percentages were used to
practices, how fair practices aid employees’ performance, answer the research questions. Associated method was used
and the relationship between fair practices and employee to test the relationship between the independent variable
performance. (fairness) and the dependent variable (employee
performance) in the organization. The type of data used is
Out of 61 copies of questionnaire distributed, 45 primary data. A response format of 2-points rating scale of
(representing 74%) were properly filled and found valid for Yes or No and Never, Often and Rarely were used.

IV. RESULTS

 Research Question One:

How do Management roles affect fairness practices in organizations?

Table 1 Management Roles and Fair Practices

Items
Freq. Yes % Freq. No %
1a. Your boss (manager/supervisor) communicates with you respectfully. 45 100
1b. Your boss criticizes you when problems arise at workplace. 29 64.4 16 35.6
1c. I receive social support from management/co-workers. 27 60.0 18 40.0
1d. Your organization have sick policy. 20 44.4 25 55.6
1e. I was trained on the job I am assigned. 44 97.8 1 2.2

A look at the table (1a-e) indicate that, all respondents does not have a health care policy for members of staff. On
(100%) agree that their supervisors and managers the question of job-based knowledge, 97.8% of respondents
communicate with them respectfully. More so, 64.4% of agreed that they were trained on their jobs, while 2.2% were
respondents accepted that they are criticised when wrong not trained.
issues/problems arise, but 35.6% disagree to that. On social
support from the organization, 60% of respondents agreed,  Research Question Two:
while 40% said no to it. On the other hand, 44.4% of To what extent do fairness practices in the organization
respondents agreed that the organization has a sick care aid employee performance?
policy, while 55.6% said No to it, indicating that the Hotel

Table 2 Fair Practices Aid Employees’ Performance

Items
Freq. Yes % Freq. No %
2a. Job are assigned to all workers. 45 100.0
2b. I am promoted as at when due 17 37.8 28 62.2
2c. Duties are assigned based on religion or tribe 9 20.0 36 80.0
2d. We are equally rewarded with pay/other incentives. 41 91.1 4 8.9
2e. We observe teamwork. 29 64.4 16 35.6
2f. I was cared for when bereaved, need pay advance etc. 23 51.1 22 48.9
2g. I observe bias towards discipline in the system. 15 33.3 30 66.7
2h. I am satisfied the way issues are resolved 36 80.0 9 20.0
2i. I have been threatened with suspension or dismissal. 15 33.3 30 66.7

Table 2 analysis (a-i) deals with assigned duties in life. While 48.9% were not supported at the same instance.
which all (100%) the respondents know their jobs. On On discipline, 66.7% do not observe bias situations towards
promotion, 62.2% indicated that they were not promoted as discipline in the management of the organization. While
at when due. While 37.8% agree to it. Also, 80% of 33.3% noticed some acts of indiscipline. This indicate that
respondents indicate that duties in the organization are not discipline is higher in the system. On the resolution of issues
assigned based on religion or tribe. While 20% of the in the organization, 80% of respondents agree to the system
respondents noticed an influence of preference of religion or of resolving matters. 66.7% of respondents have never been
tribe. On equal reward system, 91.1% of the respondents are threatened with suspension nor dismissal in their work
of the opinion that there is equal reward on pay and other place.
incentives in the company. On team work, 64.4% of
respondents accepted team work approach to duties in their  Research Question Three:
work place. While 35.6% are negative in response to What is the relationship between fairness practices and
teamwork. More so, 51.1% support the management that employee performance in the organization?
they were cared for when the need arises in their personal

IJISRT24SEP313 www.ijisrt.com 170

Volume 9, Issue 9, September– 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24SEP313

Table 3 Relationship Between Fairness Practices and Employee Performance

Items
Freq. Never % Freq. Rare % Freq. Often %
3a.i I often think of quitting my job? 13 28.9 30 66.7 2 4.4
Freq. Yes.% Freq. No.%
3b.ii I derive satisfaction working in the organisation. 42 93.3 3 6.7
3c.ii There has been improvements in the organization 20 44.4 25 55.6
since I joined.
3d.ii I always meet job targets assigned to me. 19 42.2 1 2.2
3e.ii I was fairly rated on the last performance appraisal 15 33.3 5 11.1
system.
3f.ii Workers engage in open dialogue/communication 14 31.1 6 13.3
on issues.

Results of table 3 (a-f) indicates that 66.7% of significant effect on employee performance because of
respondents rarely think of quitting their jobs, while 28.9% general acceptability.
do not entertain such thoughts. However, 93.3% of the
respondents are satisfied working in the organization. On  HO3: There is no Significant Relationships between
improvements in the organization, 55.6% of respondents Fairness and Employee Performance in the
agreed they did not see any major improvement in the Organization.
organization since they joined. However, 44.4% admitted The 66.7% of respondents rarely think of quitting their
that they have seen some form of improvements. On the jobs, 28.9% too, do not entertain such thoughts. However,
other hand, 42.2% of respondents have always met their job 93.3% are satisfied working in the organization. There are
targets as assigned to them. Meaning that they comply with major improvements as adored by 55.6% of respondents in
company rules, policies and objectives. On employee the organization. On effectiveness, 42.2% of respondents
performance appraisal, 33.3% rated the system as being fair. have always met their job targets. On appraisal, 33.3% rated
On the issue of open dialogue and communication, 31.1% of the system as fair. On communication, 31.1% of the
the respondents are of the opinion that, open dialogue is respondents apply open dialogue. In relationships, all
what they apply in the company. answers were in the positive, hence acceptance of
hypothesis. This implies that, there is a positive relationship
 Hypotheses between fairness and employee performance.

 HO1: Management Roles have no Significant effect on V. DISCUSSION

being Fair with the Employees in the Organization.
Respondents agree 100% that supervisors and Management, fairness practices have great significant
managers are respectful. A 64.4% of respondents accepted effect on performance of employees in the organization
being cautioned when wrong issues/problems arise, 35.6% (Umah’s Hotel & Resort). This is in line with Dike et al.
disagree. On social support, 60% agreed,40% disagreed. On (2021) study that management should follow fair and
sick care policy, 44.4% agreed, while 55.6% disagreed. reasonable procedures in order to establish a good
About 97.8% of members of staff were trained on job-based communication system with workers in the decision-making
knowledge, while 2.2% were not trained. This demonstrates process as well as organizational relations. Fair practices
that HO is rejected, implying that management have great have significant effect on employee performance. This is in
significant effect on fairness in the organization. tandem with Daramola and Daramola (2019) research that,
merit, raises and bonuses were the main factors of
 HO2: Fairness Practices by the Management does not performance-based pay that influenced the effectiveness of
Significantly aid Employee Performance. performance. There is a positive relationship between
All respondents know their jobs, and 62.2% were not fairness practices and employee performance in
promoted as at when due, but 37.8% agree to it. Also, 80% organizations. According to Van Dijke et al. (2010), the
of duties in the organization are not assigned based on more public employees perceive procedural fairness to be
religion or tribe. On equal reward system, 91.1% are of the high, the more likely they are to infer that they are valued by
opinion that there is equal reward on pay and other their organization. Fair practices could now be adopted as a
incentives. While 64.4% accepted team work approach to major prerequisite for an organizational system, and for
duties, 35.6% are negative in response. More so, 51.1% successful increased performance.
agreed management cares, but 48.9% varied. A total of
66.7% of respondents noticed general discipline, while VI. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATIONS
33.3% observed indiscipline. On conflict resolution 80%
agree to the approach. In all, 66.7% of respondents were Since fair practices result in efficiency and high
never threatened with suspension nor dismissal. Here, the employee performance, it is recommended that it be adopted
hypothesis is accepted, that fairness practices have a as a policy by organizations. Work must be interesting with
elements of motivation on the part of management.

IJISRT24SEP313 www.ijisrt.com 171

Volume 9, Issue 9, September– 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24SEP313

Management has clear tasks of communication, distribution [14]. Janssen, O. (2004). How fairness perceptions make
of objectives and training of members of staff for efficiency. innovative behavior more or less stressful. Journal of
High performance spirit must be developed and practiced as Organizational Behavior, 25(2), 201-215,
a culture among members of staff. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.238.
[15]. Jung, S.H., & Yoon, H.H. (2013). Do employees´
REFERENCES satisfied customers respond with an satisfactory
relationship. The effects of employees´ satisfaction
[1]. Abratt, R., & Kleyn, N. (2012). Corporate identity, on customers´ satisfaction and loyalty in a family
corporate branding and corporate reputations: restaurant”, International Journal of Hospitality
Reconciliation and integration. European Journal and Management.34, 1-8,
Marketing, 46(7-8), 1048-1063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hm.2013.02.003.
https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561211230197 [16]. Kivimäki, M., Ferrie, J. E., Head, J., Shipley, M. J.,
[2]. Baldwin, S. (2006). Organizational justice. Institute Vahtera, J., & Marmot, M. G. (2004).
for Employment Studies. University of Sussex [17]. Organizational justice and change in justice as
Campus, Falmer. 1-13. predictors of employee health: The Whitehall II
[3]. Bowen, D.E., Gilliland, S.W., & Folger R. (1999). study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community
How being fair with employees spills over to Health, 58, (11), 931-937,
Customers. Organizational Dynamics.27(3), 7-23. doi:10.1136/jech.2003.019026.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(99)90018-9 [18]. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social
[4]. Chi, C. G., & Gursoy, D. (2009). Employee psychology of procedural justice. Springer Science
satisfaction, customer satisfaction and financial and Business Media, doi: 10.1007/978-1-4899-2115-
performance: An empirical examination. 4_1
International Journal of Hospitality Management, [19]. Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2023) www.merriam-
28(2), 245-253, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.08.003 webster.org. retrieved 02/06/2023.
[5]. Colenso, M. (2000). How to accelerate team [20]. Moorman R. H., Niehoff B. P., & Organ, D. W.
development and enhance team productivity. (1993). Treating employees fairly and organizational
London: Prentice-Hall. citizenship behaviour: Sorting the effects of job
[6]. Daramola, L., & Daramola, A. A. (2019). Factors satisfaction, organizational commitment, and
influencing employee performance in an procedural justice. Employee Responsibilities and
organization. International Journal of Emerging Rights Journal, 6(3), 209-225,
Engineering and Technology.7, (12). 37-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01419445.
[7]. Dike, G. N., Anetoh, J, C., Obiezekwe, C. J., & [21]. Nazwirman, N. (2019). Analysis of employee
Eboh, S. O. (2021). Organizational justice and performance: A case study in Port Corporation.
employee performance of government owned Journal Organisasi dan Manajemen. 15(1), 24-35,
Polytechnics in Anambra State of Nigeria. Journal of doi: 10.33830/jom.v15i1.7.2019.
Business and African Economy. 7. (1), 1-41. [22]. Oakland, J. (1993). Total quality management. The
[8]. Dolzer, R. (2005). Fair and equitable treatment: A route to improving performance, (2nd ed.). Oxford:
key standard in investment treaties. The International Butterworth-Heinemann.
Lawyer. 39, (1), 87-106. [23]. Robbins, H., & Finley, M. (1996). Why teams don’t
[9]. Fujishiro, K. (2005). Fairness at work: Its impacts on work, what went wrong and how to make it right.
employee well-being. A published Ph.D. Orion Publishing Group.
Dissertation, Ohio State University. [24]. Saari, L. M., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Employee
[10]. Hassan, S. (2013). Does fair treatment in the attitudes and job satisfaction. Human Resource
workplace matter? An assessment of fairness and Management, 43(4), 395-407.
employee outcomes in government. The American [25]. Van Dijke, M., De Cremer, D., & Mayer, D. M.
Review of Public Administration, 43 (5), 539-557, (2010). The role of authority power in explaining
https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074012447979. procedural fairness effects. Journal of Applied
[11]. Ingham, H., Teare, R., Scheuing, E., & Armistead, C. Psychology, 95 (3), 488-502.
(1997). A system model of teamwork. The TQM [26]. Wilson A., Valarie A Z., Mary J. B., & Swayne, D.
Magazine, 9, (2), 118-127. G. (2008). Services marketing: Integrating customer
[12]. Jackson, B., & Madsen, S. R. (2004). Common focus across the firm. The McGraw-Hill, New York,
factors of high performance teams. Utah Valley State NY 10020. Student literature
College.1303-1310. [27]. World Health Organization (2017). Code of ethics
[13]. Janssen, I., Katzmarzyk, P. T., & Ross, R. (2004). and professional conduct. 04.
Waist circumference and not body mass index
explains obesity related health risk. The American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition,79, (3), 379-384,
https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/79.3.379.

IJISRT24SEP313 www.ijisrt.com 172