組織公平（organizational justice）向來為組織行為領域研究之重點，有研究指出公平是影響員工行為、反應最重要的因素，而組織公平可分為分配公平、程序公平、以及互動公平；此外組織公平對組織承諾、工作滿意、離職傾向、組織績效、及組織公民行為等皆有顯著之影響。《天下雜誌》連續出版台灣企業一千大之排名刊物，比較的公司跨及各個產業，然而企業聲望對於組織的效益為何？在人力資源管理的效益中，研究者指出企業聲望對於組織之人員招募有正面的影響；除此之外，企業聲望認知對於組織認同、組織承諾也有正面影響。故本研究欲瞭解組織公平、企業聲望認知與組織承諾之關係。
本研究結果顯示分配公平、程序公平、以及互動公平對企業聲望認知有顯著正向影響；分配公平、程序公平對組織承諾有顯著正向影響；程序公平比分配公平對組織承諾的影響效果強；分配公平與程序公平的交互作用對組織承諾產生影響；企業聲望認知對組織承諾有正向的影響關係；企業聲望認知對組織承諾的影響對行銷與採購部門員工之影響比非行銷與採購部門之員工來得大；企業聲望認知對組織公平與組織承諾間之關係具有部分中介效果。並且組織公平對組織承諾的影響再加入企業聲望認知後，其影響效果會增強；而影響組織承諾的總效果，最強的變項為程序公平，其次為企業聲望認知。
故建議個案公司先從建立提升程序公平的制度做起，並且在提升程序公平的
同時，也需同時提升員工之企業聲望認知，因為兩者並重下對組織承諾會產生加乘效果。對於個案公司而言，欲提升員工之企業聲望認知可從組織內部著手，即提升員工之組織公平知覺，組織亦可透過提升高階管理能力、創新能力、吸引人才能力、以及企業整體形象來提升企業聲望認知。

Organizational justice is a main issue in organizational behavior field. Some researches indicate that justice is the most important factor which affects employees’ behavior and reaction to an organization. Organizational justice is composed of distributive justice, procedural justice, and interactional justice; organizational justice significantly affects organizational commitment, work satisfaction, intention to leave, organizational performance, and organizational citizenship behavior.
《CommonWealth Magazine》continuously publishes issues about top 1000 enterprises in Taiwan in different industries. And what is the benefit of perceived external prestige (PEP) to organizations? In terms of benefit to human resource management, researchers supported that PEP had a positive effect on personnel recruiting in an organization, as well as on organizational identity and organizational commitment. Therefore, this research is intended to realize the relationship among organizational justice, PEP, and organizational commitment.
The results of this research support that
1. Distributive justice, procedural justice, and interactional justice have a significantly positive effect on PEP.
2. Distributive justice and procedural justice have a significantly positive effect on organizational commitment.
3. Procedural justice has greater effect on organizational commitment than distributive justice.
4. The interaction between distributive and procedural justice has effect on organizational commitment.
5. PEP has a positive effect on organizational commitment.
6. The effect of PEP on organizational commitment in marketing and purchasing department is larger than in non-marketing and non-purchasing department.
7. PEP serves a partial mediator in the relationship between organizational justice and organizational commitment. In this way, the effect of organizational justice to organizational commitment would be enhanced whiling adding PEP. Procedural justice has the largest total effect on organizational commitment, and followed by the PEP.
We suggest the case company to enhance procedural justice first, as well as PEP at the same time because when the two components are existent at the same time, both of them will have a multiplying effect on organizational commitment. Case company can enhance PEP internally through organizational justice. Besides, case company can also enhance PEP directly through capability of higher level management, capability of innovation, capability of attracting appliers, and whole organizational reputation.

一、 中文部分
1. 藍采風、廖榮利，1994，組織行為學
二、 英文部分
1. Adams, J. S. 1963. Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and social Psychology, 67, pp.422-436.
2. Adams, J. S. 1965.Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz(Ed.), Advances In Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 2:267-299. New York: Academic Press.
3. Andrew Blair Staley, Barbara Dastoor, Nace R. Magner, and Chandler Stolp. The contribution of organizational justice in budget decision-making to federal managers’organizational commitment. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management; Winter 2003, 15, 4.
4. Ashforth, B. E., and Mael, F , A.(1989).Social identity and the organization. Academy of Management Review,14:20-39.
5. Baron , R. M. & Kenny, D.A. 1986. The moderator- mediator variable distinction in social psychological research：Conceptual, strategic, and statistical consideration.Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology, 51(6) :1173-1182.
6. Belt, J. A., Paolillo, J. G. P. (1982). The influence of corporate image and specificity of candidate qualifications on response to recruitment advertisement. Journal of Management, 8, 105-122.
7. Bies, R. J., (1987). The predicament of injustice: The management of moral outrage. In L.L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds), Research in organizational behavior(Vol. 9, pp.289-319). Greenwich, CT:JAI Press.
8. Bies, R. J. & Moag, J. S. 1986. International justice: Communication criteria of fairness. Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 1: 43-55.
9. Brockner, J. and Wiesenfeld, B.M. (1996), “An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: interactive effects of outcomes and procedures”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol.120 No.2, pp. 189-208.
10. Brooke, P.P., Jr., D. W. Russell, and J. L. Price. 1988.”Discriminant Validity of Measures of Job Satisfaction, Job Involvement, and Organizational Commitment. ” Journal of Applied Psychology 73:139-145.
11. Carmeli, A.2004. The Link Between Organizational Elements, Perceived External Prestige and Performance. Corporate Reputation Review. London: Vol. 6, Iss. 4; p. 314
12. Carmeli A., Freund A. (2002) Corporate Reputation Review. London: Spring. Vol. 5, Iss. 1; p. 51.
13. Carmeli A, Freund.A. (2004) International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior. Boca Raton: Fall .Vol. 7, Iss.3, p.289-309
14. Chang Eunmi. (2002). Distributive justice and organizational commitment revisited: Moderation by layoff in the case of Korean employees. Human Resource Management. Summer.Vol.41, Iss.2; pg261.
15. Cropanzano, R.,& Folger, R. (1989). Referent cognitions and task decision autonomy: Beyond equity theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74:293-299.
16. David De Cremer(2005).Procedural and distributive justice effects moderated by organizational identification. Journal of Managerial Psychology.Vol.20,pp4-14.
17. Dowling, G. R., “Managing Your Corporate Image,” Industrial Marketing Management (15:2), 1986: pp.109-115.
18. Deutsch, M. (1985), Distributive Justice, New Haven, University Press, New Haven, CT. De Cremer, D. and van Vugt, M. (1999), “Social identification effects in social dilemmas :a transformation of motives”, Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 29, pp. 871-93.
19. Dutton, J.E and Dukerich, J.M.,1991. Keeping an eye on the mirror: The role of image and identity in organizational adaptation, Academy of Management Journal, 34:517-554.
20. Folger R. 1977. Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of “voice” and improvement on experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 108-119.
21. Folger, R.,& Cropanzano, R. 1998. Organizational Justice and Human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
22. Gatewood, R.D.;Gowan, M. A. and Lautenschlager, G.. J.,1993. Corporate image, recruitment image and initial job choice decisions, Academy of Management Journal, 36(2):414-427.
23. Gilly, M.C. and Wolfinbarger, M.(1998). Advertising’s internal audience. Journal of Marketing, 62:1, 69-88.
24. Greenberg, J. 1987. Reactions to procedural injustice in payment distributions: Do the means justify the ends? Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, pp. 55-71.
25. Greenberg, J., &Folger, R. 1983. Procedural justice, participation, and the fair process effect in groups and organizations. In P. Paulus (Ed.), Basic group processes:235-256. New York: Springer-Verlag.
26. Herrbach, Oliver, Mignonac, Karim. (2004). How organizational image affects employee attitudes. Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 14, Iss. 4.
27. Hirschman, A.O.1970.Exit, voice and loyalty: Response to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
28. Homans, G. C. 1961. Social Behavior: It’s Elemental Forms. New York:Harcourt, Brace, & World.
29. Konovsky M.A, Pugh S.D. 1994. Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of Management Journal 37:656-669.
30. Konovsky, M. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1991) Perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor of employee attitudes and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 698-707.
31. Leventhal, G. S. 1980. What should be fine with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In Gergen, K. Greenberg, M. & Willis,R. (Eds.), In Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research, pp. 27-55. New York: Plenum Press.
32. Leventhal, G. S., Karuza J., & Fry, W. R. 1980. Beyond fairness: A theory of allocation preference. In G. Milula (Eds.), Justice and Social Interactional. New York: Springer Verlag.
33. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. 1988. The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York: Plenum Press.
34. Malatesta, R. M., & Byrne, Z. S. 1997. The impact of formal and interactional justice on organizational outcomes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, St. Louis.
35. Masterson, S. S., & Taylor, M. S. 1996. The broadening of procedural justice: Should interactional and procedural components be separate theories? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Cincinnati.
36. Maureen L Ambrose, Marshall Schminke. Journal of Applied Psychology. Washington: Apr 2003. Vol. 88, Iss. 2; p. 295
37. McFarlin, D.B., Sweeny, P. D. Academy of Management Journal .(1992).Vol.35, Iss.3 ;pg.626, 12pgs.
38. Meyer,J.,& Allen, M.(1984). Testing the “side-bet theory” of organizational commitment: Some methodological considerations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69: 372-378.
39. Meyer,J.,& Allen, M. (1991). A three- component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resources Management Review, 1, 61-89.
40. Meyer, John P., Paunonen, Sampo V., Gellatly, Ian R., Goffin, Richard D., Jackson, Douglas N.. Journal of Applied Psychology. Washington: Feb 1989. Vol. 74, Iss. 1; p. 152.
41. Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20-52.
42. Moorman R.H. 1991. Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology 76: 845-855.
43. Mowday, R.T., L. W. Porter, and R. M. Steers. 1982. Employee-organization Linkages: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover. New York: Academic Press.
44. Niehoff B.P., Moorman R.H. 1993. Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal 36:527-556.
45. Nunnally, J. C. 1978. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
46. O’Driscoll, M.P.1987.”Attitudes to the Job and the Organisation Among New Recruits: Influence of Perceived Job Characteristics and Organisation Structure. ” Applied Psychology: An International Review 36:133-145.
47. Pfeffer, J., 1994. Competitive Advantage Through People. Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA.
48. Russell Cropanzano, Cynthia A Prehar, Peter Y Chen. Group & Organization Management. Thousand Oaks: Sep 2002. Vol. 27, Iss. 3; p. 324
49. Samuel Aryee, Pawan S Budhwar, Zhen Xiong Chen.(2002).Trust as a mediator of the relationship between organizational justice and work outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behavior.Vol. 23, Iss.3; pg.267.
50. Simon, H. A. 1997.Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making process in administrative organizations. New York: Free Press.
51. Smidts and Pruyn and Riel.(2001)” The impact of employee communication and perceived external prestige on organizational identification ”Academy Management Journal . Vol.44, Iss.5. p1039-1050.
52. Summers, T.P.& DeNisi, A.S. In search of Adams’ other: Reexamination of referents used in the evaluation of pay. Human Relation, 1990, 43, 497-511.
53. Suzanne S Masterson, Kyle Lewis, Barry M Goldman, M Susan Taylor. Academy of Management Journal. Briarcliff Manor: Aug 2000. Vol. 43, Iss. 4; p. 738
54. Thibaut, J. & Walker L.(1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
55. Tyler, T. R. 1984. The role of perceived injustice in defendants’ evaluations of their courtroom experience. Law and Society Review, 18(1):51-74.
56. Tyler, T.R., & Bies, R. J. 1990. Beyond formal procedures: The interpersonal context of procedural justice. In J. S. Carroll(Ed.), Applied social psychology and organizational settings:77-98. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
57. Tyler, T.R. and Lind, E.A. (1992), “A relational model of authority in groups”, in Zanna, M. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 25, Academic Press, New York, NY, pp. 115-19.
58. Tyler, T.R., Rasinski, K., McGraw, K. 1985. The influence of perceived injustice on the endorsement of political leaders. Journal of Applied Psychology, 41:624-655.