- Research,
‘Marion Fortin, justice at work as the common thread running through her research’: discover our interview with the TSM researcher
• Why did you choose organisational behaviour as your specialism?
After studying management at Trinity College Dublin, I was recruited by JP Morgan, an investment bank in London. The bank was in the process of merging with another bank, and I was able to observe the behaviour of individuals and groups in this stressful context. What stood out from this experience was the importance of feelings of fairness. This theme of fairness became a common thread for me. I then returned to Trinity College Dublin to complete a PhD in organisational behaviour. I subsequently obtained a position as a visiting researcher at the Stern School of Business in New York, followed by my first position as a senior lecturer at Durham University in the United Kingdom.
• How did you hear about TSM?
It was through a workshop dedicated to issues of organisational justice, organised by researcher Patrice Roussel, that I first learned about Toulouse Capitole University and TSM. This initial encounter with the team from the ‘Human Resources and Organisational Behaviour Department’ was decisive. I finally joined in 2010 when a position became available. TSM has one of the best teams in France in the field of organisational behaviour. Research in this area is inherently interdisciplinary, as it lies at the intersection of several disciplines: management, sociology and psychology. My research therefore focuses on the attitudes, motivations and reactions of individuals and groups at work.
• What was the objective of your JuDy project, funded by the ANR (2018-2023)?
The aim of JuDy was to study the dynamics of justice at work, and in particular to shed light on new perspectives concerning the career gap between men and women. This project is also based on the idea that differences in perceptions of justice at work vary according to individual motivations, which we refer to as motivated justice reasoning. To support this theory, three empirical studies were conducted.
The first focused on women returning to work after maternity leave. We found that situations perceived as unfair during this period of professional transition could have a direct or indirect impact over time on the attitudes, ambitions at work and career decisions of the participants. The popular narrative tends to suggest that women decide to withdraw from the workplace at this key moment. Others suggest that it is companies that push them out. These two explanations are interrelated. Our participants did indeed experience numerous incidents of injustice during this period. I was struck by the fact that many of these events were even contrary to French law. This study illustrates how victims of injustice can sometimes be led to justify the unfair, even illegal, treatment they have suffered. We observe a growing professional disengagement over time in relation to these experiences. To remedy this, we offer concrete advice to companies wishing to better understand how to manage maternity leave departures.
The second study, conducted among parents working from home during the Covid-19 pandemic, demonstrated how the daily experience of teleworking can increase career gaps between men and women. Our surveys found that women were more severely penalised by recurring interruptions due to childcare. What emerged from the interviews was that underlying role expectations still differ between fathers and mothers. Women feel much more guilt.
The third societal context is the difficult decisions that managers within companies are often faced with, which have negative consequences for at least some employees (redundancies, redeployment, etc.). While the literature on organisational justice has often focused on employees who suffer injustice, we have chosen instead to study the experiences of these managers. They are expected to implement rationalisation measures while at the same time looking after the well-being of their team. We observed very different dynamics: some managers were unable to reconcile their idea of justice and resigned; others managed the situation by resorting to a mechanism known as moral disengagement.
The first focused on women returning to work after maternity leave. We found that situations perceived as unfair during this period of professional transition could have a direct or indirect impact over time on the attitudes, ambitions at work and career decisions of the participants. The popular narrative tends to suggest that women decide to withdraw from the workplace at this key moment. Others suggest that it is companies that push them out. These two explanations are interrelated. Our participants did indeed experience numerous incidents of injustice during this period. I was struck by the fact that many of these events were even contrary to French law. This study illustrates how victims of injustice can sometimes be led to justify the unfair, even illegal, treatment they have suffered. We observe a growing professional disengagement over time in relation to these experiences. To remedy this, we offer concrete advice to companies wishing to better understand how to manage maternity leave departures.
The second study, conducted among parents working from home during the Covid-19 pandemic, demonstrated how the daily experience of teleworking can increase career gaps between men and women. Our surveys found that women were more severely penalised by recurring interruptions due to childcare. What emerged from the interviews was that underlying role expectations still differ between fathers and mothers. Women feel much more guilt.
The third societal context is the difficult decisions that managers within companies are often faced with, which have negative consequences for at least some employees (redundancies, redeployment, etc.). While the literature on organisational justice has often focused on employees who suffer injustice, we have chosen instead to study the experiences of these managers. They are expected to implement rationalisation measures while at the same time looking after the well-being of their team. We observed very different dynamics: some managers were unable to reconcile their idea of justice and resigned; others managed the situation by resorting to a mechanism known as moral disengagement.
• Can you tell us about the doctoral programme at TSM, of which you were the director?
I was the director of this doctoral programme from 2020 to 2023. It is a very international programme with one specific feature: all doctoral students must have funding in order to be able to devote sufficient time to their research. We select the best candidates, regardless of their nationality. Last year, there were 32 different nationalities among a cohort of around 80 doctoral students. All courses are taught in English, and students are encouraged to spend a semester abroad during their doctoral studies and to participate in international conferences. The efforts made to obtain EFMD and EQUIS accreditation have greatly helped us to improve this programme. Many aspects have been reviewed to meet the required criteria: the selection process, which must be completely transparent; financial support for candidates; communication with doctoral students; course design; appropriate assessment, etc. Ultimately, the results in terms of professional integration are very good: we find that our doctoral students easily find employment in academia.
• Can you tell us about your responsibilities as Vice-President of ENGAGE.EU?
ENGAGE.EU is a European alliance of universities that facilitates multiple collaborations. It is a genuine network of stable partners with whom we have developed shared infrastructure and teaching programmes. I have been involved in this project since its inception in 2020. In particular, I have worked on developing its research focus by organising think tanks and events that enable doctoral students to network. Since June 2023, I have been Vice-President of ENGAGE.EU. It is an exciting role and I know I can count on a close-knit and motivated team. In the coming years, we want to involve more young researchers and doctoral students, who are particularly keen on interdisciplinarity and internationalisation. The alliance facilitates numerous exchanges between researchers from different partner universities. It acts as an accelerator for projects on societal issues. This year, we will focus on targeted communication in order to offer students, administrative staff and teacher-researchers programmes and projects tailored to their expectations.