Executive Leadership training in LucerneLeadership d'excellence in the canton of Lucerne: is explaining an unfavourable decision enough to make it fair?
In the canton of Lucerne, tourism, hospitality, regional financial services and industrial SMEs form an economy in which family businesses and short decision-making chains play an important role. For SHR's “Leadership d'excellence” programme, this raises a practical question: how can leaders communicate an unfavourable decision without confusing close relationships, explanation and fairness?
What the literature establishes: distinct dimensions of fairness
Jason A. Colquitt (2001, Journal of Applied Psychology) empirically distinguishes four dimensions of organisational justice: distributive, procedural, interpersonal and informational. These concern, respectively, allocated outcomes, decision-making procedures, respectful treatment and the explanations provided. For a leader, this means that a courteous, detailed announcement does not establish that the allocation criteria were fair.
A second study: explanations influence reactions
Jerald Greenberg (1990, Journal of Applied Psychology) studied reactions to a temporary pay cut in industrial plants. In this field setting, a more thorough and considerate explanation was associated with a smaller increase in theft than an inadequate explanation. This finding suggests that the way an unfavourable decision is communicated can matter, without demonstrating that communication remedies unfairness in the decision itself.
The hasty conclusion: a good explanation makes anything acceptable
One might conclude that a skilful leader can secure acceptance of any decision; that would confuse a less adverse reaction with a fair decision. An explanation replaces neither consistent criteria nor an opportunity to flag an error. In a family business, knowing employees personally may facilitate discussion, but it can also make exceptions difficult to distinguish from favouritism. (our executive and employee training programmes)
The limits: neither local evidence nor a universal recipe
The validation study distinguishes perceptions of fairness; it does not test a communication method in Lucerne businesses. The pay-cut study concerns a particular industrial setting and a specific behaviour, rather than every possible consequence of a management decision. Applying these findings to hotel schedules, access to training in financial services or task allocation in SMEs therefore requires attention to context.
A practical check in Lucerne
Consider a hypothetical example: a family-owned hotel in Lucerne must allocate leave during a busy tourist period. As an application exercise for “Leadership d'excellence”, the manager can record the announced criteria before making decisions, then document the outcome of each request, justified exceptions and any revision following a challenge. At the end of the planning cycle, the manager calculates the proportion of decisions consistent with the announced criteria and reviews every exception. This check does not establish fairness on its own, but it allows claims about close working relationships to be tested against observable practice. To go further: explore the Executive Leadership training in Lucerne in the canton of Lucerne, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Executive Leadership in Lucerne
- executive leadership
- Lucerne
- research
- training lucerne