|
...relationships that they have developed within the organization, and certain outcomes and consequences such as reward allocations and job attitudes. Ferris, Russ, and Fandt (1989) developed a conceptual framework and working definition of organizational politics that identified antecedents, outcomes, and moderators of POP. They define politics as a "social influence process in which behavior is strategically designed to maximize short-term or long-term self-interest, which is either consistent with or at the expense of others' interests" (1989: 145). Other researchers have subsequently refined and extended this model (e.g., Ferris et al., 2002; Kacmar et al., 1999; Valle and Perrewe, 2000). These researchers suggest that certain situations in organizations (e.g., those that are ambiguous, uncertain, or subjectively determined) are conducive to political perceptions.
Some researchers (e.g., Ferris et al., 1996; Valle and Perrewe, 2000; Vigoda, 2000) have examined the pivotal role of POP as a mediator of the relationship between particular antecedents and outcomes, while others have examined political perceptions as a moderator of workplace phenomena (e.g., Harris et al., 2005; Hochwarter et al., 2000). Antecedents found to be significantly related to POP include hierarchical level (Ferris et al., 1999), feedback (Kacmar et al., 1999), interaction with supervisors (Valle and Perrewe, 2000), and career development opportunities (Kacmar et al., 1999; Parker et al., 1995). Outcomes significantly related to POP include job stress (Kacmar et al., 1999), job involvement (Ferris and Kacmar, 1992), job satisfaction (Ferris et al., 1996), and pay satisfaction (Zhou and Ferris, 1995). Previous research has treated antecedents as independent of one another in empirical testing of the POP model. We believe that it is important to begin to explore the highly interactive nature of antecedent variables commonly included in models of POP, and the transmitted effects of such interactions on outcomes associated with organizational politics. Thus, the purpose of this study is to examine the interactive roles of one type of individual difference, locus of control, and an aspect of one's relationship with their supervisor, leader-member exchange quality, in the prediction of perceptions of distributive justice, as mediated by POP.
In the following sections, we introduce the theoretical framework associated with our mediated moderation model. First, we introduce our two antecedents, work locus of control and leader-member exchange. Next, we discuss the concept of POP. We then discuss our outcome variable, distributive justice. Lastly, we develop hypotheses in order to test the relationships in our model (see Figure I).
A COGNITIVE SOCIAL LEARNING MODEL OF POLITICAL PERCEPTIONS
According to cognitive social learning (CSL) theory, perception is cognitively constructed and the nature of the relationship between job perceptions and job attitudes is purely one of reciprocity (James and Jones, 1980; James and Tetrick, 1986). An individual makes inferences about events in a social setting based on stimuli that are captured and interpreted individually. Such inferences are then impacted by an individual's unique characteristics (e.g., personality traits), pre-existing expectations and schemata, attributions, and relationships with others, as well as other influences. Thus, employee perceptions about organizational settings are affected by individual interpretations of a situation, rather than being a function of an objective description of the relevant environment (Fiske and Taylor, 1991). The variables of interest in this study interact within individuals' socially constructed realities. Work locus of control is one such characteristic that impacts an individual's interpretation of events. Individuals' perceptions of organizational politics, judgments about the quality of their relationship with their supervisor, and perceptions regarding distributive justice also result directly from social interaction with others in an organizational setting. This study contributes to our understanding of the social construction of reality by examining the interplay among these variables.
Work Locus of Control
Locus of control grew out of social learning theory (Rotter, 1954), which suggests that reinforcement will strengthen the expectancy that a particular behavior will be followed by that reinforcement in the future. Rotter states that "people ... have developed generalized expectancies in learning situations in regard to whether or not reinforcement, reward, or success in these situations is dependent upon their own behavior or is controlled by external forces, particularly luck (or) chance" (1966: 25). Thus, individual differences account for much of how we interpret events and the effect of those events upon ourselves. Spector (1982) suggests that locus of control is related to multiple other individual differences such as motivation, effort, satisfaction, perception of the job, and supervisory style. He states that internals tend to believe that they control the work environment, while externals maintain that the environment controls them. Cognitive social learning theory suggests that it is the social milieu that provides context for the interpretation of events and from those events individuals learn and adjust their behavior. Because individual differences like locus of control play such an important role in the interpretation of organizational events, it is likely that persons with an internal locus of control will be more cognizant of potentially disruptive external issues imbedded in politics and justice.
[FIGURE I OMITTED]
Leader-Member Exchange
Unlike theories of leadership that focus on leader traits and behaviors (Bass, 1990; Mintzberg, 1973), leader-member exchange (LMX) theory suggests that the effectiveness of a supervisor is largely determined by the perception of the quality of the dyadic relationship between leaders/supervisors and members/subordinates (Dansereau et al., 1973; Dansereau et al., 1975; Graen, 1976; Graen and Cashman, 1975). Leader-member exchange suggests that leaders treat members differently and, accordingly, an in-group and an out-group of members are formed. In-group membership is preferred by members, as such affiliation is often associated with preferential treatment and characterized by favorable attitudinal correlates for in-group members. Leader-member exchange is strongly associated with subjective performance ratings from leaders and with member affective states (Gerstner and Day, 1997). Additionally, training interventions where leaders are trained to foster high-quality relationships with members have increased member performance ratings and member satisfaction (Graen et al., 1982).
It is the reciprocal nature of leadership in general, and LMX more specifically because of its dyadic premise, that lends itself well to interpretation in a CSL framework. Cognitive social learning theory suggests that individuals learn from their supervisor as part of the organizational milieu in which they find themselves. The high quality relationship of in-group members with their supervisor reinforces their behavior as the scarce organizational resources which are garnered for these favored subordinates leads to reinterpretation of what it means to be so favored i.e. lower levels of dysfunctional politics and higher levels of perceived justice.
Perceptions of Organizational Politics
Kacmar and Baron (1999) attribute the beginning of empirical research on micro-level organizational politics to Gandz and Murray (1980). For the remainder of that decade, research waned as struggles to define and operationalize organizational politics ensued. Over time, the conceptualization of organizational politics has been refined as researchers consistently identify organizational politics as something that is usually perceived of negatively, even though some have attempted to reconceptualize the construct as something positive (Ferris et al., 1995).
In the conceptualization of perceptions of organizational politics, it is important to distinguish it more specifically from other politics constructs. Political perceptions are different from political tactics (an increasingly common construct of interest to researchers), which refer to specific behaviors by specific individuals (Zanzi and O'Neill, 2001), rather than the perception of political policies, rules, procedures, and outcomes like those conceptualized as POP. Ferris et al. (2002) differentiate among the constructs of organizational politics, political behavior, and politics perceptions. They state that "political behavior deals with influence attempts that occur at the individual and group level, while organizational politics examines the extent to which such behaviors are pervasive in the work, decision-making, and resource allocation processes within the organization" (2002: 183).
Rather than being an objective reality, organizational politics is subjectively perceived by individuals in a workplace (Ferris et al., 1989; Ferris et al., 2002). Much of the research (e.g., Ferris and Kacmar, 1992; Ferris et al., 1996; Kacmar et al., 1999; Valle and Perrewe, 2000) has therefore focused on perceptions of organizational politics, in response to Gandz and Murray (1980) who suggested that the most accurate way to study organizational politics is by measuring individuals' perceptions about it.
Distributive Justice
We utilized distributive justice perceptions as the outcome in our model. Previous research has demonstrated a significant relationship between distributive justice and organizational politics perceptions (Andrews and Kacmar, 2001; Parker et al., 1995). Organizational justice describes the perception...
NOTE: All illustrations and photos
have been removed from this article.
More articles from Journal of Managerial Issues
Gender effects on bias in complex financial decisions., June 22, 2008
Douglas McGregor's Theory X and Y: toward a construct-valid measure *., June 22, 2008
A production self-efficacy scale: an exploratory study., June 22, 2008
Looking for additional articles?
Search our database of over 3 million articles.
Looking for more in-depth information on this industry?
Search our complete database of Industry & Market reports by text, subject, publication
name or publication date.
About Goliath
Whether you're looking for sales prospects, competitive information, company
analysis or best practices in managing your organization,
Goliath can help you meet your business needs.
Our extensive business information databases empower business
professionals with both the breadth and depth of credible,
authoritative information they need to support their business
goals. Whether it be strategic planning, sales prospecting,
company research or defining management best practices -
Goliath is your leading source for accurate information.
|
%20%20&position=1)