Is political behavior a viable coping strategy to perceived organizational politics? Unveiling the underlying resource dynamics.

Abstract

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 102(10) of (see record 2017-34254-001). In the article, Table 1 contained a formatting error. Correlation coefficient values in the last four cells of column 6 were misplaced with correlation coefficient values in the last four cells of column 7. All versions of this article have been corrected.] We conduct a theory-driven empirical investigation on whether political behavior, as a coping strategy to perceived organizational politics, creates resource trade-offs in moderating the relationship between perceived organizational politics and task performance. Drawing on conservation of resources theory, we hypothesize that political behavior mitigates the adverse effect of perceived organizational politics on task performance via psychological empowerment, yet exacerbates its adverse effect on task performance via emotional exhaustion. Three-wave multisource data from a sample of 222 employees and their 75 supervisors were collected for hypothesis testing. Findings supported our hypotheses. Our study enhances understandings of the complex resource dynamics of using political behavior to cope with perceived organizational politics and highlights the need to move stress-coping research from a focus on the stress-buffering effect of coping on outcomes to a focus on the underlying competing resource dynamics. (PsycINFO Database Record

Perceptions of Organizational Politics Research: Past, Present, and Future

“…Accordingly, it makes sense to view POPs and political behavior as distinctive features. Nevertheless, research signaling interactive effects of politicking in high-POPs settings suggest a relationship to some degree (Sun & Chen, 2017). We argue that our current theoretical base has yet to explore the intricacies of this relationship and that the expansion of POPs research in new directions may offer clarity.…”

“…When assessing POPs research since the Ferris et al (2002) review, three related themes emerged. First, although no unifying theory exists, expectancy (Valle, Kacmar, & Zivnuska, 2003), conservation of resources (Sun & Chen, 2017), uncertainty management (Yang, 2017), social learning (Kacmar, Andrews, Harris, & Tepper, 2013), social exchange (Crawford et al, 2019), stress appraisal (Rosen et al, 2014), and affective events (Rosen et al, 2009) conceptualizations surfaced as explanations for how and why POPs relate to employee outcomes. Although these contributions have expanded the existing research base, whether their inclusion has created more of a “weed patch than a well-tended garden” (Pfeffer, 1982: 1) remains an important consideration.…”

Toward a Work Motivation Conceptualization of Grit in Organizations

“…In acknowledging areas of concern and potential remedies, this organizing framework gives rise to directions for future research. Third, we document the importance of adaptation, finding that an absence can result in erroneous conclusions (Sun & Chen, 2017). These inaccuracies arise because resource-protective and consumptive outcomes offset, concealing moderating effects of adaptation.…”

The Buffering Effect of Machiavellianism on the Relationship Between Role Conflict and Counterproductive Work Behavior

“…Consistent with such previous studies, we propose that role conflict has a positive effect on employee CWB, as it may provoke employees’ emotional exhaustion. Emotional exhaustion is “a psychological strain that is a response to chronic work stressors” ( Halbesleben and Buckley, 2004 ; Sun and Chen, 2017 , p. 1474). It describes the “feelings of being emotionally overextended and exhausted by one’s work” ( Maslach and Jackson, 1981 , p. 101).…”

“…The present study was designed to address these gaps based on the theory of conservation of resources (CORs, Hobfoll, 1989 ), which is one of the leading theoretical models of stress domains ( Sun and Chen, 2017 ). We use COR theory to examine how job stressor (i.e., role conflict) predicts employee CWB.…”