When organizational politics matters: The effects of the perceived frequency and distance of experienced politics

Abstract

Drawing from literature linking organizational politics with effects of challenge or hindrance stressors, this study investigated the effects of the frequency and psychological distance of positive and negative conceptualizations of perceived politics on the impact to the individual. It was hypothesized that the frequency of political behavior would exhibit an inverted-U-function relationship with favorable evaluations of political behavior and that this relationship would be moderated by distance. Two independent samples were used to test the hypotheses. Results for negative conceptualizations of perceived politics indicated a curvilinear frequency–evaluation relationship such that moderate levels of negative or dysfunctional politics are evaluated more favorably than either high or low levels. The distance of the political behavior was further found to moderate this relationship, with distant politics having little effect on the frequency–evaluation relationship, but politics with nearby impact yielding more negative evaluations as frequency increased. For positive conceptualizations of perceived politics, results revealed that respondents evaluated this form of politics more favorably the more it occurred. Further, positive political behavior was reported to be less desirable when its impact was believed to be at a distance rather than being felt by respondents personally. Implications are discussed.

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

“…Historically, research has subsumed POPs and political behavior as foundational elements (i.e., POPs reflect a subjective state in which workers view the nonsanctioned actions of others as self-serving; Ferris et al, 2000). Although positive (i.e., “The better my manager is at being a politician, the better it is for my work group”; Maslyn, Farmer, & Bettenhausen, 2017: 1513) and neutral (“On a scale of 0 [none] to 100 [extremely], please indicate the level of politics in your organization”; Hochwarter, Kacmar, Treadway, & Watson, 2003: 2003) approaches exist, the majority of conceptualizations view politics as an observed aversive element of work. Specific behaviors often considered (and measured) as political include striving for in-group status, sucking up to others, backstabbing, and pursuing personal goals instead of those that benefit the group or organization (Hochwarter, Kacmar, Perrewé, & Johnson, 2003).…”

“Who Champions or Mentors Others”? The Role of Personal Resources in the Perceived Organizational Politics and Job Attitudes Relationship

“…First, our results enhance the literature of political perceptions by transfusing the AET through moderating mechanisms in the POP and job attitudes. The association between POP and job attitudes, as represented in this study, has essential implications for scholars' effort to comprehend the effects of POP on organizational outcomes (Maslyn et al, 2017;Landells and Albrecht, 2019). Some stream of scholars identified a negative relationship between POP and job attitudes by different theories (Atta and Khan, 2016;Cho and Yang, 2017;Khan N. A. et al, 2019).…”

“…Given this, politics are considered to be a detrimental use of personal power to fulfill self-interests rather than organizational goals (Aggarwal et al, 2018 ). Subsequently, the workforce uses harmful power to gain personal benefits (Maslyn et al, 2017 ) which eventually leads to adverse outcomes (Franke and Foerstl, 2018 ). A growing body of literature has revealed that politics have a negative impact on individual and organizational performance (Landells and Albrecht, 2015 ; Malik et al, 2018 ; Rawwas et al, 2018 ).…”

“…According to scholars, POP play a pivotal role in organizations, culminating in undesirable phenomena that hinder employee productivity (Franke and Foerstl, 2018 ; Lin and Sun, 2018 ; Crawford et al, 2019 ). Given this consideration, the growing body of literature appears to focus on perceived POP as a major job stressor that can potentially result in negative outcomes, not just for individuals but also for the organization itself (Maslyn et al, 2017 ; Webster et al, 2018 ; Guo et al, 2019 ; Landells and Albrecht, 2019 ). This particular aspect has threatened the effectiveness of the education sector by creating an unhealthy environment that affects the mental well-being of academic staff (Landells and Albrecht, 2015 ).…”

“…Similarly, personal resources have been found to moderate the detrimental effect of job stressors that enhance employees' motivation (Peng et al, 2010 ). Although the literature has paid considerable attention to job stressors (Landells and Albrecht, 2013 ; Jam et al, 2016 ; Maslyn et al, 2017 ), to the best of our knowledge, limited empirical studies have investigated the interaction effects of POP and personal resources (PS and WE) in the higher-education sector of Pakistan. Furthermore, the extant literature highlights the important linkage between emotions and how workforce assesses and reacts to their work atmosphere (Reina et al, 2018 ; Sewell, 2020 ).…”