P. 1


|Views: 5|Likes:
Published by Aniqa Ahmad

More info:

Published by: Aniqa Ahmad on Jan 10, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Ferris (1989) defined organizational politics as µµBehavior strategically designed to maximize self interests and therefore in conflicts with

the collective organizational goals or the interests of other individuals¶¶. This definition reflects generally a negative image of the workplace politics in the eyes of most of the members of organization. Ferris also suggested organizational politics as µµthe concept of the perception of organizational politics (Perception of Organizational Politics Scale- POPS) as a good measure of organizational politics¶¶. Although some studies relate organizational politics to the theory of equity, justice as well as fairness in the workplace. (Ferris and Kacmar, 1992, Vigda-Gadot, 2003). (Kipnis et al, 1980; Pfeffer, 1992) describes organizational politics as µµA power game and influence tactics designed to achieve the best outcomes for the user¶¶. From various approaches, a variety of studies which pointed to organizational politics considered as an important antecedent of the employee performance, both formal as well informal. (E.g. Adams et al, 2002; Allen et al, 1979; Ferris and Kacmar, 1992; Gandz and Murray, 1980; Kacmr and Baron, 1999; O¶Cnnor and Morrison, 2001; Valle and Perrewe, 2000). Dory (1993) and Cropanzano et al (1997) proposed organizational politics as in most of the cases perceptions of fairness and justice symbolize a political climate at the workplace and may relate to informal as well formal work performance. As studies developed the concept of organizational politics found that µµThe workplace politics was perceived as a self serving behavior by employees to achieve self-interests, advantages as well as benefits at the expense of others and sometimes contrary to the interest of the entire organization or the work unit¶¶. Such behavior was frequently attached or associated with the manipulation and illegitimate ways of over using such powers for obtaining once objectives (Kipnis et al., 1980). Kurt Lewin¶s (1936) augmented that usually people respond to their thinking and perceptions of reality, but not on reality itself. Likewise as in organizational politics it should be known that what people think of it actually rather what it represents. Organizational politics is stated as µµOrganizational politics is associated with organizational behavior which deviates from the formal, techno- economic goal-oriented approach assumed by the rational models of organizations¶¶ (Dory and Romm 1990).

Lack of minimal fairness and justice in such systems was considered and found to be the major cause of higher perception of the organizational politics and it leads to hampered organizational performance. Hom et al (1992) said that according to the empirical findings organizational politics perceptions are significantly related with turnover intentions. 1996a.. 2000 002). Folger et al. Effects:Organizational politics is firstly related with the negative attitude towards the particular organization such as lower levels of satisfaction. commitment and trust etc. then lower is the level of equity. 1992. Ferris et al. Ferris (1989) said that generally organizational politics develop negative image about the organization in the eyes of most of the members of the organization. Organizational politics leads to self interest and decrease the level of loyalty. justice and fairness in the person¶s eye. Vigda. (Ferris and Kacmar. Here negative image about the particular organization causes low satisfaction and justice among organizational members. 1996b. 1999.Causes:Kacmar and Ferris (1991) moreover supposed that higher the perception of the politics are in the members of the organization. . 1992) they used theory of procedural justice in order to argue that the organizational politics is related with leader member exchange relationship and with the efficiency of the human resource system and with the decision making process as well. b. Though even quitting yet not proved feasible due to lack of external suitable opportunities or some other restrictions. but psychologically that person intend to leave the particular organization.

against the organization. The last sub category is concealing motives that clearly not associated with formal organizational model. . 1975). y y y Goals and outcome Means Situational characteristics/ Context Goals and outcomes: . µµThe typical uncertainty is associated with the outcomes of information technology projects and one would expect more intense organizational politics in these situations¶¶ (Mumford and Pettigrew 1975. resources distribution/ redistribution and power attainment. These categories indicate that they all deviate from the formal organizational goals. Whereas second category encompasses such actions which are against the organization and implying a direct opposition of organizational political behavior to the organizational goals and remaining two categories resources distribution and power attainment are placed generally outside the organizational goals. power tactics. Pettigrew1973. While in case of power tactics that is usually employed when there is no sufficient formal rule. Here influence and informal behavior are applied in the absence of formal authority. Means: .Dory and Romm describes the mean category of organizational politics as certain actions which are almost in all cases and not endorsed by formal organization.Goals and outcomes are further classified by Dory and Romm (1990) provide the synthesis of organizational politics behavior and in this regard they categorize the typical goals into four sub types which are self serving. Some sub categories of means are influence.Components of organizational politics:There is scheme through which we classify organizational politics into three categories which are as follows.Uncertainty is another situational characteristic that is derived logically and is structurally associated with the whole construct of organizational politics. The first category of goals describes that such individual who is engage in organizational politics are generally intent only on self-serving action rather than that of organizational serving actions. informal behavior and concealing motives. Situational characteristics/ Context: .

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->