BAHIR DAR UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGMENT

THE EFFECT OF ORGANIZATIONAL POLITICS ON EMPLOYEE JOB

PERFORMANCE: A CASE OF BAHIR DAR TEXTILE SHARE COMPANY

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO:

THE SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES OF BAHIRDAR UNIVERSITY IN
THE PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE
OF MASTERS OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (MBA)

BY: YIFREDEW GESSESSE

ADVISOR: - DEMEKE GADISSA (PHD FELLOW)

MAY 2017
BAHIR DAR, ETHIOPIA
 BAHIR DAR UNVERSITY

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

[MBA Program]

The effect of organizational politics on employee job performance:-in

the case of Bahir Dar textile share company .

“A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Masters of

Business Administration (MBA)”

By

Yifredew Gessesse

Approved by Board of Examiners

_________ ___________ __________

Advisor Signature Date

______________ ___________ __________

Internal Examiner

______________ ______________ __________

External Examiner

______________ ________________ _________

 Declaration

I, the undersigned hereby declare that this study entitled “the effect of organizational politics on

employee job performance( A case of Bahir Dar textile share company)” is an original one

carried out by myself and no part of this work has ever been submitted in part or in whole for any

academic qualification purpose . All supporting and related studies or researches by different

authors have been dully acknowledged in the reference.

Declared by:
Yifredew Gessesse ……………………… .. ……………….
Student Signature Date

Confirmed by
Demeke Gadissa (PHD Fellow) ……………………….. … ………………..
Advisor Signature Date
 Acknowledgement

Above all, I would like to extend my heartfelt thank to the almighty God, without him it would
have been impossible for me to reach to this point of my life.
I would like to fully express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to all my instructors of
Management. Especially, I would like to sincerely appreciate and thank my thesis advisor Demeke
Gadissa (Fellow Ph.D) for his continuous advice and support he provided to me in order to
produce this research project successful starting from title selection to completion of the paper.
I would like to thank all my friends, classmates, and staff members of ANRS bureau of trade
industry and market development for their continuous support on my journey of the study. My
special thank is to my friend Getnet Kebede for his unlimited help and support during my study.
I would like to thank also Bahir Dar textile share company managers and employees who
participate on this study.
Finally, my deepest and sincere thank goes to my family. Their patience & support has given me
extra strength and desire to succeed.

Yifredew Gessesse

May, 2017

iv
 Table of contents

Declaration .......................................................................................................................................................iii
Acknowledgement ...........................................................................................................................................iv
List of tables ................................................................................................................................................... viii
List of Figures ...................................................................................................................................................ix
List of Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................x
Abstract ............................................................................................................................................................xi
CHAPTER ONE .................................................................................................................................................. 1
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background of the study ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Statement of the problem ........................................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Objectives of the study............................................................................................................................... 5
1.3.1 General Objective ............................................................................................................................... 5
1.3.2 Specific Objectives ............................................................................................................................. 5
1.5 Significance of the Study ........................................................................................................................... 6
1.6 Limitations of the Study............................................................................................................................. 6
1.7 Scope of the study ...................................................................................................................................... 6
1.8 Organization of the paper........................................................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER TWO ............................................................................................................................................. 8
LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................................................ 8
2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 8
2.2 Theoretical Framework. ............................................................................................................................. 8
2.2.1 Perception Theory (Lewin, 1936) ....................................................................................................... 9
2.2.2 Norm of Reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960)............................................................................................... 9
2.3 Organizational politics and its Dimensions ........................................................................................... 10
2.3.1 General political behavior(GPB) ...................................................................................................... 11
2.3.2 Going along to get ahead(GAGA) ................................................................................................... 12
2.3.3 Pay and promotion policies (PPP) .................................................................................................... 13
2.4 Job performance ...................................................................................................................................... 13
2.4.1 Task performance (TP) ..................................................................................................................... 14
v
 2.4.2 Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) ........................................................................................ 14
2.5 Relationship between organizational politics and job performance......................................................... 14
2.6 Conceptual frame work of the study ........................................................................................................ 16
2. 7 Research hypothesis ............................................................................................................................... 17
2.8 Operational Definition of Concepts ......................................................................................................... 17
CHAPTER THREE ....................................................................................................................................... 19
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................... 19
3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 19
3.2 The Research Design ............................................................................................................................... 19
3.3 Target population ..................................................................................................................................... 20
3.4 Sample size .............................................................................................................................................. 20
3.5 Type of data, data sources, data collection instrument ............................................................................ 22
3.5.1 Types and source of data................................................................................................................... 22
3.5.2 Data collection instruments ............................................................................................................... 22
3.6 Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 23
3.7 Reliability and validity of instruments ..................................................................................................... 24
3.7.1. Reliability of the Instruments ........................................................................................................... 24
3.7.2. Validity of the instrument ................................................................................................................ 25
3.8. Ethical Consideration .............................................................................................................................. 25
CHAPTER FOUR.......................................................................................................................................... 26
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ...................................................................... 26
4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 26
4.3 Demographic Background of the respondents ......................................................................................... 27
4.3.1 Gender of Respondents ..................................................................................................................... 27
4.3.2 Age of respondents ........................................................................................................................... 27
4.3.3 Educational background of Respondents ......................................................................................... 28
4.3.4 Marital status of respondents........................................................................................................... 28
4.3.5 Experience of employees in the company ........................................................................................ 29
4.4 Reliability and Validity of measuring instruments .................................................................................. 29
4.5 Descriptive analysis of variables (OP components ,Overall OP and Job performance) ........................ 31
4.5.1 Descriptive statistics of General Political Behavior (GPB) ................................................................ 32
vi
 4.5.2 Descriptive statistics of Go along to get ahead( GAGA)............................................................. 33
4.5.3 Descriptive statistics of Pay and Promotion Policies (PPP) ........................................................ 34
4.5.4 Descriptive statistics of Employee Job performance ................................................................. 35
4.6 Hypothesis testing.................................................................................................................................... 36
4.6.1 Correlation Analysis for testing relationship between variables .......................................................... 36
4.6.2 Regression Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 40
A) Test of Normality ................................................................................................................................... 40
B) Test of Multi-collinearity ........................................................................................................................... 41
C) Test of linearity .......................................................................................................................................... 42
4.7 Discussion of main findings ...................................................................................................................... 44
4.7.1 Relationship between Overall organizational politics and its components with employee job
performance .................................................................................................................................................. 44
4.7.1.1 Relationship between general political behavior and employee job performance ...................... 45
4.7.1.2 The relationship between go along to get ahead(GAGA) and employee job performance .......... 45
4.7.1.3 The relationship between pay and promotion policies (PPP) and employee job performance.... 45
4.7.1.4 The relationship between overall organizational politics on employee job performance ............ 46
4.7.1.5 The influence of overall organizational politics on employee job performance .......................... 47
CHAPTER FIVE ................................................................................................................................................ 49
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION .................................................................................... 49
5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 49
5.2 Summary of findings ................................................................................................................................ 49
5.3 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 50
5.4 Limitation of the study ............................................................................................................................ 52
5.5 Recommendations .................................................................................................................................. 52
5.6 Suggestion for future research ............................................................................................................... 53
Appendeces.................................................................................................................................................... 54
References .........................................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendex A-English version questionnaire ............................................................................................... 61

vii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: sample selection summary ..................................................................................21

Table 4.2: Gender of respondents …………………................................................................... 27
Table 4.3: Age of respondents ......................................................................................................... 28
Table 4.4: Educational background of respondents ................................................................... 28
Table 4.5 Marital status of respondents ……………................................................................. ..29
Table 4.6 work Experience in the company ............................................................................... 29
Table 4.7 Reliability test of items …………………………………........................................... 31
Table 4.8 one sample T-test …………………………………………………………..………….32
Table 4.9 Frequency, mean and standard deviation of GPB............................................................ 32
Table 4.10 Frequency, mean and standard deviation of GAGA................................................. ….33
Table 4.11 Frequency, mean and standard deviation of PPP........................................................... 34
Table 4.12 Frequency, mean and standard deviation of job performance...................................... 35
Table 4.13 Guidelines for interpreting correlation ………………………..................................... 37
Table 4.14 correlation between variables........................................................................................... 38
Table 4.15 skewness and kurtosis‟ ………………………………………………………………..41
Table 4.16 Test of multicollinearity .................................................................................................... 41
Table 4.17 Model summary of multiple regression .......................................................................... 43
Table 4.18 Analysis of variance of variables…………………………….………………………..43
Table 4.19 Regression coefficient……………………………………………………….……….. 44
Table 4.20 Summary of hypothesis tests …………………………..……………………………. 48

viii
 List of Figures

Figure 1- the conceptual framework of the research…………………..…………………..17

Figure 2- test of normality through Histogram……………………………….……….…. 40
Figure 3- Test of linearity through P-P plot ………………………………..………..…… 42

ix
 List of Acronyms

ANRS_ Amhara national regional state

CP- conceptual performance
CWB- counterproductive work behavior
CWB1-9 –items used for measuring counterproductive work behavior starting from 1 to 9
GAGA- going along to get ahead
GAGA1-7 –items used for measuring going along to get ahead starting from 1 to 7
GPB- general political behavior
GPB1-2 –items used for measuring general political behavior starting from 1 to 2
HR- human resource department of the company
JP- Job Performance
OP- organizational politics
POPS- perception of organizational politics scale
PPP- pay and promotion policies
PPP1-7 –items used for measuring pay and promotion policies starting from 1 to 7
SPSS- statistical package for social science software
TP-task performance
TP1-7 – are items used for measuring task performance starting from 1 to 7

x
 Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of Perceived Organizational Politics on

employee job performance in Bahir Dar textile share company. Perceived organizational politics is

described through three dimensions ( GPB,GAGA and PPP) and also employee job performance is

measured through two dimensions(TP and CWB). A survey cross sectional research design was

used in the collection of data from 304 participants from each departments of the company through

proportional stratified sampling technique. Questionnaires of 5-point Likert scale, 15 items of

Perceived organizational Politics developed by Kacmar and Carlson (1997) for measuring the

perception of organizational politics, 9 items of CWB adopted from Bennett and Anderson (2002)

and 7 items of TP adopted from Williams and Robinson (1991) ,and interview were used for data

collection in the study. Both descriptive (mean, frequency, percentage) and inferential (one

sample t-test, Pearson correlation, multiple linear regression) statistics were used for analysis

purpose. Findings from the study revealed that employees of the case organization manifest

perception of organizational politics in their work environment and also there is a significant

relation between each organizational politics dimensions as well as overall organizational politics

with employee job performance. Overall organizational politics has negative significant influence

over employee job performance. Among the dimensions of organizational politics GAGA has

highest effect on employee job performance. Like other studies this study had limitations like

generalizability problem since it was done on one organization, luck of national literature. In spite

of its limitation the study help to managers to understand about the effect of OP on job

performance and also help for future researchers as a spring board by considering its limitations.

Key Words:- perceived organizational politics, employee job performance.

xi
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study

Today, organization operates through a highly competitive and global environment and also
organizations have realized that organizational politics is an important factor both for
organizations and individuals working under organization‟s umbrella (Ahmad, Hashmi and Akhtar
,2016). These external factors make the organizations to scan themselves and use their recourses
effectively and efficiently. Thus to use their resources and to increase productivity and to cope up
with the changing environment organizations should have strategies that can enhance the
performance of existing employees. Organizations should give greater emphasis in developing
employees to become loyal and willing to accept the goals and values of organization. In
organizations which have ambiguous goals, scarce resources, frequent use of new technology and
environment, non programmed decisions, and continuous organizational change will cause
political behavior through the existing employees. According to Griffin and Mohammed (2013,
p.388) organizational politics are activities people perform to acquire, enhance, and use power and
other resources to obtain their preferred outcomes in a situation where there is uncertainty or
disagreement. Thus, political behavior is the general means by which people attempt to obtain and
use power. Put simply, the goal of such behavior is to get one‟s own way about things.
Organizational politics described as an activity that permits people in organization to accomplish
goals without going through proper channels. Depending on the consistency of individual goals
with the goals of an organization political activities may assist or harm the organization. There has
no doubt that political beliefs are an ordinary observable fact in every organization. Organizational
politics represented devious behavior of employees towards their work environment only for their
self-interests. These self-interests may be at the cost of other employees or may be organizational
goals as well the observed behavior developed in this case may affect employee performance
(Shamaila, 2012). Employee job performance indicates the job role and job related activities
1
expected from the employee and how well those activities were executed, assessed on annual or
quarterly basis in order to help identify areas for improvement.
Organizational politics and employee job performance
According to Gotsis and Kortezi(2011) organizational politics is a search of self-interest of
individuals in the organization without considering their effect on the efforts of the organization to
achieve its objectives. The study of Kacmar and Ferris (1991) and Kacmar and Carlson (1994), on
perceptions of Organizational politics explains the degree to which employees view their work
environment as political in nature promoting the self-interests of others and thereby unjust and
unfair from the individual‟s point of view. Developing self-interest assumption is more
representative of actual human behavior. Some of the selfish organizational members primarily
promote self-interest even it affects organizational objectives and revealed their activities in the
direction of greater organizational goal.
Thus this research aimed to examine the effect of organizational politics on employees‟ job
performance by considering a scenario in Bahir Dar Textile Share company. Bahir Dar textile
Share Company founded in 1961 G.C by the Italian government grant to Ethiopians as war
compensation. In its history the ownership of the company was to the public i.e. 99% is held by
federal ministry of Finance and economic cooperation and the rest 1% held by other governmental
organization but currently the company is owned by Tiret Corporate completely. The company
crossed many milestones in textile sector which utilized organic cotton a lonely raw material.
Currently the company expanded its projects with more than 600 million birr which has most
technologically advanced machines and integrated cotton mill consisting of spinning, weaving,
dyeing and garment sections. After project expansion the company gives priority for international
market and exports its products for western countries. Parallel to this technological advancement to
fully functionalize the machineries revising and designing organizational structure has also made.
The company currently has more than 1461 staffs of which 822 are males and the rest 639 are
females working with 7 departments. Regardless of its new technology, low competition among
rivalry firms, high number of employees and huge capital the company goes with ups and downs
or net loss or low profit.
According to Griffin and Mohhamed (2013, p-388) organizations which make continuous
organizational structure change, adopting advanced technology, giving un programmed decision,

2
having scarce resources and ambiguous goals are possible causes for developing political behavior
in organizations. Thus from the history of the company employees are always uncertain about what
will happen next, this uncertainty will initiate employees to acquire, enhance and use power and
other resources to obtain their preferred outcome through their way. Developing such self serving
behavior may lead to decrease the performance of employees as a whole. The presence of reasons
for developing perception of organizational politics and ups and down history of the company
with net loss or low profit might be the decrease in employee job performance related to the
developed perception of politics which this research is going to address.

1.2 Statement of the problem

Organizational Politics is more often linked to individuals or groups competing for limited
resources in the organization. According to Vigoda (2011) the state of politics is more often linked
with the manipulative or controlling power–grubbing behavior of individuals and the same is
thought of when organizational politics is mentioned. Since organizations are complex social
entities they are exposed to conflicts and competition between the desires and interests of different
divisions, department, teams and individuals and these desires and self interests happened in
organizations is an inescapable reality which is intertwined within management systems that
relationships, norms, processes, performance and outcomes are highly influenced and affected by it
(Newstrom, 2007).
Many researches in the field of organizational theory were conducted from a search to know the
background of organizational politics and effects of it on individual productivity and job
performance in workplace. Among these studies done in the domain of perceived organizational
politics, few researchers (Aryee et al., 2004; Zivnuska et al., 2004 Byrne, 2005; Salmad and Amri,
2011; Kahn and hussien, 2013; Ahmad et.al, 2016) focus on the linkage of organizational politics
with work outcomes such as job performance. However, despite the presence of organizational
politics related research in the literature, the findings are still difficult to generalize due to the
research setting. Researchers like Parker (2007) and Salmad and Amri (2011) found that
organizational politics has relationship with employee job performance while few others did not
find any relationship (Zivnuska et al., 2004, Bodla,Afza and Danish, 2014). researchers like Poon

3
(2003) ,recommends that since organizational politics is a very common in current organizations
its effect on the workplace should get further study and investigation and also researches
conducted on the determinants of employee job performance by Rosen et al., (2006) further
suggested that there must be investigation on organizational behavioral aspects such as
organizational politics.
Employees in the study organization notice the presence of self serving behaviors on individuals
and/or groups and these self serving political behaviors manifested in different groups and
individuals as there are unfair treatment, unfair distribution of resources among individuals and
departments and also there are individuals and groups who are always considered correct by their
bosses and have powerful voice over others. Due to unfair treatment or presence of bias among
employees even during performance appraisal rewards like trainings, educational sponsorship,
financial rewards, promotions e.tc related to it distribute unfairly especially to the interest of the
boss. According to employees of the organization, there are individuals who are always seeking
only tasks which are related with field works having per diem and related payments even the task
is not under their job description. There are also communication problems among employees and
subordinates and within departments. The promotional policies are not implemented correctly.
There is high employee turnover in the company. These and related political behaviors of self
served individuals and groups will have effect on the perception of other employees to develop
counter productive work behavior like absenteeism and reporting with false sick lives, wasting
time through joking, doesn‟t have care about working equipments, intentionally delay tasks and the
overall performance of employees is affected by the perceived behavior. This decrease in
employee performance might decrease both the quality of products that the company produced and
the productivity of the company which in turn lead the company to be ineffective and
uncompetitive in local and global market.
Due to the above scenarios and suggestions and the fact that organizational politics is as an
unavoidable construct in organizations therefore organizational politics need more attention and
further investigation here also in our country, Ethiopia. Furthermore, as far as the researcher‟s
knowledge even if managing organizational politics is becoming important, researchers in our
country didn‟t give attention to it and there are no published articles or even unpublished studies
related to organizational politics and employee job performance here in Ethiopia.

4
Therefore, to minimize the research gap on organizational politics and its effect on employee job
outcomes especially on job performance the researcher has made an attempt in this study to
provide information about relationship between organizational politics and employee job
performance, the effect of organizational politics on employee job performance which is currently
silent problem in many companies like Bahir dar textile share company.

1.3 Objectives of the study

1.3.1 General Objective
The general objective of the study is to empirically examine the effect of organizational politics on
employee job performance in the case of Bahir Dar Textile Share Company.

1.3.2 Specific Objectives

This study is expected to address the following specific objectives:
1. To examine the current status of employee perception of organizational politics on the case
organization.
2. To examine the relationship between the dimensions of organizational politics and
employee job performance in the case organization.
3. To determine the effect of perceived organizational politics on employee job performance
4. To identify which perception of organizational politics dimension has the greatest impact
on employee job performance.
1.4 Research Questions
The research is intended to seek answers for the following questions:
1. Do employees of the case organization are involved in politics in the study organization?
2. Is there a relationship between organizational politics dimensions and employee job
performance in the case organization?
3. Does organizational politics has effect on the employee job performance in Bahir Dar textile
Share company?
4. Which organizational politics dimensions has the greatest impact on the employee job
Performance in Bahir Dar Textile Share Company?

5
1.5 Significance of the Study
As the researcher mentioned earlier there was no such related published or unpublished research
papers performed on this topic here in our country Ethiopia, thus this study provide information
to managers of the company about the effect and relationship between organizational politics and
employee job performance and would help to design policies to manage organizational politics. It
may help to policy makers of by giving general clue about the effect of organizational politics on
employee job performance for enhancing employee performance in turn to increase the
performance of the organization. It may also help to future researchers as a spring board to
undergo further researches.

1.6 Limitations of the Study

Due to limitation of time and financial constraints the study focuses on one outcome of
organizational politics which is employee job performance in one organizational setting. Thus it is
difficult to generalize its findings to other organizations. As a result it has low external validity.
The study was conducted on respondents‟ perception which may not be free from bias even was
difficult to understand the questionnaires in spite of the researcher‟s effort to get them as
objectively as possible. The other limitation was luck of national related literature conducted in
Ethiopia.

1.7 Scope of the study

Even though issue of the effect organizational politics was not tested in other both private and
public Sectors in Ethiopia, the scope of this research was only delimited to the Bahir Dar Textile
Share Company Employees due to time and financial constraint. Therefore geographically the
study was limited to only employees of Bahir Dar Textile Share company located in Bahir Dar
city. Conceptually, the study was limited to concepts of employee‟s perception of organizational
politics and employee job performance.

6
1.8 Organization of the paper
The organization of the study follows the same format with most thesis papers. The first chapter
consist of background of the study and organization, statement of the problem, research question,
objective (both the general and specific), significance of the study, limitations and scope of the
study. The second chapter consists of review related literatures, theoretical framework, conceptual
framework, the research hypothesis and operational definitions to this particular research. The
third chapter concentrates on the research design and the research methodology. The fourth chapter
presents data and data analysis and the discussions based on the collected data. The last chapter or
chapter five composed of the summary of findings, conclusion and recommendation parts of the
research.

7
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This study was intended to find out the effect of perceived organizational politics on employee job
performance and to examine the relationship between the components of organizational politics
and overall politics with that of employee job performance thus the main objective of this chapter
is to provide a review of the theories that may explain why the relationship between the main
variables (perceived organizational politics and employee job performance) may exist and review
related studies in each context. The chapter also includes the conceptual framework showing the
hypothesized relationship between the variables under the study and the operational definitions of
the terms used in the study.
The first part of this chapter provides an overview of the various theories to explain the
organizational politics-employee job performance relationships. These theories include the
perception- attitude theory of Lewin (1936) and the theory of Norm of Reciprocity by Gouldner
(1960). Additionally, the next section of the chapter deals with review of related literature to draw
attention to the main findings in previous studies related to the research variables.

2.2 Theoretical Framework.

For many years, organizational researchers have tried to understand organizational behavior of
employees in order to be able to make predictions and develop upon other aspects of
organizational behavior which have direct and indirect effect on organizational performance.
Different theories have been used to explain why individuals in organizations behave differently
and these theories have helped to provide deep understanding into organizational behavior and its
dynamics in contemporary organizations.

8
2.2.1 Perception Theory (Lewin, 1936)
According to Lewin‟s (1936) theory of perception individuals may respond to what they receive
to exist rather than reality itself and react accordingly. Thus they may behave in accordance with to
conform to what they perceive to be there. Lewin (1936) explained that organizational politics
should be studied in relations to how people think rather than what is actually happening there.
This means that when employees perceive there is unfairness in processes and procedures as well
as with the distribution processes within their organizations; they are more prone to respond with
certain behaviors. Employees of the same organization and within the same environment may
however respond differently to what they perceive as reality in that organization. That is to one
person the organizational situation may be good, fair and just to another person in the same
organization, the organizational situation may be unfair. It may be different for different gender,
age group etc. These different perceptions of individuals may inform their attitude towards their
co-workers, their supervisors and their organization as a whole.

2.2.2 Norm of Reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960)

Norm of Reciprocity theory developed by Gouldner (1960) is one main theory that may be used to
explain individual‟s work related behavior. According to Gouldner (1960) human beings attitude
have an a inherited tendency to reciprocate. Accordingly, they tend to reward those who have done
well and punish those who behaved badly towards them. These rewards or punishments may be in
a form of money, service, information, approval, respect or liking. This seems to be the basic
principle in every human society and turns to be prominent in various religions as well. The norms
of reciprocity indicate that one should help those that have helped them in the past and react those
that have been detrimental to their interest. Norm of reciprocity theory has been used in several
psycho-social as well as behavioral researches to explain range of happenings such as attitude
change, interpersonal perception ( Kenny, Bond Mohr & Horn, 1996). Since this norm as
mentioned earlier is a basic principle in humans, it can apply to the exchange relationship between
employers and their employees where employees are indebted to their employers by recompensing
the positive treatment they receive from them. Thus it can be assumed that in organizations where
individuals or employees perceive the organization to be a highly political environment and thus
unfair or unjust, they are likely to behave in ways that could be damaging or costly to the

9
organization. They may thus exhibit attitudes like absenteeism or lack of commitment to the
organization (Vigoga, 2000). Based on the theory of reciprocity of Norms, it is assumed that when
employees perceive politics and unfairness within the organization they may respond by
committing less to the organization or refraining from engaging in some organizational citizenship
behavior which have been shown to increase organizational success and effectiveness(Ladebo,
2006).

2.3 Organizational politics and its Dimensions

According to Molm, (1997) organizations are social entities that involve a struggle for resources,
personal conflicts, and a variety of influence tactics executed by individuals and groups to obtain
benefits and goals in different ways. Thus estimating the political climate of a work unit is a
difficult task but it is essential for a better understanding of organizations. Organizational politics
is an intangible type of power relations in the workplace. It represents a unique domain of
interpersonal relations, characterized by the direct or indirect (active or passive) engagement of
people in influence tactics and power struggles. These activities are commonly aimed at securing
or maximizing personal interests or, alternatively, avoiding negative outcomes within the
organization regardless of the goals of the organization or interest of others (Kacmar & Ferris,
1991).
Organizational politics is also defined as behavior strategically designed to maximize self interests
(Ferris, Russ, &Fandt, 1989) and therefore contradicts the collective organizational goals or the
interests of other individuals. This perspective reflects a generally negative image of organizational
politics in the eyes of most organization members. Gandz and Murray (1980) and Medison et al.
(1980) observed that when individuals were asked to describe workplace politics they typically
listed self-serving and controlling activities that are not perceived positively. Studies conducted by
Drory (1993), Ferris &Kacmar ( 1992) explained that organizational politics was perceived as
self-serving behavior by employees to achieve self-interests, advantages, and benefits at the
expense of others and sometimes contrary to the interests of the entire organization or work unit.
This behavior was frequently associated with manipulation, defamation, subversive-ness, and
illegitimate ways of overusing power to attain one's objectives. All the above mentioned studies

10
relied on perception theory of Kurt Lewin's (1936) argument that people respond to their
perceptions of reality, not to reality itself. Likewise, politics in organizations should be understood
in terms of what people think of it rather than what it actually represents.
According to Kacmar and Ferris (1992) a perceived politics measurement have greater important
in scientific value than another measurement in actual politics for three main reasons;
1. "Perceptions of politics are more easily measured than actual political behavior''.
2. "They represent the reality as it is in the eyes of the beholder and thus are more expressive of
player's views and behavioral intentions".
3. "They are assumed to have a greater impact on the attitudes and behaviors of employees than
actual politics" (Vigoda, Vinarski, & Ben, 2003).
Large number of empirical studies focused on what People think about political maneuvers in
modern worksites, assuming that the reality of Politics is better understood via the perceptions of
individuals instead of actual influence Tactics. According to Kacmar and Ferris (1991) and
Kacmar and Carlson (1994), perceptions of organizational politics represent the degree to which
respondents View their work environment as political in nature, promoting the self-interests of
others, and thereby unjust and unfair from the individual‟s point of view. Hence it is difficult to
have a commonly acceptable definition for the term politics but rather perceived organizational
politics can be explained with three dimensions. These are: general political behavior, which
means a person who behaves in a self-serving manner in order to achieve his/her desired goal; go
along to get ahead, which means that a person remains silent in order to achieve hi/her desired
goal; and finally, pay and promotion policies through which the organization plays its political role
(Kacmar and Carlson 1997).

2.3.1 General political behavior(GPB)

It has been observed that where there are no rule and regulations for guidance or poor
implementation of these rules and regulations activities and decisions based on opinion would
increase in organizations ( Drory & Romm, 1990; Fandt& Ferris, 1990; Ferris & King, 1991;
Ferris, Russ &Fandt, 1989; Kacmar& Ferris, 1993; Madison, 1980). It is quite common that when
there are no specific rules and regulation in an organization, the employees have no idea about the
kind of behavior that is expected of them and hence they develop their own. When employees or
individuals are left free to have their own rules, they end up making rules that are self serving and

11
strengthen the position of the one who makes those rules. The other issue that has been affected by
this vagueness, regarding rules and regulation, is the decision making. Research conducted by
Drory and Romm (1990) concluded that decision making under doubt has been found to be
susceptible to political pressure. It is quite obvious that if there is luck of information needed for
making a decision, the decision makers tend to relay on their own interpretation of the given
situation. Research studies have stated that strong competition for a position in any organization,
because sitting on that seat will allow one to get his/her hands on a treasured resource, is for sure
to be considered a political behavior (Farrell & Peterson, 1982; Kumar & Ghadially, 1989). This
clearly indicates that in organizations having limited resources must be having a political
atmosphere. Resource scarcity can strike any organization; no organization can argue being
perfect. There might be deficient in at least one part if not all; thus political activities may take
place in almost any organization. Investigating the reasons for the shortage of resources can assist
in forecasting not only the possible target of political actions but also how strong that competition
may turn out to be. According to Frost (1987) any personality who has command over important
resources that cannot be available somewhere else will be a likely target of political actions

2.3.2 Going along to get ahead(GAGA)

In organizations conflict between individuals and or groups is always linked to organizational

politics in the literature (Mintzberg, 1985; Frost, 1987). The major reason for this link between
conflict and organizational politics is that political behavior is self-serving, promoting him/herself
over the benefit of others and hence it has the potential to threaten the self-interests of others.
Conflict occurs when someone responds to a threat (Porter,Allen, & Angle, 1981). Drory and
Romm (1990) stated that the presence of conflict is an important suggestion of organizational
politics. In order to avoid conflict some individuals would end up not resisting those who desire to
influence others. It may sound a neutral act; however this act could go down as a form of political
behavior. It has been stated that it is the intent that forms the basis for a political or non-political
behavior in organizations. It means that if a person is acting in a particular behavior in order to
further his own cause, then that person is acting politically (Frost, 1987). A person who is not
rocking the boat is not viewed as a possible threat by those who are acting politically. Such a
person viewed as a possible threat is welcomed by the political group and is rewarded for not

12
interfering in the affairs of the politically motivated group. Hence, by not taking any action or by
going along to get ahead can be a wise approach to take to further one‟s own goal and desires
while working in a political atmosphere. A study conducted by Bodla, Danish and Nawaz (2012)
examine the arbitrating function of organizational politics between the employees‟ moral and their
job characteristics and concluded in their study that in order to enable employees to perform their
on the job role, the management should brief them regarding its expectations of them in terms of
their rights, duties, and tasks.

2.3.3 Pay and promotion policies (PPP)

The third dimension of perception of organizational politics is the way organizations reward and
hence, are responsible for the political behavior of its employees through policy implementation
(Ferris, Fedor, Chachere&Pondy, 1989; Kacmar& Ferris, 1993). Although the decision makers
might not be doing it consciously, it‟s the way the human resource policies and systems that are
developed and practiced that reward the individual having political behavior and punish those who
do not get involved in influence tactics (Kacmar and Carlson, 1997). Such an attitude of the
management will definitely result in a tradition where political activities will be considered as a
common practice in almost all the human resource aspects of the organizations. In comparisons
individually oriented activities are more self- centered and have high political nature. When such
an feeling or thought is reinforced either in the form of a reward or a promotion, this form of
attitude will most likely be repeated. Therefore, in different organization atmospheres promote
and reward political behavior are developed. Rewarding political tactics can also affect those who
are not used to acting politically. When individuals see others, who are involved in organizational
politics, being rewarded better than them; they are likely to be involved in political behavior in
future (Ferris, Russ &Fandt, 1989; Kacmar& Ferris, 1993).

2.4 Job performance

Job performance as a variable in empirical research can be defined in different manner and its
highly praised relevance in the field of industrial or organizational psychology by different
researchers (Sonnetag and Frese, 2002). Viswesvaran (2001) attributes this dissimilarity to the
13
characteristic of it being an abstract and latent construct with many manifestations - a notion
supported by Motowidlo (2003). Performance is a multidimensional construct where different
types of behaviors need to be considered in order to understand it (Aguinis, 2009). This study
focused on the definition of employee job performance based on two dimensions mainly task
performance (TP) and counterproductive work behavior (CWB).

2.4.1 Task performance (TP)

Task performance refers to two operational activities mainly 1) activities that transform raw
materials into goods and services in organization and 2) activities that help with the transformation
process by for example providing planning, coordination and supervision to ensure organization
efficiency and effectiveness (Casio and Aguinis, 2001). Accordingly skills and abilities are the two
main factors that contribute to task performance. As the name indicate that task performance is
mainly related with tasks listed on job description of that specific position.

2.4.2 Counterproductive work behavior (CWB)

In contrast to task performance of employees researchers Rotundo and Sackett (2002) and
O‟Brien and Allen (2008) develop another performance construct or dimension and suggested that
voluntary behaviors that are deviant and damaging to the organizational goals which are
considered in negative form are also as a part of employees‟ performance construct. Such
dysfunctional behaviors are generally labeled as counterproductive work behaviors (CWB).
Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) construct indicates to actions that adversely affect the
well-being of the organization (Rotundo and Sackett, 2002). In previous studies counterproductive
was operationally defined as negative perspective. However in this study CWB considered as a
positive contributor towards achievement of organizational goals. Therefore for the purpose of this
study the construct of CWB and items accordingly has been reversed to make it in positive form.

2.5 Relationship between organizational politics and job performance

In many organizations of an unfair working environment in the long-term employees do not want
to work in the organization in which a range of political behavior is experienced. As a result of
14
such situations, they foster a desire to leave or form a negative attitude towards the organization
(Kacmar and Baron, 1999). In contrast, few scholars indicated that organizational politics may also
have positive effects if the behaviors are in line with organizational targets (Buchanan, 2008).
The relationships between perception of organizational politics and job performance have
received a vast empirical support. Studies that adopt traditional regression techniques (e.g.
Cropanzano et al.,1997; Ferris and Kacmar, 1992; Witt et al., 2000; Chang, Rosen and Levy, 2009;
Salmad and Amri 2011; Khan and Hussian, 2014; Abbas , et al., 2015; Ahmad et.al., ,2016) and
studied that adopt structural equation modeling techniques (e.g. Kacmar et al., 1999) have revealed
that perception of organizational politics is a negative influence of job performance. This is
because, it results in numerous emotional and psychological damages such as inferiority complex,
low self-esteem, and felling of being unfairly treated. Once employees start to experience such
things, their level of commitment will be reduced and overall job performance will be influenced
as well. Therefore, it can be seen that job performance is highly influenced on a negative approach
by perceived organizational politics.
The higher the perception of politics in the eyes of an employee, the lower they perceived justice
and fairness within the organization (Gallagher and Laird 2008). A study by Folger, Konovsky and
Cropanzano (1992) related procedural justice to the perceived organizational politics. According to
Folger et al (1992), lack of justice and fairness in terms of procedures and processes were the
major cause of higher perceived politics and this normally negatively affected organizational
outcome.
Most researches done in the area of perceived organizational politics have actually linked it with
various behavioral outcomes which are often negative interfering with productivity and
performance at the individual and organizational level. For instance, some researchers have found
significant negative relationship with negligence and decreased performance (Vigoda & Kapun,
2005,Samad and Amri ,2011, Ahmad et.al 2016).
Other scholars (Martin, 2001; Jam, Khan, Zaidi & Muzaffar, 2011) on the other hand have viewed
organizational politics in a much positive view. The more positive view of political behavior in
organizations regard it as an inevitable part of the need for individuals and groups to function in a
collective context (Martin, 2001).
However one perceives politics (as negative or positive) will affect their reaction, attitude and

15
subsequently their behavior towards their organization. When procedures and distributions within
the organizations are fair and just with high level of transparency in activities (often termed
organizational justice), it generally reflects a positive image of the organization in the eyes of
employees and this increases trust of the employee towards their organization.

2.6 Conceptual frame work of the study

The proposed conceptual model of organizational politics (OP) constitutes three components
mainly GATGA (going along to get ahead), PPP (pay and promotion policies) and GPB (General
political behavior) and employee job performance (JP) which contains two aspects of TP and
CWB.

GPB

TP
GAGA Organizational
Employee job
Politics Performance
PPP CWB
 Task
perform
Independent Variables Dependent varaible
ance(TP)
Counterprodu
Figure 1- Conceptual frame work of the research adopted from S. Samad. and S.Amri(2011)
ctive work
behavior (CWB)

16
2. 7. Research hypothesis

Consequently from the above conceptual framework the following Hypothesis were developed.
H1: There is a negative and significant relationship between general political behavior (GPB) and
job performance.
H2: There is a negative and significant relationship between going along to get ahead (GATGA)
and job performance.
H3: There is a negative and significant relationship between pay and promotion policies (PPP) and
job performance).
H4: There is a negative and significant relationship between overall organizational politics (OP)
and job performance.
H5: There is a significant influence of OP components (GPB, GATGA and PPP) on job
performance.

2.8 Operational Definition of Concepts

Organizational politics –when individuals or groups in an organization use self-serving and

manipulative behaviors to promote their self interests at the expense of others and sometimes even
over the organizational goals.
Perceived organizational politics- represents the extent or degree to which an employee perceives
their work environment as political and therefore unfair or unjust and the managing of power to
obtain ends not approved by the organization.
Going Along to Get Ahead -represents lack of actions by individuals in order to secure valued
outcome
Pay and Promotion Policies- represents the action which involves the organization behaving
politically through the policies it enacts.
General Political Behavior -represents siding with individuals in order to receive favors
Employee job Performance- represent the mode by which the employees perform their work and

17
the flexible behavior of individual to go ahead of the basic requirements of job for the benefit
of organization
Counterproductive work Behavior- represents an individuals‟ behavior that is deviant and not
directly recognized by the formal reward system within the organization.

18
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction
According to Rajasekar (2013) research methodology refers to a science of how research is to be
carried out in a systematic way to solve a problem. Research methodology also concerned with the
procedures by which researchers go about their work of describing, explaining and predicating the
phenomenon. Therefore this part of the study dealt with the type and design of research, as well as
types of data, data sources and methods of data collection. The research methodology also consists
of sampling frame and technique, issues related with method of data analysis and Interpretation,
validity and reliability of the instruments and ethical considerations.

3.2 The Research Design

The type of research design used in this study is mixed survey design. This helped the researcher
to generalize the result of the study from the sample to the total population by collecting data
through qualitative and quantitative approaches. Therefore, in order to investigate the effect of
perception of organizational politics on employee‟s job performance, the researcher used mixed
research design. According to (Kothari, 2004) using mixed design can increase reliability and
validity of the research.
Since the study is conducted for the first time it consists of some exploratory nature thus the
researcher employed qualitative research design in addition to quantitative research design for data
collection. Mixed method is the strategy to be followed to collect and analysis both the qualitative
and quantitative data. This can assist to merge the data, compare the results from the two methods,
identify the differences and then offset the weaknesses of one method with the other (Creswell,
2009). Therefore, the researcher used both qualitative and quantitative data concurrently and then
compares the two data to determine combinations.

19
3.3 Target population
The target population is the entire mass of observations from which the sample is drowns, Anol B.
(2012). According to the HR department report of the case organization (2017), the total number f
employees were male 822 female 639 total 1461. But among these employees male 5 female 2
total 7 employees were in Addis Ababa office, male 47 female 66 employees were contract
employees, male 25 female 36 total of 61 whose experience less than one year in the company and
male 9 female 2 total of 11 higher officials total of male 80 and female 112 totally 192 employees
were not included under the target population due to convenience problem and to increase the
quality of data. Since the target population were selected in consideration of the easy access to
data, cost effectiveness and easy manageability of the study.
Thus, the total target population of the study that the sample was drawn was from male 742 female
527 total 1269 employees from 7 departments.

3.3 Sampling technique and procedure

According to HR department of the company evidence (2017) it had 7 departments like
production, Engineering, HR development, finance, marketing purchase and store and corporate
and within each department there were different number of employees. Thus to give equal chance
of participation for the employees the researcher used proportional stratified simple random
sampling i.e. the employee data obtained from the company's HR department were stratified
through each department and then among each strata respondents was selected randomly with the
proportional ratio of the sample and was administered the developed structural questionnaire. The
proportion ratio of every department was dependent on the target population of department. The
researcher used purposive sampling technique to select sample respondents to the interviewee
participant because lack of time, resource and knowledge in the current study.

3.4 Sample size

According to Kothari (2004) the sample size determination is based on the nature of population
that we address (heterogeneity or homogeneity), nature of the study, and availability of money
and other necessary resources. Hence, representative and adequate number of sample size will be
taken to perform a meaningful analysis. The researcher used Yamane (1967:886) simplified

20
formula to calculate sample sizes of finite population, which is used to determine the sample size
for this study. A 95% confidence level was assumed for this formula to determine the sample size,
at e=0.05. The sample size (n) was calculated by using the formula to calculate the sample size at
95% confidence level and 5% margin error;

Where:-n=Sample size required which will be determined

N=the study population which the sample will be drawn which in this is equal to 1269
e=Level of significance /allowable error /sampling error (0.05) at 0.95(95%) confidence level
. Thus n= 1269/(1+(1269*0.0025))= 1269/4.1725=304.13≅ 304
From the total of 1269 target population the researcher was selected 304 and these respondents‟
was select selected from all different departments as mentioned above by multiplying the target
population of each Department by a proportion of 304/1269=0.2396 as follows :-
Table 3.1 target population and sample selection
No. Department Target population Proportional ratio Samples selected
in the department Of selection
1 Engineering 61 0.2396 15
2 HR development 74 0.2396 18
3 Finance 23 0.2396 6
4 Production 1024 0.2396 245
5 Marketing 18 0.2396 4
6 Purchase and store 13 0.2396 3
7 Corporate 56 0.2396 13
Total 1269 304
Source:- HR Department of the company, 2017
Thus a total of 304 samples were drawn from each stratum in such manner for the study and 12
respondents were selected randomly for sake of interviewee.

21
3.5 Type of data, data sources, data collection instrument
3.5.1 Types and source of data
In order to generate relevant data for this study, the researcher used both primary and secondary
Data sources for examining the effect of organizational politics on employee job performance
According to Biggam (2008), primary data is the information that the researcher finds out by
him/herself regarding a specific topic. The main advantage with this type of data collection is that
it can be collected with information resulting from it is more consistent with the research questions
and purpose. The data was collected directly by the researcher from the respondents‟ important
information. As this study is descriptive and explanatory in nature, primary data was gathered from
employees to obtain information which gives answers to the research questions. Even if more
emphasize is given to the primary data source secondary sources like literatures, journals and
books was also used for the study.

3.5.2 Data collection instruments

Since the study was designed to employ both primary and secondary sources of data. primary data
was collected through a survey by administering a well-designed questionnaire. The
questionnaires were firs translated to Amharic language.
1. Questionnaires
For the independent variables
The independent variables of this study , organizational politics (overall OP) and its components
or dimensions of general political behavior (GPB); going along to get ahead (GAGA) and pay and
promotion policies (PPP) is measured by using survey questionnaire of POPS (perceptions of
Organizational Politics Scale) which was adapted from Kacmar and Carlson's (1997) and
reworded and restructured to fit the study setting after a pilot study. The 15 items of this scale is
used with five-point Likert scale (with l = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) in which 1
means perception of organizational politics is very low while 5 indicates high perception of
organizational politics in the study organization.
For Dependent variable
The dependent variable ,Job performance (JP),was measured based on the combination of two
components mainly task performance (TP) and counterproductive work behavior (CWB) by scales
adapted from Williams and Anderson‟s (1991) having 7 items and Bennett and Robinson (2002)
22
having 9 items and a total of 16 items through five-point Likert scale of 1 = never(a few times a
year or less), 2 = rarely( once a month or less), 3 = sometimes(a few times a month), 4 =
often(once a week), 5 = very often( a few times a week or always). The questionnaires were
designed in three parts in which the first part consists of the demographic data made up of 7 items
which sought to gather relevant information on participants‟ background the second section
consists of items used to measure perception of organizational politics and the third part consists of
items used to measure employee job performance both from task performance and
counterproductive work behavior. Here items which measure counterproductive work behavior
were positively designed. This indicates that all measures of this study are based on instruments
that have been used in previous studies and have been shown to have good psychometric
properties.
2. Interview
In addition to survey questionnaire the researcher has collected primary data by interview from
selected respondents by preparing 5 questions. Secondary data was collected through a review
from previous works mainly from reference books, journals, and websites. Here all data collection
activities is conducted only by the researcher.

3.6 Data Analysis

After data collection the data were registered, edited on Excel spreadsheet and coded then exported
to SPSS 21 version for analysis purpose. After exporting to SPSS, the raw data concerning the
respondents‟ demographic were depicted using different tables. Once the respondents profile was
presented, the perception of organizational politics and employee job performance variables were
processed using descriptive statics and inferential statics such as correlation, analysis of variance
(ANOVA) and multiple regression to show the relationship and effect of the independent variables
(dimensions of organizational politics and the overall organizational politics) with/on the
dependent variable i.e job performance and the proposed research hypothesis were tested .
The proposed model to be tasted through multiple Regressions was:
Y= b0+b1x1+b2x2 +b3x3+e
Where:- Y- is the dependent variable(job performance)
- b0 – constant, b1, b2, b3 – regression coefficients of each variable

23
X1- General political behavior(GPB)
X2- Going along to get ahead(GAGA)
X3- Pay and promotion policies(PPP) and e- error
Before the regression analysis, normality test was done by visualizing shape of the histogram
produced, linearity of the relationship among variables was checked using P-P plot and multi
colinearity test was undertaken on the specified model using correlation coefficient as well as variance
inflation factor (VIF) and tolerance value because all the above three assumptions should be fulfilled
for further usage of multiple linear regression analysis.
The qualitative data obtained from the respondents were used to support the quantitative data
obtained through close ended questionnaires.

3.7 Reliability and validity of instruments

Borg and Gall (1996) recommend that research instruments should be Pre-tested before used in
research.. Accordingly, the validity and reliability of the instrument used for this particular study
was checked before the research process is executed. Thus, in this study, to determine the
reliability and assess the validity of the instruments, a pilot test was made with a small
representative sample of 25 employees in similar company in Bahir Dar town.

3.7.1. Reliability of the Instruments

The test of reliability was another important task for effective measurement. According to
Nunnally (1978) the reliability of a measure indicates the extent to which it is without bias and
ensures consistent measurement across time and its analysis reveals that all scales are at the
acceptable magnitude value of more than 0.70. It is a measure of stability and consistency with
which instrument measures the concept (Sekaran, 2003). The inter-item consistency reliability is
tested using a popular method suggested by Cronbach. He proposed coefficient Alpha (called
Cronbach Alpha) for multi-point scaled items indicating the higher the coefficients, the better the
measuring instrument (Sekaran, 2003). Its value varies from 0 to 1 but a satisfactory value is
required to be higher than 0.7 for the scale to be reliable/acceptable (Cronbach, 1951 and
Nunnally, 1967).The researcher used Cronbach alpha to test the reliability of the measuring
instruments of variables.

24
3.7.2. Validity of the instrument
The instrument is considered valid when it actually measures what it is intended to measure.
Validity ensures the ability of a scale to measure the intended concept (Anol B. , 2012) .Testing
validity reveals vague questions and unclear instructions. It also captures important comments and
suggestions from the respondents that enable the researcher to improve efficiency of instruments,
to adjust strategies and approaches to maximize response rate. Accordingly, even if the the
instruments that were used in this study were tested by previous researchers(Bennett and
Anderson (2002) , Williams and Robinson (1991),Kacmar and Ferris (1997), to Jamil Ahmad and
Mohhamed Wakas Wkhtar (2016) , the researcher again check for language and construct validity
through the help of English, statistics and psychology professionals of the university.
Modifications were made in order to go well with the current research context.

3.8. Ethical Consideration

The Researcher assured the respondents that the information they provide is confidential and used
for academic purpose only, moreover a statement conforming the prohibition of including any
identity details or personal references in the questionnaire. This was to avoid any biased response
or unauthentic data provided by respondents and to make participants certain that he/she cannot be
traced; this would offer them enough room to express their ideas and point their responses freely
and safely. The Researcher also exercised ethical measure of treating the respondents with respect
and courtesy to feel free and gave their opinions exactly.
The data collected in process of the study was kept confidential and would not be used for any
personal interest and the whole process of the study. The study was controlled to be within
acceptable professional ethics.

25
 CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Introduction
In this chapter the study intended to describe the current status of organizational politics and
examine relationship between perception of organizational politics and employee job performance
and the effect of perception of organizational politics on employee job performance. Thus the
findings of the study are carefully presented and analyzed. Since the study was conducted through
mixed approach of collecting data from respondents, the data were also presented accordingly. The
quantitative data were collected through five point likert scale having value from one to
five(1=strongly disagree,2=disagree, 3=neutral,4=agree and 5 stands for strongly agree for the
measurement of perception of organizational politics and 1= never(a few times a year or less), 2 =
rarely( once a month or less), 3 = sometimes(a few times a month), 4 = often(once a week), 5 =
very often( a few times a week or always) for the measurement of employee job performance).In
addition to quantitative data qualitative data were collected through interview from 12 employees
of the company and the data help to further support the quantitative data collected while
performing descriptive analysis.
First the responses of the participants were coded in Excel spreadsheet and then exported to SPSS
to analyze the findings (Here questionnaires number 3&4 of GAGA and 11&12 of PPP were
reversely coded). After exporting to SPSS, the raw data concerning the respondents‟ demographic
and organizational variables were depicted using different tables. As it was mentioned in the third
chapter the study used both descriptive (mean percent, and frequency) and inferential (correlation,
regression) analysis to test and answer the hypothesis and the research objectives.
4. 2 Response rate

Out of the total distributed 304 sets of questionnaires, only 292 (96%) of the questions were
properly filled and collected & used for analysis purpose. Since this was adequate and satisfactory
enough to make the analysis, all the discussions below were made based on the data collected from
these groups of respondents.

26
4.3 Demographic Background of the respondents

The respondent‟s demographic profile was presented in this section as follows. These demographic
profiles include gender, age, educational level, marital status, year of service in the company.
These data is described through descriptive analysis and some statistical tests are performed to
investigate with perception of organizational politics and job performance.

4.3.1 Gender of Respondents

Table 4.2 Gender of respondents

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Female 156 53.4 53.4 53.4
Valid Male 136 46.6 46.6 100.0
Total 292 100.0 100.0

Source:- Researcher‟s survey data 2017

The above table indicated about gender of the respondents and from the targeted respondents
156 (53.4%) are female and the remaining 136 (46.6%) are males.

4.3.2 Age of respondents

Table 4.3 Age of respondents

Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent
18-30 145 49.7 49.7
31-40 87 29.8 79.5
41-50 52 17.8 97.3
51-60 8 2.7 100.0
Total 292 100.0
Source: - Researcher‟s survey data, 2017
The above table 4.3 indicated that 145 (49.7%) of the respondents were from age of 18-30 years,
87(29.8%) of the respondents were from age of 31-40 years, 52(17.8%) of the respondents were at
the age between 41-50 and 8(2.7%) of the respondents were ages between 51 and 60 years.
27
4.3.3 Educational background of Respondents

Table 4.4 Educational level of respondents

Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent
secondary school complete 60 20.5 20.5
TVET 118 40.4 61.0
Diploma 85 29.1 90.1
first degree 29 9.9 100.0
Total 292 100.0

Source:- Researcher‟s survey data, 2017

From table 4.4 among the respondents 60(20.5%) were secondary school complete,118(40.4%)
were TEVT complete ,85(29.1%) were diploma holders, and 29(9.9%) were BA/BSC degree
holders in their educational level.

4.3.4 Marital status of respondents

Table 4.5 Marital status of respondents

Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent
single 124 42.5 42.5
married 159 54.5 96.9
Divorced 7 2.4 99.3
Widowed 2 .7 100.0
Total 292 100.0
Source: - Researcher‟s survey data, 2017
The above table 4.5 indicate that among the respondents of the study 124(42.5%) were single,
159(54.5%) were married, 7(2.4%) were divorced and 2(0.70%) were widowed employees.

28
4.3.5 Experience of employees in the company

Table. 4.6 experience of respondents

Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent
1-5 years 57 19.5 19.5
6-10 years 124 42.5 62.0
11-15 years 80 27.4 89.4
16-20 years 21 7.2 96.6
more than 20 years 10 3.4 100.0
Total 292 100.0

Source: - Researcher‟s survey data, 2017

From the above table 4.6 among the total respondents 57(19.5%) of had experience 1-5years,
124(42.5%) had 6-10 years experience, 80(27.4%) had 11-15 years experience, 21(7.2%) had 16-
20 years experience and 10(3.4%) had experience with in the company.
As shown in the above demographic data tables (table 4.2-4.6) respondents of the research have
difference in their age, educational level, gender, work experience in the company and marital
status. These differences in demographic variables might have effect on the understanding level of
respondents, behavioral differences and these in turn might have effect on the quality of data to be
collected, the reliability and validity of measuring instruments. The researcher has understood the
case from preliminary data obtained from HR department of the company. Thus to enhance the
quality of data and increase the reliability and validity of measuring instruments and to reduce
respondents bias the researcher made clarity on research questionnaires for respondents grouping
in 6 groups from the three shifts of working hours regardless of their demographic difference in
collaboration with public relation head of the company . These really have effect on improving the
quality of data, reliability and validity of the instrument and also reduce respondent‟s bias.

4.4 Reliability and Validity of measuring instruments

Before going to different analysis tests of the study, it is necessary to make sure whether the items

29
measure what they intend to measure. Fraenkel and Wallen (2008) define reliability as the
consistency of scores or answers from one administration of an instrument to another and from one
set of items to another. This implies that reliable instrument provides consistent result. According
the above researchers validity refers to the appropriateness, meaningfulness, correctness, and
usefulness of any inferences a researcher draws based on data obtained through the use of an
instrument. According to Kothari (2008) validity is the degree to which an instrument measures
what it is supposed to measure accordingly reliable measuring instrument does contribute to
validity, but a reliable instrument need not be a valid instrument Cronbach‟s alpha is a commonly
used test of internal reliability.

Even if the items are standardized the researcher performed a pilot study to check the reliability
and confirm with previous studies, thus data was collected by the developed survey questionnaire
and calculated through SPSS version 21 software and gave results 0.82 for the general political
behavior(GPB) of 2 items like previous research results, 0.90 for go along to get ahead(GATGA)
of 7 items which is similar and better than previous research results, 0.88 for pay and promotion
policies(PPP) of 6 items similar and better than previous studies 0.88 for overall Organizational
politics of 15 items and 0.76 for employee job performance which all are above the acceptable
region(0.70 value).

30
Table 4.7 Reliability test of variables
Scales No of items Cronbach Alpha
General political behavior(GPB) 2 0.82
Going along to get ahead(GATGA) 7 0.90
Pay and promotion policies(PPP) 6 0.88
Overall perception of organizational politics(POP) 15 0.88
Employee job performance(JP) 16 0.76
Source:-researcher‟s survey data, 2017
The validity of these questionnaires was tested by Kacmar and Ferris (1997) , Bennett and
Anderson (2002) and Williams and Robinson (1991) but for this study to insure the language
validity of the questionnaire items and for construct validity also the researcher gave the
questionnaires to the English and psychology departments thus both language and construct
validity was improved and also the researcher undergone pretest the questionnaire by taking 25
respondents in the study area and made the necessary adjustments .

Factor analysis was done on OP scales to compare the dimensionality of the scale as proposed by
Kacmar and Carlson (1997) and it was found that the subjects to items ratio for the variable in the
study were correlated with other item with a value of more than 0.5 which is within the acceptable
magnitude region (Samad and Amri,2011) the same is true for job performance items.

4.5 Descriptive analysis of variables (OP components ,Overall OP and Job

performance)
The descriptive statistics was used as a way of examining valid (N), frequency, mean and standard
deviation of each item of the variables in this study. It was needed to determine the respondents‟
perception of organizational politics and job performance.
Before describing the finding of variables it is to better to undergo one sample T-test to justify the
cutoff for each aggregate mean of the variables.

31
 Table 4.8 One-Sample Statistics
Variables N Mean Std. Sig. (2-tailed)
Deviation
GPB 292 4.3420 .61753 .000
GAGA 292 4.1272 .68989 .000
PPP 292 4.2163 .58369 .000
OVERALL OP 292 4.2285 .46973 .000
JOBPERFORMANCE 292 2.3764 .32692 .000
Source:- Researcher‟s SPSS output for one sample T-test
Table 4.8 one sample t-test to show the mean values of the variables from the cutoff(3)
From the table 4.8 the mean values of each dimension of organizational politics and overall
organizational politics have higher mean value from cutoff (3) with a significance level of p
<0.001 and the mean value of the dependent variable(employee job performance) has lower mean
value than the cutoff value(3) with a significance level of . Furthermore the descriptive part of the
independent and dependent variables analyzed and presented as follows.

4.5.1 Descriptive statistics of General Political Behavior (GPB)

N Items Valid
o. N Frequency Mean Std. Devi.
Agree Neutral Disagree
1 GPB 1 292 270 22 - 4.44 0.63
2 GPB 2 292 270 22 - 4.35 0.61
Grand mean 4.39 0.62
Source:- Researcher‟s survey data 2017
Table 4.9 .Summary of the valid N, frequency, Mean and Standard Deviation of General political
Behavior (GPB)
Based on the above table 4.9 the mean values of each item and also the aggregate mean of the GPB
variable are higher than the cut-off(3) and this indicates that the respondents perceive that there is
high political work environment within the case organization. There are self serving individuals
and groups who want to satisfy their need by tearing others down. Thus employee will side with
individuals in order to receive favors. This data was also supported by those respondents who gave
their response through interview.
32
 4.5.2 Descriptive statistics of Go along to get ahead( GAGA)

N Items Valid N
o. Std.
Frequency of respondents Mean Deviation.
Agree Neutral Disagree
1 GAGA1 292 263 7 22 4.04 0.86
2 GAGA2 292 243 31 18 3.89 0.82
3 GAGA3 292 255 10 27 4.11 0.97
4 GAGA4 292 266 11 15 4.22 0.86
5 GAGA5 292 265 7 20 4.10 0.89
6 GAGA6 292 269 8 15 4.25 0.87
7 GAGA7 292 264 6 22 4.13 0.91

Grand Mean 4.12 0.69

Source:- Researcher‟s survey data 2017
Table 4.10 Summary of the frequency, Mean and Standard Deviation of Go Along to Get Ahead
(GAGA)
From the above table (4.10) the grand mean of the GAGA variable shows a value of 4.12 with a
standard deviation value of 0.69 which is above the cutoff(3) and this indicate that employee of the
case organization lack of actions to take in order to secure valued outcome rather they prefer to
remain quiet and agree with those political individuals or groups instead of fight and secure and
keep their and the organizations benefit from those individuals or groups which are participating
political behavior and take the advantages of the employees and also of the organization. This
finding is also similar obtained through interview from the case organization, they all agree that
fighting and following of those groups/individuals may lead the follower to loss something in
another time so leaving them is the best alternative because no solution will be obtained except
personal conflict.

33
 4.5.3 Descriptive statistics of Pay and Promotion Policies (PPP)

N Items Valid
o. N Std.
Frequency of respondents Mean Deviation.
Agree Neutral Disagree
1 PPP1 292 247 44 1 4.26 0.72
2 PPP2 292 247 44 1 4.08 0.63
3 PPP3 292 270 22 - 4.33 0.61
4 PPP4 292 193 46 53 3.80 1.08
5 PPP5 292 268 22 2 4.24 0.61
6 PPP6 292 270 22 - 4.50 0.63

Grand mean 4.21 0.59

Source:- Researcher‟s survey data 2017
Table 4.11.Summary of the valid N, frequency, Mean and Standard Deviation of Pay and
Promotion Policies (PPP)
From table 4.11 the grand mean for items intended to measure pay and promotion policies
dimension of perception of organizational politics has become 4.21 with a standard deviation of
0.59 which is higher than the cutoff(3). Even each item had a mean value of higher than the
average. This has shown in the case organization their pay increase is not consistent with the
published policies, the pay and promotion policies are applied politically, policies are irrelevant for
pay and promotion decisions and also since the pay promotion decisions are determined politically
employees promotion around there is not valued. The information from the interviewer also
support these data obtained through questionnaires and to generalize the interviewee response pay
and promotion policies are implemented accordingly and are implemented politically and luck
fairness. Some interviewee even didn‟t know whether a written policy about the implementation of
pay raises and promotion.

34
 4.5.4 Descriptive statistics of Employee Job performance
No. Items Valid Frequency of respondents
N SOMETIM
ALWAYS OFTEN ES SELDOM NEVER Mean Std. Devi.
1 TP1 292 - - 89 185 18 2.24 0.55
2 TP2 292 - - 28 171 93 1.78 0.60
3 TP3 292 - - 101 105 86 2.05 0.80
4 TP4 292 - - 59 217 16 2.15 0.48
5 TP5 292 - - 65 159 68 1.99 0.67
6 TP6 292 - - 20 194 78 1.80 0.54
7 TP7 292 - - 131 82 79 2.18 0.83
8 CWB1 292 7 3 139 142 1 2.57 0.65
9 CWB2 292 9 9 155 114 5 2.67 0.71
10 CWB3 292 9 2 180 86 15 2.67 0.72
11 CWB4 292 9 10 176 95 2 2.76 0.67
12 CWB5 292 9 2 76 200 5 2.35 0.68
13 CWB6 292 9 9 186 68 20 2.72 0.76
14 CWB7 292 9 2 154 125 2 2.63 0.67
15 CWB8 292 9 10 132 141 - 2.61 0.70
16 CWB9 292 9 2 187 92 2 2.74 0.68
Grand Mean 2.38 0.33

Source:- Researcher‟s survey data 2017

Table 4.12 Summary of the valid N, frequency, Mean and Standard Deviation of employee job
performance (JP)

The above table 4.12 have shown the grand mean employee job performance in the case
organization was 2.38 at a standard deviation of o.33 which is below the cutoff, even the mean
value of more items of job performance are below and around the average value. As explained in
the research design the employee job performance was measured from two perspectives i.e from
task performance which is highly related to the tasks and duties given to that specific employee
and the second part is counterproductive work behavior which is highly related to employees
35
negative or deviant behavior which may be developed when employees perceive negative image
or attitude to the organization, to their supervisors, to their co-workers and the work environment
as a whole.

Thus the above table has shown task performance is lowered and counterproductive work behavior
is also observed in the case organization. The finding have shown that more than half of the
respondents perform as follows:- assigned duties to each employee are not completed adequately
and timely, the employee didn‟t fulfill his/her specified responsibilities completely, the employee
didn‟t meet the performance requirements didn‟t engage in activities that will directly affect
his/her performance evaluation , didn‟t give priorities for their work according to the deadlines of
the work, and didn‟t perform their task free of errors.

The second part of job performance, counterproductive work behavior, have shown slightly lower
than the cutoff, this shows employees were still in a negative behavior to their work environment
and have shown taking properties without permission, spent too much time fantasizing instead of
working, taking longer break than the acceptable, coming late or starting work late, neglecting
boss‟s instruction, working with lower than the actual speed, put little effort to their work and
disclose confidential company information to unauthorized person was observed from the
respondents response. The finding through questionnaire was also supported and nearly similar
to the answers collected through interview except the item about getting money and other valuable
material by preparing falsified receipts.

4.6 Hypothesis testing

4.6.1 Correlation Analysis for testing relationship between variables

The Developed Research hypotheses are statistically tested and interpreted using different
statistical techniques. To test whether there are relationship between variables it is better to use
correlation, which is bi-vitiate measure of association (strength) of the relationship between two
variables, the Pearson's moment-product „r‟ being the most common measure was adopted. It
varies from 0 „no relationship‟ to 1 „perfect positive linear relationship‟ or -1 „perfect negative
linear relationship‟. The significance of each correlation coefficient is also displayed in the

36
correlation table. The significance level or p-value is the probability of obtaining results as extreme
as the one observed. If the significance level is very small (less than 0.05) then the correlation is
significant and the two variables are related. If the significance level is relatively large (for
instance, greater than 0.05) then the correlation is not significant and the two variables are not
related.
According to Yalew (2017) who stated guidelines for interpreting the correlation value indicated in
the following table.
Table 4.13: Guidelines for interpreting correlation with absolute values

Range Interpretation of the values

0-0.19 Very weak, negligible

0.2-0.39 Weak, low

0.4-0.59 Moderate

0.6-0.79 Strong high

0.8-1.0 Very strong, very high

Source: - Yalew (2017,p -340)

Depending on the above mentioned guide lines, the researcher has presented and interpreted the
research question and hypothesis in the following section.

Table 4.14 correlation between variables, significance level and Valid N

37
Correlations
GPB GAGA PPP OVERALL JOB
OP PERFORMANCE

Pearson Correlation 1
GPB Sig. (2-tailed)
N 292
Pearson Correlation .395** 1
GAGA Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 292 292
Pearson Correlation .352** .245** 1
PPP Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 292 292 292

**
Pearson correlation .778 .764** .688**
1
OVERALL OP Sig.(2-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 292 292 292

292
-
Pearson Correlation -.342** -.418** -.396** 1
JOB .519**
PERFORMA
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
NCE .000
N 292 292 292 292 292
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Source :- researcher‟s survey result, 2017

The correlation value (r) indicates the relationship between variables, when r value becomes
squared it shows the magnitude relationship between variables in both directions (Yalew, 2017).

38
Having the above correlation result the researcher have tested hypothesis which were about
relationship between dimensions of organizational politics and overall organizational politics with
employee job performance as follows.
Hypothesis 1- There is a significant and negative relationship between general political behavior
and employee job performance.
From table 4.14 the correlation value between general political behavior and employee job
performance was -0.342 (11.7%) at a significance level of p=0.000 (p <0.01), which confirmed
that general political behavior is negatively related with employee job performance. Thus the first
research hypothesis about the relationship between general political behavior and employee job
performance was accepted. But according to the correlation value guide this relation is with low
relation range.
Hypothesis 2- There is significant and negative relationship between going along to get ahead with
employee job performance.

From the table 4.14 the correlation value which is between going along to get ahead and employee
performance is r=-0.418 (17.4%) at a significance level of p=0.000 (p <0.01) with a moderate
relationship, and confirmed that going along to get ahead has a negative moderate significant
relationship between employee job performance. Thus the second research hypothesis was
accepted.
Hypothesis 3- There is a significant and negative relationship between pay and promotion policies
and employee job performance
From table 4.14 the relationship between pay and promotional policies and employee job
performance was tested through a Pearson correlation analysis and the value become r= -0.396
(15.7%) at a significance level of P=0.000 (p <0.01) which indicate that these two variables have
low significant and negative relationship. Thus the third hypothesis was also accepted.
Hypothesis 4- there is a significant and negative relationship between overall organizational
politics and employee performance.
From table 4.14 the relationship between overall organizational politics and employee job
performance was also tested through Pearson correlation analysis. The result have shown that
overall organizational politics and employee job performance has a relationship with r=-
.519(26.9%) at a significance level of p=0.000 (p <0.01). This value indicates that overall
39
organizational politics has a moderate negative relationship with employee job performance. As a
result the forth hypothesis which was stated as there is negative significant relationship between
overall organizational politics and employee job performance was accepted.

4.6.2 Regression Analysis

Before using multiple regression analysis the researcher have tested to check whether the
assumptions were fulfilled or not to proceed to test the fifth research hypothesis.

A) Test of Normality
A very important assumption in regression analysis that the dependent variable should be tested for
normal distribution. Normality is used to describe a symmetrical, bell-shaped curve, which has the
greatest frequency of scores around in the middle combined with smaller frequencies towards the
extremes (Pallant, 2005). The dependent variable in this case is employee job performance. If the
dependent variable is not normally distributed, there is little point in performing regression analysis
because a major assumption of the model is violated. Therefore normality test computed for the
dependent variable, in this case in figure 2 histogram shows a normal distribution curve.
Figure 2 Test of Normality through Histogram (employee job Performance)

Source : Researchers SPSS output from survey data, 2017

40
In addition to histogram of the dependent variable(employee job performance) skewness and
kurtosis of the variables were calculated and presented as follows, and from the two tests there was
a normal distribution.
Descriptive Statistics for variables
N Skewness Kurtosis
Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Std. Error
GPB 292 -.976 .143 1.225 .284
GAGA 292 -2.769 .143 2.844 .284
PPP 292 -.422 .143 -.932 .284
Overall OP 292 -2.383 .143 1.939 .284
JOB 292 2.013 .143 2.630 .284
PERFORMANCE

Source: Researcher‟s survey SPSS output 2017

Table 4.15 Skewness and kurtosis of variables
From figure 2 and table 4.15 the normality assumption was satisfied since the skewness and
kurtosis values were between the acceptable region and the histogram of the dependent variable
have shown there a normal distribution.

B) Test of Multi-collinearity
The researcher was also checked the collinearity problem with the assumption of tolerance and
variance inflation factor (VIF) statistics. Liu, 2010 suggests that a VIF value greater than 10 have
an issue of collinearity problem. But in this research data as shown in table 4.16 the values of are
below 10 for all predictors and seems that there is not an issue of co linearity between the predictor
variables.
Table 4.16 Test of multi collinearity, Dependent variable –employee job performance.
Co linearity Statistics
VARIABLES Tolerance VIF
GPB FA 0.774 1.291
GAGA 0.831 1.203
PPP 0.863 1.159
Source:- researcher‟s survey data 2017

41
 C) Test of linearity
Linearity assumption of multiple regressions was tested using scatter plot test and it was found that
there is linear relationship between independent and dependent variables. The linearity result
depicted the distribution of residuals near to the mean zero.
Figure .3 test of linearity through P-P plot.

Source: Researcher‟s SPSS output from survey data 2017

The Above three tests confirms that the assumptions are almost satisfied to use multiple linear
regression for analysis. This means that the derived model is likely to be unchanged by small
changes in the measured variables. The researcher have also checked the linearity and normality
tests before using the multiple regression to test the prediction of overall organizational politics on
employee job performance.
Hypothesis -5 there is a significant influence of organizational politics (GPB,GAGA and PPP) on
employee job performance.
This hypothesis was intended to show whether organizational politics has effect or influence on
employee job performance and if so to what extent these organizational politics components can
determine employee job performance.
Thus to test the fifth hypothesis a multiple linear regression analysis was done and the result
become as follows.
42
 Table 4.17. Model summary of multiple regression
Model Summaryb
Mode R R Square Adjusted Std. Error of the
l R Square Estimate
1 .528a .279 .271 .27907
a. Predictors: (Constant), PPP , GAGA , GPB
b. Dependent Variable: JOBPERFORMANCE
Source: Researcher‟s SPSS output of Sample survey. 2017

Table 4.18 Analysis of variance for variables

ANOVAa
Model Sum of df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Regression 8.672 3 2.891 37.118 .000b
1 Residual 22.430 288 .078
Total 31.102 291
a. Dependent Variable: JOB PERFORMANCE
b. Predictors: (Constant), GPB , GAGA ,PPP

Source:- Researcher‟s SPSS output of Sample survey. 2017

From the regression analysis as shown in the Tables 4.17, overall organizational politics has an
influence on employee job performance. It was considered with the adjusted R square, which was
value at 0.271, or 27.1%. Employee job performance was explained by the overall organizational
politics at significance level p=0.000 (p <0.01) and F value 37. 12. So the fifth hypothesis which
was stated as overall organizational politics dimensions have influence on employee job
performance is also accepted.
43
When the researcher assess the contribution of each dimension of organizational politics on
employee job performance the coefficient of regression show as follows:-

Table 4.19 Regression Coefficient

Model Un-standardized Standardized T Sig. Rank of
Coefficients Coefficients contribut
B Std. Error Beta ion

(Constant) 3.910 .150 26.000 .000

GPB -.067 .030 -.126 -2.211 .028 3rd
1
GAGA -.142 .026 -.301 -5.476 .000 1st
PPP -.156 .030 -.278 -5.160 .000 2nd
Source : Researcher‟s SPSS output of Sample survey. 2017
The above table 4.19 have shown that the constant (Beta) for the regression was 3.91 with a
significance value of 0.028 (p <0.01) and contribution coefficient for GPB was -0.126 at a
significance value of 0.000 (p <0.01) and contribution coefficient of GAGA was -0.301 at a
significance value of 0.000 and the last predictor or dimension of organizational politics, PPP, had
a contribution coefficient of -0.278 at a significance value of 0.000 (p <0.01).
Thus from the above table the second dimension of organizational politics have highest
contribution effect to employee job performance.
The developed regression model which show the influence of overall organizational politics on
employee job performance would be as follows:-

EMPLOYEE JOB PERFORMANCE= 3.910-0.126(GPB)- 0.301(GAGA)-0.278(PPP)

4.7 Discussion of main findings

4.7.1 Relationship between Overall organizational politics and its components with
employee job performance
According to Yalew (2017) the relationship between variables can be checked through Pearson-
product moment correlation(r) and the value of the correlation analysis (r ) should to made squared
44
to show the magnitude of relationship between Variables.

4.7.1.1 Relationship between general political behavior and employee job performance
The first hypothesis(H1) which stated that general political behavior have significant and
negatively relationship with employee job performance was confirmed. The study confirmed that
employees who perceived that there are influential self serving groups which build themselves by
tearing others in their organizations will develop deviant behavior which will cause to reduce their
performance Thus from the study finding GPB has (-.342)2 i.e 11.69% relationship with employee
job performance. This finding suggests that the perception of politics in any organization has a
dire consequence on the organization as a whole. Previous studies ( Aryee et al.,2004 Byrne,2005 ,
Chen and Fang 2007,Samad and Amri 2011, Keya et,al., 2016) on the relationship between
general political behavior and employee job performance indicated that there is a negative and
significant relationship between them. Similar results Zivnuska et al.,(2004) found that general
political behavior was negatively related to employee job performance.. This finding is thus
consistent with Lewin's (1936) theory of perception where individuals respond to what they
perceive to be there.

4.7.1.2 The relationship between go along to get ahead (GAGA) and employee job
performance
The second hypothesis of the study which stated as go along to get ahead (GAGA) has a negative
and significant relationship with performance is also supported in this study as we have seen on the
previous chapter i.e GAGA has 17.4% relationship with that of employee job performance.
Research conducted previously also support this finding (Aryee et al., 2004, Byrne,2005 , Chen
and Fang 2007, Samad and Amri, 2011,Vigoda, 2011, Anhange and Ugwu,2015 )

4.7.1.3 The relationship between pay and promotion policies (PPP) and employee job
performance

The third hypothesis of the study which stated that pay promotion policies has a negative and
significant relationship with employee job performance was also confirmed from the findings i.e
PPP has 15.7% relationship with employee job performance. When the pay and promotion policies
like rewards and promotions are implemented and acting politically, unfairly and employee which

45
are out of this circle will develop deviant behavior which can lead performance. Previous studies
like kacmar and Carlson (1993), Byrne (2005) Samad and Amri (2011) also support the above
finding.
Here, when an employee perceive his/her work place as unfair and political, they respond or react
accordingly on what they perceived to be there ( Cialdini, Green & Rusch, 1992, Olorunleke,
2015). According to Kim (2005), the most important factor in achieving balance in goals among
employees in organizations is to improve employees performance by increasing their commitment
level in the organization and this can be fostered by reducing politics to its minimum in
organizations. This can be promoted by improving justice and acting according to the policies in
the organizations. Chang et al (2007) emphasized that employee affectively committed strongly to
their organizations, identified with it and desired to remain a part of the organization when they
perceived the organization as fair and just as well as generally supportive. Chugarti and Zafar
(2006) add that work characteristics like clear and laid down internal promotion policies, perceived
organizational support, perceived organizational justice and job security foster organizational
commitment among employees and vice versa.
According to Gull and Zaidi (2012) the opinion of employees about other‟s self-centered
behavior like treatment of supervisory policies is negatively linked to the work enjoyment level
of the workforce.
Research conducted by Kahn and Hussain (2014) showed that there is a significant relationship
between employees‟ perceived satisfaction regarding pay and promotion policies and they
explained that the effect of pay and promotion policy on the employees perceived satisfaction
pay and promotion was significant. The implication of this significance is that employees tend to
be more satisfied with their jobs when they get a pay and promotion according to their potentials
and also when the pay promotion policies of the firm are in their favor.

4.7.1.4 The relationship between overall organizational politics on employee job

performance
The forth hypothesis of this study was about the relationship between overall organizational
politics and employee job performance and correlation analysis of the survey data confirm that the
stated hypothesis about their negative significant relationship was supported and accepted i.e
overall organizational politics has 26.9% relationship with employee job performance. This finding

46
was also supported many previous researches (Vigoda 2000, samad and amri, 2011, Rehman et.al
2011).
This relationship was further confirmed by Vigoda-Gardo and Kapun (2005) among samples
from both private and public sector organizations. The result of this relationship suggests that
the effect of organizational politics whether perceived or actual should not be underestimated in
organizations as it can negatively affect the employees‟ commitment to and performance.
According to Hira Aftab, Salman Mughal and Amna Arif (2013) organizational politics have
strong impact on the level of employee‟s performance with a correlation value of -0.649(42.1%
relationship between the variables). Higher the level of existence of organizational politics will result
in lower level of employee‟s performance and vice versa.
The influence of perceived organizational politics on the job involvement and turnover intention is
significant and it clearly affects negatively the performance of employees ( Aslam, 2013).
This finding has opposite result with the research done by Bodla et,al (2014) which explained that
organizational politics has positive relationship with one dimension of performance i.e with task
performance and negative relationship with organizational citizenship behavior.

Abbas et,al (2015) conducted a research and found that when there is perception of organizational
politics the work outcomes like performance are affected significantly with a negative manner.
Ahmad et,al (2016) described that when employees of an organization perceive people use
political act in the organization to achieve their personal or group goals by using unfair or
negative means in the meanwhile their performance is affected negatively by their perception. As
result these employee will decrease their performance.

4.7.1.5 The influence of overall organizational politics on employee job performance

This research finds that overall organizational politic has a significance influence on determining
the performance of employee in an organization. From the above table 4.16 overall organizational
politics or the three dimensions (GPB, GAGA and PPP) determine employee job performance by
the adjusted R square value which is 0.271 i.e 27.1% of job performance can be predicted by
overall organizational politics. Even though the researches which are directly related to this finding
are few this finding is also supported by researches like Samad (2011) which said that
organizational politics can influence employee job performance by 18.3%.

47
Another related study conducted by Aftab et: al ( 2013) and Ahamad et.al (2016) also support this
finding by explaining that organizational politics have a 19% contribution to employee job
performance.
Here from this research finding described in table 4.16 among organizational politics dimension
Going along to get ahead show the highest contribution to employee job performance. Though
there is no sufficient research on examining which organizational dimension has highest
contribution to job performance, this finding was almost similar to previous study conducted by
Samad (2011). In this research all the three dimensions have significant influence on job
performance but Samad (2011) conducted a research in Malaysia and found that GPB have no
significant influence on job performance. This variation in finding may have different reasons
including the research setting.
Table 4.20 Summary of hypothesis
No. Hypothesis Accept/reject Decision
1 There is a negative and significant relationship Accepted
between general political behavior (GPB) and job
performance
2 There is a negative and significant relationship Accepted
between going along to get ahead (GATGA) and job
performance.
3 There is a negative and significant relationship Accepted
between pay and promotion policies (PPP) and job
performance.
4 There is a negative and significant relationship Accepted
between overall organizational politics (OP) and job
performance.
5 There is a significant influence of OP components Accepted
(GPB, GATGA and PPP) on job performance.
Source:- Researcher‟s survey data 2017

48
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Introduction
The study investigated the relationship between perceived organizational politics and employee job
performance and the effect of organizational politics on employee job performance in Bahir Dar
Textile Share Company. This chapter presents summary of the findings derived from the study.
The chapter also discusses the general conclusions of the study as well as the necessary
recommendations to the case and related organizations. The next part of the chapter also addresses
major limitations, suggestions for future researchers.

5.2 Summary of findings

The study was conducted to determine the effect of organizational politics on employee job
performance in Bahir Dar Textile Share Company. The research was guided by the following five
research questions those were already stated in the first chapter one:-
1. Do employees of the case organization are involved in politics in the study organization?
2. Is there a relationship between organizational politics dimensions and employee job
performance in the case organization?
3. Does organizational politics has effect on the employee job performance in Bahir Dar textile
Share company?
4. Which organizational politics dimensions has the greatest impact on the employee job
Performance in Bahir Dar Textile Share Company?
In addition, five research hypotheses were formulated. Mixed research approach and descriptive
and causal research design is used to examine the relationship between organizational politics
dimensions and employee job performance and to determine the effect of organizational politics on
employee job performance. The sources of data were primary and secondary. The participants of
this study were 304 employees of the case organizations. Proportional stratified sampling
techniques were used to select samples. Of the 304 questionnaires distributed to respondents
292(96%) were correctly rated and returned. Data were collected by using two types of
standardized questionnaires. These items had been tested many times indifferent places for their
49
reliability and currently its reliability were tested with Cronbach's alpha found above 0.70 which
was in acceptable level. The POPS which contained 15 items that measured three dimensions of
organizational politics its reliability was tested and found to be range from 0.82 to 0.9 and it was
also reasonably acceptable. The 16 items used to measure job performance were tested and the
reliability was 0.76 which was acceptable.
The analysis was done using SPSS (version 21) to compute descriptive statistics such as
percentage, mean scores, standard deviations and inferential statistics such as two tailed Pearson
correlation, multiple regression analysis.
According to analysis and discussions, the following summaries of major findings were presented
in accordance with the five basic questions and the research general and specific objectives.
 Employees of the case organization were participated in organizational politics with respect
to three dimensions of organizational politics which were the general political behavior, the
going along to get ahead and pay and promotion policies.
 The dimensions of organizational politics and also overall organizational politics have
shown a negative and significant relationship with employee job performance in the case
organization.
 Organizational politics dimensions have a significant negative effect on employee job
performance in the case organization.
 Among the organizational politics dimensions going along to get ahead have shown the
highest contribution on determining employee job performance.

5.3 Conclusion
The main aim of this study was to examine effect of organizational politics on employee job
performance in Bahir Dar Textile Share Company.
Based on Lewin (1936) theory of perception, the theory of norms of reciprocity and review of
previous studies and literatures, five hypotheses were proposed. The main theoretical model used
in the study predicted that employee job performance will have negative significant relationship
with the perception of politics of employees in the selected organization.
Relevant studies based on the different ways in which respected variables have been studied were
reviewed extensively. Findings from the study showed that employees are eager and sensitive to

50
know and participate and or reject actions taken by their supervisor and/or coworkers in their
organization. Perceived organizational politics negatively predicted employee job performance.
This means that employees who perceived their work environment as fair were committed and
engaged in good organizational citizenship behavior and has better performance than those who
perceive their work environment is political (Byrne 2005, Ahmad et al, 2016), which is similar to
the research finding.
Findings from the study further discovered that employees who perceived that their work
environment is free of politics and they are treated fairly have better performance than those
employees who perceive that there is no fair treatment and pay and promotion is held politically (
Abbas et.al 2015), that is employee perception of organizational politics and job performance have
inverse relationship.
The study also revealed that employees of the study organization were perceived and participated
in perception of organization because the mean values of each dimensions of perception of
organizational politics in descriptive frequency analysis show above than the cut-off value. The
interview data obtained from respondents of the study organization also support this finding.
Here among different measurement of employee job performance in this study employee job
performance was measured through dimension of task performance and counterproductive work
behavior (Samad and Amri, 2011). Thus all the relationships of employee job performance with
perception of organizational politics were done through the sum of task performance and
counterproductive work behavior.
From previous literatures the perception of organizational politics are expressed in three common
dimensions. These dimensions are a)Pay and Promotion Policies, a dimension of organizational
politics which represents organizations behaving politically through actions that it enacts. b) Go
Along to Get Ahead involves inactions by individuals like remaining silent or overlooking certain
kinds of behaviors in order to be accepted and c) General Political Behavior represents actions by
individuals to secure value outcomes.
Most research hypothesis was developed based on the above dimensions. Thus from the
developed and tested hypothesis of the research, the researcher concluded that each dimension of
perceived organizational politics (GPB,GAGA and PPP) and overall organizational politics has a
significant and negative relationship with that employee job performance. From the findings of

51
the study the researcher also concluded that overall organizational politics can predict employee
job performance by 27.1% and among the three dimensions of perceived organizational politics
going along to get ahead has highest contribution to employee job performance.
The above findings were also highly supported by the interview data collected from respondents
of the study organization.

5.4 Limitation of the study

A number of limitations were identified during the process of this study including luck of similar
or related research done in our country, considering only one organization which might reduce
the generalizability of findings of the research, conceptually this study only focus only one
outcomes of perception of organizational politics, the study didn‟t include other mediating
variables researchers were the major limitations.

5.5 Recommendations
In spite of the limitations from the findings of the study the following recommendations were
identified and listed. The study show that each dimension of organizational politics and overall
organizational politics have significant negative relationship with employee job performance thus
organizational managers;-
 Should better know that organizational politics might happen at different levels.
 Should better identify the cause of organizational politics and manage as it will not be a
threat to reduce the performance of employees and also distinguish which political
dimension has highest effect on employee performance and better try to manage it.
 Employees should better know the pay and promotion policies to ask why in case of unfair
treatment of him/herself and also for other employees ( how, when, requirements issue of
reward and promotion)and the HR policies as a whole.
 Once the pay and promotion policy was cleared to employees this policy should better to
implemented according to that document which governs all parties.
 Organization should create and practice an open both horizontal and vertical
communication.
 Employees of the organization should better made certain about how, when, why changes
52
 should be performed when ever change is implemented by the organization.
 There should be a periodical discussion between employees and higher officials and
feedback collection mechanism.
 Resources should be allocated clearly and in a participatory approach.
 Training should better take as a continuous activity both for managers and employees(
technical and behavioral or attitude and also managerial related)

5.6 Suggestion for future research

In an attempt to address the limitations of this research, it is recommended that further research can
be conducted to investigate the concepts of organizational politics, its antecedents, workplace
outcomes in both private and public organizations The researcher also suggested for future
researchers to include large number of organizations across a range of Ethiopia. Future researchers
also can address the effect of mediating variables like emotional intelligence, stress.

53
Appendeces A- References

Abbas et,al (2015) impact of perceptions of organizational politics on employees‟ job outcomes: the
moderating role of self-efficacy and personal political skills. Sci.Int.(Lahore),27(3),2729-2734

Akanbi, Paul ayobami and Ofoegbu, O.E. (2013) Influence of Perception of Organizational
Politics on Job Satisfaction among University Workers in Oyo Town, Nigeria,
European Journal of Business and Management

Allameh, M. S., Amiri, S., & Asadi, A. (2011). A Survey of the Relationship between
Organizational Commitment and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour. Case Study;
Regional Water Organization of Mazandaram Province. Interdisciplinary Journal of
Contemporary Resaerch Business, 3(5), 360-365.

Allen, R.W., D.L. Madison, L.W. Porter, P.A. Renwick and B.T. Mayes, (1979). Organizational
politics: tactics and characteristics of its actors. California Management Review, 22:
77-83.

Anol Bhattacherjee (2012). Social science research: principles, methods, and practices. University
of south florida

Aryee, S., X.C. Zhen and P.S. Budhwar, (2004). Exchange fairness and employee performance:
An examination of the relationship between organizational politics and procedural
justice. Organizational Behaviorand Human Decision Processes, 94: 1-14.

Bennett, R.J. and S.L. Robinson, (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 85: 349-360.

Borman, W. C., Ilgen, D., R., and Klimoski, R., J. (Eds.). Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons.Parker,
C.P., R.L. Dipboye and S.L. Jackson, (1995). Perceptions of organizational politics: An
investigation of antecedents and consequences. Journal of Management, 21: 891-912.
54
Borman, W.C. and S.J. Motowidlo,(1997). Task performance and contextual performance: the
meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10: 99-109.

Byrne, Z.S., (2005). Fairness reduces the negative effects of organizational politics on turnover
intentions, citizenship behavior and job performance. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 20: 175-200.

Buchanan, D.A. (2008) You Stab My Back, I‟ll Stab Yours: Management Experience and
Perception of Organization Political Behaviour. British Journal of Management, 19, 49-
64

Chen, Y.Y. and W.C. Fang, (2007).The moderating effect of impression management on the
organizational politics - performance relationship. Journal of Business Ethics, 79: 263-
277.

Cialdini, R. B., Green, B. L., & Rusch, A. J.(1992). When Tactical Pronouncements of Change

become Real Change: The case of Reciprocal Persuasion, Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology. 63(1), 30-40.

Conner, D.S., (2006) .Human-Resource professionals' perceptions of organizational Politics as a

function of experience, organizational size and perceived independence. The Journal of
Social Psychology, 146: 717-732.

Cresswell, J. W. (2009) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches.
3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests .Psychometrika

Drory, A. (1993). Perceived political climate and job attitudes. Organizational Studies,14, 59
55
 ±71.Farh, J. L., Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1990). Accounting for organizational
citizenship behavior:

Ferris, G. R., Russ, G. S., &Fandt, P. M. (1989).Politics in organizations. In R. A. Giacalone& P.

Rosenfeld (Eds.), Impression management in the organization (pp. 143±170). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum

Ferris, G. R., &Kacmar, K. M. (1992).Perceptions of organizational politics.Journal of Manage-

ment, 18,93±116.

Ferris, G.R., G.L. Adams, R.W. Kolodinsky, W.A. Hochwarter and A.P. Ammeter,(2002).
Perceptions oforganizational politics: Theory and research directions. England JAI
:Oxford University Press.

Gadot, E. V. (2007). Leadership Style, Organizational Politics, and Employees‟Performance; an

Empirical Examination of Two Competing Models.PersonnelReview, Vol. 3, No. 5

Gandz, J., & Murray, V. V. (1980).The experience of workplace politics.Academy of

ManagementJournal, 23,237±251

Gotsis, G., and Kortezi, Z. (2011).Bounded self interest: a basis for constructiveorganizational
politics.Management Research Review Vol. 34, No. 4

Hafiz Shahid Irfan Aslam (2013) The Influence of Perception of Organizational Politics on Job
Involvement and Turnover Intentions of Employees as Moderating Effects of Person
Environment Fit: A Study on Health Department of Pakistan, International Journal of
Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-7064 Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 |
Impact Factor (2015): 6.391

56
Harris, K.J., M. James and R. Boonthanom, (2005).Perceptions of organizational politics and
cooperation asmoderators of the relationship between job strains and intent to turnover.
Journal of Managerial Issues, 17: 2642.

Hira Aftab, Salman Mughal and Amna Arif (2013). Perceptions of Politics and Perceived
Performance in Public and Private Organizations, Middle-East Journal of Scientific
Research 16 (11): 1497-1500, 2013

Kacmar, K. M., & Ferris, G. R. (1991). Perceptions of organizational politics scale (POPS):
Development and construct validation. Educational and Psychological Measurement,51,
193±205

Kacmar, K. M., & Carlson, D. S. (1994).Further validation of the perceptions of politics scale
(POPS):A multiple sample investigation. Paper presented at the Academy of
ManagementMeeting, Dallas, TX.

Kacmar, K.M. and D.S. Carlson, (1997). Further validation of the perception of politics scale
(POPS): Amultiple sample investigation. Journal of Management, 23: 627-635.

Kacmar, K.M., D.P. Bozeman, D.S. Carlson and W.P. Anthony, (1999). An examination of the
perceptions oforganizational politics model: Replication and extension. Human
Relations, 52: 383-416.

Kacmar, K.M. and Baron, R.A. (1999) Organizational Politics: The State of the Field, Links to
Related Processes, and an Agenda for Future Research. In: Ferris, G.R., Ed., Research in
Personnel and Human Resources Management, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 1-39 .

Kenny, D. A., Bond, C. F., Jr., Mohr, C. D., & Horn, E. M. (1996). Do we know how much people
like one another? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 928–936

57
Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. New York: McGraw±Hill.

Lewin, K.(1936). Principles of Topological Psychology; Ingratiatory Behaviors in

Organizational Settings. Academy of Management Review, 13, 572–587.

Liu, Y.-P., & Chien, C.-Y. (2010). Capital structure and firm value in China: A panel threshold
regression analysis. African Journal of Business Management , 4 (12), pp. 2500-2507.

Newstrom, J. W.(2007). Organizational Behaviour-Human Behavior at work (12th

Ed). New York: McGraw Hill

Mahmood A. Bodla, Talat Afza and Rizwan Qaiser Danish (2014) ,Relationship between
Organizational Politics Perceptions and Employees‟ Performance; Mediating Role of
Social Exchange Perceptions, Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences 2014,

Mintzberg, H. (1983). Power in and around organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall

Molm, L. D. (1997). Coercive power in social exchange. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Motowidlo, S.J., 2003. Job performance.

Muhammad Asif Khan and Dr. Nasreen Hussain (2014) ; the analysis of the perception of
organizational politics Among university faculty,International Conference on Social
Sciences and Humanities

Nunnally, J., (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill.

Olorunleke G.K, (2015) , Effect of Organizational Politics on Organizational Goals and Objectives,
International Journal of Academic Research in Economics and Management Sciences
2015, Vol. 4, No. 3

Pallant, J., (2001). SPSS Survival manual. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

58
Parker, C.P., R.L. Dipboye and S.L. Jackson, (1995). Perceptions of organizational politics: An
investigation of antecedents and consequences. Journal of Management, 21: 891-912.

Parker, S.K., 2007. That is my job: How employees' role orientation affects their job performance.
Human Relations, 60: 403-434.

Pettigrew, M.A., (1973). The politics of organizational decision making. London: Tavistock
Publications.

Pfeffer, J.,(1981). Power in organizations. Boston: Pitman.

Poon, J.M.L., (2003).Situational antecedents and outcomes of organizational politics perceptions.

Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18: 138-155.

Poon, J.M.L., (2004). Moderating effect of perceived control on perceptions of organizational

politics outcomes. International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 7: 22-
40.

Rosen, C.C., H.S. Chang and P.E. Levy,( 2006). Personality and politics perceptions: A new
conceptualization and illustration using OCBs. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Rotundo, M. and P.R. Sackett, (2002). The relative importance of task, citizenship and
counterproductiveperformance to global ratings of job performance: A policy
capturing approach. Journal of Applied Psychology,87: 66-80.

Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (2001). Affective Commitment to the Organization:
The Contribution of Perceived Organizational Support. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 86, 825-836.
Sekeran, U. (2003), research methods for business; a skill building approach, 4th ed., john wiley &
sons, new york, USA.

59
Shamiala Burney (2012) An Integrated Conceptual Model of Performance Appraisals and
Succession Planning using Multi valued Evaluation:Pak. j. eng. technol. sci. Volume 2, No
2 , 2012 , 144- 159

Sarminah Samad and Shahrul Amri 2011 Examining the Influence of Organizational Politics on Job
Performance:Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5(12): 1353-1363

Sonnentag, S. and M. Frese, 2002.Performance concepts and performance theory.Chichester: John

Wileyand Sons.

Vigoda, E., (2003). Developments in organizational politics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar

Publishing.

Vigoda –Gadot , E. &Drory, A. (eds) (2006) Handbookof Organizational politics , C heltenham: Edward
Elgar.

Vigoda, G.E., (2007). Leadership style, organizational politics and employees' performance; An
empirical examination of two competing models. Personnel Review, 36: 661-683.

Viswesvaran, C., (2001). Assessment of individual job performance: A review of the past century
and a look ahead. London: Sage.

Williams L.J. and S.E. Anderson, (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as
predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management,
17: 601-617.
Yalew Endaweke, (2017) Basic research principles and implementation, 4th ed. Bahir Dar
university
nd
Yamane (1967).Statistics: An Introductory Analysis, 2 Ed. New York.

Zivnuska, S., K.M. Kacmar, L.A. Witt, D.S. Carlson and V.K. Bratton, (2004). Interactive effects
of impression management and organizational politics on job performance. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 25:627-640
60
Appendix A-English version questionnaire

BAHIR DAR UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT
MBA PROGRAM

RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRES

Dear sir/madam

I am a post graduate student of business administration in BAHIR DAR University, college of

business and economics. Currently, I am undertaking a research entitled the effect of organizational
politics on Employees’ job Performance. You are one of the respondents selected to participate on
this study. Please assist me in giving correct and complete information to present a representative
finding on the current status of the effect of organizational politics on employee job performance in
Bahir Dar textile Share Company.

Finally, I confirm you that the information that you share me will be kept confidential and only used
for the academic purpose. No individual„s responses will be identified as such and the identity of
persons responding will not be published or released to anyone. All information will be used for
academic purposes only. Thank you in advance for your kind cooperation and dedicating your time.

Sincerely, Yifredew Gessesse

61
 SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION (DEMOGRAPHIC DATA)
Fill in the blanks provided by a means of a cross (√) by indicating your correct
choice.

A. Gender 1. Male 2. Female

B. Age 1. 18-30 yrs 2. 31-40 yrs 3. 41-50 yrs 4. 51-60 yrs

5. More than 60 years

C. Educational level 1. Secondary School complete

2. TVET
3. Diploma
4. First Degree
5. Master‟s Degree and PHD

D. Marital status: 1. Single 2. Married 3. Divorced 4. Widowed

E. year of service in the company (experience in this company)_____________ years

Section 2 Questionnaires for data collection about the perceptions of organizational politics with
5 point likert scale as 1=strongly disagree,2=disagree, 3=neutral ,4=agree , 5 =strongly agree

62
No Items used for general political behavior-GPB 1 2 3 4 5
1 People in this organization attempt to build themselves up by tearing
others down.
2 There has always been an influential group in this department that
no one ever crosses.
Items used for Go along to get ahead-GAGA
3 Employees are encouraged to speak out frankly even when they are
critical of well-established ideas.
4 There is no place for yes-men around here; good ideas are desired even
if it means disagreeing with superiors
5 Agreeing with powerful others is the best alternative in this
organization
6 It is best not to rock the boat in this organization
7 Sometimes it is easier to remain quiet than to fight the system.
8 Telling others what they want to hear is sometimes better than telling
the truth.
9 It is safer to think what you are told than to make up your own mind.
Items for pay and promotion policies –PPP
10 I can‟t remember when a person received a pay increase or promotion
that was inconsistent with the published policies.
11 Since I have worked in this department, I have never seen the pay and
promotion policies applied politically.
12 None of the raises I have received are consistent with the policies on how
raises should be determined
13 The stated pay and promotion policies have nothing to do with how pay
raises and promotions are determined.
14 When it comes to pay raise and promotion decisions, policies are
irrelevant.
15 Promotions around here are not valued much because how they are
determined is so political.
63
 Section 3 -Questionnaires about employee job performance
No Items used for task performance Nev sel som oft Al
er do eti en wa
m mes ys
1 I adequately complete assigned duties
2 I fulfill responsibilities specified in job description.
3 Completes job duties in a timely manner
4 I meet formal performance requirements of the job.
5 I engage in activities that will directly affect my performance evaluation.
6 Prioritizes work schedule according to deadlines.
7 I perform my task free of errors
Items for counterproductive work Behavior
1 I didn‟t take property from work without permission
2 I Spent too much time fantasizing or daydreaming instead of working
3 I never falsified a receipt to get reimbursed for more money than I spent
on business expenses especially in field works, per diem.
4 I didn‟t take an additional or longer break than is acceptable at our
workplace
5 I didn‟t come late to work without permission
6 I didn‟t neglect to follow my boss's instructions
7 I never intentionally work slowly than my actual speed
8 I disclose confidential company information to an unauthorized person
9 I never put little effort into your work

64
Part 3. Interview questions

1. Is there an influential group or individual who develop themselves by tearing others even
their action is opposite to organizational goals in your company?
2. How is the communication between individuals in your company, does constructive ideas
have value and accepted by others? Are there individuals who need to agree with their
ideas even it is wrong? Is there free criticism of ideas of subordinates and supervisors?
3. Does the company have fair pay and promotion policy? If there is such policy do the
management bodies implement it correctly? Is there equal and fair distribution of resources
among individuals, among departments?
4. Does the presence of self-serving behaviors of individuals or groups have influence on the
performance of individuals in your organization?

65
Appendix B-Amharic version questionnaire

ባህር ዳር ዩኒቨርሲቲ

የቢዝነስና ኢኮኖሚክስ ኮላጅ

ማኔጅመንት ትምህርት ክፍሌ በቢዝነስ አድሚኒስትሬሽን የማስትርስ ፕሮገራም

ሇመመረቂያ ፅሁፍ ሇሇመስራት የተዘጋጁ መጠይቆች

ይድረስ ሇተሳታፊዎች !
የዚህ መጠይቅ ዓሊማ የማስትሬት ዲግሪ መመረቅያ ጥናት ሇሟሟሊት የሚውሌ መረጃ
ሇማጠናቀር የሚውሌ ብቻ በመሆኑ ምስጥራዊነቱ የተጠበቀ ስሇሆነ ምንም ስጋት ሳይገባቹ
አስፇሊጊውና ትክክሇኛ መረጃ ሇስራዬ መቃናት እንድትሰጡኝ በአክብሮት እጠይቃሇሁ፡፡
በመሆኑም ሠራተኞች በሚመሇከት ሠራተኞች እንዲሞሌሌን እንጠይቃሇን፡፡ ይህ መጠይቅ
መሙሊት በፍቃደኝነት የተመሰረተ ነው፡፡
በቅድሚያ ሇሚደረግሌኝ ቀና ትብብር ሁለ አመሰግናሇሁ፡፡
መሌሱ የሚሰጠው በሳጽኑ ሊይ ኤክስ (X) በማድረግ ሲሆን ሇክፍት ቦታ ግን ሃሳብዎን በመፃፍ
የሚገሇጽ ይሆናሌ፡፡

ክፍሌ 1፡ የግሌ መረጃን በተመሇከተ

1. ፆታ፡- ወንድ ሴት

2. የእርስዎ እድሜ የትኛው ውስጥ ነው ከ18-30 ዓመት ከ31-40ዓመት

ሐ. ከ41-50ዓመት መ.ከ51-60 ዓመት ሠ.ከ60 ዓመት በሊይ

3. የትምህርት ደረጃዎ ሀ. 10ኛ ወይም 12ኛ ያጠናቀቀ/ች ቲቪኢቲ ያጠናቀቀ

ሐ. ዲፕልማ መ. የመጀመሪያ ዲግሪ ሠ. ሁሇተኛ ዲግሪና በሊይ

4. የጋብቻ ሁኔታ ፡- ያሊገባ ያገባ አግብቸ ፇትቻሇሁ

ባሌ/ሚስት የሞተባት/ችበት

5. በዚህ ፋብሪካ ውስጥ ያገሇገለበት ዘመን ምን ያህሌ ነው?__________________

66
 ክፍሌ 2፡-ከዚህ በታች የተዘረዘሩት ሃሳቦች ተቋማዊ ፖሉቲካን የሚመሇከቱ ሲሆን የእርስዎን

ትክክሇኛ የመስማማት ደረጃ በመምረጥ ያክብቡ( በዚህ መጠይቅ 1 የሚወክሇው በጣም አሌስማማም

2 አሌስማማም 3. የምሇው የሇኝም 4 እስማማሇሁ 5. በጣም እስማማሇሁ ማሇትን ይወክሊለ)

ተ/ቁ መጠይቅ 1 2 3 4 5

1 በዚህ ድርጅት ውስጥ ላሊውን በመጉዳት የራሳቸውን ጥቅም ከፍ የሚያደርጉ ሰዎች 1 2 3 4 5

አለ
2 በዚህ ድርጅት ውስጥ ማንም ሉሰብረው የማይችሌ ተፅዕኖ ፇጣሪ ቡድን አሇ 1 2 3 4 5

3 ሰረተኞች ሃሳባቸውን በነፃነት እንዲያቀርቡ ይበረታታለ 1 2 3 4 5

4 ከቅርብ ሃሊፊ ሃሳብ ጋር ባይጣጣሙም ጥሩ ሃሳቦች ከሆኑ ተቀባይነት አሊቸው 1 2 3 4 5

5 ከጠንካሮች ጋር መስማማትና ጠንካራነታቸውን መቀበሌ ትክክሇኛ አማራጭ ነው 1 2 3 4 5

6 ጠንካሮችንና ተፅዕኖ ፇጣሪዎችን ስራ መከታተሌና ችግር ሲፇጥሩ ሇማስቆም መሞከር 1 2 3 4 5

ዋጋ ያስከፍሊሌ
7 አሌፎ አሌፎ ከመጋፇጥ ይሌቅ አይቶ ማሇፍ ይቀሊሌ(ይሻሊሌ) 1 2 3 4 5

8 እውነታውን ከሚነገርሊቸው ይሌቅ መስማት የሚፇሌጉትን ብቻ እንዲነገሩ የሚፇሌጉ 1 2 3 4 5

ሰዎች አለ
9 በራስህ ሃሳብ ከምትኖር ይሌቅ ሰው በነገረህ እንድትኖርና እንድትስማማ የሚፇሌግ 1 2 3 4 5

ሰው አሇ
10 ከተቀመጠው የክፍያና እድገት መመሪያ ውጭ የተሰራሇትና ያደገ(ክፍያ ያገኘ) ሰው 1 2 3 4 5

አሊስተውስም
11 በዚህ ድርጅት መስራት ከጀመርኩ ጀምሮ ሇሰራተኛ ክፍያና እድገት የሚሰጠው 1 2 3 4 5

በመቀራረብና በዝምድና፡ሲሰራ አይቸ አሊውቅም

12 እኔም ያገኘሁት እድገትና ክፍያ በመመሪያው ከተቀመጠው ጋር የሚጣጣም አይደሇም 1 2 3 4 5

13 የሰራተኛ እድገትና ጥቅማጥቅም ሲሰራ የክፍያና እድገት(ጥቅማጥቅም) መመሪያው 1 2 3 4 5

ብዙም ፋይዳ የሇውም

14 ሇሰራተኛ ዕድገትም ሆነ ክፍያ ማሻሻሌ ውሳኔ የድርጀቱ የጥቅማጥቅም ህጎች 1 2 3 4 5

አያገሇግለም
15 በድርጅታችን እድገት ሲሰጥ በስራ ሳይሆን በቅርርብ እና ላልች ግንኘኖቶች ስሇሆነ 1 2 3 4 5

ሰው ሇእድገት አይጓጓም

67
ክፍሌ 3፡ ከዚህ በታች የተዘረዘሩት የስራ አፇፃፀምን የሚመሇከቱ ሲሆን በተሰጡት ሃሳቦች ሊይ ከተሰጡት

አማራጮች መካከሌ የእርስዎን የመስማማት ደረጃ ቁጥሮችን በማክበብ ያሳዩ፡በዚህ መጠይቅ ቁጥሮች

ማሇትም 1 በፍፁም 2 አሌፎ አሌፎ 3፡ አንዳንዴ 4፡ በተደጋጋሚ 5 ሁሌጊዜ ይወክሊለ፡፡

ተ/ቁ የስራ አፇፃፀምን በተመሇከተ 1 2 3 4 5

1 የተሰጡኙን የስራ ተግባራት ሙለ በሙለ እጨርሳሇሁ 1 2 3 4 5

2 በስራ ዝርዝር የተቀመጡትን ሃሊፊነቶች እወጣሇሁ 1 2 3 4 5

3 ስራየን በሰዓት አጠናቅቃሇሁ 1 2 3 4 5

4 ከኔ የሚጠበቅብኝንና የተቀመጠውን የስራ አፇፃፀም አሟላለሁ 1 2 3 4 5

5 የስራ አፇፃፀሜን በቀጥታ በሚመሇከቱ ተግባራት እሰማራሇሁ 1 2 3 4 5

6 ስራዎችን በመጠናቀቂያ ጊዜያቸው ቅደም ተከተሌ እሰራሇሁ 1 2 3 4 5

7 ስረዎቼን ከስህተት በፀዳ ሁኔታ አሰራሇሁ 1 2 3 4 5

8 ሳሊሰፇቅድ የጓደኞቸን ንብረት/መገሌገያ አሌወስድም 1 2 3 4 5

9 በቢሮ ውስጥም ሆነ ውጭ የስራ ሰዓቴን በዋዛ ፇዛዛ አሊሳሌፍም 1 2 3 4 5

10 የማይገባኝን ጥቅም ሇማግኘት በማሰብ ማንኛውንም የማጭበርበር ስራ 1 2 3 4 5

አሌሰራም

11 በስራ ቦታ ተደጋጋሚ ወይም ሇረጅም ሰዓት የሻይ እረፍት አሌወስድም 1 2 3 4 5

12 ያሇፇቃድ አርፍጀ ወደ ስራ ቦታ አሌገባም 1 2 3 4 5

13 የአሇቃዬን ተእዛዝ አሌጥስም 1 2 3 4 5

14 ሆን ብየ ፍጥነቴን ቀንሼ ስራ አሊጓትትም 1 2 3 4 5

15 የድርጅታችንን ሚስጥር ሇማይመሇከተው ሰው አሳሌፌ አሌሰጥም 1 2 3 4 5

16 በስራዬ ሊይ ሙለ አቅሜን እጠቀማሇሁ 1 2 3 4 5

68
ክፍሌ 3. የቃሌ መጠይቅ ጥያቄዎች

1. በድርጅታችሁ ውስጥ ላልቹን እና ድርጅቱን ሉጎዳ የሚችሌ ተግባር በመፇጸም

የራሳቸውን ጥቅም የሚያሥከብሩ ግሇሰቦችና ቡድኖች አለ ወይ?

2. በበድርጅታችሁ ውስጥ ያሇው የሰራተኛ እና የኃሊፊ ግኑኑነት ምን ይመስሊሌ? ገንቢ

ሃሳቦችን ሲቀርቡ ተቀባይነት አሊቸው ወይ? የሀሊፊን ሃሳብ መተቸት ይቻሊሌ ወይ?

3. ድርጅቱ ፍትሃዊ የሆነ የእድገትና ክፍያ አሰራር መመሪያ አሇ ወይ? አሰራሩ ካሇ

አፇፃፀሙ ምን ይመስሊሌ? ፍትሃዊ የሆነ የሀብት ክፍፍሌ ይደረጋሌ ወይ?

4. በድርጅቱ ውስጥ ላልችንና ድርጀቱን በመጉዳት የሚጠቀሙ ሰራተኞች በመኖራቸው

በልልች ሰራተኞች የስራ ተነሳሽነት ሊይ የሚያሳድረው ተፅህኖ ምን ይመስሊሌ?

69