The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1750-614X.htm

CMS
8,3
Political behavior,
trustworthiness, job
satisfaction, and commitment
354 An empirical study
Bradley Olson and Yongjian Bao
Faculty of Management, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge,
Alberta, Canada, and
Satyanarayana Parayitam
Department of Management and Marketing, Charlton College of Business,
University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, Dartmouth, Massachusetts, USA

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects trustworthiness can have on the
perception of organizational politics and organizational outcomes. Most studies on organizational
politics examine the negative effects of organizational politics on organizational outcomes such as
organizational commitment. This study focuses on moderators that can decrease these negative effects.
Design/methodology/approach – The organization landscape consists of Chinese organizations,
with a total of 249 employees who were surveyed in 2009. Multiple and moderated hierarchical
regression were used in the analyses.
Findings – The results show that trustworthiness moderates the negative effects of organizational
politics on job satisfaction, affective commitment and normative commitment. These findings support
the importance of combating the negative effects that are in most, if not all, organizations.
Originality/value – This study uses as its sample an Asian culture that has been under-represented
in organizational politics studies, as the majority of these studies are conducted in North America. Yet,
organizational politics likely occurs in organizations worldwide.
Keywords Politics, Trustworthiness
Paper type Research paper

Chinese Management Studies
Vol. 8 No. 3, 2014
pp. 354-374
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1750-614X
DOI 10.1108/CMS-09-2012-0129
1. Introduction
Politics and political behavior are an inescapable fact of organizations. Realizing the
pervasiveness of politics, organizational researchers have extensively researched
the perceptions of politics and its key outcomes. Organization politics is behavior within
the organization that is self-serving, not officially sanctioned and normally detrimental
to the organization (Kacmar and Carlson, 1997). A more precise definition of
organizational politics was offered by Ferris et al. (1989) who contend that:
[…] organizational politics is a social influence process in which behavior is strategically
designed to maximize short-term or long-term self-interest, which is either consistent with or at
the expense of others’ interests (Miller et al., 2008, p. 145).
Although some argue that politics within the organization can be healthy, most scholars Political
and practitioners agree that a politically motivated work environment causes
widespread damage within the organization (Kiewitz et al., 2009).
behavior and
Scholars have investigated the relationships between politics and various outcomes trustworthiness:
such as workplace aggression, in-role job performance, job satisfaction, organizational an empirical study
citizenship behavior and organizational commitment (Ferris and Kacmar, 1992; Ferris
et al., 1989). A recent meta-analysis by Miller et al. (2008) has revealed some interesting 355
results:
• strong negative relationship between organization politics (POP) and organizational
commitment;
• strong negative relationship between POP and job satisfaction; and
• moderately positive relationships between POP and employee turnover intentions and
job stress.

While most of the earlier empirical work on outcomes of POP has demonstrated a direct
and negative effect, some researchers have incorporated moderators to examine if these
negative relationships of POP on various outcomes can be minimized through
interactions (Valle and Witt, 2001; Hu, 2010). For example, Valle and Witt (2001)
investigated the importance of teamwork as a moderator in the relationship between
POP and job satisfaction. Similarly, in another study, the moderating effect of
quantitative job insecurity strengthened the negative effects of POP on normative
commitment, whereas qualitative job insecurity decreased the negative effects of POP
on affective organizational commitment (Hu, 2010).
In our research, we propose “trust” as the moderator in the relationship between POP
and job satisfaction and POP and commitment. After reviewing the extensive research
on POP and outcomes, we investigate the moderating role of trust, which has not been
studied by prior researchers in the context of the relationships between POP, job
satisfaction and commitment. This study aims to provide a greater understanding of
moderators that weaken the strong negative effects organization politics can have on
employee outcomes. The second contribution of this research stems from the fact that
the study is conducted in an atypical cultural setting. While most of the studies were
based on American cultures which are predominantly individualistic in nature, few
studies were conducted in Asia. The present study focuses on Chinese culture which is
collectivist in nature, and where individuals believe that harmony is a virtue and
fraternity is an essential component of individual behavior (Hofstede, 1993).

2. Theoretical background and hypotheses development

2.1 Organizational politics and job satisfaction
During the last three decades, researchers have explored antecedents and consequences
of organizational politics. Despite growing literature, some researchers contend that
theory development of organization politics is arguably under-explored within the field
of management (Buchanan, 2008). There are two separate streams of research in
organizational politics: one emphasizes the perception of organizational politics (POPS)
and the other focuses on political behavior tactics (Kapoutsis et al., 2012). POPS is
defined as the degree to which the respondents deem their work setting as political, and
organizational politics behavior is defined as employees using influential tactics that
would be deemed political in nature (Kacmar et al., 1999). Based on these definitions, the
CMS latter construct would be an antecedent of the former one. In this paper, the focus is on
the perception of organization politics and the effects POPS can have on organizational
8,3 outcomes.
The common view is that politics exists to promote short- or long-term self-interests;
thus, politics contributes to negative consequences for other employees and the
organization. Within this perspective, theorists suggest that office politics create
356 stressors which in turn provide an uncomfortable work setting (Ferris et al., 1989).
Organizations may reward employees for not only legitimate and value-producing work
but also perceived actions such as organizational politics that are potentially
detrimental to the organization. Employees within highly political organizations are
informally influenced to engage in political antics in order to receive rewards that may
be difficult to receive using only sanctioned or approved behavior. This non-sanctioned
behavior creates more work demand, due to extra energy and resources expended
within the organization.
Another perspective of organizational politics is broader-based and focuses on
exchange relationships within the organization. Organizations are structured for
organization– employee exchanges (Aryee et al., 2004). These exchanges may be deemed
either negative or positive, and organizations will likely have mechanisms in place to
increase favorable exchanges. Yet, in the context of social exchange theory, Hsiung et al.
(2012) argue that exchanges perceived as politically motivated have a suppressing effect
on future positive behaviors, as the exchanges that are not positively reciprocated do not
prefigure future harmonious exchanges. Within these social exchanges, politics will
sometimes occur due to the social and informal nature of the organization setting.
Employees will make decisions based on self-interest if their exchanges do not produce
rewards deemed fair and appropriate by the employees. Chang et al. (2009) argue that
both stress and social exchange perspectives suggest that perception of organizational
politics will create a workplace atmosphere of ambiguity and confusion for employees.
In order to extend the cultural boundaries of the organizational politics literature, the
focus is Chinese employees. Very little literature exists regarding Chinese human
resource management in general (Si et al., 2008), and even less about the effects of office
politics on Chinese employees (Poon, 2006). Within the Chinese culture, collectivism is
woven into the fabric of society. Cultural collectivism espouses the importance of
developing harmony and understanding with each other before developing a business
relationship, and then respecting the norms associated with those informal relationships
(Warren et al., 2004). In some countries such as China, employees rely more heavily on
these interpersonal and social exchange relationships than on legal contracts in
employee/employer relationships due to the underdevelopment of employment
contracts (Hui et al., 2004). Because formal human resource rules exist to ensure
non-discriminatory (and non-political) treatment, employees engaged in work places
with less emphasis on formal rules monitor the employee exchange relationships to
ensure fair treatment. Arguably, the perception of political behavior is very pronounced
in certain countries such as China, as exchange relationships place more emphasis on
informal expectations than do the formal contracts adopted in many Western nations.
In sociology and public governance, Chinese scholars suggested that implicit
political rules underline the history of China (Wu, 2008; Tang, 2012) and prevail in
modern China. In the field of management, organization politics is an indigenous
characteristic of Chinese organizations, from Guanxi to personal loyalty to supervisors
(Xin and Pearce, 1996; Park and Luo, 2001; Chen et al., 2002). Studies on paternalistic Political
leadership and Guanxi between supervisors and subordinates in China indicate a
hierarchical relationship in Chinese organizations which affects organizational
behavior and
commitment and performance of subordinates (Cheng et al., 2004; Wei et al., 2010). trustworthiness:
These studies reveal a continuous interest in interpersonal relationships, political an empirical study
behavior and impacts on organizational outcomes.
Job satisfaction refers to an employee’s affective responses to specific job-related 357
activities, and is derived by both affect and cognition. The enjoyment from achieving the
standards at work and the positive associations of those with whom the employee
closely works constitute the specifics of job satisfaction (Van Yperen and Janssen, 2002).
Actions such as biased pay differentials or sabotage of work will be perceived as
political and can certainly frustrate Chinese workers, particularly when such actions
directly affect the individual’s work environment. These negative actions (and
interactions) both directly and indirectly affect the employee’s job, which in turn affect
his/her perspective on job satisfaction. Less enjoyment, as well as disharmony,
decreases positive emotional responses to the job. These negative occurrences within
the organization can be particularly troublesome for those within collectivistic societies,
as such actions run counter to their culture. Thus:
H1. Perceived organization politics are negatively related to job satisfaction.

2.2 Organizational politics and organizational commitment

Along with job satisfaction, Chinese employees affected by political behavior can
question organizational commitment. Although organizational commitment has been
extensively studied in the past, researchers call for more such studies due to the
influence of commitment within the organization (Payne and Huffman, 2005; Jaramillo
et al., 2005). Organizational commitment manifests itself in many forms, and both
affective and normative commitments are key predictors of employee behavior. Thus,
understanding employees’ commitment to the organization is essential, as employees’
positive contribution to the organization is important for a profitable organization.
Affective organizational commitment refers to the employee’s emotional attachment
to and connection with the organization, which is drawn from the goals and values of the
organization (Li, 2012). Normative commitment, or the extent to which an employee feels
compelled to stay with an organization (Bergman, 2006), is a much less studied form of
organization commitment, but is also relevant in this study. Both forms of commitment
draw upon internal desires, either due to attachment or loyalty, of being committed to
the organization. However, both types of commitment are culturally driven with
differences that can be partly due to individualism and collectivism (Yao and Wang,
2006). Affective commitment is more prevalent within individualist societies, as groups
(i.e. teams, organizations) are less central in an individual’s life and thus emotional
attachment through positive experiences within the organization (i.e. shared values,
goals) is necessary for employees in individualist societies to be committed to an
organization. In contrast, normative commitment is more prevalent within collectivist
societies such as China (Ehrhardt et al., 2012). Normative commitment is what one
“ought” to do for the organization or an ethical attitude toward the organization based
on a culture of loyalty to teams and groups (Yao and Wang, 2006). Individuals within
collectivistic societies are encouraged or expected to follow norms and do their duty
CMS within the organization or group, regardless of personal feelings (Fischer and Mansell,
2009).
8,3 Chinese employees who feel a connection with the organization due to past
relationships and through the norms of the culture of loyalty could begin to doubt their
own “unquestioning” loyalty if they were subjected to an unfriendly political
environment at work. Moreover, the level of loyalty from traditional Chinese culture has
358 lessened with the younger generation (Triandis, 2004), which increases the likelihood
that employees become dissatisfied and less committed when biased actions are
perceived by employees. Thus:
H2a. Perceived organization politics are negatively related to affective commitment.
H2b. Perceived organization politics are negatively related to normative
commitment.

2.3 Trustworthiness as a moderator

This study incorporates the Mayer et al. (1995) trust/trustworthiness model that
separates trustworthiness from trust. With exchange relationships that would arise
within organization politics, members will often rely on the interpersonal trust they
have established with each other to interpret the exchanges that occur (Mayer et al.,
1995). Further, as politics are not normally sanctioned by organizations, employees who
perceive politics would have to trust others, particularly their supervisors, regarding
acceptable behaviors within the organization (Pfeffer, 1992). Trust is the willingness to
be vulnerable to the actions of another person, regardless of how much control or
monitoring one may have concerning the other party (i.e. person, group, organization).
Mayer and Davis (1999) argue that trust will be developed with a trustor’s
assessment of a trustee, and this assessment will be based on three trustworthy
characteristics, namely ability, integrity, and benevolence. The emphasis of this study is
on trustworthiness rather than on trust in order to determine how each component of
trustworthiness can influence the relationship of organizational politics and employee
outcomes. Thus, this emphasis of trustworthiness provides a more fine-grained study of
trust, as trust is a function of trustworthiness.
Ability refers to “that group of skills, competencies, and characteristics that enable a
party to have influence within some specific domain” (Mayer et al., 1995, p. 717). Ability
is likely the foundation of trustworthiness in the context of employee/supervisor/
organization relationships. Those whose relationships are coupled require each party to
be competent in their abilities to maximize trusting relations. For example, if an
employee perceives a supervisor as incompetent then the employee will likely not allow
him- or herself to be vulnerable in business dealings, even if these individuals are cordial
and pleasant. Employees who perceive their supervisor as competent and able to
influence others feel some assurance that, at least in this dyad relationship, the
supervisor is able to assist the employees in an acceptable manner, even within a
politically charged environment. Benevolence deals with the extent to which the trustee
cares and watches out for others (Mayer et al., 1995). Benevolent supervisors are
concerned about those with whom they associate, particularly those whom they
supervise. This care and concern assures the employees that their supervisors do not
directly contribute to the negative outcomes of organizational politics. Benevolence is an
extremely important leadership characteristic within the Chinese context (Wu, 2012).
Finally, integrity concerns the extent to which “the trustee adheres to a set of principles Political
that the trustor finds acceptable” (Mayer et al., 1995, p. 719). Integrity is another
important trust characteristic that resonates very well with the Chinese culture, possibly
behavior and
attributable to a history of feudalism, autocracy and exploitation of subordinates (Wu trustworthiness:
et al., 2012). Employees who perceive their supervisors as having integrity will be an empirical study
confident that because the employees do not approve of specific politically motivated
behavior, that their supervisors share the same view and do not engage in this damaging 359
behavior. Thus, all three components of trustworthiness will act as attenuates to the
negative effects that perceived political behavior can have on employee outcomes, which
are job satisfaction, affective commitment and normative commitment.
Organizational politics is individual or group behavior that is ostensibly parochial
and informal; most of it is dependent on the way in which the individuals perceive the
information they receive from supervisors and peers (Miller et al., 2008).
Trustworthiness plays a major role in the interpretation of information. Trustworthy
supervisors will provide the basis for employees to balance the negative effects of
politics in the organization with trustworthy behavior (Korsgaard et al., 2002). An
employee that views the supervisor as competent will view the supervisor as someone
who has control over aspects of the employee’s job. A competent supervisor provides
reliability and dependability that allows the employee to have consistency in the job.
Although employees will be frustrated with negative consequences that directly affect
job satisfaction, such as negative politic behavior from another employee, having a
competent supervisor could provide some cushion for these events. In this case, a
supervisor may at least provide the assurance of some remuneration or reckoning in the
future.
If the supervisor demonstrates genuine concern (benevolence) and similar values
(integrity), then the employee receives some satisfaction with the job despite other
negative experiences. The employee will not view the supervisor as an instigator of
office politics. If the employee truly believes that the supervisor has benevolence and
integrity, the employee will receive some intrinsic value from the interactions with the
supervisor, thus buffering the negative effects of perceived organizational politics on job
satisfaction. Both benevolence and integrity are more emotion-based than ability;
therefore, a supervisor who cares and promotes positive values provides the employee
with satisfaction beyond extrinsic rewards (Fulk et al., 1985). Thus:
H3a. A supervisor’s abilities will weaken the negative effects of perceived
organizational politics on job satisfaction.
H3b. A supervisor’s benevolence will weaken the negative effects of perceived
organizational politics on job satisfaction.
H3c. A supervisor’s integrity will weaken the negative effects of perceived
organizational politics on job satisfaction.
Trustworthy characteristics will have varying effects on the relationship between
perception of organizational politics and organizational commitment. As previously
discussed, those steeped in collectivism are more apt to be committed to the organization
due to the norms and values of society (normative) rather than an emotional attachment
(affective). Thus, all three trustworthy characteristics will have much greater influence
CMS on buffering the negative relationship between organization politics and normative
commitment than between organization politics and affective commitment.
8,3 A trustworthy supervisor reinforces societal norms of loyalty to the organization,
which in turn allows the employee to downplay the negative aspects of political
behavior. For example, having faith in their supervisor’s abilities, employees see the
beneficial efforts of the supervisor, thus augmenting their view of competence within the
360 organization. This perspective assures the employees that competence may prevail over
some of the perceived illogical or unfair practices within the organization.
High integrity and benevolence of the supervisor will resonate well with Chinese
employees when they contemplate perceived unfair practices such as political behavior.
A concerned and caring supervisor will likely provide a basis for loyalty to the
organization. As well, values shared between the supervisor and employee will create
unity and cohesion. Thus, the supervisor has provided positive experiences for and
interactions with the employee even during frustrating times. These types of positive
experiences/interactions, which are extremely important in a collectivistic society,
provide assurances that those who have authority within the organization do care;
consequently, loyalty, which is ingrained in the employee, is more likely to be extended
towards the organization. Thus:
H4a. A supervisor’s abilities will weaken the negative effects that perceived
organizational politics can have on normative commitment.
H4b. A supervisor’s benevolence will weaken the negative effects that perceived
organizational politics can have on normative commitment.
H4c. A supervisor’s integrity will weaken the negative effects that perceived
organizational politics can have on normative commitment.
This study does not hypothesize, however, that a trustworthy supervisor will
significantly weaken the effect of office politics on affective commitment. The damages
of organizational politics on employees within collectivistic culture will continue due to
the stronger negative effects of organizational politics on affective commitment than on
normative commitment. In other words, the negative effects to the employees’ emotional
attachment to the organization could remain or even increase despite the efforts of the
supervisors (Figure 1).

3. Methods
3.1 Data and sample
Given the size of China’s economy, we considered regional differences in selecting
companies for our research. We targeted companies from two city regions: Shanghai
and Nanjing, which represented two levels of regional economic development from high
to medium. Data was gathered from eleven Mainland Chinese companies from Shanghai
and Nanjing.
We initially contacted and visited 16 companies, half manufacturing and half service.
Five companies decided not to participate because of the time and man power required
for the survey. The remaining firms allowed us to randomly select groups based on their
organizational charts. We were allowed to discuss the purpose of the study with the
respondents, and assure them of confidentiality and anonymity when responding to
these individual surveys.
 Political
Ability Benevolence Integrity
behavior and
trustworthiness:
H3a (-) H3b (-) H3c (-) an empirical study
Job Satisfaction

361
H1 (-)
Perception of
Affective
politics
Commitment
(POP) H2a (-)

H2b (-)
Normative
Commitment
H4a (-)
H4b (-) H4c (-)

Ability Benevolence Integrity

Figure 1.
Conceptual model

The response rate was very high, with 249 useable surveys from 276 requested
employees. The average age was 30 years old, with 63 per cent males and 37 per cent
females. These employees were lower level employees. The respondents spoke very
little English; thus, survey forms were translated into Mandarin. The back-translation
technique was utilized in order to minimize interpretation errors.

3.2 Measures
A Likert-type scale is used for measuring the main variables, with anchors of “strongly
disagree” to “strongly agree”.
Job Satisfaction is measured using the scale developed by Brayfield and Rothe (1951).
This scale is used due to the global nature of the measurement (Barsky, Thoresen,
Warren, & Kaplan). The alpha for this measure is 0.79.
Affective commitment is measured using the scale developed by Meyer et al. (1990).
The alpha for this measure is 0.82.
Normative commitment is also measured using a scale developed by Meyer et al.
(1990). The reliability coefficient for this measure is 0.65.
Perception of organizational politics is measured using a scale developed by Kacmar
and Carlson (1997). This scale has an alpha of 0.85.
Trustworthiness (ability, benevolence and integrity) is measured using a scale
developed by Mayer and Davis (1999). The alpha for trustworthiness-ability is 0.94,
while the alpha for trustworthiness-benevolence is 0.91 and the alpha for
trustworthiness-integrity is 0.85.
This study utilizes three control variables: age, gender and tenure. These control
variables have been shown in previous studies to be predictors of organizational job
satisfaction and organizational commitment (George et al., 2010). Tenure is measured in
terms of numbers of years the employee is with the organization.
CMS 3.3 Common method variance
At the theoretical level, we addressed the question of operational definition by using the
8,3 manifest variables that are theoretically representative measures of latent constructs
and measurements which are unambiguous. Secondly, to eliminate the possibility that
respondents experienced evaluation apprehension or saw the responses as socially
undesirable, we ensured anonymity. Third, as another method to reduce mono-method
362 bias, we conducted personal interviews with participants and explained measures in
their native Mandarin language.
Statistically, we followed the procedures outlined by Podsakoff and Organ (1986) and
conducted Harman’s one-factor test. We subjected all the variables to a factor analysis to
see if any single factor emerged. If a substantial amount of common method variance is
present, then either a single factor will emerge or one factor will account for a majority
of covariance in the independent and criterion variables. We found that more than one
factor emerged and thus Harman’s one-factor test demonstrated that common method
variance is not substantial enough to invalidate the results. In addition to the one-factor
test, we also conducted partial correlation procedure where we partialled out the first
un-rotated factor and analyzed the relationships between independent and criterion
variables. After controlling the common method factor, the results did not change
significantly, and meaningful correlation still exists between the variables of interest.
To sum up, we followed the typical research design of hierarchical regression modeling
by going through all the necessary steps. We established the reliability of measures,
confirmed that distribution was normal and verified the internal validity and
generalizability.

4. Results
A study of correlation table reveals that the correlations between trustworthiness-
ability and trustworthiness-benevolence (r ⫽ 0.73), trustworthiness-benevolence and
trustworthiness-integrity (r ⫽ 0.77) and trustworthiness-ability and trustworthiness-
integrity (r ⫽ 0.76) are very close to or even a bit higher than the threshold level of 0.75,
which may constitute multicollinearity (Tsui et al., 1995). Because ability, benevolence
and integrity are all components of trust, a certain level of correlation between these
variables is intuitive. With a Variance Inflation Factor less than 2 for the centered data,
however, multicollinearity is not a problem in the present study (Kennedy, 1979).
Moreover, the regression coefficients are the same for centered data and un-centered
data.
Means, standard deviations and zero-order correlations are reported in Table I.
The hypotheses that organizational politics is negatively related to job satisfaction,
affective commitment and normative commitment are tested using multiple regression
analysis. In addition, a moderated hierarchical regression analysis is performed to test the
extent to which trustworthiness-ability, trustworthiness-benevolence and trustworthiness-
integrity influence the relationship between organizational politics and job satisfaction,
affective commitment and normative commitment. These results are presented in Table II.
Table II shows the results of the moderated regression analysis. Control variables
(age, gender and tenure) are entered in the first step, main variables in the second step
and interaction variables in the third step (Agresti, and Finaly, 2009). The regression
coefficients associated with each individual step are reported in steps 1 through 3. It is
important to note that with a total sample of 249, in the first step we utilize three control
Variable Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Political
Age 30.3 7.98 1.00
behavior and
Gender 1.46 1.70 ⫺0.17 1.00 trustworthiness:
Tenure 3.42 2.99 0.24*** ⫺0.08 1.00
Politics 3.45 0.95 ⫺0.11 0.05 ⫺0.08 1.00
an empirical study
Trustworthiness-
ability 4.93 1.29 0.12 0.05 0.12 ⫺0.48*** 1.00 363
Trustworthiness-
benevolence 4.31 1.32 0.22*** ⫺0.03 0.15** ⫺0.45*** 0.73*** 1.00
Trustworthiness-
integrity 4.73 1.18 0.17** ⫺0.06 0.14 ⫺0.56*** 0.76*** 0.77*** 1.00
Job satisfaction 4.85 1.23 0.16** 0.08 0.09 ⫺0.45*** 0.58*** 0.59*** 0.51*** 1.00
Affective
commitment 4.88 1.15 0.25*** 0.003 0.21*** ⫺0.51*** 0.53*** 0.56*** 0.57*** 0.65*** 1.00
Normative
Table I.
commitment 4.48 1.23 0.14** 0.11 0.07 ⫺0.30*** 0.50*** 0.52*** 0.52*** 0.49*** 0.60*** 1.00 Descriptive statistics and
correlations between
Notes: *** p ⬍ 0.001; ** p ⬍ 0.01 variables

variables thereby reducing the degrees of freedom by 3; hence, it becomes (3,246). In the
second column, we introduce four main variables; therefore, the total degrees of freedom
becomes 7 and is reported (7,241). In the final step, we have three interaction variables,
and thus the degrees of freedom becomes 10 making it (10,239).
Job satisfaction as a dependent variable is represented by Columns 1 through 3.
Column of Table II shows the control variables. Of the control variables, age (␤ ⫽ 0.19,
p ⬍ 0.01) and gender (␤ ⫽ 0.13, p ⬍ 0.05) are significant. Column 2 represents the
regression coefficients of organizational politics and moderator variables
trustworthiness-ability, trustworthiness-benevolence and trustworthiness-integrity.
The regression coefficients of organizational politics (␤ ⫽ ⫺0.307, p ⬍ 0.001) is
significant, suggesting that organizational politics is negatively related to job
satisfaction. Thus, H1, which predicts a strong negative relationship between
organizational politics and job satisfaction, is supported.
For the moderating hypotheses, the cross product of organizational politics with
moderating variables trustworthiness-ability, trustworthiness-benevolence and
trustworthiness-integrity is used. Table II column 3 shows the results of the analysis for
the moderating effects of the trustworthiness variables on organizational politics and
job satisfaction. The interaction (cross product) between organizational politics and
trustworthiness-ability is not significant (␤ ⫽ ⫺0.25, p ⬎ 0.10), organizational politics
and trustworthiness-benevolence is significant (␤ ⫽ 10.24, p ⬍ 0.001), and
organizational politics and trustworthiness-integrity is significant (␤ ⫽ ⫺1.10, p ⬍
0.05). Thus, H3a is not supported. The results show that H3b is supported. The
moderated regression results for H3c show a significant negative interaction between
organizational politics and trustworthiness-benevolence. While the negative
relationship between organizational politics and job satisfaction is self-explanatory, the
negative interaction between organizational politics and trustworthiness-benevolence
affecting job satisfaction requires a careful explanation. The interaction coefficient,
although negative, supports H3c based on the interaction plot that is discussed in the
next paragraph.
 8,3

364
CMS

Table II.

analysis of

commitment and
trustworthiness and
Moderated regression

normative commitment
job satisfaction, affective
organizational politics on
DV ⫽ Job satisfaction DV ⫽ Affective commitment DV ⫽ Normative commitment
Variables Step 1 a Step 2 Step 3 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

Age 0.19** 0.10 0.08 0.26*** 0.18*** 0.17** 0.15* 0.10 0.08
(3.00; 0.003) (1.82; 0.070) (1.45; 0.138) (4.20; 0.000) (3.36; 0.001) (3.19; 0.002) (2.35; 0.019) (1.63;0.106) (1.37; 0.171)
Gender 0.13* 0.14** 0.12* 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.06 0.05
(1.98; 0.048) (2.57; 0.011) (2.17; 0.031) (1.01; 0.312) (1.64; 0.102) (1.55; 0.121) (0.64; 0.521) (0.97; 0.332) (0.90; 0.367)
Tenure 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.13* 0.14** 0.14** 0.03 0.04 0.04
(0.74; 0.462) (1.04; 0.298) (1.08; 0.282) (2.15; 0.033) (2.65; 0.009) (2.68;0.008) (0.44; 0.659) (0.61; 0.540) (0.61; 0.538)
Politics ⫺0.307*** ⫺0.11 ⫺0.40*** ⫺0.58** ⫺0.20** ⫺0.44
(⫺5.23; 0.000) (⫺0.49; 0.619) (⫺7.35; 0.000) (⫺2.79; 0.006) (⫺3.08; 0.002) (⫺1.84;0.067)
Trustworthiness- 0.16 0.35 0.16 ⫺0.085 0.23* ⫺0.64
ability (1.55; 0.122) (0.97; 0.330) (1.73; 0.08) (⫺0.25; 0.803) (2.13; 0.034) (⫺1.63; 0.105)
Trustworthiness- 0.15 ⫺0.95** ⫺0.01 ⫺0.61 0.04 ⫺1.23**
benevolence (1.45; 0.149) (⫺2.79;0.006) (⫺0.08; 0.93) (⫺1.88; 0.061) (0.37;0.707) (⫺3.30; 0.001)
Trustworthiness- 0.04 1.01* 0.12 0.75 0.01 1.84***
integrity (0.34; 0.735) (2.14; 0.034) (1.02; 0.309) (1.67; 0.096) (0.06; 0.951) (3.55; 0.000)
Trustworthiness- ⫺0.25 0.28 0.99*
ability ⫻ politics (⫺0.634; 0.526) (0.73; 0.466) (2.25; 0.025)
Trustworthiness- 1.24*** 0.67* 1.43***
benevolence ⫻ politics (3.39; 0.001) (1.95; 0.05) (3.59; 0.000)
Trustworthiness- ⫺1.10* ⫺0.71 ⫺2.03***
integrity ⫻ politics (⫺2.19; 0.030) (⫺1.47; 0.143) (⫺3.68; 0.000)
R2 0.05 0.33 0.36 0.10 0.41 0.42 0.026 0.182 0.238
Adjusted R2 0.04 0.31 0.33 0.09 0.39 0.39 0.014 0.158 0.206
F-value 4.34** 16.76*** 13.43*** 9.18*** 24.14*** 17.49*** 2.18 7.612*** 7.399***
⌬ R2 0.27 0.03 0.31 0.01 0.155 0.056
⌬ F-value 24.82*** 4.14** 31.9*** 1.58 11.40*** 5.83***
df 3,246 7,242 10,239 3,246 7,242 10,239 3,244 7,240 10,237

Notes: *** p ⬍ 0.001; ** p ⬍ 0.01; * p ⬍ 0.05

The interaction plots are drawn following the procedures developed by Aiken and West Political
(1991). The interaction plots that show the moderating effects of trustworthiness-
benevolence and trustworthiness-integrity on the relationship between organizational
behavior and
politics and job satisfaction are presented in Figures 2 and 3. These plots are based on trustworthiness:
separate regression lines that are above and below one standard deviation. In Figure 2, an empirical study
the plots show that when trustworthiness-benevolence is low, an increase in
organizational politics results in a steeper decrease in job satisfaction than when 365
trustworthiness-benevolence is high. A greater negative slope occurs for the
relationship between organizational politics and job satisfaction for the low
trustworthiness-benevolence than for the high trustworthiness-benevolence. Thus, this
figure provides further support to H3b. Figure 3 shows that lower levels of
organizational politics are associated with higher levels of job satisfaction when
integrity is higher rather than lower. However, the fall in the job satisfaction is slightly
higher for executives when trustworthiness-integrity is higher, as organizational
politics increase, than when trustworthiness-integrity is lower; therefore, H3c is
partially supported.
Affective commitment as a dependent variable is represented by columns 4 through
6. Column 4 of Table III shows the control variables. Of the control variables, age (␤ ⫽
0.26, p ⬍ 0.001) and tenure (␤ ⫽ 0.13, p ⬍ 0.05) are significant. Column 5 represents the
regression coefficients of organizational politics and moderator variables
trustworthiness-ability, trustworthiness-benevolence and trustworthiness-integrity.
The regression coefficients of organizational politics (␤ ⫽ ⫺0.40, p ⬍ 0.001) are
significant, suggesting that organizational politics is negatively related to affective

Figure 2.
Benevolence as a
moderator in the
relationship between
organizational politics and
job satisfaction
CMS
8,3

366

Figure 3.
Integrity as a moderator
in the relationship
between organizational
politics and job
satisfaction

commitment. Thus, H2a, which predicts a strong negative relationship between

organizational politics and affective commitment, is supported.
Normative commitment as a dependent variable is represented by columns 7 through
9. Control variables are presented in column 7 of Table III. Of the control variables, only
age is a significant predictor of normative commitment (␤ ⫽ 0.15, p ⬍ 0.05). Column 8 of
Table II offers the regression results of the main variables model. The regression
coefficient of politics (␤ ⫽ ⫺0.20, p ⬍ 0.01) is significant; thus, H2b, which predicts a
strong negative relationship between organizational politics and normative
commitment, is supported.
Moderating hypotheses of organizational politics with the trustworthiness variables
(viz., trustworthiness-ability, trustworthiness-benevolence and trustworthiness-integrity)
with normative commitment as the dependent variable are presented in column 9 of Table II.
The interaction (cross product) between organizational politics and trustworthiness-ability
is significant (␤ ⫽ 0.99, p ⬍ 0.05), thus supporting H4a. The interaction coefficient between
organizational politics and trustworthiness-benevolence is also significant (␤ ⫽ 1.43, p ⬍
0.001), thus supporting the H4b. However, the interaction term of organizational politics and
trustworthiness-integrity is also significant but negative (␤ ⫽ ⫺0 2.03, p ⬍ 0.001). An
explanation for this moderation is provided in the interaction plot discussion.
The interaction plots of the moderated relationship between organizational politics
and each of trustworthiness-ability, trustworthiness-benevolence and trustworthiness-
integrity and their effect on normative commitment are presented in Figures 4-6.
As illustrated in Figure 4, higher levels of trustworthiness-ability are associated with
higher normative commitment, although higher levels of politics have a negative impact
on normative commitment. Organizational politics has a stronger negative correlation
with normative commitment when trustworthiness-ability is low than when
 Political
behavior and
trustworthiness:
an empirical study
367

Figure 4.
Ability as a moderator in
the relationship between
organizational politics and
normative commitment

Figure 5.
Benevolence as a
moderator in the
relationship between
organizational politics and
normative commitment

trustworthiness-ability is high. Similarly, Figure 5 demonstrates that higher levels of

trustworthiness-benevolence are associated with higher levels of normative
commitment, except when organizational politics are low. Beyond a limit, higher
organizational politics are associated with higher levels of normative commitment when
CMS
8,3

368

Figure 6.
Integrity as a moderator
in the relationship
between organizational
politics and normative
commitment

trustworthiness-benevolence is high than when trustworthiness-benevolence is low.

Thus, H4a and H4b are supported.
Trustworthiness-integrity as a moderator in the relationship between organizational
politics and normative commitment offers a perplexingly different figure. Figure 6
shows that the relationship between organizational politics and normative commitment
increases normative commitment for lower levels of trustworthiness-integrity, whereas
the relationship is negative when trustworthiness-integrity is higher. Yet, normative
commitment is at a higher level despite this negative slope when integrity is at the lower
level. Thus, H4c is partially supported. Although a moderator effect with the
trustworthy effects on organization politics and affective commitment was not
hypothesized, a positive relationship exists with benevolence and organization politics
on affective commitment. The relationship which supports the regression conclusion is
plotted (Figure 7).

5. Discussion
When the differences in explained variance are examined, this study shows that
perception of organizational politics has a much stronger negative effect on affective
commitment than on normative commitment. Chinese employees are less likely to be
emotionally attached to an organization, and thus a negative political environment will
provide ample reasons to further emotionally detach from the organization and lead to a
much greater decrease in affective commitment than normative commitment. It is
extremely important to understand that organizational politics can be particularly
damaging in Chinese companies, so that measures are put in place to help employees
align themselves with corporate values. Individuals not in harmony with organizational
values can be detrimental to the overall culture of the group/department in which the
employee works, or even the organization itself.
A related finding is that only one trustworthy characteristic (benevolence) seems to
mitigate the damages of perception of politics on affective commitment. Thus, providing
 Political
behavior and
trustworthiness:
an empirical study
369

Figure 7.
Benevolence as a
moderator in the
relationship between
organizational politics and
affective commitment

support groups and caring supervisors would be important to ensure values are deemed
significant to these employees. Yet, all three trustworthy characteristics have some
effect on normative commitment, a dimension of commitment which relates to culturally
ingrained loyalty, regardless of personal feelings. These findings supplement the
limited research on Chinese organizations, and underscore the importance of identifying
the varying effects culture can have on organizational politics and organizational
commitment.
Both integrity and benevolence attenuate the effects perception of organizational
politics can have on job satisfaction. Benevolence is such a strong buffer that if a
supervisor shows genuine concern for employees, even in a politically charged environment,
employees will be less critical of their jobs. When supervisors have high integrity,
employees’ perception of job satisfaction is higher than when the supervisor has low
integrity; however, integrity has less of a buffering effect than does benevolence. For
example, the effect of perceived politics has a slightly greater negative effect on employees’
job satisfaction when the supervisor has higher integrity than when the supervisor has
lower integrity. One argument for these results could be that the employee may be
frustrated by the disparity of values between the supervisor and the organization. This
frustration may override the potential buffering effect high integrity can have on an
employee, as the organization is regarded with less integrity due to the negative political
atmosphere.
Ability, on the other hand, does not have any significant effect on perception of
organizational politics and job satisfaction. This finding indicates that when employees
face a politically charged environment, they look less to abilities than to genuine care
shown by the supervisor. Genuine care (benevolence) is more centered on interpersonal
relationships than is ability; thus, these findings underscore the significance of
interpersonal relationships within Chinese culture.
CMS Another finding of this study is that trustworthy characteristics have stronger
effects on perception of organizational politics and normative commitment than on
8,3 perception of organizational politics and affective commitment. Chinese employees are
very sensitive to office politics which create disharmony and biased treatment within
the organization; accordingly, they are much less likely to feel emotional attachment to
the organization even if they remain outwardly loyal. Further, Chinese employees will
370 be less apt to allow certain characteristics, such as trustworthiness, to amend the
frustrations of office politics on affective commitment, as the latter is based on emotional
bonds.
With normative commitment, Chinese employees allow trustworthiness to
partially cushion the blow of office politics. Both ability and benevolence are strong
moderators and act similarly in their effects on perception of organizational politics
and normative commitment. Having a competent and caring supervisor gives
credence to employees that at least one superior positively represents the
organization, despite the politics of some. This assurance validates the importance
of loyalty to the organization notwithstanding personal frustrations. The effects of
integrity on politics and normative commitment are much more complex. These
findings provide support that employees whose supervisors have high integrity will
have higher normative commitment than those whose supervisors have low
integrity. Yet, employees with supervisors with lower integrity are able to increase
normative commitment with the increase of politics. One argument could be that due
to the politics within the organization, employees perceive low values as normal.
They may even perceive this type of self-serving political environment as useful for
their advancement in the work place. For example, Buchanan (2008) reports that a
group of managers in Britain view politics as necessary for organizational
effectiveness. Further, these managers feel that politics assures more resources,
improves career prospects and increases reputations. Further, Kapoutsis et al. (2012)
found that some politic tactics such as image building increase career
advancements. Similarly, Chinese employees in a climate of organization politics
whose supervisors have low integrity may become more committed to the
organization when politics increases due to the potential for derived benefits.
With the emphasis on harmony within the Chinese culture, Chinese employees
perceive organizational politics as very damaging. Yet, trustworthiness, particularly the
more emotionally based components, complements Chinese culture. Prior to this study,
empirical evidence provided few clues as to the importance trustworthiness can have on
Chinese companies and the damaging effects POPS can have on organizations. This
study has many implications for the Chinese organization. The trustworthy
characteristics of Chinese managers do matter in the context of organizational politics.
All organizations will have some element of politics and such an environment can be
especially damaging to Chinese organizations, yet individual managers can provide a
positive force in Chinese organizations where interpersonal relationships are
paramount. Although organizational politics are damaging to Western companies as
well, our findings may be somewhat different if this study was mirrored in the USA. We
would argue that organizational politics would be more damaging to normative
commitment than to affective commitment, reflecting the cultural differences between
Chinese and American societies.
6. Limitations and future research Political
A general criticism of survey research is common method variance, because the
independent and dependent constructs are often measured entirely with self-reported
behavior and
data. Yet, common method variance may not be as limiting as was once assumed, trustworthiness:
because although zero-order correlations are inflated, shared variance among the an empirical study
independent variables also increases. This shared variance makes it more difficult to
find unique, significant beta weights and reduces the chance that common method 371
variance has had a major effect on the conclusions (Olson et al., 2007). Moreover, the
measures employed in this research are perceptual and attitudinal, and thus provide
support in using a single source design.
This study highlights the positive moderating role of trustworthiness in
organizations within the Chinese culture. Comparative studies of Western and Eastern
companies should be conducted to determine whether trustworthiness would be a
stronger moderator within an individualistic versus a collectivistic society. As well,
further studies could examine the trustworthiness of the executives or the top
management team to assess employees’ commitment based on their trust of those in
power within the organization. Understanding the concept of power and its importance
in influencing the organizational politics and commitment of employees provide
avenues for future research.
To conclude, this study contributes to both the trust and perception of organizational
politics literature. Politics can be very damaging to organizations, yet trustworthiness
can be an important moderator for perceived politics and for organization outcomes. As
well, the survey group of Chinese employees offers a different landscape that
underscores the damaging effects organizational politics can have on the attitudes of
employees and the characteristics of trustworthiness.

References
Agresti, A. and Finaly, B. (2009), Statistical Methods for the Social Sciences, Pearson, Upper Saddle
River, NJ.
Aiken, L. and West, S. (1991), Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions, Sage,
Newbury Park, CA.
Aryee, S., Chen, Z.X. and Budhwar, P. (2004), “Exchange fairness and employee performance: an
examination of the relationship between organizational politics and procedural justice”,
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 94 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Bergman, M. (2006), “The relationship between affective and normative commitment: review and
research agenda”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 645-663.
Brayfield, A. and Rothe, H. (1951), “An index of job satisfaction”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 35 No. 5, pp. 307-311.
Buchanan, D. (2008), “You stab my back, I’ll stab yours: management experience and perceptions
of organization political behavior”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 49-64.
Chang, C.H., Rosen, C.C. and Levy, P.E. (2009), “The relationship between perceptions of
organizational politics and employee attitudes, strain, and behavior: a meta-analytic
examination”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 779-801.
Chen, Z.X., Tsui, A.S. and Farh, J.L. (2002), “Loyalty to supervisor vs. organizational commitment:
relationships to employee performance in China”, Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, Vol. 19 (Sept), pp. 339-356.
CMS Cheng, B.S., Chou, L. and Wu, T. (2004), “Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses:
establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations”, Asian Journal of Social
8,3 Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 89-117.
Delle, E. (2013), “The influence of perception of organizational politics on employee job
involvement and turnover intentions: empirical evidence from Ghanaian organizations”,
European Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 5 No. 9, pp. 151-160.
372 Ehrhardt, K., Shaffer, M., Chiu, W. and Luk, D. (2012), “National identity perceived fairness and
organizational commitment in a Hong Kong context: a test of mediation effects”,
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 23 No. 19, pp. 4166-4191.
Ferris, G. and Kacmar, K.M. (1992), “Perceptions of organizational politics”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 18, pp. 93-116.
Ferris, G., Russ, G. and Fandt, P. (1989), “Politics in organizations”, in Giacalone, R.A. and
Rosenfeld, P. (Eds), Impression Management in the Organization, Lawrence Erlbaum,
Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 143-170.
Fischer, R. and Mansell, A. (2009), “Commitment across cultures: a meta-analytical approach”,
Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 40 No. 8, pp. 1339-1358.
Fulk, J., Brief, A. and Barr, S. (1985), “Trust-in-supervisor and perceived fairness and accuracy of
performance evaluations”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 301-313.
George, E., Levenson, A., Finegold, D. and Chattopadhyay, P. (2010), “Extra-role behaviors among
temporary workers: how firms create relational wealth in the United States of America”,
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 530-555.
Hofstede, G. (1993), “Cultural constraints in management theories”, Academy of Management
Executive, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 81-94.
Hsiung, H., Lin, C. and Lin, C. (2012), “Nourishing or suppressing? The contradictory influences of
perception of organizational politics on organizational citizenship behavior”, Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 85 No. 2, pp. 258-276.
Hu, S. (2010), “Perceived organizational politics and organizational commitment”, Management
and Service Science Conference, Wuhan, pp. 1-4.
Hui, C., Rousseau, D. and Lee, C. (2004), “Psychological contract and organizational citizenship
behavior in China: investigating generalizability and instrumentality”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 2, pp. 311-321.
Jaramillo, F., Mulki, J. and Marshall, G. (2005), “A meta-analysis of the relationship between
organizational commitment and salesperson job performance: 25 years of research”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58 No. 6, pp. 705-714.
Kacmar, K.M. and Carlson, D.S. (1997), “Further validation of the perceptions of politics scale
(POPS): a multisample investigation”, Journal of Management, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 627-658.
Kacmar, K.M., Bozeman, D., Carlson, D. and Anthony, W. (1999), “An examination of the
perceptions of organizational politics model: replication and extension”, Human Relations,
Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 383-416.
Kapoutsis, I., Papalexandris, A., Thanos, I. and Nikolopoulos, A. (2012), “The role of political
tactics on the organizational context-career success relationship”, International Journal of
Human Resource Management, Vol. 23 No. 9, pp. 1908-1929.
Kennedy, P. (1979), A Guide to Econometrics, 2nd ed., MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Kiewitz, C., Restubog, S., Zagenczyk, T. and Hochwarter, W. (2009), “The interactive effects of
psychological contract breach and organizational politics on perceived organizational
support: evidence from two longitudinal studies”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 46
No. 5, pp. 806-834.
Korsgaard, M., Brodt, S. and Whitener, E. (2002), “Trust in the face of conflict: the role of Political
managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 2, pp. 312-319. behavior and
Li, J. (2012), “Occupational commitment and labor relations in firms: an empirical study in China”, trustworthiness:
Chinese Management Studies, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 300-317. an empirical study
Mayer, R.C. and Davis, J.H. (1999), “The effect of the performance appraisal on trust for
management: a field quasi-experiment”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 84 No. 1, 373
pp. 123-136.
Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H. and Schoorman, F.D. (1995), “An integrative model of organizational
trust”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 709-734.
Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J. and Gellatly, R. (1990), “Affective and continuance commitment to the
organization: evaluation of measures and analysis of concurrent and time-lagged
relations”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 75 No. 6, pp. 710-720.
Miller, B.K., Rutherford, M. and Kolodinsky, R.W. (2008), “Outcomes associated with perceptions
of organizational politics: a meta-analysis”, Journal of Business & Psychology, Vol. 22 No. 3,
pp. 209-222.
Olson, B., Parayitam, S. and Bao, Y. (2007), “Strategic decision making: the effects of cognitive
diversity, conflict, and trust on decision outcomes”, Journal of Management, Vol. 33 No. 2,
pp. 196-222.
Park, S. and Luo, Y. (2001), “Guanxi and organizational dynamics: organizational networking in
Chinese firms”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 455-477.
Payne, S. and Huffman, A. (2005), “A longitudinal examination of the influence of mentoring on
organizational commitment and turnover”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 48 No. 1,
pp. 58-168.
Pfeffer, J. (1992), “Understanding power in organizations”, California Management Review, Vol. 34
No. 2, pp. 29-50.
Podsakoff, P. and Organ, D. (1986), “Self-reports in organizational research: problems and
prospects”, Journal of Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 531-544.
Poon, J. (2006), “Trust-in-supervisor and helping coworkers: moderating effect of perceived
politics”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 518-532.
Si, S., Wei, F. and Li, Y. (2008), “The effect of organizational psychological contract violation on
managers’ exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect in the Chinese context”, International Journal of
Human Resource Management, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 932-944.
Tang, S.-Y. (2012), Ten Principles for a Rule-ordered Society: Enhancing China’s Governing
Capacity, China Economics Publishing House, Beijing.
Triandis, H.C. (2004), “The many dimensions of culture”, Academy of Management Executive,
Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 88-93.
Tsui, A., Ashford, S., Clair, L. and Xin, K. (1995), “Dealing with discrepant expectations: response
strategies and managerial effectiveness”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 6,
pp. 1515-1543.
Valle, M. and Witt, L.A. (2001), “The moderating effect of teamwork perceptions on the
organizational politics-job satisfaction relationship”, The Journal of Social Psychology,
Vol. 141 No. 3, pp. 379-388.
Van Yperen, N., Janssen, O. (2002), “Fatigued and dissatisfied or fatigued but satisfied? Goal
orientations and responses to high job demands”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 45
No. 6, pp. 1161-1171.
CMS Warren, D., Dunfree, T. and Li, N. (2004), “Social exchange in China: the double-edged sword of
guanxi”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 355-372.
8,3 Wei, L.Q., Liu, J. Chen, Y. and Wu, L. (2010), “Political skill, supervisor–subordinate Guanxi and
career prospects in Chinese firms”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 47 No. 3,
pp. 437-454.
Wu, S. (2008), The Implicit Rules: The Real Game in Chinese History, Yunan People’s Publishing
374 House, Kunming.
Wu, M. (2012), “Moral leadership and work performance”, Chinese Management Studies, Vol. 6
No. 2, pp. 284-299.
Wu, M., Huang, X., Li, C. and Liu, W. (2012), “Perceived interactional justice and trust in
in-supervisor as mediators for paternalistic leadership”, Management & Organization
Review, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 97-121.
Xin, K. and Peace, J. (1996), “Guanxi: Connections as substitutes for formal institutional support”,
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 6, pp. 1641-1658.
Yao, X. and Wang, L. (2006), “The predictability of normative organizational commitment for
turnover in Chinese companies: a cultural perspective”, International Journal of Human
Resource Management, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 1058-1075.

Further reading
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 Resource Management, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 1-39.

Corresponding author
Bradley Olson can be contacted at: bradley.olson@uleth.ca

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints