Content uploaded by Ishtiaq Ahmed
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ishtiaq Ahmed on Dec 12, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
14
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
ORGANIZATIONAL POLITICS AND TURNOVER INTENTION: A STUDY FROM
PRIVATE COLLEGES OF PAKISTAN
Ishtiaq Ahmed
Department of Management Science, Virtual University of Lahore, Pakistan
ABSTRACT: The organizational politics is not a new phenomenon. Due to cultural
differences it may be in different shapes but it is existing in every organization. In Pakistan the
educational employee also engage himself in politics especially in private colleges. Likewise,
others, the organizational politics is a cause of employee turnover intention. This study aims
to know the relationship of organizational politics and its three antecedent’s (favoritism, pay
and promotion and scarcity of resources) on employee turnover intention in private colleges.
The Multan city was choosing to collect the data from respondents. A quantitative method was
used in this study. To test the hypotheses regression analysis was used. The result of this study
revealed that favoritism, pay and promotion and scarcity of resources antecedents of
organizational politics create a politics tendency in employees and that will result in employee
turnover intention.
KEYWORDS: Organizational Politics, Turnover intention, Political Perception, Private
Colleges, Pakistan.
INTRODUCTION
The organizational politics is an informal way in which the employee tries to attaining power
through merit or fortune. His struggle done only for personal benefits and to acquire extra
projects (Dubrin, 2001). Sometime in an organization, the employee plays the silent politics
activities to fulfill the personal desires. These types of activities are most dangerous and
harmful than open political activities (Andrews & Kacmar, 2001). Frost (1987) argued that
employees who do not involve in organizational politics show their reaction into two forms,
the absenteeism, and turnover. According to Daft (1989) low autonomy and task contribute to
powerlessness in an individual that increased the politics in the organization.
The effects of politics on employee’s performance examined harmful that increase the stress
level of employees at the workplace (Drory & Beaty, 1991; Ferris & King, 1991; Moorhead &
Griffin, 1989; Vigoda, 2003; Ferris et al, 1996). People mostly linked organizational politics
with cunning, subversion and personal goal to fulfill in an informal way. Block (1988)
described the beautiful definition of politics he told: “if I told you, you were a very political
person; you would take it either as an insult or at best as a mixed blessing”. Kanter (1979) used
the team term power, force, and politics as general and he connotation it as negative. The power
and politics have significant effects on every member and also entire organization. The
individual behavior and attitude depending on the display of other employee’s behavior and
attitude (e.g, colleague, supervisor, and boss). Sometime the level of politics increases in the
organization in which the individual bypass or avoid the authority chain for personal interest.
He uses a shortcut and unofficial channel for personal benefits.
The turnover figure tells that the employees not happy with an organization environment,
working condition or may be the behavior of organization management. The private sector of
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
15
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
Pakistan especially education sector is growing rapidly from two decades. Therefore, the
employment chances are more in education compare to other departments. Unfortunately, the
turnover intention is also large in this sector from other sectors. Through this study, we try to
know the relationship of organizational politics and turnover intention in private colleges.
This paper tries to measure the relationship between organizational politics and employee
turnover intention in the private colleges of Pakistan. There had been not sufficient work done
on this area in Pakistan. So this paper will open the new gates for researchers to contribute their
efforts in this area.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Turnover Intention
There are few people who have started their career in an organization and retired from that
organization. There is a majority of people who switch their job at the different level from one
organization to other organization. There are many reasons behind in which employee decide
to leave the job, for example when individual see that the organization interest going to opposite
direction with his interest he leave the institute (Fugate et al, 2008).
The excessive turnover is a big issue for the organization in these days. Therefore, the
progressive organization tries to retain their committed employees through employee
assistance program for the completion of organizational goals (Whetten, 2006). In turnover
intention, the person decided to leave the current job physically or mentally. In physically form
the employee leave the organization and in mentally form a person physically not leave the job
but mentally disappear from the workplace. When the employee thinks for intention to
turnover, he passes through a process that starts with thought to quite the job and with the
passage of time this thought become stronger (Rosse, 1988).
The turnover rate in private sector is higher as compare to the public sector because in private
sector there are more opportunities for career development and growth. The private
organizations are inclined to gain the market share, for this purpose they put the extra work
burden on the employee to minimize their operational cost. These types of policies create a
turnover tendency among employees (Griffeth et al, 2000). According to Yavas et al (2004)
the behavior of employee plays a key role in organization success especially in private sector
where public dealing more. The turnover rate was also seen in where the unemployment rate is
low because alternative jobs are more and people can shift from one organization to other
organization easily. The organization that gives high salary and provides better working
environment but the employee and employer relationship are not good the employee will leave
the organization. According to Dess & Shaw (2001) turnover are two types; the voluntary and
involuntary turnover. 1) In voluntary, turnover the employee intentionally verdict to leave the
job due to bad the working environment, work overload, a rough behavior of boss and offer
good position from other organization. 2) In involuntary, turnover the organization terminate
the employee due to bad performance and his inability.
Employee turnover badly affects the organization routines performance and loss of experience
employees (Dalton & Todor, 1982; Bluedorn, 1982; Agrote & Epple, 1990). Dissatisfaction in
employees related to job increases the chance of other employment opportunities (Hellman,
1997) while high job satisfaction decrease in turnover (Saleh et al, 1965; Price & Mueller,
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
16
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
1981; Cavanagh & Coffin, 1992). The demoralization of employee is also a cause of turnover.
The demoralization may be in the shape of rude behavior of employee with their colleagues or
may be in the shape of additional working that absorbed the employee working capacity (Steers
& Mowday et al, 1982).
Organizational Politics
The organization faces an external challenge (e.g, competitor, and new technology) but within
an organization, the organizational politics is a big issue that recently attracted the researcher
attention. Organizational politics depend on the organization environment because the
environment develops the political activities and develop favoritism (Arasli, Bavik & Ekiz,
2006; Arasli & Karadal, 2009; Poon, 2003; Ferris & Kacmar, 1992; Ferris, King, Judge &
Kacmar, 1991; Kusluvan, IIhan & Buyruk, 2010; Ross, 2005; Vigoda, 2002). Mintzberg (1983)
stated that organizational politics is an informal and illegitimate employee behavior that
showing legitimate power in different ways. According to Ferris et al (1989) organizational
politics is a social process in which individual try to gain maximizes self-interest. Poon (2004)
defined organizational politics has own words according to him “the organizational politics is
an individual action that not formally approved by an organization to influence others to meet
one’s personal goals.
The organizational politics promotes the lack of trust culture in the organization and in a lack
of trust culture employee not shares the knowledge to people. He starts to reduce his dedication
and efforts and induces to withdraw behavior (Bishop et al, 2006). According to Mayes & Allen
(1977) and Zahra (1987) due to organizational politics, the performance of the organization
badly affects. Chang, Rosen & Levy (2009) considered that little bit politics is necessary to run
the team functioning but excess in politics destructive the team or individual performance.
According to Adams (1965) (who was the founder of equity theory) demonstrated that
unfairness and disparity are the two elements that changed a normal employee behavior into
political behavior.
Ethically well balanced politically behavior develops a teamwork and knowledge share culture
in an organization. The management that aware of political activities in the organization
effectively and efficiently handle the situation through promote the equality culture (Butcher
& Clarke, 2006). Political work environment creates deprivation and inequity in employees
(Gotsis & Kortizi, 2010; Harris et al, 2009; Vigoda-Gadpt & Kapun, 2005). There is examined
that the effect of organization politics on lower status employee’s more than upper level (Drory,
1993; Ferris et al, 1989; Gotsis & Kortezi, 2010). The organization politics detach the
individual physical or mental ability. According to Ferris et al (1989) in a political environment
the employee of that organization respond in the three-ways, in first, he leaves the organization,
second, he cannot withdrawal from an organization and still remain a member of an
organization, and in a third way, he involved in organizational politics activities.
Romm, & Pliskin (1997) and Seo (2003) reflected that mostly organizational politics grow
where various units’ employees make coalitions at a workplace. This type of collations
encourages the organizational politics. According to Baddeley & James (1987) there are four
types of organizational political behavioral managers in an organization. According to them,
there is clever, inpet, wise, and innocent political behavior manager in an organization. They
told that clever behavior manager interested in power, they are not ethically, their behavior is
aggressive and they are more politicized. The wise behavior manager has good interpersonal
skills, they share the information with others and keep an eye on political activities. The
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
17
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
innocent behavior managers are ethical fallow the rules and not appreciate the political
activities in the organization. The inept behavior managers also not promote the political
activities in the organization.
Sowmya & Panchanatham (2012) conducted a study in engineering college of Chennai to know
the association between organizational politics and turnover intention. Furthermore, this study
tried to know the effects of gender on turnover intention of teachers. The result of this study
presented that work place politics badly affects the performance of teaching faculty. Nayyer &
Raja (2012) attempts to know the impacts of management impression on the intensity of
organizational politics in telecommunication sector of Pakistan. The result of that study
revealed that management impression and organizational politics varies from gender to gender
and structure of an organization. The researchers suggested that to reduce the negative effects
of politics in an organization the manager should link the compensation with performance.
Established a clear communication channel and decision should be made on justice.
Gull & Zaidi (2012) conducted a research in the health sector in Lahore, Pakistan to analysis
the impact of organizational politics. The result of that study investigated that higher the
politics perception among employees lower the satisfaction in employees. They suggested that
management should identify the worker needs and try to solve them and management also
should take the psychologist service to reduce politics tendency in an organization.
Favoritism
Favoritism word is taken from Latin word favor that meaning is “mercy”. Favoritism in
organization inclination to favor of the person that has the personal link, relatives, and friends
over other employees. In favoritism, the organization executives give the special privilege to a
favorable person in organization decision and other matters. Favoritism creates a stress among
employees and the committed and loyal employee start to think turnover intention. The other
bad image of favoritism is that employee fight for power (Kwon, 2006). Favoritism devastates
the organizational harmony and prosperity. Arasli & Tumer (2008) also described that one of
the main reason of job stress in the organization is favoritism. In favoritism culture, the
employee may leave the organization or may engage themselves in organizational politics.
Individual fulfill their interest with the help of favoritism. Favoritism mostly saw in the hiring
of new employees and in monetary rewards that given to employees (Judy & Miriam, 2006).
Pay and Promotion
Pay and promotion are also the main cause of organizational politics. Ahmed & Sadia (2017)
conducted a study in banks of Pakistan to know the effect of rewards on employee’s
performance. The result of this study revealed that in private sector banks the incentive, bonus,
and promotion significantly affected the employee performance than recognition, job
autonomy, career development and work itself. In public sector the pay and promotion policies
regulated by law. Therefore, a manager cannot effect on pay and promotion policies while in
private sector manager playing a political game at pay and promotion policies and this situation
became more worst when manager promote favoritism. The organization uses the performance
evaluation program for pay and promotion to given the employees. But it has been examined
that organization commonly play political game on it. The management and administrator of
the organization inclined give higher performance rating those employees who have good
relation with a boss and support his good or bad decision. The employee who build the strong
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
18
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
relation with his boss and show curiosity in the private life of boss also rewarded (Ferris &
King, 1991).
Skinner and his colleagues developed a reinforcement theory according to them the behavior
of individual tend to be repeated with the positive response. Similarly, if organization
appreciates and giving the incentive on a political basis. The individual will repeat the political
behavior again and again.
Scarce of resources
No organization perfect about resources, if an organization not faced scarcity of resources in
all area but it may be deficient at least one area (Frost, 1987). In the organization, the employees
do not physically grapple between them but they fight fiercely political games for getting
resources (Khan & Hussain, 2014). Scarce of resources is a cause of organizational politics that
manager play (Kacmar & Carlson, 1994) when manager see that resources of an organization
are scarce their behavior more politically and they try to effect on the decision to get extra
resources. Scarce of career development opportunities lead to higher politics in an organization
because some employee perceives that their lack of promotion and career development
opportunities is that they are not playing politics games (Ferris & Buckley, 1990; Gandz &
Murray, 1980). The uncertainty generally has seen in an organization from management side
in decision making when resources are limited. Likewise, this uncertainty promotes the
political environment (Gotsis & Kortezi, 2010; Othman, 2008; Poon, 2003).
Objectives of the Study
The objectives of this study is to measure the relationship between organizational politics and
employee turnover intention in private colleges of Pakistan. The specific objectives of this
study are:
• To identify the organization politics factors that causes of employee turnover intention.
• To measure whatever organization politics effect on employee turnover intention.
• To know the relationship between organizational politics and turnover intention.
• To suggest possible solution to reduce the organizational politics.
Hypotheses of the study
H1: There is a relationship between favoritism and organizational Politics.
H0: There is no relationship between favoritism and organizational Politics.
H2: There is a relationship between pay and promotion and organizational Politics.
H0: There is no relationship between pay and promotion and organizational Politics.
H3: There is a relationship between scarcity of resources and organizational Politics.
H0: There is no relationship between scarcity of resources and organizational Politics.
H4: There is a relationship between organizational politics and turnover intention.
H0: There is no relationship between organizational politics and turnover intention.
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
19
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
Conceptual Framework
The following conceptual framework model was developed. This model describes the
relationship of favoritism, pay and promotion and scarcity of resources with organizational
politics that lead to turnover intention. The organizational politics is independent variable with
its three antecedents, while turnover intention is dependent variable.
H1
H2 H4
H1
Independent Dependent
(Figure.1)
RESEARCH DESIGN/METHODOLOGY
The quantitative technique method was applied and the experimental research was used to
know the effect of organizational politics on employee turnover intention. Multan city was the
target and choose as a sample. The convenient sampling technique was used in this study. A
close ended five-point Likert scale (1. Strongly Disagree, 2. Disagree, 3. Neutral, 4. Agree, 5.
Strongly Agree) questionnaire given to private colleges respondents for data collection. The
well-known private colleges’ brands that spread all over the country and have a good a
reputation in educational sector selected. Total 224 questionnaires were divided to respondents.
The correct filled 204 questionnaires returned back. The response rate was 91%.
In this study an eighteen questions were developed for respondents. The favoritism contained
4 questions, pay and promotion contained five questions while the scarcity of resources,
turnover intention, and organizational politics contained three questions. For analyzing the data
SPSS (statistical package for social sciences) ver.20 used. Regression analysis was used to
measure the relationship between organizational politics and employee turnover intention.
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
20
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
Table 1: Scale items
Organizational Politics
1
2
3
Generally, Organizational politics consider bad thing in my organization.
In my organization there is a group of people who try to effect on organizational
decision.
In this organization people prefer personal interest rather than organizational interest.
Favoritism
4
5
6
7
Favoritism in this organization generally consider bad thing.
Mostly, Promotion is given to best performer rather than personal basis.
My boss acknowledges my views as he acknowledges other employee’s views.
The executives prefer organizational goals over friends and relatives goals.
Pay and Promotion
8
9
10
11
12
In this organization pay and promotion given to employees according to rules and
performance.
In this organization pay and promotion policies made consistently.
I agree with my organization pay and promotion policies.
Sometimes, pay and promotion applied on politically basis.
The pay and promotion rules of my organization are clear and well defined.
Scarcity of resources
13
14
15
The employees of this organization always compete for scarce of resources.
I my organization resources often limited.
Resources are divide equally in my organization.
Turnover Intention
16
17
18
I am always looking for a new job.
I am not stay much more if offer me new job.
Last time I applied for a job before one month ago.
Table 2: Reliability
Scale
Items
Cronbach Alpha
Organizational politics
Favoritism
Pay and Promotion
Scarcity of resources
Turnover intention
3
4
5
3
3
.820
.725
.731
.728
.779
Source: SPSS ver. 20
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
21
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
Table 3: Respondents Demographic Data
Variables
Frequency
Percentage (%)
Age
Male
Female
149
55
73%
27%
Total
204
100%
Educational Level
Post-Graduation
Master’s Degree
Bachelor
13
127
64
6%
62%
32%
Total
204
100%
Job Status
Permanent
Contractual
Daily Wagers
204
0
0
100%
Total
204
100%
Job Category
Teaching Faculty
Management
183
21
90%
10%
Total
204
100%
Number of years’ service in present organization
1-2 years
3-5 years
6-8 years
9-12 years
76
88
29
11
37%
43%
14%
6%
Total
204
100%
RESULTS
Test Hypotheses One
H1: There is a relationship between favoritism and organizational Politics.
H0: There is no relationship between favoritism and organizational Politics.
Table 4: Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1
.923a
.851
.850
.17931
a. Predictors: (Constant), Favoritism
Source: SPSS ver.20
Table 5: ANOVAa
Model
Sum of Squares
Df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
1 Regression
Residual
Total
37.133
6.495
43.627
1
202
203
37.133
.032
1154.902
.000b
a. Dependent Variable: Organizational Politics
b. Predictors: (Constant), Favoritism
Source: SPSS ver.20
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
22
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
This hypothesis result suggested that favoritism exerts a significant and positive effect on
organizational politics. The table 4 shows that Favoritism has a high and strong degree of
organizational politics variance. The R Square value is .923 and adjusted R Square is .851. This
means 85% of organizational politics explained by Favoritism. Table 5 shows F value indicates
that there is a significant and strong relationship between Favoritism and organizational
politics. The increase of favoritism means the increase in organizational politics.
Test Hypotheses Two
H2: There is a relationship between pay and promotion and organizational Politics.
H0: There is no relationship between pay and promotion and organizational Politics.
Table 6: Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1
.500a
.250
.247
.40236
a. Predictors: (Constant), Pay and Promotion
Source: SPSS ver.20
Table 7: ANOVAa
Model
Sum of
Squares
Df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
1
Regression
Residual
Total
10.925
32.702
43.627
1
202
203
10.925
.162
67.484
.000b
a. Dependent Variable: Organizational Politics
b. Predictors: (Constant), Pay and Promotion
Source: SPSS ver.20
Table 6 result shows that there is a significant and positive relationship between Pay and
promotion and organizational politics. The R-square value is .500 and adjusted R-square value
is .250. According to adjusted R Square 25% organizational politics were explained by pay and
promotion. The ANOVA table 7 indicates F value is 67.484 > 2.45 (P <.05). The F value told
that there is a significant and positive relationship between pay and promotion and
organizational politics. If the organization increase the pay and promotion on politics basis the
organizational politics will also increase. Therefore, this hypothesis supported.
Test Hypotheses Three
H3: There is a relationship between scarcity of resources and organizational Politics.
H0: There is no relationship between scarcity of resources and organizational Politics.
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
23
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
Table 8: Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1
.834a
.696
.695
.25614
a. Predictors: (Constant), Scarcity of Resources
Source: SPSS ver.20
Table 9: ANOVAa
Model
Sum of Squares
Df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
1 Regression
Residual
Total
30.375
13.253
43.627
1
202
203
30.375
.066
462.985
.000b
a. Dependent Variable: Organizational Politics
b. Predictors: (Constant), Scarcity of Resources
Source: SPSS ver.20
The table 8 result revealed that scarcity of resources has a high degree of impact on
organizational politics. The R Square value is .834 and adjusted R Square is .695. This means
70% of organizational politics were determined by a scarcity of resources. ANOVA table 9
shows F value 462.985 > 2.45 (P <.05). This value indicates that there is a significant and
strong relationship between scarcity of resources and organizational politics. The result of
hypothesis indicated that scarcity of resources and organizational politics have a significant
relationship. If the scarcity of resources in organization increase the organizational politics is
also increase.
Test Hypotheses Four
H4: There is a relationship between organizational politics and turnover intention.
H0: There is no relationship between organizational politics and turnover intention.
Table 10: Test of Between-Subjects Effects
Source
Type lll Sum of
Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
Corrected Model
Intercept
Favoritism
Pay and Promotion
Scarcity of Resources
Favoritism* Pay and Promotion
Favoritism*Scarcity of Resources
Pay and Promotion*Scarcity of
Resources
Favoritism*Pay and
Promotion*Scarcity of Resources
Error
Total
Corrected Total
44.344a
384.188
.061
.144
1.244
.000
.238
.265
.000
6.068
3460.000
50.412
11
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
0
192
204
203
4.031
384.188
.061
.072
.622
.000
.238
.265
.032
127.561
12156.763
1.917
2.281
19.678
.007
7.544
8.395
.000
.000
.168
.105
.000
.934
.007
.004
a. R Squared=.880 (Adjusted R Squared= .873)
Source: SPSS ver.20
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
24
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
The P-value is 0.000, which is less than 0.05; therefore, we accept the alternate hypotheses.
The result table 10 told that the effect of organizational politics on employee turnover
significant. The hypothesis 4 revealed that organizational politics and turnover intention have
a strong positive relationship if the organizational politics increase the employee turnover
intention will also increase.
DISCUSSION
The core objectives of this study are to measure the effect of organizational politics and its
three antecedent’s favoritism, pay and promotion and scarcity of resources on employee
turnover intention in private colleges of Pakistan. The result of first hypotheses suggested that
favoritism have a significant and positive effect on organizational politics. The favoritism
developed the politics environment in the organization. The favoritism culture in private
colleges mostly seen, through favoritism, the executives try to achieve the goal and try to retain
the employees but overall the favoritism is harmful and dangerous for the organizational career.
The second hypotheses supported that injustice pay and promotion policies in organization
create a political situation in the organization. The skillful and unskillful employees generally
pay politics on it. The third hypotheses result showed that scarcity of resources is also a cause
of organizational politics and the employee play a silent politics on it. In private education
sector, the resources are limited and every employee wants to access that resources so they play
political game on a scarcity of resources and promote the political culture in an organization.
That employees who not takes part in political activities are behind.
The last hypotheses result supported that overall organizational politics develop a turnover
tendency in employees. The committed and professional employee in education try to avoid
himself from politics. The inability employees always try to get the attention of his boss and
their first priority is to protect their job. For this purpose, they set behind of organizational
goals and prefer the boss work instead of organization work. In private colleges, the low level
and unskilled worker usually involved in politics compare to skilled workers.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The employees are utmost sources of an educational institute. It is very crucial for educational
institute owners and managers to keep their brilliant performance employees specially when
the culture of an organization political. The result of this study is in line with the previous
literature that organizational politics is a cause of turnover intention. This study was to measure
the effect of favoritism, pay and promotion and scarce resources as antecedents of
organizational politics, in turn, employee turnover intention. For this purpose, a model of
organizational politics and its three antecedents on employee turnover intention developed. All
four hypotheses were supported that organizational politics and its antecedent’s favoritism, pay
and promotion and scarce of resources effect on employees and thus become the cause of
employee turnover. The result of this study shows that in private colleges the skillful and
professional employee prefers to leave the organization but not engage himself in
organizational politics.
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
25
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
Under the favoritism, the educational executives engaged in unfair activities. The result of that
unfair activities, the committed worker become uncommitted and reduce their interest in work
and they cannot cooperate with their coworkers in educational activities of the college. The
favoritism may be beneficial and fruitful for friends and relatives but not for organizational as
the whole. The executives should discriminate the favoritism culture in the organization and
appreciate the skillful workers and discourage the political workers.
Pay and promotion directly effect on employees and every employee try to get the maximum
benefit. The education executives generally rewarded to their close friends and relatives instead
of professional and skilled employees. In private colleges the pay and promotion policies for
employees are not fixed. These pay and promotion policies encourage the organizational
politics in colleges that will also lead to turnover intention. The management should take the
decisive step and introduce the new policies related to pay and promotion to minimize the
politics. The management should give the pay and promotion on the performance basis. The
performance basis pay and promotion will close the mouth of political actors.
The scarcity of resources has a positive and significant effect on organizational politics and
turnover intention. The limited resources in private colleges create a very competitive working
environment between workers. In limited resources the employee behavior more political. The
executives should adopt the justice policy on scarcity of resources to reduce the organizational
politics. The organizational politics decrees the employee efficiency and effectiveness and
employee not interested in his work. He try to seek new opportunities and think for turnover
intention. The executives should timely point out the political activities and take appropriate
decisions to reduce the turnover intention in employees.
REFERENCES
Adams, J, S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. Advances in experimental social
psychology, 2, 267-299.
Ahmed, I., & Sadia, S. (2017). The Effect of Rewards on Employee Performance: A study of
Three Districts (Lodhran, Khanewal and Vehari) of banks in Pakistan. International
Review of Management and Business Research, 1(3), 652-661.
Andrew, M. C., & Kacmar, K. M. (2001). Confirmation and extensive of the sources of
feedback scale in service based organization. Journal of business communication, 38(2),
206-226.
Arasli, H., & Karadal, H. (2009). Impacts of superior politics on frontline employees’
behavioral and psychological outcomes. Social Behavior and Personality, 37(2), 175-
190.
Arasli, H., Bavik, A., & Ekiz, H. E. (2006). The effects of nepotism on HRM and
psychological outcomes: The case of 3, 4, and 5 star hotels in Northern Cyprus.
International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. 26, 295-308.
Arasli, PhD, H., & Tumer, PhD, M. (2008). Nepotism, favoritism and cronyism: A study of
their effects on job stress and job satisfaction in the banking industry of north
Cyprus. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 36, 1237-1250.
Argote, L., and Epple, D. (1990). Learning curves in manufacturing. The American
Association for the Advancement of Science, 247, (4945) , 920.
Baddeley, S., & James, K. (1987). Owl, Fox, Donkey or Sheep: Political Skills for Managers.
Management Education and Development. 18(1), 3-19.
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
26
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
Bishop, D. et al (2006) Learning As Work: Teaching and Learning Processes in
Contemporary Work Organisations, Learning as Work Research Paper, No. 5, Cardiff
School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University, 1-38.
Block, P. (1988). The empowered manager: positive political skills at work San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass
Bluedorn, A. C. (1982). "A unified model of turnover from organizations", Human.
Relations, 35, 135-153.
Butcher, D., & Clarke, M. (2006) The Symbiosis of Organizational Politics and
Organizational Democracy, in E. Vigoda-Gadot and A. Drory (eds.), Handbook of
Organizational Politics (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK), 286–300.
Cavanagh, S. J., & Coffin, D. A. (1992). Staff turn- over among hospital nurses. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 17, 1369-1376.
Chu-hsiang Chang, Christopher C. Rosen & Paul E. Levy. (2009). the Relationship between
Perceptions of Organizational Politics and Employee Attitudes, Strain, and Behavior: A
Meta-Analytic Examination. The Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 779-801.
Daft, R. L. (1989). Organization theory and design. St. Paul: West Pub. Co.
Dalton, D.R., & Todor, W. D. (1982). Turnover turned over: An expanded and positive
perspective. Academy of Management Review, 4, 225-235.
Dess, G. G., & Shaw, J. D. (2001). Voluntary turnover, social capital, and organizational
performance. Academy of Management Review, 26, 446–456.
Drory, A. (1993). Perceived political climate and job attitudes. Organizational studies, 14,
59-71.
Drory, A., & Beaty D. (1991). Gender differences in the perception of organizational
influence tactics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12, 249 – 58.
Dubrin, A. J. (2001). Leadership. (3rd ed) New York: Houghton Mifflin
Ferris, G, R., & Kacmar, K. M. (1992). Perceptions of Organizational Politics. Journal of
Management, 18, 93-116.
Ferris, G. R., & King, T. R. (1991). Politics in human resources decisions: A walk on the
dark side, Organizational Dynamics, 20, 59-71.
Ferris, G. R., et al (1989) Politics in organizations, in R.A. Giacalone & P. Rosenfield (eds),
Impression management in the organization, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 143-70.
Ferris, G. R., Frink, D. D., Galang, M. C., Zhou, J. Kacmar, K. M., & Howard. J. L. (1996).
Perceptions of organizational politics: prediction, stress-related implications, and
outcomes. Human Relation, 49, 233–66.
Ferris, G. R., King, T. R., Judge, T. A., & Kacmar, K. M. (1991). The management of shared
meaning in organizations. In: Giacalone RA, Rosenfeld P, editors. Applied impression
management. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 41 – 64
Frost, P. J. (1987). Power, politics, and influence. In F.M. Jablin, L.L. Putname, K.H.
Roberts, & L.W. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage Publications, 503-548.
Fugate, M., Kinicki, A. J., & Prussia, G. E. (2008). Employee coping with Organizational
Change: an examination of alternative theoretical perspectives and models. Personal
Psychology, 61, 1-36.
Gandz, J., & Murray, V. V. (1980). The experience of workplace politics. Academy of
Management Journal, 23, 237-251.
Gotsis, G. N., & Kortezi, Z. (2010). Ethical Considerations in Organizational Politics:
Expanding the Perspective. Journal of Business, 93, 497-517.
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
27
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
Griffeth, R. W., Hom, P. W., & Gaertner, S. (2000). A meta-analysis of antecedents and
correlates of employee turnover: Update, moderator tests, and research implications for
the next millennium. Journal of Management, 26, 463-488
Gull, S., & Zaidi, A. A. (2012). Impact of Organizational Politics on Employees’ Job
Satisfaction in the Health Sector of Lahore Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal of
Contemporary Research in Business, 4, 156-170.
Harris, K. J., et al (2009). Relationships between Politics, Supervisor Communication, and
Job Outcomes, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(11), 2669-2688.
Hellman, C.M., (1997). Job satisfaction and intent to leave. J. Soc. Psychol., 137: 677-689.
Judy, N., & Miriam, S. (2006). Favoritism, Cronyism and Nepotism. California: Markkula
Center for Applied Ethics.
Kacmar, K. M., & Carlson, D. S. (1994). Further validation of the perceptions of politics
scale (POPS): A multiple sample investigation. Paper presented at Academy of
Management Meeting, Dallas, Texas.
Kanter, R, M. (1979). Power Failure in Management Circuits. Harvard Business Review,
1979.
Khan, A. M., & Hussain, N. (2014). The Analysis of the Perception of Organizational Politics
among University Faculty. International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities, 569-677.
Kusluvan, S., Kusluvan, Z., Ilhan, Z. & Buyruk, L. (2010). The human dimension: a review
of human resources management issues in the tourism and hospitality industry. Cornell
Hospitality Quarterly, 51(2), 171–214.
Kwon, I. (2006). Endogenous Favoritism in Organizations. The B.E. Journal of Theoretical
Economics, 6, 1.
Mayes, B. T., Allen, R. W. (1977). Toward a definition of organizational politics. Acad
Manage Rev, 2.
Mintzberg, H. (1983). Power in and around organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Moorhead, G., & Griffin, R. W. (1989). Organizational behavior. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Co.
Nayyar, S, & Raja, N. T. (2012). The Impact of Impression Management Behaviour on
Organisational Politics among Female employees in Organic and Mechanistic System
of Pakistan Telecommunication sector. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary
Research in Business, 3 (9), 914-924.
Othman, R. (2008). Organizational Politics: The Role of Justice, Trust and Job Ambiguity,
Singapore Management Review, 30(1), 43-53.
Poon, J. M. L. (2003). Situational Antecedents and Outcomes of Organizational Politics.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18, 138-155.
Poon, J. M. L. (2004). Effects of performance appraisal politics on job satisfaction and
turnover intention. Personal Review, 33(3), 322-334.
Price, J. L., & Mueller, C. W. (1981). A casual model of turnover for nurses. Academy of
Management Journal, 24, 543-565.
Romm, C.T., Pliskin, N. and Clarke, R.J. (1997). Virtual Communities and Society: Toward
an Integrative Three Phase Model, International Journal of Information Management,
17, 4, 261-270.
Ross, G. F. (2005). Tourism industry employee work stress – a present and future crisis.
Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 19(2), 133–147.
Rosse, J. G. (1988). Relations among lateness, absence and turnover: is there a progression of
withdrawal? Human Relations, 41(7), 517-531.
International Journal of Business and Management Review
Vol.6, No.4, pp.14-28, May 2018
___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
28
ISSN: 2052-6393(Print), ISSN: 2052-6407(Online)
Saleh, S. D., Lee, R. J., & Prien, E. P. (1965). Why nurses leave their jobs:An analysis of
female turnover. Personnel Administration, 28, 25-28.
Seo, M. G. (2003). Overcoming emotional barriers, political obstacles, and control
imperatives in the action-science approach to individual and organizational learning.
Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2(1), 7-21.
Sowmya, K. R., & Panchanatham, N. (2012). Faculty turnover intention in educational
institutions” in Indian. Journal of Applied Research, 3.
Steers, R. M., & Mowday, R, T., Porter, L. M. (1982). Employee – organizational linkage
New York: Academic Press.
Vigoda, E. (2002). Stress-related aftermaths to workplace politics: An empirical assessment
of the relationship among organizational politics, job stress, burnout, and aggressive
behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 571-591.
Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2003). Developments in Organizational Politics: How Political Dynamics
affects Employee Performance in Modern Work Sites. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Whetten, D. A. (2006). Albert and Whetten Revised. Strengthening the Concept of
Organizational Identity”, Journal of Management Inquiry, 15(3), 219-234.
Yavas, U., Karatepe, M. O., Babakus, E., & Avci, T. (2004). Customer Complaints and
Organizational Responses: A Study of Hotel Guests in Northern Cyprus. Journal of
Hospitality & Leisure Marketing, 11(2-3):31-46
Zahra, S. A. (1987). Organizational politics and the strategic process, Journal of Business
Ethics, 6(7), 579-587.
