Public Service Motivation - 1

Effect of Perceptions of Organizational Politics on Nepali Government Employees’ Public

Service Motivation – Job Attitude Relationships

It is the common perception of Nepali public that government employees do not work
or work very little. It is not only the perception of the Nepali public, even in the United States
polls show that the public believes government employees "work less hard" and are less
productive than their private sector counterparts (Volcker, 1989, as cited in Frank & Lewis,
2004). If government or public sector employees are not willing to work hard, then the
question arises – do they lack work motivation or are there other factors that demotivate them
to become more productive in government or public sector employment situations?
There is an implicit assumption that public sector jobs are aimed at providing help,
support and assistance in the name of the general interest and well-being of society-at-large
rather than seeking profit for personal advantage (Cerase & Farinella, 2009), whereas the
private sector offers higher pay, better career prospects and greater prestige. But, in the case
of Nepali government or public sector employees, there is a strong belief among general
public that they often do not follow the ethos of public service. This belief, to a certain extent,
represents the reality of Nepali bureaucracy which leads to the fact that Nepali employees,
while choosing a career in the government or public sector, are either not aware of the ethos
of public service or there are other factors that prevent them to give their best at their jobs.
Several theoretical works as well as empirical studies have established positive
relationships between employee motivation and several employee outcomes. Work
motivation is a complex phenomenon and there is no single theory which can explain
employees’ different attitudes and behaviors at workplace. In the past two decades, many
researchers have tried to explain employee motivation in the public sector and they have
made significant contributions to this field. One such contribution was made by Perry and
Wise (1990), who introduced the concept of "Public Service Motivation" (PSM). It assumes
that bureaucrats are characterized by an ethic to serve the public and act out of commitment
to common good, rather than mere self-interest (Houston, 2005).
After the conceptualization of PSM as a separate construct and development of a valid
measurement scale, there are several studies investigating the antecedents and outcomes of
PSM. It has now been empirically established that PSM is a separate and analytically distinct
construct and several scholars have empirically examined the relationships between PSM and
employees’ job attitudes such as job satisfaction (e.g., Bright, 2008; Kim, 2005; Naff &
Curm, 1999), organizational commitment (Crewson, 1997; Castaing, 2006), and extra-
organizational attitudes such as altruism, trust in government, serving the public or one’s
country, civic involvement, and political participation (Brewer & Selden, 1998, 2000; Brewer
et al., 2000, as cited in Liu, Tang,& Zhu, 2008). However, these studies were mostly
conducted in the developed Western world, and till date no such studies have been carried out
in a Nepali context. Given the fact that Nepali government sector has not been able to
perform as per the expectations of general public, it is imperative to know whether it lacks
PSM or there are other intervening factors that dampen the positive influence of PSM on job
attitudes.
The studies carried out in the developed western world to investigate the effect of
PSM on public employees’ work attitudes such as job satisfaction and organizational
commitment also do not provide consistent relationships between PSM and work attitudes,
which suggests that the relationships could be mediated or moderated by some other
 Public Service Motivation - 2

variables. There could be several variables that moderate or mediate these relationships. Out
of these variables one of the important variables that can have significant influence on the
relationships between PSM and job attitudes could be employees’ perceptions of
organizational politics (POP) which has been empirically found to have dysfunctional
organizational outcomes such as absenteeism, turnover, job stress, and reduced job
satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment. However, no studies even in
the West have attempted to investigate the effect of POP on PSM – job attitudes
relationships. Therefore, this study intends to examine the relationships between PSM and
POP, PSM and attitudinal outcomes, and examine the moderating effect of POP on PSM –
attitudinal outcome relationships.
Statement of the Problem
After the call of Parry (1997), there is a growing body of research investigating the
antecedents and outcomes of PSM. In 2000, Perry further raised the question of whether
management practice and organizational environment could influence PSM. To find answer
for this question and to resolve the ambiguities found in the relationship between PSM and
outcomes, researchers focused their attention toward examining the influence of other factors
in the relationships between PSM and various attitudinal and behavioral outcomes. Leisink
and Steijn’s (2009) study in Dutch public sector revealed that the relationship between PSM
and job performance is mediated by person-job fit. While investigating the influence of PSM
on job performance, Kim (2005) found that PSM positively affects organizational
performance but factors other than PSM such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment,
and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) have more effect on it. On the other hand,
Brewer (2008) suggested that there is no clear evidence of the linkage between PSM and
performance (Leisink & Steijn, 2009).
As employee attitudes have been found to have positive influences on organizational
performance and the scant literature examining the relationships between PSM and attitudinal
outcomes have been found to be inconclusive, there is a need to further explore these
relationships. Similarly, although past studies demonstrate that PSM is a universal concept,
majority of the studies carried out in different countries as well as cross cultural studies (e.g.,
Bandenabeele, Scheepers & Hondeghem, 2006) suggest that Perry’s dimensions of PSM are
not neatly reproduced since Perry’s model is specifically oriented towards US (Hondeghem
& Vandenabeele, 2005). As there could be substantial differences between the employees of
western developed countries and underdeveloped country like Nepal from socio-cultural and
socio-economic perspectives, the PSM dimensions may not be reproduced in a Nepali
context. At the same time, the findings of the studies carried out in the western context may
not be applicable to Nepali context. So, there are several issues that need to be addressed in
order to better understand the linkages between PSM and employees’ POP, PSM and
attitudinal outcomes, and the moderating mechanism between PSM and attitudinal outcomes
relationships:

 Is the PSM scale applicable to a Nepali context?

 Is there any relationship between PSM and POP?
 Are there any relationships between PSM and employees’ attitudinal outcomes?
 Are there any relationships between POP and employees’ attitudinal outcomes?
 Are the relationships between PSM and attitudinal outcomes moderated by other
variables?
 Public Service Motivation - 3

This study intends to enquire into these issues and fill the gap in understanding the
nature of relationships between Nepali government employees’ PSM and their attitudinal
outcomes (job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment). The basic
question this study seeks to address is:

In what way PSM and POP are associated with Nepali government employees' job
involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment and do their POP
moderate the relationships between their PSM and these job attitude variables?

Objective of the Study

The objective of this study is to examine the direct relationships between Nepali
Government employees’ PSM and POP and their job attitudes (job involvement, job
satisfaction, and organizational commitment) and moderating effect of POP on the
relationships between PSM and job attitudes. Further objectives are to assess applicability of
original Perry’s (1996) scale in a Nepali context and to assess the level of PSM across
employees’ age, gender, education, employment sector, hierarchical level, and tenure.

Expected Results, Application, and Uses

As mentioned in the previous section, this study specifically intends to examine the
applicability of the original PSM measure developed by Perry (1996), to evaluate Nepali
government employees’ level of PSM and to examine the relationships between PSM and
employees’ job attitudes. It also intends to examine the moderating effect of employees’ POP
on the relationship between PSM and job attitudes.

It is expected that the original measure of PSM cannot be applied to measure the level
of PSM of Nepali government employees although the dimensionality of PSM could remain
the same. There could be a possibility of adding or deleting some items of the scale so as to
make the instrument more valid and reliable in the Nepali context as previous studies have
indicated that the original instrument is not fully applicable to the studies carried out in
different countries such as China, Korea, Netherlands, Italy, Switzerland, etc.

In the present socio-political context of the country, it is expected that the level of
PSM of Nepali government employee is low to moderate with significant differences among
the employees at different hierarchical level. This study also expects that there will be a
negative relationship between PSM and POP, negative relationships between POP and
employees’ job attitudes (job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment),
and positive relationships between PSM and job attitudes. The relationships between PSM
and job attitudes will be moderated by employees’ POP since in several previous studies POP
has been found to have dysfunctional individual and organizational outcomes.

The findings of this study will have significant practical implications not only to
Nepali Bureaucracy but also to the academicians working in the area of PSM and
organizational politics. The validation of PSM measure in Nepali context will provide a
validated measure to the researchers willing to pursue studies in this area. It will also
establish/check the generalizability of the scale in a different cultural context.

Although it is a correlational study and it is not possible to establish the direction of

causality, it can be expected that PSM will positively influence employees’ job attitudes. If
 Public Service Motivation - 4

PSM explains significant amount of variances in employees’ job attitudes, then it will have
two distinct practical implications. First, devising a policy to recruit personnel in government
employment who have high level of PSM and second, developing policies and practices that
help enhance the level of PSM of those who are already working in various government
organizations. Implementation of these policy measures will contribute toward the improved
performance of Nepali bureaucracy since several past studies have established that employee
attitudes have significant impact on organizational outcomes.

Literature Review

Public Service Motivation

According to Perry and Wise (1990), public service motivation is "an individual's
predisposition to respond to motives grounded primarily or uniquely in public organizations
and institutions" (p. 368). The PSM concept assumes that there are specific motives, where
"motives" refer to psychological needs. These motives are activated specifically by the
features of public institutions and may fall into three analytically-distinct categories: rational,
norm-based and affective. Rational motives are grounded in individual utility maximization,
norm-based are grounded in a desire to pursue the common good and further the public
interest, and the affective motives are grounded in human emotions. Based upon this concept,
Perry (1996) developed a four dimensional construct as well as a measurement scale that
empirically measures PSM in individuals. The four dimensional construct includes -
attraction to policy making, commitment to public interest, self-sacrifice and compassion.

After Perry and Wise (1990), many scholars have contributed to the theoretical and
methodological advances in this field which have been used to identify/explore the influences
of PSM on employee performance and organizational outcomes. One such attempt which
conceptualizes PSM differently than did Perry and Wise (1990) is the conceptualization
presented by Brewer, Selden, and Facer (2000). It suggested that there is just not one
conception of this public service ethic and an interest in politics or policy making is not a
characteristic of PSM (Houston, 2005). However, Perry and Wise (1990) and Perry (1996)
provided a convincing definition of PSM as well as a tool that could be used to evaluate not
only PSM but also the other concepts such as job satisfaction, work performance and
employment sector (Bright, 2007). Many researchers are convinced that PSM is a meaningful
predictor of the performance of employees in public organizations.

Perceptions of Organizational Politics (POP)

Over the past four decades, scholars have attempted to define organizational politics
from different perspectives resulting in numerous definitions. However, majority of the
empirical works have taken a narrow perspective while defining it and often viewed as
subjective evaluations of others’ self-serving work behaviors not sanctioned by the
organizations (Miller et al., 2008). Gandz and Murray (1980) suggested that organizational
politics is a subjective state in which organizational members perceive themselves or others
as intentionally seeking selfish ends in an organizational context when such ends are opposed
to those of others. More recent studies, on the other hand, suggested that it should be
regarded as pervasive and necessary for normal business functioning, and a simple fact of
organizational life (Miller et al., 2008).
 Public Service Motivation - 5

Proposition of POP model by Ferris et al. (1989) and development of a valid measure
of POP (e.g., Kacmar & Ferris, 1991; Ferris & Kacmar, 1992; Kacmar & Carlson, 1997), set
new direction toward the investigation of POP and its antecedents and outcomes in 1990s
(e.g., Ferris & Kacmar, 1992, Ferris, Frink, Galang, Znou, Kacmar, & Howard, 1996;
Kacmar, Boezman, Carlson, & Anthony, 1999). POP involves an individual’s attribution to
behaviors of self-serving intent, and is defined as an individual’s subjective evaluation about
the extent to which the work environment is characterized by co-workers and supervisors
who demonstrate such self-serving behavior (Ferris et al. 2000).

Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction is one of the most intensively studied variables in organizational

research (Rainey, 1997) and is commonly treated as a critical outcome variable in
organizations (e.g. Judge & Watnabe, 1994; Landeweerd & Boumans, 1994, as cited in Chen
& Silverthrone, 2008). Locke (1976) defined job satisfaction as a pleasurable or positive
emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experience (Miller, 2008).
Spector (1997) described it as simply how people feel about their jobs and different aspects
of their jobs whereas for Lawler (1990), job satisfaction refers to people’s feelings about the
rewards they have received on the job (Chen & Silverthrone, 2008). This study will utilize
Locke’s (1976) definition of job satisfaction.

Job Involvement

Job involvement is defined as the extent to which the individual identifies

psychologically with his/her job (Blau, 1985).There are two distinct arguments about the
influence factors of employees’ involvement in their jobs. Some researchers argue that the
degree to which employees are involved in their job can be influenced by situational factors
whereas other researchers argue that job involvement is a personal characteristic (Carmeli,
2005). The arguments presented in support of the first are that a favorable organizational
image fosters the employee’s identification with his/her organization which in turn bring
satisfaction and develop a strong attachment to the organization which may translate into a
high degree of job involvement (Carmeli, 2005).

Organizational Commitment

Organizational commitment is a psychological state that characterizes the employee’s

relationship with the organization (Rashid, Sambasivan, & Johari, 2003). In the review of
commitment literature, Meyer and Allen (1991) have suggested a three component
conceptualization of organizational commitment – affective, continuance and normative
commitment (Currie & Dollery, 2006).

Organizational commitment is defined as a state in which an employee identifies with

a particular organization and its goals, and he/she wishes to maintain membership in the
organization in order to facilitate its goals (Blau & Boal, 1987).

PSM and Job Attitudes

Present study hypothesizes three job attitude variables – job satisfaction, job
involvement and organizational to be the outcomes of PSM. There is plethora of studies
which have indicated these variables as significant predictors of positive organizational
 Public Service Motivation - 6

outcomes. But there are only few studies which investigated the antecedent influence of PSM
on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Studies examining the relationship
between PSM and job involvement are virtually non-existent.

The findings of the previous studies examining the relationship between PSM and job
satisfaction are not consistent. Naff and Crum’s (1999) study revealed significant positive
relationship between PSM and job satisfaction (Liu, Tang, & Zhu, 2008). Similarly, Cerase
and Farinella (2009) found that high levels of PSM and a positive perception of change help
to raise job satisfaction. In the Chinese context, Liu et al. (2008) found positive relationship
between three dimensions of PSM (public policy making, compassion, and self-sacrifice) and
public employees’ job satisfaction. On the other hand, Bright (2008) found that the
relationship between PSM and job satisfaction would not be significant when P-O fit is taken
into account.

Findings of previous studies generally suggest a positive relationship between PSM

and organizational commitment. According to Liu et al. (2008), many scholars (e.g.,
Camilleri, 2006; Crewson, 1997; Taylor, 2007) have found positive relationship between
PSM and organizational commitment. A study by Cerase and Farinella (2009) in the Italian
Revenue Agency has also revealed a positive relationship between two dimensions of PSM
(altruism and bureaucratic governance). Ritz’s (2009) study in Swiss federal government also
indicated positive relationships between two dimensions of PSM (attraction to public policy
making and commitment to the public interest) and employees’ affective commitment.

POP and Job Attitudes

Based on Ferris et al. (1989) model of POP, numerous studies have empirically
examined the relationships between POP and attitudinal outcomes. Other than one study by
Parker et al. (1995), all other studies found negative relationship between POP and job
satisfaction (e.g., Gandz & Murry, 1980; Ferris & Kacmar, 1992; Drory, 1993; Ferris et al,
1996, Vigoda, 2000; Vigoda, 2001; Vigoda 2002; Vigoda & Cohen, 2002; Poon, 2003;
Vigoda-Gadot, Vinarski-Peretz, & Ben, 2003; Vigoda-Gadot & Kapan, 2005; Vigoda-Gadot
& Meisler, 2010). On the other hand, the findings of the studies in the relationship between
POP and job involvement are mixed. Ferris and Kacmar (1992) found positive relationship
between POP and job involvement. However, Cropanzano et al. (1997) found negative
relationship.

Most of the studies have consistently suggested negative relationship between POP
and organizational commitment (Drory, 1993; Maslyn & Fedor, 1998; Nye & Witt, 1993;
Witt, 1998; Vigoda 2000; Vigoda-Gadot et al., 2003; Vigoda & Cohen, 2002; Vigoda-Gadot
& Kapan, 2005; Vigoda-Gadot & Meisler, 2010). However, in contrary to these findings,
Cropanzano et al. (1997, Study 1) found positive relationship and other two studies
(Cropanzano et al., 1997, Study 2 and Randall et al., 1999) found no relationship at all
between POP and commitment (Miller et al., 2008).

PSM, Job Attitudes and POP: A Theoretical Framework and Research Hypotheses

In the previous sections, the concepts of PSM and POP have been explained briefly
and a review of past literature examining the interrelationships among PSM and job attitudes
and POP and job attitudes are presented. Based on this review of literature, a theoretical
 Public Service Motivation - 7

framework suggesting possible relationships among different study variables is proposed

which is shown in Fig. 1.

Perceptions of
Organizational
Politics (POP) Job
Involvement

Job
Public Service Satisfaction
Motivation
(PSM)
Organizational
Commitment

Fig. 1: Theoretical Framework

Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1: Employees’ perceptions of organizational politics will be negatively related to

all dimensions of employees’ PSM (attraction to public policy making,
commitment to the public interest, compassion, and self-sacrifice)

Hypothesis 2: All dimensions of employees’ PSM (attraction to public policy making,

commitment to the public interest, compassion, and self-sacrifice) will be
positively related to their job attitudes, i.e., (a) job involvement, (b) job
satisfaction, and (c) organizational commitment.

Hypothesis 3: Employees’ perceptions of organizational politics will be negatively related to

their job attitudes, i.e., (a) job involvement, (b) job satisfaction, and (c)
organizational commitment.

Hypothesis 4: Employees’ POP will moderate the relationships between four dimensions of
PSM and job attitudes. Higher level of employees’ political perceptions will
negatively affect the relationships between PSM and job attitudes.

Methodology

The objective of this study is to investigate the relationships between PSM and job
attitudes, and between POP and job attitudes, and to examine the moderating effect of
employees’ POP on these relationships. Therefore, this study will adopt quantitative approach
to investigate the likely relationships among study variables using already validated
instruments so that relationships established by previous studies can be tested as well as the
validity of the previous findings in a different context can be examined.
 Public Service Motivation - 8

Research Design

Research design provides a planned and structured way of achieving the research goal
to enhance validity and reliability of research findings (Mouton & Marais, 1990, as cited in
Cope, 2003). This study will have non-experimental design. The elements of research design
are described below.

Variables

In this study, variables being studied are PSM, job involvement, job satisfaction,
organizational commitment, and POP. In the investigation of PSM – job attitude
relationships, job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment are the
dependent variables and PSM is the independent variable. While examining the relationships
between POP and job attitudes, job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational
commitment are the dependent variables and POP is the independent variable. Similarly,
while investigating the moderating effect of POP in the relationship between PSM and job
attitudes, job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment are the dependent
variables, PSM is the independent variable and POP is the moderating variable.

Unit of Analysis

The broad area of investigation for this study is PSM and its outcomes in Nepali
bureaucracy. For the purpose of this study, the units of analysis will be individuals as well as
groups (socio-demographic variables).

Validity and Reliability

The internal validity of this research will be ensured through measuring different
constructs using already validated measures, analyzing the data with statistical package SPSS
16.0 for Windows and LISREL 8.8 for Windows. Conclusions will be drawn based on the
available data.

This study will utilize the instruments which have been tested for their validity and
reliability. Reliability of the instruments will be examined again with the data collected for
this study. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) will be carried out for each instrument to
check whether the data from this study fit to the same factor structures of these instruments.
Cronbach alpha of each measure will be calculated to check the reliability of the measures.

Population and Sample

The population of this study will include all employees working in Nepali government
organizations. The population will be categorized into three groups – senior executives (Joint
Secretary and above), mid-level executives (Section officer and Under Secretary), and
assistant level (All non-gazetted class I level employees,).

Sampling Design

The sample will consist of employees from the various ministries and district level
offices of Government of Nepal. The ministries of Government of Nepal can be broadly
classified into four different categories based on their roles and responsibilities. These four
 Public Service Motivation - 9

categories include the ministries related to (i) development sector, (ii) social sector, (iii)
finance and economic sector, and (iv) energy and science and technology sector. For this
study, three ministries each from the first two sectors and two ministries each from remaining
three sectors will be randomly selected. From each ministry 100 employees will be selected
(50 employees from ministry and central level offices, and 50 employees from district level
offices) to create a diverse sample of participants who represent a broad range of
governmental occupations.
Measures

Altogether, seven previously developed measures will be used to capture different

variables related to this study. These measures have been used by several researchers in
previous research studies and have been found to be valid and reliable to capture the variables
under investigation. Responses for the items will be captured in a 7-point Likert type scale
where 1= strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = slightly disagree, 4 = neither agree nor disagree,
5 = slightly agree, 6 = agree, and 7 = strongly agree.

Public Service Motivation (PSM)

PSM will be assessed by using Perry’s (1996) 24-item scale. This scale has four sub-
scales – self-sacrifice, compassion, public interest, and public-policy making. Previous
studies have found coefficient alpha of these scales from 0.55 to 0.83 (e.g., Camilleri, 2007).

Job Involvement

Job involvement will be measured by using the 6-item short form of a job
involvement scale developed by Lodahl and Kejner (1965). The coefficient alpha of this scale
was estimated to be .73. According to Gable and Dangello (1994), the shortened scale has
been successfully used in previous research studies (Mathieu & Farr 1991; Miller & Topping
1991; Baba 1990; Mathieu & Kohler 1990; Rabinowitz 1985; Batlis 1980; Hollon & Chesser
1976; Jones et al. 1975).

Job satisfaction

Overall job satisfaction will be measured using the measure developed by Cammann,
Fichman, Jenkins, and Klesh (1983) as part of the Michigan Organizational Assessment
Questionnaire (OAQ). This measure uses three items to describe an employee’s subjective
response to work in his or her job and organizations (Fields, 2002).

Coefficient alpha values for this measure ranged from .67 to .95 (Hochwarter,
Perrewe, Igalens, & Roussel, 1999; McFarlin & Rice, 1992; McLain, 1995; Pearson, 1991;
Sanchez & Brock, 1996; Siegall & McDonald, 1995, as cited in Fields, 2002).

Organizational Commitment

Although organizational commitment has been recognized as a multi-dimensional

construct, except few studies, most of the past POP studies have used unidimensional
measure of organizational commitment. Since early measures of organizational commitment
were heavily affective in their tone (Miller, 2008), measures of affective commitment only,
developed by Meyer and Allen (1997) will be used in this study. It consists of six items.
 Public Service Motivation - 10

For affective commitment, different studies found coefficient alpha values ranging
from .77 to .88 (Fields, 2002).

Perceptions of Organizational Politics Scale (POPS)

POP will be assessed using the items of two dimensions (general political behavior
and go along to get ahead) of the 15-item Perceptions of Organizational Politics Scale
(POPS) developed by Kacmar and Ferris (1991). This scale assesses employee perceptions of
the extent to which a job setting is political in nature including politics in the organization,
behavior of supervisors, and actions of co-workers (Fields, 2002).

Previous studies (Cropanzano et al., 1997; Kacmar, 1999; Kacmar & Ferris, 1991, as
cited in Fields, 2002) have found coefficient alpha values ranging from .87 to .91.

Research Procedure

Research procedure includes the administration of the questionnaire, data gathering

process, data capture, and data analysis.

Administration of the Questionnaire

The questionnaire will comprise of 56 items including eight socio-demographic

variables. Except for socio-demographic variables, responses for all items will be obtained in
a 7-point Likert-type scale.

Before the administration of the questionnaire, a pilot test will be carried out by
administering the questionnaire to 30 prospective respondents. Apart from the 56 items, these
respondents will also be asked about the time taken to complete the questionnaires as well as
about the ease of understandings of the questionnaire items. Based upon these responses, and
a careful analysis of the responses on each item of the questionnaire, it will be decided
whether to do a double translation of the questionnaire items or not.

Altogether, 1000 questionnaires will be distributed (100 questionnaires in each

Ministry) to the prospective respondents. The completed questionnaires will be collected by
contacting them personally.

Data Processing

Each returned questionnaire will be manually screened for missing data. After manual
screening, the responses of each individual respondent will be captured into SPSS 16.0 for
Windows statistical software. Appropriate coding will be done while capturing the responses.

Data Analysis

Analysis of data will be carried out using SPSS 16.0 for windows. Initially, after
entering data with appropriate coding, the data will be examined for dispersion, central
tendency and normality. A reliability analysis for each instrument will be carried out by
calculating Crohbach alpha.
 Public Service Motivation - 11

Descriptive statistics of socio-demographic variables as well as other variables will be

calculated. For testing the direct relationship between study variables, correlation coefficients
will be calculated. As this method of analysis is not considered to be robust, structural
equation modeling (SEM) will be carried out using LISREL 8.8 for Windows to test the
hypothesized direct relationships.

Moderated multiple regression (MMR) analysis will be used to test the moderating
effects of work attitude variables on POP – work outcome relationships. According to
Aguinis (1995), several independent evaluations conducted over the past four decades
indicate that MMR is an appropriate method for detecting the effects of moderator variables.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) will be conducted to find out whether there exists any
difference among different group of employees based on demographics on their levels of
PSM, job attitudes, and POP.

Limitations

The purpose of this study is to delineate the relationships among PSM, job attitudes,
and POP of employees working in Nepali government organizations. This study proposes to
utilize cross-sectional survey technique for capturing the responses. The data thus collected
may not be free from self-report bias. One shot administration of the questionnaire may not
be effective to capture the attitudinal and perceptual variables. A longitudinal study with data
collected at different point of time will be more appropriate for this type of study which will
not be possible due to time constraints and will be a major limitation of this study.

Although, random sampling is essential for increased validity and generalizability of

findings, sampling design of this study is not truly random. Nevertheless, efforts will be made
to increase the validity and generalizability through purposive sampling while choosing
different sector and stratifying the employees into three strata of hierarchical level.
 Public Service Motivation - 12

Timeline of the Proposed Study

The study is planned to be completed in a period of one year. The details of the
activities to be carried out for the completion of this study are shown in the table below.

Month→ 1 2 3 4 5-9 10 11 12
Activity
Collection of relevant X
books/journals/any other relevant
materials

Review of literature and X

development of conceptual
framework
Study Design X
Recruitment and training of X
Enumerators
Pilot Test X
Data collection/organization X
Estimation / analysis X
Preparation of Draft Repot X
Revision of the Draft Report and X
Submission of Final Report
 Public Service Motivation - 13

References

Blau, G.J., & Boal, K.B. (1987). Conceptualizing how job involvement and organizational
commitment affect turnover and absenteeism. The Academy of Management Review,
12(2), 288-300. Retrieved from http:/www.jstor.org/stable/258536
Bodla, M.A., & Danish, R.Q. (2005). Politics and workplace: An empirical examination of
the relationship between perceived organizational politics and workplace performance.
South Asian Journal of Management, 16(1), 44-62
Bozeman, D.P., Perrewe, P.L., Kacmar, M.K., Hochwarter, W.A., & Brymer, R.A. (1996).
An examination of reactions to perceptions of organizational politics. Paper presented at
the annual meeting of the Southern Management Association, New Orleans, LA.
Brewer, G.A., Selden, S.C., & Facer, R.L. (2000). Individual conceptions of public service
motivation. Public Administration Review, 60(3), 254-263.
Bright, L. (2007). Does person-organization fit mediate the relationship between public
service motivation and the job performance of public employees? The Review of Public
Personnel Administration, 27, 361-379.
Bright, L. (2008). Does public service motivation really make a difference on the job
satisfaction and turnover intentions of public employees? The American Review of Public
Administration, 38, 149-165.
Carmeli, A. (2005). Exploring determinants of job involvement: an empirical test among
senior executives. International Journal of Manpower, 26(5), 457-472.
doi:10.1108/01437720510615143
Castaing, S. (2006). The effects of psychological contract fulfillment and public service
motivation on organizational commitment in the French civil service. Public Policy
Administration, 21(1), 84-98.
Cerase, F.P. & Farinella, D. (2009). Public service motivation: How does it relate to
management reforms and changes in the working situation of public organizations? A
case study of the Italian Revenue Agency. Public Policy and Administration 24, 281-308.
Chen, J., & Silverthrone, C. (2008). The impact of locus of control on job stress, job
performance and job satisfaction in Taiwan. Leadership and Organization Development
Journal, 29(7), 572-582. doi:10.1108/01437730810906326
Cope, C. (2003). Occupational stress, strain and coping in a professional accounting
organization (Unpublished master’s theses, University of South Africa, Pretoria).
Retrieved from
http://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/2186/00THESIS.pdf?sequence=2
Crewson, P.E. (1997). Public service motivation: Building empirical evidence of incidence
and effect. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 7(4), 499-518.
Currie, P., & Dollery, B. (2006). Organizational commitment and perceived organizational
support in the NSW police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies &
Management, 29(4), 741-756. doi:10.1108/13639510610711637.
Drory A., & Romm, T. (1988). Politics in organization and its perception within the
organization. Organization Studies, 9(2), 165-179. doi:10.1077/017084068800900202
 Public Service Motivation - 14

Ferris, G.R., & Frink, D.D. (1994). Understanding as an antidote for the dysfunctional
consequences of organizational politics as a stressor. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 24(13), 1204-1220. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb01551.x
Ferris, G.R., & Kacmar, K.M. (1992). Perceptions of organizational politics. Journal of
Management, 18(1), 93-116. doi:10.1177/014920639201800107
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 Relations, 49(2), 233-266. doi:10.1177/001872679604900206
Ferris, G.R., Frink, D.D., Gilmore, D.C., & Kacmar, K.M. (1994). Understanding as an
antidote for the dysfunctional consequences of organizational politics as a stressor.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 24(13),1204-1220. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb
Ferris, G.R., Russ, G.S., & Fandt, P.M. (1989). Politics in organizations. In R.A. Giacalone
and P. Rosenfield (Eds), Impression management in the organization. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum, 143-170.
Ferris, G.R., Adams, G., Kolodinsky, R.W., Hochwarter, W.A., & Ammeter, P.A. (2002).
Perceptions of organizational politics: Theory and research directions. In F. Dansereau
and F.J. Yammarino (Eds.), Research in multi-level issues, 1, 83-111. Greenwich, CT:
JAI Press.
Fields, D.L. (2002). Taking the measure of work: A guide to validated scales for
organizational research and diagnosis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc.
Frank, S. & Lewis, G. (2004). Government employees: Working hard or hardly working? The
American Review of Public Administration, 34, 36-51.
Gable, M., & Dangello, F (1994). Job involvement, machiavellianism and job performance.
Journal of Business and Psychology, 9(2), 159-170. Retrieved from
http:/www.jstor.org/stable/25092460
Gandz, J., & Murray, V.V. (1980). The experience of workplace politics. The Academy of
Management Journal, 23(2), 237-251. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/255429
Houston, D.J. (2005). Walking the walk of public service motivation: Public employees and
charitable gifts of time, blood, and money. Journal of Public Affairs Research and
Theory, 16, 67-86.
Kim, S. (2005). Individual-level factors and organizational performance in government
organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(2), 245-261.
Leisink, P. & Steijn, B. (2009). Public service motivation and job performance of public
sector employees in the Netherlands. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75,
35-52.
Liu, B., Tang, N., & Zhu, X. (2008). Public service motivation and job satisfaction in China:
An investigation of generalizability and instrumentality. International Journal of
Manpower, 29(8), 684-699.
Maslyn, J.M., & Fedor, D.B. (1998). Perceptions of politics: Does measuring different foci
matter? Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(4), 645-653. Retrieved from
http://myweb.usf.edu/
 Public Service Motivation - 15

Miller, B.K., Rutherford, M.A., & Kolodinsky, R.W. (2008). Perceptions of organizational
politics: A meta-analysis of outcomes. Journal of Business Psychology, 22, 209-222.
doi:10.1007/s10869-008-9061-5
Naff, K.C., & Crum, J. (1999). Working for America: Does public service motivation make a
difference? Review of Public Personal Administration, 19, 5-15.
Nye, L.G., & Witt, L. A. (1993). Dimensionality and construct validity of the perceptions of
organizational politics scale (POPS). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53.
821-829. doi: 10.1177/0013164493053003026
Perry, J.L. (1996). Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct
reliability and validity. Journal of Administration Research & Theory, 6, 5-12.
Perry, J.L. (1997). Antecedents of public service motivation. Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory, 7(2), 181-197.
Perry, J.L. & Wise, L.R. (1990). The Motivational bases of public service. Public
Administration Review, 50, 367-373.
Rashid, M. Z., Sambasivan, M., & Johari, J. (2003). The influence of corporate culture and
organizational commitment on performance. Journal of Management Development,
22(8), 708-728. doi: 10.1108/02621710310487873
Ritz, A (2009). Public service motivation and organizational performance in Swiss federal
government. International Review of Administrative Science, 75(1), 53-78.
Taylor, J. (2007). The impact of public service motives on work outcomes in Australia: A
comparative multi-dimensional analysis. Public Administration, 85(4), 931-959.
Vandenabeele, W., Scheepers, S., Hondeghem, A. (2006). Public service motivation in
international comparative perspective: The UK and Germany. Public Policy and
Administration, 21(1), 13-31.
Vigoda, E. (2000). Organizational politics, job attitudes, and work outcomes: Exploration and
implication for the public sector. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 57, 326-347.
doi:10.1006/jvbe.1999.1742
Vigoda, E. (2001). Reactions to organizational politics: A cross-cultural examination in Israel
and Britain. Human Relations, 54(11), 1483-1517. doi:10.1177/00187267015411004
Vigoda, E. (2002). Stress-related aftermaths to workplace politics: The relationships among
politics, job distress, and aggressive behavior in organizations. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 23 (5), 571-591. Retrieved from http:/www/jstor.org/stable/4093666
Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2007). Leadership style, organizational politics, and employees’
performance: An empirical examination of two competing models. Personnel Review,
36(5), 661-683. doi:10.1108/00483480710773981.
Vigoda, E., & Cohen, A. (1998). Organizational politics and employee performances: A
review and theoretical model. Journal of Management Systems, 10(3), 59-72. Retrieved
from http://poli.haifa.ac.il/~acohen/docs/27.pdf
Vigoda, E., & Cohen, A. (2002). Influence tactics and perceptions of organizational politics
A longitudinal study. Journal of Business Research, 55, 311-324. doi:10.1016/S0148-
2963(00)00134-x
Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Drory, A. (Eds.) (2006). Handbook of Organizational Politics.
Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar
 Public Service Motivation - 16

Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Kapun, D. (2005) Perceptions of politics and perceived performance in
public and private organizations: A test of one model across two sectors. Policy &
Politics, 33(2), 251-276. Retrieved from
http://organizations.haifa.ac.il/html/html_eng/Memberspublications/Vigoda/OPsectors.pd f
Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Meisler, E. (2010). Emotions in management and the management of
emotions: The impact of emotional intelligence and organizational politics on public
sector employees. Public Administration Review, 72-86. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
6210.2009.02112.x
Vigoda-Gadot, E., Vinarski-Peretz, H., & Ben-Zion, E. (2003). Politics and image in the
organizational landscape: An empirical examination among public sector employees.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(8), 764-787. doi:10.1108/02683940310511872.
 Public Service Motivation - 17

Appendix - 1

Date: ………………….

Dear Respondent,

This questionnaire is a part of a study to examine the relationship between employees’

public service motivation and job attitudes and the moderating effect of perceptions of
organizational politics in these relationships. The first section seeks your personal
information. The remaining three sections are for knowing about your perceptions of
prevalence of politics in your organization, your level of PSM and job attitudes.

Please choose appropriate alternative as per instructions given below. This study is
purely for academic purpose. Strict confidentiality will be maintained with the responses
obtained. It will take you about 15 minutes to complete this questionnaire.

Thanking you for your cooperation.

Sincerely Yours,

Arjun Kumar Shrestha Ajaya Kumar Mishra

Asst. Professor Visiting Faculty
Kathmandu University School of Management Kathmandu University School of Management
Balkumari, Lalitpur Balkumari, Lalitpur
 Public Service Motivation - 18

Section I

1. Your Age: ___________________

2. Sex: _______________

3. Marital Status: ______________

4. Educational Qualification:_________________

5. Name of Your Office: _______________________________________

6. Name of Ministry: __________________________________________

7. Present position: Gazetted/Non-Gazetted Class: ____________

8. Year of Joining the Government Service ___________ B.S.

Section II

With respect to your own feelings about your job, please indicate the degree of your
agreement or disagreement with each statement by checking one of the five alternatives
below each statement.

Choose 1 if you strongly disagree Choose 3 if you are not sure

Choose 2 if you disagree Choose 4 if you agree
Choose 5 if you strongly agree
1. People in this organization attempt to build themselves up by tearing others down.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. There has always been an influence group in this department that no one ever crosses.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. Employees are encouraged to speak out frankly even when they are critical of well-
established ideas. (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. There is no place for yes-men around here; good ideas are desired even if it means
disagreeing with superiors. (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. Agreeing with powerful others is the best alternative in this organization.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. It is best not to rock the boat in this organization.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
 Public Service Motivation - 19

7. Sometimes it is easier to remain quiet than to fight the system.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. Telling others what they want to hear is sometimes better than telling the truth.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9. It is safer to think what you are told than to make up your own mind.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10. The major satisfaction in my life comes from my work
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11. The most important things that happen to me involve my work.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12. I’m really a perfectionist about my work.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
13. I live, eat and breathe my job.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
14. I am very much involved personally in my work.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
15. Most things in life are more important than work. (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
16. All in all, I am satisfied with my job
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
17. In general, I don’t like my job (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
18. In general, I like working here
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

19. I would be very happy to spend rest of my career with this organization.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20. I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
21. I do not feel like “part of the family” at my organization. (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
22. I do not feel “emotionally attached” to this organization. (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
23. This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
24. I do not feel a strong sense of belonging to my organization. (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
 Public Service Motivation - 20

Section III

With respect to your own belief please indicate the degree of your agreement or disagreement
with each statement by checking one of the five alternatives below each statement.

Choose 1 if you strongly disagree Choose 3 if you are not sure

Choose 2 if you disagree Choose 4 if you agree
Choose 5 if you strongly agree

1. Making a difference in society means more to me than personal achievements.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. I believe in putting duty before self.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. Doing well financially is definitely more important to me than doing good deeds. (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. Much of what I do is for a cause bigger than myself.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. Serving citizens would give me a good feeling even if no one paid me for it.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. I feel people should give back to society more than they get from it.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7. I am one of those rear people who would risk personal loss to help someone else.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. I am prepared to make enormous sacrifices for the good of society.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9. I am rarely moved by the plight of the underprivileged. (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10. Most social programs are too vital to do without.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11. It is difficult for me to contain my feelings when I see people in distress.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12. To me, patriotism includes seeing to the welfare of others.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
13. I seldom think about the welfare of people whom I don't know personally. (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
14. I am often reminded by daily events about how dependent we are on one another.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
 Public Service Motivation - 21

15. I have little compassion for people in need who are unwilling to take the first steps to
help themselves.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
16. There are few public programs that I wholeheartedly support. (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
17. It is hard for me to get intensely interested in what is going on in my community (R).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
18. I unselfishly contribute to my community.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
19. Meaningful public service is very important for me.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20. I consider public service my civic duty.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
21. I would prefer seeing public officials do what is best for the whole community even if
it harmed my interest.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
22. Politics is a dirty word.(R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
23. The compromises that are involved in public policy making don't appeal to me. (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
24. I don't care much for politicians. (R)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Thank you for participating in this survey.

 Public Service Motivation - 22

Bibliography

For the purpose of this study following journal articles, books, and doctoral
dissertations, and master level theses have been collected. The articles are mostly from
international journals and are mostly research based. These articles provide foundational
understanding of the concepts public service motivation, perceptions of organizational
politics, and the relationships between these constructs and employees’ attitudinal outcomes.

Some of the articles listed below report the findings of several studies linking public
service motivation with antecedents and outcomes in several cultural contexts whereas other
articles report the findings of the studies linking organizational politics to several antecedents
and outcomes.

These articles as well as dissertations not only provide the conceptual understanding
of the variables under investigations but also the inter-linkages among these variables. These
articles/dissertations provide basic ideas for choosing a suitable methodology and data
analyses techniques for the study of this nature.

List of Articles, books, doctoral dissertations, and master level theses

Aguinis, H. (1995). Statistical power problems with moderated multiple regression in

management research. Journal of Management, 21(6), 1141-1158.
Allen, R.W., Madison, D.I., Porter, L.W., Renwick, P.A., & Mayes, B.T. (1979).
Organizational politics: Tactics and characteristics of its actors. California Management
Review, 22(1), 77-83. Retrieved from
http://www2.stetson.edu/~bboozer/RWBStetsonSite/Political_Actors_Tactics.pdf
Andrews, M.C., & Kacmar, K.M. (2001). Discriminating among organizational politics,
justice and support. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(4), 347-366. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3649544
Andrews, M.C., Witt, L.A., & Kacmar, K.M. (2003). The interactive effects of organizational
politics and exchange ideology on manager ratings of retention. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 62, 357-369. doi:10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00014-3
Aronow, J.A.P. (2004). The Impact of Organizational Politics on the Work of the Internal
Human Resources Professional. Unpublished Research Paper. Stout, Wisconsin:
University of Wisconsin. Retrieved from
http://www2.uwstout.edu/content/lib/thesis/2004/2004aronowj.pdf.
Balfour, D.L., & Wechsler, B. (1996). Organizational commitment: Antecedents and
outcomes in public organizations. Public Productivity and Management Review, 19(3),
256-277. Retrieved from http//www.jstor.org/stable/3380574
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182
Blau, G.J., & Boal, K.B. (1987). Conceptualizing how job involvement and organizational
commitment affect turnover and absenteeism. The Academy of Management Review,
12(2), 288-300. Retrieved from http:/www.jstor.org/stable/258536
 Public Service Motivation - 23

Bodla, M.A., & Danish, R.Q. (2005). Politics and workplace: An empirical examination of
the relationship between perceived organizational politics and workplace performance.
South Asian Journal of Management, 16(1), 44-62
Bozeman, D.P., Perrewe, P.L., Kacmar, M.K., Hochwarter, W.A., & Brymer, R.A. (1996).
An examination of reactions to perceptions of organizational politics. Paper presented at
the annual meeting of the Southern Management Association, New Orleans, LA.
Bright, L. (2005). Public employees with high levels of public service motivation: Who are
they, where are they, and what do they want? Review of Public Personnel Administration,
25, 138-154.
Bright, L. (2007). Does person-organization fit mediate the relationship between public
service motivation and the job performance of public employees? The Review of Public
Personnel Administration, 27, 361-379.
Bright, L. (2008). Does public service motivation really make a difference on the job
satisfaction and turnover intentions of public employees? The American Review of Public
Administration, 38, 149-165.
Buchanan, D., & Badham, R. (1999). Politics and organizational change: The lived
experience. Human Relations, 52(5), 610-629. doi: 10.1177/001872679905200503
Buchanan, D.A. (2008). You stab my back, I’ll stab yours: Management experience and
perceptions of organizational political behaviour. British Journal of Management, 19(1),
49-64. Retrieved from
https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/bitstream/1826/432/1/You_stab_my_back.pdf .
Burns, T. (1961). Micropolitics: Mechanisms of institutional change. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 6(3), 257-281. Retrieved from http:/www.jstor.stable/2390703
Byrne, Z.S. (2005). Fairness reduces the negative effects of organizational politics on
turnover intentions, citizenship behavior and job performance. Journal of Business
Psychology, 20 (2), 175-200. doi:10.1007/s10869-005-8258-0
Camilleri, E. (2007). Antecedents affecting public service motivation. Personnel Review, 36,
356-377.
Carmeli, A. (2005). Exploring determinants of job involvement: an empirical test among
senior executives. International Journal of Manpower, 26(5), 457-472.
doi:10.1108/01437720510615143
Cerase, F.P. & Farinella, D. (2009). Public service motivation: How does it relate to
management reforms and changes in the working situation of public organizations? A
case study of the Italian Revenue Agency. Public Policy and Administration 24, 281-308.
Chen, Y., & Fang, W. (2008). The moderating effect of impression management on the
organizational politics – performance relationship. Journal of Business Ethics, 79, 263-
277. doi: 10.1007/s10551-007-9379-277
Chen, J., & Silverthrone, C. (2008). The impact of locus of control on job stress, job
performance and job satisfaction in Taiwan. Leadership and Organization Development
Journal, 29(7), 572-582. doi:10.1108/01437730810906326
Chughtai, A.A. (2008). Impact of job involvement on in-role job performance and
organizational citizenship behavior, Journal of Behavioral and Applied management,
169-183. Retrieved from
http://www.ibam.com/pubs/jbam/articles/vol9/no2/JBAM_9_2_4.pdf
 Public Service Motivation - 24

Cropanzano, R., Howes, J.C., Grandey, A., & Toth, P. (1997). The relationship of
organizational politics and support to work behaviors, attitudes, and stress. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 18 (2), 159-180. Retrieved from
http:/www.jstor.org/stable/3100247
Cope, C. (2003). Occupational stress, strain and coping in a professional accounting
organization (Unpublished master’s theses, University of South Africa, Pretoria).
Retrieved from
http://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/2186/00THESIS.pdf?sequence=2
Coursey, D.H. & Pandey, S.K. (2007). Public service motivation measurement: Testing an
abridged version of Perry's proposed scale. Administration and Society, 39, 547-568.
Coursey, D.H., Perry, J.L., Brudney, J.L. & Littlepage, L. (2008). Psycohmetric verification
of Perry's public service motivation instrument: Result for volunteer examplars. Review of
Public Personnel Administration, 28, 79-90.
Currie, P., & Dollery, B. (2006). Organizational commitment and perceived organizational
support in the NSW police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies &
Management, 29(4), 741-756. doi:10.1108/13639510610711637.
Danaeefard, H., Balutbazech, A.E., & Kashi, K.H.A. (2010). Good soldiers’ perceptions of
organizational politics Understanding the relation between organizational citizenship
behaviors and perceptions of organizational politics: Evidence from Iran. European
Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science, 18, 146-162. Retrieved from
http://eurojournals.com/
Diefendorff, J.M., Brown, D.J, Kamin, A.M., & Lord, R.G. (2002). Examining the roles of
job involvement and work centrality in predicting organizational citizenship behaviors
and job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(1), 93-108. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4093687
Drory, A. (1993). Perceived political climate and job attitude. Organization Studies, 14(1),
59-73. doi: 10.1177/017084069301400105
Drory A., & Romm, T. (1988). Politics in organization and its perception within the
organization. Organization Studies, 9(2), 165-179. doi:10.1077/017084068800900202
Fairbrother, K., & Warn, J. (2003). Workplace dimensions, stress and job satisfaction.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(1), 8-21. doi:10.1108/02683940310459565
Farrell, D., & Petersen, J.C. (1982). Patterns of political behavior in organizations. The
Academy of Management Review, 7(3), 403-412. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/257332
Fedor, D., Ferris, G.R., Harrell-Cook, G., & Russ, G.S. (1998). The dimensions of politics
perceptions and their organizational and individual predictors. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 28(19), 1760-1797. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01345.x
Fedor, D., Maslyn, J., Farmer, S, & Bettenhausen, K. (2008). The contribution of positive
politics to the prediction of employee reactions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
38(1), 76-96. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00297.x
Ferris, G.R., Russ, G.S., & Fandt, P.M. (1989). Politics in organizations. In R.A. Giacalone
and P. Rosenfield (Eds), Impression management in the organization. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum, 143-170.
 Public Service Motivation - 25

Ferris, G.R., Adams, G., Kolodinsky, R.W., Hochwarter, W.A., & Ammeter, P.A. (2002).
Perceptions of organizational politics: Theory and research directions. In F. Dansereau
and F.J. Yammarino (Eds.), Research in multi-level issues, 1, 83-111. Greenwich, CT:
JAI Press.
Frank, S. & Lewis, G. (2004). Government employees: Working hard or hardly working? The
American Review of Public Administration, 34, 36-51.
McGrath, J.E., & Johnson, B.A. (2003) Methodology makes meaning: How both qualitative
and quantitative paradigms shape evidence and its interpretation. In Camic, P.M., Rhodes,
J.E., and Yardley, L. (Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives
in methodology and design. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Ferris, G.R., & Frink, D.D. (1994). Understanding as an antidote for the dysfunctional
consequences of organizational politics as a stressor. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 24(13), 1204-1220. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb01551.x
Ferris, G.R., & Kacmar, K.M. (1992). Perceptions of organizational politics. Journal of
Management, 18(1), 93-116. doi:10.1177/014920639201800107
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 Relations, 49(2), 233-266. doi:10.1177/001872679604900206
Ferris, G.R., Frink, D.D., Gilmore, D.C., & Kacmar, K.M. (1994). Understanding as an
antidote for the dysfunctional consequences of organizational politics as a stressor.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 24(13),1204-1220. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb
Fields, D.L. (2002). Taking the measure of work: A guide to validated scales for
organizational research and diagnosis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc.
Gable, M., & Dangello, F (1994). Job involvement, machiavellianism and job performance.
Journal of Business and Psychology, 9(2), 159-170. Retrieved from
http:/www.jstor.org/stable/25092460
Gandz, J., & Murray, V.V. (1980). The experience of workplace politics. The Academy of
Management Journal, 23(2), 237-251. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/255429
Gellis, Z.D., & Kim, J.C. (2004). Predictors of depressive mood, occupational stress, and
propensity to leave in older and younger mental health case managers. Community
Mental Health Journal, 40(5), 407-421. doi:10.1023/B:COMH.0000040655.09817.e8.
Gilmore, C.G., Ferris, G.R., Dulebohn, J.H., & Harrell-Cook, G. (1996). Organizational
politics and employee attendance. Group & Organization Management, 21(4), 481-494.
doi: 10.1177/1059601196214007
Gotsis, G., & Kortezi, Z. (2009). Ethical considerations in organizational politics: Expanding
the perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(4), 497-517. doi: 10.1007/s10551-009-
0241-7
Gray, B., & Ariss, S.S. (1985). Politics and strategic change across organizational life cycles.
The Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 707-723. Retrieved from
http.//www.jstor.org/stable/258040
Grix, J. (2002). Introducing students to the generic terminology of social research. Politics,
22(3), 175-186.
 Public Service Motivation - 26

Harrel-Cook, G., Ferris, G.R., & Dulebohn, J.H. (1999). Political behaviors as moderators of
perceptions of organizational politics – work outcomes relationships. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 20(7), 1093-1105. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3100348
Harris, K.J., Andrews, M.C., & Kacmar, K.M. (2007). The moderating effects of justice on
the relationship between organizational politics and workplace attitudes. Journal of
Business Psychology, 22, 135-144. doi:10.1007/s10869-007-9054-9
Hochwarter, W.A., Perrewe, P.L., Ferris, G.R., & Guercio, R. (1999). Commitment as an
antidote to the tension and turnover consequences of organizational politics. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 55, 277-297. doi: jvbe.1999.1684
Hochwarter, W.A., Kacmar, K.M., & Perrewe, P.L. (2003). Perceived organizational support
as a mediator of the relationship between politics perceptions and work outcomes.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 438-456. doi: 10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00048-9
Indratono, S. & Chen, C.V. (2011). Moderating effects of tenure and gender on the
relationship between perceptions of organizational politics and commitment and trust.
South Asian Journal of Management, 18(1), 7-36.
Kacmar, K.M., Bacharch, G.G., Harris, K.J., & Zivnuska, S. (2011). Fostering good
citizenship through ethical leadership: Exploring the moderating role of gender and
organizational politics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(3), 633-642.
doi:10.1037/a0021872
Kacmar, K.M., & Baron, R.A. (1999). Organizational politics: The state of the field, links to
related processes, and an agenda for future research. In G.R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in
Personnel and Human Resources Management, 17, 1-39. Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
Kacmar, K.M., Bozeman, D.P., Carlson, D.S., & Anthony, W.P. (1999). An examination of
the perceptions of organizational politics model: Replication and extension. Human
Relations, 52(3), 383-416. doi: 10.1177/001872679905200305
Kacmar, K.M., & Carlson, D.S. (1997). Further validation of perceptions of politics scale
(Pops): A multiple sample investigation. Journal of Management, 23(5), 627-658.
doi:10.1177/014920639702300502
Kacmar, K.M., & Ferris, G.R. (1991). Perceptions of organizational politics scale (POPS):
Development and construct validation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51,
193-205. doi:10.1177/0013164491511019
Kelloway E.K. (1998). Using LISREL for structural equation modeling A researcher’s guide.
Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications
Kim, S. (2009). Revising Perry's measurement scale of public service motivation. The
American Review of Public Administration, 39, 149-163.
Khati, R.D. (2005). Politics in university decision-making. Tribhuvan University Journal,
25(1), 111-118. Retrieved from http://tujournal.edu.np/index.php/TUJ/article/view/168
Latif, A., Abideen, Z. U., & Nazar, M.S. (2011). Individual political behavior in
organizational relationship. Journal of Politics and Law, 4(1), 199-210. Retrieved from
http:// www.ccsenet.org/jpl
Layne, C.M. (2001). The relationship of occupational stress, psychological strain, and
coping resources to the turnover intentions of rehabilitation counselors (Unpublished
doctorial dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blaskburg).
 Public Service Motivation - 27

Retrieved from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-10262001-

104828/unrestricted/Cmannlayneweb.pdf
Leisink, P. & Steijn, B. (2009). Public service motivation and job performance of public
sector employees in the Netherlands. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75,
35-52.
Madison, D.L., Allen, R.W., Porter, L.W., Renwick, P.A., & Mayes, B.T. (1980).
Organizational politics: An exploration of managers’ perceptions. Human Relations,
33(2), 79-100. doi: 10.1177/001872678003300201
March, J.G. (1962). The business firm as a political coalition. The Journal of Politics, 24(4),
662-678. Retrieved from http:/www.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-
3816%28196211%2924%3A4%3C662%3ATBFAAP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-F
Maslyn, J.M., & Fedor, D.B. (1998). Perceptions of politics: Does measuring different foci
matter? Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(4), 645-653. Retrieved from
http://myweb.usf.edu/
Maslyn, J., Fedor, D., Farmer, S., & Bettenhausen, K. (2005). Perceptions of positive and
negative organizational politics: Roles of the frequency and distance of political
behavior. Paper presented at the 2005 annual meeting of the Southern Management
Association, Charlotte, SC. Retrieved from
http://webs.twsu.edu/farmer/articles/maslyn,%20Fedof%20Farmer%20&%20Bettenhause
n%202005%20SMA.pdf
Mayes, B.T., & Allen, R.W. (1977).Towards a definition of organizational politics. The
Academy of Management Review, 2(4), 672-678. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/257520
Mechanic, D. (1962). Sources of power of lower participants in complex organizations.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 7, 349-364. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2390947
Miller, B.K., Rutherford, M.A., & Kolodinsky, R.W. (2008). Perceptions of organizational
politics: A meta-analysis of outcomes. Journal of Business Psychology, 22, 209-222.
doi:10.1007/s10869-008-9061-5
Mintzberg, H. (1983). Power in and around organizations. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Nepal Rastra Bank (2011). Lists of banking and non-banking financial institutions.
Kathmandu: Nepal Rastra Bank. Retrieved from http://bfr.nrb.org.np/
Nye, L.G., & Witt, L. A. (1993). Dimensionality and construct validity of the perceptions of
organizational politics scale (POPS). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53.
821-829. doi: 10.1177/0013164493053003026
Parker, C.P., Dipboye, R.L., & Jackson, S.L. (1995). Perceptions of organizational politics:
An investigation of antecedents and consequences. Journal of Management, 21(5), 891-
912. doi: 10.1177/014920639502100505.
Pathak, P. (2004).Managerial problems in the public and private sectors in Nepal. Banking
Promotion, 8(2), 130-134
Perry, J.L. (1996). Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct
reliability and validity. Journal of Administration Research & Theory, 6, 5-12.
Perry, J.L. & Wise, L.R. (1990). The Motivational bases of public service. Public
Administration Review, 50, 367-373.
 Public Service Motivation - 28

Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in Organizations. Marshfield, MA:Pittman

Podsakoff, P.M., Ahearne, M., & MacKenzie, S.B. (1997). Organizational citizenship
behavior and the quantity and quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 82, 262-270.
Poon, J.M.L. (2003).Situational antecedents and outcomes of organizational politics
perceptions. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(2), 138-155.
doi:10.1108/02683940310465036
Rahim, M. A. (1997). Relationships of stress, locus of control, and social support to
psychiatric symptoms and propensity to leave a job: A field study with managers. Journal
of Business and Psychology, 12(2), 159-174. doi:10.1023/A:1025018101302
Ram, P., & Prabhakar, G.V. (2010). Leadership styles and perceived organizational politics
as predictors of work related outcomes. European Journal of Social Sciences, 15 (1), 40-
55. Retrieved from http://www.eurojournals.com/ejss_15_1_04.pdf
Randall, M.L., Cropanzano, R., Bormann, C.A., & Birjulin, A. (1999). Organizational
politics and organizational support as predictors of work attitudes, job performance and
organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20 (2), 159-174.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3100417
Rashid, M. Z., Sambasivan, M., & Johari, J. (2003). The influence of corporate culture and
organizational commitment on performance. Journal of Management Development,
22(8), 708-728. doi: 10.1108/02621710310487873
Ritz, A (2009). Public service motivation and organizational performance in Swiss federal
government. International Review of Administrative Science, 75(1), 53-78.
Rosen, C.C. (2006). Politics, Stress, and Exchange Perceptions: A Dual Process Model
Relating Organizational Politics to Employee Outcomes (Unpublished doctorial
dissertation, University of Akron, Akron). Retrieved from
http://etd.ohiolink.edu/viewcgi/Rosen%20Charles.pdf?akron1151425394
Rosen, C.C., Levy, P.E., & Hall, R.J. (2006). Placing perceptions of politics in the context of
the feedback environment, employee attitudes, and job performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 91(1), 211-220. doi: 1037/0021-9010.91.1.211
Rotenberry, P.F., & Moberg, P.J. (2007). Assessing the impact of job involvement on
performance. Management Research News, 30(3), 203-215.
doi:10.1108/01409170710733278
Sekaran, U. (2003). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach (4th ed.).
Denver: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Shore, L.M., Newton, L.A., & Thornton III, G.C. (1990). Job and organizational attitudes in
relation to employee behavioral intentions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11(1),
57-67. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2488020
Schein, V.E. (1977). Individual power and political behaviors in organizations: An
inadequately explored reality. The Academy of Management Review, 2(1), 64-72.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/257607
Trochim, W.M.K. (2008). Research Methods Knowledge Base. Retrieved from
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/
 Public Service Motivation - 29

Tushman, M.L. (1977). A political approach to organizations: A review and rationale. The
Academy of Management Review, 2(2), 206-216. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/257904
Uygur, A., & Kilic, G. (2009). A study into organizational commitment and job involvement:
An application towards the personnel in the central organization for Ministry of Health in
Turkey. Ozean Journal of Applied Sciences, 2(1), 113-125. Retrieved from
http://ozelacademy.com/OJAS_v2n1_13.pdf
Valle, M., & Perrewe, P.L. (2000). Do politics perceptions relate to political behaviors? Tests
of an implicit assumption and expanded model. Human Relations, 53(3), 359-386.
doi:10.1177/0018726700533004
Vigoda, E. (2000). Organizational politics, job attitudes, and work outcomes: Exploration and
implication for the public sector. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 57, 326-347.
doi:10.1006/jvbe.1999.1742
Vigoda, E. (2001). Reactions to organizational politics: A cross-cultural examination in Israel
and Britain. Human Relations, 54(11), 1483-1517. doi:10.1177/00187267015411004
Vigoda, E. (2002). Stress-related aftermaths to workplace politics: The relationships among
politics, job distress, and aggressive behavior in organizations. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 23 (5), 571-591. Retrieved from http:/www/jstor.org/stable/4093666
Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2007). Leadership style, organizational politics, and employees’
performance: An empirical examination of two competing models. Personnel Review,
36(5), 661-683. doi:10.1108/00483480710773981.
Vigoda, E., & Cohen, A. (1998). Organizational politics and employee performances: A
review and theoretical model. Journal of Management Systems, 10(3), 59-72. Retrieved
from http://poli.haifa.ac.il/~acohen/docs/27.pdf
Vigoda, E., & Cohen, A. (2002). Influence tactics and perceptions of organizational politics
A longitudinal study. Journal of Business Research, 55, 311-324. doi:10.1016/S0148-
2963(00)00134-x
Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Drory, A. (Eds.) (2006). Handbook of Organizational Politics.
Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar
Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Kapun, D. (2005) Perceptions of politics and perceived performance in
public and private organizations: A test of one model across two sectors. Policy &
Politics, 33(2), 251-276. Retrieved from
http://organizations.haifa.ac.il/html/html_eng/Memberspublications/Vigoda/OPsectors.pd f
Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Meisler, E. (2010). Emotions in management and the management of
emotions: The impact of emotional intelligence and organizational politics on public
sector employees. Public Administration Review, 72-86. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
6210.2009.02112.x
Vigoda-Gadot, E., Vinarski-Peretz, H., & Ben-Zion, E. (2003). Politics and image in the
organizational landscape: An empirical examination among public sector employees.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(8), 764-787. doi:10.1108/02683940310511872.
Witt, L.A., Andrews, M.C., & Kacmar, K.M. (2000). The role of participation in decision-
making in the organizational politics – job satisfaction relationship. Human Relations,
53(3), 341-358. doi:10.1177/0018726700533003
 Public Service Motivation - 30

Wright, B.E. & Pandey, S.K. (2008). Public service motivation and the assumption of person-
organization fit: Testing the mediating effect of value congruence. Administration and
Society, 40, 502-521.Yen, W., Chen S., & Yen, S. (2009). The impact of perceptions of
organizational politics on workplace friendship. African Journal of Business
Management, 3(10), 548-554. Retrieved from http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM
Zhang, G., & Lee, G. (2010). The moderation effects of perceptions of organizational politics
on the relationship between work stress and turnover intention: An empirical study about
civilian in skeleton government of China. iBusiness, 2, 268-273.
doi:10.4236/ib.2010.23034
Zhou J., & Ferris, G.R. (1995). The dimensions and consequences of organizational politics
perceptions: A confirmatory analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25(19),
1747-1764. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1995.tb01816.x
Zivnuska, S., Kacmar, K.M., Witt, L.A., Carlson, D.S., & Bratton, V.K. (2004). Interactive
effects of impression management and organizational politics on job performance. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 25(5), 627-640. Retrieved from