Organizational Support, Participation in Organizational Decision-Making, Organizational Politics, and Perceived Social Status among Faculty Members: The Mediating Effects of Status Seeking Styles

Document Type: Research Paper

Authors

1 Institute of Educational, Psychological, and Social Research, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Counseling, Hazrat-e Masoumeh University, Qom, Iran

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine a psychosocial model of predicting perceived social status among faculty members. To this end, 135 faculty members in one of the state universities in Tehran, Iran, were recruited through convenient sampling. We used Perceived Organizational Support Scale (POSS), Perceptions of Organizational Politics Scale (POPS), Participation in Organizational Decisions Making Scale (PODMS), and Dominance and Prestige Scale (DPS) to collect data. Findings showed that 40% of participants believed that social status of academic careers has decreased in Iran since they have entered into their jobs. Perceived organizational support, perceived organizational politics, and participation in decision-making were associated with perceived social status directly and indirectly by the mediating role of prestige-based status-seeking style. The link between perceived organizational politics and perceived social status were negative, but there were positive associations between other factors in model and perceived social status. Then, we might conclude that perceived social status is determined by the quality of organizational support, political atmosphere in organization, participation in organizational decision-making, and prestige-based status-seeking styles. Faculty members with prestige-based status-seeking style had better feelings toward their job as a high social status job, which may facilitate their self- actualization

Keywords

Main Subjects


Article Title [Persian]

حمایت سازمانی، مشارکت در تصمیم گیری سازمانی، سیاست‌های سازمانی و ادراک از جایگاه اجتماعی در اعضای هیات علمی: اثرات واسطه‌ای سبک‌های جایگاه طلبی اجتماعی

Authors [Persian]

  • حمید خانی پور 1
  • الهام فتحی 2
1 موسسه تحقیقات تربیتی، روانشناختی و اجتماعی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران
2 گروه مشاوره، دانشگاه حضرت معصومه(س)، قم، ایران
Abstract [Persian]

هدف این مطالعه بررسی مدل روانی اجتماعی برای پیش‌بینی ادارک از جایگاه اجتماعی در بین اعضای هیات علمی بود. از 135 نفر از اعضای هیات یکی از دانشگاه‌های دولتی شهر تهران به شیوه دردسترس نمونه‌گیری انجام شد. برای جمع‌آوری داده‌ها از مقیاس حمایت سازمانی ادارک‌شده، مقیاس ادارک از سیاست‌های سازمانی، مقیاس مشارکت در تصمیم‌گیری سازمانی و مقیاس برتری-منزلت استفاده شد. در کل 40 درصد از شرکت‌کنندگان این نگرش را داشتند که جایگاه اجتماعی برای کاردانشگاهی در ایران از زمانی که عضو هیات علمی شده‌اند، کاهش یافته است. حمایت سازمانی ادارک‌شده، ادارک از سیاست‌های سازمانی و مشارکت‌داده‌شدن در تصمیم‌گیری‌های سازمانی هم به صورت مستقیم و به صورت غیرمستقیم از طریق سبک‌های جایگاه‌طلبی اجتماعی با جایگاه اجتماعی ادارک‌شده رابطه داشتند. رابطه بین سیاست‌های سازمانی ادارک شده و جایگاه اجتماعی ادارک‌شده منفی بود؛ اما سایر ابعاد مدل رابطه مثبتی با جایگاه اجتماعی ادارک‌شده داشتند. می‌توان نتیجه‌گیری کرد که ادارک از جایگاه اجتماعی متاثر از کیفیت حمایت اجتماعی سازمانی، جو سیاسی در سازمان، مشارکت در تصمیم‌گیری سازمانی و سبک جایگاه‌طلبی مبتنی بر منزلت دارد. اعضای هیات علمی که از سبک جایگاه‌طلبی مبتنی بر منزلت استفاده می‌کنند، احساس بهتری نسبت به کار دانشگاهی به عنوان کاری با جایگاه اجتماعی بالا دارند و این امر ممکن است در تسهیل خودشکوفایی‌شان موثراست.

Keywords [Persian]

  • جایگاه اجتماعی
  • حمایت سازمانی ادارک شده
  • سیاست های سازمانی ادارک شده
  • مدیریت
Ahmady, S., Changiz, T., Masiello, I., & Brommels, M. (2007). Organizational role stress among medical school faculty members in Iran: Dealing with role conflict. BMC Medical education, 7(14); 1-10.

Anderson, C., & Kennedy, J. A. (2012a). Status hierarchies in teams: Micropolitics and the negotiation of rank. Research on managing groups and teams15[H1] , 49-80.

Anderson, C., & Kennedy, J. A. (2012b). Micropolitics: A new model of status hierarchies in teams. In Looking[H2]  back, moving forward: A review of group and team-based research (pp. 49-80). Emerald[H3]  Group Publishing Limited. [H4] 

Anderson, C., Hildreth, J. A. D., & Howland, L. (2015). Is the desire for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empirical literature. Psychological Bulletin, 141(3), 574-601.

Arani, A. M., Kakia, L., & Malek, M. J. (2018). Higher education research in Iran: Quantitative development and qualitative challenges. In Researching[H5]  Higher Education in Asia (pp. 315-326). Singapore: Springer.

Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review14(1), 20-39.   

Atta, M., & Khan, M. J. (2016). Perceived organizational politics, organizational citizenship behavior and job attitudes among university teachers. Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 26(2), 21-38.

Bailey, T., Berg, P., & Sandy, C. (2001). The effect of high-performance work practices on employee earnings in the steel, apparel, and medical electronics and imaging industries. ILR Review, 54(2a), 525-543.

Blome, F., Möller, C., & Böning, A. (2019). Open house? Class-specific career opportunities within German universities. Social Inclusion, 7(1), 101-110.    

Bourdieu, P. (1988). Homo academicus. New york, Stanford University Press.     

Butler, D. (2009). Plagiarism scandal grows in Iran: Investigation finds more cases of duplication in publications co-authored by ministers and senior officials. Nature, 462(4274[H6] ), 704-706.

Cheng, J. T., & Tracy, J. L. (2014). Toward a unified science of hierarchy: Dominance and prestige are two fundamental pathways to human social rank. In The[H7]  psychology of social status. Springer, New York.

Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., Foulsham, T., Kingstone, A., & Henrich, J. (2013). Two ways to the top: Evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence. Journal of personality and social psychology, 104(1), 103-125.

Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Henrich, J. (2010). Pride, personality, and the evolutionary foundations of human social status. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(5), 334-347.

Cooper-Thomas, H., Xu, J. & M. Saks, A. (2018), The differential value of resources in predicting employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 33 (4/5), 326-344. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-12-2017-0449

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Self-determination theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 416–436). Sage[H8]  Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n21

Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & Van Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological bulletin, 129(4), 569-591.

Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied psychology, 71(3), 500-507.

Eshraghi, R. (2017). Factors affecting the professional development of faculty members: A case study of Ilam Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran. International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 7(4), 509-515.

Ferris, G. R., & Kacmar, K. M. (1992). Perceptions of organizational politics. Journal of Management, 18(1), 93-116.

Fouad, N. A., & Brown, M. T. (2000). The role of race and class in development: Implications for counseling psychology. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (3rd ed.) (pp. 379-408). New York: John Wiley

Francis, R. D. (2018). Book Review: Working in Class: Recognizing How Social Class Shapes Our Academic Work. Teaching Sociology, 46 (3), 280-282[H9] .

Fuller, J. B., Hester, K., Barnett, T., Frey, L., Relyea, C., & Beu, D. (2006). Perceived external prestige and internal respect: New insights into the organizational identification process. Human relations, 59(6), 815-846.

Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Stanford university press.

Inglehart, R., & Abramson, P. R. (1994). Economic security and value change. American Political Science Review88(2), 336-354.

Kacmar, K. M., & Ferris, G. R. (1991). Perceptions of organizational politics scale (POPS): Development and construct validation. Educational and Psychological Measurement51(1), 193-205.

Kasser, T., & Kasser, V. G. (2001). The dreams of people high and low in materialism. Journal of Economic Psychology22(6), 693-719.

Kasser, T., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Sheldon, K. M. (2004). Materialistic values: Their causes and consequences. Psychology and consumer culture: The struggle for a good life in a materialistic world, 1(2), 11-28.         

Kasser, T.  (2016). Materialistic values and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 67[H10] , 489-514.

Kennedy, J. A., Anderson, C., & Moore, D. A. (2013). When overconfidence is revealed to others: Testing the status-enhancement theory of overconfidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 122(2), 266-279.

Kreiner, G. E., & Ashforth, B. E. (2004). Evidence toward an expanded model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 25(1), 1-27.

Kurtessis, J. N., Eisenberger, R., Ford, M. T., Buffardi, L. C., Stewart, K. A., & Adis, C. S. (2017). Perceived organizational support: A meta-analytic evaluation of organizational support theory. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1854-1884.

Lee, E. M. (2017). Where people like me don't belong: Faculty members from low-socioeconomic-status backgrounds. Sociology of Education, 90(3), 197-212.

Macionis, J. (2006). Society: The Basics (8th ed). New Jersy: Pearson Education, Inc.        

Marique, G., Stinglhamber, F., Desmette, D., Caesens, G., & De Zanet, F. (2013). The relationship between perceived organizational support and affective commitment: A social identity perspective. Group & Organization Management, 38(1), 68-100       

Maslow, A. (1948). Some theoritical consequences of basic need gratification. Journal of personality, 16(4), 402-416.

Mokhtari, R., Safania, A. M., Soltanpour-zarandi, H. (2019). Investigate the relationship between inter-organizational factors and political behavior, with emphasis on the role of mediator perception of organizational politics. Journal of Sport Management, 11(1), 119-131. (In Persian)

Oreyzi, H. and M. Golparvar (2010). The relationship between perceived organizational support and work and organizational factors: A path analysis. Management Research in Iran, 15(4), 147-177. (In Persian)

Parkhurst, J. T., & Hopmeyer, A. (1998). Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity: Two distinct dimensions of peer status. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 18(2), 125-144.

Pandelaere, M. (2016). Materialism and well-being: The role of consumption. Current Opinion in Psychology. 10[H11] , 33-38.

Potipiroon, W., & Ford, M. T. (2019). Relational costs of status: Can the relationship between supervisor incivility, perceived support, and follower outcomes be exacerbated? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 92(4), 873-896.     

Porter, L. W. (1961). A study of perceived need satisfactions in bottom and middle management jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology45(1), 1-15.         

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: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 20(2), 159-174.

Redhead, D., Cheng, J. T., Driver, C., Foulsham, T., & O'Gorman, R. (2018). On the dynamics of social hierarchy: A longitudinal investigation of the rise and fall of prestige, dominance, and social rank in naturalistic task groups. Evolution and Human Behavior, 40(2), 222-234.

Riggle, R. J., Edmondson, D. R., & Hansen, J. D. (2009). A meta-analysis of the relationship between perceived organizational support and job outcomes: 20 years of research. Journal of business research62(10), 1027-1030.     

Saks, A. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology,  21(7), 600-619. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610690169

Schneider, B., & Alderfer, CP. (1973). Three studies of measures of need satisfaction in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18(4), 489-505.

Sidanius, J. (1993). The psychology of group conflict and the dynamics of oppression: A social dominance perspective. In W. McGuire & S. Iyengar (Eds.), Current approaches to political psychology ()[H12] . Durham, NC: Duke University Press.     

Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., Van Laar, C., & Levin, S. (2004). Social dominance theory: Its agenda and method. Political Psychology, 25(6), 845-880.

Sijtsema, J., Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., & Salmivalli, C. (2009). Empirical test of bullies' status goals: Assessing direct goals, aggression, and prestige. Aggressive Behavior: Official Journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression35(1), 57-67.

Steel, R. P., & Mento, A. J. (1987). The participation-performance controversy reconsidered: Subordinate competence as a mitigating factor. Group & Organization Studies12(4), 411-423.  

Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology33(1), 1-39.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004). The Social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In J. T. Jost & J. Sidanius (Eds.), Key readings in social psychology. Political psychology[H13] : Key readings (pp. 276-293). New York, NY, US: Psychology Press.

Thompson, M. N., & Subich, L. M. (2006). The relation of social status to the career decision-making process. Journal of Vocational Behavior69(2), 289-301.

Thompson, M. N., & Subich, L. M. (2007). Exploration and validation of the differential status identity scale. Journal of Career Assessment15(2), 227-239.

Thompson, M. N., & Dahling, J. J. (2012). Perceived social status and learning experiences in social cognitive career theory. Journal of Vocational Behavior80(2), 351-361.

Thompson, M. N., & Subich, L. M. (2011). Social status identity: Antecedents and vocational outcomes. The Counseling Psychologist39(5), 735-763.        

Tyler, TR., & Blader, S. L. (2002). Autonomous vs. comparative status: Must we be better than others to feel good about ourselves? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes89(1), 813-838.

Van Knippenberg, D., & Sleebos, E. (2006). Organizational identification versus organizational commitment: Self‐definition, social exchange, and job attitudes. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior27(5), 571-584.

Vigoda, E. (2002). Stress‐related aftermaths to workplace politics: the relationships among politics, job distress, and aggressive behavior in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior23(5), 571-591.

Von Rueden, C., Gurven, M., & Kaplan, H. (2010). Why do men seek status? Fitness payoffs to dominance and prestige. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences. 278(1715)[H14] , 2223-2232. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.2145

Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1999). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 126-134.

Wood, S., & De Menezes, L. (1998). High commitment management in the UK: Evidence from the workplace industrial relations survey, and employers' manpower and skills practices survey. Human Relations51(4), 485-515.


 [H1]Issue number?

 [H2]Editors’ names?

 [H3]Place of publication?

 [H4]Since the same authors have published these two works in the same year, you need to distinguish them in the text using (2012a) and (2012b).

 [H5]Editors’ names?

 [H6]Issue number?

 [H7]Editors’ names?

 [H8]Place of publication?

 [H9]Needs a major revision based on apa 6th edition guidelines for book review referencing, including the original work authors names.

 [H10]Issue number

 [H11]Issue number?

 [H12]Page numbers?

 [H13]Two sentences in the title?

 [H14]Issue number