Page 1 of 8

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning

Available at http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/

e-ISSN: 2395-0463

Volume 01 Issue 11

December 2016

Available online: http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/ P a g e | 676

Moderating Role of Performance Appraisal Politics on Transformational

Leadership and Job Performance: A Proposed Framework

Syed Mir Muhammad Shah; Dr. Kamal Bin Ab. Hamid2

syedmir@iba-suk.edu.pk ; abkamal@uum.edu.my

1University Utara Malaysia and Sukkur Institute of Business Administration, Pakistan

2University Utara Malaysia

Abstract

There is enormous literature available that

explains the effectiveness of leadership styles

over job performance. A large number of studies

also explain that how this relationship could be

improved further. To date, there have been

several studies explaining the nature and

influence of leadership styles over job

performance. Despite the huge literature on this

relationship, there is still a disagreement on

which leadership styles influences job

performance more effectively. In addition to

this, the literature provides confusing results on

the relationship between leadership styles and

job performance. This is true particularly with

regards to essential role of transformational

leadership in facilitating job performance.

Therefore, the present study proposes

performance appraisal politics as a moderating

variable on the relationship between

transformational leadership and job

performance.

Keywords: Transformational Leadership, Job

Performance, Performance Appraisal Politics,

Moderation, Conceptual Framework

1. INTRODUCTION

The past studies have witnessed that job

performance has remained the center of interest

for the researchers in the domain of human

resource management (Wall, Michie, Patterson,

Wood, Sheehan, Clegg, & West, 2004; Jamal,

2007; Imran, Arif, Chima & Azeem, 2014).The

performance of employees has always been

considered as the key towards the success of

organization and the job performance of

employees. It has remained the topic of interest

for the managers for every type of business and

its scope (Motowidlo & Scotter, 2004). In this

regard the researchers have paid great attention

to find out those factors that influence job

performance, influencing positively or

negatively (Muhammad, Nadeem & Ashfaq,

2011). The researchers have not yet been agreed

upon any single construct to measure job

performance nor concluded definite way to

gauge it. A study conducted by Tse and Chiu

(2014) on job performance on five Banks of

China has resulted differentiated outcomes of

job performance of line managers and

immediate subordinates.

Extensive literature on job performance has

highlighted upon employee performance and

other factors influencing it. Out of these studies

many studies have shown significant

relationship between job satisfaction and job

performance (Judge, Thoresen, & Bono, 2001;

Moynihan & Pandey, 2007). Other studies have

reported relationship of motivation and job

performance (Van Knippenberg, 2000;

Page 2 of 8

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning

Available at http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/

e-ISSN: 2395-0463

Volume 01 Issue 11

December 2016

Available online: http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/ P a g e | 677

Halbesleben & Bowler, 2007) and other factors

that affect performance include gender

(Semadar, Robins, & Ferris, 2006) age (Ng &

Feldman, 2008) salary (Lemieux, Macleod, &

Parent, 2009), and stress (Hourani, Williams, &

Kress, 2006). A recent study conducted by Pahi,

& Hamid (2015) have determined positive

relationship between leadership and

commitment to service quality. The present

study outlined job performance as effectiveness

of individual behaviors that contribute to the

organizational objectives (McCloy, Campbell,

& Cudeck, 1994).

Wofford, Whittington, and Goodwin (2001),

Geyer and Steyrer (1998), Bass (1985) pointed

out in their studies that the leadership

concentrate on strengthening relations in

between managers and employees, they define

the expectations of their subordinates, explain

their roles and fulfill their requirements as they

seek expected level of performance. Referring

to past studies, scholars have found varied

relationship in between leadership styles and job

performance (i.e., positive, negative and no

relation). The studies conducted by (Rad &

Yarmohammadian, 2006), Voon, Ngui, and

Ayob (2011) and Dolatabadi and Safa (2010)

have found positive and significant relationship

between leadership styles and job performance.

Additionally, other studies resulted insignificant

and negative relationship between transactional

leadership styles and performance (Sheridan &

Vredenburgh, 1978; Geyer, & Steyrer, 1998;

MacKenzie, Podssakoff & Rich, 2001; Parry,

2003). Accordingly, Sheridan and Vredenburgh

(1978) and O'Reilly and Roberts (1978) that

there is no relationship between leadership

styles and job performance.

This situation of inconsistent results calls for

further attention towards the relationship

between leadership styles and job performance.

Particularly, present study proposes

performance appraisal politics as a moderating

variable on the relationship between

transformational leadership and job performance

drawing upon the guidelines of Barron and

Kenny (1986).

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP

AND JOB PERFORMANCE

According to Bass, Avolio, Jung, and Berson

(2003) followers are motivated and feel inspired

with the transactional leadership style. The key

elements of transformational leadership are

inspirational motivation and idealized influence

(Bass et al., 2003). The motivation determines

the thinking and innovativeness of the leaders

(Bass & Avolio, 1995). Literature also

emphasizes on the differences between

transformational and transactional leadership

(Burns, 1978). The transactional leadership

offers reciprocal gain by providing benefits to

employees on the basis of their performance.

Additionally, researchers have argued that the

effectiveness of transformational in comparison

to transactional leadership (Gardner & Stough,

2002). Moreover, studies have suggested that

transformational and transactional leadership

styles are entirely different than each other

(Lowe, Kroeck, & Sivasubramaniam, 1996).

Interestingly, researchers have suggested that

leaders could behave in both of the ways of

leadership. However, literature provides

empirical support to the notion that

transformational leadership is of more

importance than transactional (Dvir, Eden,

Avolio, & Shamir, 2002). Similarly, the work

of Bass et al. (2003) has supported the

effectiveness of transformational leadership

with regards to improving effectiveness as well

as efficiency. These researchers have further

Page 3 of 8

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning

Available at http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/

e-ISSN: 2395-0463

Volume 01 Issue 11

December 2016

Available online: http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/ P a g e | 678

suggested that transformational leadership holds

greater potential than transactional.

On emphasizing the importance of

transformational leadership, researchers have

explained that it enhances individual motivation

(Glynn, 1996). This style of leadership also

helps individuals in organizations in bringing

innovativeness in the process, it also helps

individuals in adopting and accepting changes

that are positive (Hurley & Hult, 1998; Argyris

& Sochon, 1996). Additionally, the

transformational leaders promote learning

culture at organizational level (Hurley & Hult,

1998; Argyris & Sochon, 1996). The positive

aspect of transformational leadership lies in its

emphasis on controlling decisions rather than

relying on punishment mechanisms (Waldman,

Bass, & Yammarino, 1990). One could

conclude that this kind of leadership holds

positive influence over organizations and

specifically on the individuals in terms of

helping them to adopt change and developing

positive attitude towards learning new things. It

helps individuals to understand complexities of

real world problems associated with job

performance for improving overall

organizational effectiveness. Therefore, it

becomes essential to pay appropriate attention

towards this style of leadership.

2.2 PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

POLITICS AS A MODERATING

VARIABLE

The term politics to express machinations in

appraisal performance, most notably was

initially used by Longenecker, Sims & Gioia,

(1987). They defined politics as conscious

attempts by individuals to get better or guard

their own conflicting interests when courses of

action are possible. The authors conducted a

qualitative survey on performance appraisal by

interviewing 60 executives. They found that the

evaluators had almost always political motives

in their mind when they did conduct

performance appraisals. Particularly, the

researchers provided documented proof that

evaluators use discretion and consider the

possible efficiency and consequences of their

remarks while rendering performance appraisal.

This was enlighten by Longenecker et al. (1987)

in their findings that raters often rate the

subordinates based on their own judgment and

they were not concerned to give accurate

ratings. Mostly the ratings were usually based

on these influences the inspiration of raters to

keep away from confrontations, that is regarded

as more efficient managers and acquire the

desired rewards for themselves or their

subordinates.

The politics with regards to performance

appraisals have been largely emphasized in the

literature (See for example Longenecker et al.,

1987). Further to this, the extent of influence of

politics over the assessment of employee

performance has been denoted in the work of

Tziner, Latham, Price, & Haccoun (1996). In

doing so, the researchers have made utmost

effort in explaining the critical influence of

organizational politics over evaluations of

employee performance. It is critically important

for organizations to appropriately evaluate

employee performance. However, this

assessment has largely been influenced badly

due to politics. Due to this fact, scholars have

given much attention to the leadership styles,

organizational politics and job performance in

the past research (Bass, 1985; Geyer & Steyrer,

1998; MacKenzie et al., 2001; Lowe et al.,

1996; Parry, 2003; Vigoda-Gadot, 2003;

Vigoda-Gadot, 2007), and the researchers have

come up with varying outcomes and found

inconsistent results. Organizational politics is

much studied in different perspectives such as

employees’ perception of politics as a general or

supervisors and subordinates perspectives and

its effects on performance.