Pakistan Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology

2020, Vol. 18, No. 2, 32-39

Relationship between Perceived Transformational Leadership and

Organizational Citizenship Behavior in University Teaching Faculty

Mohsin Atta
University of Sargodha
&
Muhammad Jahanzeb Khan
Department of Psychology, University of Peshawar

Abstract
Present study was executed to examine the moderating effect of organizational politics (POP) in
relationship of perceived transformational leadership (TRF) and organizational citizenship behavior
(OCB). A sample of public sector university teachers (N = 494) from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab
provinces of Pakistan was selected through convenient sampling procedure. Present study
operationalizes the constructs through Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ-5X; Bass &
Avolio, 1997), Organizational Politics Scale (Kacmar & Carlson, 1997), and OCB Scale (Lee & Allen,
2002). Hierarchical regression analysis demonstrated that organizational politics and its facets i.e.
general political behavior (GPB) and pay and promotion policies (PPP) significantly moderated
between perceived transformational leadership and OCB and strengthened the positive relationship
between them. Certain limitations and suggestions have also been discussed to convene future
research.
Keywords: Organizational politics, transformational leadership, organizational citizenship behavior.

Intellectual input of universities has been indisputably regarding the leadership style has gained essential value in
recognized for the growth and development of the various organizational settings. It is therefore examining PL empirically
segments of society. Teaching faculty, one of the most important in indigenous perspective may yield valuable findings of
entity that contributes to the span of knowledge, is assumed as practical utility.
substantial force for the improvement and progress of society.
There are unquestionably various individual and organizational Theories of Leadership
concerns that necessarily should be addressed to comprehend so
that to facilitate the attitudes and behaviors of teaching faculty. Many theories of leadership have been proposed viewing
Among others factors leadership and political behaviors are leadership from different perspectives. These theories are
those that exert intense impact on employees’ loyalties with assumed to be distinctive on the bases of who leads, under
organization other than the formal roles and responsibilities. It is certain circumstances, and who follows. For example, Trait
therefore present study tends to find out the individual effects of leadership considers personal characteristics to differentiate
perceived leadership styles and perceived organizational politics leaders from the individuals who are not leader (Robbins &
besides their interactive effects on organizational citizenship Coultar, 2005). The theory suggests that the leaders generally
behavior (OCB) in university teachers. inherit the traits, which distinguish them from others (Cleveland,
Perceived Leadership Style Stockdale & Murphy, 2000). While trait theorists focused on
Leadership has been widely conceived as a process of traits the leaders possessed, behavioral theorists emphasized
influencing the group members, in various job-related situations, upon the relationships with others, output, and performance
so that to achieve common goals and objectives (Stoner, (Bolden, Gosling, Marturano, & Dennison, 2003). The shift
Freeman, & Gilbert, 1996), whereas leadership styles denote to towards behavior school was the result of McGregor’s Theory X
the behaviors used by the leaders to influence followers in order and Theory Y (1960). According to this theory manager are
to motivate them to perform effectively in work settings (e.g., divided into two groups who have different assumptions towards
Duta, 2011; Gozukara, Hatipoğlu, & Gunes, 2017). human nature. The managers of theory X consider that
Although much work on leadership previously has been done individuals dislike work and want to avoid it. Therefore, in order
on its styles or types but researchers, in recent years, have been to achieve organizational goals, most of the times others should
focusing on leaders’ perception of employees, For example, be directed, punished, and controlled.
Shah, Shah, and Pathan (2017) examined the impact if perceived Situational leadership theories neither focus on particular
leadership (PL) on employee satisfaction with job and job traits nor behaviors instead these theories suggest that no
performance in teaching faculty of the public sector universities leadership is effective in all situations. These theories suggest
of Pakistan. Mitonga-Monga, Coetzee, and Cilliers (2012) found that effective leadership style is dependent on situational factors,
relationship in PL and participation of employees in typical the followers, the tasks, the individuals, and the organization
manufacturing organizations. Likewise, Mester, Visser, and (Bolden, Gosling, Marturano, & Dennison, 2003). Fiedler’s
Roodt (2003) attempted to find out the relationship of PL with contingency approach to leadership (1967) is an example of
job involvement, satisfaction with job, organizational situational leadership which postulates that there is situation to
commitment, and OCB. They also found varied results when make effective leadership and that there is no single best way of
compared the actual and perceived leadership styles. These leadership. The Hersey-Blanchard Model of Leadership (1977)
empirical evidences propose that employees’ perception is another situational approach that suggests leadership styles as
determined by the developmental levels of the followers. Full employees, e.g. procurement of appreciation and
Range Model of Leadership, originally proposed by Burns acknowledgement, which lead them to practice them more even
(1978), has also been labeled as cutting-edge leadership theory without looking for formal reward.
(Robbins & Coultar, 2005). This model states that three types of Previous inconsistent results for the relationship of perceived
leadership behaviors can be found including transformational, leadership styles and OCB suggest that researchers should try to
transactional and laissez-faire leadership style. The theory focus more paths of relationships between these two variables
postulates that the transformational leaders transform the including some possible third variable effect which perhaps acts
followers through encouraging them, making more helpful, as a moderator or mediator. This scarcity of literature was
harmonious and caring not only for co-workers but also for their discussed by Boerner, Dutschke, and Wied (2008), who stated
organization as a whole, and thus bring positive change among that little information is available on the contextual factors which
them. They are proactive and make their followers aware of affect the relationship of charismatic leadership and OCB.
collective interests and help them to achieve organizational goals The discussion postulates that previous researchers have
(Bodla & Nawaz, 2010). In order to transform employees they inconsistent findings regarding the relationship of leadership
practice various essential techniques of transformational styles with OCB. This suggests the possible presence of some
leadership that may include inspirational motivation, third variable, possibly a mediator or moderator. Organizational
individualized consideration, idealized influence, intellectual politics might be an important intervening variable, in
stimulation, and idealized attributes (Bass & Avolio, 1994). relationship of perceived leadership and OCBs, because it is
On the other hand, transactional leaders tend to exercise supposed to be the integral part of organization. Acts of politics
exchange of rewards to increase their work efficiency and for instance, struggles for power, making alloy groups, planning
interest in work. This leadership style involves an exchange of strategically and pulling legs are as common in the organizations
leader’s interest and follower’s expectations (Northouse, 2016). as other more visible acts of management for instance, planning,
These leaders are suitable for making deals that may bring a controlling and managing.
desired change in employee, and thus can quickly achieve the Perceived Organizational Politics (POP) Organizational
short term goals of an organization. A leader can bring loyalty politics specifically is conceived as tactics used by the
among the employees to the extent that they go beyond their employees, which are meant to enhance or protect the interests
duties and perform favoring behaviors, which are not part of of oneself or of the group. These are the acts of seeking,
their formal roles, towards the organization. Leaders may also developing and using power in order to gain required and
influence their followers to display organizational citizenship desirable outcomes in the organization specifically when there is
behaviors (Banu, Amudha, & Surulivel, 2012). uncertainty (Pfeffer, 1981).
Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) Politics within organization is an important dimension of
Organ (1988) mainly introduced the OCB concept while leadership behaviors. Leaders often indulge in political acts such
reconsidering the traditional notion of job performance. He as making lobbies, struggle of power for resources, and
found that job performance elucidated some qualitative allocating informal rewards. Thus, organizational politics plays
characteristics besides quantitative work aspects, whom he an instrumental role in clarifying the ambiguity in organization
termed OCB that involves those behaviors which are more than as well as constructing shared meanings around those issues
the actual call of duty but aid the development of the which are not properly defined hence (Ammeter et al., 2002).
organization. Hence, OCB has always been considered as a Because of its inevitable presence within organizational settings,
constructive construct while observing organizational behavior. the researchers have also been interested in the exploring factors,
OCB involves a number of voluntary organization-facilitating which contribute to POP.
behaviors that enhance the social and psychological context of Moderating role of POP between perceived leadership styles
performance, whereas they are not considered under formal and OCB. Social exchange theory (Blau, 1965) elucidates that
reward system (Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 2006). Within when employees do have the favorable and positive perception
organizational context some of OCBs include helping to recruit of organization, they give back through encouraging responses.
appropriate individuals to particular tasks, contributing to Likewise, when employees distinguish the organization
improve the workplace facilities through valuable suggestions, unfavorable to them, they respond by reducing favorable stance
or ready to be available for unpaid overtime (Pickford & Joy, towards the organization. Inverse relationship of POP with OCB
2016). Although, as compare to typical organizations, is one of the example of such transaction. When we compare
universities have their own unique and distinct organizational these two constructs on definitional level, we find that OCB
context but OCB may also be observed in teaching and involves organization-serving behaviors that are always positive
administrative employees over there. These OCBs varies in for the organization, in contrast POPs include those self-serving
employees depending upon the leadership vision usually behaviors that might put organizational interests into stake.
reflected by VCs. Therefore, a negative relationship between these two variables
Leadership and Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) does sound logical.
Leadership has been found associated with OCB. For instance, Although there is empirical evidence that explains positive
Johnson (2008) studied the effects of perceived charismatic relation between POP and OCB, for example Din, Iram, and
leadership among a sample of school teachers and their heads Farooq (2018) found strong positive relation between both when
and found that attribution of charismatic leadership style results studied in a sample of textile industry employees but more often
in an increase in OCB among the teachers. Similarly, Malik, POP has been perceived as negative by the employees, the first
Saleem, and Naeem (2016) found democratic and autocratic thing what an employee can do in response to POP is that; he/she
leadership styles as positive predictor of employees’ OCB in a can reduce his/her voluntary, organization facilitating behaviors.
sample of telecom employees in Pakistan. Majeed et al. (207) This is so because these behaviors do not bring any direct reward
carried out research on teaching faculty of higher education to the employee, as they are not part of formal job description;
institute in Pakistan and found that transformational leadership and their reduction does not result in any direct negative impact
positively predicted OCB, where EI moderates between the both. on the employee. Therefore, it is safer for the employee to reduce
Keeping in view these empirical endeavors it seems reasonable OCB level in response to POP. This has been supported by many
to assume that extra role behaviors add progressive value to researchers. For instance, Afshardoust, Feizabadi, Zakizadeh,
and Abdolhoseyni (2013) studied a sample of sports employees Measures
and observed inverse relationship between OCB and POP. Atta Perceived organizational politics (POP). POP was measured
and Khan (2016) also observed negative relationship of POP and using 15-items measure, developed by Kacmar and Carlson
its factors with OCB in faculty members of public sector (1997). It included 3 sub-scales namely Go-along-to-get-ahead,
universities in Pakistan. Pay and Promotion Policies and General Political Behavior.
On the other hand, there is TRF which has been associated Reliability coefficients for the subscales were .77 General
positively with OCB as it involves encouraging the employee, Political Behavior, .78 for Go-along-to-get-ahead and .73 for
inspiring him, and communicating clearly with him regarding his Pay and Promotion Policies reported by Danaaefard, Balutbzeh,
duties, roles, and what the leader expects more than the actual and Kashi (2010). Present study incorporated not only overall
call of duty. When employees do perceive the atmosphere as scores of POPS but also the accounted for its three sub constructs
highly political the level of their positive work behaviors tend to to accomplish results.
decrease. Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ 5X, Short).
In such highly political situations, in order to get more and more Scale was developed by Bass and Avolio (1997) was adopted for
rewards, the employees lean towards increasing their voluntary present study to measure the construct of perceived leadership
positive acts, which are more than their assigned duties. among university teachers. MLQ was self-report measure with
Leadership also uses certain tactic to keep the employees Liker type response format. Reliability coefficients as reported
committed to their duties and thus they are inclined to by authors for the MLQ sub-scales ranged from .63 to .92.
demonstrate citizenship behavior. Therefore it is safer to suppose Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB). OCB Scale
that organizational politics acts as moderator for the relationship developed by Lee and Allen (2002). Scale was composed of five
of TRF and OCB by strengthening their existing positive constructs i.e. altruism, courtesy, conscientiousness, civic virtue,
relationship. In conclusion of aforementioned discourse is and sportsmanship. Danaaefard, Balutbazeh, and Kashi (2010)
hypothesized for preset study that: has reported satisfactory reliabilities that ranged .75 to .88 for
H: Perceived organizational politics would moderate between sub-scales. Response format is anchored on 5-point Likert scale.
perceived transformational leadership and organizational Current study operationalized the pertinent constructs through
citizenship behavior such as the high level of perceived scores obtained by aforementioned scales, where high score
organizational politics will strengthen their positive relationship. corresponded with higher level of construct and vice versa.
Procedure
METHOD Participants were approached directly, by the researcher, in
their respective universities. In order to guarantee the
Research design confidentiality of the information the provision of participant’s
Keeping in view the context and nature of study correlational personal and university’s names were optional in demographic
survey research design deemed appropriate. sheet. This act of anonymity was a deliberate attempt to
Sample encourage their true and free responses on measurement
A convenient sample of university teachers (N = 494) was instruments. Informed consent and confidentiality of data was
drawn from various universities of Punjab and Khyber ensured in accordance with APA guidelines besides briefing
Pakhtunkhwa provinces and capital city of Pakistan. Participants participants about the study purpose. They were provided with
did belong to the different departments of social and natural questionnaires dossier along with essential written and oral
sciences. Only those regular teachers of public sector instructions pertaining to their response. Successfully completed
universities were including in the study who were having questionnaires from participants were collected back by the
minimum job experience of two years. Sample comprised n=234 researcher himself or on his behalf by the assistant. Participants
female and n=260 male teachers with the age range from 24 to were also individually thanked for their cooperation and
61 (M = 36.39, SD = 9.02) years. volunteer participation in study.

RESULTS
Table 1. Inter Scale Correlations (N=494)
Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 M SD α
1 -- .10 -.12 -.16* -.09 .27** 76.92 10.59 .90
2 -- -- .53*** .78*** .32*** -.14* 41.34 4.51 .76
3 -- -- -- .48** .22* -.23* 47.85 7.05 .74

4 -- -- -- -- -.28** -.16* 7.11 2.04 .71

5 -- -- -- -- -- -.17* 25.47 4.99 .76
6 -- -- -- -- -- -- 15.26 3.40 .70
Note. 1 = transformational leadership; 2 = perceived organizational politics; 3 = general political behavior; 4 = go-along-to-get-
ahead; 5 = pay and promotion policies; 6 = organizational citizenship behavior.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Table 1 depicts means, standard deviations, correlation matrix ranged between .70 for OCB to .90 for Transformational
and alpha reliabilities for all variables of present study. Table 1 leadership.
shows that all main scales achieved satisfactory alpha that
Table 2. Summary of the Results for Moderating Role of POP and General Political Behavior in Relationship between Leadership
Styles and OCB (N = 494)
Organizational Citizenship Behavior
Model 1 Predictors ∆R2 β
Step 1 TRF .04 .20***
Step 2 POP .05 -.13***
TRF .20***
Step 3 POP × TRF .06 .08*
Total R2 .15
Model 2
Step 1 TRF .047 .20***
Step 2 GATGA .076 -.18***
TRF .20***
Step 3 GATGA × TRF .074 -.02
Total R2 .197
Model 3
Step 1 TRF .04 .20***
Step 2 GPB -.15***
TRF .06 .20***
Step 3 GPB × TRF .07 .14**
Total R2 .17
Model 4
Step 1 TRF .038 .20***
Step 2 PPP -.13***
TRF .052 .18***
Step 3 PPP × TRF .075 .17***
Total R2 .162
Note. TRF = transformational Leadership; POP = perceived organizational politics; GPB = general political behavior; GATGA =
go-along-to-get-ahead; PPP = pay and promotion policies.
*p > .05. **p > .01. ***p > .001.

Table 2 summarizes the results for moderating role of POP and predicting OCB moderated by GPB in relation with TRF.
general political behavior (GPB) in relationship between Step 3 of model 3 accounted for product of independent and
leadership styles and OCB. moderator variables on criterion variable. The step was found to
Model 1 shows hierarchical regression analysis for predicting be statistically significant {F (3, 491) = 11.55, p < .05}. Product
OCB moderated by POP in relation with transformational of TRF and GPB significantly predicted OCB ({β = -.14, t =
leadership (TRF). Step 3 of model 1 accounted for product of 1.09, p < .05}). This interactive effect added 1% variance in 3rd
independent and moderator variables on outcome variable. The step {∆R2 =.07, ∆F (1, 490) = 2.99, p < .05}. The Figure 2
step was found to be statistically significant {F (3, 491) = 9.76, illustrate plot below showing the moderation analysis with its
p < .05}. Product of TRF and POP significantly predicted OCB significant interaction effect.
({β = .08, t = 2.53, p < .05}). This interactive effect added 1% Model 4 of Table 2 shows hierarchical regression analysis for
variance in 3rd step {∆R2 =.06, ∆F (1, 490) = 2.28, p < .05}. The predicting OCB moderated by PPP in relation with TRF. Step 3
Figure 1 presented below shows the moderation analysis with its of model 4 accounts for product of independent and moderator
significant interaction effect. variables on criterion variable. The step is found to be
Model 2 shows hierarchical regression analysis for predicting statistically significant {F (3, 491) = 14.30, p < .001}. Product
OCB moderated by GATGA in relation with TRF. Step 3 was of TRF and PPP significantly predicts OCB (β = .17, t = 3.60, p
found to be non-significant {F (3, 491) = 14.28, p = n.s} and < .05). This interactive effect added significant change variance
does not yield additional significant variance {∆R2 =.077, ∆F (1, in 3rd step {∆R2 =.075, ∆F (1, 490) = 13.00, p < .001}. The Figure
490) = .22, p < .05}. 3 in given below shows the graphic display of significant
Model 3 of Table 17 shows hierarchical regression analysis for interaction effect.

100
99
Organizational Citizenship

98
97 Low POP
96
Behavior

High POP
95
94
93
92
91
90
Low TRF High TRF
Figure 1. Interactive effect of transformational leadership and perceived organizational politics on organizational citizenship behavior.
Figure 1 is showing the moderating role of POP, where slope of strengthens the positive relationship between TRF and OCB.
the regression line shows that high level of POP as moderator

100
Organizational Citizenship

99
98
97
Behavior

96
Low GPB
95 High GPB
94
93
92
91
90
Low TRF High TRF
Figure 2. Interactive effect of TRF and general political behavior on OCB.

It is evident from Figure 2 that general political behavior (GPB) revealing that the positive relationship between TRF and OCB is
is moderating the relation between TRF and OCB. The plots are relatively much stronger when GPB is high as moderator.

100
Organizational Citizenship

99
98
97
Behavior

96
Low PPP
95
94
93
92
91
90
Low TRF High TRF

Figure 3. Interactive effect of TRF and pay and promotion policies on OCB.

Figure 3 indicates the moderating role of pay and promotion Our finding revealed that perceived transformational
policies (PPP) and regression slopes are illustrating that the leadership (TRF) was strongly correlated with OCB and
positive relationship between TRS and OCB is quite stronger demonstrated weak and non-significant relationship with POP.
when level of PPP is high as moderator. OCB on the other hand exhibited negative association with POP.
The initial relationship pattern in the expected directions
DISCUSSION fulfilled the basic assumptions of moderation model thus
researchers attained confidence to further test the moderating
Psychometric soundness of the instruments measuring role of POP in relationship between TRF and OCB.
certain construct was scanned prior to compute the correlation For the present study statistical procedure recommended by
matrix for study variables (see Table 1). Results demonstrated Baron and Kenny (1986) was carried out to test the possible
an adequate index of alpha reliability i.e. greater than .70 as moderating effect of POP in relationship to leadership styles and
recommended by Nunnanly and Bernstein (1994). Standard criterion variables. As we discussed earlier that the leadership
deviation entailed low to moderate values for various scales that behaviors not only exert a direct influence on OCB but they may
provided the evidence for the good approximation in relation to also affect OCB in combination with POP. When organizational
parameters. politics is perceived from the employees at workplace, it has
Zero order correlation (see Table 1) was initially accounted often been taken as a negative precursor that possibly produces
for peeping into relationship pattern among variables of the negative behaviors among them, those results in dampened
study. A desired pattern of relationships i.e. positive correlation effectiveness in the organization.
between TRF and OCB; inverse between POP and OCB, Results of the present study revealed that POP, general
provided researcher assurance to move further for analyses to political behavior (GPB), and pay-and-promotion-policies (PPP)
test hypothesis of the study. significantly moderated between TRF and OCB such that the
interaction of POP and TRF strengthened the positive indirectly to change or transform the followers by encouraging
association of TRF and OCB (see Table 2). There are certain them, bring positive change among them through motivation.
explanations that endorse these findings. They turn their subordinates to be more caring, helpful, and
Specifically it was surmised, based upon the notion of social harmonious not only for other coworkers but also for their
exchange theory (Blau, 1965), that when employees do perceive organization as a whole. TRF also involves encouraging the
positive and favorable image of organization towards them they employee, inspiring and communicating clearly with him/her
tend to reciprocate in the same vein. On the other hand, when regarding his/her duties, roles and what the leader expects more
employees perceive organization’s image as contrary to their than the actual need of duty. When the employees perceive the
expectations, they respond reciprocally to the organization. It is atmosphere as highly political, the level of their positive work
also logical to assume that when a university teacher receives behaviors is decreased e.g., decrease in OCB, but at the same
positive and healthy feedback in the form of the recognition of time, because of the well-recognized organizational
his / her work, appreciation, and words of motivation from his effectiveness of OCB, transformational leaders become more
head. it is perceived as inspirational and internally satisfying thus vigilant and concerned to enrich OCB among them. They
leading him / her to strengthen extra role behaviors. Negative motivate the employees for innovativeness and goal clarification
relationship between POP and OCB has been the evidence of through idealized influence; energize them by an optimistic view
such transaction. When we compare these two constructs on of the future through inspirational motivation; inspiring the
definitional level, we find that OCB involves organization- followers to use their creativity and problem solving ability
serving behaviors which are voluntary in nature and are always through intellectual stimulation and caring for the employees’
found to be positive for the organization. Whereas, there are needs and respecting him through individualized consideration.
POPs which include those self-serving behaviors that may put These TRF behaviors surmise to play critical role in molding and
organizational interests at stake. Therefore, a negative consequently enhancing employees’ citizenship behaviors and
relationship between these two variables should not be seen as give them confidence to be favorable toward organization.
unusual. When employees conceive organizational environment A more logical explanation of strong positive TRF-OCB
highly political they, in response to this situation, tend to sense relationship in the presence of high POP resides in the notions of
insecurity or feelings of injustice which ultimately spawn social exchange theory proposed by Blau in 1965 and norms of
reactivity among them and force them to decrease various reciprocity, suggested by Gouldner (1960) that the employees
positive attitudes like affective commitment, involvement in job, incline to increase their positivity towards the organization when
and citizenship behavior. they find that, even in highly political environment, the leader is
Moreover, as POP has always been perceived as negative by being involved in such positive encouraging acts as TRF. A
the employees, the first thing what an employee can do in recent study of Bodla and Danish (2013) also support our
response to POP is that s/he can reduce her/his voluntary, assumption, in which they examined the meditational role of
organization facilitating behaviors. This is so because these social exchange perceptions between POP and employee morale
behaviors do not bring any direct reward to the employee, as they in Pakistani students working part time (during day time) in
are not part of formal job description; and their reduction does various organizations and enrolled in MBA classes in the
not result in any direct negative impact on the employee. evening. Regression analysis and structural equation modeling
Therefore, it seems conceivable for the employee to reduce OCB elucidated that social exchange perceptions significantly
level in reaction to POP. This has been supported by many mediated in the relationship of POP and employees’ morale, and
researchers. For instance, Afshardoust, Feizabadi, Zakizadeh, contributed for almost 70% of the total effect.
and Abdolhoseyni (2013) studied a sample of sports employees More specifically existing literature also witness to the fact
and observed a significant negative relationship between OCB that TRF demonstrates individualized consideration to listen
and POP. In university settings political involvement in certain employees attentively, deliberately acts as mentors to pay close
things like promotions, selections, assignment of administrative attention to the employees’ growth and achievement needs, and
responsibilities may strengthen perception of political helps them to develop their full potential (e.g. Nohe & Hertal,
maneuvering and breech of fairness which may lead employees 2017). Thus, they create and escalate positive behaviors and
to alleviate their loyalties and OCBs. attitude and increased level of OCB, in particular, among
In Pakistani context, Atta and Khan (2016) carried out a employees even when they have been perceiving high political
study on university teachers and found causal relationship in activity around them
TRF and OCB; Ahmad (2010) further studied the individual and
interactive effects of POP on OCB and examined a strong IMPLICATIONS
negative relationship between these variables; and Naseer, Ali,
and Summan (2019) found inverse causal relationship between Standing of leadership in organizational settings is well-
POP and OCB in supervisors of touring companies in southern known fact and current findings also endorsed that
China. Similarly, Vigoda (2000b) studied the relationship of organizational politics in combination of transformational
POP with altruism and compliance (the two forms of OCB) and leaders have key role in promoting OCBs among faculty
observed that increase in OCB was associated with two forms of members. Finding further emphasize the need of training and
OCB. development to strengthen specifically transformational
Whereas, in western organizational settings Randall et al., leadership skills and insightful discernment of OCBs along with
(1999) studied the relationship of POP with OCB within suitable political tactics to enhance effectiveness in universities.
individual and organizational context and concluded a strong
negative relationship between these variables. Similarly, Vigoda LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
(2007), Vigaoda and Drory (2006) observed a strong inverse
relationship between POP and OCB. Present study merely concentrated on the perceived TRF of
However, on the other hand, leadership theory originally university teachers, whereas combined data of teachers and
projected by Burns (1978) yields an understanding that the TRF departmental heads could be of valuable to generalize and
and OCB are positively associated because of potential validate the findings. Moreover, facets of OCB are also
behaviors of transformational leaders implied directly or suggested to be explored in further studies within the social,
cultural, and demographic perspective. Multi method approach CONCLUSION
may further enhance the researchers’ empirical understanding of
phenomenon In conclusion it is elucidated that POP and its facets i.e.
general political behaviors and pay-and-promotion-policies
function as moderator such as their high level strengthens the
positive relationship between perceived TRF and OCB.
Moreover a positive relation between TRF and OCB and inverse
between POP and OCB was also elucidated

REFERENCE

Afshardoust, M., Feizabadi, M. S., Zakizadeh, B., & Cleveland, J., Stockdale, M., & Murphy, K. R. (2000).
Abdolhoseyni, M. (2013). Relationship between organizational Women and Men in Organizations. London: Lawrence Elbaum
citizenship behaviour and organizational perceived politic Associates.
among the sport organization experts of Tehran municipality. Danaaefard, H., Balutbzeh, A., & Kashi, K. H. (2010).
International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, Good soldiers' perceptions of organizational politics
4(4), 870–873. understanding the relation between organizational citizenship
Ahmad, R. U. (2010). Direct and indirect effects of behaviors and perceptions of organizational politics: Evidence
organizational justice and perceptions of politics on personal from Iran. European Journal of Economics, Finance and
and organizational outcomes (Unpublished doctoral thesis), Administrative Sciences, 18, 146–162.
International Islamic University, Islamabad: Pakistan. Din, M. Z., Iram, B., & Farooq, F. (2018). Impact of
Ammeter, A. P., Douglas, C., Gardner, W. L, Hochwarter, Organization Politics on Organization Citizenship Behavior.
W. A., & Ferris, G. R. (2002). Toward a political theory of International Journal of Academic Research in Business and
leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 751–796. Social Sciences, 8(8), 66–78.
Atta, M., & Khan, M. J. (2016). Perceived Organizational Duta, C. (2011). Leadership styles. Paper presented at the
Politics, Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Job Attitudes 6th international scientific conference of “defence resources
Among University Teachers. Journal of Behavioural Sciences, management in the 21st centuary”. Braşov: Romania.
26(2), 21-38. Fiedler, F. E. (1967). A theory of leadership effectiveness.
Banu, C. V., Amudha, R., & Surulivel, S. T. (2012). A New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
pragmatic study on organization citizenship behavior in an Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A
indian private leisure travels organization using factor analysis. preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–
European Journal of Social Sciences, 28(4), 581–589. 178.
Bass, B. M. & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational Gozukara, I., Hatipoğlu, Z., & Gunes, O. O. (2017). The
leadership (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. impact of perceived leadership style on performance appraisal
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994) (Eds.). Improving satisfaction and organizational diagnosis in terms of turnover
organizational effectiveness through transformational intention. International Journal of Business and Management,
leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 12, 104. 10.5539/ijbm.v12n9p104.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1997). Full range leadership Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1977). Management of
development: Manual for the multifactor leadership organizational behavior. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall.
questionnaire. CA, Mind Garden. Johnson, S. K. (2008). I second that emotion: Effects of
Blau, P. (1965). Exchange and power in social life. New emotional contagion and affect at work on leader and follower
York: Wiley. outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 1−19.
Bodla, M. A., & Danish, R. Q. (June, 2013). Intervening Kacmar, K. M., & Carlson, D. S. (1997). Further validation
role of social exchange perceptions between perceived of the perceptions of organizational politics scale (POPS): A
organizational politics and employee morale. Paper presented at multiple sample investigation. Journal of Management, 23(5),
Proceedings of 21st International Business Research 627–658.
Conference, Canada. Lee, K., & Allen, N. J. (2002). Organizational citizenship
Bodla, M. A., & Nawaz, M. M. (2010). Comparative study behavior and workplace deviance: The role of affect and
of full range leadership model among faculty members in public cognitions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 131-142.
and private sector higher education institutes and universities. Majeed, N., Ramayah, T., Mustamil, N., Nazir, M., &
International Journal of Business and Management, 5(4), 208– Janshed, S. (2017).Transformational leadership and
214. organizational citizenship behavior: Modeling emotional
Boerner, S., Dutschke, E. & Wied, S. (2008). Charismatic intelligence as mediator. Management & Marketing. Challenges
leadership and organizational citizenship behaviour: examining for the Knowledge Society, 12(4), 571-590.
the role of stressors and strain. Human Resource Development Malik, S. S., Saleem, M., & Naeem, R. (2016). Effect of
International, 11(5), 507–521. leadership styles on organizational citizenship behaviour in
Bolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A., & Dennison, P. employees of telecom sector in Pakistan. Pakistan Economic and
(2003). A review of leadership theory and competency Social Review, 54(2), 385-406.
frameworks. Report for Chase Consulting and the Management McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New
Standards Centre, Centre for Leadership Studies, University of York: McGraw Hill.
Exeter, UK. Mester, C., Visser, D., Roodt, G. & Kellerman, R. (2003).
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Leadership style and its relation to employee attitudes and
Row. behavior. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 29(2), 72-82.
Mitonga-Monga, J., Coetzee, M., & Cilliers, F. V. N.
(2012). Perceived leadership style and employee participation in
a manufacturing company in the democratic republic of Congo. Pickford, H. C., & Joy, G. (2016). Organisational
African Journal of Business Management, 6(15), 5389-5398. citizenship behaviours: Definitions and dimensions. Saïd
Naseer, K., Ali, K., & Summan, G. (2019). Relationship Business School RP, Egrove Park, Oxford University.
between perception of organizational politics and organizational Robbins, S. P., & Coultar, M. (2005). Management (8th
citizenship behavior: testing a moderated mediation model. Edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Asian Business & Management, 18, 12-141. doi: Shah, S., Shah, A. A., & Pathan, S. K. (2017). The
10.1057/s41291-018-00057-9. relationship of perceived leadership styles of department heads
Nohe, C., & Hertal, G. (201). Transformational leadership to job satisfaction and job performance of faculty members.
and organizational citizenship behavior: a meta-analytic test of Journal of Business Strategies, 11(2), 35–56.
underlying mechanisms. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1364. doi: Stoner, J. A., Freeman, F. E., Gilbert, D. R. (1996).
10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01364 Management (translation). Jakarta: Prenhallindo.
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2006). Leadership style, organizational
(7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. politics, and employees’ performance: An empirical
Nunnally, J. C., Bernstein, I. H. (1988). Psychometric examination of two competing models. Personal review, 36(5),
Theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994. 661-683.
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2007). Leadership style, organizational
The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. politics, and employees’ performance: An empirical
Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. examination of two competing models. Personal review, 36(5),
(2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, 661-683.
antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Drory, A. (2006) (Eds.). Handbook of
Publications, 2006. organizational politics. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Boston, MA:
Pitman.

Received: Aug 14, 2017

Revisions Received: March 18, 2021