Page 1 of 9

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning

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

e-ISSN: 2395-0463

Volume 02 Issue 1

January 2016

Available online: http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/ P a g e | 162

Moderating Role of Performance Appraisal Politics on

Transformational Leadership and Job Performance: A

Proposed Framework

Syed Mir Muhammad Shah1Dr. Kamal Bin Ab. Hamid2

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

2University Utara Malaysia

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

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.

Page 2 of 9

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning

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

e-ISSN: 2395-0463

Volume 02 Issue 1

January 2016

Available online: http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/ P a g e | 163

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; 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.

Page 3 of 9

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning

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

e-ISSN: 2395-0463

Volume 02 Issue 1

January 2016

Available online: http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/ P a g e | 164

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 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