Examining Organizational Cronyism as an Antecedent of Workplace Deviance in Public Sector Organizations
| DOI | 10.1177/0091026017716655 |
| Author | Sajid Bashir,Abdul Karim Khan,Sadia Shaheen |
| Published date | 01 September 2017 |
| Date | 01 September 2017 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2017
Article
Public Personnel Management
2017, Vol. 46(3) 308 –323
Examining Organizational
© The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
Cronyism as an Antecedent of sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026017716655
DOI: 10.1177/0091026017716655
journals.sagepub.com/home/ppm
Workplace Deviance in Public
Sector Organizations
Sadia Shaheen1, Sajid Bashir1, and Abdul Karim Khan2
Abstract
This study examines the relatively new phenomenon of organizational cronyism
as a determinant of deviant workplace behavior in public sector organizations in
Pakistan. It also examines the mediating role of psychological contract breach. Data
were collected from 180 employees working in various public sector organizations in
Pakistan. The results indicate that organizational cronyism is positively related with
psychological contract breach, which in turn results in deviant workplace behavior in
public sector organizations.
Keywords
public administration, workplace attitudes and behaviors, procedural justice
Introduction
An antimeritocracy activity that has attracted the attention of researchers in recent
years is organizational cronyism, which is the bestowing of privileges to friends, col-
leagues, or relatives on the basis of relationships and association rather than on actual
performance standards (Khatri & Tsang, 2003; Khatri, Tsang, & Begley, 2006; Turhan,
2014). When organizational cronyism exists, certain employees may be supported on
the basis of relationships and connections, whereas others may be discriminated
against. Thus, such cronyistic relationships have the potential to damage the well-
being of an organization as well as its employees and promote a sense of injustice and
1Capital University of Science & Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan
2United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates
Corresponding Author:
Sajid Bashir, Capital University of Science & Technology, Kahuta Road, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan.
Email: profsajid@hotmail.com
Shaheen et al.
309
inequality in the workplace (Yan & Bei, 2009). It has been demonstrated that if there
is cronyism and nepotism inside an organization, the out-group members have low job
satisfaction, low organization commitment, and low morale (Arasli, Bavik, & Ekiz,
2006; Padgett & Morris, 2005). All these negatives have a long-term negative effect
on organizational performance (Khatri, 1999).
Realizing the negative impacts of organizational cronyism, public management
researchers have also aired concerns about its impact on organizational functioning.
For instance, Condrey (2002) raised concerns about cronyism and favoritism in the
aftermath of diminished role of Georgia’s central personnel authority. Similarly,
Diefenbach (2009) argued that new public management practices are encouraging
organizational cronyism, moral cowardice, and sycophancy. Despite these recent con-
cerns on organizational cronyism by public management researchers, we lack under-
standing of behavioral reactions to organizational cronyism. And how perceptions of
organizational cronyism translate into behavioral outcomes. In the current research,
we aim to address this gap to demonstrate the relationship between perceived organi-
zational cronyism and employees’ reactions, that is, deviant workplace behavior
(DWB). While testing this main relationship between organizational cronyism and
DWB, we also aim to explore the underlying mechanism between organizational cro-
nyism and DWB; thus answering the question of how organizational cronyism trans-
lates into DWB. We argue that the mechanism through which organizational cronyism
results in DWB can be explained by social exchange theory (Adams, 1965; Blau,
1964). Specifically, employees perceptions of cronyism and preferential treatment
result into breach of the psychological contract—employee’s perception regarding the
extent to which the organization has failed to fulfill its promises or obligations
(Robinson & Rousseau, 1994) and the breach feeling in turn results into DWB
(Greenberg, 1990; Matthijs Bal, Chiaburu, & Jansen, 2010; Uhl-Bien & Maslyn, 2003;
Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski, & Bravo, 2007).
Our research contributes to literature in many ways. First, Previous studies have
analyzed the attitudinal outcomes to organizational cronyism (Arasli et al., 2006;
Padgett & Morris, 2005). According to best of our knowledge, this is the first study to
examine the behavioral reactions of organizational cronyism in a public sector con-
text. By doing so, we highlight the negative behavioral outcomes of merit violations
which tend to be higher in public sector organizations (Campbell, Im, & Jeong, 2014;
Nasir & Bashir, 2012). Second, by exploring the underlying mechanism between orga-
nizational cronyism and DWB, we provide a more nuanced view of how perceptions
of organizational cronyism translate into employees’ reactions. This understanding is
important for public managers to fully combat the detrimental effects of organizations
cronyism. As absence of merit in public sector organizations results in an environment
that is characterized by injustice with high turnover intentions, job stress, and negative
word of mouth (Asunakutlu & Avci, 2010; Arasli & Tumer, 2008; Turhan, 2014).
Third, the study of DWB has additional important implications for public sector orga-
nizations. The primary interest of the public sector organizations is based on perfor-
mance and public service motives rather than economic motives (as it is of traditional
private sector organizations). Failure to perform in a public sector organization could
310
Public Personnel Management 46(3)
have a detrimental impact on key societal functions (i.e., police services, judicial sys-
tem, and district administration). This has deleterious implications if there is a preva-
lence of DWB in public sector organizations (Jordan, Lindsay, & Schraeder, 2012;
Quratulain & Khan, 2015a). Fourth, we conducted our research in Pakistani public
organizations which are at salient contrast to the dominant Western (mainly the United
States) organizations. As a relatively high-power distance culture, Pakistani society is
often described as supporting high inequalities of power and wealth (Hofstede, 2003).
The paternalism associated with such cultures certainly speaks to our interest of exam-
ining organizational cronyisms (Khatri & Tsang, 2003). Similarly, in developing coun-
tries, the practices such as cronyism and favoritism continue to be part of daily life (
Iles, Almhedie, & Baruch, 2012). Our study thus extends research on organizational
cronyism into a new national and cultural context providing the literature with essen-
tial tests of generalizability of Western findings into the context of a developing
country.
Hypotheses Development
Cronyism and DWB
The dictionary meaning of crony is a friend of long-standing or a close friend or com-
panion (Oxford English Dictionary, 1999). In 1952, the first time cronyism was used
in a political sense when Truman administration was accused of selecting employees
for administration on the basis of close relationships rather than objective criteria.
Afterward, cronyism started to be considered a relationship-based type of favoritism,
and this conception changed the meaning of the word altogether (Turhan, 2014).
Cronyism can exist in an organization in two forms: (a) horizontal cronyism, which
is defined as relationship-based favoring at the same level (e.g., friends, colleagues,
classmates, social groups, and unions), or (b) vertical cronyism, which is the favoring
of a subordinate on the basis of nonperformance-related factors, so the latter involves
the relationship between a leader and a follower (Khatri et al., 2006). Although public
sector literature lacks the verbatim definition of cronyism, it has been mostly dis-
cussed as nonmerit-based employment practice grounded in preferential treatment
based on friendships (Condrey, 2002; Diefenbach, 2009). Hence, the attributes associ-
ated with organizational cronyism include antimeritocracy in pay decisions (Rynes,
Gerhart, & Parks, 2005), promotions (Choi, 2011), and availability of fewer opportu-
nities to women and minorities (Powell & Butterfield, 1997; Riccucci, 2009).
The focus of current study is on the behavioral reactions of employees in the form of
DWB which are defined as intentional behavior that spoils organizational values and
norms, simultaneously damaging the well-being of the organization and its members
(Robinson & Bennett, 1995). There is ample evidence in literature which suggests that
organizational unfairness and a lack of merit-based rewards in the workplace can result
in DWB (Mingzheng, Xiaoling, Xubo, & Youshan, 2014). The unethical practices of
organizational cronyism have a different impact on crony favored and nonfavored
employees (Khatri & Tsang, 2003). Cronies enjoy exceptional treatment by supervisors
Shaheen et al.
311
as they are trusted, supported, and rewarded, and thus, these are the reasons they dem-
onstrate satisfaction with and commitment to their jobs and ranks. However, noncronies
are discriminated because cronies are preferred over noncronies despite having equal
knowledge, skills, and abilities in matters of selection, promotion, and appraisal (Khatri
& Tsang, 2003). Thus, a perception of prejudice develops among noncronies and this
leads to job dissatisfaction,...
To continue reading
Request your trial