This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
This research aims to test; the influences of proactive personality on career success, the influences of self promotion on career success and the influences of ingratiation to career success. Survey method is applied in this research. The population is the entire employee of public organization in Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta (DIY) Indonesia. The sample quantity is 96 employees. The technique of sample drawing used is method of purposive sampling. This research applies statistical technique of regression analysis.
The conclusion of all the hypothesis proposed are: (1) there is no influence of proactive personality on career success, (2) there is influence of self promotion on career success and (3) there is influence of proactive personality on career success.
Apublic organization has a high complexity. Some literatures describe a public organization as a system which has core element ( such as resources, activity, policy) that integrate each element to make contribution in increasing and creating an organization competitive challenge (Carmeli and Tishler, 2004). Therefore, human resources have an important role in improving an organizational performance.
We would like to thanks to Universiity of Pembangunan Nasional 'Veteran' Yogyakarta(UPNVY) Indonesia which had give grant to this research with scheme Hibah Internal 2009.
The decreasing of community trust towards public service quality, it demands Indonesian government for doing bureaucracy changing or reforming to make some innovation in the public service. However, it has not realized entirely yet in government structure Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. It can be seen from the lower response of the government structure in giving response toward public service innovation process so the public service has not appropriate to the society demand yet (Purbokusumo, etc, 2006). Actually, Indonesian government should be aware of this condition and it can be part of internal or external problem mapping in the innovation of public organization. Moreover, in each phase of public service innovation process can not apart from the organizational internal support itself, including the employees. The employee career success will become an important discourse because it will be able to improve the organizational performance.
The improving of individual career should be suitable with career path policy in each institution. The career path often changes when the individual face the complexity of organizational reality and changing. The consequences, an employee or individual should be responsible to their own planning and developing career. Some researches in many career literatures have identified the amount of influences on career success, like race, organizational experience and performance. The comprehensive model of career success has included some individual and organizational variable (Judge & Bretz, 1994). On the individual level, some demographic variable such as human capital, motivational (Wayne, Liden, Kraimer & Graft, 1999), proactive personality, human capital and leader support (Muafi & Effendi, 2009) are correlated to career success. Then on the organizational level including industrial sector, geographic location and company measurement are also related to individual career success (Seibert,Crant & Kraimer, 1999).
The previous research although had given big contribution on career literature, however some researches more emphasized on skill, performing and organizational success need to be focus on organizational politics, like ingratiation behaviors and self promotion (Cook, Ferris and Dulebohn, (1999).
The improving of individual career should be suitable with career path policy in each institution. The career path often changes when the individual face the complexity of organizational reality and changing. The consequences, an employee or individual should be responsible to their own planning and developing career. Since globalization the organizational changes very fast, it becomes a trend that influence on individual psychology in reaching career success. According to Judge and Bretz, (1994) most of research about career draws an individual as passive, under controlled one and intense situational influence on human behavior. Difference from this perspective, Bell and Staw (1989) argue that personality develop through personal control process and influence on the result which determined by the environment power finally.
When career success related to the above issues, so career success can be reached by an individual who understood himself, know how to detect the environment changes and create an opportunity for himself and learn from their fault (Greenhauss, Callanan & Godshalk, 2000). Many researches in career literature have identified the amount of influences on career success like race, organizational experiences and performance. A comprehensive model of career success has included some individual and organizational variables (Judge & Bretz, 1994). On individual level, many demographic variables such as human capital and motivation related to career success (Wayne, Liden, Kraimer & Graft, 1999). Then, on organizational level like industrial sector, geographic location and company size are also related to career success (Seibert, Crant & Kraimer, 1999).
Judge & Bretz (1994) suggest that understanding of career success focuses on organizational politics, included ingratiation behavior and self promotion (Cook, Ferris and Dulebohn, 1999). Political behavior is a no sanction behavior organizationally, it may be disadvantaged for organizational objectives or other individual in one organization (Harrell-Cook, Ferris & Dulebohn, 1999 in Randall, et al., 1999). The organizational politics involve one interest above organizational interest (Greenberg & Baron, 2000). The evaluation of individual subjective towards observed situation or behavior as a politics becomes organizational politics perception (Harrel-Cook, Ferris & Dulebohn, 1999). Political behavior in organizations as those aqctivities that are not required as part of one's formal role in the organization, but thet influence, or attempt to influence, the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within the organization (Robbins, 2001). This definition encompasses they key elements from what most people mean when they talk about organizational politics.
Politics can be functional or dysfunctional rely on symptoms happened. Other definition said politics as a narrow, that is politics is limited as a behavior to maximize individual interest in short or long term (Cropanzano, et al., 1997). Organizational politics involve an individual interest above organization interest (Greenberg & Baron, 2000). An individual subjective evaluation towards observed situation or behavior as a politics is a perception of organizational politics (Harrel-Cook, Ferris & Dulebohn, 1999). Organizational politics with no clear distinction made between the two phenomena. While there is some implicit, if not explicit, assumption that the two constructs are related, the present work views political behavior and perceptions of politics as distinct and separate constructs (Cook, et al., 1999). Theoriticians and researchers have examined various aspects of political behavior and perceptions of organizational politics with no clear distinction made between the two phenomena. While there is some implicit, if no explicit, assumption that the two constructs are related, the present work views political behavior and perceptions of politics as distinct and separate constructs (Cook et al., 1999). Most pertinent to the purposes of the current study are two behaviors these authors categorized as tactical-assertive behaviors, specifically ingratiation and self-promotion.
Goodfrey, Jones, and Lord (1986) characterized ingratiation behaviors as less proactive (i.e., more reactive) verbal and non verbal behaviors than those involved in self-promotion. The focus of ingratiation behaviors is on 'attention giving' through agreeing with the target's opinions, expressing conformity with the target's values, and offering prause or flattering remarks directed toward the target.
Self promotion behaviors are focused toward 'attention getting'. Self-promoters is to give the appearance of competence through expressions of self confidence, directing attention toward their purported accomplishments, or by exercising behaviors assumed to be valued by the target individual. Self- promoters engage in specific behaviors with the objective of establishing an image of the political actor as competent, intelligent, and/or extremely (Cook et al., 1999).
Ferris and Judge (1991) state that politics influence on behavior related to individual career success. On practical level, the research is most needed, since recently an individual career success is not only determined by the company but also by the individual himself.
Bell and Staw (1989) argue that finally a personality through personal controlling process can influence on the result determined by environment power. The based assumption of research when applying ingratiation and self promotion in this research is a political behavior has influence on career success depending on an employee's tactical type, it means that is an employee utilizes ingratiation or self promotion (particularly employee in a government institution). However, a private employee tends to apply supervisor-focused tactics or job-focused tactics.
Bateman and Crant (1993) defined the individual with a prototypical proactive personality as one who is relatively unconstrained by situational forces and who effects environment exchange. A proactive personality as a stable disposition toward proactive personality. The construct domain of proactive personality according to Bateman and Crant (1993) is determined by a relation between proactive construct and five general factors of personality, and then known as big five personality, they are extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness to experience.
The research result by Seibert, Crant and Kraimer (1999) show that there is a positive relation between an individual with proactive personality and two indicators of career success, they are self-reported subjective (fee and promotion) and subjective (career satisfaction), after controlling some variables like applied in the Judge et al. research (1995), they are demographic, human capital, motivational, organizational and industry variables. There is a positive relationship between individuals' proactive personality and career success (Seibert et al., 1999). This literature has been used to develop the conceptual framework for this study as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. The Effect Of Proactive Personality, Self Promotion and Ingratiation on Career Success for employee of public organization
Based on the research model, this study hypothesis that:
H1. There is influence of proactive personality to career success,
H2. There is influences of self promotion to career success.
H3. There is influences of proactive personality to career success.
Based on the characteristics of research problem, this research is an survey research. This study applies non probability sample design (purposive technique). The amount of respondent who involved in this research is 96 respondents. The type of questionnaire is closed questionnaire and asking the perception of employee of public organization in Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta (DIY). The Likert 7 point scale was used for measurement with scale 1 (strongly disagree) until 7 (strongly agree). The result of validity and reliability examining conclude that for each indicator in examined variable points out significant or loading factor >0,5 (valid) (Appendix A). However, in reliability examining points out cronbach alpha >0,6 (reliable) (Appendix B). The technique of statistics utilized in this study is regression analysis.
EMPIRICAL RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Sample Profile
In relation to sample profile, Table 1 shows that the majority respondent characteristics were females (40,6%), department in Bappeda, and Post Graduate 47.9%.
Table 1. Profile of Respondents (N = 96)
4.2. Hypothesis Test
This research used the proactive personality as the independent variable and career success as the dependent variable for regression analysis in order to illuminate the no correlation between the proactive personality and career success. As shown in Table 2, there is no influences of proactive personality to career success (Î² = 0.027, p < 0.793). Thus, Hyphotesis 1 was partly not supported.
For analysis, self promotion was an independent variable and career success as the dependent variable for regression analysis in order to illuminate the correlation between the self promotion and career success. As shown in Table 2, there is influences of self promotion to career success (Î² = 0.293, p < 0.006). Thus, Hypothesis 2 was partly supported.
Finally, ingratiation was an independent variable and career success as the dependent variable for regression analysis in order to illuminate the correlation between the ingratiation and career success. As shown in Table 2, there is influences of self promotion to career success (Î² = 0.208, p < 0.042). Thus, Hypothesis 3 was partly supported.
The research result explains that proactive personality has no significant influence on career success. This result does not support research by Seibert, et al. (1999) that shows proactive personality has influence on objective and subjective career success. Therefore it also does not support Crant's argument (1995) that explains individual with proactive personality chooses and creates a situation that can improve high performance. They can use more proactive activity in the career management, like watching job information and outer organization. This research also does not support Ashford and Black's argument (1996) that individual with proactive personality get sponsorship and career support, make career planning and sustain in facing career's obstacles. The result of interview by researcher with the respondents collect explanation that there are some individuals in Pemda Sleman institution who have close relationship with the senior official at that time, so they get higher confidence than others. When there is a career promotion, the senior will promote the official who have he known well first psychologically, however may be there are others who have more skills and competency. Nevertheless, researcher believes that there is an opportunity they who are in the structural position actually have competency. Individuals' career success is not influenced by proactive personality factor at all. There are many other factors in career success. They are (Metz, 2004) human capital, motivation and support from senior, (Nilawati, 2004; Wayne et al., 1999), personality, human capital, motivation and senior's support (Muafi & Irhas, 2009).
Based on the information from the interview, it explains that there is an individual who was expressly acted in front of others in order to get intention from his partners and the senior. An individual who was doing self promotion is seen more than friendly. Their goals are giving and showing their competence through self confidence directly pays attention to achieve their goals perfectly or by giving example a behavior that have target assumption individually. The individual who acted self promotion tries doing specific behavior to build an image that he is a smart, competent and dedicated worker (Cook, et al., 1999). In Pemda Sleman institution, there is a big opportunity some individuals are expressly acted politically for their own interest, they do self promotion in order to get senior's attention that they are smart and competence. By doing this they hope will get the first promotion.
Ingratiation behavior is a behavior did by someone to make him self more interest by others (Linden & Mitchell, 1988). Ingratiation behavior is always patient either supported by effort to utilize the influence and/or get political benefits. However, ingratiation behavior is not always involving winding method to manipulate others, in fact some individuals doing ingratiation behavior unawares (Liden & Mitchel, 1988). In Pemda Sleman, there is big opportunity some individuals / employees are aware doing political effort to individual intention, by doing ingratiation in front of their seniors or partners. They hope they will get promotion first than others. This political effort can be openly but also hidden.
CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION AND LIMITATION OF THIS STUDY AND
The result concludes that proactive personality has no influence on career success, self promotion has influence on career success and ingratiation has influence on career success.
The contributed implication is this research result shows self promotion and ingratiation have influence on career success in fact. The government in Pemda Sleman should be more careful and has clear standard in the employees' promotion, in order self promotion and ingratiation can be minimized. High self promotion and ingratiation indeed have bad effect to organizational performance or other employees who are really competent in certain position but no chance. Moreover, political behavior usually emerges when there is no transparency on some regulations related to the quality of employees' life (example unclear promotion requirements, career structure, criterion of job evaluation, salary determination or compensation). Decreasing of not responsible political behavior, an organization should determine the above things more transparent, so misunderstanding can be avoided that effect to political behavior which point out certain individual intention. Nevertheless, the decision should be based on rationality not politics only.
The limitations of this research are; (a) this research takes only objects in one of government institution. It is better the next research try to take different objects, like manufacturing company, health institution, tourism, industry, journalism, education or other service companies, (b) the examining result is based on cross sectional data and self report data, so it make bias. This implication causes perception on each respondent very subjective since one perception on an object will be different (Muafi & Effendi, 2009).