Creating a Measure of Dysfunctional Office and Organizational Politics: The DOOP Scale
Anderson, Thomas Paul
This item is only available for download by members of the University of Illinois community. Students, faculty, and staff at the U of I may log in with your NetID and password to view the item. If you are trying to access an Illinois-restricted dissertation or thesis, you can request a copy through your library's Inter-Library Loan office or purchase a copy directly from ProQuest.
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/2142/71920
Description
Title
Creating a Measure of Dysfunctional Office and Organizational Politics: The DOOP Scale
Author(s)
Anderson, Thomas Paul
Issue Date
1992
Doctoral Committee Chair(s)
Zaccaria, Joseph S.
Department of Study
Education
Discipline
Education
Degree Granting Institution
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Degree Name
Ph.D.
Degree Level
Dissertation
Keyword(s)
Business Administration, Management
Psychology, Industrial
Sociology, Industrial and Labor Relations
Abstract
This study was performed to create and validate a perceptual measure of Dysfunctional Office and Organizational Politics (DOOPs). Statements for the measure were derived from office and organizational politics definitions implied or stated in the non-professional literature. Subsequently, two scales were created, one 21 statement scale for use in practice, the "DOOP Scale"; and one 10 statement scale for use in research, the "Short Form DOOP Scale". A mail questionnaire to 1000 randomly selected directors, managers and assistant managers/supervisors was utilized. Subjects were stratified by state residence and gender. The response yielded 282 useable questionnaires, and after elimination of respondents using "Lie" and "Inconsistent Response" subscales, 267 respondents remained (males, n = 134, females, n = 133, mean age = 41.4 years, mean years employed = 10.5). An exploratory maximum likelihood factor analysis was performed on the original pool of 43 statements. Subsequently, analyses with oblique or orthogonal rotations specifying from two to five factors were performed. No meaningful or statistically satisfactory solutions were found. One factor solutions for both scales explained 45.5% and 50.4% of the variance respectively. Internal coefficient alpha consistency measurements for the scales were.94 and.91 respectively. Approximate one month retest coefficients were.87 for both scales (n = 47). Correlations between the scales (respectively) and various perceptual measures were as follows: promotion satisfaction, $-$.36 and $-$.34; reward accuracy $-$.35 and $-$.34; global job satisfaction, $-$.43 and $-$.42; employee turnover,.23 and.26; productivity, $-$.33 and $-$.32; job stress,.25 and.27; positive change orientation, $-$.23 and $-$.23; creativity, $-$.40 and $-$.38; role ambiguity,.45 and.44; and autonomy, $-$.48 and $-$.46. Correlations at.23 were p. $<$.001, and above.23, p. $<$.0001, using two-tailed tests. Measures which failed to correlate significantly with DOOPs perceptions were: supervisory level, employment length, employee age, educational level, span of control, and interpersonal interaction. Females scored significantly higher than males on the DOOP Scale, p. $<$.05, two-tailed test. Implications and suggestions for organizational consultants, including a proposed "vicious circle" model of DOOPs; for job seeking candidates and for future research, are discussed.
Use this login method if you
don't
have an
@illinois.edu
email address.
(Oops, I do have one)
IDEALS migrated to a new platform on June 23, 2022. If you created
your account prior to this date, you will have to reset your password
using the forgot-password link below.
