In the context of boundaryless careers, professionals, and managers need to be proactive about networking to build and maintain relationships in career and community domains for personal value and visibility (Claes & Ruiz-Quintanilla, Reference Claes and Ruiz-Quintanilla1998; Sturges, Conway, Guest, & Liefooghe, Reference Sturges, Conway, Guest and Liefooghe2005). By engaging in networking behaviors, professionals, and managers can better craft their social networks and attain social capital embedded in social relationships in order to achieve positive career outcomes, and can focus on how to access and mobilize social resources embedded in relationships (e.g., de Janasz, Sullivan, & Whiting, Reference de Janasz, Sullivan and Whiting2003; Wolff, Moser, & Grau, Reference Wolff, Moser and Grau2008). Scholarly research has demonstrated that networking behavior has positive effects on self-rated career and work outcomes, such as promotion, total compensation, career satisfaction, and subjective and objective sales performance (Michael & Yukl, Reference Michael and Yukl1993; Orpen, Reference Orpen1996; Langford, Reference Langford2000; Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004; Macintosh & Krush, Reference Macintosh and Krush2017). At the same time, networking is a behavioral demonstration that promotes personal visibility and affects others’ perceptions and evaluations. Networking behavior is typically seen by observers as effectively or ineffectively enacted (Mohd Radsi, Garavan, & Ismail, Reference Mohd Radsi, Garavan and Ismail2013). Only Thompson (Reference Thompson2005) and Sturges et al. (Reference Sturges, Conway, Guest and Liefooghe2005) reported positive correlations between networking and supervisory ratings of job performance. Few studies have examined the effects of networking behavior on supervisors, particularly when supervisors’ prediction of upward advancement determines their final decision on promotion and compensation.
Networking is considered both a behavior-related ‘influence tactic’ supportive of upward appeal (Levy, Collins, & Nail, Reference Levy, Collins and Nail1998; Taber & Blankemeyer, Reference Taber and Blankemeyer2015) and a social cue by supervisors seeking to determine an actor’s promotability. Different from self-rated retrospective career outcomes (e.g., promotion, compensation, and perceived career success), promotability reflects supervisors’ support for an employee’s advancement (Greenhaus, Parasuraman, & Wormley, Reference Greenhaus, Parasuraman and Wormley1990), revealing whether or not the support is sufficient for a promotion (Wayne, Liden, Kraimer, & Graf, Reference Wayne, Liden, Kraimer and Graf1999; Van Scotter, Motowidlo, & Cross, Reference Van Scotter, Motowidlo and Cross2000). Thus, it is vital for professionals to engage in career- or community-based networking behaviors in order to influence supervisors’ immediate inferences regarding the professionals’ capacity and willingness to perform effectively at higher job levels (De Pater, Van Vianen, Bechtoldt, & Klehe, Reference De Pater, Van Vianen, Bechtoldt and Klehe2009). As no research has directly examined the different relationships between multidimensional networking behaviors and promotability evaluation, the present study investigates whether or not – and if so, to what extent – career- and community-based networking behaviors are related to supervisory ratings of employees’ promotability.
Because networking is an effort to gain or achieve career success, the individual who is networking should be concerned about other people’s perceptions of the networking, which are a function of how effectively the individual presents the networking. More specifically, observers’ perception of actors’ networking behaviors can shape the observers’ related evaluations of the actors and, thus, can influence the effectiveness of the actors’ networking (Floyd, Reference Floyd2014). Empirical studies have shown that gender differences moderate the relationships between networking and individual outcomes (e.g., Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004; Gremmen, Akkerman, & Benschop, Reference Gremmen, Akkerman and Benschop2013; Macintosh & Krush, Reference Macintosh and Krush2017). However, few studies have investigated other individual differences as moderators. An exception is recent research showing that political skill is less observable than the demographic variable of gender, but that explicit behavior can influence supervisors’ perceptions and evaluation (Breland, Seitz, Treadway, Lovelace, & Gazdag, Reference Breland, Seitz, Treadway, Lovelace and Gazdag2017). The present study examines the issue by paying particular attention to the moderating effects of political skill on networking behaviors’ effectiveness in maximizing promotability. Individuals possessing political skills can engage in politically astute career- and community-based networking behaviors that shape supervisors’ perceptions in ways conducive to desired outcomes (Treadway, Breland, Adams, Duke, & Williams, Reference Treadway, Breland, Adams, Duke and Williams2010). The present study considers the joint effect that networking behaviors and political skill can have on supervisors’ evaluations of subordinate employees’ potential for promotion. Moreover, involvement in career- and community-based networking may give rise to various types of evaluations.
The present study contributes to the literature in several ways. First, this study extends the effects of networking behavior from self-rated career success (as recalled after a period of time) to supervisors’ concurrent evaluation of promotability. The investigated relationship could yield findings capable of answering an important question: in the workplace, what should employees do to influence supervisors’ perceptions of the employees when the supervisors are trying to predict how well the employees would perform in higher-level positions? Second, rather than treat networking as a unitary construct, the current study suggests that career- and community-based networking behaviors lead to promotability (Treadway et al., Reference Treadway, Breland, Adams, Duke and Williams2010). By rigorously exploring the various types of relationships between career or community networking and promotability, the current study can deepen the networking literature and explain the comparative effectiveness of various networking behaviors. Third, rather than detect the gender differences associated with networking effectiveness, this study examines the moderating effect of political skill on the relationship between networking behaviors and promotability, and addresses how subordinate employees perform politically to attract positive attention from supervisors. This knowledge should be valuable to individuals who want to proactively shape their careers as well as to professionals who assist employees in their career management.
THEORY AND HYPOTHESES
People’s engagement in networking behaviors not only can foster a strong social-capital network for the achievement of desirable career outcomes (Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004), but also can serve as an informational cue by which supervisors can judge who within a pool of employees most deserves promotion (Spence, Reference Spence1973). The former perspective views networking behavior as a means by which individuals can access and mobilize social resources embedded in interpersonal relationships (Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2001; De Vos, Clippeleer, & Dewilde, Reference De Vos, Clippeleer and Dewilde2009); the latter perspective focuses on how observers perceive networking behavior and, from the perceptions, draw inferences about advancement recommendations (Noe, Reference Noe1996; Mohd Radsi, Garavan, & Ismail, Reference Mohd Radsi, Garavan and Ismail2013). Most empirical results show that, through increases in social capital, networking behavior is positively associated with self-rated retrospective measures of compensation, promotion, and perceived career success (e.g., Michael & Yukl, Reference Michael and Yukl1993; Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004; Wolff & Moser, Reference Wolff and Moser2009, Reference Wolff and Moser2010). Nevertheless, little empirical research has addressed how networking affects supervisors’ contemporary evaluations of promotability, which can determine employees’ real promotion in the future (De Pater et al., Reference De Pater, Van Vianen, Bechtoldt and Klehe2009). The retrospective data of promotion and compensation is collected and recalled during a period of time, and is conceived of as distal career outcomes. The effect of networking behavior on supervisors’ promotability ratings is more proximal than compensation and promotion, and can enhance real promotion (Claes & Ruiz-Quintanilla, Reference Claes and Ruiz-Quintanilla1998). Thus, the current study examines the relationship between networking behavior and supervisor-rated promotability, detecting the effectiveness of networking on supervisors’ perceptions and evaluations.
According to Treadway et al. (Reference Treadway, Breland, Adams, Duke and Williams2010), networking behaviors can be directed to career or community domains, and individuals engaging in networking behaviors within these two domains have unique outcomes. Career-based networking behaviors include maintaining external contacts, socializing, engaging in professional activities, and increasing internal visibility whereas community-based networking behaviors refer chiefly to participation in community events. Attribution theory (Heider, Reference Heider1958; Fiske & Taylor, Reference Fiske and Taylor1991) posits that people draw upon certain informational cues in an attempt to determine whether internal (personal) or external (situational) factors can help explain the causes of a behavior. Under the context of employee evaluations, supervisors observe subordinates’ career- or community-based networking behaviors and are likely to commit a fundamental attribution error (Ross, Reference Ross1977) by attributing the extent of certain networking behaviors to personal factors. Thus, the extent of a specific type of networking behavior may lead supervisors to make inferences about employees’ capabilities and talents, in turn deeply influencing judgments about whether an employee is suitable for a higher-level position (Williams & Walker, Reference Williams and Walker1985).
In this study, career-based networking behavior is more visible and favorable than community-based networking behaviors at directly inducing supervisors’ positive inferences about employees (Noe, Reference Noe1996). New and higher-level jobs will require employees to possess and develop relevant knowledge, skills, and expertise (De Pater et al., Reference De Pater, Van Vianen, Bechtoldt and Klehe2009). The greater the number of career-based networking behaviors an employee engages in, the more easily he or she will reap complementary benefits from social capital. Employees with more social capital are more likely than other employees to enhance their own value by facilitating exchanges of information within the employing organization and, consequently, to achieve superior outcomes (Friedman & Krackhardt, Reference Friedman and Krackhardt1997; Hitt, Bierman, Shimizu, & Kochhar, Reference Hitt, Bierman, Shimizu and Kochhar2001; Mehra, Kilduff, & Brass, Reference Mehra, Kilduff and Brass2001). Social capital built from career- and community-based networking behaviors can assist employees not only in exchanging information, but also in accumulating job-related knowledge (Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004), providing clues as to future performance in higher positions. Moreover, employees’ development of interpersonal relationships through career-based networking behaviors reflects the employees’ competence in dealing with various types of people both inside and outside organizations (Higgins & Kram, Reference Higgins and Kram2001), and this competence increases the possibility that employees can acquire resources from influential persons to enhance their prospects for getting promoted (Kram, Reference Kram1988). Thus, employees’ engagement in career-based networking behavior – as opposed to community networking – can signal a supervisor about their job-related knowledge and interpersonal relationships, so that the supervisor can feel better able to predict which employees will perform well in higher positions. Noe (Reference Noe1996) found that networking resulted in objective career success because it increased an individual’s visibility, development opportunities, and capacity to negotiate promotions. However, it did not investigate the more direct relationship between networking behavior and development potential. The present study examines this issue, comparing the relationships that exist (1) between career-based networking behavior and promotability and (2) between community-based networking behavior and promotability. Therefore, I propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1: Career-related networking behavior will be more positively related to promotability evaluations than will community-based networking behavior.
Political skill as the moderator
Because promotability evaluations are a function of supervisors’ subjective perceptions of upward mobility, ample room exists for individuals to engage in networking behaviors that can shape supervisors’ perceptions of these individuals concerning their true effectiveness and developmental potential (Liu, Liu, & Wu, Reference Liu, Liu and Wu2010). Relevant to this matter is the idea of political skill, defined as ‘the ability to effectively understand others at work and to use such knowledge to influence others to act in ways that enhance one’s personal and/or organizational objectives’ (Ferris et al., Reference Ferris, Treadway, Kolodinsky, Hochwarter, Kacmar, Douglas and Frink2005: 127). Thus, central to the effectiveness of networking is the given employee’s ability to adapt his or her networking behavior to diverse situations in a manner that conveys genuineness and sincerity (Ferris et al., Reference Ferris, Treadway, Kolodinsky, Hochwarter, Kacmar, Douglas and Frink2005), and to effectively convince supervisors that he or she is suitably competent for higher positions.
The elaboration likelihood model (ELM), which is a well-known theory of persuasion accounting for the persuasiveness of information content (Petty & Cacioppo, Reference Petty and Cacioppo1986), can provide a theoretical foundation for discussing how political skill may enhance the relationship between networking and promotability. The ELM suggests that people retrieve and process information by way of either central or peripheral paths. Individuals who carefully examine an observable relevant message (i.e., who engage in central processing) will judge the message on the basis of the content of the message itself. By contrast, individuals who process a message without carefully examining the merits of the presented information (i.e., who engage in peripheral processing) will judge the message on the basis of such environmental cues as the information source’s characteristics. Actually, career- and community-based networking behaviors are important informational cues for supervisors when they are evaluating employees’ developmental opportunities (Noe, Reference Noe1996). Indeed, the career-based networking behaviors are central-processing cues because these behaviors are directly observable in the organization. In contrast, community-based networking behaviors are peripheral-processing cues because employees participate in community activities outside the organization, thus increasing the difficulty with which supervisors observe employees’ participation in community activities. Owing to physical proximity, supervisors observe more employee-initiated career networking with such job-relevant targets as peers and clients than employee-initiated community networking with such relatively job-irrelevant targets as churches and social groups (Nisbett & Ross, Reference Nisbett and Ross1980; Michael & Yukl, Reference Michael and Yukl1993). Empirical results suggest, in general, that community-based networking behavior might be less frequent than career-based networking behavior, further suggesting that community networking might have low observability for supervisors (Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2001, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004; Treadway et al., Reference Treadway, Breland, Adams, Duke and Williams2010; Mohd Radsi, Garavan, & Ismail, Reference Mohd Radsi, Garavan and Ismail2013). Thus, when evaluating employees’ upward potential, supervisors appear likely (1) to observe with care the direct substantial cues of career-based networking behaviors and (2) to observe, perhaps with less care, the indirect symbolic cues of community-based networking behaviors. More specifically, supervisors apparently pay more attention to the extent of expressivity characterizing employees’ community participation than to actual enactment; but most of all, supervisors seem to concentrate on the actual and substantial enactment of career-based networking behavior.
Politically skilled employees are effective in the development, maintenance, and recognition of social networks (Ferris, Hochwarter, Douglas, Blass, Kolodinsky, & Treadway, Reference Ferris, Hochwarter, Douglas, Blass, Kolodinsky and Treadway2002), and improve others’ perceptions and evaluations of them (Treadway, Hochwarter, Kacmar, & Ferris, Reference Treadway, Hochwarter, Kacmar and Ferris2005). Employees who execute community-based networking behavior with political skill can strengthen the significance of networking, which might also increase supervisors’ positive affect toward them (Judge & Bretz, Reference Judge and Bretz1994; Noe, Reference Noe1996). Networking that increases positive affect can bolster career success, whereas networking that comes across as self-promotion can undermine career success (Mohd Radsi, Garavan, & Ismail, Reference Mohd Radsi, Garavan and Ismail2013). The extent to which employees’ community-based networking behaviors are astute and sincere can determine the extent to which supervisors like the employees. The more frequently a politically skilled employee participates in community activities, the more likely he or she is to gain the admiration of supervisors and to gather positive promotability evaluations. Thus, I propose that, in general, employees who are high in political skill are more likely than those who are low in political skill to exhibit impressive community-based networking behavior, which can increase promotability:
Hypothesis 2: Political skill will strengthen the positive relationship between community-based networking behaviors and promotability evaluations. That is, the higher an individual’s political skill, the more positive his or her involvement in community-based networking behaviors will be for promotability evaluations.
However, employees’ political skillfulness in career networking might trigger supervisors’ negative perceptions of the employees. According to the ELM (Petty & Cacioppo, Reference Petty and Cacioppo1986), supervisors who centrally process essential career-networking details are more likely to observe the substantial contents of politically skillful employees’ career-based networking behavior than the supervisors are to observe the expressivity of employees’ same behavior. Although employees are just doing what they should do at work, the salience of career networking displayed by politically skillful employees may lead supervisors to infer that the employees are purposely engaging in excessive networking. The supervisors are quite likely to categorize the employees as manipulative politically skilled persons, to perceive them as a threat, and to give them unfavorable evaluations. Floyd (Reference Floyd2014) found that actors’ networking with high-status friends is attributable to self-serving goals and is negatively related to supervisory performance ratings. Thus, I propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 3: Political skill will weaken the positive relationship between career-based networking behavior and promotability evaluations. That is, the higher an individual’s political skill is, the more negative his or her involvement in career-based networking behaviors will be for promotability evaluations.
METHOD
Sample and study design
To test the hypotheses, the present study surveyed and collected data from financial-services sales agents and their supervisors working at branches of a large bank in Taiwan. I contacted the supervisors, asking each one (1) to provide me with one or two names of sales agents and (2) to send the surveys directly to the named agents. Every survey included a cover letter explaining the study’s objective and was coded (on the return envelopes). I distributed a total of 215 surveys directly to sales agents, and 1 week later, sent the agents’ supervisors another survey about the corresponding subordinates’ performance and promotability evaluations (which were also coded to allow a matching of the corresponding surveys after their return). This study emphasized confidentiality by having individual participants return the survey directly to the author. Usable surveys with no missing data for any items in the analysis were received from a set of 103 supervisors corresponding to exactly 160 of the 181 responding employees, yielding a dyadic response rate of ~74%.
The 160 employee–supervisor dyads comprised 160 employees and 103 supervisors. The respondent group of 160 employees was 63% female, with an overall average age of 30.91 years (SD=8.43) and an average organizational tenure of 3.16 years (SD=3.82). The respondent group of 103 supervisors was 51% male, with an overall average age of 35.55 years (SD=9.42) and an average organizational tenure of 7.96 years (SD=6.80).
Measurement
All variables were self-reported by employees, except for promotability and task performance, which were assessed by supervisors. The original version of the questionnaire was translated into Chinese by me, the author, and then translated back from Chinese into English by two bilingual foreign-language experts. Finally, the translation was reviewed for appropriateness by five organizational-behavior experts to ensure the content validity and face validity of the measurements (Brislin, Reference Brislin1980).
Networking behavior
Networking behavior was measured with Forret and Dougherty’s (Reference Forret and Dougherty2001) 28-item networking-behavior scale. Respondents were asked to indicate on a 6-point scale how often they had typically engaged in networking behaviors within the last year. This scale measures five types of networking behavior: maintaining external contacts, socializing, engaging in professional activities, increasing internal visibility, and participating in community activities. Cronbach’s α sequentially were 0.82, 0.84, 0.72, 0.82, and 0.82.
For this study, I conducted a confirmatory factor analysis to detect the dimensions of networking behaviors. The five-factor model achieved a good model fit (χ2=1054.22, df=340, χ2/df=3.10, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)=0.06, comparative fit index (CFI)=0.93, normed fit index (NNFI)=0.91, incremental fit index (IFI)=0.93) and was better than a one-factor model (χ2=2,114.50, df=350, χ2/df=6.04, RMSEA=0.16, CFI=0.75, NNFI=0.73, IFI=0.75) and a two-factor model (χ2=1355.92, df=349, χ2/df=3.89, RMSEA=0.10, CFI=0.82, NNFI=0.80, IFI=0.82). χ2 difference tests also indicate that the five-factor model was better than the one-factor model and the two-factor model (∆χ2=301.70 and 1,060.28, ∆df=9 and 10, respectively, p<.01). These results suggest that the present study’s constructs were distinct from one another. Consistent with Forret and Dougherty’s (Reference Forret and Dougherty2001, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004) methodology, the current study’s statistical analysis rests on five types of networking behaviors, rather than on a combination of career- and community-based networking behaviors.
Political skill
Political skill was measured with Perrewe, Zellars, Ferris, Rossi, Kacmar, and Ralston (Reference Perrewe, Zellars, Ferris, Rossi, Kacmar and Ralston2004) 6-item scale. Respondents reported the extent to which they agreed with each statement, such as ‘I understand people well.’ Responses rested on a 5-point Likert scale (ranging from 1=‘strongly disagree’ to 5=‘strongly agree’). The Cronbach’s α for this scale was 0.84.
Promotability
Promotability was measured with Lin and Huang’s (Reference Lin and Huang2005) 3-item scale of developmental potential. Supervisors were asked to indicate on a 6-point scale the extent to which they agreed with each statement, such as the statement ‘If possible, I will promote the employee in the future.’ The Cronbach’s α for this measure was 0.91.
Control variables
Several additional variables were included in the study to control for factors that might confound the relationship between networking behavior and career-related outcomes (Becker, Reference Becker2005). Following the suggestion of Wolff and Moser (Reference Wolff and Moser2009), the current study used three human-capital variables – education, organizational tenure, and work experience. Herein, education is related to network size (Carroll & Teo, Reference Carroll and Teo1996) and to compensation. Ng, Eby, Sorensen, and Feldman (Reference Ng, Eby, Sorensen and Feldman2005) have shown that experience and tenure are related to compensation and may also influence networking behavior (e.g., Kram & Isabella, Reference Kram and Isabella1985). Respondents in the present study indicated their highest education degree (1=‘high school’, 2=‘bachelor’s degree’, 3=‘master’s degree’, and 4=‘doctorate degree’), organizational tenure, and work experience. Organizational tenure and work experience were measured as years and months and then converted to years.
Prior research has often focused on employees’ current task performance (e.g., Beehr, Taber, & Walsh, Reference Beehr, Taber and Walsh1980; Greenhaus, Parasuraman, & Wormley, Reference Greenhaus, Parasuraman and Wormley1990) and demographic variables (e.g., Williams & Walker, Reference Williams and Walker1985; Hartman, Griffeth, Crino, & Harris, Reference Hartman, Griffeth, Crino and Harris1991) as key factors in predicting promotability. Thus, in addition to demographic variables, I also included the second supervisor-rated variable of task performance as the control variable in this study. The task performance measure here was made up of four items adopted from Wayne and Liden (Reference Wayne and Liden1995) and MacAllister (Reference MacAllister1995). Supervisors were asked to indicate on a 6-point scale the extent to which they agreed with each statement as applied to a given employee. Sample items include ‘In my estimation, this employee has completed his or her work very effectively.’ The Cronbach’s α for this measure was 0.91. This study controlled for two demographic variables that, according to research (Ng et al., Reference Ng, Eby, Sorensen and Feldman2005), correlate with career-related outcomes: gender (0=‘male’, 1=‘female’) and relationship status (0=‘single’, 1=‘in a steady relationship’).
RESULTS
Table 1 shows the means, standard deviations, and correlations of all variables included in this study. The correlations among the five networking-behavior variables ranged from 0.26 to 0.67. Maintaining external contacts was positively related to task performance and promotability (r=0.22 and 0.27, p<.05), and engaging in professional activities was positively related to promotability (r=0.24, p<.05), but not to task performance. The correlation between task performance and promotability was the highest (r=0.76, p<.01), but these two variables were associated with different networking behaviors. Thus, controlling for task performance has helped clarify the relationships between networking behaviors and promotability. I also ran multicollinearity statistics to detect the extent to which correlations among variables were high. Results show that none of the tolerances were at or below 0.10, providing confidence that multicollinearity was not a problem in this study. These results allowed me to proceed with the following hierarchical regression analyses.
Table 1. Correlations, means, and standard deviation of variables
Note. n=160; reliabilities are shown in the diagonal.
a 0=‘male’, 1=‘female’.
b 0=‘single’, 1=‘in a steady relationship’.
*p<.05; **p<.01.
Hypothesis testing
This study investigated the relationship between networking behaviors and promotability by conducting hierarchical regression analyses. Table 2 presents the results of the hierarchical regression analyses. Of the control variables, only task performance was significantly positively related to promotability (β=0.75, p<.01). The unique incremental to R 2 was calculated for the set of networking-behavior variables after the control variables were entered into the regression, and the results show that networking-behavior variables could explain significant variances of promotability (ΔR 2=0.09, p<.05). Hypothesis 1, declaring that involvement in career-based networking behavior would be more positively related to promotability than community-based networking behavior, received partial support. Compared to career networking, participating in community activity was not associated with promotability (β=0.02, p>.10). Of the career-based networking behaviors, only maintaining external contacts and participating in professional activities were significantly related to promotability (β=0.20 and 0.25, p<.05). However, the relationship between socialization and promotability was found to be negative (β=−0.17, p<.05).
Table 2. Regression results: networking behaviors as predictors of promotability
Note. * p<.05; **p<.01. All the regression coefficients shown are standardized.
Hypothesis 2 proposed that political skill moderates the relationship between community-based networking behaviors and promotability. According to Baron and Kenny (Reference Baron and Kenny1986), each of the five interaction terms for networking behaviors in combination with political skill were entered into the regression after the control variables, networking behaviors, and political skill. To counter the problem of multicollinearity in tests of interaction terms, I centered all networking behaviors combined with political skill before creating the interaction terms (see Aiken and West, Reference Aiken and West1991). As seen in Table 2, only the interaction terms of participating in community activities and maintaining external contacts in combination with political skill were significantly related to promotability (β=0.20 and −0.18, p<.05). To clarify the form of the relationship, I followed Aiken and West’s (Reference Aiken and West1991) procedures and plotted a graph, with which I investigated the relationship between community-based networking behavior (participating in community activities) and promotability under different levels of political skill (i.e., high and low). Figure 1 illustrates that when political skill was relatively high, participating in community activities was positively related to promotability; this pattern conforms to the expected shape of the hypothesized interaction. Thus, the result supports Hypothesis 2. Also, I examined the joint effect that maintaining external contacts and political skill would have on promotability and plotted their relationship in Figure 2. The figure illustrates that when political skill was relatively low, maintaining external contacts was associated with lowered promotability evaluation. Thus, the results partially support Hypothesis 3.
Figure 1. The moderating effect of political skill on the relationship between participating in community activities and promotability
Figure 2. The moderating effect of political skill on the relationship between maintaining external contacts and promotability
DISCUSSION
Although networking has drawn much attention from career researchers, there remains the important question regarding what type of networking behaviors will influence supervisory evaluations for career advancement. The present study extends prior research (e.g., Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004; Treadway et al., Reference Treadway, Breland, Adams, Duke and Williams2010; Mohd Radsi, Garavan, & Ismail, Reference Mohd Radsi, Garavan and Ismail2013) by distinguishing career- and community-based networking behaviors from one another and by identifying their specific effects on promotability. Results of the current study support the argument that employees who are involved in career-based networking behaviors and integrate considerable political skill into their community-based networking activities have a good chance of enhancing their supervisor’s impression of them as competent for higher positions in the future (Wolff & Moser, Reference Wolff and Moser2009).
The current study built upon calls to better understand the effects of networking on promotability evaluations by supervisors (Bozionelos, Reference Bozionelos2008). Although networking behaviors are an important predictor of career advancement, research focusing on real networking behaviors is relatively scant (Huang, Reference Huang2016). The current study contributes to the literature by linking the attribution theory and ELM to networking in order to clarify the relationships among networking behaviors, promotability, and political skill. The findings consolidate evidence pertaining to the incremental validity of networking behaviors’ effects on promotability (with task performance and demographic variables controlled for). Moreover, the findings help further uncover the distinctive nature of networking behaviors insofar as career- and community-based networking behaviors differ from each other regarding their association with promotability. According to attribution theory (Fiske & Taylor, Reference Fiske and Taylor1991), subordinates’ networking behaviors can shape supervisors’ perception of subordinates and supervisors’ career-progression predictions for subordinates. Career networking has ‘pure’ competence characteristics, which lead supervisors to use high-promotion-potential explanations. In contrast, community networking – when exhibited by politically skillful employees – has ‘mixed’ warmth and competence characteristics, which lead supervisors to make similar inferences about employees’ traits and motives because supervisors tend to attribute salient behavior to disposition rather than to situation (Lassiter, Geers, Munhall, Ploutz-Snyder, & Breitenbecher, Reference Lassiter, Geers, Munhall, Ploutz-Snyder and Breitenbecher2002). The results show the value of networking based on the ELM (Petty & Cacioppo, Reference Petty and Cacioppo1986): supervisors used career and community networking as central and peripheral informational cues to make upward-advancement evaluations.
Consistent with findings presented by Forret and Dougherty (Reference Forret and Dougherty2004), the current study’s findings show that career-based networking behavior, particularly in professional activities outside organizations, was positively related to promotability. This finding reinforces an important idea: supervisors may infer, from employees’ engagement in professional activities, that the employees have opportunities for competency development in addition to personal growth (Mohd Radsi, Garavan, & Ismail, Reference Mohd Radsi, Garavan and Ismail2013). Moreover, the finding suggests that, in order to develop their career prospects, employees should signal both their ambition and their capabilities by engaging in professional activities.
Contrary to the findings of previous studies (Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004; Wolff & Moser, Reference Wolff and Moser2010; Mohd Radsi, Garavan, & Ismail, Reference Mohd Radsi, Garavan and Ismail2013), the current study’s findings show that maintaining external contacts was positively related to promotability and that socializing was negatively related to promotability. In general, employees who frequently maintain external contacts may rapidly access new extra-organizational information beneficial to the employees’ prospects for career advancement (Wolff & Moser, Reference Wolff and Moser2010). Supervisors place a high value on maintaining relationships and may view employees who frequently contact outsiders as ambitious and proactive in maintaining instrumental relationships. In contrast, supervisors may consider socialization a waste of employee time and effort. An employee taking part in these informal socializing activities is essentially networking with peers who tend to have little influence on either the performance evaluations or the upward-promotion decisions affecting the employee (Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004), and frequent peer interaction might give supervisors the impression that the employee is politicking or has weak career commitment, which could lead to negative promotability evaluations.
According to a high-performance culture like Taiwan’s (Dissanayake et al., Reference Dissanayake, Niroshane, Nisansala, Rangani, Samarathunga, Wickramaarachchi, Nirasha, Wickramasinghe and Wickramasinghe2015; Hofstede, n.d.), employees should value tradition, work hard, and de-emphasize leisure in order to improve performance persistently. Socializing at work is seen as ineffective and inefficient, and supervisors generally do not encourage employees who engage in such behavior. Moreover, because familial collectivism has deep roots in Taiwan, the development and maintenance of relationships there are associated with emotional and instrumental trust embedded in social networks (Chua, Morris, & Ingram, Reference Chua, Morris and Ingram2009). People’s involvement in socializing can help configure friendships, but typically lacks instrumental benefits. Similarly, involvement in community networking tends to create links that are more emotional than instrumental.
However, the findings of this study do not show that increases in internal visibility are effective at enhancing promotability evaluations, even when employees are politically skillful. One plausible explanation for these particular findings concerns the variable of job attribute. All respondents of this study worked in banks and were involved in selling financial services to potential customers. The respondents’ job focus was on individual sales, which gave the respondents few opportunities to accept highly visible or challenging work assignments or to participate in task forces or committees. Thus, most of these respondents seldom had an opportunity to prove their broader capabilities (McCauley, Ruderman, Ohlott, & Morrow, Reference McCauley, Ruderman, Ohlott and Morrow1994). Another plausible explanation is that the frequency or the extent of internal visibility presented in this study was lower than in past studies, which might lead to an underestimation of internal visibility’s effects. Table 1 shows that the frequency of internal visibility (M=1.63) was, in fact, less pronounced here than in past research (Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004; M=3.19), suggesting that respondents in the current study demonstrated a limited range of internal visibility. In this type of case, such a restriction of range (Schmidt, Hunter, & Urry, Reference Schmidt, Hunter and Urry1976) relative to internal visibility may make it difficult for promotability-evaluating supervisors to differentiate among employees on the basis of networking behavior.
The current study represents an initial attempt to empirically evaluate and demonstrate the moderating effects of political skill on the relationship between community-based networking behaviors and promotability. This study is a response to the arguments of Ferris et al. (Reference Ferris, Treadway, Kolodinsky, Hochwarter, Kacmar, Douglas and Frink2005) that politically skilled individuals who engage in networking activities are more likely to experience success than politically unskilled ones. However, a finding in the current study indicates that political skill is not always effective in every situation. In this regard, the current research indicates that employees’ maintenance with external contacts is, for the most part, negatively related to promotability when the employees’ political skill is high. One explanation for this finding is that employees’ maintenance of contacts takes place more frequently than the employees’ participation in community activities, resulting in a situation where political manipulation expands in the maintenance of contacts, inducing perceptions of insincerity. Although political skill is regarded as an important social competency (Ferris et al., Reference Ferris, Hochwarter, Douglas, Blass, Kolodinsky and Treadway2002), the current study’s results highlight that it is not always effective and, in fact, can sometimes harm personal career development. Thus, politically skilled individuals should be careful to adapt their networking behaviors to diverse situations in a manner that conveys genuineness and sincerity toward the target (Treadway et al., Reference Treadway, Breland, Adams, Duke and Williams2010). Engaging in more community activities and maintaining fewer external contacts are two strategies that could help politically skilled employees impress a given supervisor of their worthiness for promotion.
The findings here also provide professionals with useful suggestions and guidance on networking and career self-management. Before enacting any networking behaviors geared toward gaining a promotion, professionals should self-assess personal political skill in advance. The effectiveness of networking depends on the mastery of political skill. When seeking to prove themselves qualified for higher positions, professionals low in political skill should exhibit more career-based networking behaviors that signal confidence and social competency. In contrast, politically skilled professionals should be involved in community-based networking behavior to persuade a given supervisor that they are better than their colleagues for future advancement in the organization.
Limitations of the current study and directions for future research
The current study has several limitations that point to areas of inquiry for future research. First, as with any correlational study, inferences of causality cannot be made with certainty in this investigation. For example, it could be that promotability affects networking behaviors. Although alternative orderings of paths cannot be ruled out, prior theory and empirical findings suggest that the causal ordering of the variables in this study is justified (Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004; Thompson, Reference Thompson2005). Longitudinal research on networking-behavior processes is critical to the further substantiation of this study’s conclusions. Moreover, research conducted in a natural setting, preferably observational research, seems important for this field as well.
Second, differences among supervisors’ approaches to conducting evaluations might have confounded the relationships between employees’ networking behaviors and supervisors’ promotability evaluations.Footnote 1 Supervisors’ political skill may affect relationships. The more politically skillful the supervisors are, the better they can detect the authenticity and hidden motives of employees’ networking behaviors. Future research should consider supervisors’ political skill as a control variable or moderator.
Finally, the sample consists only of financial-service sales agents in one bank. When the respondents in the current study is compared with the respondents with various jobs in previous research (e.g., Forret & Dougherty, Reference Forret and Dougherty2004; Wolff & Moser, Reference Wolff and Moser2010), the results of this current study may resist any direct generalization to less interactive jobs like R&D engineering positions or public-sector management positions (Mohd Radsi, Garavan, & Ismail, Reference Mohd Radsi, Garavan and Ismail2013). Accordingly, the current study suggests that future research should investigate and compare the differences among diverse job types. On a related note, my decision to conduct the current study within a single organization affected the study’s external validity (i.e., generalizability). However, the single-organization context created an opportunity to hold constant a host of contextual factors, such as compensation policies, HRM policies, and organizational culture, and also enhanced the study’s internal validity (i.e., reduced plausible alternative explanations).
To expand the current findings, future research should integrate all the types of networking behaviors and investigate interactive models that explain how employees’ networking behaviors ultimately lead to promotability evaluations. For example, supervisors may regard those employees who engage in more professional activities and less socialization as more concentrated on self-development – a perception that, in turn, may strengthen supervisors’ favorable evaluation of the employees in the context of promotion decisions.
Future research would also do well to explore the mechanisms that mediate supervisors’ perceptions of and inferences about subordinates regarding the relationship between networking and promotion. Weer and Greenhaus (Reference Weer and Greenhaus2017) showed that supervisors perceived employees displaying significant extra-role behaviors as highly committed to the organization and, in turn, evaluated them as having significant structural growth opportunities. For instance, the more a professional is involved in career networking, the more likely the supervisor will be to perceive the professional as a skillful self-monitor, as an extravert, or simply as a likable person; and then, there is a better chance that the supervisor will evaluate the professional as promotable. Another mediating mechanism of network structures might also explain why networking behaviors lead to career outcomes. Gremmen, Akkerman, and Benschop (Reference Gremmen, Akkerman and Benschop2013) found that networking behaviors have explanatory power in network structures. It is possible that the more diverse or frequent the networking behaviors of an employee are, the more effective the network ties will be; thus, because of social capital embedded in network structures, the employee will be more likely to receive upward promotion.
In sum, my goal in this study has been to forge a better understanding of the relationships among networking behaviors, promotability, and political skills. Results of this study suggest that career-based networking behaviors affect promotability beyond task performance. In addition, the results suggest that employees with elevated political skills might do well to engage in community-based networking behaviors, which can positively influence supervisors’ evaluation of promotability in this context.
Acknowledgement
This study was supported by Ministry of Science and Technology (NSC 96-2416-H-424-006).
