<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<record
    xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
    xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd"
    xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">

  <leader>01531nam a2200205Ia 4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="008">181130s2018    xx            000 0 und d</controlfield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Lu, Xiaojun</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Political skill, organizational justice, and career success in minland China</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="260" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">2018</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">p.371-388.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="504" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="d">Jun</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Organizational justice is a topic popularized for Western bureaucracies but there is less known about its influence in Eastern cultures. This research tests how organizational justice moderates the relationship between political skill and career success in the Chinese public sector. Analysis reveals that four dimensions of political skill (networking ability, apparent sincerity, social astuteness, and interpersonal influence) correlate positively with career success (measured as perceived internal marketability and perceived career success). Although hypothesized that organizational justice would lessen the influence of political skill on career success as a result of the implementation of formal merit-based pay rules, findings show that political skill is only partially moderated. While lessening the value of social astuteness, a positive relationship between interpersonal influence and internal marketability remains. - Reproduced.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Administrative organization</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Civil service</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Public administration</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Public management</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Guy, Mary E.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">International Review of Administrative Sciences</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="906" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Civil service</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">506783</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">506783</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="0">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="1">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="4">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="7">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="a">IIPA</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">IIPA</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">2018-12-07</subfield>
    <subfield code="h">84(2), Jun, 2018: p.371-388.</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">AR118578</subfield>
    <subfield code="r">2018-12-07</subfield>
    <subfield code="w">2018-12-07</subfield>
    <subfield code="y">AR</subfield>
  </datafield>
</record>
