Adaptation of the Perception of Organizational Policy Scale (POPS) M. Kacmar and D. Carlson: Analysis of Internal Structure



Objective. The first stage in adapting the Organizational Policy Perception Scale (POPS) by M. Kacmar and D. Carlson in a Russian-speaking sample: analysis of the internal structure and reliability of the questionnaire.
Background. The political nature of the organization is obvious. There are practically no tools that allow you to assess how “politicized” organization is. We need to measure to what extent people are targets of intrigues and informal influence or of unfair distribution of resources in the organization. Can they express their opinion without negative consequences or get a transparent and fair career path? All these questions is of great importance for both the individual and the organization. The best-known tool for studying the subjective assessment of organizational politics is the Organizational Policy Perception Scale (POPS) by M. Kacmar and D. Carlson. This scale was not adapted to the Russian-speaking sample.
Study design. The study was carried out in the form of a survey of two samples of people using the “Perceptions of Organizational Politics” (POPS) scale by M. Kacmar and D. Carlson, which was translated into Russian.
Participants. The study was conducted on two samples: 407 (52% women) and 575 (100% women) subjects.
Measurements. To process and analyze the data, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyzes, Cronbach's alpha coefficient and correlation analysis, and a criterion for comparing mean values were used in the Rstudio statistic environment.
Results. In the first sample, it was shown that the scale has good indicators of reliability and model data fit. And, as a result of the exploratory analysis, it was suggested that the exclusion of reverse questions from the scale would improve the internal structure of the questionnaire, the model data fit. It was shown in the analysis of second independent sample data. Scale reliability scores were found to be high, 0,91-0,93 (Cronbach's alpha).
Conclusions. As a result of confirmatory factor analysis, we were able to confirm the original three-factor model of the questionnaire. Adaptation of the POPS methodology on a Russian-speaking sample will allow us to study the organizational culture and perception of the organization by the employee in Russian companies.

General Information

Keywords: perception of politics; organizational climate and culture; manipulation; networking; conciliation; informal influence; self-censorship; justice; career; pay and promotion; nepotism

Journal rubric: Methodological Tools

Article type: scientific article


Funding. The reported study was funded by Russian Science Foundation, project number 22-18-00452, at the St-Petersburg State University.

Acknowledgements. The authors would like to thank Anastasia Postanina for assistance in the preparation of the research review, and Tatiana Kazantseva, Ekaterina Aleksandrova and Ulyana Udavikhina for their participation in the translation of the methodology and organization of data collection.

Received: 10.11.2023


For citation: Mararitsa L.V., Kinunen T.A., Gurieva S.D., Yanicheva T.G., Yumkina E.A. Adaptation of the Perception of Organizational Policy Scale (POPS) M. Kacmar and D. Carlson: Analysis of Internal Structure. Sotsial'naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo = Social Psychology and Society, 2024. Vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 190–208. DOI: 10.17759/sps.2024150111. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)


  1. Zubarev G.A. Organizatsionnaya politika i manipulyatsii kak istochniki vlasti v organizatsii [Institutional Policies and Manipulation as a Source of an Organisation Power] // Sovremennaya ekonomika: problemy i resheniya = Modern Economics: Problems and Solutions, 2016. Vol. 2, no. 74, pp. 41–46. DOI:10.17308/meps.2016.2/1394 (In Russ)
  2. Mararitsa L.V., Kinunen T.A., Gurieva S.D., Yakukhnova A.S., Yanicheva T.G., Yumkina E.A. Adaptatsiya metodiki vospriyatiya organizatsionnoi politiki (POPS) M. Kachmar i D. Karlson: baza dannykh i statistika [Adaptation of the Perception of Organizational Policy Scale (POPS) M. Kacmar and D. Carlson: dataset and statistics][Nabor dannykh] [Dataset] // RusPsyData: Repozitorii psikhologicheskikh issledovanii i instrumentov [Psychological Research Data & Tools Repository]. Moscow, 2024. DOI:10.48612/MSUPE/z4dz-71dv-nmnv
  3. Allen R.W., Madison D.L., Porter L.W., Renwick P.A., Mayes B.T. Organizational politics: tactics and characteristics of its actors // California Management Review. 1979. Vol. 22. P. 77–83. DOI:10.2307/41164852
  4. Cropanzano R.S., Kacmar K.M., Bozeman D.P. Organizational Politics, Justice, and Support: Their Differences and Similarities // Organizational Politics, Justice, and Support: Managing Social Climate at Work. Westport, Conn: Quorum Books, 1995. P. 2–18.
  5. Dipboye R.L., Foster J.B. Multi-level theorizing about perceptions of organizational politics // Research in Multi-Level Issues. 2002. Vol. 1. P. 255–270. DOI:1016/S1475-9144(02)01035-4
  6. Drory A., Romm T. Politics in Organization and Its Perception within the Organization // Organization Studies. 1988. Vol. 9. P. 165–179. DOI:10.1177/017084068800900202
  7. Drory A. Perceived Political Climate and Job Attitudes // Organization Studies. 1993. Vol. 14. P. 59–71. DOI:10.1177/017084069301400105
  8. Dueber D.M. et al. To reverse item orientation or not to reverse item orientation, that is the question // Assessment. 2022. Vol. 29. № 7. P. 1422–1440. DOI:10.1177/10731911211017635
  9. Ferris G.R., Harris J.N., Russell Z.A., Maher L.P. Politics in organizations // The SAGE Handbook of Industrial, Work & Organizational psychology: Organizational psychology. Sage Reference, 2018. P. 469–486.
  10. Ferris G.R., Kacmar K.M. Perception of Organizational Politics // Journal of Management. 1992. Vol. 18. P. 93–116. DOI:10.1177/0013164491511019
  11. Ferris G.R., Ellen B.P., McAllister C.P., Maher L.P. Reorganizing organizational politics research: A review of the literature and identification of future research directions // Annual review of organizational psychology and organizational behavior. 2019. Vol. 6. P. 299–323. DOI:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015221
  12. Ferris G.R., Russ G.S., Fandt P.M. Politics in Organizations // Impression Management in the Organization. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1989. P. 143–170. DOI:10.4135/9781473914957.n21
  13. Hochwarter W.A., Rosen C.C., Jordan S.L., Ferris G.R., Ejaz A., Maher L.P. Perceptions of Organizational Politics Research: Past, Present, and Future // Journal of Management. 2020. Vol. 46. № 6. P. 879–907. DOI:1177/0149206319898506
  14. Hochwarter W., Kacmar K., Treadway D., Watson T. It’s all relative: The distinction and prediction of politics perceptions across levels // Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2003. Vol. 33. P. 1995–2016. DOI:1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01872.x
  15. Kacmar K.M., Carlson D.S. Further Validation of the Perceptions of Politics Scale (POPS): A Multiple Sample Investigation // Journal of Management. 1997. Vol. 23. P. 627–658. DOI:10.1177/014920639702300502
  16. Kacmar K.M., Ferris G.R. Perceptions of organizational politics scale (POPS): Development and construct validation // Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1991. Vol. 51. P. 193–205. DOI:10.1177/0013164491511019
  17. Kaya N., Aydin S., Ayhan O. The Effects of Organizational Politics on Perceived Organizational Justice and Intention to Leave // American Journal of Industrial and Business Management. 2016. Vol. 6. P. 249–258. DOI:10.4236/ajibm.2016.63022
  18. Kipnis D., Schmidt S.M., Wilkinson I. Intraorganizational influence tactics: Explorations in getting one's way // Journal of Applied Psychology. 1980. Vol. 65. № 4. P. 440–452. DOI:1037/0021-9010.65.4.440
  19. Landells E.M., Albrecht S.L. Perceived organizational politics, engagement, and stress: The mediating influence of meaningful work // Frontiers in Psychology. 2019. Vol. 10. Article 1612. DOI:3389/fpsyg.2019.01612
  20. Mintzberg H. The Organization as Political Arena // The Journal of Management Studies. 1985. Vol. 22. P. 133–154. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1985.tb00069.x
  21. Nye L.G., Witt L.A. Dimensionality and construct validity of the perceptions of politics scales (POPS) // Education and Psychological Measurement. 1993. Vol. 53. P. 821–829. DOI:1177/0013164493053003026
  22. O’Connor W.E., Morrison T.G. A comparison of situational and dispositional predictors of perceptions of organizational politics // Journal of Psychology. 2001. Vol. 135. № 3. P. 301–312. DOI:10.1080/00223980109603700
  23. Robbins S.P. The administrative process: integrating theory and practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1976. 494 p.
  24. Vigil-Colet A., Navarro-González D., Morales-Vives F. To reverse or to not reverse Likert-type items: That is the question // Psicothema. 2020. Vol. 32. № 1. P. 108–114. DOI:10.7334/psicothema2019.286
  25. Vigoda E. Organizational Politics, Job Attitudes, and Work Outcomes: Exploration and Implications for the Public Sector // Journal of Vocational Behaviour. 2000. Vol. 57. P. 326–347. DOI:10.1006/jvbe.1999.1742
  26. Vigoda-Gadot E., Talmud I. Organizational Politics and Job Outcomes: The Moderating Effects of Trust and Social Support // Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2010. Vol. 40. P. 2829–2861. DOI:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00683.x
  27. Woods C.M. Careless Responding to Reverse-Worded Items: Implications for Confirmatory Factor Analysis // Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment. 2006. Vol. 28. P. 186–191. DOI:1007/s10862-005-9004-7
  28. Zalzenik A. Power and politics in organizational life // Harvard business review. 1970. Vol. 48. P. 47–60. URL: (Accessed 24.09.2023).

Information About the Authors

Larisa V. Mararitsa, PhD in Psychology, Assistant Professor, Department of Social Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Saint Petersburg State University, St.Petersburg, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:

Tamara A. Kinunen, PhD in Psychology, Senior Researcher, Department of Social Psychology, Saint Petersburg State University, St.Petersburg, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:

Svetlana D. Gurieva, Doctor of Psychology, Professor, Head of Social Psychology Department, Saint Petersburg State University, St.Petersburg, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:

Tatiana G. Yanicheva, PhD in Psychology, Associate Professor at the Department of Social Psychology, Saint Petersburg State University, St.Petersburg, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:

Ekaterina A. Yumkina, PhD in Psychology, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Psychology, Saint Petersburg State University, St.Petersburg, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:



Total: 60
Previous month: 32
Current month: 28


Total: 32
Previous month: 12
Current month: 20