INTRODUCTION

The context in which regulatory agencies operate can be characterized as a political arena (Campos, Ávila & da Silva Jr., 2000), marked by conflicts of interest and power struggles between organizations that seek to influence the regulation processes (Hanegraaff, Ploeg & Berkhout, 2020). In this competitive environment, there is a need for interaction with different government actors, civil society representatives, and private actors for good performance in the work environment (Davidovitz & Cohen, 2021, Bustos, 2021). The governance of regulatory agencies requires participation and interaction between public and private organizations to identify problems, share information, and discuss and search for alternatives that allow guiding State intervention (Fraussen & Beyers, 2016; Rex, 2018; Benoît, 2021).

Although from an ideal perspective, the governance of regulatory agencies should allow access to all interested parties and avoid over- or under-representation of interests, one may observe that different organizations achieve different levels of access to regulatory bodies and their decision-makers (Fraussen & Beyers, 2016; Hanegraaff, Ploeg & Berkhout, 2020). Recent research sought to identify attributes of interest groups with better access to decision-makers and identified characteristics such as technical expertise, access to information and knowledge, representativeness, legitimacy, access to resources, and the possibility of supporting policy implementation (Irwin & Githinji, 2015; Fraussen & Beyers, 2016). The interaction between regulatory agencies and private agents occurs through the relations between employees of private organizations and public officers who work in the agencies (Albareda, 2020). Few studies assessed how the characteristics of private-sector representatives influence their interactions with government officers (Irwin & Githinji, 2015). Focusing specifically on individuals in advocacy situations before regulatory agencies, the role of Political Skill and Personal Reputation stands out.

Political Skill may be understood as the ability to effectively understand others in the work environment and use such knowledge to influence behavior toward achieving personal or organizational goals (Ferris et al., 2005). Empirical research often shows the benefits of Political Skills in the workplace (Treadway et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2014; Munyon et al., 2015), as well as in social interactions (Wang & Hall, 2019). Individuals with high political ability are more likely to achieve better working performance, job satisfaction, and career success. Individuals with high political capacity are more likely to achieve better performance and job satisfaction, as well as career success (Cullen, Gerbasi & Chrobot-Mason, 2018; Kwon, 2020; Chen, Jiang &Wu, 2021) because they are noticed as information and knowledge sources by their colleagues, benefiting themselves from such dependency (Ferris et al., 2005; Cullen et al., 2018). They are also more likely to recognize and take advantage of opportunities since they can perceive relevant information in the environment in which they operate (Ferris et al., 2007; Russell et al., 2016; Wihler et al., 2017).

Reputation, in turn, is the social representation of something or someone, formed from a set of information and beliefs built by a community (Bromley, 2001). It can be understood as the identity created from the perception of a group so that the individual has limited control of his reputation since it is built by third parties’ perception (Ferris et al., 2005). According to Cavazza, Guideti and Pagliaro (2014), constructing a positive reputation in the work environment is challenging, time-consuming, and complicated to maintain since a single deviation can compromise the entire effort. Nevertheless, reputation is a powerful social control tool (Cavazza, Pagliaro, & Guidetti, 2014) that considerably influences factors such as performance and career success (Zinko et al., 2017).

Given the above, this research aims to contribute to the literature on the interaction between private agents and public organizations. In this sense, this research aims to analyze the relationship between Political Skill, Personal Reputation, and Performance of private-sector agents in their interactions with regulatory agencies. To achieve the proposed objective, the article is divided as follows. The following section presents the theoretical framework that guides the paper's development. Next, the research method is presented. The results and analyzes are introduced in the fourth section. Finally, the conclusions are displayed.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Political Skill

Studies on Political Skill are relatively recent in the literature. Interest in the subject arises from the acknowledgment that organizations as political arenas in which interactions and power games are constant, and the exercise of influence and persuasion are essential facets (Pfeffer, 1981; Mintzberg, 1985). Based on these premises, the concept of Political Skill arises, where individuals inserted in relational contexts seek to persuade others while they are also influenced (Good & Schwepker Jr., 2022).

The Political Skill concept has been applied to several contexts and appears especially applicable to the analysis of relations between public and private organizations in the context of the governance structure of regulatory Agencies. Human resources are critical for the effectiveness of advocacy efforts (Fraussen & Beyers, 2016). At a micro level of analysis, the individual's characteristics and attributes, especially those related to the ability to negotiate, influence, and persuade, can be decisive in convincing decision-makers and, therefore, in the success of the defense of interests.

Political skill emphasizes the individual's cognitive and interpersonal characteristics, encompassing a comprehensive set of social skills that help the individual navigate different organizational environments, gather support, and resource access (Kimura, 2015; Kimura, Bande & Fernández-Ferrín, 2018; Good & Schwepker Jr., 2022). People with high political skills tend to present behaviors that indicate an increased self-awareness about the social environment in which they are inserted, being able to modify their behaviors to better adapt to the situation, demonstrating sincerity, inspiring confidence, and influencing the behavior of others (Ferris et al., 2005; Banister & Meriac, 2014).

Several concepts of political skill have been proposed over the years (Chen, Jiang & Wu, 2021). Kimura (2015) points out that recent studies usually use the definition proposed by Ferris et al. (2005): political skill is the ability to comprehend others effectively and to use such knowledge to influence people to act in favor of personal or organizational goals (Ferris et al., 2005). Political skill is positively associated with several social effectiveness constructs (Banister & Meriac, 2014; Wang & Hall, 2019), yet it differs from other constructs by focusing on particularly efficacious skills in the work environment (Kwon, 2020).

Empirical research usually characterizes Political Skill as a multidimensional construct composed of four distinct but related dimensions: (i) Social Astuteness; (ii) Interpersonal Influence; (iii) Networking Ability; and (iv) Apparent Sincerity (Ferris et al., 2005; Banister & Meriac, 2014; Kimura, Bande & Fernández-Ferrín, 2018; Kwon, 2020; Chen, Jiang & Wu, 2021).

Social Astuteness refers to the ability to interpret your own behavior accurately, as well as that of others in different social contexts. It concerns the capacity for discernment and self-awareness (Ferris et al., 2005; Ferris et al., 2007). For Wang and Hall (2019) Social Astuteness deals with the ability to understand social interactions and accurately interpret one's own and other's behavior. Similarly, Good and Schwepker Jr. (2022) argue that individuals with social astuteness are strong in observing others and interpreting their interactions, indicating that they have a higher social network understanding and self-awareness. Individuals with social astuteness can participate in different social occasions, observe others and perceive subtle social situations to adjust their behaviors according to their influence goals (Chen, Jiang & Wu, 2021).

Interpersonal Influence corresponds to the ability to adapt and properly calibrate behavior to each situation, to influence and obtain specific responses from other people (Ferris et al., 2005; Pfeffer, 2010). Wang and Hall (2019) understand personal influence as the ability to exert influence and obtain the desired responses from other people through effective communication, being pleasant, developing harmony, and making others feel at ease. For Cheng, Jiang and Wu (2021), interpersonal influence is defined as the ability to change the expectations of others in a subtly and convincingly. Kimura (2015) summarizes interpersonal influence as the ability to exert an influence on others subtly and convincingly and to adapt and appropriately calibrate one's behavior to each situation to obtain specific responses from other people.

The Networking Ability deals with the ability to identify and develop networks of relationships, build alliances and coalitions, as well as identify important contacts and build relationships (Ferris et al., 2005; Wang & Hall, 2019). The Networking Ability reflects people's ability to establish and manage various networks and contacts, exchanging knowledge, information, and resources relevant to achieving organizational and personal goals (Russell et al., 2016; Wihler et al., 2017; Good & Schwepker Jr., 2022). People with high political skills are more likely to understand others, identify those who have valuable resources or assets, and build friendly, trusting, and beneficial relationships (Kimura, 2015; Chen, Jiang & Wu, 2021).

Finally, Apparent Sincerity refers to the fact that individuals with high political ability are perceived as people with high levels of integrity, authenticity, and sincerity, even in a context of manipulation (Ferris et al., 2005; Ferris et al., 2007). The behavior of politically skilled people is often seen as honest and sincere, inspiring confidence (Chen, Jiang & Wu, 2021) and enabling the effective practice of influence, as their actions appear genuine and upright (Ferris et al., 2005; Ferris et al. al., 2007). Individuals with Apparent Sincerity inspire confidence because their actions are not seen as coercive or manipulative, enabling the exercise of influence over others (Good & Schwepker Jr., 2022).

Although it is typically applied in an intra-organizational context, recent studies have used Political Skill in an inter-organizational perspective, maintaining the view that the construct and its dimensions are positively associated with performance in the work environment (Treadway et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2014; Cullen et al., 2018; Chen, Jiang & Wu, 2021). Kimura, Bande and Fernández-Ferrín (2018) confirmed the influence of political skill on sellers´ performance due to their ability to relate to consumers and readily adapt to environmental changes. Good and Schwepker Jr. (2022) analyzed the relationship between political skill and salespeople's performance. For the authors, skilled sellers use their interpersonal skills to understand buyers and influence their decisions. Results indicate that political skill is positively associated with building customer relationships and sales performance (Good & Schwepker Jr., 2022).

Personal Reputation

Reputation has been the object of study in public organizations with a focus on its effects on legitimacy, autonomy, and organizational power (Bustos, 2021). Specifically for regulatory agencies, reputation influences the trust of those regulated, facilitating cooperation, and knowledge and information exchange, so that reputation is understood as an asset for these public organizations in their relationship with society (Capelos et al., 2016; Bustos, 2021; Davidovitz & Cohen, 2021; Peci, 2021). This argument also seems valid from an inverse perspective since relationships often involve reciprocity (Yang, 2005). The reputation of individuals representing private organizations is an asset in their relationship with public organizations, for it facilitates access, knowledge and information exchange, and cooperative relationships (Nastase & Muumans, 2020).

Like Political Skill, Personal Reputation also exerts a relevant influence on the work environment performance (Laird et al., 2013; Zinko et al. 2012). Cavazza, Guidetti and Pagliaro (2014) indicate that individuals with a favorable reputation are more likely to access resources through collaboration and social interaction. Graham, Harvey and Puri (2015) identify the manager's reputation as a determining factor for resource access. Zinko et al. (2017) present evidence that reputation can make a difference in the exchange of information between individuals who do not know each other personally. A positive reputation within a group increases the chances of achieving better performance and creating favorable impressions that lead to better performance evaluations (Blickle et al., 2011). Yang, Volet and Mansfield (2018) indicate the supervisor's reputation is a determining factor for students to choose the Doctoral program. Zinko et al. (2012) showcased that a good reputation can also provide more power to the individual, greater autonomy, and career progress. Individuals with a favorable reputation are more likely to be effective in influencing others since they are seen as more trustworthy (Hochwarter et al., 2007; Yang, Volet & Mansfield, 2018).

In addition to influencing performance in the social context, a reputation is a tool for social control (Cavazza, Guidetti & Pagliaro, 2014). Individuals are concerned with the image formed and projected from themselves for a group to which they belong, so they moderate their attitudes and shape their behavior to adapt to each environment for fear of social sanctions (Duran, 2016). When analyzing the voluntary registration process of lobbying and advocacy organizations in the European Union, Nastase and Muumans (2020) identified reputational concerns and benefits as the main driver of the behavior.

Personal reputation refers to a shared collective perception of an individual's attributes (Laird et al., 2013). Reputation is composed of favorable and unfavorable perceptions of different audiences that emerge from past actions and results (Capelos et al., 2016; Peci, 2021), so that reputation is a multifaceted concept, indicating that the same person or organization can have more than one reputation depending on the attributes considered and the target audience (Bromley, 2001; Bustos, 2021). Individuals may have different reputations in different groups. The reputation that an individual carries in the firm he works for is different from the one he has in the family environment or among friends. Even within the same organization, personal reputation may vary in the departments and sectors of the firm (Ferris et al., 2007; Laird et al., 2013).

Mui, Halberstadt and Mohtashemi (2003) proposed a tree of reputation typologies in which the concept is separated into the group and the individual reputation. Usually, reputation study focuses on the organization, but Bustos (2021), in a literature review on the subject in the field of public administration, indicates the need for studies focusing on individual reputation. For Mui, Halberstadt and Mohtashemi (2003) personal reputation can be divided into direct and indirect. Direct reputation refers to perceptions derived from the evaluator's experience and direct observation. Indirect reputation refers to a reputation based on second-hand evidence, such as that acquired through "word of mouth" (Mui, Halberstadt and Mohtashemi, 2003).

Although organizational and personal reputations interact, they may be studied separately (Capelos et al., 2016). Focusing specifically on the individual, Zinko, Gentry and Laird (2016) built a multidimensional model that assesses reputation from three different perspectives that are not necessarily correlated: (i) Task Reputation; (ii) Social Reputation; and (iii) Integrity Reputation. Diverse reputation can affect performance dissimilarly (Capelos et al., 2016). Zinko, Gentry and Laird (2016) argue for the need for studies considering the distinct personal reputation dimensions.

The Task Reputation dimension concerns the personal reputation based on the results obtained from performing assignments (Zinko, Gentry & Laird, 2016). It is based on the perception of competence, knowledge, and effective delivery of results (Capelos et al., 2016). Irwin and Githinji (2015) emphasize the role of competence and technical expertise in the access of interest groups to those responsible for public policies.

Social Reputation is interlinked with conviviality and social interactions with other actors (Ferris et al., 2005). The work environment involves interdependence, and people depend on each other to achieve their personal and organizational goals. The ability to interact plays a fundamental role in how individuals are seen by colleagues and stakeholders. In this context of continuous interplay, social reputation is formed based on interactions (or lack thereof) with other people (Zinko, Gentry & Laird 2016).

The personal reputation built based on integrity (Integrity Reputation) refers to how integrous (or not) the individual is perceived. It reflects an ability to demonstrate empathy and communicate honestly (Capelos et al., 2016). Integrity Reputation is an essential component of personal reputation and is a relevant attribute in different social contexts, whether at work, in the family, or the religious community (Zinko et al., 2012). Integrity is a necessary component of reputation, for it allows the public to go beyond the perception of other behaviors and develop expectations about the individual's actions in any situation (Zinko, Gentry & Laird 2016).

Relationship between Individual Reputation and Political Skill

As previously argued, Political Skill and Personal Reputation are both positively associated with individual performance in the work environment and provide several benefits. Beyond these associations, research indicates that Political Skill is positively associated with Personal Reputation (Liu et al., 2007; Laird, Zboja & Ferris, 2012; Zinko & Rubin, 2015). Developing a personal reputation involves taking deliberate actions to generate and maintain positive impressions of the created identity (Laird, Zboja & Ferris, 2012). Politically skilled individuals have a high ability to develop relationships, are perceived as sincere and authentic, even in manipulation environments, and have the ability to accurately interpret other people's behavior and adapt their attitudes to influence (Banister & Meriac, 2014; Good & Schwepker Jr., 2022). Consequently, these individuals inspire greater confidence and transmit signals that lead to a favorable image to others, resulting in higher personal reputation assessments (Ferris et al., 2005; Laird et al., 2013).

Individuals with a high level of political ability combine a keen understanding of social situations with the ability to adjust their behavior to meet changing needs, aspects that inspire confidence and allow influence and control over others (Liu et al., 2007). In addition to direct observation influencing reputation, there is another contributing factor. Political Skill allows individuals to communicate their success sincerely and effectively, thus improving their image and reputation (Laird et al., 2013; Russel et al., 2016). This implies that political ability shapes the way other people perceive and evaluate an individual's reputation (Munyon et al., 2015).

Besides, it is possible to observe personal reputation playing a relevant role in the relationship between Political Skill and Performance. Laird et al. (2013) concluded that political skill provides employees with the ability to highlight their performance favorably, resulting in the formation of positive perceptions of personal reputation. Job performance was positively associated with the personal reputation of politically skilled employees but not with individuals with low political ability levels (Laird et al., 2013). These findings indicate a relevant role of personal reputation in the relationship between political ability and performance. Other studies evidence that reputation plays a mediating role between political skill and performance. Liu et al. (2007) found that the relationship between political ability and job performance was fully mediated by personal reputation.

In these cited studies, Reputation and Political Skill were approached as single-dimension constructs. Advances in research with the constructs have demonstrated the multidimensionality of Political Skill (Ferris et al., 2005; Banister & Meriac, 2014; Kimura, Bande & Fernández-Ferrín, 2018; Chen, Jiang & Wu, 2021) and Personal Reputation (Mui, Halberstadt & Mohtashemi, 2003; Capelos et al., 2016; Zinko, Gentry & Laird 2016). Analysis focusing on the constructs' dimensions may evidence different relationships that better detail the interaction between Personal Reputation and Political Skill (Liu et al., 2007). The present research aims to fulfill this theoretical gap and contribute to the political skill and reputation literature. Figure 1 summarizes the relationships proposed in this theoretical framework.

METHOD

Sample and Data Collection

The present study was carried out with information collected through questionnaires applied to employees of Brazilian federal regulatory agencies that deal directly with representatives of regulated companies and interest groups. Four regulatory agencies in the infrastructure sector were surveyed: the National Land Transport Agency (ANTT), the National Civil Aviation Agency (ANAC), the National Waterway Transport Agency (ANTAQ), and the National Electric Energy Agency (ANEEL). The questionnaires were applied in person between June and July 2019 and sought to assess the respondent's perception of a private sector representative with whom he had a direct relationship in his professional activities. Third-party assessments were employed by Laird et al. (2013), Laird, Zboja and Ferris (2012), and Kwon (2020) in studies on reputation, political ability, and performance. The final sample had 82 responses. Table 1 summarizes the number of responses obtained from each Regulatory Agency.

Measures

Political Skill. Political Skill assessment was carried out from a multidimensional perspective, seeking to assess the four dimensions of the construct: Social Astuteness, Interpersonal Influence, Network Ability, and Apparent Sincerity. The Political Skill Inventory (PSI) scale (Ferris et al., 2005) was used since it has already been widely used and validated in previous research on the subject (Chen, Jiang & Wu, 2021).

Personal Reputation. As in the previous construct, Personal Reputation was also evaluated from a multidimensional perspective, based on the measurement of three dimensions: Social Reputation; Task Reputation; and Integrity Reputation. The scale created by Zinko, Gentry and Laird (2016) was used, which encompasses the different dimensions of reputation.

Performance. This research deals with the environment of interaction between civil servants and representatives of regulated companies/ interest groups so that performance was evaluated from a contextual perspective. Contextual performance is associated with interactions with other individuals and behaviors that demonstrate self-discipline, persistence, and willingness to strive at work. It involves behavioral patterns that support the psychological and social context in which task activities are carried out (Scotter, Motowidlo & Cross, 2000). The scale created by Borman and Motowidlo (1993) was used for contextual performance assessment. Items were rated on a scale of 1 (not at all likely) to 7 (extremely likely).

The questions of the first two constructs were evaluated on a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree). This scale is commonly used in the field of applied social studies (Bryman, 2008) and has a number of points that allow a greater sensitivity of the scale, avoiding the central point, at the same time that it does not demand too much effort from the respondent (Lee and Lings, 2008). Before the application, the scales were adapted to the research context and were submitted for evaluation by four Ph.D. researchers with experience in research on the constructs for verifying the suitability and pertinence of the items for measuring the constructs. The questionnaire was submitted to a pre-test with respondents with a profile similar to the surveyed population to check for problems in understanding the questions and scales used. Chart 1 presents the constructs and items used for measurement.

Data Analysis

Data were analyzed using factor and multiple regression analysis. Factor analysis was used to summarize the questionnaire variables and verify the factors proposed by the theory. As established in the theoretical framework, Political Skill and Reputation are constructs composed of different dimensions, therefore the variables concerning each construct were analyzed together. Thus, a factorial analysis was performed for each construct and a specific one for Performance. All factor analyses were performed using the principal components technique. The extraction of factors was based on the Eigenvalue. Factors with eigenvalues with values greater than one were extracted. Varimax rotation was used to reinforce that the variables had high-factor loadings in a single factor and improve interpretation. The variables with lower loadings were suppressed. Furthermore, following Hair Jr. et al. (2010) guidelines, Barlett's sphericity test and the KMO indicator were used to verify the adequacy of the factorial analysis. Variables with commonalities below 0.5 were removed.

Once the factors were created, multiple regression analysis was used to verify the association between the created factors and the Performance. Several models were tested to identify the individual associations of the constructs and performance and to check for possible associations between the factors of Political Skill and Reputation. To test the potential mediation relationship of Reputation on the relationship between Political Skill and Performance, regression analyzes were carried out adopting Reputation factors as dependent variables and Political Skill factors as independent variables. The following section presents the results of the statistical analyses.

ANALYSIS AND RESULTS DISCUSSION

Factor Analysis

The results of the factorial analysis with the variables on Political Skill resulted in the creation of four factors that explain 74.94% of the original data variance. The KMO coefficient and Barlett's test showed acceptable results (0.851 and p < 0.00) according to Hair Jr. et al. (2010) standards. Variables with commonalities below 0.5 or with high factor loading in more than one factor were excluded. Finally, Cronbach's Alpha coefficient was applied to assess the suitability of the scales used to measure the factors (Table 2).

The created factors are aligned with the works of Ferris et al. (2005) and Ferris et al. (2007), so the first factor created brings together variables that deal with the agent's influence capacity, the factor being called Interpersonal Influence. The second factor brings variables related to the social astuteness of individuals, being called Social Astuteness. The third factor is composed of variables related to the individual's noticeable sincerity, so it was named Apparent Sincerity. Finally, the fourth and last factor aggregates variables on the ability to build contact networks which was called Networking Ability. The reliability of the factors was evaluated using Cronbach's Alpha. All resulting values are within the parameters considered adequate by Hair Jr. et al. (2010).

Factor analysis with the Reputation construct variables (Table 3) showed adequate KMO coefficient and Barlett's test (0.834 and p<0.00 respectively) and resulted in the creation of 3 factors that explain 81.64% of the original variance. Cronbach's Alpha coefficient showed acceptable values for all factors. The factors correspond to what was proposed by Zinko et al. (2016). so they were called Integrity Reputation, Task Reputation, and Social Reputation.

Finally, factor analysis was performed with the variables associated with the Performance construct. The results (Table 4) showed adequate KMO coefficient and Barlett's test (0.928 and p<0.00 respectively) and indicated the creation of a single factor, called Performance, which explains 73.88% of the original variance. Cronbach's Alpha also showed adequate results, indicating the reliability of the adopted scale.

For variable summarizing for subsequent analyses, the factors created were transformed into values from the average of the variables that compose them, according to Hair Jr. et al.´s (2010) guidelines.

Regression Analysis

After the creation of the factors, no missing values were detected, but four observations were eliminated because they were outliers. Multicollinearity diagnosis was performed using Pearson's correlation and did not show the presence of high correlations between the factors. The data were then used in multiple regression analysis, adopting Performance as the dependent variable and the factors related to Political Skill and Personal Reputation as independent variables. Table 5 presents the results.

Legend: * statistically significant at p <0.1; ** statistically significant at p < 0.05; *** statistically significant at p < 0.01; (-) variable not inserted in the model.

The first model tested included factors related to the Political Skill construct. The results encountered indicated that only the factors Interpersonal Influence and Apparent Sincerity are positively associated with performance in the work environment. These significant results corroborate the perspective that Political Skill is positively associated with Performance (Treadway et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2014; Munyon et al., 2015) also in the advocacy environment.

The individual with high Apparent Sincerity is able to act by demonstrating frankness and honesty in a genuine way, inspiring trust (Banister & Meriac, 2014; Chen, Jiang & Wu, 2021; Good & Schwepker Jr., 2022), even when there are ulterior motives in their attitudes (Ferris et al., 2012). By allowing individuals to be viewed favorably (Kimura, 2015), Apparent Sincerity enables the practice of influence (Ferris et al., 2005; Ferris et al., 2007). The results confirm these perspectives also for the environment of interaction with public officers so that the cognitive ability to appear sincere and arouse confidence are relevant for a good performance in the interaction with employees of regulatory agencies.

Interpersonal Influence, in turn, corresponds to the ability to adapt and calibrate behavior properly to each situation (Ferris et al., 2005; Pfeffer, 2010) to communicate effectively for persuasion and, thus, obtain specific responses (Kimura, 2015; Wang & Hall, 2019). Interpersonal Influence is responsible for making the selected behavior of politically qualified individuals more effective (Whiler et al., 2017). According to Wang and Hall (2019) and Kwon (2020), this dimension refers to communication competence. Those with the ability to influence have a particular way of communicating, which positively interferes with the quality of their relationships and performance perceptions (Liu et al., 2014). In an environment of competition for access to the regulatory agency (Hanegraaff, Ploeg & Berkhout, 2020; Davidovitz & Cohen, 2021), such as the one analyzed, this characteristic tends to stand out, which explains the positive association found.

Despite Social Astuteness being described as a relevant dimension of political skill (Kwon 2020) associated with job performance (Munyon et al. 2015), the results found did not corroborate this perspective. This dimension refers to the ability to accurately interpret one's own behavior as well as that of others in different social contexts (Chen, Jiang & Wu, 2021; Good & Schwepker Jr., 2022). The Networking Ability, in turn, deals with the ability to identify and build relationships with relevant contacts (Wihler et al., 2017; Chen, Jiang & Wu, 2021; Good & Schwepker Jr., 2022), resulting in benefits for the individual (Ferris et al., 2005; Wang & Hall, 2019).

Social Astuteness and Networking ability did not show a statistically significant association with Performance. In both cases, the lack of significance can be explained by public agencies' standardized service procedures that ensure equal treatment between private agents (Campos et al., 2000). This feature would reduce possible variations in social contexts and would mainly drive the behavior of public and private agents, diminishing the role of Social Astuteness and Networking Ability and their influence on performance.

The second model tested deals only with factors related to Personal Reputation. The findings indicate that only Social Reputation and Reputation for Integrity were positively associated with Performance. Concerns and benefits with reputation induce the behavior of individuals (Cavazza, Guidetti & Pagliaro, 2014; Nastase & Muumans, 2020). Considering that it is an environment of constant interaction, the ability to make people feel comfortable (which is related to Social Reputation) and to be perceived as honest and sincere (which is associated with Integrity Reputation) (Capelos et al., 2016; Zinko, Gentry & Laird 2016) are confirmed as individual assets directly related to their performance in the work environment.

Differently, the Task Reputation, which is the reputation based on the results obtained in the execution and performance of their activities (Capelos et al., 2016; Zinko, Gentry & Laird 2016), did not present significant results. Competence and technical expertise are usually described as resources employed by interest groups to access public agencies and decision-makers (Irwin & Githinji, 2015; Fraussen & Beyers, 2016). Such a perspective does not seem to be supported by the results. Eventually, in the analyzed context, a favorable reputation in terms of technical capacity and knowledge is a minimum necessary condition for access, not being reflected in a differential capable of differentiating the performance of private agents.

Models 3 and 4 jointly tested the Political Skill and Reputation factors. All variables were included in Model 3, whereas in Model 4 only the variables with statistical significance in any of the previous models were included. Results showed that only Social Reputation and Integrity Reputation maintained a significant and positive association with performance. Interpersonal Influence and Apparent Sincerity factors (related to Political Skill), initially statistically significant (according to Model 1), became non-significant with the inclusion of Personal Reputation factors. These results indicate that Reputation dimensions have a mediation effect on the relationship between Political Skill and Performance.

The relationship between Political Skill and Performance is mediated by individual reputation, suggesting that, in the analyzed context, political skill is an antecedent of reputation and that its influence on the individual's perception of performance occurs from the construction of a reputation in the work environment. This perspective corroborates the arguments of Laird, Zboja and Ferris (2012) and Laird et al. (2013) that the individual's political skill positively influences the perception of other people and the construction of reputation.

The mediating role of Personal Reputation on the relationship between Political Skill and Performance had already been previously described in the literature (Liu et al., 2007), however, the authors treated the constructs as unidimensional. Personal Reputation and Political Skill are multidimensional concepts (Ferris et al. 2005; Zinko, Gentry & Laird, 2016). Addressing the construct´s dimensions turn it possible to detail the mediating effect and observe that, at least in the context of the regulatory agencies, the mediation relationship occurs between specific dimensions of the constructs. This finding constitutes a theoretical contribution from the present work.

For testing the association between Political Skill and Personal Reputation factors (Banister & Meriac, 2014; Zinko & Rubin, 2015; Good & Schwepker Jr., 2022), two complementary models were tested assuming Personal Reputation factors with statistically significant results as dependent variables and Political Skill factors with significant results as independent variables. Table 6 presents the results.

Legend: * statistically significant at p <0.1; ** statistically significant at p < 0.05; *** statistically significant at p < 0.01.

Both models tested proved to be significant and with an expressive capacity to explain the dimensions of Reputation (R² coefficient of 0.47 and 0.43). The results show that the Apparent Sincerity factor is positively associated with Social Reputation and Integrity Reputation. The ability to appear sincere is fundamental to how the reputation for being a person of integrity and honesty is projected onto other individuals (Laird et al., 2013; Russel et al., 2016). Sincerity allows politically qualified individuals to merge any ulterior motives if they are present (Ferris et al., 2012). Thus, people with high levels of Apparent Sincerity are perceived by others as sincere and honest, even when they are not, generating a positive Integrity Reputation. Therefore, it is possible to state that those who manage to appear sincere in their actions are more likely to be seen by the public as beings of high integrity.

The Interpersonal Influence factor, in turn, is significantly and positively associated with the Social Reputation factor but does not show significant results with the Integrity factor. Interpersonal Influence is understood as the individual's ability to adapt their behavior and exert influence to change the expectations of others in a subtle and convincing way (Kimura, 2015; Cheng, Jiang & Wu, 2021). Social Reputation, in turn, concerns the reputation developed from living and interacting in the social environment (Ferris et al., 2005; Zinko, Gentry & Laird, 2016), so that the positive association between the constructs seems natural. Unlike the Reputation of Integrity, which requires the development of an image perceived as honest, frank and upright (Capelos et al., 2016; Zinko, Gentry & Laird 2016. While the first reputation derives from affability in interactions, the second imposes a higher expectation of behavior.

FINAL REMARKS

This paper aimed to analyze the relationship between Political Skill, Personal Reputation, and Performance of private agents in their interactions with regulatory agencies. The interaction between public and private-sector agents in the context of regulatory policies is still an incipient theme in Brazil. There are no national surveys focused on identifying the relevant attributes of private agents for their job performance interacting with regulatory agencies. To achieve the objective, information was collected on the perception of employees of regulatory agencies about a representative of the private sector with whom they relate directly in their professional activities.

The results corroborate the perspective that both Political Skill and Personal Reputation are positively associated with a positive perception of the private agent´s performance in their interactions with public organizations. In the present research, Political Skill and Personal Reputation were evaluated from a multidimensional perspective, which made it possible to specify which dimensions are effectively relevant to performance in the analyzed work environment, besides highlighting the interactions between the dimensions of the constructs.

When analyzing the dimensions of Political Skill, the results indicate that only the dimensions of Interpersonal Influence and Apparent Sincerity were significantly related to performance. Considering the dimensions of Personal Reputation, only the dimensions of Social Reputation and Integrity Reputation were significantly associated with the criterion variable. These results corroborate the perspective that different contexts may demand distinct aspects of Political Skill and Personal Reputation and that these constructs should be analyzed from a multidimensional perspective since their dimensions' influence may vary.

These results contribute to the field of studies by filling a gap identified in the literature and expanding discussions to the context of intra-organizational relationships between public and private actors in a regulatory environment. The results also indicated a mediating effect of the significant dimensions of Individual Reputation on the dimensions of Political Skill, indicating that the relationship between political ability and performance occurs indirectly from a positive reputation. The evidence of the interaction between the dimensions of the analyzed constructs and the identification of which dimensions are associated with performance in the studied environment are contributions of this work to the literature.

From a practical perspective, the results suggest characteristics to be enhanced by representatives of private organizations working with regulatory agencies. Despite being a politicized field of action, beyond political skill, it is necessary to develop a positive reputation. Specifically, the results suggest that the exclusive presence of political ability may not be a sufficient condition for maintaining performance in the analyzed context. There is a need for efforts to build and maintain a positive image by private organizations in their relationships with public organizations in regulatory environments.

This research has its limitations. The sample is small and was collected in a non-random way, which does not allow population inferences about the results found. Given these limitations, although the results corroborate the literature, further research on public-private relationships in the context of regulatory agencies is still needed to confirm or refute the findings presented here. Even though the results do not allow population inference, they establish research hypotheses to be tested in future studies.

The political skill, individual reputation, and performance of private agents were analyzed from the perspective of the public interlocutor. Other analysis perspectives of (regulated firms, for instance) or combinations of points of view could be used to analyze the same proposed relationships. Likewise, there are many ways to measure and analyze an individual's performance. Future research may assess the influences of political skill and personal reputation on different forms of individual performance in inter-organizational relationships. Furthermore, future longitudinal studies may evaluate how these behavior patterns may change or not over time and in which situations.

REFERÊNCIAS

Albareda, A. (2020) Prioritizing professionals? How the democratic and professionalized nature of interest groups shapes their degree of access to EU officials. European Political Science Review, 12(4), 485-501. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773920000247

Banister, C.M., Meriac, J.P. (2015) Political Skill and Work Attitudes: A Comparison of Multiple Social Effectiveness Constructs. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 149(8), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2014.979127

Benoît, C. (2021) Politicians, regulators, and regulatory governance: The neglected sides of the story. Regulation and Governance, 15(1), 8-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12388

Blickle, G., Schneider, P. B., Liu, Y., Ferris, G. R. (2011). A Predictive Investigation of Reputation as Mediator of the Political-Skill/Career-Success relationship. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(12), 3026–3048. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00862.x

Bromley, D. B. (2001). Relationships between personal and corporate reputation. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4), 316–334. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560110382048

Bryman, A. (2008). Social Research Methods. Oxford University Press, 3ª edição.

Bustos, E.O. Organizational Reputation in the Public Administration: a systematic literature review. Public Administration Review, 81(4), 731-751. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13363

Campos, A. M., Avila, J. P. C., da Silva Jr, D. S. (2000). Avaliação de agências reguladoras: uma agenda de desafios para a sociedade brasileira. Revista de Administração Pública, 34(5), 29–46.

Capelos, T., Provost, C., Parouti, M., Barnett, J., Chenoweth, J., Fife-Schaw, C., Kelay, T. (2016) Ingredients of institutional reputations and Citizen engagement with regulators. Regulation and Governance, 10(4), 350-367. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12097

Cavazza, N., Guidetti, M., Pagliaro, S. (2014). Who Cares for Reputation? Individual Differences and Concern for Reputation. Current Psychology, 34(1), 164–176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12144-014-9249-y

Cavazza, N., Pagliaro, S., Guidetti, M. (2014). Antecedents of Concern for Personal Reputation: The Role of Group Entitativity and fear of Social Exclusion. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 36(4), 365–376. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1080/01973533.2014.925453

Chen, H., Jiang, S., Wu, M. (2021) How important are political skills for career success? A systematic review and meta-analysis. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 33(19), 3942-3968. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2021.1949626

Cullen, K. L., Gerbasi, A., Chrobot-Mason, D. (2018). Thriving in Central Network Positions: The Role of Political Skill. Journal of Management, 44(2), 682–706. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0149206315571154

Davidovitz, M., Cohen, N. (2021) Alone in the campaign: distrust in regulators and the coping of front-line workers. Regulation and Governance, early view. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12396

Duran, A.S. (2016). Information and Reputation in the 17th Century: Establishing Trust in the Social Networks of Portuguese Businessmen. Studia Historica-Historia Moderna, 38(2), 425–466.

Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Brouer, R. L., Munyon, T. P. (2012). Political skill in the organizational sciences. In Politics in organizations: Theory and research considerations (pp. 487–529). New York; NY: Routledge/Taylor and Francis.

Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Kolodinsky, R. W., Hochwarter, W. A., Kacmar, C. J., Douglas, C., Frink, D. D. (2005). Development and validation of the political skill inventory. Journal of Management, 31(1), 126–152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206304271386

Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Perrewé, P. L., Brouer, R. L., Douglas, C., Lux, S. (2007). Political skill in organizations. Journal of Management, 33(3), 290–320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300813

Fraussen, B., Beyers, J. (2016) Who´s in and who´s out? Explaining access to policymakers in Belgium. Acta Politica, 51(2), 214-236. https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2015.9

Good, M.C., Schwepker, C.H. (2022) Business-to-business salespeople and political skill: Relationship building, deviance, and performance. Journal of Business Research, 139, 32-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.09.035

Graham, J. R., Harvey, C. R., Puri, M. (2015). Capital allocation and delegation of decision-making authority within firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 115(3), 449–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2014.10.011

Hair Jr., J. F., Black, W., Barry, J., Rolph E., Tatham, R. L. (2010). MultivatiateData Analysis (6. ed.). Porto Alegre: Bookman.

Hanegraaff, M., Ploeg, J., Berkhout, J. (2020) Standing in a Crowded Room: Exploring the Relation between Interest Group System Density and Access to Policymakers. Political Research Quarterly, 73(1). https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1065912919865938

Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., Zinko, R., Arnell, B., James, M. (2007). Reputation as a moderator of political behavior-work outcomes relationships: A two-study investigation with convergent results. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 567-576. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.567

Irwin, D., Githinji, M. (2016) Business associations in Kenya: the success factors. Journal of Public Affairs, 16(2), 162-180. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1573

Kimura, T. (2015). A Review of Political Skill: Current Research Trend and Directions for Future Research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(3), 312-332. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12041

Kimura, T., Bande, B., Fernández-Ferrín, P. (2019) The Roles of political skill and intrinsic motivation in performance prediction of adaptive selling. Industrial Marketing Management, 77, 198-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.09.005

Kwon, H. W. (2020). Performance Appraisal Politics in the Public Sector: The Effects of Political Skill and Social Similarity on Performance Rating. Public Personnel Management, 49(2). https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0091026019859906

Laird, M. D., Zboja, J. J., Martinez, A. D., Ferris, G. R. (2013). Performance and political skill in personal reputation assessments. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(6), 661-676. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPM-10-2011-0097

Laird, M.D., Zboja, J.J., Ferris, G.R. (2012) Partial mediation of the political skill - reputation relationship. Career Development International, 17(6), 557-582. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620431211280132

Lee, N., Lings, I. (2008). Doing Business Research – a guide to theory and practice. Sage Publications, 1ª Ed.

Liu, Y., Ferris, G. R., Xu, J., Weitz, B. A., Perrewé, P. L. (2014). When Ingratiation Backfires: The Role of Political Skill in the Ingratiation–Internship Performance Relationship. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13(4), 569-586.

Liu, Y., Ferris, G. R., Zinko, R., Perrewé, P. L., Weitz, B., Xu, J. (2007). Dispositional antecedents and outcomes of political skill in organizations: A four-study investigation with convergence. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 71(1), 146-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.04.003

Mintzberg, H. (1985). The organization as political arena. Journal of Management Studies, 22(2), 133-154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1985.tb00069.x

Mui, L., Halberstadt, A., Mohtashemi, M. (2003). Evaluating Reputation in Multi-agents Systems. In Trust, Reputation, and Security: Theories and Practice, pp. 123–137.

Munyon, T. P., Summers, J. K., Thompson, K. M., Ferris, G. R. (2015). Political Skill and Work Outcomes: A Theoretical Extension, Meta-Analytic Investigation, and Agenda for the Future. Personnel Psychology, 68(1), 143-184. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12066

Nastase, A., Muurmans, C. (2020) Regulating lobbying activities in European Union: a voluntary club perspective. Regulation and Governance, 14(2), 238-255. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12200

Peci, A. (2021) Agencies in the News? Public agencies´ media evaluations in a low-trust context. Governance, 34(4), 1075-1095. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12579

Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Marshfield, MA: Pitman.

Pfeffer, J. (2010). Power: Why some people have it and others don’t. New York; NY: HarperCollins.

Rex, J. (2018) Anatomy of agency capture: An organizational typology for diagnosing and remedying capture. Regulation and Governance, 14(2), 271-294. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12209

Russell, Z. A., Ferris, G. R., Thompson, K. W., Sikora, D. M. (2016). Overqualified human resources, career development experiences, and work outcomes: Leveraging an underutilized resource with political skill. Human Resource Management Review, 26(2), 125-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.09.008

Scotter, J. R., Motowidlo, S. J., Cross, T. C. (2000). Effects of Task Performance and Contextual Performance on Systemic Rewards. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(4), 526-535. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.85.4.526

Treadway, D. C., Adams, G., Hanes, T. J., Perrewe, P. L., Magnusen, M. J., Ferris, G. R. (2014). The Roles of Recruiter Political Skill and Performance Resource Leveraging in NCAA Football Recruitment Effectiveness. Journal of Management, 40(6), 1607-1626. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312441836

Wang, M.Z., Hall, J.A. (2019) Political Skill and outcomes in social life. Personality and Individual Differences, 149, 192-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.05.010

Wei, L. Q., Liu, J., Chen, Y. Y., Wu, L. Z. (2010). Political Skill, Supervisor-Subordinate Guanxi and Career Prospects in Chinese Firms. Journal of Management Studies, 47(3), 437-454. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00871.x

Wihler, A., Blickle, G., Ellen, B. P., Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R. (2017). Personal Initiative and Job Performance Evaluations: Role of Political Skill in Opportunity Recognition and Capitalization. Journal of Management, 43(5), 1388-1420. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0149206314552451

Yang, K. (2005) Public Administrator´s Trust in Citizens: a missing link in Citizen involvement efforts. Public Administration Review, 65(3), 273-285.

Yang, Y., Volet, S., Mansfield, C. (2018). Motivations and influences in Chinese international doctoral students’ decision for STEM study abroad. Educational Studies, 44(3), 264–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2017.1347498

Zinko R., Gentry, W. A., Laird, M. D. (2016). A development of the dimensions of personal reputation in organizations. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 24(4), 634–649. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-04-2015-0854

Zinko, R., Furner, C. P., Prati, L. M., Heyden, M. L. M., Tuchtan, C. (2017). A Study of Negative Reputation in the Workplace. Journal of Career Assessment, 25(4), 632–649. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1069072716653371

Zinko, R., Gentry, W. A., Hall, A., Grant, G. L. (2012). Reputational Change Among Managers. Journal of Managerial Issues, 24(1), 9–26.

Zinko, R., Rubin, M. (2015). Personal reputation and the organization. Journal of Management and Organization. Journal of Management & Organization, 21(2). https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2014.76