Conclusion

In conclusion, the literature which is reviewed indicates that impression management plays an
imperative role in an organization and different issues of organization. Different impression
management tactics have been employed by both men and women and it is observed that
masculine- typed tactics lead better performance evaluation and feminine-typed tactics be
inclined not to lead those benefits. Female adopting masculine- typed tactics are often punished
rather than rewarding for contradicting their gender role. Impression management plays a vital
role in feedback seeking process as both informational and impression management motive leads
to the feedback, but these two motives can also lead to different directions. Along with that the
firms’ financial performance is directly related to its commitment with natural environment.
Within the area of organization we used a delineated number of IM tactics and those job
applicants who used IM tactics performed better in their interview and if the person is poorly
qualified and he used IM tactics than they did better in the interview. It is noticeable that self
monitoring behavior, dressing to impress are particularly unique contributions in managing
positive impression in an organization. We conceived that intentionally looking bad at work as a
form of impression management whereby an employee purposefully attempts to convey an
unfavorable impression. Impression management has a positive relationship with citizenship behavior
and team satisfaction. Within the organizational environment managers can identify the
employees who actively perceive organizational politics and then observe their management in
the organization. While in the opposite case, employees who are more willing about telling their
perceptions about the organization are more sincere towards the organization. So, it is observed
that the results on interaction of impression management and organizational politics on job
performance considering expectancy theory have displayed a significant amount of variance in
ratings of employee performance.