top of page

Relationship of the paties underlying Psychological Contract

Having a good relationship with employees is very important for any organization to motive employees, increase performances as well as develop its business. 

 

Rousseau, (2001) emphasizes the psychological contract is “an important framework for understanding the employment relationship”. Psychological contract can be known as the relationship between employee and employer that is considered to be “foundation of employee relation” (Robinson and Rousseau, 1994; Morrison and Robinson, 1997).

 

Psychological contract likes a heart of relationship of the parties which is about the mutual expectations and fulfillments of the parties (Michael, 2012). It is a subject to change the relationship of the parties (Anderson & Schalk, 1998). The kind of relationship between the parties can have the impact on the psychological contract (De Campos, 1994). Robinson & Morrison (1995); Homan (1961) explained psychological contract is about the terms of social exchange relationship between employee and employer which is combination of “each party engages in with the beliefs that other party will reciprocate these behavior in one way or another”.

According to Bal et al. (2008); Gakovic & Tetrick (2003), psychological contract is consistently linked with the organization commitment and career commitment which are seen as an “array obligations”. Obligations could be seen as a currency of exchange for psychological contract (Robinson and Rousseau, 1994).  The relationship of psychological contract is “component onto performance behavior” from the psychological contract promises (John & Julia, 2015).

 

Therefore in order to build a good relationship, the parties have to ensure to meet the expectations of other part. According to the research and literature review, in oder to manage and ensure the expectations of the parties for psychological contract, the employer and employee has to create the mutual trust or faith for each other by keeping the promises and filling the expectations.

 

The research shows that employees try their best to complete the given job, and take responsibility for what they have done, improve and develop themselves. The employees also be happy with their given job without request or complaint, and willing to accept their mistakes and try to fix these problems

 

Meanwhile, employers provide good working conditions, polices to support employees, recognize employee’s performances, communicate with employees to hear the feedback and solve the problems, provide fair opportunities for employees to improve and develop themselves and promotion.

 

Furthermore, the research shows that the expectations of the parties can change and develop over time which has the same perspective of Schalk & Roe (2007). Therefore, to ensure the expectations fulfillment, there are some meetings which allows employers and employees to communicate that makes them understand each other and add more terms or agreements into psychological contract. By doing this, the company and employees can make sure they meet the expectations of other.

 

The relationship is turning to good or bad that depends on how the employer and employee can fill the expectations for each other. If the relationship is poor it will effect on the performance, behavior and attitude of employees that decreases productivity and company’s image. If the relationship is good it will bring many benefits for company and employees such as the faith, good attitude and behavior at work, more responsibility, high productivity, low turnover rate and high job satisfaction.

 

Further reading:

 

 

 

 

References.

  • Anderson, N. & Schalk, R. (1998). The psychological contract in retrospect and prospect. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 19: 637-647.

  • Bal P M, De Lange A H, Jansen P G W and Van Der Velde M E (2008), “Psychological Contract Breach and Job Attitudes: A Meta-Analysis of Age as a Moderator”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, pp. 143-158.

  • DE CAMPOS, P.A. (1994). The relationship between coaches and athletes: The strength of the psychological contract in sports. Unpublished PhD dissertation. San Diego, CA: United States International University.

  • Gakovic, A. and Tetrick, L.E. (2003), “Psychological contract breach as a source of strain for employees”, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 235-246.

  • Homans, G.C. (1961), Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York, NY.

  • John Rodwell & Julia Ellershaw (2015). What is exchanged in psychological contracts? Multiple sets of obligations, targeted effort and uncertainty reduction. . Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Vol. 37 No. 2, 2015 pp. 232-247.

  • Micheal Wellin (2012). Managing the Psychological Contract: Using the Personal Deal to Increase Business Performance. Gower Publishing, Ltd.

  • Morrison, E. W., & Robinson, S. L. (1997). When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review, 22, 226–256.

  • Robinson, S.L. and Morrison, E.W. (1995), “Psychological contracts and OCB: the effect of unfulfilled obligations on civic virtue behavior”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 289-298.

  • Robinson, S.L. and Rousseau, D.M. (1994), “Violating the psychological contract: not the exception but the norm”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 245-259.

  • Rousseau, D. M. (2001). Schema, promise and mutuality: The building blocks of the psychological contract. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 511–541.

  • Schalk, R. & Roe, R.E. (2007). Towards a dynamic model of the psychological contract. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 37(2): 167-182.

© 2015 by Thanh An Cao

  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon
  • Google+ Social Icon
bottom of page