No abstract

There is growing attention in the academic literature and popular press regarding workplace transitions. Change is frequently mentioned as a defining quality of the new workplace and, in turn, employment relationships. A framework is presented that describes employee evaluation of the employment relationship in the context of change. Specifically, the authors apply psychological contract and sensemaking theories to address two questions: What contextual factors shape employee perceptions of change in psychological contract fulfillment? and What cognitive factors shape employee responses to perceptions of deficiency in psychological contract fulfillment? The authors’ aim is to enhance understanding of employment relationships in the context of organizational change and stimulate empirical research that treats change context as a substantive variable. The authors discuss theoretical and practical implications of the framework. Recommendations for practitioners engaged in organizational change are offered.

The authors extend i-deals theory to an individual-within-a-team context. Drawing upon social comparison theory, they contend that individuals will react to their own i-deals within the context of group members' i-deals. Therefore, they examine the role of relative i-deals (an individual's i-deals relative to the team's average) in relation to employee performance. Furthermore, integrating social comparison theory with social identity theory the authors assert that the behavioral outcomes of relative i-deals are influenced by the team's social and structural attributes of team orientation and task interdependence. Finally, they contend that the perceptions of one's relative standing with the leader, or leader-member exchange social comparison (LMXSC), mediate the i-deals-outcome relationship in groups with low team orientation and task interdependence. Results of multilevel modeling using time-lagged data from 321 employees nested in 46 teams demonstrated that the positive relationship between relative i-deals and employee performance was stronger in groups with low team orientation and task interdependence, and the mediation effect of LMXSC was stronger in teams with low rather than high team orientation. (PsycINFO Database Record

Workplace transitions are thought to result in a fundamental shift in the employment relationship. This study used sensemaking theory to examine when and how organizational change affects employees’ psychological contracts (PCs). The authors suggest that employees interpret organizational change through contextual and cognitive factors related to the change. These factors, in turn, influence whether employees revise their PCs. Results of our longitudinal study suggest that the extent to which contextual and cognitive factors affect employees’ PCs depends on the type of PC. Transactional and balanced PCs were unaffected by the contextual and cognitive factors related to the change, while changes occurred in relational PCs.

In this study, we develop and test a model that extends leader-member exchange (LMX) theory to a dual leadership context. Drawing upon relative deprivation theory, we assert that when employees work for 2 leaders, each relationship exists within the context of the other relationship. Thus, the level of alignment or misalignment between the 2 relationships has implications for employees' job satisfaction and voluntary turnover. Employing polynomial regression on time-lagged data gathered from 159 information technology consultants nested in 26 client projects, we found that employee outcomes are affected by the quality of the relationship with both agency and client leaders, such that the degree of alignment between the 2 LMXs explained variance in outcomes beyond that explained by both LMXs. Results also revealed that a lack of alignment in the 2 LMXs led to asymmetric effects on outcomes, such that the relationship with agency leader mattered more than the relationship with one's client leader. Finally, frequency of communication with the agency leader determined the degree to which agency LMX affected job satisfaction in the low client LMX condition.

Purpose – This paper aimed to explore the relationship between flexibility i-deals and employee attitudes. The authors developed theory and tested a non-linear model between i-deals and perceived organizational support (POS), and career satisfaction. Design/methodology/approach – Hierarchical linear modeling using multisource data collected in a field study from 207 employees and 39 managers supported the hypotheses. Findings – Consistent with the proposed non-linear model, low and high levels of flexibility i-deals were associated with high POS and career satisfaction. At moderate levels of i-deals, employee attitudes were lower. Research limitations/implications – Though non-linear relationships are unlikely to result from multi source common method data, the cross-sectional study design limits the authors from claiming causality between the variables of interest. This study is an important step towards elucidating the complex nature of relationship between flexibility i-deals and employee outcomes. Practical implications – Organizations must heed the needs of employees who seek accommodations in their work schedule. However, organizations should be cognizant of the associated implications at different levels of flexibility granted. Social implications – I-deals partly satisfied employees' need for affiliation by strengthening their emotional bonds with the organization (i.e. POS). I-deals also enhanced employees' career satisfaction which is an important component of self-actualization. By meeting employees' higher order needs i-deals have the potential to create a workplace that provides overall wellbeing rather than just a living. Originality/value – This is the first study to investigate non-linear relationships between flexibility i-deals and employee attitudes.

The employee–employer relationship is said to be affected by extensive workplace transitions, and yet little is known about how employees make sense of these changes while deciding on their responses to them. Our study investigated two factors, social comparison and the nature of the exchanges, as moderators of the effects of psychological contract (i.e., employee beliefs regarding the terms of exchange between the employee and the organization) and psychological contract fulfillment (i.e., employee beliefs regarding the extent to which the employer is fulfilling these terms of exchange) on employee performance. Analysis of data before and after organizational change showed that unfavorable social comparison is associated with lower employee performance for transactional, relational, and balanced psychological contracts. Employees’ perception of the social nature of exchange was associated with lower performance in response to relational and balanced psychological contract fulfillments.

No abstract