SummaryThis study examines supervisor and subordinate perceptions of and attributions for psychological contract breach. The data suggest that supervisor and subordinate perceptions are most likely to differ on the extent to which the organization violated its obligations to provide fair pay, advancement opportunities, and a good employment relationship. In addition, the results indicate that the greater the degree of psychological contract breach reported by subordinates, the less committed they are to the organization and the lower their job performance (as rated by their supervisor). Moreover, when psychological contract breach is perceived, supervisors' and subordinates' attributions regarding the reasons for the breach are likely to differ. Speci®cally, the ®ndings suggest that subordinates are more likely to attribute breach to the organization's intentional disregard for the commitments that it had made to the employee, while supervisors are more inclined to attribute breach to situations beyond the organization's direct control.

Despite previous calls to examine trust from the perspectives of both the manager and subordinate, most studies have exclusively focused on trust in the manager. The authors propose that trust in the subordinate has unique consequences beyond trust in the manager. Furthermore, they propose joint effects of trust such that subordinate behavior and intentions are most favorable when there is high mutual trust. Findings reveal unique relationships of trust in manager and trust in subordinate on performance, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), and intentions to quit. Furthermore, the interaction of trust in manager and trust in subordinate predicts individual-directed OCB in the hypothesized direction.

No abstract

Summary The current research explores supervisor‐level antecedents of abusive supervision in the workplace. Specifically, this study introduces affective events theory to the abusive supervision literature to suggest that supervisor role overload, a work‐related event, leads to supervisor frustration. As an intense negative emotional reaction, frustration, in turn, triggers supervisors to exhibit abusive behaviors in the workplace. Supervisor personality traits—namely, neuroticism, conscientiousness, and agreeableness—are also posited to moderate these hypothesized relationships. Specifically, neuroticism is expected to moderate the relationship between role overload and frustration while conscientiousness and agreeableness are expected to moderate the relationship between frustration and abusive supervision. Ultimately, we propose and examine a moderated‐mediation model. Multisource field data demonstrate general support for the hypothesized relationships. We conclude with theoretical and practical implications as well as future research avenues. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This research examines the relationships between psychological contract fulfillment and three types of employee behavior: in-role performance, organizational citizenship behavior directed at the organization, and organizational citizenship behavior directed at individuals within the organization. Using a sample of 134 supervisor-subordinate dyads, this study suggests that the extent of psychological contract fulfillment is positively related to the performance of all three types of employee behavior. In addition, the results indicate that psychological contract fulfillment is more strongly related to citizenship behavior directed at the organization than to citizenship behavior directed at one’s colleagues. Finally, this research investigates if employees’ attributions regarding the reasons that psychological contract breach occurred also impact their work performance. However, the data provide only limited support for the idea that employees are most likely to reduce their work effort when they perceive that the organization has intentionally failed to live up to its commitments.