Breach Begets Breach: Trickle-Down Effects of Psychological Contract Breach on Customer Service

Abstract

Adopting a multifoci approach to psychological contract breach (i.e., breach by the organization referent and breach by the supervisor referent), the authors propose a trickle-down model of breach. Results from three studies show that supervisor perceptions of organizational breach are negatively related to supervisor citizenship behaviors toward the subordinate, resulting in subordinate perceptions of supervisory breach. Subordinate breach perceptions are, in turn, negatively related to subordinate citizenship behaviors toward the customer and, ultimately, customer satisfaction. The findings demonstrate the interconnected nature of social exchange relationships at work and draw attention to the effects of breach for other employees and customers.

Psychological contract breach's antecedents and outcomes in salespeople: The roles of psychological climate, job attitudes, and turnover intention

“…The effect of customer information breach on stock market return is seemingly due to anticipated customer retaliation through lawsuits and lower share-of-wallet. Therefore, the findings of Bordia et al (2010) and Malhotra and Malhotra (2010), suggest that the effects of psychological contract breach, and one of its precursors-psychological climate-are not constrained to organizational boundaries. Future research should apply the psychological contract framework to examine salesperson-manager relationships, and if and how psychological contract breach affects salespeople's relationships with buyers.…”

“…job attitudes) likely to be affected by psychological contract breach, other interesting areas of inquiry went unexamined. One such query is what Bordia et al (2010) refer to as the trickle-down effects of psychological contract breach. Bordia et al (2010), within the customer service context, link managerial perceptions of psychological contract breach to reduced employee support which results in employee perceptions of psychological contract breach.…”

“…One such query is what Bordia et al (2010) refer to as the trickle-down effects of psychological contract breach. Bordia et al (2010), within the customer service context, link managerial perceptions of psychological contract breach to reduced employee support which results in employee perceptions of psychological contract breach. This effect trickles down as employees perceiving greater psychological contract breach provide lower levels of customer service thereby reducing customer satisfaction.…”

“…When employers fail to fulfill those obligations, psychological contract breach occurs. Psychological contract breach is acknowledged to have unfavorable consequences on a range of employee attitudes and behaviors such as diminished job satisfaction (Dupré & Day, 2007;Johnson & O'Leary-Kelly, 2003), diminished organizational commitment (Ito & Brotheridge, 2005;Raja, Johns, & Ntalianis, 2004), diminished customer-oriented (Bordia, Restubog, Bordia, & Tang, 2010) and coworker-oriented (Chen, Tsui, & Zhong, 2008) citizenship behavior, augmented absences (Deery et al, 2006) and turnover intention (Raja et al, 2004;Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowsky, & Bravo, 2007), amongst others. Given that lower levels of job satisfaction (Ladik, Marshall, Lassk, & Moncrief, 2002;Singh, Verbeke, & Rhoads, 1996) and organizational commitment (Rutherford, Boles, Hamwi, Madupalli, & Rutherford, 2009) yield increased salesperson turnover intention, understanding factors that influence these job attitudes is critical to building and maintaining high performing sales forces.…”

Temporary Food Handlers’ Compliance with Effective Food-Hygiene Practices

“…In most cases they fill up low-skilled, poorly remunerated positions and are tied-free for a particular employer (Lenard & Straehle, 2012). Very often, the public misjudge their devotion and commitment (Chambel & Alcover, 2011) as implicit in any short-term position is the workers' inability to contribute fully and commit to standards expected in a job (Bordia, Restubog, Bordia, & Tang, 2010). Workers are effectively recruited when they fit job specifications and are competent while a contractual one means workers leave their work without much guilt and usually for other life priorities (Casey & Alach, 2004).…”