Introduction to the Handbook of Research on the Psychological Contract at Work

Abstract

The psychological contract is "an individual's beliefs regarding the terms and conditions of a reciprocal exchange agreement between the focal person and another party" (Rousseau, 1989, p. 123). The psychological contract represents the employee's mental model or cognitive schema about the exchange relationship with the employer. This schema comprises the employee's perceived mutual obligations to contribute certain resources (e.g., time, loyalty, work effort) to the organization, as well as the organization's obligation to contribute certain resources (e.g., competitive pay, training and development, flexible working hours) in return. The psychological contract influences the employee's interpretation of employer actions (or non-actions) and guides employee emotions, attitudes, and behavior toward the organization. Decades of research have shown that perceived psychological contract fulfillment is associated with positive employee attitudes and behaviors, whereas perceived psychological contract breach is associated with negative such reactions (for a meta-analysis see Bal,

Perceived identity threat and organizational cynicism in the recursive relationship between psychological contract breach and counterproductive work behavior

“…Moreover, perceptions of PCB do not happen in a vacuum, but are situated in time and happen with reference to past employee or employer actions and future anticipations ( Kozlowski, 2009 ; Tomprou et al, 2015 ). Over time, a growing number of scholars have drawn attention to this dynamic nature of the PC (e.g., Griep and Vantilborgh, 2018a , 2018b ; Griep et al, 2019 ; Hansen and Griep, 2016 ; Schalk and Roe, 2007 ; Solinger et al, 2016 ; Tomprou et al, 2015 ; Van der Schaft et al, 2020 ) leading us to consider what the PCB–CWB relationship might look like if explored as a cycle of processes over time.…”

Self-initiated expatriates in menial jobs: Destructive psychological contracts in the hospitality sector

“…In line with calls by Griep and colleagues (2019), studying the effects of prolonged employment in such a destructive exchange relationship would therefore be another trajectory to follow. Incorporating time could add additional insights to these processes, especially regarding the changes in perceptions and behavior over time.…”

“…Second, following calls by Griep and colleagues (2019), we provide contextual insights into the PCs of a group of employees in a more precarious work setting. Our study confirms findings in the extant literature that PC breach and violation feelings bear a negative impact on employee behavior (e.g., Bordia et al, 2008; Restubog et al, 2015), even when employees may have few external employment opportunities.…”

“…This means that employees are expected to show positive attitudes and behavior if the employer fulfils the PC (positive norm of reciprocity; Cropanzano and Mitchell, 2005), but these attitudes and behaviors are likely to change (negative norm of reciprocity; Cropanzano and Mitchell, 2005) if the employer does not deliver on explicit or assumed expectations, also referred to as PC breach (Morrison and Robinson, 1997). Despite the recent increase in the use of terms like sustainable HR and sustainable employment, suggesting that PCs are generally fulfilled, several authors have stated that this is not the case for large groups of employees working in precarious employment contexts such as menial jobs (e.g., Bal and Brookes, 2022; Griep et al, 2019). This is evidenced by numerous recent press articles that have discussed problematic employment conditions in supermarkets (Harounyan, 2017), logistics (Kellogg et al, 2020), the travel industry (Hansen and Vugts, 2022), and the hospitality industry (Bresson, 2021).…”

Exploring self-regulation theory as a mechanism of the effects of psychological contract fulfillment: The role of emotional intelligence

“…Based on theories of social influence, PC theory has suggested in the past that PC evaluations can be shared by specific individuals ( Ho, 2005 ; Ho and Levesque, 2005 ) or teams as a whole ( Laulié and Tekleab, 2016 ; Tekleab et al, 2020 ). Future research should explore whether emotionally intelligent individuals are more likely to influence other individuals’ perceptions of the PC ( Griep et al, 2019 ).…”