Is the psychological contract worth taking seriously?

Abstract

Although the psychological contract has become the focus for a body of research, it retains a number of conceptual and empirical problems and challenges. This paper reviews some of the main problems associated with the construct and with the way in which it has been studied. It also considers critically the ‘problem’ of the psychological contract, namely that organizations are either no longer able to promise the traditional organizational career and job security or they violate their promises, and suggests that the novelty of this problem has been overstated. Finally, it sets out a case for retaining the psychological contract as a focus for policy and research and presents an embryonic theory built around the causes, content and consequences of the psychological contract which implies a rather different research agenda to that which has dominated the debates so far. Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Understanding psychological contract breach due to labour costs reduction: Contingent upon employee sex and managerial control

“…The results supported the notion that psychological contract breach represents a fundamental cognitive process underlying employees’ attitudes and behaviours towards their organizations (Rousseau, ). Even though debates exist in the usefulness of this construct (Guest, ; Rousseau, ), the findings here supported the construct as a basic mechanism through which employees understand their relationships with their organizations (Guest & Conway, ).…”

Integrating expectations, experiences, and psychological contract violations: A longitudinal study of new professionals

“…Our findings did not support the met-expectations hypothesis: that unmet expectations lead to dissatisfaction, which then leads to turnover (Wanous et al, 1992). Guest (1998) argued that it is not clear that unmet obligations (psychological contract violations) are different from unmet expectations and instead reflect on the magnitude of the breach and intensity of the ensuing reaction. As noted above, empirical findings that support a distinction between these two concepts are few.…”

Doing More with Less? Employee Reactions to Psychological Contract Breach via Target Similarity or Spillover during Public Sector Organizational Change

“…The findings support researchers' claims about the utility of the psychological contract as a framework for understanding how organizational change filters through to affect employee attitudes and behaviour (Arnold, ; Conway and Briner, ; Guest, ; Rousseau, ). While there has been some debate about whether any kind of change inevitably leads to more negative attitudes and reduced employee contributions (Choi and Ruona, ), our research shows clearly that when the content of the organizational changes reflect cost‐cutting measures it results in psychological contract breach.…”