Psychological contract development during organizational socialization: adaptation to reality and the role of reciprocity

Abstract

SummaryBased on the theoretical framework of newcomer sensemaking this study examines factors associated with changes in newcomers' psychological contract perceptions during the socialization process. More specifically, two mechanisms are addressed that could explain changes in newcomers' perceptions of the promises they have exchanged with their employer: (1) unilateral adaptation of perceived promises to reality and (2) adaptation of perceived promises as a function of the reciprocity norm. To test our hypotheses, a four-wave longitudinal study among 333 new hires has been conducted, covering the first year of their employment relationship. Results show that changes in newcomers' perceptions of the promises they have made to their employer are affected by their perceptions of their own contributions as well as by their perceptions of inducements received from their employer. Changes in newcomers' perceptions of employer promises are affected by their perceptions of employer inducements received, but the impact of perceived employee contributions is less clear. The data provide limited support for the idea that the adaptation of perceived promises to perceived inducements and contributions occurs to a stronger extent during the encounter stage than during the acquisition stage of socialization.

When I'm 64: Psychological contract breach, work motivation and the moderating roles of future time perspective and regulatory focus

“…However, an important question concerns whether psychological contract fulfilment and breach are indeed at opposite ends of the same continuum (Bal et al, 2008;Conway & Briner, 2005). Further, the operationalization of the psychological contract consists of two different dimensions (De Vos et al, 2003). As our results revealed, some dimensions may be breached whereas others are not.…”

“…The psychological contract can be measured using multiple dimensions which are defined as cognitions of different types of obligations at an individual level (De Vos, Buyens, & Schalk, 2003;Rousseau, 1995). Traditionally, two types of obligations have been distinguished: transactional and relational ones (Rousseau & Parks, 1993).…”

“…Obligations were measured by indicating the extent to which employees felt that their organization was obliged to provide transactional or relational obligations (Coyle-Shapiro & Conway, 2005). Fulfilment was assessed by indicating the extent to which employees felt their employer had actually fulfilled these obligations (De Vos et al, 2003). Psychological contract subscales for expected and fulfilled transactional and relational obligations were included.…”

How mass layoffs are related to lower job performance and OCB among surviving employees in Chile: an investigation of the essential role of psychological contract

“…For instance, under economic difficult circumstances it is harder to maintain sales rates, while individual job performance may still be high. Moreover, while self-rated job performance may be a less objective indicator of performance than measures such as sales rates (Williams & Anderson, 1991), the measure of job performance that is used in the current study indicates an assessment by the employee about their performance on the job (see e.g., Bal, Jansen, Van der Velde, De Lange, & Rousseau, 2010b;De Vos et al, 2003). Subjective performance measures are valid for the current study.…”

“…Psychological contract breach is defined as the cognition that the employer has failed to fulfill one or more elements within the psychological contract (Morrison & Robinson, 1997). Perceptions of job security have been cited frequently as being a part of the psychological contract of an employee with an organization (Adkins et al, 2001;De Vos, Buyens, & Schalk, 2003). Hence, according to psychological contract theory, when employees perceive that their jobs have become more insecure as a result of mass layoffs in the organization, they will be increasingly likely to perceive their psychological contract as being breached by the organization.…”