The ‘problem’ of the psychological contract considered

Abstract

This response to Guest's (1998) Commentary addresses some common misconceptions in popular writings referencing psychological contracts. Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Management practices and performance of mergers and acquisitions in Pakistan: mediating role of psychological contract

“…Previous studies (Garrow 2005 ; Musharraf 2003 ) classify that said strategic mechanism increase M&A performance, provided that, a positive trusted culture should be maintained between employer and employees during M&A. Findings of this study signify that a positive PC can enhance the effectiveness of said management practices to increase the M&A performance (Mao and Liu 2009 ; Rousseau 1998 ), subject to the context of the organizations that involved in M&A which is also confirmed by previous studies (Edwards and Edwards 2012 ; Papadakis 2005 ).…”

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

“…Second, our findings highlighted psychological contract breach as linking the three‐way interaction to employees’ organizational commitment. 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, ).…”

Once bitten, twice shy: The negative spillover effect of seeing betrayal of trust.

“…This betrayal spillover effect extends prior research on psychological and social contracts (Donaldson & Dunfee, 1994, 1999; Robinson, 1996; Rousseau, 1998; Thompson & Hart, 2006). This research, as well as research on psychological contracts, rest on the premise that there exists a shared understanding whereby people and institutions bind themselves to an unspoken set of rules to establish societal order Halevy et al (2011), (Hobbes, 1946).…”