Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T21:57:31.477Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Balanced versus Unbalanced Psychological Contracts in Temporary and Permanent Employment: Associations with Employee Attitudes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Jeroen de Jong ,
René Schalk  and
Nele de Cuyper
Jeroen de Jong
Affiliation:
Tilburg University, the Netherlands
René Schalk
Affiliation:
Tilburg University, the Netherlands
Nele de Cuyper
Affiliation:
K. U. Leuven, Belgium
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study concerns balance in exchange relationships as described in the psychological contract literature about employees’ and employers’ promises and fulfilment of these promises. Balance is investigated, firstly, in relation to temporary versus permanent employment and, secondly, in relation to employees’ attitudes (fairness, job satisfaction, and intention to quit). Analyses were based on a Dutch sample of 290 temporary and 489 permanent workers. Regarding balance in mutual promises, we found that temporary workers were more likely to have psychological contracts with few mutual promises than permanent workers, while permanent workers were more likely to have psychological contracts with many mutual promises compared to temporary workers. Regarding balance in the fulfilment of promises, we found the opposite pattern, namely, that fulfilment was higher in temporary workers compared to permanent workers. Furthermore, only mutual high fulfilment of promises was associated with higher job satisfaction and fairness and with lower intentions to quit.

Keywords

employment relationshippsychological contractsreciprocitysocial exchangetemporary employment雇佣关系心理契约互惠社会交换临时雇佣
Type
Articles
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 5 , Issue 3 , November 2009 , pp. 329 - 351
Copyright
Copyright © International Association for Chinese Management Research 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, J. S. 1965. Inequity in social exchange. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology: 267–299. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ashford, S. J., George, E., & Blatt, R. 2007. Old assumptions, new work: The opportunities and challenges of research on nonstandard employment. In Walsh, J. P. & Brief, A. P. (Eds.), Academy of management annals: 79–144. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1964. Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Brayfield, A. H., & Rothe, H. F. 1951. An index of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 35(5): 307–311.Google Scholar
Bull, S. B., & Donner, A. 1987. The efficiency of multinomial logistic regression compared with multiple group discriminant analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82(400): 1118–1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambel, M. J., & Castanheira, F. 2006. Different temporary work status, different behaviors in organization. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20(3): 351–367.Google Scholar
Claes, R. 2005. Organization promises in the triangular psychological contract as perceived by temporary agency workers, agencies, and client organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 17(3): 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. 2001. The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(2): 278–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. 2001. Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3): 425–445.Google Scholar
Connelly, C. E., & Gallagher, D. G. 2004. Emerging trends in contingent work research. Journal of Management, 30(6): 959–983.Google Scholar
Conway, N., & Briner, R. B. 2005. Understanding psychological contracts at work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Coyle-Shapiro, J. A.-M., & Kessler, I. 2002a. Contingent and non-contingent working in local government: Contrasting psychological contracts. Public Administration, 80(1): 77–101.Google Scholar
Coyle-Shapiro, J. A.-M., & Kessler, I. 2002b. Reciprocity through the lens of the psychological contract: Employee and employer perspectives. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11(1): 1–18.Google Scholar
De Cuyper, N., Isaksson, K., & De Witte, H. 2005. Employment contracts and well-being among European workers. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
De Cuyper, N., De Jong, J., De Witte, H., Isaksson, K., Rigotti, T., & Schalk, R. 2008a. Literature review of theory and research on the psychological impact of temporary employment: Towards a conceptual model. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(1): 25–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Cuyper, N., Rigotti, T., De Witte, H., & Mohr, G. 2008b. Balancing psychological contracts: Validation of a typology. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(4): 543–561.Google Scholar
De Jong, J., & Schalk, R. 2005. Temporary employment in the Netherlands: Between flexibility and security. In de Cuyper, N., Isaksson, K., & de Witte, H. (Eds.), Employment contracts and well-being among European workers: 119–152. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing-Ltd.Google Scholar
De Jong, J., Schalk, R., & Goessling, T. 2007. An institutional perspective on the employment position of temporary workers in the Netherlands. Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations, 62(3): 492–515.Google Scholar
De Vos, A. 2002. The individual antecedents and the development of newcomers’ psychological contracts during the socialization process: A longitudinal study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Gent University, Gent.Google Scholar
Farh, J.-L., Hackett, R. D., & Liang, J. 2007. Individual-level cultural values as moderators of perceived organizational support-employee outcome relationships in China: Comparing the effects of power distance and traditionality. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3): 715–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goudswaard, A., Kraan, K. O., & Dhondt, S. 2000. Flexibiliteit in balans. Flexibilisering en de gevolgen voor werkgever zyxonesixzeroxyzn werknemer. Hoofddorp: TNO Arbcid.Google Scholar
Gouldner, A. W. 1960. The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25(2): 161–178.Google Scholar
Guest, D. E., & Clinton, M. 2005. Contracting in the UK: Current research evidence on the impact of flexible employment and the nature of psychological contracts. In de Cuyper, N., Isaksson, K., & de Witte, H. (Eds.), Employment contracts and well-being among European workers: 201–224. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
Guest, D. E., & Conway, N. 1998. Fairness at work and the psychological contract. London: CIPD.Google Scholar
Heerma van Voss, G.J.J. 1999. The tulip model and the new legislation on temporary work in the Netherlands. The International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations, 15(4): 419–430.Google Scholar
Hom, P. W., Tsui, A. S., Wu, J. B., Lee, T. W., Zhang, A. Y., Fu, P. P., & Li, L. 2009. Explaining employment relationships with social exchange and job embeddedness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2): 277–297.Google Scholar
Irwin, J. R., & McClelland, G. H. 2003. Negative consequences of dichotomizing continuous predictor variables. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(3): 366–371.Google Scholar
Isaksson, K., Bernhard, C., Claes, R., De Witte, H., Guest, D., Krausz, M., Peiro, J. M., Mohr, G., & Schalk, R. 2003. Employment contracts and psychological contracts in Europe. Results from a pilot study. Stockholm: National Institute for Working Life.Google Scholar
Kalleberg, A., Reskin, B. F., & Hudson, K. 2000. Bad jobs in America: Standard and nonstandard employment relations and job quality in the United States. American Sociological Review, 65(2): 256–278.Google Scholar
Koh, W. L., & Yer, L. K. 2000. The impact of the employee-organization relationship on temporary employees’ performance and attitude: Testing a Singaporean sample. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(2): 366–387.Google Scholar
Lambert, L. S. 2007. Promised and delivered inducements and contributions in a psychological contract: Using equations as an aid for developing theory. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Conference, Philadelphia, PA, August 2007.Google Scholar
Lambert, L. S., Edwards, J. R., & Cable, D. M. 2003. Breach and fulfillment of the psychological contract: A comparison of traditional and expanded views. Personnel Psychology, 56(4): 895–934.Google Scholar
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Kraimer, M. L., & Sparrowe, R. T. 2003. The dual commitments of contingent workers: An examination of contingents’ commitment to the agency and the organization. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(5): 609–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. 1958. Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Co.Google Scholar
McLean-Parks, J., Kidder, D. L., & Gallagher, D. G. 1998. Fitting square pegs into round holes: Mapping the domain of contingent work arrangements onto the psychological contract. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(S1): 697–730.Google Scholar
Morrison, E. W., & Robinson, S. L. 1997. When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review, 22(1): 226–256.Google Scholar
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 1999. Classifying educational programmes: Manual for ISCED-97 implementation in OECD countries, 1999 edition. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
OECD. 2002. OECD employment outlook. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzic, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5): 879–903.Google Scholar
Porter, L. W., Pearce, J. L., Tripoli, A. M., & Lewis, K. M. 1998. Differential perceptions of employers’ inducements: Implications for psychological contracts. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(S1): 769–782.3.0.CO;2-1>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, J. R. 1997. Handbook of organizational measurement. International Journal of Manpower, 18(4/5/6): 301–558.Google Scholar
Rousseau, D. M. 1995. Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Rousseau, D. M., & Tijoriwala, S. A. 1998. Assessing psychological contracts: Issues, alternatives and measures. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(S1): 679–695.Google Scholar
Sels, L., Janssens, M., & Van den Brande, I. 2004. Assessing the nature of psychological contracts: A validation of six dimensions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(4): 461–488.Google Scholar
Shore, L. M., & Barksdale, K. 1998. Examining degree of balance and level of obligation in the employment relationship: A social exchange approach. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(S1): 731–744.Google Scholar
Shore, L. M., Tetrick, L. E., Taylor, M. S., Coyle-Shapiro, J. A.-M., Liden, R. C., McLean-Parks, J., Morrison, E. W., Porter, L. W., Robinson, S. L., Roehling, M. V., Rousseau, D. M., Schalk, R., Tsui, A. S., & Dyne, L. V. 2004. The employee-organization relationship: A timely concept in a period of transition. In Martocchio, J. J (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management: 291–370. Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegrist, J. 1996. Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1(1): 27–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sjöberg, A., & Sverke, M. 2000. The interactive effect of job involvement and organizational commitment on job turnover revisited: A note on the mediating role of turnover intention. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 41(3): 247–252.Google Scholar
Tan, H.-H., & Tan, C.-P. 2002. Temporary employees in Singapore: What drives them? The Journal of Psychology, 136(1): 83–102.Google Scholar
Tekleab, A. G., & Taylor, M. S. 2003. Aren’t there two parties in an employment relationship? Antecedents and consequences of organization-employee agreement on contract obligations and violations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(5): 585–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsui, A. S., Pearce, J. L., Porter, L. W., & Tripoli, A. M. 1997. Employee-organization relationship: Does investment in employees pay off? Academy of Management Journal, 40(5): 1089–1121.Google Scholar
Turnley, W., & Feldman, D. C. 1999. The impact of psychological contract violations on exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect. Human Relations, 52(7): 895–922.Google Scholar
Van Dyne, L., & Ang, S. 1998. Organizational citizenship behavior of contingent workers in Singapore. Academy of Management Journal, 41(6): 692–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, J. B., Hom, P. W., Tetrick, L. E., Shore, L. M.,Jia, L., Li, C., & Song, L.J. 2006. The norm of reciprocity: Scale development and validation in the Chinese context. Management and Organization Review, 2(3): 377–402.Google Scholar
Yang, D. T., & Zhou, H. 1999. Rural-urban disparity and sectoral labour allocation in China. Journal of Development Studies, 35(3): 105–133.Google Scholar