Balancing HRM: the psychological contract of employees. A multi‐level study
| Pages | 664-683 |
| Published date | 20 September 2011 |
| Date | 20 September 2011 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/00483481111169625 |
| Author | Mariëlle Sonnenberg,Bas Koene,Jaap Paauwe |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
Balancing HRM: the psychological
contract of employees
A multi-level study
Marie
¨lle Sonnenberg
University of Tilburg, Tilburg, The Netherlands
Bas Koene
RSM Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, and
Jaap Paauwe
University of Tilburg, Tilburg, The Netherlands
Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to “bridge” two streams of HRM research: organisation level research on
HRM and performance and individual level research on employee work perceptions and behavioural
performance. This study seeks to analyse the value of organisation level HRM practices for individual
level employees’ assessment of the degree of violation of their psychological contracts. It also aims to
examine the contribution of commitment HRM practices and traditional HRM practices in explaining
perceptions of psychological contract violation.
Design/methodology/approach – Based on a sample of 49 organisations with 2,099 individual
respondents, the paper analyses the relationship between organisation level HRM practices and
individual level employees’ assessment of the degree of violation of their psychological contracts,
using multi-level analysis.
Findings – The findings show a clear positive influence of a number of HRM practices. More use of
HRM practices leads to lower levels of perceived psychological contract violation for individual
employees, regardless of individual characteristics. Commitment HRM practices explain about half of
the variance in psychological contract violation that is due to the total amount of HRM practices.
Research limitations/implications – Alimitation of the study is its cross-sectional design and the
measure of HRM practices, indicating more or less explicit attention for HRM in an organization, but
not possible substitutable and synergetic effects between various HRM practices. Further research
should therefore explore the effect of combinations of HRM practices. Findings however do indicate
the relevance of organization level HRM for individual level perceptions of the employment
relationship.
Practical implications – It is in the interest of managers to have a clear knowledge of which
organisational activities will elicit those attitudes and behaviours necessary to achieve organisational
goals. These findings highlight the importance of HRM practices to contribute to employees’ realistic
assessment of the mutual demands of their employment relationship with their organization. The more
HRM practices the better in terms of employees’ psychological contract violation. Furthermore, the
findings show the importance of commitment HRM practices, but also the remaining relevance of more
traditional practices.
Originality/value – This study combines insights on organisation level HRM with insights on
individual level psychological contracts. Although the necessity of using multi-level analysis in these
kinds of studies has been argued by various researchers, this study is one of the first to use this
analytical technique, thus genuinely showing the impact of organizational level HRM practices on
individual level HR outcomes (in this case the psychological contract).
Keywords Psychologicalcontracts, Human resource management,Multi-level analysis
Paper type Research paper
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm
PR
40,6
664
Personnel Review
Vol. 40 No. 6, 2011
pp. 664-683
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0048-3486
DOI 10.1108/00483481111169625
Introduction
In both HRM research and HRM practice, the relationship between HRM and
organisational performance has increasingly become a matter of interest, as can be
seen in the numerous articles and books on High Performance Work Systems
(e.g. Appelbaum et al., 2000, Boxall and Macky, 2009) and the rising interest in “HR
scorecards” (e.g. Becker et al., 2001; Paauwe, 2004; Huselid et al., 2005).
Authors in the field consistently voice concerns that we need to know more about
the mechanisms through which HRM influences organisational performance (see for
instance Delery, 1998; Wright et al., 2005, Paauwe and Boselie, 2005). Over the past
decade, this has lead to HRM research focusing on issues of organisation and control:
through optimisation of the organisation of work, aiming to combine efficiency and
flexibility through the innovative structuring of work and the sophistication of the
management control mix. Commitment, empowerment, teamwork, and self-control are
at the heart of “high commitment or high involvement work systems” that seem to
provide “optimal” HRM systems (e.g. Arthur, 1994; Huselid, 1995; Appelbaum et al.,
2000, Boxall and Macky, 2009). This approach to HRM operationalises one of its central
promises, i.e. that it creates a new, more flexible and adaptable work environment and
employment context, creating a better situation for both employer and employee.
Often, however, this conclusion goes hand in hand with a somewhat derogatory
position towards “traditional HRM”: commitment HRM practices align the interests of
employees and organisation better than traditional HRM practices. Still, in much of this
research the relationship between organization level HRM and organizational
performance remains elusive (e.g. Boselie et al., 2005).
Individual level HRM performance research, mostly taking a psychological
perspective, has been more effective in linking individual’s characteristics to a variety
of outcome variables such as intention to leave the organisation, employee satisfaction,
and various types of commitment (see for instance Robinson and Rousseau, 1994;
Robinson and Morrison, 2000; Lewis-McClear and Taylor, 1998; Turnley and Feldman,
2000; Tekleab and Taylor, 2003). A recent and successful stream of research in this
tradition has focused on the importance of the psychological contract (e.g. Herriot and
Pemberton, 1997; Rousseau, 1995; Guest, 1998; Paauwe and Boselie, 2005). The
psychological contract can be defined as: “an individual’s belief, shaped by the
organisation, regarding reciprocal obligations” (Rousseau, 1995, 2005). Violation of the
psychological contract has been empirically linked to a number of attitudes and
behaviours, such as for instance trust, loyalty, commitment and intention to leave
(e.g. McLean Parks and Schmedeman, 1994; Robinson and Rousseau, 1994; Robinson
and Morrison, 2000; Ten Brink et al., 2001).
In this study we aim to “bridge” both streams of HRM research, organisational level
research towards the relationship between HRM and performance and individual level
research on the relationship between work perceptions and individual performance.
The psychological contract is especially helpful in this respect, because it connects
organisational level and individual level HRM research through its focus on the
exchange relationship between organisation and individual.
Focusing on the influence of HRM practices on the psychological contract, we take a
specific perspective on HRM. Where most HRM research emphasizes the substantive
impact of HRM on organisation and coordination of work, in this study we consider
organisational practices such as HRM practices and elements of organisational
Balancing HRM:
the psychological
contract
665
To continue reading
Request your trial