Interplay between trust and distrust in the workplace: examining the effect of psychological contract breach on organizational disidentification
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JABS-02-2015-0022 |
| Pages | 1-16 |
| Published date | 02 January 2018 |
| Date | 02 January 2018 |
| Author | Hira Rani,Ghulam Ali Arain,Aneel Kumar,Iram Rani Shaikh |
| Subject Matter | Strategy,International business |
Interplay between trust and distrust in
the workplace: examining the effect
of psychological contract breach
on organizational disidentification
Hira Rani, Ghulam Ali Arain, Aneel Kumar and Iram Rani Shaikh
Hira Rani is Student at
the Sukkkur Institute of
Business Administration,
Sukkur, Pakistan.
Ghulam Ali Arain is
Assistant Professor at the
Department of Human
Resources, Effat
University College of
Business, Jeddah, Saudi
Arabia. Aneel Kumar is
PhD Scholar at the
Sukkur Institute of
Business Administration,
Sukkur, Pakistan.
Iram Rani Shaikh is
based at the Department
of Business
Administration, Shah
Abdul Latif University,
Khairpur, Pakistan.
Abstract
Purpose –This study aims to examine the effect of psychological contract breach on organizational
disidentification through the “affect-based” mediating mechanisms of trust and distrust.
Design/methodology/approach –Using a convenient sampling technique, cross-sectional data were
collected from 281 doctors working in public sector health-care organizations in Pakistan. After initial
data screening, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to test the measurement models’
validity and reliability. The hypothesized relationships were tested using structural equation modeling
(SEM) with AMOS.
Findings –The results of this study showed that psychological contract breach had significant direct
and indirect positive effects through the mediating mechanism of distrust on organizational
identification. However, trust was not supported as a mediator in that relationship.
Research limitations/implications –This study uses cross-sectional data. Other researchers should
use longitudinal design with two or three time lags. This study uses a sample of doctors from different
cities of Pakistan, as this is a global era, so results cannot be generalized; this opens the future avenue
for other scholars to select a broad sample from multiple organizations like businesses and NGOs from
different countries or to use it in different context. The authors have used single source (questionnaires)
and quantitative method to collect data for this study, so there is a probability of self-report bias. As
future is of mixed method, so future researchers should use mixed method for deep and thorough
understanding of different selected phenomena.
Practical implications –Due to the experiences of breach of psychological contract, the doctors
may either lose trust or may experience distrust which may further reduce their level of identification
in an organization. Their contribution toward best interest of hospital decreases and their
willingness to identify with their working place declines. Practically, the authors have compared
that it is either the trust or distrust which can lead to organizational disidentification among
doctors.
Social implications –The findings will help employers and hospital authorities to understand that
doctors are the most important strategic element of every hospital. Having sound financial, physical
and informational capital is incomplete and worthless if there is no “doctor”. Because they have to
deal directly with patients, so in this case, they are most important and crucial. A doctor’s
identification and their loyalty with high level of trust directly on employer and indirectly on hospital
all contributes toward an organization’s long-term success, and ultimately for the success of
society.
Originality/value –This study contributes to the existing literature on the consequences of employees’
psychological contract breach by simultaneously testing trust and distrust as the two competing
affect-based mediating mechanisms between psychological contract breach and organizational
disidentification.
Keywords Social identity theory, Organizational behaviour, Research design
Paper type Research paper
Received 19 February 2015
Revised 27 May 2015
24 September 2015
06 February 2016
10 March 2016
19 April 2016
Accepted 3 May 2016
DOI 10.1108/JABS-02-2015-0022 VOL. 12 NO. 1 2018, pp. 1-16, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1558-7894 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES PAGE 1
Introduction
According to Ashforth and Mael (1989), organizational identification, which refers to an
employee’s “perception of oneness with or belongingness to” an organization (p. 34), has
been an important concept in the field of organizational behavior for the past two decades
(Edwards, 2005;Hameed et al., 2013;Riketta, 2005). A plethora of empirical studies [see
meta-analysis of Riketta (2005)] have confirmed that employees’ perception of
organizational identification is positively associated with a wide variety of positive work
outcomes, such as job involvement (van Knippenberg and van Schie, 2000), in-role
behavior (Chughtai and Buckley, 2010) and extra-role performance (Blader and Tyler,
2009;Bordia et al., 2008;Restubog et al., 2008).
In today’s global world, the employee-employer exchange relationship is vulnerable to
many contextual and situational threats, such as layoffs, little or no job security, greater
reliance on contractual workers and fewer opportunities for promotion, which make it very
difficult for organizations to increase and sustain their employees’ levels of identification
(Tekleab et al., 2005). Consequently, employees are more likely to perceive the employer’s
psychological contract breach (Robinson, 1997;Rousseau, 1995), which can subsequently
decrease their organizational identification (Arain et al., 2012;Bordia et al., 2008;Restubog
et al., 2008).
Psychological contract breach (PCB), which refers to employees’ cognition of failure of their
organization to fulfill any or all of its obligations toward them (Robinson, 1997), has been
widely established as a potentially important factor influencing organizational identification
(Epitropaki, 2003,2013;Bordia et al., 2008;Restubog et al., 2008;Zagenczyk et al., 2013).
However, most studies have focused on the direct relationship between PCB and
organizational identification, and less is known about the underlying psychological
mechanism that maintains this relationship. Thus, the current study aims at contributing to
the existing literature on PCB and organizational identification in three ways.
First, given that the social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) has been used largely to
understand the relationship between PCB and organizational identification, the current
study integrated the affective events theory (Weiss and Cropanzano, 1996) with the
social exchange theory to understand the aforementioned relationship. Inclusion of
the affect perspective on PCB and organizational identification not only complements
the social exchange view but also broadens the horizon of existing PCB research that
categorizes the outcomes of PCB into two categories only: attitudes and behaviors
(Kickul et al., 2004).
Second, the conceptualization and operationalization of trust and distrust measures
reported in prior studies are vague, such that they are often treated as two sides of the
same coin. For instance, Robinson (1996) and Deery et al. (2006) tested low trust as a
mediator between PCB and work outcomes by treating it as distrust. Similarly Zhao et al.
(2007) recorded mistrust by taking reverse scores of the trust measure. However, many
recent studies (Dimoka, 2010,2011;Lewicki et al., 1998;Li et al., 2010;McKnight and
Choudhury, 2006;McKnight et al., 2004) have argued that trust and distrust are two
independent constructs that may co-exist. Thus, this study contributes to this debate by
providing empirical evidence supporting trust and distrust as two distinct, independent
constructs.
Third, this study examines trust and distrust as the two competing mediating
mechanisms between PCB and organizational disidentification, where the first
represents the social exchange view, while the second represents the affect-based
view of the aforementioned relationship. It would be interesting to examine how these
two mediating mechanisms work when they are tested simultaneously in a
multi-mediation statistical analysis.
PAGE 2 JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES VOL. 12 NO. 1 2018
To continue reading
Request your trial