State of the psychological contract. Manager and employee perspectives within an Australian credit union
| Published date | 01 September 2006 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/01425450610683636 |
| Date | 01 September 2006 |
| Pages | 421-434 |
| Author | Richard Winter,Brent Jackson |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
State of the psychological
contract
Manager and employee perspectives within an
Australian credit union
Richard Winter
School of Business and Information Management,
The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia, and
Brent Jackson
Shipe Mason Consulting, Ethos House, Canberra, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – To identify and describe work environment conditions that give rise to a shared or
different state of the psychological contract for managers and employees.
Design/methodology/approach – Semi-structured interviews conducted with seven managers and
12 employees within an Australian credit union. Questions relate to the causes (work environment
conditions) and conten t (salary, recognition and rewards, trust and fa irness, open/honest
communication) of the psychological contract. Comparative analysis techniques identify and
contrast psychological contract categories of managers and employees.
Findings – Although managers and employees shared similar responses as to the state of the
psychological contract, they attributed different causes to these states. Managers tended to construct
rational explanations and emphasise resource constraints and financial considerations, whilst
employees constructed emotional explanations and attributed this situation to an unfair, uncaring or
distant management. Employees regarded the Staff Consultative Committee and open-door policies as
“symbolic acts” rather than genuine attempts to give employees a voice in the company.
Practical implications – Aligning the psychological contract espoused by management more
closely with that upheld by employees requires managers to adopt more personal, face-to-face
communication strategies. The removal of status-related barriers to communication places managers
in a better position to explain to employees how the organisation can meet (or not) specific contract
expectations and obligations.
Originality/value – Paper provides interesting insights into how contracts form within the conte xt
of work environment, HRM policy and practice, and cultural factors – work context factors largely
ignored by psychological contract researchers.
Keywords Psychologicalcontracts, Credit unions, Australia,Workplace
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
For many years, the employee-employer relationship has been viewed as a social
exchange process based on the norms of reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960) and mutual
support (Blau, 1964). According to social exchange theory (Shore and Barksdale, 1998),
a productive employment relationship exists where there is a degree of balance in
perceived employee-employer obligations. In a balanced and mutually supporting
relationship, employees freely exchange their skills, effort and commitment in return
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm
State of the
psychological
contract
421
Received December 2004
Revised October 2005
Accepted November 2005
Employee Relations
Vol. 28 No. 5, 2006
pp. 421-434
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/01425450610683636
To continue reading
Request your trial