Does team orientation matter? Linking work engagement and relational psychological contract with performance

Abstract

Purpose The cultural transformation introduces team orientation as a powerful tool to reconfigure the human capital to become more productive. The purpose of this paper is to try to uncover two folds: first is to check the direct effects of employees’ work engagement and rational psychological contract on contextual performance and job satisfaction and second is to investigate the moderating effect of team orientation in-between above-stated relationships. Design/methodology/approach The self-administrated questionnaires and simple random sampling are used to collect data from 380 employees of banking and insurance sector. Findings The findings reveal that work engagement and relational psychological contract have positive relationships with employees’ contextual performance and job satisfaction. Furthermore, the presence of team orientation has strengthened effect on direct existing relationships. Practical implications This study adds the body of knowledge by providing insights into team orientation in different avenues. For practice side, it is important to discourse the work engagement of employee and their relational psychological contract to enhance the contextual performance. Moreover, high work engagement leads to high commitment level and ultimately increases the level of job satisfaction. Originality/value The contemporary research is lacking with respect to the empirical investigation of team orientation, more particularly, in relationship to human psychology factors. This unique model is addressing the real time issue by providing insights to relational psychological contract, employees work engagement, contextual performance and job satisfaction.

Employee engagement and performance: a systematic literature review

“…Research using the particular scale UWES-9 [Schaufeli et al, 2002] 9 items rated on 7-point scale: 3 vigor items, 3 dedication items, and 3 absorption items 47 studies: Akhtar et al, 2016;Alessandri et al, 2018;Ali et al, 2018;Bakker and Bal, 2010;Bakker et al, 2012;Bal and De Lange, 2015;Castanheira, 2016;Cesário and Chambel, 2017;Chughtai and Buckley, 2011;Dijkhuizen et al, 2016;Eldor and Harpaz, 2016;Eldor, 2017;Findikli, 2015;Fletcher, 2016;Freeney and Fellenz, 2013;Gordon and Demerouti, 2015;Gorgievski and Moriano, 2014;Gutermann et al, 2017;Kapil and Rastogi, 2017;Karatepe, 2011;Karatepe and Olugbade, 2016;Kašpárková et al, 2018;Kataria et al, 2013;Kovjanic and Schuh, 2013;Lathabhavan et al, 2017;Lorente and Salanova, 2014;Maden, 2015;Mäkikangas et al, 2016;Myrden and Kelloway, 2015;Nazir and Islam, 2017;Park et al, 2017;Rahman et al, 2017;Reijseger et al, 2017;Schmitt et al, 2016;Shantz and Alfes, 2013;Shantz et al, 2016;Shuck and Zigarmi, 2015 1 ;Steffens and Haslam, 2014;…”

“…Research studies using the particular data source Self-reported questionnaire 47 studies: Akhtar et al, 2016;Albdour and Altarawneh, 2014;Alfes and Truss, 2013;Ali et al, 2018;Anitha, 2014;Bal and De Lange, 2015;Barnes and Collier, 2013;Benn et al, 2015;Chong and Lee, 2017;Chughtai and Buckley, 2011;Dalal and Baysinger, 2012;Dash and Muthyala, 2016;Farndale et al, 2014;Findikli, 2015;Fletcher, 2016;Freeney and Fellenz, 2013;Gordon and Demerouti, 2015;Gorgievski and Moriano, 2014;Kapil and Rastogi, 2017;Karatepe and Olugbade, 2016;Kašpárková et al, 2018;Kataria et al, 2013;Kim and Koo, 2017;Lathabhavan et al, 2017;Lorente and Salanova, 2014;Maden, 2015;Mäkikangas et al, 2016;Medlin and Green, 2009;Medlin et al, 2016;Nazir and Islam, 2017;Park et al, 2017;Rahman et al, 2017;Reijseger et al, 2017;Saks, 2006;Shantz and Alfes, 2013;Shantz et al, 2016;Shuck and Zigarmi, 2015;Steffens and Haslam, 2014;Suan Choo, 2016;…”

Employee Deviance as By-product of Psychological Contract: The Moderating Effects of Power Distance among Employees in Insurance Companies in Nigeria

“…Organizational outcomes such as performance could also be hampered by poor psychological contract. In this vein, consider that Rahman, Rehman, Imran and Aslam's [7] study revealed that work engagement and relational psychological contract have positive relationships with employees' contextual performance and job satisfaction.…”

“…Essentially, power distribution and consequent power distance is a leadership factor [13] which may orchestrate abuse of the subordinate by the superior Richard, Boncoeur, Chen & Ford, [14] leading to inter-personal aggression and conflict with negative effects to organizational productivity [7]. For example, Iqbal and Rasheed [17] using structural equation-modeling (SEM) technique found that mistreated employees involved in negative reactions and these reactions does not only contained deviating behavior, it also influences them emotionally.…”

“…For instance, an employee may be looking to improve on his or her skills, improve his member-to-member interaction skills or get quality training with his new employment. These expectations may influence his or her feelings towards his or her organization and may further energize his or her motivation towards engagement in the work [5,6] and job performance [7]. Depending on whether they are actualized or not, these expectations (of employee vs employers) have many employee outcomes such as: negative outcomesemployee deviance, employee turnover, or positive outcomes -commitment and dedication to work.…”