Impact of individual psychological contract breach on organizational citizenship behavior at individual level: Mediating role of trust in supervisor

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between individual psychological contract breach on organizational citizenship behavior at individual level and to test the mediation effects of trust in supervisor. The study was carried out in software industry of KPK, Pakistan. Data was gathered from 337 operational level executive (i.e. executive, assistant manager, manager) through randomly selected sampling method. Numerous statistical techniques (correlation, regression) had been used to deduct the results. Results indicate that individual psychological contract breach significantly predicts organizational citizenship behavior at individual level and with trust in supervisor and fully mediates the indirect relationship between individual psychological contract breach and organizational citizenship behavior at individual level. This research also provides the empirical evidence regarding significance of individual psychological contract grounded on social exchange and affective events theory in the context of KPK, Pakistan. Lastly, contribution of study, limitations and future directions are also discussed.

Psikolojik Sözleşme İhlalinin İşten Ayrılma Niyeti Üzerine Etkisinde Yöneticiye Güvenin Aracılık Rolü

“…Sonuç olarak da örgüte yaptığı katkıların söz verildiği gibi işveren tarafından karşılanacağına dair güvenini kaybeder. Bu bulgu daha önceki çalışmalarla da paralellik göstermektedir (Cistulli ve Snyder, 2019;Marwat ve Adnan, 2020) Araştırmanın üçüncü bulgusuna göre, yöneticiye güven işten ayrılma niyetini negatif olarak etkilemiş ve H3 hipotezi kabul edilmiştir. Yöneticiye güvenle birlikte çalışanlar kendilerini daha çok güvende hisseder, örgütlerine daha çok bağlanır ve daha az işten ayrılmayı düşünürler.…”

“…Psikolojik sözleşme ihlallerinin tabiatıyla örgütler ve yöneticiler için olumsuz sonuçları bulunmaktadır (Jayaweera vd., 2021;Bal vd., 2008;Li vd., 2016;Milanović vd., 2018;Robinson ve Morrison, 2000;Turnley ve Feldman, 2000;Johnson ve O'Leary-Kelly, 2003;Sarikaya ve Kok, 2017). Bu sonuçlar arasında yöneticiye olan güvenin sarsılması (Cistulli ve Snyder, 2019;Marwat ve Adnan, 2020) ve çalışanların işten ayrılma niyetlerindeki artış (Aykan, 2014;Moquin vd., 2019, Azeem vd., 2020Samuel ve Engelbrecht, 2021) da bulunmaktadır. Psikolojik sözleşme ihlallerinin negatif sonuçları genellikle Sosyal Değişim Teorisinin (Balu, 1964) karşılıklılık normu (Gouldner, 1960) çerçevesinde açıklanmaktadır.…”

“…If the organization does not acknowledge the contributions made by the employee to the organization as expected, that is, if the employee perceives that the organization does not fulfill its obligations towards the individual-this situation is considered as a 'psychological contract violation' (Rousseau, 1989: 128;Morrison & Robinson, 1997: 230). Psychological contract violations have negative consequences for organizations and its managers (Jayaweera et al, 2021;Bal et al, 2008;Li et al, 2016;Milanović et al, 2018;Robinson & Morrison, 2000;Turnley & Feldman, 2000;Johnson & O'Leary-Kelly, 2003;Sarikaya & Coke, 2017), a few of which can be listed as follows; the loss of trust in the manager (Cistulli & Snyder, 2019;Marwat & Adnan, 2020) and the increase in employees' turnover intention (Aykan, 2014;Moquin et al, 2019, Azeem et al, 2020Samuel & Engelbrecht, 2021). The negative consequences of psychological contract violations are generally explained within the framework of the reciprocity norm (Gouldner, 1960) of Social Exchange Theory (Balu, 1964).…”

How do illegitimate tasks affect hospitality employees’ adaptive performance? An explanation from the perspective of cognitive-affective system theory of personality

“…This cynicism breeds distrust and resentment, making employees feel undervalued and exploited. Such perceptions reduce motivation and responsibility, leading to decreased adaptive performance (Bashir and Nasir, 2013;Marwat and Adnan, 2020). When employees are forced to accept illegitimate tasks, it contradicts their expectations and creates distributive injustice, breaching the social exchange relationship.…”