The psychological contracts of violation victims: A post‐violation model

Abstract

Summary Organizations may fail to keep their commitments to their employees, at times leading to psychological contract violation. Although many victims of violation remain with their employer despite such adverse experiences, little research exists on their responses in the aftermath of violation. This paper develops a post‐violation model to explain systematically how violation victims respond to and cope with violation and the effects this process has on their subsequent psychological contract. Central to post‐violation are the victims' beliefs regarding the likelihood of violation resolution and the factors affecting it. The model specifies how the victim engages in a self‐regulation process that results in an array of potential psychological contract outcomes. Possible outcomes include reactivation of the original pre‐violation contract, the formation of a new contract that may be more or less attractive than the original, or a state of dissolution wherein the victim fails to form a functional psychological contract with the employer. The research and practical implications of this model are discussed. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Actively Coping with Violation: Exploring Upward Dissent Patterns in Functional, Dysfunctional, and Deserted Psychological Contract End States

“…Psychological contract breach refers to the “perception that the organization has failed to fulfill promised obligations” (Bordia et al, 2010, p. 1579), while psychological contract violation denotes the strong negative emotional responses such as anger, frustration, and distress that may follow from the perception of psychological contract breach (Morrison and Robinson, 1997; Bankins, 2015). According to Tomprou et al (2015) negative emotional responses are particularly likely to occur following breaches of ‘important obligations’ and ‘losses significant to the employee’ (p. 1). Hence, Tomprou et al (2015) conceptualize violation as “a highly significant breach that elicits strong negative emotional reactions” (p. 1).…”

Psychological contracts: enhancing understanding of the expatriation experience

“…The employment relationship is perceived as more transactional in nature from the employer's perspective with little care or concern about expatriates' emotional needs. Similar to the outcomes proposed in the PVM (Tomprou et al, 2015), a variety of negative reactions surface from the expatriate perspective; some individuals seem to resign themselves to an unfavourable reality, whereas others are motivated to negotiate for a better deal, and still others are decided on changing organisations at the conclusion of their assignment (Pate & Scullion, 2009).…”

“…We draw attention to the need for such a coherent and consistent framework for PCT generally, noting that some steps have already been taken in that direction (e.g. Rousseau et al, 2016;Tomprou et al, 2015), and that cross-over research by scholars (e.g. Haslberger & Brewster, 2009;Pate & Scullion, 2009) points to such a need.…”

“…Paralleling this theoretical development, Tomprou, Rousseau, and Hansen (2015) present the post-violation model (PVM), which delves deeper into the dynamics of the employee-employer relationship during the Repair phase. The PVM is a systematic attempt to explain the processes by which employees (e.g.…”

What’s Next after Psychological Contract Violation?

“…Dulac et al, 2008;Raja et al, 2004;Zhao et al, 2007), and increased intentions to quit, cynicism, burnout, and workplace deviance (Bordia et al, 2008). Consequently, several studies have explored the processes employees use to repair the relationship with the employer following PCV (Bankins, 2015;Conway and Briner, 2002;Tomprou et al, 2015). However, these studies have concentrated on the coping strategies and self-regulation processes used to repair trust and justice with the organization, and have neglected the more sustainable effects of emotions of betrayal or anger on the individual's well-being.…”