With a Little Help from My Friends (and Substitutes): Social Referents and Influence in Psychological Contract Fulfillment

Abstract

This study investigated employees’ choice of social referents and the impact of social influence on their beliefs of psychological contract fulfillment. Using data from a field study conducted with 99 employees in a research organization, we found that one’s referent choice varied with the domain of promise evaluated. When evaluating the organization’s fulfillment of organization-wide promises, employees’ referents were primarily coworkers with whom they had close direct ties, namely, friends and advice givers. On the other hand, when evaluating the fulfillment of job-related promises, employees’ referents were mainly fellow workers who could substitute for them and people with whom they had multiple relationships. The effects of social influence also varied with the domain of promise evaluated. For organization-wide promises, employees’ fulfillment evaluations were similar to those of their friends. However, for job-related promises, their fulfillment evaluations were dissimilar to those of coworkers who played the dual roles of friends and substitutes. This study advances psychological contracts research by demonstrating that third parties to the psychological contract can influence fulfillment evaluations. In turn, the effect of such influence is contingent on the domain of promises being evaluated and the nature of the networks. We discuss implications for research in psychological contracts, social networks and influence, and referent choice.

The influence of entrepreneurs’ social referents on start-up size

“…We have argued that when there are other closer (i.e., micro-level) relevant referents for the entrepreneurial activity, such as other entrepreneurs personally known to the entrepreneur or the entrepreneur's previous experience in that role, entrepreneurs may pay more attention to the micro-level referents and less to macrolevel ones. In a sense, our arguments and results provide some hints and evidence for exploring the ways in which individuals vary their use of referent information according to their characteristics (Ho and Levesque 2005).…”

“…Accordingly, two main mechanisms have emerged to understand how close social referents are selected: cohesion and structural equivalence (Ho 2005;Ho and Levesque 2005;Shah 1998). The former states that individuals are influenced by direct ties to those with whom they share more interpersonal connections (Shah 1998).…”

“…In other words, when a person, in our case the entrepreneur, is exposed to the influence of different referents, he or she will primarily be influenced by those referents belonging to the close personal network, thereby reducing the influence of more distal potential referents. As individuals tend to select referents similar to them in terms of personal attributes and roles (Adams 1963;Ho and Levesque 2005;Kulik and Ambrose 1992;Shah 1998), entrepreneurs will take other entrepreneurs into consideration when they take decisions about their ventures (i.e., when they are acting as entrepreneurs). The referent selection framework points out that the selection of others as referents is, in part, contingent upon physical proximity (Kulik and Ambrose 1992).…”

“…Consequently, the impact of these macro-level social referents on entrepreneurs will be contingent upon the characteristics of the individual entrepreneurs. In this regard, the referent choice selection framework suggests that individuals tend to identify and select similar others as referents, and that such selection is, in part, contingent upon physical proximity and similarities in personal attributes and roles (Adams 1963;Ho and Levesque 2005;Kulik and Ambrose 1992;Shah 1998). In keeping with this idea, we argue that the influence of provincial-level social referents or macro-referents (i.e., established entrepreneurs in the province) will weaken in the case that entrepreneurs personally know other entrepreneurs who then become their social referents (mirco-referents).…”

Psychological contract breach and turnover intention: the moderating effects of social status and local ties

“…Social networks can help or hinder employer efforts to promote psychological contracts that are mutually beneficial to both employees and the employer. The informal network, which often does not parallel the organisation's formal structure (Krackhardt and Hanson, 1993), has been found to play an important role in shaping the psychological contract and its related beliefs (Ho, 2005;Ho and Levesque, 2005), ultimately affecting employee attitudes and perceptions (Rice and Aydin, 1993). Understanding the dynamics underlying employee psychological contracts is important for several reasons in relation to social networks.…”