Psychological Contract Case Study

Rousseau, 1994). In this research we study the relational component of the psychological contracts.
Breach of Psychological contract happens when one party to the contract perceives that contractual obligations committed or promised by the other party has not been full filled (Rousseau, 1995). Employees respond in a variety of ways for a breach of a psychological contract by the organization (Rousseau, 1995). Employees tend to respond in negatively in numerous ways to a breach of psychological contract as predicted by the social exchange theory (Rousseau, 1995; Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski, & Bravo, 2007). Scholars have cited negative emotional and behavioral responses to perceived breach of psychological contracts by employees in relation to

Morrison and Robinson (1997) in order to enhance clarity in the definition, distinguished between psychological contract breach and feelings of violation accompanied by strong emotions. They reported that psychological contract breach, a cognitive appraisal, emanates from the perception that employee has that there is discrepancy between what was promised vs. what was actually given. In contrast, violation refers to emotional and affective reaction that follows from cognitive appraisal of breach. Rousseau and Parks (1993) reports that perceived psychological contract violations happen when an employee perceives that the employer has failed to honour one or more of its commitments or obligations under the psychological contract associated with a strong emotional response (Morrison & Robinson, 1997) to the perception. They further stated that PCV’s ‘[do] not necessarily respond to “objective reality”, because psychological contracts, by definition, are in the minds of the employees’ (Morrison & Robinson, 1997, p.227, fn.1). the scholars have also found that PCV’s have degraded the employee’ trust in their employers, Job satisfaction, discharge of their obligations to the organization, satisfaction with their employer, and intention to remain with the employer (Robinson, 1996;

The main challenge that I will face would be to receive a satisfactory response from the participants to gather sufficient data for data analysis and short time scale I have for the research.
There is also a possibility that potential participants may not be having a clear idea about the psychological contract as an expressed term. Hence, probably, they may demonstrate their reluctance in taking part in the research. Therefore, it would be useful to outline the aims of the study in the questionnaire and engage in some knowledge sharing process prior to the questionnaire survey with the participants in the area of psychological contracts to obtain a true result. However, as the researcher, I have to make an assumption that the respondents have a reasonable knowledge and understanding in the area of psychological contracts. There may be instances where I might get some spurious responses if the respondents did not have a clear idea about the subject matter or if they get the help of some one or completely delegated the survey completion to someone else. Further, these potential problems could be mitigated to a greater extent as stated above if I have the chance to sit with respondents and explain them on the areas they are not very clear