MEDIATING ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONAL AND LEADER
TRUST
Master Thesis University of Groningen Faculty of Economics and Business MSc Human Resource Management
Groningen, June 2014
Asimina Gkasti Student Number: S2502615
Carolieweg 18A 9711 LS Groningen, Netherlands Phone: + 31 6 49 23 88 60
E-mail: a.gkasti@student.rug.nl
ABSTRACT
The current study investigated whether and how the implementation of the five core job characteristics as described by Hackman and Oldman (1976) is related to the perceived maintenance of employee’s psychological contract, and whether and how organizational and leader trust operate as a clarifying mechanism in this relationship. In order to interpret the role of trust, I use the social exchange theory as an explanatory mechanism and its main argument that the employment relationship is as an exchange relationship. Using data from a questionnaire survey among employees (N= 98) from various organizations, results demonstrated that employees form positive trust perceptions to the organization and to the leader in response to the implementation of the five aspects of work design. Organizational and leader trust, in their turn, were found to be positively related to employees’ psychological contract maintenance perceptions.
Table of Contents 2
1 Introduction……….……..3
2 Theoretical Background………..….5
2.1 Psychological Contract..……….…...5
2.2 Core Job Characteristics and Psychological Contract………...…. ..6
2.3 The mediating role of trust………...8
3 Methodology………..…...14
3.1Participants and Procedure………...14
3.2Measures………...……14
3.2.1Core Job Characteristics...14
3.2.2Trust in Organization………..….…. 15
3.2.3 Trust in Supervisor………..….…15
3.2.4 Perceived Maintenance of Psychological Contracts.……….…………..….…15
3.3 Data Analysis… …………...………...15
4 Results………..16
4.1Descriptive Statistics and Correlations………...……16
INTRODUCTION
According to the social exchange theory, the employment relationship is an exchange relationship, where employer and employee exchange constantly resources (Blau, 1964). This ‘’give and take’’ relationship allows employees to form a psychological contract with their organization (Bal et al, 2013). In case of fulfilment of the organization’s obligations and exchanges, employee’s psychological contract is perceived to be maintained (Rousseau, 2000). On the contrary, psychological contract breach may occur if employees perceive that their organization has failed to deliver on what they perceive was promised; in this case, the organization’s obligations are not fulfilled (Schalk & Freese, 1993).
Nowadays, organizations have the remarkable obligation to make work a happier experience for all their employees (Harold, 2008). In other words, organizations can develop a positive and enduring psychological bond with their employees by improving the content and design of the work. Work design could create a pattern of expectations about what the organization should offer to employees and what it is obligated to provide them with.
Job design and in particular core job characteristics are of central interest in this study. To be more specific, job characteristics refer to a theory of work design that plays a crucial role in organizational theory. According to this theory, organizations can encourage increased work quality and positive work attitudes, by enhancing jobs along the five dimensions of skill variety, task identity, task significance, task autonomy, and task feedback (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Extensive research has been conducted focused on the motivating potential of job design and the work outcomes it produces (Karasek, Brisson, Kawakami, Houtman, Bongers, Amick, & Benjamin, 1998). However, work design has not yet been examined in relationship to psychological contract perceptions.
In order to further clarify the maintenance of psychological contract as a consequence of job design, I use the social exchange theory to propose organizational and leader trust as mediating explanatory mechanisms that can link job characteristics to psychological contract maintenance. As Aryee, Budhwar and Chen (2002) wrote, the employment relationship can be characterized as a social exchange, which is premised on a long-term exchange of favours and on a diffuse obligation to reciprocate. In other words, investments of the one party are likely to be reciprocated by the other party (Bal, 2013). Therefore, in this research I suggest that a job design of high quality can potentially generate trust in employees towards their leader and the organization. Employees will reciprocate trust to the leader and to the organization, as an exchange for the benefits they gain from work design. The positive trust perceptions then provide the basis for the formation of unique mental expectations and beliefs that the organization and their immediate supervisors will keep their promises and fulfil their obligations. This will foster employees’ perceptions of the maintenance of their psychological contract. Therefore, the main notion, as it is visualised in Figure 1, is that the implementation of the five core job characteristics will lead employees to form positive trust perceptions of the leader and the organization, which in their turn will foster positive perceptions of psychological contract maintenance.
Figure 1: Conceptual Model
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Psychological Contract
The psychological contract is an increasingly pertinent aspect of workplace relationships. It basically refers to the relationship between organizations and employees and regards their mutual obligations as a central issue (Rousseau, 2004). To be more specific, psychological contracts represent one’s own and other people’s relational obligations and are highly perceptual and dynamic in nature (Anderson & Schalk, 1998; Rousseau, 1990, 1995; Rousseau & Tijoriwala, 1998). Contrary to the written employment contract, psychological contracts reside in the mind of the individual and they can play a crucial role in defining the relationship between organization and employee. Therefore, psychological contracts comprise mental models that facilitate the framing of promises and obligations (Robinson & Rousseau, 1994). When these promises are kept and the obligations are fulfilled, psychological contracts are perceived to be maintained (Rousseau, 2004). On the contrary, a violation of them may occur when one party of the employment relationship perceives that the other party has not fulfilled its obligations and has not delivered what it was promised (MacNeil, 1985).
According to Kenneth Moss, (2012) employee’s psychological contract can be maintained when the expectations of one side become clear to the other side, and when there is an agreement upon them. This means, that both parties understand and accept the role the other party expects them to fulfil, and are motivated to meet the expectations (Moss, 2012). Bal et
al. (2010) articulate that organizations have both economic and socio-emotional obligations towards their employees. The distinction between these types of obligations is also supported by MacNeil (1985), who acknowledged that the economic obligations form employee’s transactional psychological contract, while the socio-emotional obligations determine employee’s relational psychological contract. In this study, I focus on examining how employees evaluate the socio-emotional contract fulfilment by their organizations and leaders. Socio-emotional fulfilment refers to the extent to which employees perceive that their organization has fulfilled its obligations regarding resources that aim to strengthen the employment relationship and develop the employees (Bal et al, 2010). For instance, these resources include career support or flexible working scheme that is considered a form of socio-emotional support of the organization for the employees (Bal et al, 2010). Thus, in the present study, only the relational contracts will be taken into account (Rousseau & Tijoriwala, 1998).
Core Job Characteristics and Psychological Contract
This study’s major notion is that the maintenance of employee’s psychological contract can be a consequence of work design. Work design theory encompasses the core job characteristics theory. According to this theory, organizations can encourage increased work quality and positive work attitudes, by enhancing jobs along five dimensions (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). First of all, there is skill variety, which refers to the extent to which one uses different skills and talents to perform the work. Task identity is the second core characteristic of work design and refers to the degree to which a person is in charge of completing an identifiable piece of work from start to finish. Third, task significance implies how within an organization an employee’s job, affects other employee’s work and their well-being. In addition, there is autonomy, which deals with the independence, freedom and discretion in carrying out the job. Finally, feedback regards receiving of timely, clear and specific information about the effectiveness of employee’s job performance (Piccolo & Colquitt, 2006).
significant impact on the perceived maintenance of employee’s psychological contract, as it allows them to appraise the extent to which the organization keeps its promises and fulfils its obligation towards the employee.
I use the social exchange theory to further underpin the relationship between core job characteristics and employee’s perceptions of maintenance of their psychological contract. According to this theory, the employment relationship is an exchange relationship, and the norm of reciprocity constitutes its central concept (Bal et al 2010). This means, that in a business environment, organizations and employees are engaged in continuous interaction, where they exchange resources and anticipate that their resource investments and efforts will be reciprocated by the other party (Bal et al 2010).
To be more specific, an organization that implements the five core aspects of work design is concerned with the quality of work that it provides to its employees (Piccolo & Colquitt, 2006). Incorporating skill variety, task identity, task significance, task autonomy and job feedback into a job is likely to generate positive emotions and employees could positively assess their organization’s intentions. In other words, when organizations and leaders enhance the content and quality of employee’s jobs, employees might feel that they receive support and concern, thus, their psychological contract is likely to be maintained.
Specifically, through skill variety, employees can use multiple skills to perform their job (Oldham & Hackman, 2010). This is important as the job becomes an interesting and challenging experience that leads employees to perceive that their organization and leaders respect their need to use a particular set of abilities they possess. Therefore, employees might feel that the organization succeeds in fulfilling the obligation of providing an interesting and meaningful work.
In addition, a job that incorporates, task identity allows employees to complete a job from the beginning till the end and to not perform only a portion of the job (Oldham & Hackman, 2010). As a result, employees identify with their job and enjoy its outcomes. In this case employees may perceive task identity as a form of support and concern of the organization for them.
A certain degree of freedom and discretion allowed to employees over their job can make them more powerful and influential within an organization, as they will have a say in the decision making process (Oldham & Hackman, 2010). This may lead to a positive assessment, regarding the organization’s and leader’s intentions.
Finally, through feedback employees become aware of the results of their work and they learn what to expect from their superiors (Lawler, 1973). Having access to such information, either the feedback is positive or negative, creates a climate of support, which allows employees to consider that the organization fulfils its socio-emotional, work-related obligations towards them.
This job design-based exchange, results in stable relationships between employees and both their leader and the whole organization (Rousseau, 1995). Thus, the implementation of the five aspects of work design results in a mutually satisfied exchange relationship leading employees to assume that the organization and their supervisors will fulfil their obligations and deliver what they promised (Oldham & Hackman, 2010, Rousseau, 1995). Thus, high-quality core job characteristics may be related to employee perceptions of psychological contract maintenance. The above lines of reasoning lead to the first hypothesis:
H1: Core job characteristics are positively related to perceived maintenance of the psychological contract.
The mediating role of trust
Trust has always been a key element in the exchange relationship between two or more parties. In business environments and within an organization the actors involved in the employment relationship highly rely on each other for valued results (Krot & Lewicka, 2012). When trusting relationships are developed between organizations and employees outcomes of superior quality are expected (Krot & Lewicka, 2012). In the present study, trust operates as the clarifying mechanism that links the core job characteristics to the perceived maintenance of psychological contract.
On the other hand, cognitive trust describes a rational evaluation of an individual’s ability to carry out obligations.
A more thorough investigation of trust was conducted by Mayer, David, & Schoorman, (1995), who set the ground for the concept of trustworthiness. Trustworthiness was examined through the Ability, Benevolence, and Integrity (ABI) model. In particular, ability refers to the competences that allow a party to have power within a specific domain, benevolence refers to a trustee’s desire to do good to the trustor and finally integrity refers to the trustee’s adherence to principles or ideals that the trustor finds acceptable. Therefore, the extent to which there is trustworthiness in social interactions is contingent on the trustor’s belief regarding the degree of the trustee’s ability, benevolence and integrity. Mayer, David, & Schoorman, (1995), used all three traits in order to understand why some parties are more trusted than others.
The definition of trustworthiness leads to the formation of trust intentions. Trust as an intention is defined as ‘‘the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party’’ (Mayers & David, 1999).
In this study trust is seen as both the organization’s and leader’s perceived trustworthiness and it is interpreted as an intention to become vulnerable. This means that employees’ trust perceptions are based on positive evaluations of the organization’s and leader’s trustworthiness in terms of their ability, benevolence, and integrity regarding the promises and obligations related to the psychological contract. Trustworthiness itself, leads employees to submit to the intentions of both the organization and leader.
Another important characteristic of trust is that it is a multidimensional construct (Cummings & Bromiley, 1996; Nyhan & Marlowe, 1997). Within a business environment interpersonal trust, encompasses different levels of trust such as trust in each other, trust in senior leaders, trust in the organization, trust in external relationships and finally trust in line managers (Lima, Michel & Caetano, 2011). This study places emphasis on only two referents of trust, which are trust in the organization and trust in the leader. The mediating role of both organizational and leader trust is useful in examining how core job characteristics eventually lead to positive perceptions of employees regarding their psychological contract. This study takes into consideration the definitions of the organizational and leader trust.
beneficial, or at least not detrimental, to them is also important (Tan & Tan, 2000). As stated in the previous section, social exchange theory proposes that employees acquire economic (e.g., economic rewards) and socio-emotional (e.g., support) resources through the relationships with their organization (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986). The socio-emotional exchanges between employees and organization involve unspecified obligations, in which the parties involved reciprocate effort towards one another. Thus, according to the social exchange theory, during the exchange relationship between the organization and the employees, trust perceptions are likely to be developed, when the organization implements a work design of superior quality, by adjusting to each job the five core job characteristics.
I further explain this trust development by providing one example for each core job characteristic. Organizations that design a job to incorporate skill variety demand from their employees to use multiple skills and abilities they possess. This indicates that employees will perceive a job as more interesting if it requires a mix of skills and could potentially develop a positive attitude for their work. In addition, an increase in skill variety shows that organizations believe and rely on employee’s competences. Consequently, employees are likely to think that their organization fulfil their need of an interesting work. As a result, positive evaluations to the organizations intentions in terms of benevolence, regarding the obligations of an interesting work are formed. This results employees to get vulnerable to their organization’s intentions.
Task identity is another core job characteristic that can also reinforce trust perceptions in an organization. Employees, who complete a job from start to finish and not undertake proportion of the job, feel identified not only with their job but also with the goals and values of the organization. This indicates that employees are highly valued by the organizations, and through task identity employees are given the chance to become an integral part of it. This allows employees to form positive trust perceptions to their organization which recognizes their value and believe in their competences. Therefore, the trustworthy relationship that is developed between the organization and employees allows them to be vulnerable to its decisions and actions.
towards the firm, which views them as key contributors to the proper functioning of the firm by making other people dependent on their work. Thus, trust to the organization’s benevolence and integrity of fulfilling the obligation of providing significant tasks leads employees to the willingness to be left to its discretion.
Next, organizations can design jobs to incorporate a certain level of autonomy. Employees who have autonomy to act on their own and maintain a high level of discretion on their work may think that their organization has faith on their abilities and on the outcomes they produce. They will perceive that they have been trusted. Thus, trustworthiness perception to the organization, regarding its obligations to fulfil the obligation of giving freedom to carry out the work, will induce trust intentions to become vulnerable. Consequently employees will reciprocate an effort to prove that they are worthy to their organization’s faith (Kerry, Capps, Randall, Cangemi, Caillouet, Larry, 1986).
Last, employees who receive a sincere and constructive feedback of their work can form positive trust perceptions of their organization. This is mainly because the state of being informed about the results of your work, gives employees the chance to correct any underperforming issues and make them even more effective in their work. Therefore employees will trust their organization’s ability to provide them with constructive feedback and helping them become better performers, therefore, they will reciprocate trust. In this way, the organization shows that it is concerned with employees’ work related needs, and the latter will become contingent on their actions (Ryan, Kathleen, Oestreich, 1998).
Based on the above mentioned examples the implementation of core job characteristics generates organizational trustworthiness. In short, employees evaluate positive the organizations’ trustworthiness in terms of ability, benevolence and integrity and anticipate fulfilment of its socio-emotional and developmental obligations. Employees in return to the exchange of work design will respond with the intention to be vulnerable to the organization’s actions. This leads to the formulation of the second hypothesis, which is as follows:
supervisors are considered the most important representatives of the organization towards employees, and they play a pivotal role in designing and supervising the work.
According to social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), supervisors and subordinates interact on a daily basis and both are engaged in exchanges (Graen & Cashman, 1975). Usually supervisors build relational contracts with employees as they coexist in a work environment that forces them to cooperate and communicate constantly. Thus relational exchanges take place that seem to be vital for the formation of trust perceptions to the leaders.
An additional point of concern is that supervisors play a pivotal role in designing employee’s work (Slack, Chambers & Johnston 1995). The complexity and the content of the work can be determinants of employee’s behavior (Piccolo & Colquitt, 2006). A work design of high quality can positively impact employee’s trust perceptions to the leader. For instance, supervisors who give employees the opportunity to prove their competences through skill variety and task identity can earn the trust of employees. This is because employees will feel grateful to make best use of their expertise and at the same time they may feel as having a meaningful work since they contribute remarkably to the work of others. In short, they will positively assess the trustworthiness of the leader in terms of benevolence as the leader support employees’ professional and developmental needs. Establishing a trustworthy relationship with the employees, leaders will have the chance to accept employees’ vulnerability to their actions.
Autonomy and feedback in the work can impact positively trust perceptions to the leader (Aryee, Budhwar & Chen, 2002). When supervisors give employee’s the discretion and freedom to carry out work, they feel as being trusted. They are also likely to believe that their leader fulfills the socio-emotional obligation of providing autonomy into the work; therefore employees will assess positively their leader trustworthiness and are likely to intent to submit to their actions
Finally, supervisors make job expectations clearer through feedback. In this case employees assess positively their leaders’ benevolence and integrity because through feedback, they know what to expect from them. This creates a climate of support and respectful treatment,thus trustworthiness will set the ground for the formation of trust intentions towards the leader (Aryee, Budhwar & Chen, 2002).
H3: Core job characteristics are positively related to trust perceptions to the leader.
Over time, there has been extensive research on the role of trust in the psychological contracts. Trust has been examined as a process, an input and as an output of psychological contracts (Keith, 2011). Based on the conceptual model of this study (Figure 1), trust is explored as both output and input. First, trust is investigated as a consequence –as an output- of work design. An organization that integrates the five core features of work design into the jobs of employees can generate trust perceptions in employees. Second, trust to the organization –as an input- allows employees to form positive expectations that their organization will fulfill its promises. Given the existence of trust to an organization employees might feel secure working in it and consequently they will expect that their organization will treat them in a manner consistent with their initial expectations. When this occurs, employee’s psychological contract is maintained.
This is also the case with leader trust. The role of leaders is of great significance in an organization as they are really close to the employees. They are responsible for designing their work, monitoring it and giving employees feedback on how to improve – if existed – any underperforming issues. Supervisors can earn the trust of employees by making work an interesting experience for them. This can be achieved through the implementation of the core job characteristics. In response to it, employees will respond with positive trust perceptions to their leaders. Specifically, employees who trust their leaders will be committed to the decisions they make and will expect a fulfilment of their obligations (Kingshott & Pecotich, 2007). Based on Rouseau, (1995) whenever employee’s individual beliefs, regarding an exchange informal agreement with their leaders are secured, maintenance of the effectiveness of their psychological contract is achieved. In other words, the positive trust perceptions to the leader generate the impression that they will behave in a predictable manner to the employees, and this can ensure the maintenance of employee’s psychological contract.
Consequently, the following hypotheses are formulated:
H4: Trust in the organization mediates the positive relationship between core job characteristics and perceived maintenance of the psychological contract.
METHODOLOGY Participants and Procedure
Participants in this study were employees who have a supervisor in their work. The sample was 98 respondents drawn from multiple organizations in several industries in Greece. Respondents were approached via different social networks (Linked-in) and electronic platforms such as email. Participants filled out an online questionnaire that assessed participants’ perceptions of core job characteristics, organizational trust, leader trust, and maintenance of psychological contract, separately. The majority of the respondents were male (n = 58, 58%). A total of 80 (80%) of the respondents has a higher educational background (education beyond secondary school education level) and 18 (20%) were in possession of either baccalaureate or technical diploma. In addition, 39 (40%) respondents held a management position, while 59 (60%) did not. The mean age of the participants was 37 years (standard deviation [SD] = 10.32) and their mean organizational tenure was 6 years (SD = 8.04). Data were collected during the period of time from February to April, 2014. As the study examines sensitive data, all participants were informed that the information they provide will remain confidential and that it will be used exclusively for academic purposes.
Measures1
Core job characteristics
In order to measure the independent variable the Job Diagnostic Survey (Oldham & Hackman, 1997) was used. This instrument encompasses a number of statements that describe the job and in particular, skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback. On a 7 point scale, ranging from 1 (very inaccurate) to 7 (very accurate), participants indicate the accuracy of the statement. Example items for each of the five core job characteristics are: ‘The job requires me to use a number of complex high-levels skills’’ (skill variety); ‘‘The job provides me the chance to completely finish the pieces of work I begin’’ (task identity), ‘‘This job is one where a lot of other people can be affected by how well the work gets done’’ (task significance); ‘‘The job gives me considerable opportunity for independence and freedom to how I do the work’’ (task autonomy); ‘‘Supervisors often let me know how well they think I am performing the job’’ (task feedback).
Trust in organization
Organizational trust was measured by a 7-item scale by Gabarro and Athos (1978), and used by Robinson (1996). Example items are ‘My employer is not always honest and truthful’ (reverse-scored) and ‘I believe my employer has high integrity.’ Answers were provided on a 7-point scale. Likert scale: 1 = ‘‘Strongly Disagree’’, 7 = ‘‘Strongly Agree’’.
Trust in supervisor
A 7-item scale by Schoorman, David, Mayer & Roger (2007) was used to measure the second mediator which is trust in supervisor. Response options ranged from (1) ‘strongly disagree’ to (7) ‘strongly agree.’ The items, used, investigate the trustworthiness of leader in terms of ability, benevolence and integrity, as well as trust as a willingness to become vulnerable. Example items include: ‘My supervisor keeps my interests in mind when making decisions.’ and ‘I would be willing to let my supervisor have complete control over my future in this company’.
Perceived maintenance of psychological contract
Employer fulfilment was measured by indicating the extent to which employees believe that their organization and supervisors have fulfilled their socio-emotional and developmental obligations. For this reason a 9-item scale, ranging from (1) ‘strongly disagree’ to (7) ‘strongly agree’ by Bal et al. (2010) was used. Examples of obligations are the following: ‘Freedom to do the job well’ and ‘Participation in the decision making’.
Data Analysis
the organization with perceived maintenance of psychological contract. As I examine a multiple mediation research model, I followed the bootstrapping process in order to assess the indirect effects stemming from the research model. This allowed me to test both mediators simultaneously. All statistics data are presented in tables and figures at the end of the study.
RESULTS Descriptive Statistics and Correlations
In order to assess the reliability and internal consistency of the set of items in this study, I used the Cronbach Alpha’s reliability test and all items appeared to be worthy of retention. In particular the subscale of Core Job Characteristics, Organizational Trust and Psychological Contract appeared to have good internal consistency, α = .77, α = .91, and α = .84, respectively. The internal consistency of Leader Trust was α = .72, after the removal of one out of seven items, which reported a highly negative correlation (Item 6: Increasing my vulnerability to criticism by my supervisor would be a mistake).
It is worth mentioning that the study variables were significantly correlated with each other. First, the independent variable of this study, core job characteristics, shows a positive correlation with organizational trust (r = .24, p <.05). Second, a positive correlation between core job characteristics and leader trust is also noticed, although not significant (r = .15). Moreover, leader trust seem to have a significantly high positive correlation with organizational trust (r = .68, p < .01). As also predicted, core job characteristics are significantly related to psychological contract (r = .36, p < .01). Finally, results show a strong positive correlation between psychological contract and both organizational and leader trust (r = .61, p < .01; r = 52, p < .01). No significant correlations were found between the control variables of gender, and management position and the main study variables. The educational level of respondents was positively related to both core job characteristics (r = .26) and psychological contract (r = .20).
Hypotheses Testing
psychological contract (B = .15, t = 1.99, p = .05). Accordingly, hypothesis 1 is supported. In addition, out of the three control variables used only the educational level of the respondents seems to contribute significantly to the perceived maintenance of employee’s psychological contract (B = .15, t = 2.16, p = .01).
Hypothesis 2 predicts that core job characteristics are positively related to trust perceptions to the organization. The results of the regression analysis indeed show that core job characteristics are positively related to trust to the organization (B = .30, t = 2.65, p = .01). Therefore, hypothesis 2 is also supported.
Hypothesis 3 predicts that core job characteristics are positively related to trust perceptions to the leader. Although there is a lower degree of relatedness between core job characteristics and leader trust in comparison to the relationship between core job characteristics and organizational trust, results indicate a positive relationship (B = .23, t = 2.00, p = .05). Consequently, hypothesis 3 is confirmed.
Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations of the Variables
N= 98
* p < .05; ** p < .01*
M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Core Job Characteristics 5.00 .82
TABLE 2
Results of Regression Analysis
Model and variables entered
Dependent Variable Model: Psychological Contract B SE t p R2 .11 Constant 3.53 .06 56.01 .00 Gender .02 .07 .24 .81 Education .15 .07 2.16 .01 Management Position .00 .07 .10 .91
Core Job Characteristics .15 .08 1.99 .05 Organizational Trust .34 .09 3.87 .00
Leader Trust .19 .09 2.19 .03
Model and variables entered
Mediator variable model: Organizational Trust
Mediator variable model: Leader Trust B SE t p R2 B SE T p R2 Constant 0.00 0.97 .00 1.00 .11 0.00 0.99 .00 1.00 .07 Gender -.20 .10 -2.03 .05 -.15 .10 -1.52 .13 Education -.09 .10 -.96 .33 -.16 .10 -1.51 .13 Management Position .10 .11 .93 .35 .10 .11 .86 .39 Core Job Characteristics .30 .11 2.65 .01 .23 .12 2.00 .05 Indirect Effects
DISCUSSION
In this study I introduced and tested a model that used social exchange theory and theory on organizational and leader trust for explaining the relationship between core job characteristics and perceived maintenance of employee’s psychological contract. By combining these literatures with the Job Characteristics Model for work design and theory on psychological contract, I created a model, which suggests that a work design that incorporates the five job characteristics of skill variety, task identity, task significance, task autonomy, and task feedback can promote the maintenance of employee’s psychological contract, mainly because it increases employee’s trust toward their organization and their leader.
Findings
Limitations
Several limitations of this study should be taken into account when the present results are interpreted. A first limitation of this study is that it is based on cross-sectional data. Therefore causal interferences are impossible to make. This indicates that reversed causation between organizational, leader trust and psychological contract may occur.
A second limitation is that in this study employee’s perceptions regarding concepts such as organizational and leader trust and the state of their psychological contract were evaluated. Therefore, most of the data were collected through self-reports, which are likely to create problems of common-method bias (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Podsakoff, 2012). In particular, self-reports of employer’s fulfillment of socio-emotional and developmental needs can constitute a potential limitation, as they are based on an individual’s personal view and they do not include other-reports such as supervisors. Self-reports of employees trust perceptions may also be biased, in the sense that they reflect a personal evaluation that cannot be verified by other sources.
The current study took into account several demographic variables as covariates, such as gender, educational level and management position of the respondents. A possible limitation of this study could be that other situational factors that were not taken into account such as the economic crisis may also relate to trust perceptions and maintenance of psychological contract. It is important to mention that the current study took place in the surrounding area of Greece, where there are high levels of uncertainty and job insecurity due to the financial and economic crisis. Trust perceptions and in particular trust as a willingness to be vulnerable to the leader and to the organization can largely be affected by an insecure work-related context. Therefore, other situational factors could have been taken into account when examining the relationship between core job characteristics and perceived maintenance of employee’s psychological contract.
Theoretical Implications
existing literature on core job characteristics and psychological contract. In particular, it integrates the literature of psychological contract with core features from the work design, social exchange and trust literature, in order to examine employee’s maintenance of psychological contract as an outcome of work design. To be more specific, in this study the attention is shifted to the maintenance of employee’s psychological contract, which occurs when the organization and leader fulfil their socio-emotional and developmental obligations towards employees. Based on the results of this study, the fulfilment of the above mentioned obligations occurs as a consequence of the implementation of the core job characteristics into the work of employees.
In addition, the study contributes to the social exchange theory. This theory specifies that organizations and employees exchange resources and anticipate that their resource investments and efforts will be reciprocated by the other party (Bal et al 2010). The present results suggest that employees tend to perceive the implementation of the five core job characteristics in their work design as a resource investment by the organization and the leader in the social exchange with them. In particular the integration of skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback into the work of employees raises employee’s expectations that both the organization and leader, will deliver on what they promised. Consequently, the use of work design yields a significant benefit for employees. This is the perceived maintenance of their psychological contract.
Thus, the role of trust as mediator in this paper indicates the trustworthiness of the organization and leader regarding their socio-emotional and developmental obligations they have towards employees. The perceived trustworthiness allows employees to become vulnerable to the organization and leader and be affected by their decisions (Mayer, David, & Schoorman, 1995). Organizational and leader trust can strengthen employee’s faith and belief that organization and leader will keep their promises. This implies the maintenance rather than violation of employee’s psychological contract.
In previous research trust has been examined as an antecedent of psychological contract but it has not been examined before in relation to core job characteristics. The present results suggest that both organizational and leader trust can further clarify why the five dimensions of work design eventually lead to the maintenance of employee’s psychological contract. In addition, according to the results of this study organizational trust has a stronger positive impact on the relationship between core job characteristics and psychological contract in comparison to leader trust. This suggests that the organizations’ intentions and behaviors, matter more for employees, when work design is implemented. Finally, these contributions can guide future literature in more in-depth research analysis by investigating the role of leader not only in conjunction with the work design but also with the perceived maintenance of employees’ psychological contract.
Practical Implications
This study provides several practical implications for HR practitioners, who can manage employee’s psychological contract, by setting in motion a promising job design. This practice could be achieved through an increase in employee’s trust perceptions.
job design is implemented a fulfilment of socio-emotional and developmental obligations occurs. Therefore, employee’s psychological contract is maintained.
Practically this indicates, that HR practitioners can manage employee’s psychological contract. According to Hess and Jespen (2009) a breach of psychological contract can result in negative cognitive responses such as work dissatisfaction and intentions to leave the organization. In addition Rousseau (2004) argued that negative responses such as reduced loyalty, commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors are developed when there is a violation of psychological contract. In order to avoid these consequences, it would be advantageous to manage employee’s psychological contract in advance by offering employees jobs that are designed according to the five aspects of job design.
Moreover, the results of this study show that incorporating skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback into the work of employees, provides the basis for the formation of trust perceptions to the leader and to the organization. In this study, trust is seen as the willingness to get vulnerable irrespective of the ability to monitor or control the other party (Mayer, David & Schoorman, 1995). Working in an environment that promotes trust can have significant impact for both the organization and employees. On the one hand the organization could benefit from employees, who have formed positive trust perceptions towards it as they are likely to make best use of their competences for the benefit of the organization. On the other hand, employees could feel secure and willing to rely into the organization in which they work. Therefore, trust can be promoted into organizations, as it is a beneficial condition that allows both parties to interact in a reciprocal manner and generate positive work outcomes.
Future Directions
This study also offers some suggestions for future research. My results show that indeed a promising job design can affect positively employees’ evaluations of their psychological contract. This is achieved both directly and indirectly. In this study, I used the organizational and leader trust as an underlying process through which core job characteristics can lead to the perceived maintenance of employee’s psychological contract.
As the topic of this study is quite new in the literature, it would be interesting to explore other potential variables as both mediators and moderators, through which the above mentioned relationship is verified. A potential mediator could be interactional justice and in particular the fairness of the interaction with supervisors (Pate, Martin, McGoldrick, 2003). It would be interesting to examine how core job characteristics promote interactional justice and how this affects employee’s psychological contract; the relationship between interactional justice and psychological contract has already been supported in previous research (Tetrick & Shore, 1994; Morrison & Robinson, 1997). It is also likely to examine potential moderators and predict under which conditions the relationship between core job characteristics and perceived maintenance of psychological contract is affected negatively or positively. A possible moderator can be the big five personality traits. People usually occupy job positions that fit their personal traits and some score high on some of the big five personality traits and others do not (Tudge, Higgins, Thoresen & Barrick, 2006). Assuming that people have different reactions towards the implementation of work design they may perceive the state of their psychological contract differently. For example a job that incorporates task significance and autonomy can lead to perceived maintenance of psychological contract for individuals who score high on conscientiousness and extroversion but it may also lead to a violation of it if people score low on these traits.
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
Andrew Hayes, (2013), Multilevel Mediation Analysis
Aryee S., Budhwar P. S., Chen Z. X., (2002). Trust As A Mediator Of The Relationship Between Organizational Justice And Work Outcomes: Test Of A Social Exchange Model.
Journal Of Organizational Behavior, 267–285.
Bal, P. M., De Lange, A. H., Zacher, H. & Van Der Heijden, I.J.M., (2013). A Lifespan Perspective On Psychological Contracts And Their Relations With Organizational Commitment. European Journal Of Work And Organizational Psychology, 22(3), 279-292
Bal, P. M., Jansen, P. G. W., Van Der Velde, M. E. G., De Lange, A. H. & Rousseau, D. M. (2010). The Role Of Future Time Perspective In Psychological Contracts: A Study Among Older Workers. Journal Of Vocational Behaviour, 76: 474-486.
Blau P., (1964). Exchange And Power In Social Life. Wiley: New York.
Chiaburu, D.S, & Harrison, D.A. (2008). Do Peers Make The Place? Conceptual Synthesis And Meta-Analysis Of Coworker Effects On Perceptions, Attitudes, Ocbs, And Performance.
Journal Of Applied Psychology, 93: 1082-1103.
Cummings L., Bromiley P., (1996). The Organizational Trust Inventory (Oti), Development And Validation, 303-310.
Donald A. J. Cable, (2008). The Psychological Contract: The Development And Validation Of A Managerial Measure.
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived Organizational Support. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 71: 500-507.
Grant, Fried, And Juillerat, (2009). Work Matters: Job Design In Classic And Contemporary Perspectives,422-424
Guest, D. E. & Conway, N. (1997), Employee Motivation And The Psychological Contract, London
Hackman, J. R. & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development Of Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal
Harold, A. P., (2008), Psychological Contract And Employment Relationship, The Icfai University. Journal Of Organizational Behavior, 7(4): 7-24
Hart, Kerry M.; Capps, H. Randall; Cangemi, Joseph P.; Caillouet, Larry M, (1986). Exploring Organizational Trust And Its Multiple Dimensions: A Case Study Of General Motors. Organizational Development Journey, 31-39.
Herriot, P., Manning, W. E. G. & Kidd, J. M (1997), The Content Of The Psychological Contract. British Journal Of Management, 8: 151-162.
Jackson, Keith (2011) Trust In The Psychological Contract: An International Employee Perspective.
Judy Pate, Graeme Martin, Jim Mcgoldrick, (2003) "The Impact Of Psychological Contract Violation On Employee Attitudes And Behaviour", Employee Relations, 6: 557 - 573
Karasek, Robert; Brisson, Chantal; Kawakami, Norito; Houtman, Irene; Bongers, Paulien; Amick, Benjamin, (1998). The Job Content Questionnaire (Jcq): An Instrument For Internationally Comparative Assessments Of Psychosocial Job Characteristics. Journal Of
Occupational Health Psychology, 3(4): 322-355
Kelsey Nicholle Kaska, (2011). Building Trust: How Farmers Manage Social Interactions In Their Home Communities, 66-68.
Kreitner R., Kinicki A., (2012). Motivating Employees Through Job Design Organizational Behavior, 10th Edition, Mcgraw-Hill.
Krot K, Lewicka D., (2012). The Importance Of Trust In Manager-Employee Relationships.
International Journal Of Electronic Business Management, 10(3): 224-233
Laler, Edward, (1973). Motivation In Work Organizations, Belmont, California: Wadswoth Publishing Company Inc, 148.
Lima M. S., Michel J. W., Caetano A., (2011), Clarifying The Importance Of Trust In Organizations As A Component Of Effective Work Relationship. Journal Of Applied Social
Psychology.
Morrison Ew., Robinson Sl., (1997), ‘‘When Employees Feel Betrayed: A Model Of How Psychological Contract Violation Develops’’. Academy Of Management Review, 22: 226-256
Moss K., 2012, Effective Leadership: Managing Psychological Contracts
Narelle Hess, Denise M. Jepsen, (2009) "Career Stage And Generational Differences In Psychological Contracts". Career Development International, 14(3): 261 - 283
Neil Anderson, René Schalk, (1999). The Psychological Contract In Retrospect And Prospect.
Journal Of Organizational Behavior, 19: 637–647
Nyhan, R.C. And Marlowe, H.A. (1997). “Development And Psychometric Properties Of The Organizational Trust Inventory”. Evaluation Review, 21(5): 614-35.
Oldham G. R., Hackman J. R., (2010). Not What It Was And Not What It Will Be: The Future Of Job Design Research. Journal Of Organizational Behavior 31(2-3): 463–479.
Podsakoff P. M., Mackenzie, S. B. & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012), Sources Of Method Bias In Social Science Research And Recommendation On How To Control It. Annual Review Of
Psychology, 63: 539-569.
Radostina K. Purvanova, Joyce E. Bono & J. Dzieweczynski, (2006). Transformational Leadership, Job Characteristics And Organizational Citizenship Performance, Human Performance, 19(1): 1-22
Rhoades Shanock, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2006). When Supervisors Feel Supported: Relationships With Subordinates’ Perceived Supervisor Support, Perceived Organizational Support, And Performance. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 91: 689-695.
Richard Hall, (2006) Psychological Contracts: Why Do They Matter? University Of Sydney.
Richard M. Emerson, (1976). Social Exchange Theory. Annual Reviews, Annual Review Of
Sociology, 335-362
Robinson, Rousseau, (1994). Violating The Psychological Contract: Not The Exception But The Norm. Journal Of Organizational Behavior, 15: 245-259.
Ronald F. Piccolo, Jason A. Colquitt, (2006). Transformational Leadership And Job Behaviors: The Mediating Role Of Core Job Characteristics. Academy Of Management
Rousseau D., (2004). Psychological Contracts In The Workplace: Understanding The Ties That Motivate. The Academy Of Management Executive, 18(1): 120-127.
Rousseau D., (2000). Psychological Contract Inventory, Technical Report.
Rousseau, D.M. & Tijoriwala, S.A. (1998). Assessing Psychological Contracts: Issues, Alternatives, And Types Of Measures. Journal Of Organizational Behavior, 19: 679-695.
Russel P.J. Kingshott, Anthony Pecotich, (2007). The Impact Of Psychological Contracts On Trust And Commitment In Supplier-Distributor Relationships. European Journal Of
Marketing, 41(9/10): 1053-1072.
Ryan, D. Kathleen, Oestreich, K. Daniel, (1998). Driving Fear Out Of The Workplace: Creating The High-Trust, High-Performance Organization (2nd Ed.), The Jossey-Bass Business & Management Series.
Slack N, Chambers S, Johnston R, (1995), 4th Edition, Operations Management, Pearson Education.
Starnes B. J., Truhon A., Mccarthy V, (2011). A Primer On Organizational Trust: Organizational Trust: Employee-Employer Relationships
Tan Hh, Tan Csf (2000). Towards The Differentiation Of Trust In Supervisor And Trust In Organization, Genetic, Social, And General Psychology Monographs, 126(2): 241-260 Tetrick Lm., Shore Le., (1994), ‘‘The Psychological Contract As An Explanatory Framework In The Employment Relationship’’, Trends In Organizational Behavior, 1(1): 92-107
Tudge A, Higgins C.A , Thoresen C.J. & Barrick M.R, (2006), The Big Five Personality Traits, General Mental Ability And Career Success Across The Life Span, Personnel Psychology, 52(3): 621-659
APPENDIX
Core Job Characteristics – Job Diagnostic Survey
1. The job requires me to use a number of complex or high level skills. 2. The job requires a lot of cooperative work with other people.
3. The job is arranged so that I do not have the chance to do an entire piece of work from beginning till the end.
4. Just doing the work required by the job provides tiny chances for me to figure out how well I am doing.
5. The job is quite simple and repetitive.
6. The job can be done adequately by a person working alone, without talking or checking with other people.
7. The supervisors and co-workers on this job almost never give me any ‘’feedback’’ about how well I am doing on my work.
8. This job is one where a lot of other people can be affected by how well the work gets done. 9. The job denies me any chance to use my potential initiative or judgment in carrying out the work. 10. Supervisors often let me know how well they think I am performing the job.
11. The job provides me the chance to completely finish the pieces of work I begin.
12. The job itself provides me very few chances about whether or not I am performing well.
13. The job gives me considerable opportunity for independence and freedom to how I do the work. 14. The job itself is not very significant or important in the broader scheme of things.
Trust in organization
Using five items from the 7- items scale created by Gabarro and Athos: 1. I believe my employer has high integrity.
2. I can expect my employer to treat me in a consistent and predictable fashion. 3. In general, I believe my employer’s motives and intentions are good.
4. I think my employer treats me fairly.
5. Managers from my organization are open and upfront with me. 6. I am not sure I truly trust my employer.
Trust in leader
1. My supervisor keeps my interests in mind when making decisions.
2. I would be willing to let my supervisor have complete control over my future in this company. 3. If my supervisor asked why a problem occurred, I would speak freely even if I were partly to blame.
4. I feel comfortable being creative because my supervisor understands that sometimes creative solutions do not work.
5. It is important for me to have a good way to keep an eye on my supervisor. 6. Increasing my vulnerability to criticism by my supervisor would be a mistake.
7. If I had my way, I wouldn’t let my supervisor have any influence over decisions that are important to me.
Psychological contract
To what extent do you think that your organization / leader has fulfilled the following obligations?
Socio-emotional fulfillment Developmental fulfillment
Freedom to do the job well Participation in decision making Flexible working scheme Support to learn new skills
