Content area
Full Text
Introduction
The psychological contract has achieved prominence as an investigative paradigm within organisational research ([34] Marks, 2001), providing a broad explanatory framework for understanding employee-organisation linkages ([51] Rousseau, 1989; [38] McFarlane Shore and Tetrick, 1994; [17] Guest, 1998a). Despite this, there remains much debate around its terms ([50] Roehling, 1997) and there have been a number of critiques of the concept ([17] Guest, 1998a), which have led to calls for more rigorous theoretical and empirical examination of it ([18] Guest, 1998b).
The empirical data presented in this paper is intended to contribute to theoretical development of the psychological contract, particularly in respect of trust and the psychological contract which is argued to be under-explored ([45] Robinson, 1996). Arguments are presented in respect of the transactional/relational nature of the contract and the cognitive/affective bases of trust and the relationships between the constructs are explored. To support this, the study draws on [21] Guest and Conway's (2002) definition the psychological contract which is argued to consist of the perceptions of both parties to the employment relationship, organisational and individual, of the reciprocal obligations implied in that relationship. This definition is adopted as it supports exploration of multiple perspectives of obligations within the contract, those of both employer and employees, in three case study firms.
In summary, this paper addresses a research question that considers the bases of trust within transactional and relational psychological contracts in order to provide theoretical development of psychological contract literature.
Conceptual overview
Trust is argued to be fundamental to the psychological contract ([19] Guest and Conway, 1998), albeit there is limited consideration of trust in respect of the nature of the psychological contract, that is, the extent to which it is transactional or relational, such nature being considered by many to be central to the understanding of psychological contracts ([33] MacNeil, 1985; [55] Rousseau, 2004). Consideration is thus given here first to the nature of the psychological contract, so that the implications of transactional and relational contracts for trust can then be further explored.
The nature of the psychological contract
Transactional contracts have been defined as specific, monetisable exchanges between parties, the focus being on providing monetary remuneration for services provided by the employee ([13] De Meuse et al. , 2001) and...