تاثیر نسبی مشخصه، شدت و زمان بندی نقض قرارداد روانشناختی بر روی نتایج رفتاری و نگرشی

A psychological contract defines the perceived reciprocal obligations that characterize a relationship between an individual and organizational entity. Breach of a psychological contract can negatively affect work behaviors and attitudinal perceptions, and may also elicit an emotional response (violation) which can help to explain these negative consequences. This research focuses on the role of psychological contracts in a supply chain setting. We explore when and how three conditions of psychological contract breach – attribute, severity, and timing – negatively impact outcomes, and assess the mediating role of psychological contract violation in this relationship. To evaluate our hypotheses, we employ a laboratory experiment in which participants assume the role of a purchasing manager. We impose various breach factors and observe their relative impact on the decision-making behavior and fairness perceptions of the participant. We show that while the breach factors significantly impact task behavior, these relationships are not explained by psychological contract violation. However, violation is useful in explaining, in part, the results pertaining to fairness perceptions.

Much of the business conducted in supply chain exchanges is governed by written contracts. However, previous research has shown that the proclivity of organizational decision-makers to reference the written or formal contract when differences arise is rather low, effectively increasing the relevance of social, relational, and psychological contracts in supply chain governance (Handley and Benton, 2009, Kaufmann and Stern, 1988, Lumineau and Henderson, 2012 and Ryall and Sampson, 2006). Recent research investigating such behavioral factors in supply chain contexts adds further credence to their importance. Factors such as trust (Byoung-Chun et al., 2011 and Johnston et al., 2004), cooperation (Jiang, 2009 and Tangpong et al., 2010), and communication (Eckerd and Hill, 2012 and Prahinski and Benton, 2004) are all found to influence decision-making behavior. Other research has shown that relational factors, such as fairness and justice, can impact supply chain relationships in meaningful ways (Griffith et al., 2006, Katok and Pavlov, 2013 and Liu et al., 2012). Our work contributes to this important stream of research by investigating the role that psychological contracts play in decision-making behavior, and overall fairness perception, in a purchasing context. Specific decision-making tasks within inter-firm exchanges are typically carried out by individuals, such as purchasing managers (PMs), who independently form their own interpretation of the exchange agreement. This introduces a distinctly psychological element into contractual relations, written and unwritten alike, wherein the terms are understood in the eye of the beholder (Macneil, 1985 and Rousseau and McLean Parks, 1992). This purely idiosyncratic view of exchange obligations is known as the psychological contract. When an individual perceives a failure in fulfillment of the psychological contract, this is known as psychological contract breach. These failures may also generate an emotional response, and this component is referred to as psychological contract violation. Since psychological contract breaches may occur in supply chain relationships, it is important to understand the impact of different types of breaches to better predict their consequences. The conditions of psychological contract breach that we focus on in this research include the attribution, severity, and timing of the breach. We examine the relative impact of each of these breach factors on an individual PM's behavioral and attitudinal outcomes, and assess the extent that these outcomes may be explained by the emotions associated with violation of the psychological contract. We demonstrate that all three of the breach factors under evaluation have an impact on task behavior, but surprisingly these effects are not explained by the experience of violation. However, when considering the attitudinal outcome of fairness perception, the severity and attribution of a breach – but not the timing – impart a significant influence and these associations can be explained in part by the experience of violation. Our findings overall reveal that psychological contracts play a role in supply chain relationships and, as such, should be managed on the same order as other key exchange contracts. This research contributes to the purchasing and supply chain literatures in several key ways. First, it provides insights into the decision-making behaviors and fairness perceptions exhibited by those assuming the role of a PM in response to a psychological contract breach. We compare the relative effects of various breach-inducing factors on these outcomes, and the potential mediating role of psychological contract violation. Research in operations and supply chain management exploring the role of emotions in work behaviors is nascent (see Bendoly, 2013, Bendoly, 2011 and Urda and Loch, 2013), and we offer a substantive contribution on this front. Second, we depart from the traditional approach of evaluating exclusively construct-level outcomes (such as job satisfaction and civic virtue), and assess the impact of breach on a task behavior that is specific and quantifiable. Finally, we incorporate fairness perception as an outcome variable, which to the best of our knowledge has not been previously assessed. Our work is positioned within the broader framework for behavioral operations disciplinary research set forth by Bendoly et al. (2010), in that we adopt norms from social psychology in defining the variables of interest and in designing and executing the associated controlled experiments.

This research answers specific calls for investigations into the social and behavioral dimensions of supply chain relationship management (Frankel et al., 2008). As this work demonstrates, variables of this nature are significantly likely to influence the decisions of PMs and have the potential to drive individuals’ work behaviors and attitudinal perceptions. This provides critical insights into the behavioral reactions exhibited by individuals when subjected to an adverse situation, thus addressing an important gap in operations and supply chain management research (Bendoly et al., 2006). Our study makes additional key theoretical and managerial contributions. First, we examine the relative impact of theoretically determined factors of breach on two different types of outcomes: behavioral and attitudinal. The behavioral outcomes we examine are specific, quantifiable decisions, representing a contribution beyond the construct-level phenomena typically examined in the psychological contract literature. Second, we examine the role that psychological contract violations play in these relationships, thereby contributing to a burgeoning and promising stream of literature on emotions in supply management. In addition, our findings add depth to the broader literature on violation by examining its effect on different categories of outcomes. Future research opportunities abound in this area. In addition to the cultural considerations identified in the discussion section, it would be useful for future research to examine how the insights found here apply to relationships involving more personal interaction between the PM and supplier. One possibility for extending the research in this direction is to increase the socio-emotional focus of the relationship by allowing the PM and supplier (two human participants) to meet before the experiment commences or to interact with one another during the experiment using instant messaging, versus the exclusively virtual environment reflected in the present relationship. There is also opportunity to explore the supplier side of psychological contract development and violation. Finally, future research might investigate alternative outcome possibilities, such as renegotiation strategies or decisions to abandon the relationship altogether. The opportunities for expanding this line of inquiry to supply chain exchanges offer promise to managers navigating these complex, multi-dimensional relationships.