2004
Volume 34, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 0921-5077
  • E-ISSN: 1875-7235

Abstract

Samenvatting

Het psychologische contract is een managementconcept dat verklaart hoe veranderingen in en het al dan niet naleven van wederzijdse verplichtingen tussen werkgever en werknemer samenhangen met attitudes en gedragingen. Onderzoekers gaan veelal uit van causale, lineaire verbanden tussen een psychologisch contractbreuk en werknemersattituden en -gedragingen en maken gebruik van de sociale uitwisselingstheorie om reacties op psychologisch contractbreuk te verklaren. Steeds vaker wordt erkend dat dit perspectief moet worden aangevuld met andere theorieën en onderzoeksmethoden om zo de complexiteit en de dynamieken van het psychologische contract beter te begrijpen. Gezien het grotendeels uitblijven van onderzoek naar de rol van technologie, is er ook steeds meer vraag naar theorieën die het begrip van technologie in het psychologisch contractraamwerk vergroten. Dit is voornamelijk van belang in vluchtige, onzekere, complexe en ambigue arbeidscontexten. In deze conceptuele paper stellen we voor om de sociomaterialiteitstheorie als een aanvullende lens te gebruiken om meer inzicht te krijgen in de rol van technologie in de dynamiek van het psychologische contract. We vergelijken de traditionele en recentere psychologisch contractperspectieven met het sociomaterialiteitsperspectief en leggen uit waar deze lens een waardevolle bijdrage aan de literatuur kan leveren. We sluiten af met een kritische reflectie op dit perspectief en praktische aanbevelingen.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/GO2021.1.004.JACO
2021-02-01
2021-06-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abdallah, C., Lusiani, M., & Langley, A.(2019). Performing process research. In B.Boyd, T. R.Crook, J. K. L.Whu, & A. D.Smith (Eds.), Standing on the shoulders of giants: Traditions and innovations in research methodology (pp. 91-113). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Alcover, C. M., Rico, R., Turnley, W. H., & Bolino, M. C.(2017). Understanding the changing nature of psychological contracts in 21st century organizations: A multiple-foci exchange relationships approach and proposed framework. Organizational Psychology Review, 7(1), 4-35.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Austin, J. L.(1975). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  4. Bandura, A.(2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 164-180.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bankins, S.(2015). A process perspective on psychological contract change: Making sense of, and repairing, psychological contract breach and violation through employee coping actions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(8), 1071-1095.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bankins, S.(2019). A narrative approach to psychological contracts. In Y.Griep & C.Cooper (Eds.), Handbook of research on the psychological contract at work (pp. 377-396). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bankins, S., & Formosa, P.(2019). When AI meets PC: Exploring the implications of workplace social robots and a human-robot psychological contract. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29(2), 215-229.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bankins, S., Griep, Y., & Hansen, S. D.(2020). Charting directions for a new research era: Addressing gaps and advancing scholarship in the study of psychological contracts. European Journal of Workand Organizational Psychology, 29(2), 159-163.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Barad, K.(2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.
  10. Beer, D.(2012). The comfort of mobile media: Uncovering personal attachments with everyday devices. Convergence, 18(4), 361-367.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Blau, P. M.(1964). Exchange and power in social life. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  12. Bourdieu, P.(1990). The logic of practice.Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  13. Butler, J.(1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of “sex”. New York, NY: Routledge.
  14. Conway, N., & Briner, R. B.(2005). Understanding psychological contracts at work: A critical evaluation of theory and research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  15. Coyle-Shapiro, J. A., & Shore, L. M.(2007). The employee-organization relationship: Where do we go from here?Human Resource Management Review, 17(2), 166-179.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Darling, K.(2017). ‘Who’s Johnny?’ Anthropomorphic framing in HRI, integration, and policy. In P.Lin, K.Abney, & G.Bekey (Eds.), Robot ethics 2.0 (pp. 173-192). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Das, D., De Jong, R., & Kool, L. (m.m.v. J.Gerritsen). (2020). Werken op waarde geschat: Grenzen aan digitale monitoring op de werkvloer door middel van data, algoritmen en AI. Den Haag: Rathenau Instituut.
  18. De Jong, R., Das, D., Kool, L., & Peters, M.(2020). Zicht op werk: Grenzen aan het digitaal meten van werkenden. Beleid en Maatschappij, 47(2), 183-190.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. De Regt, H. C. D. G., Dooremalen, A. J. P. W., & Schouten, M. K. D.(2007). Exploring humans: An introduction to the philosophy of social sciences. Amsterdam: Boom.
  20. Dilthey, G.(1983). Traditional hermeneutics. Reports on Philosophy, 7, 3-12.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Dirksmeier, P., & Helbrecht, I.(2008). Time, non-representational theory and the “performative turn”. Towards a new methodology in qualitative social research. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-9.2.385
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Ellul, J., Wilkinson, J., & Merton, R. K.(1964). The technological society. New York: Vintage books.
  23. Feldman, M. S., & Orlikowski, W. J.(2011). Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1240-1253.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Freese, C., Schalk, R., & Croon, M.(2008). De Tilburgse psychologische contract vragenlijst. Gedrag & Organisatie, 21(3), 278-294.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Giddens, A.(1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  26. Gouldner, A. W.(1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161-178.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Hein, S. F.(2016). The new materialism in qualitative inquiry: How compatible are the philosophies of Barad and Deleuze? Cultural Studies?Critical Methodologies, 16(2), 132-140.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Jones, M.(2014). A matter of life and death: Exploring conceptualizations of sociomateriality in the context of critical care. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 895-925.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Knapp, J. R., Diehl, M. R., & Dougan, W.(2020). Towards a social-cognitive theory of multiple psychological contracts. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29(2), 200-214.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. MacLeod, A., Cameron, P., Kits, O., & Tummons, J.(2019). Technologies of exposure: Videoconferenced distributed medical education as a sociomaterial practice. Academic Medicine, 94(3), 412-418.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Molm, L. D., Schaefer, D. R., & Collett, J. L.(2007). The value of reciprocity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 70, 199-217
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Morrison, E. W., & Robinson, S. L.(1997). When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 226-256.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Obushenkova, E., Plester, B., & Haworth, N.(2018). Manager-employee psychological contracts: Enter the smartphone. Employee Relations, 40(2), 193-207.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Orlikowski, W. J.(2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28(9), 1435-1448.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Orlikowski, W. J., & Scott, S. V.(2008). Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 433-474.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E.(1984). The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social Studies of Science, 14(3), 399-441.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Rousseau, D. M.(1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2(2), 121-139.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Rousseau, D. M.(2001). Schema promise and mutuality: The building blocks of the psychological contract. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74(4), 511-541.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Rousseau, D. M., Hansen, S. D., & Tomprou, M.(2018). A dynamic phase model of psychological contract processes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(9), 1081-1098.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Schalk, R., & Roe, R. E.(2007). Towards a dynamic model of the psychological contract. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 37(2), 167-182.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Sherman, U. P., & Morley, M. J.(2020). What do we measure and how do we elicit it? The case for the use of repertory grid technique in multi-party psychological contract research. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29(2), 230-242.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Stoverink, A. C., Kirkman, B. L., Mistry, S., & Rosen, B.(2020). Bouncing back together: Toward a theoretical model of work team resilience. Academy of Management Review, 45(2), 395-422. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2017.0005
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Suchman, L., & Suchman, L.A.(2007). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  44. Tomprou, M., Rousseau, D. M., & Hansen, S. D.(2015). The psychological contracts of violation victims: A post-violation model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(4), 561-581.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Turkle, S. E. (Ed.). (2007). Evocative objects: Things we think with. Boston: MIT press.
  46. Turkle, S.(2012). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. New York: Basic.
  47. Woodrow, C., & Guest, D. E.(2017). Knowledge acquisition and effective socialization: The role of the psychological contract. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 90(4), 587-595.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Yang, Y., Griep, Y., & Vantilborgh, T.(2020). Exploring temporal changes in obligated and delivered inducements: A dynamic systems perspective. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29(2), 183-199.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Zhao, H. A. O., Wayne, S. J., Glibkowski, B. C., & Bravo, J.(2007). The impact of psychological contract breach on work-related outcomes: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60(3), 647-680.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/GO2021.1.004.JACO
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/GO2021.1.004.JACO
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error