Asking hard questions: reading critically
This is an extract from an article which looks at the concept of the psychological contract. It
questions how organisations seek to manage the psychological contract and the links to
communication mechanisms. As you read the extract, ask yourself:
i)
ii)
iii)
What am I being asked to think or believe?
What strategies are being used to convince me?
Is the evidence provided sufficient?
The management of psychological contracts is a core task for firms that attempt to develop ‘peoplebuilding’ rather than ‘people-using’ organisations in an organisational climate characterised by trust’
(Schalk and Rousseau, 2001). This plausible assertion presents a challenge for organisations, since
the same authors also assert that: `The organisation cannot be considered as a single party to the
psychological contract and it does not always speak with one voice’ (op cit). This raises a number of
intriguing questions about how organisations do in fact seek to manage the psychological contract
and in particular whether they try to use communication mechanisms that promote a single
organisational `voice’ or whether they accept that this is not feasible.
The concept of the psychological contract is not new but it has been used increasingly in
recent years as a framework within which to study aspects of the employment relationship.
There is no clear consensus on the definition of the psychological contract (Guest 1998). However,
most researchers accept that it should be viewed as a two-way exchange of perceived promises and
obligations. As Schalk and Rousseau (2001) suggest, there are interesting issues about who speaks
for the organisation. There are also questions about how feasible it is to draw a clear line between
expectations, promises and obligations.
The issues are wider than the management of the psychological contract, presenting a
challenge to the way we conceptualise and seek to manage employment relations as well
as organisational climates and cultures. First, Martin (1992) in her analysis of organisational culture,
draws a distinction between academic perspectives that emphasise integration,
differentiation and fragmentation. Secondly, some have suggested, largely on empirical grounds, that
this is unrealistic, that some degree of differentiation on the basis of criteria such as corporate division
or interest group is inevitable and that management of organisational culture should start from this
viewpoint. The third perspective - fragmentation - is even less optimistic about the feasibility of
managing organisational culture because it views culture as myriad complex relationships.
Support for finding some integration through organisational communication can be
found in the research by Smidts et al (2001) who demonstrate that a construct they term
`communication climate’ plays an important role in fostering organisational identification. Building on
earlier work on organisational identification by Ashforth and Mael (1989) and Dutton et al (1994),
Smidts et al argue that extensive top-down communication and use of multiple channels of
communication are likely to increase organisational identification, with
positive consequences for self-esteem, organisational commitment and co-operative behaviour. By
implication, the process of communicating the psychological contract can
be as important as its content.
This raises empirical questions about the sort of model of the psychological contract
held by senior management, how they seek to communicate it and, more specifically,
what it is that they seek to communicate. It must be acknowledged at the outset that a
focus on the management of the contract and the communication processes associated
with this neglects the two-way reciprocal exchange that lies at the heart of the concept.
The same neglect is of course apparent in the bulk of the published research that ignores
the employer’s perspective. The aim of this article is to redress the imbalance in
the research by focusing on its management and, in particular, on the core issue of how
communication contributes to its successful management.
From: Guest, D. and Conway, N. (2002), Communicating the psychological contract: an employer
perspective, Human Resource Management Journal, 12(2) pp.22-38
Hazel Christie, Skills and Learner Development, H.Christie@napier.ac.uk
Asking hard questions: reading critically
Hazel Christie, Skills and Learner Development, H.Christie@napier.ac.uk