Do psychological contracts include boundaryless or protean careers?

Abstract

Purpose To examine the existence of career psychological contracts and consequences of perceived violations for traditional, protean and boundaryless career psychological contracts in one sample of aerospace employees. Design/methodology/approach Structured questionnaires were used to collect data. Regression analysis was used to test hypotheses. Findings Most employees consider traditional career goals like job security and upward mobility important, but believed the organization failed to meet these perceived obligations. Perceived violations of psychological contract obligations for job security and training reduced organizational commitment, and violations of perceived upward mobility opportunity obligations were related to intentions to leave. Employees' commitment to managers moderated the effect of low levels of organizational career contract violations, but had no effect on intentions to leave if managers violated psychological career contracts or if the organization had a high level of perceived career psychological contract violations. Originality/value Organizations could benefit from providing more training in career support for managers and scholars should examine organizational and managerial psychological contracts as separate constructs.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 115 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.