Multiple obligations: distinguishing the dimensionality and confirming the role of ideology within the psychological contract framework

Abstract

I seek to further understand and empirically test the role of ideology, or\ncommitment to an espoused cause, as part of a multidimensional psychological contract\namong employees in organizational settings. I present and provide a preliminary\nvalidation of a measure of ideological contracts and propose a model that suggests\nemployees develop perceived obligations with their employers based on economic,\nsocial, and ideological reasons. Different behaviors are likely to be expected based on\nthe obligation types that are most significant to the employees. Specifically, my model\nsuggests obligations stemming from the espousal of a cause may elicit positive employee\ncontributions toward organizational goals. Further, I posit that employees may seek to\nbenefit distinct individuals and/or entities within the organization based on their\npsychological contract form. Cross-sectional data from four distinct samples provided\nstrong support for the idea that transactional, relational, and ideological components of\nthe psychological contract are distinct, and preliminary support that such components are\npredictive of specific individual-level outcomes.

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 — 28 citations exist upstream.

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