The examples of factors on the iceberg are not exhaustive and the sequences are not intended to be coordinated or directly reciprocal. Many other factors may be true. I have already stressed the importance of promoting open communication, without which a leader will never discover what the iceberg looks like, let alone how to manage it. “. Since psychological contracts represent how people interpret promises and commitments, both parties to the same employment relationship may have different views. (DM Rousseau and KA Wade-Benzoni, 1994) Ultimately, the psychological contract is the responsibility of both the employee and the employer. The two have different responsibilities to protect against potential violations. For the employer, it is about ensuring that an employee does not have a bad perception and that promises are kept. For the employee, it is a question of managing his expectations so that difficult situations or adverse personal circumstances are not perceived as having a negative effect on productivity and not as a worker who “lives”. On its own, the legal employment contract provides a limited understanding of the employment relationship, with employees contributing little to its terms once it has been accepted.
In this sense, the psychological contract can be more influential. It describes the perception of the relationship between employers and employees and influences how people behave on a day-to-day basis. At its core, the psychological contract is based on the daily actions and statements of one party and how they are perceived and interpreted by the other. Unlike the legal employment contract signed by employers and employees, it is not tangible. In reality, this contract is something you sign on the first day and probably don`t see much for the rest of your time in the store. If the employee and employer do not enter into a dispute, this contract may well remain in a filing cabinet at the back of the office. Employees in large organizations do not identify a single person as their “employer.” Line managers are important for making day-to-day decisions, but employees are also affected by decisions made by senior management and human resources. Employees may not know who is personally responsible for decisions that affect their well-being or the future of the company. It`s no surprise that hiring surveys confirm that employees` experiences at work are heavily influenced by the quality of supervisors they see on a regular basis. It`s fair to say that for many employees, the psychological contract is largely the agreement they have with their direct supervisor.
GUEST, D.E., ISAKSSON, K. and DE WITTE, H. (eds.) (2010) Employment contracts, psychological contracts and employee well-being: an international study. Oxford: OUP works by Denise M. Rousseau and later delves into the details and perspectives of the psychological contract.    Sandra L. Robinson noted that employees often report a breach of the psychological contract a few years after taking up their duties and that the effects of a breach of contract have a negative impact on employee productivity and retention.  One of the definitions of the psychological contract places more emphasis on what the employer owes to its employees. It has been defined as the mutual perception of employers and employees in relation to their mutual obligations at work with each other.
These obligations can be derived, imprecise in nature, can be understood as a kind of promise or definition of mutual expectations, and failure to meet expectations leads to a breach of trust or belief. What appears to be a “fair” relationship will not remain the same throughout a person`s career. Their lives will evolve and what they need from their employer will evolve with them. The term “psychological contract” refers to the expectations, beliefs, ambitions and obligations of the individual as perceived by the employer and the employee. The concept was born in the early 1960s and is at the heart of understanding the employment relationship. Based on knowledge of psychology and organizational behavior, it provides employers with a strong reason to pay attention to the “human” side of the working relationship. Although the concept of psychological contract describes the expectations of employers and employees, the concept has been studied primarily from the employee`s point of view. An explanation can be seen in the “virtuous circles” – or “vicious circles” – that operate in the model. The key to maintaining a strong psychological contract lies in clear communication and managing the employee`s expectations. It`s important that every employee in your company understands what they can expect from their time there, so make sure you have an open dialogue with every member of your team. This way, frustrations or misunderstandings can be detected and dealt with early before they become something more serious.
Overall, the psychological contract can cover the following aspects of the employment relationship: The term psychological contract refers to the often tacit expectations and assumptions that two parties (employees and the organization, their leaders and managers) have of each other about things like behavior and behavior. The nature of the relationship in transactional analysis is somewhat different from that of the employee and the employer, although the feeling of agreeing on transparent mutual expectations in transactional analysis is very similar in spirit and relevant to the psychological contract in employment. It`s an easy way to generally decide what`s right and what`s unfair when you “sell” or convince others to accept or accept the change: the concept of psychological contract was originally developed by Denise Rousseau. Rousseau is a professor of organizational behavior and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University. This relationship is also made up of many other expectations that, while not fully formalized, are equally important. While an employment contract is a legal agreement printed on paper, the psychological contract relies on the daily actions, statements and promises on one side of the relationship and how they are received by the other. These psychological contracts can be influenced by many things, such as morality and mutual or contradictory values between employer and employee, external forces such as nudge theory, and relative forces such as Adams` theory of justice.  The term “psychological contractation” is not generally used to refer to the psychological contract in the workplace, but can occur in the context of therapy. It would be useful for all of us if this term and the theory associated with it were used as an extension of the use of transactional analysis in human communication and in human understanding in general.
In life, relationships and communication usually work on a very superficial level. Opportunities to explore, understand, explain, and agree on mutual expectations are largely ignored or overlooked – mostly out of fear or ignorance. It`s a miracle that people manage to work together, given how two people or two parties can interpret meaning differently while seeming unable to seek or offer greater transparency or clarity. ZHAO, H. A. O., WAYNE, S. J., GLIBKOWSKI, B.C. and BRAVO, J. (2007) The impact of psychological contract breach on work‐related outcomes: a meta‐analysis. Personnel psychology.
Volume 60, No. 3, pp. 647-680. The basic descriptions of the psychological contract tend to simplify the concept as it only adds intangible input/reward factors (such as loyalty and effort/job security and satisfaction) to the traditional tangible wages/hours and other clearly measurable mutual obligations found in a traditional employment contract. .