Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Originalarbeit

Der merkmalsorientierte Ansatz psychologischer Verträge

Published Online:April 20, 2016https://doi.org/10.1026/0932-4089/a000194

Abstract

Zusammenfassung. Wir stellen den merkmalsorientierten Ansatz zur Messung psychologischer Verträge (McLean-Parks, Kidder & Gallagher, 1998), ein Inventar zu deren Erfassung sowie ausgewählte Befunde vor. Kerndimensionen sind der Fokus der Beziehung (ökonomisch bzw. sozio-emotional), die Greifbarkeit, die wahrgenommene Veränderbarkeit, die Breite (Beschäftigung umfasst verschiedene Lebensbereiche bzw. ist ausschließlich arbeitsbezogen), die Einzigartigkeit und die Freiwilligkeit der Beziehung, die um die Randmerkmale Zeitrahmen (Dauer und Befristung) und Zugehörigkeit zu mehreren Organisationen ergänzt werden. Die Faktorstruktur der durch das Inventar erfassten Kernmerkmale erweist sich als replizierbar stabil. Die Beschäftigungsform ist eine zentrale Determinante einiger, aber nicht aller Merkmale des psychologischen Vertrags. Die Dimensionen des merkmalsorientierten Ansatzes lassen sich im Sinne der Gegenüberstellung relationaler und transaktionaler Verträge anordnen. Allerdings sind Breite, geringe Greifbarkeit und Veränderbarkeit eher Komponenten relationaler Verträge, gehen aber mit geringerer Arbeitszufriedenheit und mehr Beanspruchung einher. Die Angemessenheit einer positiven Bewertung relationaler im Gegensatz zu transaktionalen psychologischen Verträgen wird diskutiert.


The Dimensional Approach to Measuring Psychological Contracts

Abstract. We introduce the dimensional approach to assessing psychological contracts that is based on the work of McLean-Parks, Kidder and Gallagher (1998), an inventory for its assessment, and a selection of results. Core dimensions are: focus of the relationship (socioemotional vs. transactional), tangibility, stability, scope (the extent to which the employment relationship encompasses various spheres of life), particularism, and volition. Additional peripheral characteristics are time frame (duration and terminability) and multiple relationships. The factor structure of the core dimensions was found to be stable in two samples. The type of work arrangement determines some, but not all, dimensions of the psychological contract. The dimensions can be arranged as the juxtaposition of relational versus transactional contracts. Although scope, low tangibility, and low stability characterize relational contracts, they correlate with less job satisfaction and increased strain. We critically discuss the alleged favorability of relational contracts in contrast to transactional psychological contracts.

Literatur

  • Ashford, S. J., George, E. & Blatt, R. (2007). Old assumptions, new work: The opportunities and challenges of research on nonstandard employment. In J. P. WalshA. P. BriefEds., The Academy of Management Annals (Vol. 1, pp. 65 – 117). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group/Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar

  • Bazana, P. G. & Stelmack, R. M. (2004). Stability of personality across the life span: A meta-analysis. In R. M. StelmackEd., On the psychobiology of personality: Essays in honor of Marvin Zuckerman (pp. 113 – 144). New York, NY: Elsevier. Google Scholar

  • Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Chichester: Wiley. Google Scholar

  • Burroughs, S. M. & Eby, L. T. (1998). Psychological sense of community at work: A measurement system and explanatory framework. Journal of Community Psychology, 26, 509 – 532. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Cavanaugh, M. & Noe, R. (1999). Antecedents and consequences of relational components of the new psychological contract. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 323 – 340. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • CIETT (2000). Orchestrating the evolution of private employment agencies towards a stronger society. Brussels: CIETT (International Confederation of Temporary Work Business). Google Scholar

  • Conway, N. & Briner, R. B. (2002). Full-time versus part-time employees: Understanding the links between work status, the psychological contract and attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 279 – 301. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Conway, N. & Briner, R. B. (2005). Understanding psychological contracts at work – A critical evaluation of theory and research. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • De Cuyper, N. & de Witte, H. (2008). Volition and reasons for accepting temporary employment: Associations with attitudes, well-being, and behavioural intentions. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 17, 363 – 387. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • De Jong, J., De Cuyper, N., De Witte, H., Silla, I. & Bernhard-Oettel, C. (2009). Motives for accepting temporary employment: A typology. International Journal of Manpower, 30(3 – 4), 237 – 252. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Galais, N. (2003). Anpassung bei Zeitarbeitnehmern – Eine Längsschnittstudie zu individuellen Determinanten der Übernahme und des Wohlbefindens. Nürnberg: Mielentz. Google Scholar

  • Galais, N. & Moser, K. (2009). Organizational commitment and the well-being of temporary agency workers: A longitudinal study. Human Relations, 62, 589 – 620. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Galais, N., Sende, C., Hecker, D. & Wolff, H.-G. (2012). Flexible und atypische Beschäftigung: Belastungen und Beanspruchung. In B. BaduraA. DuckiH. SchröderJ. KloseM. MeyerHrsg., Fehlzeiten-Report 2012. Gesundheit in der Flexiblen Arbeitswelt: Chancen nutzen – Risiken minimieren (S. 109 – 121), Heidelberg: Springer. Google Scholar

  • George, E., Chattopadhyay, P. & Zhang, L. L. (2012). Helping hand or competition? The moderating influence of perceived upward mobility on the relationship between blended workgroups and employee attitudes and behaviors. Organization Science, 23, 355 – 372. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Hecker, D. (2010). Merkmale psychologischer Verträge zwischen Beschäftigten und Organisationen (Unveröffentlichte Dissertation). Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg. Google Scholar

  • Hecker, D. & Behrens, B. (2013). Der psychologische Vertrag bei Veränderungsprozessen – Herausforderungen meistern. In Bundesanstalt für Arbeitsschutz und ArbeitsmedizinHrsg., Arbeitnehmer in Restrukturierungen. Gesundheit und Kompetenz erhalten (S. 103 – 118). Bielefeld: Bertelsmann. Google Scholar

  • Houseman, S. N. (2001). Why employers use flexible staffing arrangements: Evidence from an establishment survey. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 55(1), 149 – 170. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Hui, C., Lee, C. & Rousseau, D. M. (2004). Psychological contract and organizational citizenship behavior in China: Investigating generalizability and instrumentability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 311 – 321. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Jahn, E. J. & Wolf, K. (2005). Flexibilität des Arbeitsmarktes: Entwicklung der Leiharbeit und regionale Disparitäten. IAB-Kurzbericht, 14, 1 – 8. Google Scholar

  • Kalleberg, A. L., Reskin, B. F. & Hudson, K. (2000). Bad jobs in America: Standard and nonstandard employment relations and job quality in the United States. American Sociological Review, 65, 256 – 278. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Kalleberg, A. L. & Rognes, J. (2000). Employment relations in Norway: Some dimensions and correlates. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 315 – 335. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Koene, B., Garsten, C. & Galais, N. (2014). The management and organization of temporary work – An introduction. In B. KoeneC. GarstenN. GalaisEds., The Management and Organization of Temporary Agency Work (pp. 1 – 20). New York: Routledge. Google Scholar

  • Kvasnicka, M. (2009). Does temporary help work provide a stepping stone to regular employment? In D. Autor (Ed.), Studies of labor market intermediation (pp. 335 – 372). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar

  • Lohmann-Haislah, A. (2012). Stressreport Deutschland 2012 – Psychische Anforderungen, Ressourcen und Befinden. Dortmund: BAuA. Google Scholar

  • McClurg, L. N. (1999). Organizational commitment in the temporary-help service industry. Journal of Applied Management Studies, 8, 5 – 26. Google Scholar

  • McInnis, K. J., Meyer, J. P. & Feldman, S. (2009). Psychological contracts and their implications for commitment: A feature-based approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74, 165 – 180. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • McLean Parks, J., Kidder, D. L. & Gallagher, D. G. (1998). Fitting square pegs into round holes: Mapping the domain of contingent work arrangements onto the psychological contract. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 697 – 730. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Millward, L. J. & Hopkins, L. J. (1998). Psychological contracts, organizational and job commitment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1530 – 1556. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Millward, L. J. & Brewerton, P. M. (2000). Psychological contracts: Employee relations for the twenty-first century? In C. L. CooperI. T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 1 – 62). Chichester: Wiley. Google Scholar

  • Mohr, G., Rigotti, T. & Müller, A. (2005). Irritation – Ein Instrument zur Erfassung psychischer Beanspruchung im Arbeitskontext: Skalen- und Itemparameter aus 15 Studien. Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, 49, 44 – 48. Link, Google Scholar

  • Moser, K. (1996). Commitment in Organisationen. Bern: Huber. Google Scholar

  • Mowday, R., Steers, R. M. & Porter, L. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224 – 247. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Neuberger, O. & Allerbeck, M. (1978). Messung und Analyse von Arbeitszufriedenheit. Erfahrungen mit dem “Arbeitsbeschreibungsbogen ABB“. Bern: Huber. Google Scholar

  • Nienhüser, W. & Baumhus, W. (2000). „Fremd im Betrieb“. Der Einsatz von Fremdfirmenpersonal als Arbeitskräftestrategie. In A. MartinW. NienhüserHrsg., Neue Formen der Beschäftigung – neue Personalpolitik? (S. 61 – 120). München: Hampp. Google Scholar

  • Parker, S. K., Griffin, M. A., Sprigg, C. A. & Wall, T. D. (2002). Effect of temporary contracts on perceived work characteristics and job strain: A longitudinal study. Personnel Psychology, 55, 689 – 719. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Pedulla, D.S. (2013). The hidden costs of contingency: Employers’ use of contingent workers and standard employees’ outcomes. Social Forces, 92, 691 – 722. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Pfeffer, J. & Baron, J. N. (1988). Taking the workers back out: Recent trends in the structuring of employment. In L. L. CummingsB. M. StawEds., Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 10, pp. 257 – 304). Greenwich: JAI Press. Google Scholar

  • Polivka, A. E. & Nardone T. (1989). On the definition of ’contingent work’. Monthly Labor Review, 112, 9 – 16. Google Scholar

  • Raja, U., Johns, G. & Ntalianis, F. (2004). The impact of personality on psychological contracts. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 350 – 367. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • R Core Team (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/. Google Scholar

  • Robinson, S. L., Kraatz, M. S. & Rousseau, D. M. (1994). Changing obligations and the psychological contract: A longitudinal study. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 137 – 152. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Robinson, S. L. & Morrison, E. W. (1995). Psychological contracts and OCB: The effect of unfulfilled obligations on civic virtue behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 289 – 298. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Roth, P. L. (1994). Missing data: A conceptual review for applied psychologists. Personnel Psychology, 47, 537 – 560. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Rousseau, D.M. (1990). New hire perceptions of their own and their employer’s obligations: A study of psychological contracts. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, 389 – 40. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Rousseau, D.M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. London, UK: Sage. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Rousseau, D. M. & McLean-Parks, J. (1993). The contracts of individuals and organizations. In L. CummingsB. StawEds., Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 15, pp. 1 – 43). Greenwich: JAI Press. Google Scholar

  • Rousseau, D. M. & Tijoriwala, S. A. (1998). Assessing psychological contracts: Issues, alternatives, measures. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 679 – 695. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Schein, E. H. (1980). Organizational psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Google Scholar

  • Schmidt, S., Roesler, U., Kusserow, T. & Rau, R. (2014). Uncertainty in the workplace: Examining role ambiguity and role conflict, and their link to depression – a meta-analysis. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23, 91 – 106. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Sende, C. & Galais, N. (2014). Unternehmensflexibilität und personelle Flexibilisierungsstrategien in Deutschland. In C. SchlickK. MoserM. SchenkHrsg., Produktionskapazitäten flexibel managen (S. 1 – 80). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. Google Scholar

  • Sels, L., Janssens, M. & van den Brande, I. (2004). Assessing the nature of psychological contracts: A validation of six dimensions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 461 – 488. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Storrie, D. (2002). Temporary agency work in the European Union. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions: Ireland. Google Scholar

  • Subramony, M. (2014). Client supportiveness in contingent employment: The role of relationship quality. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23, 131 – 144. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Talós, E. (1999). Atypische Beschäftigung: Internationale Trends und sozialstaatliche Regelungen. Wien: Manz. Google Scholar

  • Thomas, D. C., Au, K. & Ravlin, E. C. (2003). Cultural variation and the psychological contract. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 491 – 501. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Virtanen, M., Kivimäki, M., Elovainio, M., Vahtera, J. & Cooper, C.L. (2001). Contingent employment, health and sickness absence. Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health, 27, 365 – 372. Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Wagner, A. (2010). Atypische Beschäftigung. Eine wissenschaftliche Bilanzierung. Abschlussbericht der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung: Berlin. Google Scholar

  • Wellin, M. (2007). Managing the psychological contract: Using the personal deal to increase business performance. Hampshire: Gower. Google Scholar