A STUDY OF NEW EMPLOYEES PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT AT KENYA BUREAU OF STANDARDS, HEAD OFFICE, NAIROBI

Transcription

1 A STUDY OF NEW EMPLOYEES PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT AT KENYA BUREAU OF STANDARDS, HEAD OFFICE, NAIROBI KARIUKI MARY WANJIRA A MANAGEMENT RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (MBA), SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI 2010

2 DECLARATION This research project is my original work and has never been presented to any university or college for the award of degree, diploma or certificate. Signature Kariuki Mary Wanjira 1) 61/8268/2006 Date This project has been submitted for examination with my approval as the university supervisor. Signature Prof. Peter K Obonyo Dept, of Business Administartion, School of Business University of Nairobi

3 DEDICATION I dedicate this work to my loving husband Joseph Gachini, who encouraged me to pursue this course and to our sons Elvis and Adrian for their endless support and understanding throughout the course, I owe this to you. I further dedicate this work to my parents, sisters and brothers for their support and above all to the Almighty Father for all His countless blessings and favors during this course. 11

4 a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t I wish to acknowledge my supervisor Professor Peter K Obonyo for his advice and tireless efforts in guiding me during the entire work on this project. Indeed, if it were not for him, 1 would not have come this far. I would also like to acknowledge my well wishers who gave me the inspiration to take up this course and those who gave me guidance and assistance throughout the study. My gratitude also goes to the respondents who spared their time to complete my questionnaires. Special appreciation goes to Caroline Munene for her encouragement and assistance in data analysis. in

5 Table of Contents Declaration...i Dedication...ii Acknowledgement... iii List of tables...vii List of figures...viii Abstract...ix CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION... 1 Background Psychological Contract Perception Perception and Psychological contract Kenya Bureau of Standards Statement of problem Objective of the study Importance of the study Human Resources Managers Management of Kenya Bureau of Standards... 6 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction Psychological contract development Factors associated with psychological contract development Types of psychological contracts Strategic implication of the psychological contract...13 iv

6 CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Research design Data collection Data analysis...17 CHAPTER FOUR: DATA FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION Introduction Demographic results Respondents designation Gender of the Respondents Respondents Level of Education Respondents Age Factors associated with psychological Contract Development Employees focused obligations Employer s focused obligations Types of Psychological Contract CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction Summary Conclusion Recommendations Recommendations for KEBS Management Recommendations for further research Limitation of the study REFERENCES v

7 APPENDICES 36 APPENDIX I: Research questionnaires APPENDIX II: Letter oflntroduction APPENDIX III: Frequencies, Means, Standard Deviations and Percentages derived from Respondents rating of KEBS obligations to Employees. APPENDIX IV: Frequencies, Means, Standard Deviations and Percentages derived from Respondents rating of Employees obligations to KEBS. vi

8 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Types of psychological contracts Table 2: Distribution of respondents by position held Table 3: Distribution of respondents by expected duration of stay...22 vu

9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Distribution of respondents by gender...20 Figure 2: Distribution of respondents by level of education...21 Figure 3: Distribution of respondents by age vin

10 ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to establish the types of contracts formed by new employees at Kenya Bureau of Standards. To achieve this objective, data were collected through a survey from all new employees hired between October 2008 and April Data was collected using a structured questionnaire which was administered through and drop and pick later basis. Responses were received from seventy two (72) employees from a target of eighty (80), giving a 90 percent response rate. It was established that all the aspects highlighted as employee-focused obligations scored a mean score of between 3 and 4. This implied that the respondents felt slightly obliged to their employer. The employer-focused obligations scored a mean score of between 1 and 2. This indicates that the respondents strongly agreed or simply agreed. It is important to point out that among the respondents, 66.7 percent were between 26 and 30 years. This comprises of employees at their early career development stage hence the reason for high expectations from the employer. This result to a transactional contract than relational contract among the new employees targeted. The study established that the contract between the new employees and KEBS is more transactional than relational. It is important therefore, for the management of KEBS to influence the new employees psychological contract by communicating its un-written offers and expectations to employees as well as giving audience to these employees in order to correct any misconception. This will require the KEBS management to consider employee assistance programs addressing this generation s needs. These can include mortgages, car loans, good medical covers, and opportunity for development. These among others can help retain the new employees and above all develop a sense of continuity which eventually results to the formation of a relational contract. It will also be of importance for a similar study to be carried out after at least two years to establish if the contracts and the factors that contributed to them changed IX

11 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Psychological Contract The concept of a psychological contract was introduced in 1960 by Argyris. It received attention following the economic downturn in the early 1990 s. The economic downturn led to the restructuring, downsizing, mergers and takeovers in many organizations. That was accompanied by changes in how personnel felt and acted towards their employers. The psychological contract helped explain those changes and, therefore regained attention (Van den Brande, 1999). It has been defined as... the perceptions of the two parties, employee and employer, of what their mutual obligations are towards each other (Geust & Conway, 2002). These obligations will often be informal and imprecise: they may be inferred from actions or from what has happened in the past, as well as from statements made by the employer, for example during the recruitment process or in performance appraisals. Some obligations may be seen as 'promises and others as 'expectations'. The important thing is that they are believed by the employee to be part of the relationship with the employer. In 1989 Rousseau stated that these expectations are difficult to comprehend as a whole. They can be seen more like a multiple collective of diverse and differing expectations held by a set of actors (Anderson & Schalk, 1998). Therefore Rousseau (1989) presented a narrower definition with the perspective of the individual as the central element; Psychological contracts are defined as the beliefs individuals hold regarding the terms and conditions of the exchange agreement between themselves and their organizations. Guest and Conway (2002) suggest that the extent to which employers adopt people management practices will influence the state of the psychological contract; the contract is based on employees' sense of fairness and trust and their belief that the employer is honoring the 'deal' between them. Where the psychological contract is positive, increased employee commitment and satisfaction will have a positive impact on business performance. 1

12 Relationships and relational issues such as obligations play an increasingly important role in economics and organizational behavior (Williamson, 1979). Employers pay senior employees more than junior ones doing the same work. This demonstrates the influence of relationships on economics and behavior. A key issue in the formation of employee-employer relationships is emergence of psychological contracts regarding what each party owes the other. Rousseau (1995) distinguishes between transactional and relational contracts; Transactional contracts refer to collaborations of limited duration (2 to 3 years most) with well-specified performance terms. In contrast relational contracts are open-ended collaborations with only loosely specified performance terms. These contracts have significant influence on employee attitudes and workplace behavior. Transactional contracts can be characterized as easy-to-exit agreements with relatively high turnover. Employees who view their contract as a transactional one have lower levels of organizational commitment and weak integration into the organization which allows for high member rotation and freedom to enter new contracts. With high affective commitment, strong member-organization integration, and stability built on the traditions and the history of the relationship, relational contracts exemplify many emblematic characteristics of paternalistic relationships. Relational obligations include mutual loyalty and long-term stability, often in the form of job security (Rousseau, 1995) Perception According to Robbins and Judge, (2007) perception is a process by which individuals organize and interpret their sensory impression in order to give meaning to their environment. They argued that perception is influenced by factors which can broadly be classified into three; perceiver, target and the situation or stimulus. Luthans (1992) stated that the key to understand perception is to recognize that it s a unique interpretation of the situation, not an exact recording of it. He defines the concept as a complicated interaction of selection, organization and interpretation. He further describes it as complex cognitive process that yield a unique picture of the world that may different from reality. Recognition of the difference between perceptual world and the real world is vital to the understanding of behavior. A specific example would be the universal assumption made by managers that subordinates always want promotion, when, in fact, many subordinates really feel psychologically forced to accept promotion (Luthans, 1992). 2

13 1.1.3 Perception and Psychological Contract Perception begins when a person is confronted with a sensual stimulus or situation either physical or socio cultural environment. For instance, new employees may be confronted with new environment and procedures. This initiates working of the employees perceptual process. Once the perceiver is confronted, registration of stimulus or situation in the sensory and neural mechanisms where interpretation takes place. This is the most significant cognitive aspect of perception. Psychological processes such as learning, motivation and personality affect interpretation of a stimulus or situation. The situation when interpreted gives a feedback. A psychological feedback that may influence employees perception is the supervisor s eyebrow or change in voice inflection. This may result to behavioral reaction such as employees moving slowly or quickly. The behavioral termination of perception is the reaction or behavior Luthans, 1992). Psychological contract has been associated with perception of expectations that each party has on the other. It thus develops over time and takes the perception process as described. Once the contract is formed visible reactions are seen inform of behavior such as being loyal or working extra hours. The notion that the psychological contract can influence behavior was proposed by Schein (1990): Though it remains unwritten the psychological contract is a powerful determiner of behavior in organizations. Schein almost certainly made this comment based more on his personal observation and intuition Kenya Bureau of Standards Kenya Bureau of Standards is a regulatory body that was established in July 1974 through an Act of Parliament, Cap 496; The Standards Act. Its sole responsibility is to ensure that Kenyans are offered quality goods and services by offering services in Standardization, Quality Control and Conformity Assessment. To achieve this, it is driven by its vision Quality products for Quality Life and core values ( Its head office is situated at Nairobi and has Five (5) other regions namely; Coast, Northeastern, Mount Kenya Rift Valley and Lake whose offices are located in Mombasa, Garrisa, Nyeri, Nakuru and Kisumu respectively. 3

14 With the Government directive to the ports and entry points to operate 24 hours and terminations of contracts due to retirement, death, resignation and dismissals, (Human Resource Information System (HRIS), KEBS) there was a need to increase the number of existing staff. This resulted to recruitment of 141 new employees between October, 2008 and April, 2009 of officers (graduate), technicians (Ordinary Diploma & Higher Diploma holder), clerks (certificate holders) and drivers. Out of these, eighty were posted in Nairobi office. It has been KEBS culture to carry-out a comprehensive induction program that last between (one) 1 and (three) 3 months to their new employees conducted at KEBS Centre and facilitated by KEBS senior employees before being posted to various duty stations. Cost implication could be among the reasons as to why KEBS recruit in large numbers. Such groups include 1998 and There have been exits during the first two years and some possible reasons for the high turnover would be unmet expectations by the employer and head hunting due to the extensive training offered. Of concern to me is the perception that the new employees hold regarding their employer (KEBS) and themselves on the contract beyond the written offer 1.2 Statement of Problem Contracts are a mainstay in employment relations, establishing inducements and contributions basic to membership in an organization (Barnard, 1973). Whether written or oral, contracts are promises made in exchange for some compensation or return, and are enforced or at least recognized in law (Farnsworth, 1982; Murray, 1974). Increasingly, however, non written or implied contracts arising out of the employment relationship have been the subject of litigation (Heshizer, 1984; Koys, Briggs and Grenig, 1987) and practitioner concern (Dunahee & Wangler, 1974). This is due to the implications they have in employment relations. During job offers, formal communication is done by the employer on issues concerning pay, termination and acceptance of the offer procedures and the terms of employment whether contractual or permanent. However employment being a mainstay requires clarity in all aspects so as to avoid misconceptions especially by new employees who are developing the organization comprehensiveness. Abwavo (2005) carried a related study on the relationship between psychological contract and organizational commitment and job satisfaction in commercial banks in Nairobi. Among others 4

15 the researcher found that there was a positive correlation between employer s obligation and job satisfaction and a negative correlation between psychological contract and organization commitment. She observed that the findings were contrary to earlier research conducted in other places (Eienenberger et al, 1986; Randall, 1999). A psychological contract study closely related to my study was carried by Rousseau ini990 at Kellogg School of Management. The focus of Rousseau s study was new hires perceptions of their employer s and their own obligations. The data was collected two weeks to graduation from MBA students who had secured and accepted job offers. Among others the study established that distinct types of employer-employee obligations exist. Two types of obligations were demonstrated empirically: transactional obligations of high pay and career advancement in exchange for hard work and relational obligations involving exchanging job security for loyalty and a minimum length of stay (Rousseau, 1990). These distinct patterns are consistent with make versus buy strategies of human resources management (HRM) described by Miles and Snow (1980) and reflect the two major types of contracts namely transactional and relational contracts. Psychological contract types are usually classified on a continuum from relational to transactional with a shift to the later having occurred in recent times. Most organizations will have a variety of psychological contract with various segment of their workforce depending on the business strategy and the value, knowledge and skills that they contribute (Davidson, 2001). Based on Davidson, 2001 argument, I wish to examine the types of relationships between new employees at Nairobi Office and their employer (KEBS) from the employees perception. The new employees were issued with a written letter of offer as the practice with employers. Above the terms and conditions stipulated in the offer, there are usually un-written offers that each party expects from the other. These offers bring about the psychological contract which is real in the employment relationships. There is need, therefore, that the expectations be understood by both parties as they constitute the psychological contract and breach of these contracts would affect their relationship. Psychological contract will be operationalized with two sets of terms: employee-focused obligations (i.e. to be fulfilled by the employee) and employer-focused 5

16 obligations (i.e. to be fulfilled by the organization). However, each set of obligations is from the employee's perspective. Employees with beliefs conforming to the predicted pattern of a relational contract are expected to report employer- and employee-focused obligations that would reflect a long-term relationship (such as loyalty on the part of the employee and job security provided by the organization). Another pattern of employee- and employer focused obligations is expected to be consistent with a transactional view (e.g. hard work by employee and high pay by the organization). This study is therefore different from Rousseau s study (1990), in context and the population; since the employers in Rousseau s study were as many as the units of study, i.e 260 students out of 480 MBA graduating class. The sample for Rousseau s study comprised only of students who had accepted permanent job offers. The sample size in this study was smaller than in the Rousseau s study, comprising of eighty (80) newly hired employees at KEBS. 1.3 Objectives of the study 1. To determine the employees (respondents ) perceptions of their obligations to KEBS. 2. To establish the employees (respondents ) perceptions of KEBS obligations to them. 1.4 Importance of the study The study will be of importance to: Employers The study will provide an insight on how the new employees perceive their employer s and their own obligations to help handle them for a productive workforce Management of Kenya Bureau of Standards It will help to provide feedback to Kenya Bureau of Standards Management on how to package information provided to new employees on various issues that often cause misunderstanding among new employees that are beyond the written offer particularly regarding their own and employer s obligations and rights. 6

17 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction The concept of Psychological Contract was first used by Argyris (1960) and has been developed further by the works of many researchers like Levinson et al. (1962), Schein; (1980,) and most recently by Rousseau (1989; 1995; 2000). Psychological contract is an implicit exchange relationship between the employer and the employees encompassing mutual expectations and obligation of each party towards the other. According to Rousseau (1989), psychological contract is promise based and over time, takes the form of a schema which is relatively stable. A schema is defined as a cognitive structure that represents organized knowledge about a given stimulus - a person or situation - as well as rules that direct information processing (Fiske & Taylor, 1984). Schema refers to an individual s beliefs, frames of references, perceptions, values and concepts. Schema provides a base that serves as a guide to an individual for information collection, assimilation, interpretation, actions, and expectations, thereby simplifying cognitive processes by which people make sense of events and situation in which they may find themselves (Fiske & Taylor, 1984). Schemas typically influence the perception of incoming information, retrieval of stored information, and inferences. It is commonly believed by researchers that psychological contract is an individual s belief about the term and conditions of a reciprocal exchange agreement with an employer - a belief that some form of promises have been made and that the terms are accepted by all involved. By these observations, psychological contract becomes an unwritten set of expectations between everyone in an organization and unlike a written contract, is of dynamic in nature. Although the contract is unwritten, it may have significant effect on employee behavior on the job, employee morale, performance and desire to leave the job. Rousseau (1995) suggested that psychological contract depends on the employee s understanding of the explicit and implicit promises regarding the exchange of employee contributions (such as efforts, loyalty and ability) and organizational inducements (such as pay, promotion, job security). The mutual aspect of psychological contract has been mentioned by most of the researchers. According to Levinson et al. The psychological or unwritten contract is a product of mutual 7

18 expectations. These have two characteristics: (a) they are largely implicit and unspoken, and (b) they frequently antedate the relationship of person and company (Levinson et. al 1962). Each employee brings a set of expectations to the organization regarding how his/her psychological needs are going to be met in the organizational context. These needs include dependence need, need for affection, privacy, control of one s own life, and expectations that allow for changing self-identity and continuing growth into new occupational roles and responsibilities and all other related needs. The company also has expectations regarding the behavior and performance of the employee. An unwritten contract results when the employee and the employer achieve a mutually beneficial working organization that satisfies both the parties expectations. Thomas & Anderson, 1998 argue that it s during the first three to six months after entering the organization that the rudimentary psychological contract is brought more into reality. According to Rousseau (1995), newcomers usually have an exaggeratedly positive view of the labor relationship. Their initial perceptions are characterized by high expectations towards the employer and lower expectations of themselves. That matches findings from the realistic expectations literature (Louis, 1980). As newcomers gain more experience within the organization, they will adapt their expectations more to reality. Rousseau (1995), states that newcomers will weaken their perceptions of organization promises during their first months in their new jobs while their perceptions of their own promises will increase. 2.2 Psychological Contract Development Weick (1981) argues that when two parties can predict what each other will do in an interaction; (based upon both inference and observation of past practices) a contract to continue these behaviors into the future emerges and structures their future relationship. Thus, expectations formed during interactions regarding future patterns of reciprocity can constitute a psychological contract for an individual who is a party to the relationship. In generally, when individual employees believe that they are obligated to behave or perform in a certain way and also believe that the employer has certain obligations toward them, these individuals hold a psychological contract. 8

19 During the recruitment process, the employer and interviewee discuss what they each can offer in the prospective relationship. If agreement is reached, most employers will impose a standard form contract, leaving the detail of the employee's duties to be clarified "on the job". But some of the initial statements, no matter how informal and imprecise, may later be remembered as promises and give rise to expectations. Whether they are incorporated into the parallel psychological contract will depend on whether both parties believe that they should be treated as part of the relationship. The better organized employers are careful to document offers to reduce the risk of raising false expectations followed by disappointment Factors associated with Psychological Contract Development Both individual and organizational factors appear to be associated with the development of the psychological contract. Individual determinants include experiences and expectations which may have been formed about the employment relationships, prior to employment, during recruitment, during early organizational socialization or from experiences in the course of employment (Rousseau, 2001a). These experiences and expectations may vary according to individual difference factors such as age, gender, level of education, union membership, non work commitments etc (Guest & Conway, 1998). Organizational factors influencing the development of the psychological contract include human resource policies and practices which may indicate certain promises or obligations on the part of the employer and expectations of employees (Guest & Conway, 1998). Noer (2000) argues that many organizations are operating a cultural lag from the old psychological contract. They want the flexibility of "new" contracts but retain the artifacts of a traditional contract e.g. career paths, benefits etc. This indicates a need for employers to be clearer, more explicit on mutual obligations and to communicate them unambiguously. For a successful organizational, managing the psychological contract needs to begin before hiring process. Niehoff and Paul (2001) state that an organization publication interview process, contract negotiation and orientation process all contribute towards the formation of employee s psychological contract with the organization 9

20 2.3 Types of Psychological Contracts In his study Rousseau (2000) operationalized psychological contract with two sets of terms: employee-focused obligations (i.e. to be fulfilled by the employee) and employer-focused obligations (i.e. to be fulfilled by the organization), however each set of obligations was from the employee s perspective. He expected employees with a relational contract to report employerand employee-focused obligations that would reflect a long-term relationship (such as loyalty on the part of the employee and job security provided by the organization). The other pattern of employee- and employer focused obligations was expected to be consistent with a transactional view (e.g. hard work by employee and high pay by the organization).). These obligations reflect the two major types of psychological contract, namely; relational and transactional. Psychological contract has also been classified on a continuum from relational to transactional with a shift to the latter having occurred in the recent times (Davidson, 2002 and MacNeil, 1985) Given the dynamics and varying nature of psychological contract, there could be a number of types of psychological contracts existing in the organizational context. Rousseau (1995) identified a simple 2 x 2 model of psychological contract giving rise to four different types of contract (Table 1). The two dimensions of the 2 x 2 model are time frame and performance requirements. Time frame refers to the duration of the employment and performance requirements are the expectations of performance (or performance benchmarks) as a precondition of employment. Many studies concluded that the longer a relationship continues between employer and employee, the greater the exchange between the two parties becomes one of mutual trust, affection and understanding. The 2 x 2 model creates a framework of four possible types of psychological contract namely; transactional (short term, specified performance), relational (long-term, non-specified performance), transitional (short-term, nonspecified performance) and balanced (long-term, specified performance). 10

21 Table 1: Types of Psychological Contract Performance Requirements Time Frame Short Term Long Term Non-Specified performance Transitional Relational Specified performance Transactional Balanced Source: Rousseau (1995): Promises in action: Psychological c o n tra c ts in organizations Transactional: The transactional contract is present when the employment arrangement is of a short-term or limited duration, primarily focused exchange of work in lieu of money with a specific and definite description of duties and responsibilities and limited involvement in organization... Transactional contracts involve specific monetizable exchanges (e.g. pay for attendance) between parties over a specific time period as in the case of temporary employment or recruitment by buy'-oriented firms (Miles and Snow, 1980). Such transactional contracts involve acquisition of people with specific skills to meet present needs (e.g. high tech firms, temporary employment agencies). Highly competitive wage rates and the absence of long-term commitments are characteristic of transactional contracts. Armstrong (2007) refers to it as the economical contracts. Mcshane and Glinow (2008) indicated that new employees form transactional contract until they develop a sense of continuity with the organization. Transactional contracts can be used to the advantage of some highly skilled and employable individuals in ways of their choice, for example by insisting on certain working patterns before accepting a job, this is impossible for lower skilled workers. Employees who expect less security and fewer benefits from an organization may feel less entitled to request or take up "family friendly" working practices (Lewis & Smithson, 2001). Relational contract: It involves open-ended agreements to establish and maintain a relationship involving both monetizable and non-monetizable exchanges (e.g. hard work, loyalty and security). Such arrangements are often found in what Miles and Snow (1980) termed as 'make'- onented firms which typically hire people at entry levels and develop them over time to meet BnvERsrrY of Nairobi KADCT= (JB M **

22 future needs (e.g. IBM and other service-oriented companies). Feldhiem (1999) defines relational contracts as a social emotional base that underlies expectations of shared ideals and values, and respect and support in the interpersonal relationships. McShane and Glinow (2008) refer to this contract as marriage-like contract, which are long-tem attachment that encompass a broa array of subjective mutual obligations. They argue that permanent employees are likely to have ansuch contracts. The relational contract results from long-term employment arrangements based upon mutual trust and loyalty. Growth in career and remuneration comes mainly from seniority and other benefits and rewards are only loosely related to work performance. The contract is derived from long term membership and participation in the organization. Transitional: By definition it is not exactly a psychological contract, but a cognitive state which reflects the changes in organizational context and socio-economic changes and transitions that are in contradiction with a previously established arrangement or psychological contract. This type of cognitive state is apparent during company mergers and acquisition, downsizing as well as related state of uncertainties in work life (Sarkar 2002). The transitional contract is usually present when elements of an organization change, e.g. in a merger, causing uncertainty, distrust and instability in the workforce along with the possibility of high turnover. A practical transactional contract is often required to restore even a degree of trust between employees and employer. Balanced: Balanced psychological contract refers to a dynamic and open-ended employment engagement pre-conditioned on business success of the employer organization and the employee s opportunities to develop skill sets and opportunities for career advancement based on skills and performance (Sarkar 2002). Both employee and organization contribute to each other s development. Rewards to workers are based upon performance and contributions to the organization s business success or competitive advantages, particularly in the face of changing business environment. In most of the public owned and professionally managed organizations, balanced type of psychological contract exists. It is in the middle of the continuum and is a combination of the contract which Davidson (2001) refers to it as a hybrid. This is most preferred by most organizations as it incorporates a blending of elements of both transactional 12

23 and relational contract. Armstrong (2001) also emphasizes that it incorporates shared value and commitment as well as specified results and time frames. 2.4 Strategic Implication of the Psychological Contract Sparrow and Marchington (1998) argue that the psychological contract concept has been useful in capturing the complex changes at work in times of uncertainly. It acts as an organization wide framework of analysis and captures concerns over new employment practices. Armstrong (2006) acknowledges that the psychological contract offers a representation of what happens in the workplace. He emphasizes the importance of the concept by highlighting the important but often neglected features and offers a framework for addressing issues about managing performance, focuses on people rather than technology and it draws attention to some important shifts in the relationship between people and the organization. As mentioned earlier psychological contract has been associated with workplace behavior and Schein, 1990 was the first to suggest so. This is because psychological contract is more of perception than the reality. Robbins and Judge (2007) defined the role expectation as how others believe you should act in a given situation. In the workplace the concept is well defined in the perspective of psychological contract which sets out mutual expectation between the employer and employee. In effect, psychological contract defines the behavioral that go with every role. Behavior is greatly influenced by our personal interpretation of the reality and it is easy to understand why our perceptual processes are potent determinant of behaviors. The relationship of behavior and perception has been explained in the attribution theory which attempts to explain the why of behavior (Matteson and Ivancevich, 1990). Robbins and Judge (2007) emphasized that the world as it is perceived is the world that is behaviorally important. This implies that the employer should be concerned with the way the employees perceive obligations to ensure clear understanding of their relationship. According Matteson and Ivancevich, (1990) attitudes are determinants of behavior because they are linked with perception. Attitude is a mental state of readiness learned and organized through experience, exerting a specific influence on a person s response to people, objects and situation with which it is related. Attitudes thus provide the emotional basis of one s interpersonal 13

24 relations and identification with others. Attitudes have traditionally been described as a process in which we logically calculate our feelings towards the attitude object based on analysis of our beliefs. Thus beliefs predict feelings which predict behavioral intentions which predict behavior (McShane and Glinow, 2008). Psychological contract has been associated with the following attitudes at workplaces: Organizational Commitment: Organizational commitment can be defined as the degree to which an employee identifies with a particular organization and its goals, and wishes to maintain membership in the organization (Robbins et al 2008: 80). McShane and Glinow, (2008) defines it as employees emotional attachment to, identification and involvement in a particular organization. The existence of a strong, relational psychological contract would seem to be very similar to a high level of organizational commitment. Studies have indicated a strong correlation between the breach of a psychological contract and lower organizational commitment (e.g.: Lester et al 2002). Commitment is also build when employees have organizational comprehension; this refers to the employees understanding of the company s past, present and future. This also builds employees loyalty and it is facilitated by open and rapid communication to and from corporate leaders and interaction with co-workers McShane and Glinow, (2008). Employee Engagement: Employee engagement is now one of the most widely recognized constructs amongst organizational development and HR professionals. It refers to an individual s involvement with, satisfaction with, and enthusiasm for the work they do (Robbins et al 2008: 81). The relationship between engagement and the psychological contract is unclear. While it might be hypothesized that engagement might require a strong relational contract, it might also be possible that employees draw a distinction between their commitment to their work, and their evaluation of their employer s behavior. According to McShane and Glinow (2008), employee involvement increases affective commitment by strengthening the employee social identity with the organization. Employees feel part of the organization when they take part in decisions that direct the organization s future. This attitude also builds another attitude of trust since by giving power it is a demonstration of the company s trust in it is employees. Perceived Organizational Support: While this concept is much less prominent in organizational psychology, it is particularly close to the employee s orientation to their psychological contract. 14

25 % It measures the degree to which employees believe the organization values their contribution and cares about their well-being (Robbins et al 2008: 80). McShane and Glinow (2008), acknowledge that employees will develop affective commitment if there is shared values. That is when the employees values are congruent with the organizational values. Organizational Justice: Organizational justice, the degree to which processes and outcomes at work are regarded as fair by employees, appears to be very similar to the idea of an intact psychological contract. Research has indicated that various measures of either procedural or distributive justice correlate with various behavioral and attitudinal outcomes in much the same way that measures of the psychological contract do (Conway and Briner 2005: 76). McShane and Glinow, (2008) state that justice is seen to prevail in an organization that fulfils its obligations to employees and abide by humanitarian values such as fairness, courtesy, forgiveness and moral integrity. 15

26 CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research design This was a case study carried out at Kenya Bureau of Standards (KEBS). The case study was preferred because only one organization was involved and the objectives of the study were to estimate the proportion of persons in a specified population who behave in a certain way and then describe their characteristics. This was intended to help explain differences in the perception of different groups of the respondents. This was a census survey as it targeted all new employees at the Headquarters. 3.2 Data collection Primary data was collected using a self-structured questionnaire. The questionnaire comprised of both open and closed ended questions. The instrument was divided into two sections: section A consisted of questions that helped understand the respondent and section B comprised of questions that helped answer the objectives of the project (See appendix I). The questionnaires were administered to eighty newly hired employees through s to the majority and pick and drop to a few who could not access computer. The targeted respondents were managers, senior officers, officers, assistant officers, clerks and messengers. 16 O

27 3.3 Data analysis The data was quantitative. The first step in the analysis was to edit and clean-up the data. Data was then coded and keyed in. The SPSS was used to facilitate the analysis. The output of the analysis consisted of frequencies, means, standard deviations and percentages. The results were presented in tables and figures. 17 O

28 CHAPTER FOUR DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Introduction A structured questionnaire was used to collect the data. The research objectives were (1) to determine employees (the respondent) perceptions of their obligations to KEBS and (2) to establish the employees perceptions of KEBS obligations to them. To achieve this, the respondents were presented with statements describing contractual obligations and were required to rate on the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with the statements. A 1-5 point Likert type scale was used to rate the statements. For the purpose of analysis, the respondents ratings of each statement has factorial mean which are classified as follows; factorial mean below 2.9, 3 to 3.9 and above 4 are considered high, medium and low respectively for employer-focused obligation and vice versa for employee s-focused obligations. High rating means that the respondent strongly agreed, medium rating implies that the respondent neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement while low rating implies that they disagreed. Eighty new-employees hired by KEBS between October 2008 and April 2009 in Nairobi offices were targeted. Out of the eighty possible completed questionnaires, only seventy two were received. This is equivalent to a 90 percent response rate. The results of the study were quantitative in nature and descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. Frequency distributions, mean and standard deviation were used to summarize the data to show broad trends in the responses and the findings are presented in tables and charts for understanding as tabulated in figures and tables below and appendices III and IV. 18

29 4.2 Demographic Results Respondents Designation The respondents included managers, senior officers, officers, assistant officers, technicians, clerks and messengers as shown in table 2 below. Majority of the new hires were assistant officers. These were fresh graduates with little or no experience. They are usually required to undergo a comprehensive induction program to equip them with relevant skills and knowledge of various KEBS function before executing their duties. It is important to note here that KEBS is a make-oriented organization that hires majority of its employees at entry levels. Table 2: Distribution of the respondents by position held in the organization Position Held Frequency Percent Managers Senior Officers Officers Ass. Officers Technician Clerk Messenger Gender of the Respondents The findings presented in figure 1 indicate that most of the recently hired employees were males whose percentage was 63.9 and the rest females. 19

30 Figure 1: Distribution of the respondents by Gender Female 36.1% Male 63.9% Respondents Level of Education The respondents levels of education were masters degree, bachelors degree, higher diploma, and ordinary diploma to others (qualification below an ordinary diploma). The findings, presented in figure 2 below, showed that the highest number of respondents were bachelors degree holders with a percentage of 58.3, followed by masters degree level with a percentage of 16.7 and the lowest were others with a percentage of 2.8. When asked to rate the expected duration they intend to stay with KEBS, majority of the respondents were willing to work in the organization for more than five years with percentage of 38.9 while 30.6 percent were willing to work in the organization for less than two years as shown in the table 3. Level of education was one of the major individual factors influencing psychological contract. This is because the higher the education level one has the more the expectations. Most of the respondents with high level of education, that is masters degree level were willing to remain in the organization for more than three years. It emerged that most of the bachelors degree holders were willing to be with the company for at least two years. This recorded 52 percent. This implied that level of education influenced the duration of stay of the respondents in the organization. Overall, 74 percent of respondents had shown interest in the organization by indicating their willingness to be in the organization for atleast two years. This could be due to the fact that most 20

31 of the new hires are at their early stage of career development and would like to acquire more practical knowledge and skills to enable them advance. Figure 2: Distribution of the respondents by Level of Education Others 2.8% Diploma 8.3% Higher National Dipl 13.9% Masters 16.7% Bachelors 58.3% Respondents Age Figure 3 shows the age bracket for all the respondents interviewed which ranged from below 20 years to 40 years. The highest number of the respondents was in the age bracket of years with a percentage of 66.7 followed by age bracket of years with a percentage of 16.7 and the rest were below 20 years percent of the respondents in the age group between 26 and 30 had bachelors degrees, implying that majority of the new employees were fresh graduates or graduates who had less than five years since their graduation. 21

32 Figure 3: Distribution of the respondents by Age years 5.6% years 8.3% Below 20 years 2.8% years 16.7% years 66.7% Table 3: Analysis of the respondents by Expected Duration of stay F requency P ercent L e ss than a y ear year y ea rs y ea rs years y ea rs and a b o v e M is s in g Total

33 4.3 Factors associated with the Development of Psychological Contract Employee s focused Obligations Employees were asked to rate the extent to which they felt obliged to KEBS. Summary of the findings is presented in appendix IV. When the respondents were asked to show the extent to which they can do voluntary services, majority (69%) showed committal attitude. This was consistent with the percentage, (60%), that indicated having concern for the organization s issues. It is also influenced by the past experiences of an individual and the experience formed during the prior socialization with the organization stakeholders. According to the tabulated data (presented in appendix IV), 69 percent were willing to do non required task with a percentage of 11.4 having a very high volunteering spirit. Only 22 percent were not willing at all do any non required task as illustrated in appendix III. Thus, a mean score of 2.86 and a standard deviation of 1.27 as presented in appendix IV confirm that majority of respondents were willing to consider the non-routine job activities. The other individual factors included the search for opportunities. The respondents interviewed were willing to seek their development opportunities outside the organization. Out of respondents interviewed, only 11.1 percent were not willing to seek development opportunities. This resulted to a mean score of 3.8 and standard deviation of 1.3 as validated by appendix IV. The 11.1 percent represent the respondents with ordinary diploma and below. The other factors included setting out to get a position in a certain organization and availing themselves for attachment in an organization prior to their employment and wanting a job with such an organization. 23

34 4.3.2 Employer s focused Obligations Career development was an employer-focused obligation factor. According to the tabulated data in appendix III, 77.1 percent had the view that the organization owed them. Mean score of 1.7 and a standard deviation of 1.2, suggest this as a strong expectation which the employer should deliver and it was consistent with the urge to explore career opportunities as illustrated by the magnitude of the mean of 2.1 and standard deviation of 1.3. This is an indication that most respondents were aiming at developing their career, hence they were willing to change their employer often in search of these opportunities. Need for training was also considered to be employer s obligation with a mean score of 1.7 and standard deviation of 0.9. The last factor considered to be highly demanded was availability of opportunity for development which had a mean score of 1.7 and standard deviation of This is attributed by the fact that majority of the newly recruited employees were in the age bracket of years, which is the period when majority are establishing themselves in careers(early career development stage) hence the high quest for training and career development aspects ranging between 1 (Strongly Agree) and 3 (moderate). Pay is an organization obligation to its employees. It thus influences the relationship between them. Out of all the interviewed respondents viewed high pay as benefit that they should derive from the organization as an exchange for hard work. This was indicated by a mean score of 1.8. Others, with a mean score of 1.7 and standard deviation of 0.9 had the view, pay should be based on performance level. The other benefit expected was the support with personal problems which had a mean score of 2.47 and standard deviation of 1.2. Thus the respondents were expecting both the monetary and non monetary valued benefits from the employer. 24

35 According to the data collected job security was one of the obligations of the employer that the employer has to the employees with cumulative percentage of This is supported by the willingness of the respondent to give an advance notice to their employer in case of they need to change employer with a cumulative percentage of 63. When asked the extent to which they can accept transfer to other regional offices, slightly more than half of the respondents showed willingness. This statement had a mean score of 3.1 which indicated the attachment they have with KEBS. Thus job security was viewed as one of the non monetary benefits that the employees would draw from their employer. On issues of management, the respondents felt that KEBS owed them a performance management system that is fair and clear to all to help them achieve objectives they set at the beginning of the year which in result would help them be rewarded. This accounted for a mean score of 1.8 and standard deviation of 1.2 as shown in appendix III. Also communication of policies and issues that affect the employees as well as their changes was considered to be important with a mean score of 1.8 and a standard deviation of 1.2. This is consistent with the following obligations: a sense of direction for the organization, transparency of the management, availability of resources and the adequate information which the respondents agreed that the organization owed them. 4.4 Types of Psychological Contract Transactional contract exists in the organization because majority (97.2 percent) of the respondents had a specific time frame that they intended to stay in the organization. The time frame ranged from less than one year to more than five years, having a cumulated percentage of 97.2 while only 2.8 had an indefinite time frame to stay in the organization as illustrated in table 3. Comparison with the educational level table shows an equivalent percentage of employees with lower than diploma. Probably, only these were willing to serve the organization longer. 25

36 Employees with qualification of diploma and above had specific time frame. This also agrees with the percentage of those who viewed the job as a stepping stone to career development. The second factor in support of transactional contract is the expected high pay by the respondents. Out of the respondents interviewed, 76.5 percent were of the view that high pay was expected as a reward of hard work as presented in appendix III. They also contended that the pay should be based on the performance. The third factor that indicated the existence of transactional contract was need for promotion based on performance appraisal and it accounted for a mean score of 2.1 as shown in appendix III. The last factor that contributed to development of transaction contract was search for career development. Most of the respondents were in search of career development. The findings showed that majority of them were even willing to explore many career opportunities which was accounted for by mean score of 2.1 as tabulated in appendix IV. The organization was obligated to provide paths for career development and this was portrayed by the fact they were in need of training. Thus the respondents were over expectant of the employer than they felt obliged to the employer. The other type of psychological contract that emerged from the data was relational contract. According to McNeil (1985), this is characterized by both economical and non-economical needs and it is subjective and intrinsic in nature. Some of the employees were willing to stay in the organization for indefinite time frame. The second factor in support of this is the loyalty of the employees to the organization. This accounted for accumulative percentage of 89.1 with loyalty ranging from slightly low to very high as presented in appendix IV. The other statements portraying the employees loyalty include keeping the organization secrets as shown by their unwillingness to support their competitors. This accounted for a mean score of 3.6 as shown in appendix III, which is a high value. Other statements in support of the existence of a relational contract include; the employees willingness to work for extra hours as shown in appendix IV with mean score of 2.7, the protection of the propriety information, taking the organization concerns as personal, willingness to take a transfer offer, recommendation to a friend, and protection of the organization image were good indicators of employees loyalty. 26

37 Job security was viewed as an indicator for relational contract. The respondents required a long term job security with a mean score of 1.97 and standard deviation of This implied that they were willing to exchange their hard work and loyalty for job security. The respondents interviewed, indicated willingness to give an advance notice before resigning from KEBS, which accounted for a mean of 3.65 as presented in appendix III. This implied that before leaving KEBS the employees would notify the employer of their intentions. The prior attachment with organization, specifically wanted a job with the organization which accrued for a mean of 2.61 and a standard deviation of 1.39 and readiness to spend more than two years in the organization with a mean score of 3.26 and standard deviation of

38 CHAPTER FIVE SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Introduction This chapter covers the summary and discussion of the findings in relation to the objective of the study, limitation of the study and the further research recommendation. 5.2 Summary It is clear from the research findings that majority of the respondents were between age 26 to 30 years of age. This was consistent with the education level where bachelors degree holders were majority. This implies that KEBS hires most fresh graduates with little or no experience and develops them through extensive training hence the urge for training and career development by the majority of the respondents. It was also clear that the employee s-focused obligations were between low limit of 4 and high of 5, that is, they simply disagreed or strongly disagreed. They also felt that the employer was obliged to fulfill all the factors enumerated in the instrument than they did. This was evidenced by the high and low limits which were between 1 and 2, that is, they strongly agreed or simply agreed. Some of the factors that are associated with psychological contract include; pay based on performance, long term job security, promotion, opportunities for career development, unspecified time frame, hard work to mention but a few. These have been analyzed and tabulated in appendix III and IV. The findings indicate that there are two types of psychological contracts namely; transactional and relational contract. Some of the obligations associated with transactional contract that were scored highly by the respondent include; high pay with low and high limit scores of 1 and 2.6 respectively out a possible maximum of 5. This implies that the respondents believed that the employer owed them a high pay. The second was training, with scores of low and high limit of 0.6 and 2.4 respectively out of a possible maximum of 5. This indicates that new employees expect to be trained. This could be as a result of the high number of new hires who are at their early career development stage and it supports McShane and Glinow (2008) argument that majority of the new hires will exhibit a transactional contract. Hence the high demand for career 28

39 advancement and opportunity for development which had low and high limits scores of 0.5 and 2.9 and 0.9 and 2.5 respectively. These scores are out of 5. The following factors were associated with relational contract. Job security, which had low and high limits of 0.7 and 3.1 respectively out of a possible maximum 5. This implied that the respondents expected to be retained in the organization for longer period of time. This is consistent with the mean score for expected minimum number of years to serve in the organization, which is3.2 with low and high limits of 1.7 and 4.6. The other factor was loyalty with a mean score of 3.6 which indicated that the respondents were very loyal. Other factors that show employees loyalty include protection of propriety information, giving notice while changing the employer, taking organization personal and refusal to support employer competitors. This conformed to the study done by Rousseau (1990) which found that two distinct types of employer-employee obligations existed. The types of obligations were transactional obligations of high pay and career advancement in exchange for hard work and relational obligations involving exchanging job security for loyalty and a minimum length of stay. These obligations relate to the two types of psychological contracts. It is also consistent with the literature review that there exists two distinguished types of psychological contract, namely; relational and transactional, though in a continuum. Obligations used to assess relational contract in the instrument included; job security, support with personal problems, training, and career advancement opportunity. The respondents strongly believed that their employer had a responsibility to fulfill these obligations in exchange of their hard work and loyalty as indicated in appendix III and IV. This is consistent with Feldhiem (1999) description of relational contracts as those which exhibit expectations of shared ideas and values, respect and support. They are seen as contracts that exist in family. On the other hand, transactional contracts were measured with obligations which included: duration of stay with the organization, high pays. Armstrong (2007) referred to them as economical contract. They involve specific monetizable exchanges (e.g. pay for attendance) between parties over a specific time period and they are mostly used by high technology firms or in case of temporary employment. It was the 29

40 most common contract among the new hires Its existence among the employees could be due to their newness in the organization hence lack of the company comprehension and sense of continuity (McShane and Glinow, 2008). 5.3 Conclusion The study established that the new employees expected much from their employer with most employer-focused obligations having a mean score ranging between 1 and 2 out of a possible 5. This implied that they strongly believed that the employer owes them the benefits which are not directly specified in the terms and conditions of service. This is contrary to their expected obligations to their employers which had a mean score between 2 and 3 out of a possible score of 5. This implies that their perception of their obligations to the employer ranged from slightly low to moderate. This reflects more of transactional than relational contract and it is consistent with McShane and Glinow s (2008) suggestion that new employees form transactional contracts until they develop a sense of continuity with the organization. 5.4 Recommendations Recommendations for KEBS management The study established that the contract between the new employees and KEBS is more transactional than relational. It is important therefore, for the management of KEBS to influence the new employees psychological contract by communicating its un-written offers and expectations to employees as well as giving audience to these employees in order to correct any misconception. Majority of the respondents interviewed were bachelors degree holders who see no limit and have an urge to establish themselves in the shortest time possible. This will require the KEBS management to consider employee assistance programs addressing this generation s needs. These can include mortgages, good medical covers and car loans. These among others can help retain the new employees and above all develop a sense of continuity which eventually results to formation of relational contract. 30

41 5.4.2 Recommendations for further research This study only covered the new employees in Nairobi, though they are the majority. It is, therefore, important to include others posted in the regions. This study having been done within their first year of employment it would be of important for a similar study to be carried out after at least two years to establish if the contracts and the factors that contributed to them changed. 5.5 Limitation of the study Some of the factors that limited the study were cost and response rate. There was a 10 percent non response to the questionnaires administered. The study is also limited to KEBS, Nairobi Office newly employed staff between October 2008 to April 2009 hence its findings cannot be generalized to older employees of KEBS or other organizations. 31

42 REFERENCES Anderson, N. and Schalk, R. (1998). The p sych o lo g ica l con tra ct in retro sp ect a n d p ro sp ect. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, pp Armstrong, M. (2006) A H an dbook o f H uman R esource M anagem ent P ra ctice 10th ed. Kogan Page, London. Armstrong, M. and Murlis, H. (2007) Reward Management; A H an dbook o f R em uneration Strategy a n d P ra ctice 5th ed. Kogan Page, London. Barnard, C. I. (1973), the F unctions o f the E xecutive, Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Bravo B. A. (2005): The P sych o lo g ica l Contract, O rg a n iza tio n a l C om m itm ent a n d Job Satisfaction. A stu dy o f co m m ercial Banks in N airobi. Unpublished MBA project, University of Nairobi. Conway, N. and Briner, R. B. (2005) U nderstanding P sych o lo g ica l C on tracts a t Work: A C ritica l E valuation o f Theory a n d R esearch. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dunahee, M. H. and Wangler, L. A. (1974). 'The p sy ch o lo g ic a l contract: A conceptual structure f o r m anagem ent/em ployee relations'. Personnel Journal, July, , 548. Farnsworth, E. A. (1982). C o n tra cts; Little Brown, Boston. Feldheim, M. (1999). D ow nsizing. P a p er p re se n te d a t the S outheastern C onference o f P u blic A dm in istration, St. Petersburg, FL, October 6-9. Guest, D. and Conway, N. (1998). F airness a t w ork a n d the p sy ch o lo g ic a l contract. London: Institute of Personnel and Development. Guest, D.E. and Conway, N. (2002) P ressu re at w ork a n d the p sy ch o lo g ic a l contract. London: CIPD. 32

43 Heshizer, B. (1984). 'The im p lied contract exception to a t-w ill firin g '. Labor Law Journal, 35, Huseman, R. C, Hatfield, J. D. and Miles, E. W. (1987). 'A new p e rsp e c tiv e on equ ity theory: The equity sen sitivity construct'. Academy of Management Review, 12, Koys, D, J., Briggs, S. and Grenig, J. (1987). 'State cou rt d isp a rity on em ploym ent a t will'. Personnel Psychology. 40, Lester, S. Tunley, W., Bloodgood, J. and Bolino, M. (2002) N ot Seein g E ye to Eye: D ifferences in S u pervisor a n d Subordinate P ercep tio n s o f a n d A ttrib u tes f o r P sych ological C on tract B reach Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol 23: Lewis, S. and Smithson, J. (2001). Sense o f entitlem en t to su p p o rt f o r the recon ciliation o f em ploym ent a n d fa m ily life. Human Relations, 54(11), Luthans, F. (1992). O rg a n izational B ehavior 6th Edition. McGraw-Hill, Irwin. Singapore. MacNeil, I. R. (1985). 'Relational contract: What w e do a n d do not know', Wisconsin Law Review, Freedland, M. (2003) The P erso n a l E m ploym ent Contract, Oxford University Press, London. Matteson, M. T and Ivancevich, J.M (1990). O rgan izational B eh avior a n d M anagem ent, 2nd Edition. Richard,D. Irwin, Inc. USA. McShane, L. S. and Glinow, M. A. V. (2008). O rganizational B eh avior 4,h Edition. McGraw- Hill, Irwin. New York. 33

44 Miles, R, E. and Snow, C, C. (1980). 'D esigning stra teg ic hum an resou rces system '. Organizational Dynamics, Cuyper, D., Isaksson, K. and Witte, H. (2005) E m ploym ent con tra ct a n d w ell-b ein g am ong E uropean w orkers. K.U Leuven, Belgium. Niehoff, B. P. and Paul, R.J. (2001). The ju s t w orkplace: D evelo p in g a n d m aintaining effective p sych o lo g ica l contracts. Review of Business, Vol 22 Issue Vi pg 5-8. Noer, J. (2000). L eadin g organizations through su rvivor sickness: A fra m e w o rk f o r the new m illennium. In R. Burke & C.L. Cooper (Eds.), the organization in crisis. Oxford: Blackwell. Rhoades, L. and Eisenberger, R. (2002) P e rceived O rg a n izational Support: A review o f the L iteratu re Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (4): Robbins, S.P. and Education, Inc. New Jersey. Judge, T.A.(2007) O rgan izational B eh avior 12th Edition. Pearson Robbins, S.P., Judge, T.A., Millett, B. and Waters-Marsh, T. (2008) Behavior, 5th Edition. Frenchs Forest: Pearson Education Australia. Rousseau, D. M. (1988). 'Why can't I fir e an ybody an ym ore?' Crain's Chicago Business. July 4. Rousseau, D. M. and Anton, R. J. (1988). 'Fairness a n d im p lied co n tra ct obligation s: A p o licy-ca p tu rin g study'. Human Performance, 1, Rousseau, D. M. (1990). N ew hire p ercep tio n o f their ow n a n d th eir e m p lo y e r s obligations: A stu dy o f p sych o lo g ica l contracts. Journal of Organizational Behavior Vol 11. John Wiley & Sons. 34

45 Rousseau, D. M. (2001a). Schem a, p ro m ise a n d m utuality: The bu ildin g blocks o f the p sych o lo g ica l contract. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74(4), Rousseau, D. M. and Murray, J. E. (1974). C on tracts, Bobbs-Merrill. New York. Schein, E. H. (1980). O rg a n iza tio n a l P sych ology, Prentice-Hall. Sparrow, P. and Marchington, M. (1998). H um an resou rce m anagem ent: The new agenda. London: Pitman Weick, K. (1981). The S o cia l P sych o lo g y o f O rganizing, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. Williamson, O. E. (1979). 'T ransaction-cost econom ics: The govern ance o f contractual relation s'. Journal of Law and Economics, 11, Website th retrieved on 10 April, OF Na ir o b i TF LlBR4,9f

46 APPENDIX I QUESTIONAIRRE. SECTION A: PERSONAL INFORMATION. 1. Position Held Please tick appropriately. 2. Gender MALE 3. Education level Bachelor FEMALE Higher National Diploma Diploma 4. Age Below 20yrs [ ] yrs yrs [ ] yrs [ ] yrs Above 40 yrs [ ] 5. (a) Were you previously employed Yes [ ] No [ ] (b) If yes, state the number of years you had worked. (c) What was your salary KShs 36

47 6. How long do you expect to remain with this organization and in the specific job or position for which you were hired? ( tick appropriately) (0) less than a year 1year [ 2 years [ ] 3 years [ ] 4 years [ ] 5 years and above. SECTION B 1. What extent do you believe KEBS obligates or owes you? (Indicate appropriately): Obligations Not at all i. Promotion ii. High pay iii. pay based on current level of performance iv. Training v. long-term job security vi. career development vii. Support with personal problems viii. Avail resources required. ix. Performance management that s clear and fair. x. Transparency Somehow moderate Slightly high Very Jllgh 2. What extent do you believe you owe your employer (KEBS)? Obligations 1. Working extra hours 2. Loyalty 3. volunteering to do Not at all Somehow moderate Slightly high Very high 37

48 non-required on the job tasks 4. advance notice if taking a job elsewhere 5. willingness to accept a transfer 6. refusal to support the employer's competitors 7. Protection of propriety information 8. Spending a minimum of two years in the organization. 9. Take this organization concerns personal 10. Protect this organization s image 11. Seek out development opportunities that enhance my value to this organization. 3. Please tick appropriately. N PERSPECTIVE STRONGL AGRE NEUTRA DISAGRE STRONGL O S Y E L E Y AGREE DISAGREE 1 I took this job as a stepping stone to a better job with another organization. 2 I specifically set 38

49 out to get a position with this organization. 3 1 really wanted a job with this particular employer. 4 I had been attached in this organization before employment. 5 I expect to work for a variety of different organizations in my career. 6 I do not expect to change organizations often during my career 7 There are many career opportunities I expect to explore after I leave my present employers. 8 I was taken for the job I applied for. 9 I was well briefed of the job during the interview. 39

50 APPENDIX II LETTER OF INTRODUCTION Researcher: Mary W. Kariuki July 2009 Dear respondent, RE: MBA Research Project I am a student carrying out a research project on types of psychological contract among new employees at Kenya Bureau of Standards, (KEBS) as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Masters in Business Administration, University of Nairobi. The purpose of this letter is therefore to request you to complete the questionnaire attached herein. The information and data gathered will be solely for academic purposes and will be treated with strict confidence. Thank you for your kind assistance and cooperation. Yours faithfully, Mary W. Kariuki Student Professor Peter K Obonyo Supervisor 40

51 APPENDIX III Frequencies, Means, Standard Deviations and Percentages derived from the Respondents' Ratings of KEBS Obligations to Employees. Factors Rating of KEBS Obligations Mean Std. Deviation Promotion Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree Missing High Pay Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree 0 0 Strongly disagree Missing 4 Total Pay based on performance level Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree 0 Missing Training Strongly agree Frequency Percent

52 Agree Neutral Disagree 0 0 Strongly disagree Missing 0 Long-term job security Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree Missing 0 Career Development Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree Support with personal problems Avail resources required Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree Missing Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral

53 Performance management clear and fair Transparency Opportunity for development Adequate information for work Disagree Strongly disagree Missing Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree 0 Strongly disagree Missing Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree 0 Strongly disagree Missing Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree 0 Strongly disagree Missing 0 Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree 0 Strongly

54 disagree Missing Clear sense of direction Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree 0 Strongly disagree Missing 0 Communicati on changes Frequency Percent Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree 0 Strongly disagree Missing

55 APPENDIX IV Frequencies, Means, Standard Deviations and Percentages derived from the Respondents Ratings of Employees obligations to KEBS Factors Rating of Em ployees Obligations Mean Std. Deviation working extra hours Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Volunteering to do non-required tasks Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Loyalty Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Advance notice if taking a job elsewhere Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly

56 high Very high Missing Willingness to accept a transfer Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Refusal to support the employer's Frequency Percent competitor Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly Protection of propriety information Spending a minimum of 2 years in the organization Take organizations concerns personal high Very high Missing Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Not at all Slightly low

57 I expect to explore many career opportunities Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Was taken for the job I applied Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Was briefed of the job during the interview Slightly high Very high Missing Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing

58 Protect this organizations image Seek development opportunities Recommend a friend to KEBS Feel challenged to offer constantly the best to KEBS Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing 0 Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing 0 Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Took the job as a stepping stone Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high

59 Specifically set out to get a position with organization Really wanted a job with the particular organization Was attached in this organization before employment To work with a variety of organizations in my career Missing Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low Moderate Slightly high Very high Missing Do expect to change organizations often Frequency Percent Not at all Slightly low