It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change (Megginson, 1963, p.4).

Transcription

1 The moderating impact of supportive managerial practices on the relationship between psychological contract breach and organizational citizenship behavior A quantitative study at a Dutch bank in the context of organizational change Master Thesis Human Resource Studies Student: Britt de Haar ANR: Date: November 26, 2014 Name of supervisor: Second supervisor: Prof. Dr. R.F. Poell Prof. Dr. M.J.D. Schalk Project period: April 2014 until December 2014

2 Abstract Although research on psychological contracts has found that breaches lead to a range of negative workplace outcomes, there is hardly any empirical research available on managerial approaches to reduce or offset the unfavorable outcomes of a breach. Therefore, based on social exchange theory and the AMO model, this research examines the moderating impact of supportive managerial practices (SMP) on the relationship between psychological contract breach (PCB) and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) in the context of organizational change. Data were collected using questionnaires, completed by 422 employees of a Dutch multinational banking and financial services company who have been through a merger or restructuring process. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis found support for a direct negative relationship between the PCB aspect of social atmosphere and OCB. However, no significant relationship was found for the other five dimensions of PCB and OCB. Furthermore, results indicated that SMP had a moderating impact on the relationship between the PCB aspect of organizational policies and OCB. No significant results were found for the moderating role of SMP in the relationship between the other five dimensions of PCB with OCB. To conclude, this study addressed an important but under-researched area of the psychological contract framework by providing a better understanding of the role of SMP in redressing PCB. Future research is necessary to increase our knowledge of supervisors key roles in managing the unfavorable outcomes of PCB. Keywords: organizational citizenship behavior, psychological contract breach, supportive managerial practices, social exchange theory, AMO model, communication, organizational change 2

3 Table of contents 1. Introduction Theoretical framework Organizational citizenship behavior Psychological contract breach Psychological contract breach and Organizational citizenship behavior The moderating role of supportive managerial practices Control variables Method Design Sample Procedure Instruments Statistical analysis Results Descriptive statistics and correlations Regression analysis Discussion and conclusion Interpretation Limitations Recommendations for future research Practical implications References Appendix A: Questionnaire Appendix B: Dimensions supportive managerial practices Appendix C: Factor structure supportive managerial practices

4 1. Introduction It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change (Megginson, 1963, p.4). Nowadays, more and more organizations face a dynamic and changing environment (Turnley & Feldman, 1998). Organizational change interventions, such as mergers, acquisitions and reorganizations, have become common practices because of ongoing globalization, economic developments and fast-changing markets (Boselie, 2010; Robinson, 1996). In light of these trends, psychological contracts are playing an increasingly important role in contemporary employment relationships (Robinson, 1996). Organizations have had to adjust employment relationships and the psychological contracts underlie them (Rousseau, 1989). A psychological contract refers to the beliefs regarding the terms and conditions of the exchange relationship that exists between an employee and employer (Rousseau, 1989; 1995). These beliefs are subjective and based on employees perceptions (Deery, Iverson & Walsh, 2006). However, there is a breach of the psychological contract when employees perceive that their organization has failed to comply with the implicit and explicit promises (Robinson & Rousseau, 1994). One can imagine that unmet expectations will have an effect on attitudes and behavior. A well-documented consequence of psychological contract breach is that employees are less willing to engage in organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs; Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski & Bravo, 2007). According to Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Brachrach (2000), OCBs consist of extra-role behaviors which are intended to benefit the organization, such as sharing ideas and helping co-workers to manage their workload. The topic of OCB has become of great interest to organizations, because research demonstrated strong correlations with employee effectiveness (Yen & Niehoff, 2004) and organizational success (Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1994). This study uses social exchange theory (Blau, 1964; Gouldner, 1960) to examine the relationship between a breach in the psychological contract and the willingness of employees to go above and beyond the call of duty. This theory assumes that people tend to feel obligated to help those who have helped them (Gouldner, 1960). Based on social exchange theory, employees who experience a psychological contract breach will restore equity by engaging in negative, withdrawn and/or counterproductive behaviors (Restubog, Hornsey, Bordia & Esposo, 2008). 4

5 Research on psychological contracts has found that breaches lead to a range of negative workplace outcomes, including high turnover and reduced trust in the organization (Robinson, 1996). It is reasonable that these negative responses will increase over time, in particular when organizations fail to adequately rectify those breaches. However, there is hardly any empirical research available on managerial approaches to reduce or offset the unfavorable outcomes of a breach resulting from organizational change. The identified moderating and mediating factors in the relationship between psychological contract breach and organizational outcomes do not specifically address management strategies that companies can employ. Therefore, this research examines the moderating effect of supportive managerial practices. By drawing upon the Ability, Motivation, Opportunity (AMO) model, it could be explained that managers can help employees with a breach by employing skillsenhancing, motivation-enhancing and empowerment-enhancing practices (De Ruiter, Blomme, Schalk, 2014b). Communication plays a major role in employing these practices. Good communication in the workplace might result in mutual understanding and can reduce the consequences of a psychological contract breach. De Ruiter, Schalk and Blomme (2014a) developed a preliminary model of managerial approaches to remedying psychological contract breach based on qualitative research. Consequently, it is important to enrich the existing literature by conducting quantitative research and discover how these unfavorable effects can be reduced or even be eliminated. Practically, according to the fact that organizational change interventions have become common practices, it seems reasonable that even more employees will perceive that their organization has failed to fulfil their psychological contract decently. Banks, as many other companies, will have to manage these breaches. Therefore, it seems interesting for organizations to know which effective practices frontline managers may use to reduce the negative effects of a breach and stimulate OCBs. Engaged employees willing to go the extra mile are essential for successful organizations, after all. The central aim of this study is to address the gap in knowledge and inform practitioners about supportive managerial strategies that can be used to redress OCBs. This research also adds value to the existing literature by considering the crucial role of the immediate manager in minimizing the negative effects of psychological contract breach. Based on the preceding, the following research question is stated: What is the effect of psychological contract breach on employees organizational citizenship behavior and to what extent is this effect moderated by supportive managerial practices? 5

6 2. Theoretical framework In this section the theoretical underpinnings of the proposed relationships are presented. First, the concepts organizational citizenship behavior and psychological contract breach are discussed. Subsequently, the relationships between these variables are theoretically and empirically grounded. Finally, the moderating effect of supportive managerial practices is described. 2.1 Organizational citizenship behavior It is widely supported that organizations could not survive unless employees were willing to engage in OCB (Katz, 1964; Katz & Kahn, 1978). Organ (1988) originally defined OCB as individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization (p. 4). Discretionary behavior is not a formal requirement of the job description and can be interpreted as a personal choice of the employee. More recently, OCB is conceptualized as synonymous with the concept of contextual performance, defined as performance that supports the social and psychological environment in which task performance takes place (Organ, 1997, p. 95). Thus, OCBs includes such contributions as volunteering for extra job activities, upholding workplace rules and procedures regardless of personal inconvenience, and helping others (Organ & Ryan, 1995). According to Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff, & Blume (2009), one of the most popular conceptualizations of OCB is the model by Organ (1988), who originally proposed a five-factor OCB model consisting of altruism, courtesy, conscientiousness, civic virtue, and sportsmanship. Organ (1988) defined altruism as a form of helping behavior, while courtesy is demonstrated by preventing organization problems through communication and general consideration for others. Conscientiousness is behavior indicating that employees accept and adhere to the rules, regulations, and procedures of the organization; civic virtue is behavior indicating that employees take an active interest in the life of their organization; and sportsmanship is defined as a readiness on the part of employees to tolerate less than ideal circumstances without complaining and making problems seem bigger than they actually are. A different taxonomy was proposed by Williams and Anderson (1991), who divided OCB into individual-directed behavior (OCB-I) and organization-directed behavior (OCB-O). OCB-I benefits specific individuals, whereas the organization in general profits from OCB-O. Altruism and courtesy have been grouped into OCB-I, while the last three are OCB-O (Bragger, Rodriguez-Srednicki, Kutcher, Indovino, & Rosner, 2005; Williams & Anderson, 6

7 1991). This categorization of OCB-I and OCB-O covers most other OCB-related constructs (Podsakoff et al., 2009). 2.2 Psychological contract breach A breach of the psychological contract can undermine the relationship upon which the individual s employment contract is based and result in lower discretionary inputs. Robinson and Rousseau (1994) defined a psychological contract breach (PCB) as an employee perception that the organization has failed to fulfil its obligations. Since PCB is a subjective experience, it could occur in absence of a real breach. It is an employee's belief that a breach has occurred that affects his or her behavior and attitudes, regardless of whether that believe is valid or whether an actual breach took place (Robinson, 1996, p. 567). A perceived breach of contract is more likely to result if employees perceive that they have made contributions as promised, yet those contributions have not been adequately reciprocated (Morrison & Robinson, 1997). Research findings show that a breach of the psychological contract is not an exception. Many employees are able to describe a situation in which they perceived that their organization did not live up their promises, whereas they themselves fulfilled their part of the deal (Robinson & Rousseau, 1994; Turnley & Feldman, 1998; Lester, Turnley, Bloodgood & Bolino, 2002, Conway & Briner, 2005). A breach can be caused by reneging or incongruence. Reneging is when agent(s) of the organization break a promise to an employee, because the organization is unable to fulfill a specific promise (Robinson & Morrison, 2000) or is unwilling to do so (Morrison & Robinson, 1997). Incongruence, on the other side, is when the employee and organizational agent(s) have different insights about whether a promise exists (Morrison & Robinson, 1997). Whether an employee actually perceives the discrepancy between promises and reciprocations depends on the salience of the discrepancy and employee vigilance. Salience refers to the degree to which the discrepancy is prominent to the employee (Fiske & Taylor, 1984). It is affected by the size of the discrepancy, the importance of the promise to the employee, and the extent to with the employee remember the promise because it was either very explicit or recently made (Morrison & Robinson, 1997). In addition, employee vigilance refers to the extent to which employees monitor how well the organization has fulfilled their psychological contract. Vigilance is common in exchange relationships (Rousseau & McLean Parks, 1993). Because it requires energy, the level will vary over time and across persons (Morrison & Robinson, 1997). Three factors affect vigilance: uncertainty, the perceived costs of finding out an unmet promise, and the nature of the employee-organization relationship. 7

8 2.3 Psychological contract breach and Organizational citizenship behavior According to the social exchange theory, people interact with other people since they are motivated by the expectations that the other party will offer inducements in return (Blau, 1964; Gouldner, 1960). Social exchange involves series of interactions between two parties, for example inducements from the employer and contributions from the employee (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). The parties are creating mutual obligations over time, which contain elements that are both economic and social in nature (Conway & Briner, 2005; Restubog et al., 2008). According to Taylor and Tekleab (2004), social exchanges and reciprocity play a crucial role in the psychological contract because mutual obligations form that contract. If one party does not reciprocate, an imbalance is created between the contributions of the two parties and this will be perceived as a negative event (Bal, De Lange, Jansen, & Van der Velde, 2008; Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). Subsequently, and in accordance with affective events theory (Blau, 1964; Taylor & Tekleab, 2004), employees will respond to contract breach as an imbalance in social exchange by various negative workplace attitudes and behaviors (Suazo, 2011). In particular, social exchange theory suggests that employees are less motivated to engage in extra-role behaviors when they perceive that their employment relationship is built upon the foundation of an unfair social exchange (Organ, 1988; 1990). Employees negative responses to PCB can also explained by insights from the group value model (Tyler, 1989). Drawing from social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), proponents of the group value model argue that fair treatment communicates symbolic messages about the relationship between the organization and the employee. It has consequences for the extent to which employees can take pride in their organizational membership. When people feel that they are treated unfairly, they lose trust in the organization. They respond with a psychological withdrawal from the organization characterized by negative affect and disidentification, which in turn leads to less motivation to engage in OCBs (Kreiner & Ashforth, 2004; Restubog et al., 2008). Zhao et al. (2007) developed in their meta-analysis a causal model integrating breach and work-related outcomes and their results showed the significant impact of PCB on organizational citizenship behavior. Employees were less likely to engage in OCBs when they perceive a negative relationship with their employer. The results were consistent with prior research investigating the role of PCB on desirable employee behaviors that benefit the organization. Employees whose psychological contracts have been breached are most likely to withhold those behaviors that benefit the organization as a whole (Restubog & Bordia, 2006; 8

9 Restubog, Bordia, & Tang, 2007; Turnley, Bolino, Lester, & Bloodgood, 2003). Finally, Robinson and Morrison (1995) found that high levels of breach were associated with low levels of OCB assessed a year later. Based on the above mentioned empirical evidence and theory, it could be argued that employees with a psychological contract breach will not go beyond role requirements and contractually rewarded job achievements. Therefore, the following hypothesis is formulated: H1: Psychological contract breach is negatively related to organizational citizenship behavior. According to the literature, the negative impact of a psychological contract breach on organizational citizenship behavior is indisputable. However, it seems reasonable that there are some ways to mitigate the effects of a psychological contract breach. 2.4 The moderating role of supportive managerial practices The quality of the relationships between line managers and their team members is starting to receive greater attention in the analysis of HRM (Boxall & Purcell, 2011). Gilbert, De Winne and Sels (2011), for example, found evidence for the important role of relations-oriented leadership behavior of line managers on employees affective commitment. Supporting is one of the included dimensions of relations-oriented leadership in the research of Gilbert et al. (2011), which refers to showing consideration, acceptance, and concern for the needs and feelings of other people (Yukl, Gordon, & Taber, 2002, p.20). The supportive supervisor can shape employees perceptions of PCB by offering managerial practices. These practices together form a consistent and coherent system of HR practices that enhance the high-performance culture of an organization to achieve the organizational goals: a high performance work system (HPWS; Boselie, 2010). The underlying principles of HPWS are represented by the AMO model (Appelbaum, Bailey, Berg, & Kallenberg, 2000). The AMO model builds on the notion that organizational interests are best served by an HR system that attends to employees interests, namely their skill requirements, motivation and the quality of the job (Boselie, 2010). Individual performance is considered to be a function of abilities, motivation and opportunity to participate, and ultimately result in increased organizational performance (Boselie, 2010). According to Gardner, Wright and Moynihan (2011), HR practices can be conceptualized in three categories, namely skills-enhancing, motivation-enhancing and empowerment-enhancing practices. Skills-enhancing practices like extensive training 9

10 influence employees ability by improving their knowledge, skills and abilities. Second, motivation-enhancing practices shape employees climate perceptions and provide direct incentives and rewards to work toward certain work roles. Typical ones include regular performance feedback and incentives. Finally, empowerment-enhancing practices are designed to empower employees to use their skills and motivation. Practices such as employee involvement and information sharing are generally applied to offer these opportunities (Gardner et al., 2011; Subramony, 2009). Communication has a vital role in the failure or success of any organization (Orpen, 1997). Tompkins (1984; p ) defines organizational communication as the study of sending and receiving messages that create and maintain a system of consciously coordinated activities or forces of two or more people. Since supervisors have a position to provide a bigger picture of the organization to their subordinates, they have a crucial role in this process (Robson & Tourish, 2005). Therefore, communication is a recurring and crucial part of supportive managerial practices. According to Downs and Hazen (1977), it is important that supervisors listen and pay attention, are open to ideas and offer guidance to their personnel in solving job-related issues. Drawing upon the AMO model, it can be argued that managers can reduce employee s feelings of breach by employing skills-enhancing, motivation-enhancing and empowermentenhancing practices (De Ruiter et al., 2014b). For example, employees who have experienced a PCB related to changing job requirements can be supported by managers through improving and training their knowledge and abilities. Motivation- or empowerment-enhancing practices are suited when employees experience breaches related to other aspects of their psychological contract. Several studies provided an excellent starting point for assessing the role of an employee s immediate manager in redressing PCB (Dulac, Coyle-Shapiro, Henderson, Wayne, 2008; Zagenczyk, Gibney, Kiewitz, & Restubog, 2009). Dulac et al. (2008) suggested the mitigating role of leader-member exchange (LMX) in the relationship between PCB and undesirable workplace outcomes. Social support, as a currency of social exchange, may be more readily available for individuals with high quality LMX relationships. Furthermore, Zagenczyk et al. (2009) found that a supportive relationship with a supervisor may buffer the negative effects of PCB experienced by an employee. Based on the stress-buffering hypothesis (Cohen & Willis, 1985), it could be assumed that social support buffers the threat to self-esteem and the unpleasant feelings that arise from stressful situations. When employees believe that they are supported by supervisors, they may respond differently to 10

11 experienced breaches. For example, supervisors may offer explanations that could change employee attributions for breach. Consequently, employees maintain positive perceptions of their relationship with their organizations, despite broken promises. However, the studies from Dulac et al. (2008) and Zagenczyk et al. (2009) do not address specific behaviors or managerial approaches that minimize the negative effects of breach. De Ruiter et al. (2014a) made a first step in the development of a comprehensive model on managerial approaches to redress OCB. Based on their research and the previous logic, it could be argued that differences in supportive managerial practices could have a moderating effect on the relationship between psychological contract breach and organizational citizenship behavior. Therefore, the following hypothesis is stated: H2: Supportive managerial practices will buffer the relationship between psychological contract breach and organizational citizenship behavior in such a way that the negative effect of the breach will be smaller among employees who perceive more (a) skills-enhancing, (b) motivation-enhancing, and (c) empowerment-enhancing practices. Based on these relationships and assumptions, the following conceptual framework was created. Figure 1. Conceptual model 11

12 2.5 Control variables In order to exclude spurious relationships, the following control variables were taken into account in this research: age, gender, organizational tenure, educational level, weekly working hours and level of data collection. Specifically, age could influence the extent of perceived contract breach (Restubog et al., 2008). Additionally, older employees might show more citizenship behavior (Kidder & Parks, 2001). Furthermore, gender is included as a control variable in this study. According to Lub, Bijvank, Bal, Blomme and Schalk (2012), males and females could differ significantly regarding their reactions to PCB. Moreover, gender could influence the level of OCB (Bal, Jansen, van der Velde, de Lange & Rousseau, 2010). Also organizational tenure is taken into account, because the length of employment may be associated with the frequency of unfulfilled obligations experienced (Robinson, 1996; Turnley & Feldman, 2003). Organizational tenure is associated with OCB as well. Membership in an organization for a long period creates some degree of identification, which may cause the employee to be willing to go the extra mile (Turnley & Feldman, 2000). Moreover, educational level might influence the perceptions of PCB and the level of OCB. According to Becker (1960), more educated employees have greater alternative job opportunities. Therefore, it is likely that they attach less value to unmet expectations and that their behavior does not go beyond the formal job requirements (Koster & Sanders, 2006). In addition, the number of hours employees worked in an average week could influence the extent of PCB (Dick, 2010) as well as the level of OCB (Bal et al., 2010). Finally, supplementary dummy variables were created for the centralized and decentralized level of data collection. More specifically, data were collected at the head quarter of the bank and at a Local Member bank. 3. Method 3.1 Design In order to measure the hypothesized relationships between the variables used in this explanatory study, a quantitative study was designed and conducted. The research had a crosssectional design, which means that the data is gathered at one single point in time (Pallant, 2007). Self-reported questionnaires were used to examine the variables of interest. The present study concentrated on the employees of a Dutch multinational banking and financial 12

13 services company, including one Local Member bank in the eastern part of the Netherlands and one department at the head office in the middle of the Netherlands. 3.2 Sample First, the questionnaires were conducted at a Local Member bank. The independent local banks have a combined total of approximately employees and form a network of banks in the Netherlands. They serve more than 7.6 million Dutch retail and wholesale customers with financial services. In order to improve their professionalism and competitive position, several mergers of local banks took place in this context. The number of these local banks is cut to approximately 100 from the current 129. The selection of respondents is based on the criteria that the Local Member bank has recently merged with a neighbor bank. Furthermore, the costs at the head office of the bank will have to be at least 220 million lower in 2016 than they were in Restructuring of the firm s operations is necessary and many jobs are eliminated. Therefore, the questionnaires were also conducted at a department which has been through such a process. The psychological contracts of employees within these organizations have been changed dramatically, thus it is highly likely that employees have perceived a breach (Turnley & Feldman, 1998). Altogether, 784 electronic structured questionnaires were distributed and 471 employees completed the questionnaire, which resulted in a response rate of 60.1 percent. Listwise deletion of missing data and exclusion of outliers reduced the useable sample to 422 respondents for the current study percent (N=212) of the respondents have been through a restructuring process at the head quarter, while 49.8 percent (N=210) of the respondents were working at a Local Member bank where a merger took place. 234 male respondents (55.5 percent) and 188 female respondents (44.5 percent) filled in the questionnaire. In order to guarantee the respondent s anonymity, age was measured by employing a six-point categorical scale. Therefore, no exact average can be calculated. An estimate of the average was calculated by multiplying the average of each age category (assuming that employees are between 18 and 67 years old) with the frequencies of that category. Summing up the six different groups and divide it by N=422, gives an average age of 41.3 years. The respondents worked on average 34.5 hours per week (SD = 3.8) and the average tenure of employees was 14.6 years (SD = 10.3). Most of the respondents were highly educated, with 59.2 percent (N=250) who completed higher professional education/hoger beroepsonderwijs and an additional 25.6 percent (N=108) who completed academic education/wetenschappelijk onderwijs. The 13

14 remaining respondents were lower educated (10.4 percent secondary vocational education/middelbaar beroepsonderwijs, 3.3 percent upper secondary education/hoger voortgezet onderwijs, 1.2 percent senior secondary education/middelbaar voortgezet onderwijs and 0.2 percent lower vocational education/lager beroepsonderwijs ). 3.3 Procedure Data was gathered between August 11 th and September 11 th, 2014 by a master s student Human Resource Studies from Tilburg University. The respondents were chosen based on purposive sampling. By using purposive sampling, it was guaranteed that the respondents have been through a merger- of reorganization process. The response options within the general questions, for example about the name of the department, differed per organization. Therefore, the general questions at the beginning of the questionnaire were adjusted to each organization. Appendix A shows the final questionnaire, including an aggregation of these possible response options. In order to explain the goal of this study and make clear agreements, meetings were planned between the researcher and the HR manager of both units. Thereafter, the study was conducted by sending out an electronic structured questionnaire to all employees. The online questionnaire included a cover letter, which informed the participants about the research goal, the procedures and the way in which their anonymity was guaranteed. Respondents were assured that all information provided was treated with strict confidence and that the information was used solely for the purposes of the study. All participants got at least three weeks to complete the survey and filling in the questionnaire took approximately 15 minutes. In order to increase the response rate, employees received two reminders. 3.4 Instruments Most of the instruments used in this study were based on previously published scales. Only the scale of supportive managerial practices was new and has not been validated yet. In order to check construct validity and to organize and reduce items into factors, factor analysis was conducted for all scales (Keith, 2006). First, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) should be larger than.60 and Bartlett s test needs to show significance (p<.05) in order to fulfill the requirements for appropriate factor analysis (Bartlett, 1954; Kaiser, 1974). Subsequently, factors were evaluated using Kaiser s criterion ( 1) whereby a scree plot is used to confirm the amount of factors. Thereafter, the reliability of the scales was tested by checking the Cronbach s alpha (.7), corrected item-total correlations (.3), and alpha if item deleted (<α). Finally, the scale scores of the measurement scales were calculated. 14

15 Organizational citizenship behavior Organizational citizenship behavior was measured with a fourteen-item scale based on the work of Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, & Fetter (1990) and Organ (1988). The initial scale was developed for supervisor rating of employee behavior, but the scale has been adapted by Mauritz (2012) for individual self-rating by employees. The present scale covered both the OCB-I dimensions (altruism and courtesy) and one OCB-O dimension (civic virtue). Items were rated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). Five items were used to measure altruism (α=.71). An example item is: I help orient new people even though it is not required. Factor analysis indicated that the scale measured one construct, which explained 47.24% of the variance. The variable civic virtue was measured with four items (α=.73). An example question is: I keep up with developments in this company. Factor analysis confirmed that the scale consisted of one factor. The explained variance was 55.88%. Five items were used to measure courtesy (α=.67). An example item is: I consider the impact of my actions to others. Factor analysis indicated that the scale measured one construct as well, which explained 43.92% of the variance. Finally, all items were summed to form an index of OCB (α=.85). A scale score was created by adding up the scale scores of the three separate dimensions and then dividing it by three. Factor analysis showed that three components had an eigenvalue larger than 1. However, the first factor had an eigenvalue of 4.93 and the other two factors had values close to 1. In addition, OCB is measured with an existing scale of which the factor structure was tested previously. Therefore, one scale was created. The explained variance was 35.18%. Psychological contract breach Psychological contract breach was measured by the short version of the Tilburg Psychological Contract Questionnaire (TPCQ), constructed by Freese, Schalk and Croon (2008). The questionnaire consists of a set of items assigned to six scales (work content, career development, social atmosphere, organizational policies, work life balance and rewards) to measure the perceived obligations of the organization. Each set of items on the obligations of the organization is introduced with a question: In the employment relationship you have expectations about what the organization will offer. To what extent is your organization obliged to offer you the following? The perceived employee obligations were measured likewise. All scale items are measured using a five-point Likert scale ranging between not at 15

16 all (1) to a great extent (5). None of the items were deleted, because all of the items had a Corrected-Item-Total Correlation above.30. In order to evaluate the extent to which the obligations are fulfilled, the following question was included after each distinct aspect of the psychological contract: To what extent did your employer fulfill the previous obligations? The evaluation-oriented part is the only part used in this research (Van der Smissen, Schalk & Freese, 2013). The six items were reversed, such that a high score on this scale indicated a breach of the psychological contract. The fulfillment of the psychological contract is measured by a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from much less than expected (1) towards to much more than expected (5). Supportive managerial practices Supportive managerial practices was measured by the scale AMO-practices in the context of PCB (De Ruiter et al., 2014b). This questionnaire was developed since no existing questionnaire covered all aspects of AMO-practices in the specific context of a breach. The questionnaire was designed to cover the three aspects of the AMO model. The short Dutch version of the scale is used, which contains thirty items. Example items were my supervisor provides coaching that supports my development (ability), my supervisor creates a compensation arrangement that is tailored to fit me when organizational events negatively affect me (motivation), and my supervisor offers adequate justification for decisions made about my job (opportunity). Answers could be given on a five-point Likert scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). The questionnaire including all items of supportive managerial practices can be found in Appendix B, Table B1. The separate scales were checked for its factor structure using Principal Axis Factoring. Six items were used to measure ability (α=.85). Factor analysis showed a two component solution, making a clear distinction between on-the-job coaching and training opportunities. Item AMO5.28 ( Suggests training that might be of benefit to me ) was anticipated to load on the training opportunities part of ability, but instead loads more strongly on on-the-job-coaching. After removing that item a simple structure is revealed with two clear components. The remaining five items together form a scale with a reliability expressed in Cronbach s α=.82. They explain 78.22% of the variance. The variable motivation was measured with nine items (α=.87). Factor analysis showed that the measurement scale consisted of two instead of the expected three factors. The three items measuring feedback clustered as the first factor and the dimensions compensate (three items) and breached obligation (three items) clustered as the second factor. The two- 16

17 factor solution explained 66.18% of the variance. Fifteen items were used to measure opportunity (α=.94). Factor analysis indicated that the measurement scale consisted of two factors. After removing the cross-loadings (item AMO5.15, AMO5.18 and AMO5.22), the second factor comprised only two items: AMO5.23 and AMO5.30. It was decided to remove these items too, in order to create a one-factor solution. The remaining ten items together form a scale with a reliability expressed in Cronbach s α=.93. In total they explain 61.94% of the variance. For a complete overview of the factor structure see also Appendix C, Table C1-C3. Next to the three sub factors, an overall factor supportive managerial practices (SMP; α=.95) was computed which comprised those 24 items that were included in the factor analysis. Control variables Six control variables were included in this study to investigate the relationship between psychological contract breach and organizational citizenship behavior. Age is measured on a categorical six-point scale ranging from less than 25 years old (1) to more than 65 years old (6). Furthermore, gender (1=male, 2= female) and level of data collection (1=decentralized, 2=centralized) were recoded into dummy variables. Additionally, organizational tenure is measured in years and weekly working hours in hours. Finally, educational level is measured on a categorical seven-point scale ranging from primary education (1) to academic education (7) with the question: what is your highest completed education? 3.5 Statistical analysis The SPSS Statistics 20 program was used to run the statistical analyses. First of all, data was entered in SPSS and was checked on missing values, errors and outliers. Data was analyzed using excluding cases listwise. Subsequently, the distribution of responses was checked per scale in order to explore whether there was enough variance in the data. The scales of PCB and SMP appeared to be normally distributed in which most scores occurred in the centre, tapering out towards the extremes (Pallant, 2007). However, the scores on OCB were very high and not normally distributed. According to Pallant (2007), this is a quite common phenomenon in social sciences. In addition, the means, standard deviations, and the Pearson s correlations of the variables were calculated. These calculations were made to examine whether distinct variables did not overlap, but also to evaluate the distribution and mean value of responses. 17

18 Thereafter, the hypotheses of this study were tested using multiple regression analysis. To test the first hypothesis, a bivariate regression was performed between psychological contract breach and organizational citizenship behavior, while taking the control variables into account. The second hypothesis stated that (a) ability, (b) motivation, and (c) opportunity practices moderate the relationship between psychological contract breach and organizational citizenship behavior. First, the interaction term was calculated (PCB multiplied by ability, motivation or opportunity practices). Subsequently, a multiple hierarchical regression was conducted between the interaction term and OCB, while controlling for PCB, the supportive managerial practices and the control variables. Furthermore, in order to facilitate interpretation, the significant interaction effect should be plotted at one standard deviation below and above the mean of supportive managerial practices in order to create high and low categories of these practices (Aiken & West, 1991). 4. Results 4.1 Descriptive statistics and correlations Table 1 shows the means, standard deviations and the Pearson s correlations of the variables included in this study. Remarkable is the average score of the respondents on OCB (4.45; SD =.39) which is very high on a scale from 1 to 5. The six PCB dimensions measured in this study were all moderate and significantly correlated to each other. PCB work content was positively correlated with PCB career development (r=.42, p<.01), PCB social atmosphere (r=.33, p<.01), PCB organizational policies (r=.30, p<.01), PCB work life balance (r=.31, p<.01) and PCB rewards (r=.21, p<.01). Furthermore, PCB career development was positively correlated with PCB social atmosphere (r=.40, p<.01), PCB organizational policies (r=.20, p<.01), PCB work life balance (r=.25, p<.01) and PCB rewards (r=.31, p<.01). Additionally, PCB social atmosphere was significantly correlated with PCB organizational policies, PCB work life balance and PCB rewards (r=.37, p<.01; r=.29, p<.01; r=.30, p<.01 respectively), and PCB organizational policies was positively related to PCB work life balance (r=.15, p<.01) and PCB rewards (r=.20, p<.01). Finally, also PCB work life balance was positively correlated to PCB rewards (r=.26, p<.01). 18

19 Table 1 Means, standard deviations and correlations M SD OCB PCB work content * 3. PCB career *.42** development 4. PCB social **.33**.40** atmosphere 5. PCB org. policies **.20**.37** 6. PCB work life *.31**.25**.29**.15** balance 7. PCB rewards **.31**.30**.20**.26** 8. SMP ** -.28** -.40** -.36** -.36** -.22** -.22** 9. SMP Ability ** -.25** -.47** -.27** -.29** -.20** -.21**.87** 10. SMP Motivation ** -.25** -.36** -.34** -.33** -.16** -.22**.93**.78** 11. SMP Opportunity ** -.27** -.31** -.36** -.35** -.24** -.18**.93**.69**.76** 12. Age ** * *.10*.08.12* 13. Gender * ** 14. Org. tenure (yr.) *.12* ** Education ** ** ** -.14** -.26** 16. Weekly working hours (hrs.) ** ** ** -.17**.39** 17. Level of data collection ** -.15** ** ** **.30**.28** Note. N=422. ** Correlation is significant at the.01 level (2-tailed) * Correlation is significant at the.05 level (2-tailed) OCB (1-5); PCB (1-5), AMO (1-5), age (from 1= younger than 25 years to 6= older than 65 years ), gender (1=male, 2=female), education (from 1= primary education to 7= academic education ); Level of data collection (1=decentralized; 2=centralized) 19

20 The PCB dimensions work content, career development, social atmosphere and work life balance were all negatively correlated to OCB. Respondents with a high level of breach in work content, reported a lower level of OCB (r=-.10, p<.05). Additionally, the level of OCB was lower when employees reported a higher level of breach in career development (r=-.10, p<.05), social atmosphere (r=-.14, p<.01) and work life balance (r=-.10, p<.05). The weak correlations came as no surprise because the average of OCB was very high. The three dimensions of supportive managerial practices were all significantly correlated to each other. Ability was positively correlated with motivation (r=.78, p<.01) and opportunity (r=.69, p<.01). Furthermore, also motivation and opportunity were positively correlated (r=.76, p<.01). This indicates that a high score on one supportive managerial dimension was also accompanied by high scores on the other dimensions. Due to the high correlations between the three dimensions ability, motivation and opportunity, an accurate measurement of the separate hypotheses was complicated. The strong correlations might suppress the effect of the separate dimensions. Therefore, it was decided to solely interpret the results of the SMP index in this study. The moderating variable supportive managerial practices (SMP) was positively related to OCB (r=.26, p<.01). In addition, SMP was negatively correlated to work content (r=-.28, p<.01), career development (r=-.40, p<.01), social atmosphere (r=-.36, p<.01), organizational policies (r=-.36, p<.01), work life balance (r=-.22, p<.01), and rewards (r=-.22, p<.01). These correlations indicate that when the level of supportive managerial practices increases, employees report a higher level of OCB and a lower level of PCB. The control variable age was positively correlated to OCB (r=.13, p<.01) and SMP (r=.11, p<.05) and negatively correlated with PCB career development (r=-.11, p<.05). Furthermore, gender was negatively related with PCB rewards (r=-.12, p<.05), while organizational tenure was negatively related with PCB career development (r=-.12, p<.05) and positively related with PCB social atmosphere (r=.12, p<.05). In addition, education showed significant correlations with PCB career development (r=.13, p<.01) and PCB work life balance (r=-.13, p<.01). Weekly working hours was negatively associated with PCB work content (r=-.15, p<.01) and PCB work life balance (r=-.22, p<.01), and level of data collection was significantly correlated with PCB career development (r=.18, p<.01), PCB social atmosphere (r=-.15, p<.01) and PCB work life balance (r=-.18, p<.01). Finally, because organizational tenure and age were highly correlated (r=.74, p<.01), it was chosen to exclude organizational tenure from further analysis. 20

21 4.2 Regression analysis In order to test the conceptual model, hierarchical multiple regression was conducted. Table 2 shows the results of this regression analysis. The first model in Table 2 solely included the five control variables, which explained 5 percent of the variance in OCB. As reflected in model 1, the control variables age, gender, educational level and level of data collection were significantly correlated with OCB (β=.16, p<.01; β=.14, p<.05; β=.12, p<.05; β=-.11, p<.05 respectively). PCB dimensions and OCB The six dimensions of PCB were entered in the second model to test the first hypothesis. The incorporation of these dimensions led to an R² of.08. This second model pointed out that the control variables age (β=.17, p<.01), gender (β=.13, p<.05), educational level (β=.13, p<.05) and level of data collection (β=-.13, p<.05) were still significant after the dimensions of PCB were added into the regression. Additionally, the results showed that there was a significant relationship between PCB social atmosphere and OCB (β=-.13, p<.05). However, the relationships between the other five PCB dimensions and OCB were insignificant. Therefore, hypothesis 1 is just partially supported. Moderating variable supportive managerial practices Model 3 included the variable supportive managerial practices (SMP). As mentioned before, it was decided to solely interpret the results of the SMP index due to the high correlations between the three dimensions ability, motivation and opportunity. The incorporation of the SMP index led to an R² of.12. SMP was significantly and positively related to OCB (β=.23, p<.01). Furthermore, the control variables age (β=.14, p<.01), gender (β=.12, p<.05), educational level (β=.13, p<.05) and level of data collection (β =-.11, p<.05) were still significant after SMP was added into in the regression. Finally, the interaction term (PCB multiplied by SMP) was added to the regression as reflected in the fourth model. The high correlation between the SMP dimensions was still an issue of concern in this analysis. Therefore, solely the results of the SMP index were interpreted. The incorporation of the interaction term resulted in a model that explained 14% of the variance in OCB. Hypotheses 2 proposed a moderating effect of SMP on the relationship between PCB and OCB. Only the interaction term with PCB organizational policies was negative and significant (β=-.12, p=.01). As a result, there was partial support for hypotheses 2. Furthermore, the variables age (β=.15, p<.01), gender (β=.13, p<.05), educational level 21

22 (β=.13, p<.05), level of data collection (β=-.11, p<.05) and PCB organizational policies (β=.67, p<.01) were significant in this model. Although the moderating role on the other five dimensions of PCB was not confirmed, the total model significantly predicts OCB (F=3.60, p<.01). A summary of the main results is reflected in figure 2. Figure 2. The relationships between the main variables of this study 22

23 The presence of a significant interaction term indicates that the effect of the independent variable (PCB organizational policies) on the dependent variable (OCB) depends on the different values of the moderator (SMP). In order to facilitate interpretation, an interaction plot was generated (Figure 3). A distinction between low, medium and high categories was created by taking one standard deviation below the mean of SMP (low group), and one standard deviation above the mean of SMP (high group) (Aiken & West, 1991). According to the interaction plot, a distinction of high and low levels of SMP tempts to have a differentiated impact on the levels of OCB depending on the level of PCB in organizational policies. More specifically, high levels of SMP lead to increased levels of OCB when PCB organizational policies is kept low. However, when an employee perceives that a lot of promises have not been adequately reciprocated, high levels of SMP will result in a decrease in OCB, while low levels of SMP indicate increased levels of OCB. Figure 3. Plot of the interaction effect of SMP on the relationship between PCB org. policies and OCB 23

24 Table 2 Hierarchical regression analysis Variables Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 B S.E. β B S.E. β B S.E. β B S.E. β Age ** ** ** ** Gender * * * * Education * * * * Weekly working hours Level of data collection * * * * PCB work content PCB career dev PCB social atmosphere * PCB org. policies ** PCB work life balance PCB rewards Supportive managerial practices (SMP) ** PCB work content*smp PCB career dev.*smp PCB social atmos.*smp PCB org. policies*smp ** PCB work life*smp PCB rewards*smp R² ΔR² F 4.02** 3.20** 4.44** 3.60** ΔF 4.02** 2.44* 16.81** 1.80 Note. N=422. B= unstandardized regression coefficient; β= standardized regression coefficient; S.E.= standard error. ** Significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) * Significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) 24

25 5. Discussion and conclusion This study concerned the extent to which the relationship of psychological contract breach with organizational citizenship behavior was moderated by supportive managerial practices. 429 employees of a Dutch multinational banking and financial services company who have been through a merger or restructuring process completed a questionnaire. Evidence was found for the expected negative relationship between the PCB dimension social atmosphere and OCB. However, no significant relationship was found for the other five dimensions of PCB and OCB. Therefore, there was partial support for hypothesis 1. Furthermore, results indicated that SMP had a moderating impact on the relationship between the PCB dimension organizational policies and OCB. However, the moderating role on the relationship between the other five dimensions of PCB with OCB was not confirmed. Consequently, also hypothesis 2 was partially supported. Finally, this research found evidence for the relationship between SMP and OCB. 5.1 Interpretation The first hypothesis described the relationship between PCB and OCB. The findings in this study generated support for the relationship between the PCB dimension social atmosphere and OCB. More specific, employees who perceive that the organization has failed to fulfil its obligations concerning the dimension social atmosphere are less motivated to engage in OCB. This is in line with social exchange theory (Organ, 1988; 1990) and social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), which stated that people lose trust in the organization when they feel that they are treated unfair. They respond with a psychological withdrawal from the organization characterized by negative affect and disidentification, which in turn leads to less motivation to engage in OCBs (Kreiner & Ashforth, 2004; Restubog et al., 2008). Surprisingly and in contrast with previous empirical evidence, no significant relationships were found for the other five dimensions of PCB with OCB. One explanation for these non-significant relationships could be the high average and low standard deviation of OCB (M=4.45 on a scale from 1 to 5, SD=.39). This phenomenon is usually termed ceiling effect (Cramer & Howitt, 2004), since there is a bunching of scores at the upper level of OCB. This is a commonly encountered practical issue in gathering data, which limit the range of data reported by the instrument. Limited variability in the data gathered on OCB may reduce the power of statistics on correlations with PCB (Cramer & Howitt, 2004). The high level of employee involvement is marked by more than employees as one of the 25

26 strengths of the bank, which could explain the appareance of this ceiling effect (internal report only). Another explanation for the non-significant relationships of the five PCB dimensions with OCB could be the phrasing of the questions in the Tilburg Psychological Contract Questionnaire (TPCQ; Freese et al., 2008). Respondents got confused by the word obliged in the sentence to what extent is your organization obliged to offer you the following? They were wondering if they should take this literally. According to the respondents, an employer has almost no obligations, except those that arise from collective labor agreements or their labor contract. Therefore, it could be the case that the respondents have kept their labor contract instead of their psychological contract in mind while filling in the questionnaire. This could have influenced the results in predicting OCB. Additionally, this research focused on a possible under- or overfulfillment of the psychological contract, also known as a breach. It is assumed that there is a certain range within which employees accept deviations from what they expect, there is a zone of acceptance (Morrison & Robinson, 1997; Rousseau, 1995, p ). As long as the level of fulfillment of the psychological contract does not cross the boundaries of what is considered as acceptable to the employee, OCB will not decrease when certain perceived obligations are not met. The terms of the psychological contract will be reconsidered and a new contract will be developed. This pattern is known as revision (Schalk & Roe, 2007). The high levels of OCB could suggest that the breaches of the psychological contract were not important enough to exceed the limits of what is perceived as tolerable by employees. In other words, the underfulfillment of some dimensions of the psychological contract of the employee seemed acceptable and did not lead to lower levels of OCB. Furthermore, respondents could have experienced that the organization has not failed to deliver on its obligations. Employees might not experience a specific breach because the merger or reorganization process has proceeded relatively smoothly. Simultaneously, organizational change interventions do not have the same impact for every employee. This could have resulted in lower levels of perceived breaches. Finally, employees are less likely to engage in OCBs when the organization is unable or unwilling to fulfill a specific promise, or when it is not clear whether a promise exists (Morrison & Robinson, 1997; Robinson & Morrison, 2000). Due to the high average tenure of 14.5 years, a lot of respondents might not recollect specifically what they could expect. This could be a reason for the non-significant relationship between the five dimensions of PCB and OCB as well. 26

27 The second hypothesis described the moderating role of supportive managerial practices on the relationship between PCB and OCB. There was partial support for this moderating role, because SMP buffers the relationship between the PCB dimension organizational policies and OCB. According to this research and social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), it could be stated that the relationship between the PCB dimension organizational policies and OCB differs for people with higher or lower levels of supportive managerial practices. The interaction plot showed that in comparison to low SMP, high SMP leads to a higher level of OCB when the level of PCB organizational policies is kept low, however, once the level of PCB organizational policies is high, low SMP is more beneficial in terms of OCB of the respondents. In other words, it will be counterproductive for managers who offer a high level of SMP to redress OCB. An explanation for this remarkable finding could be that managers pay too much attention to the presence of specific breaches, while employees would not have even noticed these breaches by themselves. It makes employees more aware of the existence of PCB which leads to a more critical review of the supportive relationship with their supervisor. As a result, employees could experience even more breaches than initially expected. Since breaches are subjective and based on employees perceptions (Deery et al., 2006), it would be better to let sleeping dogs lie. Additionally, the concepts of the dimension PCB organizational policies and SMP overlapped each other. They both cover questions about communication and a fair manager. It could be argued that employees will not accept managerial practices from their line manager when they experience breaches for the organizational policies dimension. For example, when employees are of the opinion that they have an unfair supervisor, they will score high on the dimension PCB organizational policies. These employees are disappointed and have already lost confidence in their superior. Trust is likely to play a significant role in the subjective experience of PCB, because it may influence the interpretation and reaction of employees to that perceived breach (Robinson, 1996). All the effort from the same manager to minimize the negative effects of PCB could therefore have the opposite effect, and OCB might further decrease. Besides the support for the moderating role of SMP on the relationship between the PCB dimension organizational policies and OCB, the moderating role on the relationship between the other five dimensions of PCB with OCB was not confirmed. Therefore, also hypothesis 2 was partially supported. The most important explanation for these nonsignificant relationships is the newly developed supportive managerial practices scale. In the past, hardly any empirical evidence has focused on identifying the specific practices that 27

28 managers can employ to mitigate the negative effects of PCB. The study from De Ruiter et al. (2014a) has taken an important first step in the development of a comprehensive model on managerial approaches to redressing PCB. By building upon this more comprehensive account of managerial approaches, this study addressed quantitative research to further our understanding of these managerial practices. Questionnaire items were generated to assess the effectiveness of the managerial approaches. The survey was used for the first time in the present study and had not been validated before. Unfortunately, 42 respondents did not complete this part of the questionnaire. Start-up problems were unavoidable, but items must be refined to create a more robust measurement scale. Although hypothesis 2 was not fully supported, it is interesting to note that the direct effect of supportive managerial practices on OCB was significant. This indicates that as the level of supportive managerial practices increases, employees show more OCBs. This outcome is in line with the research of Gong, Chang and Cheung (2010), who stated that an organization provides substantial inducements through supportive managerial practices and that employees may reciprocate OCBs towards the organization. 5.2 Limitations Several limitations with regard to the present study need to be taken into account. First of all, the research design of this study was cross-sectional. All variables were measured at one point in time. As a result, the effects of a change in the psychological contract on OCB levels cannot be studied adequately. Furthermore, no causal inferences could be drawn from the data and results might be influenced by temporary factors. For example, the mood state of employees could affect their answers. Furthermore, relationships that were found in this study exist in a certain context, in particular the financial sector. It is recommended to perform the present study in multiple contexts in order to investigate the influence of the environment on the relationships found. Additionally, due to the use of a questionnaire which was based on self-report measures, same source bias is imaginable. This could have influenced the effect sizes of the present study (Doty & Glick, 1998). Another limitation of this research is the sampling technique. Purposive sampling might have led to limited variability in the data gathered on OCB. Respondents had to meet the criteria that they have been through a merger- of reorganization process which possibly have resulted in an underestimation of the effects. 28

29 In addition, the measurement scales in this study could be a limitation. As mentioned previously, the survey of supportive managerial practices was used for the first time in this research and respondents experienced some difficulties with the phrasing of the questions in the TPCQ. Since no extensive tests preceded the actual data collection, one might suggest that some items were unclear for the respondents. Finally, it could be argued that the timing of this research was not opportune. On August 1, 2014, the Local Member bank has merged with a neighbor bank after which the electronic questionnaires were distributed on August 25 th, The same applies for the departments at the head quarter which have been through a restructuring process till July 1, Employees are still discovering the effects of the reorganization and need time to get to know each other. Therefore, partly due to the summer holidays, some employees were not able to completely assess the practices of their new manager. Employees could have completed the questionnaire differently when they were more familiar with their new manager. 5.3 Recommendations for future research Despite of the limitations, this research contributes to a better understanding of the proposed relationships in the context of organizational change. This study confirms the findings of Freese, Schalk and Croon (2011) who conclude that the psychological contract should be considered as a multi-dimensional concept; organizational changes have an influence on the different content aspects of the psychological contract. Furthermore, this study provides more insight in the moderating impact of managerial approaches to reduce or offset the unfavorable outcomes of a breach. The characteristics of the respondents of this study were compared with HR data from employees who are covered by the CLA of the bank and currently working in the Netherlands (date of reference July 1, 2014). It turned out that the variables gender, age, weekly working hours and tenure are representative of the whole population of the Dutch multinational banking and services company, which make it easy to generalize the results. However, based on this study, several future research propositions could be made. First, attention should be paid to a longitudinal design that involved repeated observations. Although longitudinal studies on psychological contracts are rare (Freese, 2007), the findings from these studies on the content of the psychological contract indicate that psychological contracts change over time. Furthermore, it is likely that the effects of psychological contract breaches will only appear after a time delay. Employees who perceive breaches might not immediately report less OCB. With a longitudinal study, the effects of a change in a 29

30 psychological contract on OCB levels could be studied adequately and causal inferences can be drawn from the data. A longitudinal study design will also control for undesirable effects as consistency of responses and mood states. Furthermore, the respondents in this study were highly educated and the average tenure was relatively high. A future sample should contain multiple organizations in various sectors to investigate whether the non-significant relationships in this research are actually caused by the context in which the current research was conducted. To overcome the limitations of a questionnaire based on self-reported measures, vignettes and observations are recommended future research methods in investigating the psychological contract. Unfortunately, there could be a discrepancy between how people behave and how they say they behave. Additionnally, the unexpected results ask for a follow-up study, which should provide an in-depth understanding of the effect of supportive managerial practices. More research should be done on and with the newly developed supportive managerial practices scale to create a valid and reliable scale. Since the constructs ability, motivation and opportunity were highly correlated and could not be seen as separate constructs, it was decided to solely interpret the results of the SMP index in this study. However, relevance for investigating the impact of the different constructs still exist, because researchers acknowledge the three constructs as delivering different outcomes (Jiang, Lepak, Hu & Baer, 2012). It would enable researchers to test if the effectiveness of particular managerial approaches to redressing PCB are influenced by the type of breach experienced. At the same time, the phrasing of some sentences of the TPCQ (Freese et al., 2008) could be changed to prevent future confusion with this measurement scale. Another suggestion for future research is to examine the role of PCB in attitudes, such as commitment. In contrast with OCB, which typically involves proactive behavior to benefit the organization, commitment is a psychological state that binds the individual to the organization (Allen & Meyer, 1990). PCB could have a stronger relationship with attitudes than with proactive behavior. Further research could address hard outcomes of a breach as well, such as performance or productivity. The influence of a breach on these variables is of particular interest for organizations, because these outcome variables are predictors of both economic and socio-political organizational outcomes (Boxall & Purcell, 2011). Finally, future research may focus on LLX and individual differences, such as personality, when studying PCB in the context of organizational change. The quality of the supervisor s relationship with his or her own supervisor (LLX) could determine his access to 30

31 organizational resources and therefore his position to redress a subordinate s PCB. Further, personality could be incorporated in the conceptual model as influencing variable, but could also be linked with managerial practices. This linkage would be valuable to assess the fit in personality between the line manager and the employee, which would enable researchers to test interesting assumptions. For example, is the effectiveness of SMP influenced by the fit in personality between the line manager and the employee? Therefore, it is advisable to expand the present conceptual model in future studies. 5.4 Practical implications According to the fact that organizational change interventions have become common practices, managers and HR departments should be aware of the influence of PCB on OCB. More specifically, employers would be wise to avoid or minimize breaches on the dimension social atmosphere as much as possible, since breaches on these aspects have a significant impact on OCB. For example, supervisors could focus more on meaningful appreciation and recognition, which takes relatively little effort. Good working relationships and support by colleagues should be encouraged as well, since breaches on these aspects have a negative impact on OCB and, in the end, on organizational success (Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1994). Additionally, the results pointed at the importance of open and transparent communication, since this research indicated that SMP had a moderating impact on the relationship between the PCB dimension organizational policies and OCB. The perceived breaches did not result in low levels of OCB, but they could have their impact on other outcome variables such as performance and productivity. It is therefore important that the supervisor is in constant dialogue with his employees. At the same time, employees should be open and honest about their perceived breaches. By looking at individual situations and discover which aspects of the psychological contract are important to someone, a breach and its consequences can be reduced. Hence, it could be recommendable for HR professionals to explore the possibilities of introducing I-deals, since these are special conditions between the employee and employer which customize labor conditions to better suit personal needs and aspirations (Thornthwaite, 2004). Since not all supervisors have an innate ability to express their appreciation to their employees and to communicate open and transparent, a training program for line managers on how to minimize the unfavorable outcomes of PCB could be an effective intervention. HRD professionals can facilitate and support the line managers in this respect. Finally, along with the introduction of training programs for supervisors, an open 31

32 culture is an important aspect. It is essential for a successful organization that employees can freely express their concerns and dissatisfaction regarding their psychological contracts to their immediate managers. Recently performed research within the bank has demonstrated the need for a culture transition as well (internal report only). The organization strives for an open culture and wants to foster a climate in which employees can speak their minds. It requires a joint effort from top management, HR, supervisors and employees to make a successful transition into a new, open culture. To conclude, this study addressed an important but under-researched area in the psychological contract framework by providing a better understanding of the role of supportive managerial practices in redressing PCB. Furthermore, it gives important pointers for future research. Still, much work has to be done to uncover all the potential benefits of supportive managerial practices in the context of psychological contract breach and organizational change. However, by linking insights from the AMO model to the context of psychological contract breaches, this work revealed another piece of the proverbial iceberg that has been hidden under the surface up to now. 32

33 6. References Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of occupational psychology, 63(1), Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., & Kallenberg, A.L. (2000). Manufacturing advantage: Why high-performance work systems pay off. Ithaca, NY ILR Press. Bal, P.M., De Lange, A.H., Jansen, P.G.W., & Van der Velde, M.E.G. (2008). Psychological contract breach and job attitudes: A meta-analysis of age as a moderator. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, doi: /j.jvb Bal, P. M., Jansen, P. G., Van Der Velde, M. E., De Lange, A. H., & Rousseau, D. M. (2010). The role of future time perspective in psychological contracts: A study among older workers. Journal of vocational behavior, 76(3), doi: doi: /j.jvb Bankins, S. (2012). Investigating the dynamics of psychological contract: How and why individuals contract beliefs change. Doctoral dissertation, University of Queensland, Australia. Retrieved from: Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various X2 approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16(2), Retrieved from Becker, H. S. (1960). Notes on the concept of commitment. American journal of Sociology, 66, Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley. Boselie, P. (2010). Strategic human resource management: A balanced approach. London: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2011). Strategy and human resource management. Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan. Bragger, J. D., Rodriguez-Srednicki, O., Kutcher, E. J., Indovino, L., & Rosner, E. (2005). Work-family conflict, work-family culture, and organizational citizenship behaviour among teachers. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20(2), doi: /s

34 Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological bulletin, 98(2), 310. doi: / Conway, N., & Briner, R. B. (2005). Understanding psychological contracts at work. A critical evaluation of theory and research. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Cramer, D., & Howitt, D. L. (2004). The Sage dictionary of statistics: a practical resource for students in the social sciences. Sage. Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, doi: / Deery, S. J., Iverson, R. D., & Walsh, J. T. (2006). Toward a better understanding of psychological contract breach: A study of customer service employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), doi: / De Ruiter, M., Blomme R-J., & Schalk R. (2014b). Organizational change, psychological contract breach and supportive HR practices: Insights from the AMO model. Manuscript submitted for publication. De Ruiter, M., Schalk, R., & Blomme, R-J. (2014a). Managerial approaches to redressing psychological contract breach: evidence from employees and managers. Manuscript in preparation. Dick, P. (2010). The transition to motherhood and part-time working: mutuality and incongruence in the psychological contracts existing between managers and employees. Work, Employment & Society, 24(3), doi: / Doty, D. H., & Glick, W. H. (1998). Common methods bias: Does common methods variance really bias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1(4), doi: / Downs, C. W., & Hazen, M. D. (1977). A factor analytic study of communication satisfaction. Journal of Business Communication, 14(3), Dulac, T., Coyle-Shapiro, J. A-M., Henderson, D.J., & Wayne, S.J. (2008). Not all responses to breach are the same: the interconnection of social exchange and psychological contract processes in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 51, Retrieved from: Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1984). Social cognition. New York: Random House. 34

35 Freese, C. (2007). Organizational change and the dynamics of psychological contracts: A longitudinal study. Ridderkerk: Ridderprint. Freese, C., Schalk, R., & Croon, M.A. (2008). Schending van het psychologisch contract tijdens organisatieveranderingen. Tijdschrift voor HRM, 4, pp Retrieved from: file:///c:/users/pc/downloads/ pdf Freese, C., Schalk, R., & Croon, M. (2011). The impact of organizational changes on psychological contracts: A longitudinal study. Personnel Review, 40(4), doi: / Gardner, T. M., Wright, P. M., & Moynihan, L. M. (2011). The impact of motivation, empowerment, and skill-enhancing practices on aggregate voluntary turnover: the mediating effect of collective affective commitment. Personnel Psychology, 64(2), doi: /j x Gilbert, C., De Winne, S., & Sels, L. (2011). The influence of line managers and HR department on employees affective commitment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(8), doi: : / Gong, Y., Chang, S., & Cheung, S. Y. (2010). High performance work system and collective OCB: a collective social exchange perspective. Human Resource Management Journal, 20(2), doi: /j x Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity. American Sociological Review, 25, doi: / Jiang, K., Lepak, D.P., Hu, J., & Baer, J.C. (2012). How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), doi: /amj Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), doi: /bf Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral Science, 9, doi: /bs Katz, D., & Kahn, R.L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley. Keith, T. Z. (2006). Multiple regression and beyond. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. CA. Keyton, J. (2005). Communication and organizational culture. Sage, Thousand Oaks, 35

36 Kidder, D. L., & Parks, J. M. (2001). The good soldier: who is s (he)? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(8), doi: /job.119 Koster, F., & Sanders, K. (2006). Organizational citizens or reciprocal relationships? An empirical comparison. Personnel Review, 35(5), Retrieved from: Kreiner, G. E. and Ashforth, B. E. (2004). Evidence toward an expanded model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, doi: /job.234 Lester, S.W., Turnley, W.H., Bloodgood, J.M. & Bolino, M.C. (2002). Not seeing eye to eye: differences in supervisor and subordinate perceptions of and attributions for psychological contract breach. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, doi: /job.126 Lub, X., Bijvank, M. N., Bal, P. M., Blomme, R., & Schalk, R. (2012). Different or alike? Exploring the psychological contract and commitment of different generations of hospitality workers. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 24(4), doi: / Mauritz, A.V.R.P. (2012). Employee age and organizational citizenship behavior: An empirical study on the influence of occupational future time perspective. Master s thesis Human Resource Studies. Megginson (1963). Lessons from Europe for American Business. Southwestern Social Science Quarterly 44(1) Morrison, E. W., & Robinson, S. L. (1997). When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review, 22, doi: / Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: the good soldier syndrome. Lexington: Lexington Books. Organ, D.W. (1990). The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior. In B.M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.). Research in organizational behavior, 12, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It's construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10(2), doi: /s hup1002_2 Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48, doi: 36

37 Orpen, C. (1997). The effects of formal mentoring on employee work motivation, organizational commitment and job performance. The Learning Organisation, 4(2), pp doi: Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analyses. Berkshire, UK:Open University Press. Podsakoff, P.M., & MacKenzie, S.B. (1994). Organizational citizenship behaviors and sales unit effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Research, 31, doi: / Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26, doi: / Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1, doi: / (90) Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Blume, B. D. (2009). Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), doi: /a Restubog, S.L.D., & Bordia P. (2006). Workplace familism and psychological contract breach in the Philippines. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 55, doi: /j x Restubog, S. L. D., Bordia, P., & Tang, R. L. (2007). Behavioral outcomes of psychological contract breach in a non-western culture: the moderating role of equity sensitivity. British Journal of Management, 18, doi: /j x Restubog, S. L. D., Hornsey, M. J., Bordia, P., & Esposo, S. R. (2008). Effects of psychological contract breach on prganizational citizenship behaviour: Insights from the Group Value Model. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8) doi: /j x Robinson, S. L. (1996) Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Administrative science quarterly 41: doi: /

38 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, doi: /job Robinson, S. L., & Morrison, E. W. (2000). The development of psychological contract breach and violation: A longitudinal study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, doi: / (200008)21:5<525::AID-JOB40>3.0.CO;2-T Robinson, S. L., & Rousseau, D. M. (1994). Violating the psychological contract: Not the exception but the norm. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, doi: /job Robson, P.J.A., & Tourish, D. (2005). Managing internal communication: an organizational case study. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 10(3), pp doi: / Rousseau, D.M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2, doi: /BF Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage. Rousseau, D. M., & Parks, J. M. (1993). The contracts of individuals and organizations. In L.L. Cummings and B.M. Staw (Eds.). Research in organizational behavior, 15, Greenwich, JAI Press. Schalk, R., & Roe, R. E. (2007). Towards a dynamic model of the psychological contract. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 37(2), doi: /j x Suazo, M. M. (2011). The impact of affect and social exchange on outcomes of psychological contract breach. Journal of Managerial Issues, 23(2), Retrieved from: Subramony, M. (2009). A meta analytic investigation of the relationship between HRM bundles and firm performance. Human resource management, 48(5), doi: /hrm Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The social psychology of intergroup relations, 33, 47. Retrieved from: Integrative-Theory-of-Intergroup-Conflict.pdf 38

39 Taylor, M. S., & Tekleab, A. G. (2004). Taking stock of psychological contract research: Assessing progress, addressing troublesome issues, and setting research priorities. In J. A. M. Coyle-Shapiro, L. M. Shore, M. S. Taylor, & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.). The employment relationship. Examining psychological and contextual perspectives (pp ). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Thornthwaite, L. (2004). Working time and work-family balance: A review of employees preferences, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 42, doi: / Tompkins, P.K. (1984). The functions of human communication in organizations. In C.C. Arnold & J.W. Bowers (Eds.). Handbook of rhetorical and communication theory. (p ). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Turnley, W.H., & Feldman, D.C. (1998). Psychological contract violations during corporate restructuring, Human Resource Management, 37(1), doi: /(SICI) X(199821)37:1<71::AID-HRM7>3.0.CO;2-S Turnley, W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2000). Re examining the effects of psychological contract violations: unmet expectations and job dissatisfaction as mediators. Journal of organizational behavior, 21(1), doi: /(SICI) (200002)21:1<25::AID- JOB2>3.0.CO;2-Z Turnley, W. H., Bolino, M. C., Lester, S. W., & Bloodgood, J. M. (2003). The impact of psychological contract fulfillment on the performance of in-role and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of management, 29(2), doi: / Tyler, T. R. (1989). The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group-value model. Journal of personality and social psychology, 57(5), 830. doi: / Van der Smissen, S., Schalk, R., & Freese, C. (2013). Organizational change and the psychological contract; How change influences the perceived fulfilment of obligations. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(6), doi: /JOCM Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, doi: / Yen, H.R., & Niehoff, B.P. (2004). Organizational citizenship behaviors and organizational effectiveness: Examining relationships in Taiwanese banks. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, doi: /j tb02790.x 39

40 Yukl, G., Gordon, A., & Taber, T. (2002). A hierarchical taxonomy of leadership behavior: integrating half a century of behavior research. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 9, doi: / Zagenczyk, T.J., Gibney, R., Kiewitz, C., & Restubog, S.L.D. (2009). Mentors, supervisors and role models: Do they reduce the effects of psychological contract breach? Human Resource Management Journal, 19, doi: /j x Zhao, H., Wayne, S. J., Glibkowski, B. C., & Bravo, J. (2007). The impact of psychological contract breach on work-related outcomes: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60, doi: /j x 40

41 Appendix A: Questionnaire Instructions Dear participant, Please read the questions carefully and choose the answer that fits you most. Please put a tick in the box that represents the answer of your choice. You can change your answer by ticking the intended box the last tick will always overwrite previous ones. The survey starts with some general questions about your personal situation. Subsequently, the focus of the rest of the questions will be on your work experiences. Thank you in advance for your cooperation! A. General questions 1. At which location did you work before the merger? Achterhoek-Oost Graafschap-Noord 2. What is the name of your directorate? Particulieren Private Banking Bedrijven Bedrijfsmanagement I m working for a staff department 3. What department do you work in? Connect Bemiddeling Connect Projectmanagement Connect4U Connect Bancaire Professionals Recruitment Samen Werkt! RN Samen Werkt! LB Leiding & Staf 4. Are you male or female? Male Female 5. What is your age? Younger than 25 years years years years years Older than 65 years 41

42 6. What is your highest completed education? Primary school Lower vocational education Senior secondary education Secondary vocational education Upper secondary education Higher professional education Academic education 7. How many years of work experience do you have within the bank?.years 8. How many hours do you work per week?..hours 42

43 B. Organizational obligations Job Content Not at all (1) Slightly (2) Somewhat (3) Moderately (4) To a great extent (5) In the employment relationship employees have expectations about what the organization will offer. To what extent is your organization obliged to offer you the following? 1. Variation in your work Challenging work Interesting work Autonomy Much less than expected (1) Less than expected (2) As expected (3) More than expected (4) Much more than expected (5) 5. To what extent did your employer fulfil the obligations with regard to Job Content? Career Development Not at all (1) Slightly (2) Somewhat (3) Moderately (4) To a great extent (5) To what extent is your organization obliged to offer you the following? 6. Career opportunities Training and education Coaching on the job Professional development opportunities Much less than expected (1) Less than expected (2) As expected (3) More than expected (4) Much more than expected (5) 10. To what extent did your employer fulfil the obligations with regard to Career Development? 43

44 Social Atmosphere Not at all (1) Slightly (2) Somewhat (3) Moderately (4) To a great extent (5) To what extent is your organization obliged to offer you the following? 11. Good working atmosphere Good cooperation Support from colleagues Appreciation and recognition Much less than expected (1) Less than expected (2) As expected (3) More than expected (4) Much more than expected (5) 15 To what extent did your employer fulfil the obligations with regard to Social Atmosphere? Organizational Policies Not at all (1) Slightly (2) Somewhat (3) Moderately (4) To a great extent (5) To what extent is your organization obliged to offer you the following? 16. A fair supervisor Clear and fair rules and regulations Open communication Ethical policies concerning society and environment Much less than expected (1) Less than expected (2) As expected (3) More than expected (4) Much more than expected (5) 20. To what extent did your employer fulfil the obligations with regard to Organizational Policies? 44

45 Work Life Balance Not at all (1) Slightly (2) Somewhat (3) Moderately (4) To a great extent (5) To what extent is your organization obliged to offer you the following? 21. Consideration of personal circumstances Opportunity to schedule your own holidays Working at home Adjustment of working hours to fit personal life Much less than expected (1) Less than expected (2) As expected (3) More than expected (4) Much more than expected (5) 25. To what extent did your employer fulfil the obligations with regard to Work Life Balance? Rewards Not at all (1) Slightly (2) Somewhat (3) Moderately (4) To a great extent (5) To what extent is your organization obliged to offer you the following? 26. Employment security Appropriate salary Good benefits package Pay for performance Much less than expected (1) Less than expected (2) As expected (3) More than expected (4) Much more than expected (5) 30. To what extent did your employer fulfil the obligations with regard to Rewards? 45

46 C. Employee Obligations Not at all (1) Slightly (2) Somewhat (3) Moderately (4) To a great extent (5) In the employment relationship you have opinions on what you should offer the organization. To what extent do you feel obliged to offer your organization the following? 1. Good cooperation Helping colleagues Provide good service to customers Performing well on tasks you do not like Integrity Dedication to your work Being cost-conscious when dealing with organizational properties Not at all (1) Slightly (2) Somewhat (3) Moderately (4) To a great extent (5) 8. To what extent did you fulfil your obligations?

47 Not at all (1) Slightly (2) Somewhat (3) Moderately (4) To a great extent (5) To what extent do you feel obliged to offer your organization the following? 9. Keeping knowledge and skills up to date to be able to deal with changing requirements 10. Participating in training outside working hours that is important to do your job properly 11. Making suggestions for improvement Volunteering to do additional tasks Working overtime if that is necessary to get the job done 14. Participation in training to enhance employability Willingness to work in different positions The flexibility to change positions Willingness to work in another region Stay with the organization for several years Not at all (1) Slightly (2) Somewhat (3) Moderately (4) To a great extent (5) 19. To what extent did you fulfil your obligations?

48 D. Employee behavior The next questions are about the extent to which you feel involved and connected with your bank. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? Strongly disagree (1) Disagree (2) Neither agree or disagree (3) Agree (4) Strongly agree (5) 1. I am always ready to lend a helping hand to those around me 2. I attend meetings that are not mandatory, but are considered important 3. I take steps to try to prevent problems with other workers 4. I am willingly help others who have work related problems 5. I attend functions that are not required, but help the company image 6. I am mindful of how my behavior affects other people s jobs 7. I help others who have heavy work loads I read and keep up with organization announcements, memos, and so on 9. I try to avoid creating problems for coworkers I help others who have been absent I keep abreast of changes in the organization I consider the impact of his/her actions on coworkers I help orient new people even though it is not required I do not abuse the right of others

49 E. Behavior of your supervisor This part of the questionnaire contains a number of statements relating to the behavior of your supervisor. Indicate for each statement to what extent this reflects the behavior of your supervisor, whereby 1 is strongly disagree and 5 is strongly agree. My supervisor... Strongly disagree (1) Disagree (2) Neither agree or disagree (3) Agree (4) Strongly agree (5) 1. Teaches me specific job-related or technical skills Gives me specific guidance as to how I can improve Creates a compensation arrangement that is tailored to fit me when organizational events negatively affect me 4. Communicates details about organizational events/procedures that negatively affect me in a timely manner 5. Provides the opportunity to follow training, courses and workshops 6. Goes out of his/her way to ensure the obligation is still fulfilled when the organization has failed to deliver on its obligations 7. Listens to and understands any real concerns I might have 8. Helps me participate in high-visibility activities inside the organization 9. Encourages me to talk openly about organizational events that have negatively affect me 10. Goes out of his/her way to promote my interests 11. Provides coaching that supports my development

50 12. Helps me to analyze my performance Allows me to complete a portion of my work outside of the office when organizational events negatively affect my work schedule 14. Is honest in his/her communication to me about organizational events/procedures 15. Provides the opportunity to work on another project/task within my department/organization Provides adequate time for me to attend training Persuades important organizational players to fulfill their obligations to me 18. Offers adequate justification for decisions made about my job 19. Gives me support and feedback regarding my performance 20. Treats me with kindness and consideration when decisions are made about my job 21. Provides the opportunity to express my views and feelings during organizational procedures that negatively affect me 22. Gives me tasks where I work with people who can influence my career Supports me in dealing with senior management Encourages me to try new ways of behaving in my job 25. Is willing to go beyond formal policies to negotiate my compensation when organizational events negatively affect me 26. Shows concern for my rights as employee

51 27. Takes action on things brought up by me Suggests training that might be of benefit to me Encourages higher management to fulfill its broken promises at a later time 30. Gives me the opportunity to appeal the outcomes of organizational procedures that negatively affected me This is the end of the survey. Thank you for your cooperation! Are you interested in my research and do you want to read more? Enter your address and you will receive more information after the survey is closed. Enter your address 51

52 Appendix B: Dimensions supportive managerial practices Table B1 Item My supervisor Dimension - Subdimension nr. 1. teaches me specific job-related or technical skills Ability on-the-job coaching 2. gives me specific guidance as to how I can improve Motivation - feedback 3. creates a compensation arrangement that is tailored to fit me Motivation - compensate when organizational events negatively affect me 4. communicates details about organizational events/procedures that negatively affect me in a timely manner Opportunity adequate explanations 5. provides the opportunity to follow training, courses and Ability training opportunities workshops 6. goes out of his/her way to ensure the obligation is still fulfilled when the organization has failed to deliver on its obligations Motivation deliver on breached obligation 7. listens to and understands any real concerns I might have Opportunity listening empathically 8. helps me participate in high-visibility activities inside the organization Opportunity stimulate cooperation 9. encourages me to talk openly about organizational events that Opportunity confer have negatively affect me 10. goes out of his/her way to promote my interests Opportunity voice employee concerns 11. provides coaching that supports my development Ability on-the-job coaching 12. helps me to analyze my performance Motivation - feedback 13. allows me to complete a portion of my work outside of the office Motivation - compensate when organizational events negatively affect my work schedule 14. is honest in his/her communication to me about organizational events/procedures Opportunity adequate explanations 15. provides the opportunity to work on another project/task within my department/organization Opportunity - stimulate cooperation 16. provides adequate time for me to attend training Ability training opportunities 17. persuades important organizational players to fulfill their obligations to me Motivation deliver on breached obligation 18. offers adequate justification for decisions made about my job Opportunity adequate explanations 19. gives me support and feedback regarding my performance Motivation - feedback 20. treats me with kindness and consideration when decisions are made about my job Opportunity listening empathically 21. provides the opportunity to express my views and feelings during Opportunity confer organizational procedures that negatively affect me 22. gives me tasks where I work with people who can influence my career Opportunity - stimulate cooperation 23. supports me in dealing with senior management Opportunity voice employee concerns 52

53 Item My supervisor Dimension - Subdimension nr. 24. encourages me to try new ways of behaving in my job Ability on-the-job coaching 25. is willing to go beyond formal policies to negotiate my Motivation - compensate compensation when organizational events negatively affect me 26. shows concern for my rights as employee Opportunity listening empathically 27. takes action on things brought up by me Opportunity voice employee concerns 28. suggests training that might be of benefit to me Ability training opportunities 29. encourages higher management to fulfill its broken promises at a later time Motivation deliver on breached obligation 30. gives me the opportunity to appeal the outcomes of organizational procedures that negatively affected me Opportunity confer Note. Answers on a five-point scale from one (strongly disagree) to five (strongly agree) 53

54 Appendix C: Factor structure supportive managerial practices Table C1: FA Ability Item 1 2 Teaches me specific job-related or technical skills.83 Provides the opportunity to follow training, courses and workshops.87 Provides coaching that supports my development.86 Provides adequate time for me to attend training.95 Encourages me to try new ways of behaving in my job.86 Eigenvalue % variance Cronbach s alpha.82 54

55 Table C2: FA Motivation Item 1 2 Gives me specific guidance as to how I can improve -.81 Creates a compensation arrangement that is tailored to fit me when.71 organizational events negatively affect me Goes out of his/her way to ensure the obligation is still fulfilled when the.51 organization has failed to deliver on its obligations Helps me to analyze my performance -.91 Allows me to complete a portion of my work outside of the office when.65 organizational events negatively affect my work schedule Persuades important organizational players to fulfill their obligations to me.73 Gives me support and feedback regarding my performance -.92 Is willing to go beyond formal policies to negotiate my compensation when.84 organizational events negatively affect me Encourages higher management to fulfill its broken promises at a later time.83 Eigenvalue % variance Cronbach s alpha.87 55

56 Table C3: FA Opportunity Item 1 Communicates details about organizational events/procedures that negatively affect.67 me in a timely manner Listens to and understands any real concerns I might have.83 Helps me participate in high-visibility activities inside the organization.66 Encourages me to talk openly about organizational events that have negatively affect.80 me Goes out of his/her way to promote my interests.84 Is honest in his/her communication to me about organizational events/procedures.83 Treats me with kindness and consideration when decisions are made about my job.76 Provides the opportunity to express my views and feelings during organizational.82 procedures that negatively affect me Shows concern for my rights as employee.88 Takes action on things brought up by me.77 Eigenvalue 6.19 % variance Cronbach s alpha.93 56