Search results
This Essay argues that the “psychological contract”—the parties’ respective, subjective, idiosyncratic understandings of their contractual obligations to one another—is important and predictable. The common law of contract tells us how to discern the legal promise.
- The Definition
- The Pros
- The Cons
- The Impact on The Bottom Line
As editor, I have written about this form of ‘contract’ on occasion. Below is an excerpt from The Importance of the Psychological Contract. Vera Hillman, a former HR Exchange Network contributor, has also written about the concept. In her piece, The Psychological Contract: Relevance for Our Everyday Business Operations, Hillmann outlined what she c...
Having defined the psychological contract in greater detail, let us turn the focus now to the pros and cons.
Not-On-Paper
As previously mentioned, the psychological contract is not a physical contract; it’s not documented in any way. This makes it very difficult to execute. In fact, some say it is for this reason alone a PC cannot actually be defined as a contract.
Inconsistent
The psychological contract isinconsistent. Every single employee develops their own PC with the company. While these contracts may be similar across the board, they are still just as unique as each member of the company workforce.
Redundant
There are some that believe the concept of the psychological contract is redundant, even obsolete. Why? There are other ways to measure the employee-employer relationship. This includes employee engagement and pulse surveys.
Like it or not, the psychological contract is real and in force for every employee. Ignoring this fact can be a detriment to the company. Why? These contracts, while the responsibility of both parties, are not created by the employer, but the employee. Additionally, they can change those contracts on a whim and there is no notice required to the em...
- Mason Stevenson
The first line of work I describe investigates the operation of a psychological phenomenon that can potentially skew judicial decisionmaking, and points toward possible remedies that depend on decisionmakers being made aware of this cognitive effect.
- Lack of Capacity. It's expected that both (or all) parties to a contract have the ability to understand exactly what it is they are agreeing to. If it appears that one side did not have this reasoning capacity, the contract may be held unenforceable against that person.
- Duress. Duress, or coercion, will invalidate a contract when someone was threatened into making the agreement. In an often cited case involving duress, a shipper (Company A) agreed to transport a certain amount of Company B's materials, which would be used in a major development project.
- Undue Influence. If Person B forced Person A to enter into an agreement by taking advantage of a special or particularly persuasive relationship that Person B had with Person A, the resulting contract might be found unenforceable on grounds of undue influence.
- Misrepresentation. If fraud or misrepresentation occurred during the negotiation process, any resulting contract will probably be held unenforceable. The idea here is to encourage honest, good faith bargaining and transactions.
We tailor this retrospective look by reviewing the antecedents and outcomes associated with psychological contract breach and discussing the dominant theoretical explanations for the breach-outcome relationship.
Feb 8, 2011 · Robert Gordon University. Citations (22) References (32) Abstract. Purpose – For longer than most people would think, over 40 years, organisational psychologists have been defining and...
People also ask
How difficult is it to enforce a psychological contract?
Is a psychological contract real?
What happens if a psychological contract is breached?
Are psychological contracts restraining immoral psychology?
Is a psychological contract a pro or a con?
What are the practical implications of research on psychological contracts?
Jun 1, 2009 · Given the large amount of research on the psychological contract over the past two decades, the time seems ripe for new research that examines psychological contracts in conjunction with other types of contracts (e.g., legal, social) that impact behavior in organizations.
