Employees' reactions to psychological contract breach: A moderated mediation analysis

Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 57–66

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Vocational Behavior journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jvb

Employees' reactions to psychological contract breach: A moderated mediation analysis Yau-De Wang a,b,⁎, Hui-Hsien Hsieh b,1 a b

National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan Department of Management Science, National Chiao Tung University, 1001 University Road, Hsinchu, 300, Taiwan

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 18 February 2014 Available online 24 April 2014 Keywords: Psychological contract breach Job satisfaction Acquiescent silence Perceived ethical climate

a b s t r a c t This study examined the mediating role of acquiescent silence in the relationship between psychological contract breach and employee job satisfaction, as well as the moderating roles of perceived ethical climate on that relationship and on the mediation effect of acquiescent silence. Survey data were collected from a sample of 273 full-time employees from nine high-tech firms in Taiwan. The results showed that acquiescent silence partially mediated the relationship between psychological contract breach and job satisfaction. Moreover, the results from the moderation analysis showed that perceived ethical climate moderated the influence of psychological contract breach on acquiescent silence and the results from the moderated mediation analysis revealed that this mediation of acquiescent silence was moderated by perceived ethical climate such that at the lower level of perceived ethical climate, the mediation effect of acquiescent silence became stronger. Implications for managerial practices and suggestions for future research were discussed. © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Psychological contract refers to employees' beliefs about the mutual obligations or the terms of the reciprocal exchange agreement that exists between themselves and their organizations (Rousseau, 1989). Psychological contract is one form of the social exchange relationship that develops between employees and their organizations, which has been conceived as an important framework for understanding the employment relationship in organizations (Shore & Tetrick, 1994). A core element in the psychological contract is employees' belief that their organizations will fulfill their commitments. When employees perceive that their organizations have failed to fulfill their obligations, the employees will then experience psychological contract breach (PCB; Robinson & Rousseau, 1994; Rousseau, 1995). In other words, PCB refers to the cognitive evaluations of employees about their organizations' failures to fulfill the promised obligations tacitly agreed on in the employment relationship (Morrison & Robinson, 1997). A direct consequence of PCB is a feeling of violation, a negative affectivity referred as psychological contract violation (Morrison & Robinson, 1997; Robinson & Morrison, 2000). The feeling of violation often results in a variety of negative job attitudes and behaviors, such as reduced job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and citizenship behaviors and workplace deviance (Bal, De Lange, Jansen, & Van Der Veld, 2008; Bordia, Restubog, & Tang, 2008; Rosen, Chang, Johnson, & Levy, 2009; Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski, & Bravo, 2007), consequences harmful to employees' as well as their organizations' performance (Zhao et al., 2007). Though the negative consequences of PCB on employees' attitudes and behaviors are well understood, the mechanisms that cause these consequences are not fully explored.

⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of Management Science, National Chiao Tung University, 1001 University Road, Hsinchu, 300, Taiwan. Fax: +886 3 5713796. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (Y.-D. Wang), [email protected] (H.-H. Hsieh). 1 Fax: +886 3 5713796.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.04.003 0001-8791/© 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

58

Y.-D. Wang, H.-H. Hsieh / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 57–66

In this research, we aim to address the issue mentioned above by proposing and testing the mediation role of acquiescent silence on the relationship between PCB and employee job satisfaction. Acquiescent silence refers to employees' involuntary or passive withholding of relevant ideas or opinions about their own work because of the feeling of resignation (Pinder & Harlos, 2001; Van Dyne, Ang, & Botero, 2003). As a work behavior, acquiescent silence has been found dysfunctional to organizations because it can reduce innovations in workplace (Argyris & Schön, 1978), interfere with organizational change effort (Morrison & Milliken, 2000), and devastate employees' job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Morrison & Milliken, 2000; Vakola & Bouradas, 2005). Compared with deviant workplace behaviors, which are intentional and motivated by the need to restore equity or seek retributive justice (Aquino, Lewis, & Bradfield, 1999; Greenberg, 1990), acquiescent silence is passive, low risk-taking and may be more likely to be used by employees as a response to their perceived workplace injustice such as PCB. Because organizations often monitor and control their employees' work behaviors and performance, the explicit act of workplace deviance runs the risk of being detected and sanctioned by organizations. Acquiescent silence, however, is passive and can hardly be detected by co-workers or managers, which makes it less likely to bring undesirable consequences to employees. When employees feel that they are unable to correct the contract breach made by their organizations, they may choose to stop voicing their concerns about the breach and express a soundless remonstrance (e.g., withholding their comments during a departmental meeting purposely) (Morrison & Milliken, 2000), which constitutes an act of acquiescent silence. Yet, as a more likely response to PCB, the phenomenon of acquiescent silence has not been sufficiently examined by empirical research. Given the possible causal explanation of acquiescent silence on the effects of PCB on employees' job satisfaction, it is necessary to examine whether the acquiescent silence functions as a mechanism to mediate the influence of PCB on employees' job satisfaction. The first purpose of this study is to provide an empirical validation on this mediation role of acquiescent silence. Another issue deserving our attention is that researchers have not yet sufficiently attended to the influences of organizational contexts on the relationship between PCB and employees' attitudinal and behavioral responses. Employees seldom react similarly to their perceived contract breaches across different organizational contexts (Dulac, Coyle-Shapiro, Henderson, & Wayne, 2008). By examining the moderating effects of job cognitions (e.g., the likelihood of being punished by the organization or the existence of attractive employment alternatives) on the relationship between PCB and employees' withdrawal behaviors, Turnley and Feldman (1999) concluded that organizational situations can moderate the effects of PCB on employees' attitudinal and behavioral responses. In the present study, we argue that perceived ethical climate (PEC), as employees' cognitive awareness of their organizations' moral context, can act as a moderator on the relationship between PCB and employees' reactions to PCB. Our argument is based on Barnett and Schubert (2002), which noted that employees' perception of their organizations' ethical climate is an important factor affecting their causal evaluations of their experienced PCB. Under a higher level of PEC, employees often sense more organizational justice and support (Koh & Boo, 2001), a cognition which deters the causal interpretation of PCB as a wrongful act purposefully committed by their organizations and thus helpful for buffering the negative influence of PCB on employees' attitudes and behaviors. As such, we intended to examine the extent to which the perceived ethical climate, as an important cognition of organizational context, moderates the relationships between PCB, acquiescent silence, and job satisfaction. The second purpose of our study is to verify a moderated mediation model, which jointly examines the moderating effect of PEC on the PCB–acquiescent silence relationship and the moderating effect of PEC on the mediation influence of acquiescent silence on the PCB–job satisfaction relationship. By achieving the aforementioned two purposes, this study may contribute to the literature by enriching our understanding about how PCB can work to affect employee attitudes and behaviors. 1.1. Literature review and hypotheses 1.1.1. Mediating role of acquiescent silence on the PCB–job satisfaction relationship Based on social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), studies in the literature have shown that employees are likely to respond to PCB with negative affect and job attitudes. For example, PCB has been found to be negatively related to employees' job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Bal et al., 2008; Rosen et al., 2009; Zhao et al., 2007). The negative influence on job attitudes from PCB can lead to various employee counter-productive work behaviors including absenteeism (Deery, Iverson, & Walsh, 2006), psychological withdrawal behaviors (Lo & Aryee, 2003), and workplace deviance (Bordia et al., 2008). Acquiescent silence, defined as “withholding relevant ideas, information, or opinions, based on resignation” (Van Dyne et al., 2003, p. 1366), is a type of counter-productive work behavior which can be a result of reduced job satisfaction because of PCB. Employees who experienced PCB are inclined to feel unfairly treated and may develop negative affective responses and attitudes, such as the feeling of violation (Morrison & Robinson, 1997) and reduced job satisfaction (Zhao et al., 2007); and, affected by the negative affect and attitudes, employees may choose to remain silent instead of engaging in deviant behaviors as revenge on their organizations for their perceived PCB (Morrison & Milliken, 2000; Ng & Feldman, 2012; Pinder & Harlos, 2001). Compared with workplace deviance, the act of silence can avoid causing disruption of workgroup harmony and detection and sanctions by managers. In other words, when a PCB occurs, employees may feel dissatisfied with their jobs and are likely to passively accept the fact of the breach based on a feeling of resignation. Although the above argument suggested that the affective or attitudinal consequences of PCB could result in employee silence, the opposite may occur. That is, PCB may lead to silence first and the silence then renders a reduction in job satisfaction. Based on cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957), Epitropaki (2013) argued that PCB can arouse dissonant cognitions about one's organizations and can stimulate employees to take actions, for example, reducing their level of identification with their organizations, to remedy their cognitive dissonance. As employees' perceived contract breach represents an unmet expectation of the benefits promised by their employers to pay for the contributions they have made to their employers (Morrison & Robinson, 1997), a

Y.-D. Wang, H.-H. Hsieh / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 57–66

59

convenient, immediate action that may be taken to decrease the cognitive dissonance from PCB is to reduce their job input in order to counterbalance the unmet expectation. This cognitive dissonance argument suggests that PCB as employees' cognitive evaluations about how they are treated by their organizations (Morrison & Robinson, 1997) can cause acquiescent silence directly without necessarily counting on the mediation of affective or attitudinal consequences of PCB. In the literature, scholars have pointed out that silence behaviors could be negatively associated with employees' job attitudes such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Morrison and Milliken (2000) argued that employees' act of withholding information about potential problems or issues can lead to their feelings of not being valued and a lack of control on their jobs, a psychology which may result in a decrease in their job satisfaction. Based on their argument, Vakola and Bouradas (2005) demonstrated that individual employees' silence behaviors were negatively related to their job satisfaction. Morrison (2011) further pointed out that being able to voice one's opinions in job situations can make employees feel more satisfied with their jobs, because the opportunities for voicing allow them to make contributions to their jobs. On the other hand, not being able to voice one's ideas, opinions, and suggestions for improving the situation at work can lead to reduced job satisfaction because it makes employees feel that there is a lack of opportunity to contribute to their organizations. Amalgamating the above arguments concerning acquiescent silence as a direct consequence of PCB and the subsequent negative influence of the silence on job satisfaction, we propose: Hypothesis 1. Acquiescent silence mediates the negative influence of PCB on job satisfaction.

1.1.2. The moderating role of PEC on the PCB–acquiescent silence–job satisfaction relationship PEC has been defined as “the prevailing perceptions of typical organizational practices and procedures that have ethical content” (Victor & Cullen, 1988, p. 101). PEC can be classified into five different sub-types: instrumental climate (characterized by the maximization of self-interest), caring climate (characterized by concern for the well-being of others), independence climate (characterized by adherence to one's own personal ethical beliefs), rules climate (characterized by the expectation to adhere to the company's policies and procedures), and law and code climate (characterized by the expectation to comply with the law and with professional standards). Organizations are often judged on whether they are ethical according to the extent to which they possess each of the five sub-types of ethical climates. For example, if most of the members of an organization show a greater concern about the interests of their colleagues and organization in their decision makings and work behaviors than about their own interests, the organization will be considered more ethical because it has manifested a non-instrumental climate. Similarly, an organization will be considered as more ethical if its members show more caring for others, independence in decision making and rules or law and code abiding in their decision making and behavior. In the literature, scholars (e.g., Dension, 1996; Schneider, 1990) have argued that organizational climate is a milieu experienced by the members of an organization toward the entire social environment of their organization; and the different sub-types of ethical climates can be combined and integrated into a holistic, overall organizational ethical climate. As such, the present study took this integrative, holistic approach to combine the aforementioned five sub-types of ethical climates into a global ethical climate in order to explore the effects of PEC on employee silence and satisfaction. PEC may affect employees' reactions to negative work events they encounter on their jobs (e.g., perceived contract breach) because it serves as a perceptual lens through which employees diagnose and assess their job situations (Cullen, Parboteeah, & Victor, 2003). Drawing from organizational justice theory (Greenberg, 1990), Koh and Boo (2001) argued that employees who perceive their organizations as ethical are more likely to feel that their organizations are fair and supportive to them, and this feeling of fairness and supportiveness can buffer them from the harmful effects of negative work events (Kickul, Neuman, Parker, & Finkl, 2001; Robinson & Morrison, 2000). Additionally, Dulac et al. (2008) noted that when employees experience a higher level of organizational support, they are more likely to “seek out information and interpretations that facilitate the conclusion that although breach has occurred, their organization has been fair in the process” (p. 1084), an act which can assuage their cognitive dissonance to PCB. The above arguments suggest that PEC can play a buffering role in the relationship between PCB and employees' responses to a breach. Intuition may suggest that PCB experienced by employees can make them feel that their organizations lack an ethical climate. However, as PCB is concerned about the losses to the personal interests of an individual employee (me), it may not necessarily be in line with the losses to the collective interests of the organization (we or society), a salient beneficiary defined more broadly (O'Donohue & Nelson, 2009). PCB may not result in a lower level of PEC because the failure for the delivery of personal interests promised to individual employees may not coincide with the failure to satisfy the collective interests of employees by organizations. Being constituted by a system of organizational ethical practices, values, and norms, ethical climate is an immediate social context of organization (Martin & Cullen, 2006) which can provide important cues to employees about the appropriate attitudes and behaviors they may take to respond to their perceived PCB. PEC can serve as an organizational context for employees' making sense of the causal antecedents of PCB (Morrison & Robinson, 1997; Rosen et al., 2009). For example, under a higher level of PEC, the atmosphere of justice and equity permeating an organization can make employees cautious when identifying the causes of their perceived PCB. They are less likely to attribute the breach to an act intentionally and purposefully committed by their organizations. Misunderstanding of the mutual expectations by their employers, or other uncontrollable events (e.g., an organization's being temporarily short of resources for meeting employees' expectations), becomes more likely causal interpretations for the PCB. Hence, a higher level of PEC will help to mitigate the direct effects of PCB on the negative, dysfunctional behavioral responses such as acquiescent silence. In contrast, employees under a lower level of PEC are more likely

60

Y.-D. Wang, H.-H. Hsieh / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 57–66

to think their perceived contract breach is committed on purpose by their organizations, a cognition which confirms their impressions about a low ethical climate in the organization. Furthermore, the fear of negative repercussions from an explicit challenge to the inequality from PCB, or the belief that their opinions may not be valued by the uncaring leadership under the lower-level ethical climate, can aggravate employees' silence (Walumbwa & Schaubroeck, 2009). As such, the employees are more likely to use acquiescent silence as a response to reciprocate their organizations' PCB and make the silence as a mediator of the effects of PCB on their job satisfaction. PEC may not only moderate the influence of PCB on acquiescent silence but also constrain the negative influence of the silence on job satisfaction. Under a higher level of PEC, employees are allowed to express their concerns about PCB, and there is no fear of negative repercussions or concern about being neglected; it would therefore be unjustifiable for them to use silence as a response to PCB. If employees still opt for such an action, the negative relationship between silence and job satisfaction will likely be attenuated because the insufficiency in justification may prevent them from considering their managers or organizations as the causes of their silence (Morrison & Milliken, 2000), an attribution which can result in reduced job satisfaction because it makes employees feel that they are not valued by their employers. In line with the above reasoning, we expect that the direct effects of PCB on acquiescent silence and the indirect effects of PCB on job satisfaction via acquiescent silence will be moderated by employees' PEC. Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed: Hypothesis 2. PEC will moderate the effect of PCB on acquiescent silence such that the effect is stronger when PEC is lower. Hypothesis 3. PEC will moderate the mediating effect of acquiescent silence on the relationship between PCB and job satisfaction such that the mediating effect is stronger when PEC is lower.

2. Method 2.1. Sample and procedure The participants of this study were full-time employees from nine high-technology firms in Taiwan, including electronics, semiconductors, telecommunications, information technology, and software companies. We contacted the managers of these companies and requested their consent for their employees' participation. The participants were assured confidentiality and informed that their responses will be anonymous and used only for this research. A total of 450 questionnaires were distributed and 284 were returned. After eliminating those with missing data, the final sample comprises 273 valid questionnaires, yielding a valid response rate of 61%. Of the 273 respondents, 46.9% are males and 53.1% are females. Eight percent of them were high-school graduates, 60.5% were college graduates, and 31.5% had graduate-level education. The age of respondents ranges from 21 to 63 years, with a mean of 33.87 (SD = 8.42). Their average organizational tenure is 8.66 years (SD = 8.54). 2.2. Measures The measures were initially written in English and the back-translation procedure (Brislin, 1986) was used to ensure the accuracy and semantic equivalence of their translation from English into Chinese. The authors first translated the English version of the measures into Chinese. The Chinese version of the measures was then independently back-translated into English by two bilingual experts. Discrepancies between the original and the back-translated versions were discussed by the authors and the two experts, and the corresponding revision, comprised of a new round of translation and back-translation, was then carried out and repeated until a consensus concerning the accuracy and semantic equivalence of the translation was reached in discussion. This procedure ensured the content validity of the measures. 2.2.1. PCB PCB was measured by the five items adapted from Robinson and Morrison (2000). Sample items are “Almost all the promises made by my employer during recruitment have been kept so far” (reverse scored) and “I have not received everything promised to me in exchange for my contributions.” Respondents were asked to evaluate their perceptions of how well their psychological contracts had been fulfilled by their employer using a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The Cronbach's α for this scale was. 87. 2.2.1.1. Acquiescent silence. Acquiescent silence was assessed by the five items adapted from Van Dyne et al. (2003). A sample item is “I passively withhold ideas based on resignation.” Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed with the items on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The Cronbach's α for the scale was .85. 2.2.1.2. Job satisfaction. Job satisfaction was assessed using the five-item version of Brayfield and Rothe's (1951) scale, which has been frequently used in the literature (Saari & Judge, 2004). Sample items included “at this very moment, I am enthusiastic about my work” and “right now, I feel fairly satisfied with my present job.” Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed with the above statements using a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The Cronbach's α for this scale was .87.

Y.-D. Wang, H.-H. Hsieh / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 57–66

61

2.2.2. PEC PEC was assessed using the scale developed by Victor and Cullen (1988). The scale five subscales which measure instrumental climate (6 items; e.g., “in this company, people are mostly out for themselves”), caring climate (4 items; e.g., “the most important concern is the good of all the people in the company as a whole”), independence climate (3 items; e.g., “the most important concern in this company is each person's own sense of right and wrong”), rules climate (3 items; e.g., “it is very important to follow the company's rules and procedures here”), and law and code climate (4 items; e.g., “in this company, people are expected to strictly follow legal or professional standards”). Respondents were asked to evaluate their perceptions of their organizations' climates on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). We conducted a higher order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the factor structure of the overall PEC measure. Results revealed that the fit indices for five first-order factors plus one second-order factor fell within an acceptable range (χ2 [165] = 424.62, p b .01; GFI = .88, CFI = .94, NNFI = .93, SRMR = .08, RMSEA = .07), suggesting that the five subtypes of climate constituted a global construct of PEC. The Cronbach's α was .83, .81, .75, 75, and .83 for instrumental climate, caring climate, independence climate, rules climate, and law and code climate, respectively. The Cronbach's α for the overall PEC scale was .85. 2.2.2.1. Control variables. The demographic variables of gender, age, organizational tenure, and education level of respondents were included as control variables in the study because prior research has suggested that these demographic variables may be related to silence behaviors (Morrison & Milliken, 2000) and employee attitudes including job satisfaction (Bedeian, Ferris, & Kacmar, 1992; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). They were coded as: gender (0 = female; 1 = male), age (in years), organizational tenure (in years), and education level (1 = below high school; 2 = high school; 3 = junior college; 4 = university; 5 = graduate). Moreover, negative affectivity was included as a control variable because previous research has suggested that negative affectivity is related to job satisfaction (Watson & Slack, 1993) and employee silence (Tangirala & Ramanujam, 2008). Negative affectivity was measured using Watson, Clark, and Tellegen (1988) 0-item scale. Respondents were requested to indicate the extent to which they generally felt each affective description in the scale. The range of extent varied from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much). The Cronbach's α for the scale was .88. Because age and organizational tenure were found to be highly correlated with each other (r = .90, p b .01), tenure was dropped from the subsequent statistical analyses. 2.3. Level of analysis of ethical climate Though the measure of PEC refers to individual employees' perceptions of organizational ethical climate, it may also be considered as a variable at the organizational level. We calculated intraclass correlations (ICCs) to determine the variability and the reliability of PEC across the nine high-technology firms in our sample (Bliese, 2000). We used the ICC(1) to examine the degree of variability in the measure at the individual level that is attributed to being part of the group (company). The ICC(1) value of PEC was .01, which was lower than the criterion of .12 (Bliese, 2000). On the other hand, we used the ICC(2) to examine the reliability of the group means. The ICC(2) value of PEC was .25, which was lower than the criterion of .70 (Bliese, 2000). The above results suggested that there was not sufficient agreement for aggregating the individual-level PEC into organizational-level. As individual employees may act according to what they perceive are the ethical values of their organizations (Biron, 2010) and we are concerned about the effects of their personal perception of ethical climate on their reactions to PCB, it is appropriate for us to measure PEC at the individual level to capture the perceptions of our survey respondents. 2.4. Cautions against common method variance We addressed the issue of common method variance (CMV) in three ways. First, according to Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, and Podsakoff (2003), the negative affectivity of survey respondents is a likely source for CMV in the research involving the single-source measurement of employees' perceptions about their organizations and their job attitudes and behaviors. The above problem of the contamination from CMV in examining the relationships between these variables can be treated by using the negative affectivity as a control variable in regression analysis. We included the measure of our respondents' negative affectivity in our regression analyses and found that after controlling for the influence of negative affectivity on job satisfaction, the mediation of acquiescent silence on the PCB–job satisfaction relationship and the moderations of PEC on the PCB–acquiescent silence relationship and on the mediation effect of acquiescent silence remained significant (see Table 3). This partialling out of negative affectivity as a source for CMV helped to remove the doubt about the validity of our findings. Second, our CFA analysis (see Table 1) revealed that the five-factor model (which included the above four variables and the negative affectivity) fitted significantly better than the one-factor model, a result indicating no significant CMV according to Harmon's one-factor test (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986). Lastly, CMV was assessed using a marker variable test suggested by Lindell and Whitney (2001) and Malhotra, Kim, and Patil (2006). According to Lindell and Whitney (2001), the smallest observed correlation between the marker variable and any other substantive variable that is theoretically irrelevant is assumed to be due to CMV. In this study, we used the demographic variable of gender as the marker variable, which has a non-significant correlation with PCB, acquiescent silence, and job satisfaction. We chose the smallest positive correlation coefficient involving gender with acquiescent silence (rM = .03, ns) for use in the partial correlation adjustment procedure to examine the degree of the CMV. The mean change in correlations of the four key study variables (rU − rA) when partialling out the effect of rM was .03, suggesting that no significant CMV was shared by these variables.

62

Y.-D. Wang, H.-H. Hsieh / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 57–66

Table 1 Results of confirmatory factor analyses. Model

χ2

df

Δχ2

CFI

NNFI

SRMR

RMSEA

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

564.47 799.34 1067.52 1306.16 2007.19

220 224 224 227 230

– 234.87⁎⁎ 503.05⁎⁎ 741.69⁎⁎ 1442.72⁎⁎

.93 .89 .86 .81 .69

.92 .88 .84 .79 .66

.07 .10 .10 .11 .13

.07 .10 .12 .13 .17

Five-factor model Four-factor model 1a Four-factor model 2b Three-factor modelc One-factor model

Note: Δχ2 denote differences between the five-factor model and other models. CFI = comparative fit index; NNFI = non-normed fit index; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation. a This model combines psychological contract breach and perceived ethical climate into one factor. b This model combines acquiescent silence and job satisfaction into one factor. c This model combines acquiescent silence, job satisfaction, and negative affectivity into one factor. ⁎⁎ p b .01.

Though we were unable to rule out fully the contamination problem caused by CMV, the above cautious measures helped to strengthen confidence in our findings. 2.5. Data analysis To test for the mediation role of acquiescent silence, we used the SPSS macro created by Preacher and Hayes (2004). Their method incorporates the normal theory approach (i.e., the Sobel test), a bootstrap approach, and Baron and Kenny's (1986) approach to estimate the indirect effects of PCB on job satisfaction. The interactional influence of PEC and PCB on acquiescent silence was used to test the moderation of PEC on the PCB–acquiescent silence relationship. To test for moderated mediation of PEC, we utilized another SPSS macro created by Preacher, Rucker, and Hayes (2007). This macro facilitates estimation of the conditional indirect effects of acquiescent silence by bootstrapping methods, and is able to probe the significance of conditional indirect effects at different values of the moderator variable. Furthermore, we applied conventional procedures for plotting simple slopes to interpret the interactive effects, at one standard deviation above and below the mean of the moderator (Aiken & West, 1991). 3. Results 3.1. Construct validity of measurement Before testing the hypotheses, we conducted CFA to examine the convergent and discriminant validities of the variables in our study. The results in Table 1 show that the five-factor model (which included the four variables in our hypotheses: PCB, acquiescent silence, job satisfaction, and PEC and the control variable, negative affectivity) fitted the data better (χ2 [220] =564.47, p b .01; CFI = .93, NNFI = .92, SRMR = .07, RMSEA = .07) than the other four models that reduced the number of factors by combining some of the five factors into one factor. Chi-square difference tests also indicated a significantly better fit for the five-factor model compared with the other four models (see Table 1), providing evidence for the attainment of satisfactory discriminant validity on the five variables. Moreover, the factor loadings of the indicators in each of the five variables were statistically significant (p b .05), a sign for the attainment of a satisfactory convergent validity (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). Based on the above findings, we concluded that the measurement of the psychological variables in our study had attained satisfactory psychometric soundness. 3.2. Descriptive statistics Descriptive statistics, reliability estimates, and correlations of the study variables are presented in Table 2. Table 2 Means, standard deviations, reliability, and correlations among study variables. Variable

M

SD

1

1. Gender 2. Age 3. Tenure 4. Education 5. Negative affectivity 6. PCB 7. PEC 8. Acquiescent silence 9. Job satisfaction

.47 33.87 8.66 4.02 2.20 2.57 3.34 2.22 3.57

.50 8.42 8.53 .88 .45 .65 .32 .48 .66

–

2 .13⁎ .04 .14⁎

−.09 .13 .13⁎ .03 −.01

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

(.88) .14⁎ −.16⁎⁎ .32⁎⁎ −.35⁎⁎

(.87) −.18⁎⁎ .27⁎⁎ −.41⁎⁎

(.85) −.08 .28⁎⁎

(.85) −.30⁎⁎

(.87)

–

.90⁎⁎ −.36⁎⁎ −.20⁎⁎ .01 .08 −.04 .21⁎⁎

– −.42⁎⁎ −.18⁎⁎ −.05 .07 −.08 .22⁎⁎

–

.16⁎⁎ .20⁎⁎ −.13⁎ .12⁎ −.09

Note: PCB = psychological contract breach; PEC = perceived ethical climate. Cronbach's α is in parentheses. ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01.

Y.-D. Wang, H.-H. Hsieh / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 57–66

63

Table 3 Regression results for testing mediation of acquiescent silence. Predictor Partial effect of control variables on job satisfaction Gender Age Education Negative affectivity Direct and total effects PCB ➔ acquiescent silence (a) PCB ➔ acquiescent silence, controlling for job satisfaction Acquiescent silence ➔ job satisfaction Acquiescent silence ➔ job satisfaction, controlling for PCB (b) PCB ➔ job satisfaction (c) PCB ➔ job satisfaction, controlling for acquiescent silence (c′) Indirect effect and significance using normal distribution PCB ➔ acquiescent silence ➔ job satisfaction (a × b) Bootstrapping results for indirect effects PCB ➔ acquiescent silence ➔ job satisfaction (a × b)

b

SE

t

−.03 .02⁎⁎

.07 .01 .04 .08

−.40 3.55⁎⁎ 1.85 −4.23⁎⁎

.04 .05 .08 .07 .05 .06 SE .01 SE .01

3.74⁎⁎ 2.49⁎ −3.65⁎⁎ −2.37⁎ −7.20⁎⁎ −6.55⁎⁎

.08 −.34⁎⁎ .16⁎⁎ .12⁎

−.29⁎⁎ −.18⁎ −.39⁎⁎ −.36⁎⁎ Estimate −.03 Estimate −.03

Z −2.16⁎ 95% CI (−.07, −.01)

Note: PCB = psychological contract breach; CI = confidence interval; unstandardized regression coefficients are reported. Bootstrap sample size = 5000. ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01.

3.3. Hypotheses testing The results in Table 3 showed that there was a significantly positive association between PCB and acquiescent silence (b = .16, p b .01). Because it was likely that PCB was related to the silence through the mediation of negative affectivity and job satisfaction – the possible affective and attitudinal consequences of PCB – we treated negative affectivity as a control variable and partialled out the possible mediation of job satisfaction, and found that PCB remained positively related to acquiescent silence (b = .12, p b .05). Similarly, we found that after partialling out the possible linkage between PCB and job satisfaction, acquiescent silence had a significantly negative association with job satisfaction (b = -.18, p b .05). Together with the finding of a significantly negative association of PCB with job satisfaction (b = -.39, p b .01), the above two results suggested that acquiescent silence could mediate the association of PCB and job satisfaction. We then controlled the effects of acquiescent silence on job satisfaction and found that the association between PCB and job satisfaction was reduced from −.39 to −.36 (c vs. c′ in Table 3), a decrease suggesting the existence of the mediation effect of acquiescent silence. We further tested the significance of this mediation effect by using the Sobel test (Sobel, 1982) and the bootstrapping procedures. The results from the Sobel test showed that the mediation effect was significant (Z = −2.16, p b .05). The results from the bootstrapping procedures showed that the 95% confidence interval around the indirect effect did not contain zero (−.07, −.01), which also indicated that the mediation effect was significant. With the above results, we concluded that Hypothesis 1 was supported. The results in Table 4 showed that PEC interacted with PCB to affect acquiescent silence (b = −.22, p b .05; ΔR2 = .01, p b .05). The negative interaction suggested that the effect of PCB on acquiescent silence became stronger when PEC was lower. We followed the procedures suggested by Aiken and West (1991) to plot the moderation effect of PEC in Fig. 1. The figure shows that there is a stronger positive relationship between PCB and acquiescent silence when the level of PEC is lower. Simple slope tests indicated that

Table 4 Regression results for testing moderation of perceived ethical climate. Predictor

Acquiescent silence b

Step 1: Gender Age Education Negative affectivity Step 2: PCB PEC Step 3: PCB × PEC

SE

R2

t

ΔR2

.11⁎⁎ .02 .01 .03 .30⁎⁎

.06 .01 .03 .06

.32 .45 .80 4.72⁎⁎

.17⁎⁎ .01

.04 .09

3.86⁎⁎ .09

−.22⁎

.11

−1.99⁎

F 8.59⁎⁎

.16⁎⁎

.05⁎⁎

8.30⁎⁎

.17⁎⁎

.01⁎

7.76⁎⁎

Note: PCB = psychological contract breach; PEC = perceived ethical climate. Unstandardized regression coefficients are reported. ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01.

64

Y.-D. Wang, H.-H. Hsieh / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 57–66

Fig. 1. The moderating effect of PEC on the relationship between PCB and acquiescent silence. Note: PCB = psychological contract breach; PEC = perceived ethical climate.

whereas PCB was unrelated to acquiescent silence at the higher level of PEC (slope = .10, ns), PCB was significantly and positively related to acquiescent silence at the lower level of PEC (slope = .24, p b .01). Accordingly, Hypothesis 2 was supported. We tested the moderation of PEC on the mediating effect of acquiescent silence by following the procedures suggested by Preacher et al. (2007). We examined the conditional indirect effect of PCB on job satisfaction through acquiescent silence at two values of PEC: one standard deviation above the mean score of PEC (the high value condition) and one standard deviation below the mean score of PEC (the low value condition). As shown in Table 5, the results revealed that the conditional mediation effect of PCB was stronger and significant at the lower level of PEC (95% CI = [−.098, −.010], p b .05) but was weakened and became non-significant at the higher level of PEC (95% CI = [−.058, .001], ns). According to these results, we concluded that Hypothesis 3 was supported. 4. Discussion The finding of a significant association between PCB and acquiescent silence, after controlling the influence of negative affectivity as well as job satisfaction on the silence, supported the conjecture that acquiescent silence is a direct response to PCB. By being silent on their jobs, employees can reduce their job input to correct the disequilibrium between the contributions made by them and the benefits received from their organizations underlying their PCB (Morrison & Robinson, 1997). This finding enriches the literature by showing that in addition to being a consequence of negative affect or attitudes from PCB, acquiescent silence as a negative work behavior can be rendered directly by PCB. The finding of a significantly negative association between acquiescent silence and job satisfaction after controlling the influence of PCB on job satisfaction suggests that acquiescent silence as a negative workplace behavior may serve as a basis for employees' making sense of their feelings about their jobs. This result contributes to the literature by showing that in addition to being a direct attitudinal consequence of PCB, the decrease in job satisfaction can be incurred by employees' negative behavioral reactions to their PCB. The confirmation of the mediation effect of acquiescent silence on the PCB–job satisfaction relationship adds contributions to the literature by showing that employees' negative job experiences can first incite their negative behavioral responses, which then result in their negative job attitudes, a sequence of influence that is the reverse of the commonly assumed job experience–attitude–behavior sequence of relationship (Zhao et al., 2007). Our finding of a moderation influence of PEC on the relationship of PCB and acquiescent silence provides us with a new understanding about the relationship between ethical climate and employee silence. While a previous study (Wang & Hsieh, 2013) found that organizational-level PEC was negatively related to employees' acquiescent silence, the present study showed that the individual-level PEC worked to reduce the negative association between perceived contract breach and acquiescent silence. Together, these two results suggest that PEC may work to reduce acquiescent silence in two ways. At the organizational level, it may provide employees with an atmosphere of safety which can work to reduce their silence as a response to their PCB (Walumbwa & Schaubroeck, 2009). At the individual level, it may serve as a sense-making lens for employees' benign interpretation of the causes of PCB, a cognitive assessment which can result in less acquiescent silence (Rosen et al., 2009). Table 5 Results of testing moderated mediation.

PEC

Level

Conditional indirect effect

Boot SE

Boot z

Boot p

Low (mean − 1 SD) High (mean + 1 SD)

−.044 −.018

.022 .014

−1.987 −1.266

.047 .205

95% CI LL

UL

−.098 −.058

−.010 .001

Note: PEC = perceived ethical climate; CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit. Bootstrap sample size = 5000.

Y.-D. Wang, H.-H. Hsieh / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 57–66

65

The finding of the moderation effects of PEC on the relationship between PCB and acquiescent silence supported Dulac et al.'s (2008) and Koh and Boo's (2001) arguments about the buffering effects of the organizational contexts characterized as ethical and supportive on employees' negative behavioral responses to their PCB. Though scholars (e.g., Rosen et al., 2009) have argued for an organizational contextual influence on employees' PCB and their subsequent attitudes and behaviors, few studies have been conducted to uncover this effect. The above finding of the moderation of PEC – an important organizational context – lends support to the above argument. The finding of the moderation effects of PEC on the PCB–acquiescent silence–job satisfaction relationship provided us with a deeper understanding about the role of organizational contexts on employees' PCB and their subsequent attitudes and behaviors. As an organizational context, PEC may not only work to reduce the direct association of PCB and acquiescent silence but also attenuate the indirect, negative association between PCB and job satisfaction. Combining the findings of two moderating effects of PEC, this study contributed to the literature by showing that organizational context can affect employees' PCB and their subsequent attitudes and behaviors in multiple ways (as a simple moderator and/or as a moderator of mediator). In summary, the results of this study make us understand better how PCB can exert its influence on job satisfaction; the importance of taking organizational contexts into consideration when making sense of the influence of PCB on job attitudes and behaviors; and the complexity of the working of the organizational contexts on accounting for the influence. 4.1. Practical implications Some practical managerial implications can be derived from the results of this study. The associations between PCB, acquiescent silence, and reduced job satisfaction suggest to organizations that striving to understand and honor the expectations of their employees concerning the employment relationship is an effective way of preventing the development of acquiescent silence and the lowering of job satisfaction in employees, the two negative behavioral and attitudinal consequences which are harmful to organizational performance. As organizations may inadvertently fail to meet the expectations of their employees concerning the employment relationship, the existence of a stronger ethical climate will work to reduce the negative influences of PCB on employees' job behaviors or attitudes as shown in their acquiescent silence and reduced job satisfaction. Nurturing a climate which is characterized as caring, non-instrumental, independent in decision making, and rules or law and code abiding can induce a perception of organizational morality in employees which will prove useful not only for enhancing ethicality of organizational decision makings but also for improving employment relationships in order to enhance organizational performance. 4.2. Limitations and future research The present study suffers from some limitations. First, the research was conducted in a single, high-tech industry in Taiwan; therefore, the generalization of its findings to other industries or societies must be made with caution. Future studies can be extended to include samples from other industries or other cultures for the purpose of improving the external validity of the findings. Second, we have made efforts to treat the problem of CMV, and found that its contamination of our findings might not be serious. As we were unable to collect the information about our variables from multiple sources, there remained a possibility for some CMV in our regression analyses, which might threaten the internal validity of our findings. It is recommended that future research expand the findings of this cross-sectional study by replicating the present model through longitudinal research designs in order to rule out common method bias and allow for more definitive causal conclusions. While we used cognitive dissonance to argue for a direct relationship between PCB and acquiescent silence, the sense-making process and the feeling of safety to suggest a moderation effect of PEC on the PCB–silence relationship, and the justification process to support the conjecture of a moderation effect of PEC on the mediation influence of acquiescent silence, we did not include these psychological mechanisms in our study. Future research can be conducted to verify if these mechanisms do account for the relationships between PCB, employee attitudes and behaviors, and organizational context for the purpose of broadening our understanding about the nomological network of perceived contract breach. Acknowledgments We thank the editor Professor Mark Lee Savickas and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this manuscript. The first author’s contribution was supported by a grant from the National Science Council in Taiwan (NSC 100-2410-H-009-003). References Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411–423. Aquino, K., Lewis, M. U., & Bradfield, M. (1999). Justice constructs, negative affectivity, and employee deviance: A proposed model and empirical test. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 1073–1091. Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Bal, P. M., De Lange, A. H., Jansen, P. G. W., & Van Der Veld, M. E. G. (2008). Psychological contract breach and job attitudes: A meta-analysis of age as a moderator. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, 143–158.

66

Y.-D. Wang, H.-H. Hsieh / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 57–66

Barnett, T., & Schubert, E. (2002). Perception of the ethical work climate and covenantal relationships. Journal of Business Ethics, 36, 279–290. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator reliable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personal and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. Bedeian, A. G., Ferris, G. R., & Kacmar, K. M. (1992). Age, tenure, and job satisfaction: A tale of two perspectives. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 40, 33–48. Biron, M. (2010). Negative reciprocity and the association between perceived organizational ethical values and organizational deviance. Human Relations, 63, 875–897. Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley. Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analyses. In K. J. Klein, & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349–381). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Bordia, P., Restubog, S. L. D., & Tang, R. L. (2008). When employees strike back: Investigating mediating mechanisms between psychological contract breach and workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1104–1117. Brayfield, A. H., & Rothe, H. F. (1951). An index of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 35, 307–311. Brislin, R. W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instrument. In W. Lonner, & J. Berry (Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural research (pp. 137–164). Beverly Hills: Sage. Cullen, J. B., Parboteeah, K. P., & Victor, B. (2003). The effects of ethical climates on organizational commitment: A two-study analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 46, 127–141. Deery, S. T., 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, 166–175. Dension, D. R. (1996). What is the difference between organizational culture and organizational climate? A native's point of view on a decade of paradigm wars. Academy of Management Review, 21, 619–654. 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, 1079–1098. Epitropaki, O. (2013). A multi-level investigation of psychological contract breach and organizational identification through the lens of perceived organizational membership: Testing a moderated-mediated model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 65–86. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16, 399–432. Kickul, J. R., Neuman, G., Parker, C., & Finkl, J. (2001). Settling the score: The role of organizational justice in the relationship between psychological contract breach and anticitizenship behavior. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 13, 77–93. Koh, H. C., & Boo, E. H. Y. (2001). The link between organizational ethics and job satisfaction: A study of managers in Singapore. Journal of Business Ethics, 29, 309–324. Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 114–121. Lo, S., & Aryee, S. (2003). Psychological contract breach in a Chinese context: An integrative approach. Journal of Management Studies, 40, 1005–1020. Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Patil, A. (2006). Common method variance in IS research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science, 52, 1865–1883. Martin, K. D., & Cullen, J. B. (2006). Continuities and extensions of ethical climate theory: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 175–194. Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171–194. Morrison, E. W. (2011). Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 5, 373–412. Morrison, E. W., & Milliken, F. J. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review, 25, 706–725. Morrison, E. W., & Robinson, S. L. (1997). When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review, 22, 226–256. Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2012). Employee voice behavior: A meta-analytic test of the conservation of resources framework. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 216–234. O'Donohue, W., & Nelson, L. (2009). The role of ethical values in an expanded psychological contract. Journal of Business Ethics, 90, 251–263. Pinder, C. C., & Harlos, K. P. (2001). Employee silence: Quiescence and acquiescence as response to perceived injustice. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management, Vol. 20. (pp. 331–369). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavior research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12, 531–544. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, 36, 717–731. Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185–227. Robinson, S. L., & Morrison, E. W. (2000). The development of psychological contract breach and violation: A longitudinal study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 525–546. Robinson, S. L., & Rousseau, D. M. (1994). Violating the psychological contract: Not the exception but the norm. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 245–259. Rosen, C. C., Chang, C. H., Johnson, R. E., & Levy, P. E. (2009). Perceptions of the organizational context and psychological contract breach: Assessing competing perspectives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 202–217. Rousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2, 121–139. Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Saari, L., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Employee attitudes and job satisfaction. Human Resource Management, 43, 395–407. Schneider, B. (1990). Organizational climate and culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Shore, L. M., & Tetrick, L. E. (1994). The psychological contract as an explanatory framework in the employment relationship. In C. L. Cooper, & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Trends in organizational behavior (pp. 91–109). New York: Wiley. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290–312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Tangirala, S., & Ramanujam, R. (2008). Employee silence on critical work issues: The cross level effects of procedural justice climate. Personnel Psychology, 61, 37–68. Turnley, W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (1999). The impact of psychological violations on exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect. Human Relations, 52, 895–922. Vakola, M., & Bouradas, D. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of organizational silence: An empirical investigation. Employee Relations, 27, 441–458. Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40, 1359–1392. Victor, B., & Cullen, J. B. (1988). The organizational bases of ethical work climates. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33, 101–125. Walumbwa, F. D., & Schaubroeck, J. (2009). Leader personality traits and employee voice behavior: Mediating roles of ethical leadership and work group psychological safety. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1275–1286. Wang, Y. D., & Hsieh, H. H. (2013). Organizational ethical climate, perceived organizational support, and employee silence: A cross-level investigation. Human Relations, 66, 783–802. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. Watson, D., & Slack, A. K. (1993). General factors of affective temperament and their relation to job satisfaction over time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 181–202. 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, 647–680.