Not seeing eye to eye: differences in supervisor and subordinate perceptions of and attributions for psychological contract breach

Abstract

Abstract This study examines supervisor and subordinate perceptions of and attributions for psychological contract breach. The data suggest that supervisor and subordinate perceptions are most likely to differ on the extent to which the organization violated its obligations to provide fair pay, advancement opportunities, and a good employment relationship. In addition, the results indicate that the greater the degree of psychological contract breach reported by subordinates, the less committed they are to the organization and the lower their job performance (as rated by their supervisor). Moreover, when psychological contract breach is perceived, supervisors' and subordinates' attributions regarding the reasons for the breach are likely to differ. Specifically, the findings suggest that subordinates are more likely to attribute breach to the organization's intentional disregard for the commitments that it had made to the employee, while supervisors are more inclined to attribute breach to situations beyond the organization's direct control. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.