Different Temporary Work Status, Different Behaviors in Organization

This study examined the contributions of the psychological contract framework to an understanding of the effects of different work statuses on employees' behavior. We compared temporary firm workers (n=71) with core workers (n=268) and direct-hire temporary workers (n=149) with core workers (n=...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of business and psychology 2006-03, Vol.20 (3), p.351-367
Main Authors: Chambel, Maria José, Castanheira, Filipa
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attitudes
Behavior
Business structures
Career development planning
Civics
Comparative studies
Developmental psychology
Employees
Employment
Flexibility
Hypotheses
Impact analysis
Industrial and organizational psychology
Labor force
Organizational behavior
Organizational psychology
Psychological aspects
Psychological research
Psychology
Social exchange theory
Social psychology
Temporary employment
Temporary labor
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study examined the contributions of the psychological contract framework to an understanding of the effects of different work statuses on employees' behavior. We compared temporary firm workers (n=71) with core workers (n=268) and direct-hire temporary workers (n=149) with core workers (n=42) in two different samples. As expected, temporary firm workers consider that they receive fewer socio-emotional inducements from the organization they work for (opportunities for promotion, career development, long-term employment), but direct-hire temporary workers who succeeded in having their contracts extended had a psychological contract in which socio-emotional components predominated. A psychological contract with a predominance of socio-emotional components was important for organizations because it mediated the influence of work status on civic virtue behaviors on the part of temporary firm workers, and directly and positively influenced these behaviors in direct-hired temporary workers (behaviors as assessed by their supervisors). Contrary to the hypothesis, psychological contract had a direct and positive influence on the in-role behavior of direct-hire temporary workers. The implications of the findings for psychological contract research are discussed.
ISSN:0889-3268
1573-353X
DOI:10.1007/s10869-005-9015-0