The moderating effect of power distance on employee responses to psychological contract breach

Thomas J. Zagenczyk, Kevin S. Cruz, Janelle H. Cheung, Kristin L. Scott, Christian Kiewitz, Bret Galloway

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

35 Scopus citations

Abstract

Understanding how employees’ cultural values are related to their responses to promises broken by their organizations (i.e., psychological contract breach) is important given today’s global workplace. Although past research has found that psychological contract breach is positively associated with employee exit, voice and neglect and negatively associated with loyalty, we know little about the role that cultural values play in this process. We explore the role that power distance orientation—an employee’s acceptance of power differentials in society—plays in employee responses to breach. We argue that employees with high power distance orientations will be more likely to respond passively to breach (loyalty and neglect), whereas employees with low power distance orientations will be more likely to exhibit active responses to psychological contract breach (exit and voice). We tested our notions using a sample of 265 employees from different cultures across two points in time. Employees with high power distance orientations were less likely to respond to psychological contract breach with exit and voice than employees with low power distance orientations. However, power distance orientation did not significantly moderate the relationships between psychological contract breach and neglect or loyalty, respectively. We discuss theoretical and practical implications of our findings.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)853-865
Number of pages13
JournalEuropean Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology
Volume24
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2 2015

Keywords

  • Culture
  • Power distance
  • Psychological contracts
  • Social exchange

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The moderating effect of power distance on employee responses to psychological contract breach'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this