| The reciprocal exchange of an employee's time and effort in return for inducements defines the basic terms of the employment relationship. Research on employees' beliefs about this exchange, called a psychological contract, has focused almost exclusively on inducements delivered by the organization to the employee. However, the fundamental premise of an employment relationship is that the employee's receipt of inducements is contingent upon his or her contributions.; Combining inducements and contributions into an integrative model of the psychological contract raises a crucial theoretical question: how should these elements be combined to capture psychological contract fulfillment and violation? Competing approaches for linking inducements with contributions can be drawn from two prominent theoretical traditions: discrepancy theory and equity theory. These approaches are grounded in strong traditions but examination reveals that both embody untested and possibly unjustified assumptions. An alternative approach is developed suggesting that employees evaluate inducements and contributions by the extent to which these elements fulfill fundamental human needs. Relying on principles of need fulfillment a cognitive appraisal model of psychological contract evaluation is developed.; The discrepancy model, equity model, and one archetype of the cognitive appraisal model were tested experimentally by manipulating the levels of promised and delivered inducements and contributions and assessing participants' reactions to varied psychological contracts. All three models explain significant variance in participants' reactions suggesting that all three models of cognitive appraisal are viable. However, the constraints implied by the discrepancy and equity models were rejected indicating that appraisals do not conform to their predictions. Instead, the data support the archetype of the cognitive appraisal model and further analyses reveal the effects of fulfillment and violation. |
