Psychological contract breach among allied health professionals: Fairness, individual differences and an aggravated breach effect
Journal of Health Organization and Management, ISSN: 1477-7266, Vol: 29, Issue: 3, Page: 393-412
2015
- 13Citations
- 3Usage
- 63Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations13
- Citation Indexes13
- 13
- CrossRef12
- Usage3
- Abstract Views3
- Captures63
- Readers63
- 32
- 31
Article Description
Purpose – Allied health professionals are vital for effective healthcare yet there are continuing shortages of these employees. Building on work with other healthcare professionals, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the influence of psychological contract (PC) breach and types of organisational justice on variables important to retention among allied health professionals: mental health and organisational commitment. The potential effects of justice on the negative outcomes of breach were examined. Design/methodology/approach – Multiple regressions analysed data from 113 allied health professionals working in a medium-large Australian healthcare organisation. Findings – The main negative impacts on respondents’ mental health and commitment were from high PC breach, low procedural and distributive justice and less respectful treatment from organisational representatives. The interaction between procedural justice and breach illustrates that breach may be forgivable if processes are fair. Surprisingly, a betrayal or “aggravated breach effect” may occur after a breach when interpersonal justice is high. Further, negative affectivity was negatively related to respondents’ mental health (affective outcomes) but not commitment (work-related attitude). Practical implications – Healthcare organisations should ensure the fairness of decisions and avoid breaking promises within their control. If promises cannot reasonably be kept, transparency of processes behind the breach may allow allied health professionals to understand that the organisation did not purposefully fail to fulfil expectations. Originality/value – This study offers insights into how breach and four types of justice interact to influence employee mental health and work attitudes among allied health professionals.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84929239657&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jhom-05-2013-0107; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25970532; http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/10.1108/JHOM-05-2013-0107; http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full-xml/10.1108/JHOM-05-2013-0107; http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JHOM-05-2013-0107; https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JHOM-05-2013-0107/full/html; https://researchbank.acu.edu.au/flb_pub/796; https://researchbank.acu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1795&context=flb_pub; http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JHOM-05-2013-0107; http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/JHOM-05-2013-0107; http://researchbank.acu.edu.au/flb_pub/796
Emerald
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know