1、中文 3645 字， 2040 单词 ,12900 英文字符 外文翻译 原文： The Mediating Effects of Psychological Contracts on the Relationship Between Human Resource Systems and Role Behaviors: A Multilevel Analysis 作者： Jin-feng Uen Michael S. Chien Yu-Fang Yen 起止页码： 215223 出版日期（期刊号）： 2009 年 3 月 21 日 出版单位： Springer Science+Business
2、Media, LLC 2009 The Mediating Effects of Psychological Contracts on the Relationship Between Human Resource Systems and Role Behaviors: A Multilevel Analysis Abstract Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine the mediating effect of the psychological contracts on the relationship between huma
3、n resource (HR) systems and role behavior. Design/Methodology/Approach Multilevel analyses were conducted on data gathered from 146 knowledge workers and 28 immediate managers in 25 Taiwanese high-tech rms. Findings Relational psychological contracts mediated the relationship between commitment-base
4、d HR systems and in-role behaviors, as well as organizational citizenship behaviors. Transactional psychological contracts did not signicantly mediate these relationships. In addition, the results also indicated that commitment-based HR systems related positively to relational psychological contract
5、s and negatively to transactional psychological contracts. Practical Implications Commitment-based HR systems could elicit a wide range of knowledge workers behaviors that are benecial to the goals of the rms. Furthermore ,our ndings also provide insight into, how HR systems potentially elicit emplo
6、yees role behaviors. Organizations could elicit employees in-role behaviors by providing nancial and other non-nancial, but tangible, inducements and facilitate employees extra-role behaviors by providing positive experiences, such as respect, commitment, and support. Originality/Value The study is
7、one of the primary studies to empirically examine the mediating effect of psycho-logical contracts on HR systems and employee behaviors. Introduction Human Resource (HR) systems create and support employment relationships. Thus, psychological contracts can be treated as employees beliefs stemming fr
8、om the HR system. Furthermore, psychological contracts represent employees beliefs about mutual employment obligations.Employees tend to perform what they believe, that is, according to their psychological contracts. Thus, psycho-logical contracts are positively related to employees role behaviors,
9、turnover intentions, commitment, and trust. In other words, psychological contracts are not only formulated by HR systems but also inuence employee behaviors. Consequently, psychological contracts can be viewed as the linking mechanism between HR systems and employee behaviors. In the past decade, m
10、ost psychological contract research has focused on identifying the components of psychological contracts and the effects of the fulllment or the violation of psychological contracts by employers. For example, Robinson et al. (1994) found that the components of psychological contracts included expect
11、ations of high pay,pay based on the current level of performance, training,long-term job security, and career development. Based on these ndings, Robinson and Morrison (1995) further pro-posed that employees are less likely to engage in civic virtue behavior when these expectations were violated. In
12、 summary, researchers have conrmed that violated psychological contracts negatively inuence employees role behaviors while fullled psychological contracts have positive inuences. However, no studies have empirically examined psychological contracts as a linking mechanism between HR systems and emplo
13、yee behaviors. Accordingly, the goal of this study is to empirically examine psychological contracts as a mediator of the relationship between HR systems and role behaviors. Our results will provide insights regarding the reason for HR systems having an effect on employees role behaviors. Based on t
14、hese insights, HR practitioners will gain a better under-standing of how to facilitate employees role behaviors (e.g.,by offering them specic inducements). Subsequently, we provide a brief review of psychological contract research, discuss relationships between HR systems and psychological contracts
15、, and propose psychological contracts as mediators of the HR systememployee behavior relationship. HR systems are considered as an organizational level variable, whereas psychological contracts and role behaviors are both considered as individual level variables. Thus, relationships between HR syste
16、ms and these variables are considered cross-level relationships and will be tested accordingly. Psychological Contracts Initially, a psychological contract was dened as an implicit, unwritten agreement between parties to respect each others norms and mainly used as a framework that referred to the i
17、mplicitness of the exchange relationship between an employee and his/her employer. It did not acquire construct status until the seminal work of Rousseau in the 1990s. According to Rousseau (1989, 1995), a psycho-logical contract is an individuals belief regarding the terms and conditions of a recip
18、rocal exchange agreement between employees and employers. Furthermore, psycho-logical contracts include different kinds of mental models or schemas, which employees hold concerning reciprocal obligations in the workplace. In accordance with MacNeils (1985) typology of promissory contracts, Rousseau
19、(1990) also categorized psychological contracts into two types: transactional and relational. Based on Rousseau and McLean Parks (1993) framework, transactional and relational psychological contracts differ on the following ve characteristics: focus ,time frame, stability, scope, and tangibility. Sp
20、ecically, transactional contracts focus on economic terms, have a specic duration, are static, narrow in scope, and are easily observable. Relational contracts simultaneously focus on both economic and socio-emotional terms, have an indefinite duration, are dynamic, pervasive in scope, and are subje
21、ctively understood. In summary, transactional psychological contracts refer to employment arrangements with short-term exchanges of specied performance terms and relational psychological contracts refer to arrangements with long-term exchanges of non-specied performance terms. Empirical evidence sup
22、ports not only the existence of these two different types of psychological contracts, but also the movement between them. For example, Robinson et al. (1994) found that as contracts become less relational, employees perceived their employment arrangements to be more transactional in nature. Hypothes
23、is 1 Commitment-based HR systems will positively relate to relational psychological contracts. In contrast, when an organization applies a low commitment-based HR system, such as narrowly dened jobs, limited training efforts, relatively limited benets, and lower wages, employees will perceive that t
24、he organization has committed to offer them little to no training or career development. These perceptions will shape employeestransactional psychological contracts, which primarily focus upon the economic aspects of their short-term reciprocal exchange agreement with the organization. Accordingly, we hypothesize that commitment-based HR systems will negatively relate to transactional psychological contracts. Hypothesis 2 Commitment-based HR systems will negatively relate to transactional
