《建立核心员工保留模型：新心理契约的再考虑》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《建立核心员工保留模型：新心理契约的再考虑（13页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、原文：原文： TowardsTowards a a contingentcontingent modelmodel ofof keykey staffstaff retention:retention:TheThe newnew psychologicalpsychological contractcontract reconsideredreconsideredGregory LeeTheories and evidence of widespread changes in employment relationships abound in literature. The organiza
2、tional environment is increasingly characterised by mandates of flexibility, reorganization, reengineering and downsizing. As a result, traditional perceptions of what is owed between an employee and an organization are subject to reappraisal. Such perceptions are encapsulated by the concept of the
3、psychological contract. Evidence suggests that in the transient global business environment, the psychological contract of employees and organizational representatives may be shifting towards a far more transactional paradigm. Transactional contracts describe perceptions that employment obligations
4、are more short-term, work content based and less relational. However in the case of key employee groups, such transactional relationships may conflict with an organisations need to retain its core skills and knowledge that form one of its only truly sustainable competitive advantages. Therefore dive
5、rgent and varied psychological contracts increase the difficulty of decisions regarding the long-term retention of key employees. An explanatory model is therefore presented here, allowing for the various permutations and effects on key staff retention that may arise from such differing perceptions.
6、 Organisational solutions and research propositions are suggested for future research.Psychological contracts and employee retentionIt should be noted that, in this context, staff “retention” is a concept not only concerned with stemming the dysfunctional turnover of key employees but also (equally
7、important) with the behaviours and attitudes that are evidenced if they stay (Flowers see Sheridan, 1992 for impact on turnover) as well as betrayal of trust (Robinson, 1996; Robinson Robinson, 1996; Robinson Turnley Horwitz, 1991). As a result, many organizations (especially large corporations) act
8、ively sought to insulate their workforce from the demands of the market by a somewhat artificial system of internal controls and mechanisms such as promotion and reward systems based on seniority.The “old” psychological contract that accompanied this belief was essentially a system of perceived rela
9、tional obligations. Employers generally offered employees almost absolute job security, consistent rewards, career management through steady training and advancement and long term company-defined benefit plans(retirement), in exchange for the expectation that employees would give all their loyalty a
10、nd effort to the company for the very long-term (Ehrlich, 1994). Individual employees and organizational decision-makers alike genuinely perceived these as the mutual obligations of a healthy employment relationship, and acted accordingly.However, the 1980s (later for many South African organization
11、s) saw the beginning of broad economic pressures such as the increasing globalization of business, changing demographics and information technology. These effectively shifted the sources of competitiveness (Ehrlich, 1994; Kissler, 1994). Organisations implemented increasingly stringent efforts to im
12、prove their productivity, including widespread restructuring, downsizing and flexibility drives that stripped organizations to a minimum of staff, with widespread terminations of mid-management in particular(Cappelli, 1992 Horwitz Hiltrop, 1996; but see Coldwell, 1993). In many cases, long term comp
13、any loyalty to employees has been replaced by the demands of having a flexible workforce that can adjust quickly to market needs, regardless of who needs to be hired, terminated or changed. Essentially, labour markets appear to have become far more market-driven or externalized (Cappelli, 1995).It s
14、hould be noted that neither the old contract nor the changes are necessarily representative of all (or even most) companies. However, where they have occurred, the wholesale reduction of job stability essentially rewrote the perceived obligations of psychological contracts. Employers had made it cle
15、ar through action that, with the new business environment, they could no longer be expected to owe employees the same obligations that had previously been perceived as core to the employment contract. Employees, initially shocked and depressed, have to varying degrees responded by adjusting their ow
16、n perceptions of mutual obligations. Literature reports the realization by many employees that they must discard the old assumptions of mutual loyalty and to some extent take responsibility for their own careers, without dependence on any one organization(Tornow, 1998; Hardijzer, 2000) Practitioners and academics have therefore observed and hypothesized the birth of a whole new psychological contract, with significantly different perceived obligations on both sides of the empl
