QUALITATIVE STUDY ON THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE EXISTANCE OF THE EMPLOYEES’ PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT. THE CASE OF THE ROMANIAN AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of psychological contract (PC), which describes the promises that play the role of obligations within the employment relation, has become during the last thirty years a major analysis tool in the organizational behaviour field. However, it has been mainly used, almost exclusively, in North-American or British organizational contexts. Only recently the researches on the psychological contracts have turned towards other parts of the world such as China, Southern America or India. Despite this opening towards new horizons, the Eastern European countries mainly remain unexplored from the psychological contract perspective. Certain well-known researchers (for example Rousseau and Coyle-Shapiro) have even stated that the psychological contract simply doesn’t exist in this part of Europe. The present study which represents a part of the author’s doctoral thesis, demonstrates the opposite. Thus, our field research carried out in 2010 in two companies of the automotive industry in Romania on a sample of 31 participants, led us to conclude that the psychological contract is present in this country, too. By using a qualitative methodological approach inspired from the grounded theory, we have been able to notice that the foundations of the existence of the psychological contract are present in the analyzed sample. First of all, the employees benefit from contractual freedom, which allows them to negotiate the terms of their psychological contract and to begin or get out of an employment relation if it becomes unsatisfactory. Secondly, the employers benefit from a lot of flexibility when presenting the terms of the psychological contract to their employees. These two elements are derived from the market economy which is now being built in Eastern Europe and represent a significant change as compared to the employment relation characteristic to the centralized economy. Finally, our survey allowed us to seize, in the analyzed employment relation, the presence of two other elements sine qua non of the existence of the psychological contract in Romania, respectively the mutuality and the reciprocity. Anyway, our study led us to the conclusion that the psychological contract theory is relevant when it comes to analyzing the employment relation in this country. However, if the psychological contract principles can be applied and function properly in this context, other profound analyses are necessary in order to understand the characteristic features of the employer-employee relation in Romania.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".