Psychological Contract Breach, Work-Family Conflict and Self- Efficacy as Predictors of  Pro-Social Behaviour of Bank Employees

Abstract

The investigated psychological breach, work- conflict and self- efficacy as of pro-social behaviour. Two-hundred and seventy one (271) from six banks located in Port-Harcourt were used for the study. Four instruments were used, they include:

 

Psychological Contract Breach Scale, Work-Family Conflict Scale, Self-Efficacy Scale and Pro-Social Behaviour Scale. Three hypotheses were postulated and tested.

 

The findings showed that the first hypothesis which states that psychological contract breach (PCB) will not predict pro-social behaviour among bank employees was accepted (β=.001,ns), the result was not significant.

 

The second hypothesis which states that work-family conflict (WFC) will not predict pro-social behaviour among bank employees was rejected (β =-.13, P<.01),

the result proved significant, while the third hypothesis which states that self-efficacy will not predict pro- social behaviour among bank employees was also rejected ((β=.52, P<.001), the result showed a significant positive prediction. The result and implications were discussed and suggestions were made for further researchers.

Introduction

Background of Study

Organizations come into existence for specific purposes. One of them is to hire employees at different levels. It is the collective efforts of the employees that help organizations to achieve their purposes.

In this sense, organizations can be conceived of as “association of cooperative efforts” (Vivekanand & Pevekar, 2009).

The hiring of employees is generally done for specific positions which carry along with it well-specified roles and responsibilities, so that organization can move towards accomplishing its objectives in a well coordinated manner (Staw, 1984).

Recently, organizations have come to realize that in order to compete effectively in the hyper- competitive business environment, their employees must not only effectively carryout their designated roles,

they must also be willing to engage themselves in extra-role behaviours which generally fall outside the prescribed formal role, but which are nevertheless essential for the survival of the organization (Vivekanand & Pevekar, 2009).

Special focus has been placed on self-motivated employees whose actions extend  beyond the formal requirements of the job.

Dyne, Graham and Dienesch (1994) asserts that organizational employees are expected to not only follow written rules and job descriptions, but also spontaneously perform behaviours which go beyond delineated role expectations that benefit the organization.

The global economy is in shambles, hence organizations benefit from employees who voluntarily engage in work behaviours that go beyond formal requirements and expectations (Dyne et al., 1994).

References

Adams, J. S. (1965). “Inequity in social exchange”, in L. Berkowitz, (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Academic Press, New York, NY.

Amazue, L. O. (2011). Roles of cultural variations, self-esteem and gender in work- family conflict. An unpublished thesis, Department of Psychology University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

Argyris, C. (1960). Understanding organizational behaviour. Homewood, Illinois: Dorsery Press.

Aselage, J., & Eisenberger, R. (2003). Perceived organizational support and psychological contracts: A theoretical integration. Journal of Organization Behaviour, 24, 491-509.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-Efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.

StudentsandScholarship Team

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*