Pan-Pacific Conference XXXIV. Designing New Business Models in Developing Economies

indicated by a 6-point Likert scale, measuring hope
( = .86), efficacy ( = .90), resilience ( = .72),
and optimism ( = .75). Ethical practice entailed
asking employees to voluntary participate, with an
indication of opting out, if desired, and confirming
anonymity and confidentiality of results. A target
sample of 1406 blue and white collar workers from
different industries were selected, with a response of
only 597 usable respondents. The sample consisted
of 55.8% males, and 43.6% females (4 individuals
did not indicate their gender), with educational
levels varying from pre matric level to post graduate
degrees. The average age of the respondents was
36.45, varying between 18 and 64 years, of whom
43.7% were not married, 50.4% married or
cohabiting and 5.2% divorced, separated or
widowed (.7% missing). Most of the participants
indicated that they were black Africans (68.9%),
followed by White (16.4%), Indian (6.9%) and
Colored (7.5%) (1% missing). Data was analyzed
with SPSS. Multiple Regression Analysis
investigated the prediction of PCB as independent
variable with PsyCap as dependent variable.
RESULTS
The results of the relationship between PCB and
PsyCap is reported in Table 1.
Table 1 Stepwise Multiple Regression Analysis of breach with PsyCap factors as dependent variables
F(df) p B unst B st t p r
Dependent R R 2 Adjusted
variable
R 2
Self-efficacy .329 .108 .106 70.281
(1;582)
.000 -.329 -.340 -8.383 .000 -.329
p = .000
Hope .329 .108 .106 70.669
(1;583)
.000 -330 -.346 -8.406 .000 -.329
p = .000
Resilience .113 .013 .011 7.559
(1;587)
.000 -.106 -.113 -2.757 .006 -.113
p = .003
Optimism .251 .063 .061 39.226
(1;584)
.000 -.291 -.302 -6.263 .000 -.251
p = .000
Discussion
Table 1 indicates a significant negative correlation
as well as prediction of breach on all four the
PsyCap factors, with a prediction varying between
6.1% and 10.6%. For every unit that breach
increases, self-efficacy, hope, resilience and
optimism is respectively significantly negatively
influenced with .34, .35, .11 and .30 units. This
negative effect is in agreement with the literature
that breach leads to adverse effects in business [2]
[4] [6] [7] [8].
Limitations, future research and implications for
management
The results of the current study is limited to the
South African sample. More research needs to be
done in other countries. Future studies could
investigate the further adverse effects of breach and
its adverse effects in the business environment, as
well as factors that may enhance PsyCap.
This study emphasizes the importance of the dark
side of breach and serves as encouragement to
improve psychological contract relationships. This
investigation adds to the body of knowledge of
PsyCap – as far as could be established, this
relationship was measured for the first time.
CONCLUSION
It is important that industry should take note of the
potential advantage of management psychological
contract relationships to the benefit of the
organization and that potential breach should be
avoided at all costs.
REFERENCES
[1] D. Rousseau, “Psychological and implied
contracts in organizations,” Empl. Responsib.
Rights J., vol. 2, pp. 121–139, 1989.
[2] Y.-D. Wang and H.-H. Hsieh, “Employees’
reactions to psychological contract breach: A
moderated mediation analysis,” J. Vocat.
Behav., vol. 85, pp. 57–66, 2014.
[3] S. Van den Heuvel and R. Schalk, “The
relationship between fulfilment of the
psychological contract and resistance to change
during organizational transformations,” Soc. Sci.
Inf., vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 283–313, 2009.
[4] E. Ahmed, B. D’Netto, J. Chelliah, and E. Fein,
“Psychological contract breach: Consequences
of unkept promises of permanent employment,”
Contemp. Manag. Res., vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 183–
210, 2016.
[5] V. Cassar and R. B. Briner, “The relationship
between psychological contract breach and
organizational commitment: Exchange
imbalance as a moderator of the mediating role
of violation,” J. Vocat. Behav., vol. 78, no. 2,
26