PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT VIOLATION, ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT AND EMPLOYEE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR AMONG CHINESE AND THAI ENTERPRISES: IN CROSS-CULTURAL CONTEXT

(1)

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT

VIOLATION, ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT AND EMPLOYEE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR

AMONG CHINESE AND THAI ENTERPRISES:

IN CROSS-CULTURAL CONTEXT

Ling Peng

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Management)

International College,

National Institute of Development Administration

2021

(2)

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT

VIOLATION, ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT AND EMPLOYEE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR

AMONG CHINESE AND THAI ENTERPRISES:

IN CROSS-CULTURAL CONTEXT Ling Peng

International College,

Major Advisor ( Zhongwu Li, Ph.D.)

The Examining Committee Approved This Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Management).

Committee Chairperson (Assistant Professor Sid Suntrayuth, Ph.D.)

Committee (Associate Professor Vesarach Aumeboonsuke, Ph.D.)

Committee (Associate Professor Jiafu Su, Ph.D.)

Committee (Professor Wang Bin, Ph.D.)

Committee ( Zhongwu Li, Ph.D.)

Dean (Associate Professor Piboon Puriveth, Ph.D.)

_____/_____/_____

(3)

ABST RACT

ABSTRACT

Title of Dissertation PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT VIOLATION, ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT

AND EMPLOYEE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR AMONG CHINESE AND THAI

ENTERPRISES: IN CROSS-CULTURAL CONTEXT

Author Ling Peng

Degree Doctor of Philosophy (Management)

Year 2021

With the increasingly fierce global competition and the continuous development of modern information technology, enterprises are confronted with tremendous challenges, along with the accompanying tense labor relations, which also makes the competition between employees more and more fierce, thus the negative behaviors of employees in the workplace are constantly emerging. Employees Counterproductive Work Behavior (ECB) has progressively attracted a topic of shared interest among academia and businesses, is pervasive among various types of organizations, is highly implicit and disruptive, makes it difficult for organizations to guard against, and poses a serious threat to the organization.

This study based on psychological contract violation (PCV), organizational commitment (OC), and employees counterproductive work behavior (ECB) related theory, build "PCV-OC-ECB" research model, through theoretical and empirical analysis to explore the relationship between PCV, OC and ECB, as well as the mediating role of OC.

In this study, 426 Chinese employees form Chinese enterprise and 247 Thai employees from Thailand enterprise were selected as samples, among which the Chinese samples were from 8 enterprises in central, western and southern China, and the Thai samples were from 4 enterprises in Thailand-China Rayong Industrial Park.

Using literature research method, questionnaire survey method, SPSS 21.0 and AMOS21.0 as data analysis tools, the reliability and validity of the data were analyzed, and the path analysis and group analysis were conducted by constructing SEM to verify the research hypothesis proposed in this paper.

(4)

iv

The innovation points of this study are as follows: 1) OC is introduced as the intermediary variable in the relationship between PCV and ECB for the first time, and a research model of "PCV-OC-ECB" is constructed to explore the intermediary role of OC. 2) Breaking the limitation of single-dimension research on PCV and ECB, the research on three dimensions of PCV and two dimensions of ECB was carried out. 3) Expanded the theoretical research on the relationship between PCV and ECB of Turnley and others. 4) The cross-group research on ECB in Thailand and China enterprises is carried out for the first time, which enriches the research methods and contents.

The conclusions of this study are: 1) PCV has a significant positive impact on ECB; 2) PCV has a significant negative impact on OC; 3) OC has a significant negative impact on ECB; 4) OC plays a mediating role in the relationship between PCV and ECB. 5) There are significant differences in the relationship among the dimensions of PCV, OC and ECB among Chinese-Thai employees.

Based on the research conclusions, this paper derives management implications as: 1) Organizations can improve the relationship between the organization and employees by strengthening their organizational management practices; 2) Increase employee commitment to the organization and reduce the probability of employee counterproductive work behavior; 3) Respect employees from different cultural backgrounds and enhance cultural integration; 4) Implement differentiated human resources management.

(5)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT S

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Three years of doctoral study is coming to an end. During these three years, I have gained a lot and made great progress. All this is due to the support and help from my advisor, classmates and family.

First of all, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to my advisor, Dr.Zhongwu Li for the continuous support given in my Ph.D study and research. His guidance helped me in every aspect of my research and with the writing of this thesis.

His rigorous academic attitude and profound theoretical foundation have promoted my scientific research ability greatly. I admire him for his integrity, his approachable personality and his unique insight into the cutting-edge issues of current research.

Dr.Zhongwu Li noble ethics are my role model. It is a great honor in my life to be his student.

Secondly, sincerely thank Dr.Jiafu Su for giving me advice and help during the writing of my thesis. Thanks to my good partners Yupei Du and Na Wei who accompanied me in my doctoral study. It was their help and encouragement that enabled me to overcome one difficulty after another and get close to the shore of victory. Thanks to the alumni and friends who helped me complete the survey. Thanks to my leaders and colleagues for their support and help in my work, so that I can carry out my scientific research work smoothly. Thanks to the paper review and defense experts, Thank you for your hard work.

Finally, Thanks to my family for their silent support. In the past three years, I have been so busy with my studies and work that I have no time to care about my family. However, they did not complain at all. Thank you for your understanding, support and tolerance.

My doctoral study is coming to an end, but my academic research career has only just begun. In the future, I will encourage myself to keep going and make more achievements on the road of scientific research.

Ling Peng October 2021

(6)

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 2.1 Summary of Psychological Contract Scale ... 26

Table 3.1 Enterprise Distribution Information... 77

Table 3.2 Psychological Contract Violation Scale ... 81

Table 3.3 Organizational Commitment Scale ... 82

Table 3.4 Employee Counterproductive Work Behavior Scale ... 84

Table 3.5 Distribution of Pre-test Samples (N = 168) ... 85

Table 3.6 Descriptive Statistics... 86

Table 3.7 Reliability Analysis of the Scale ... 88

Table 3.8 Reliability Analysis of Psychological Contract Violation ... 89

Table 3.9 Reliability Analysis of Organizational Commitment Scale ... 90

Table 3.10 Reliability Analysis Results of Employee Counterproductive Work Behaviors ... 92

Table 3.11 Validity Analysis Results of Psychological Contract Violation ... 94

Table 3.12 Validity Analysis Results of Organizational Commitment ... 95

Table 3.13 Validity Analysis Results of Employees' Counterproductive Work Behavior ... 96

Table 4.1 Basic Situation of Chinese Samples ... 98

Table 4.2 Basic Information of Thailand Samples ... 99

Table 4.3 Descriptive Statistical Analysis of Chinese Sample ... 101

Table 4.4 Descriptive Statistical Analysis of Thailand Sample ... 101

Table 4.5 Total Reliability Analysis ... 102

Table 4.6 Reliability Analysis of China Sample Scale ... 103

Table 4.7 Total Reliability Analysis ... 105

Table 4.8 Thai Sample Scale Reliability Analysis... 105

Table 4.9 Validity Analysis Results of Each Variable ... 108

Table 4.10 Common Method Deviation Test ... 110

(12)

Table 4.11 Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis ... 113

Table 4.12 Fitting Index of the Model ... 114

Table 4.13 Discriminant Validity Analysis ... 115

Table 4.14 Validity Analysis Results of Each Variable ... 116

Table 4.15 Common Method Deviation Test ... 118

Table 4.16 Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results ... 121

Table 4.17 Fitting Index of the Model ... 122

Table 4.18 Discriminant Validity Analysis ... 123

Table 4.19 Matrix of Pearson Correlation Coefficients for Each Dimension of PCV, OC and ECB ... 124

Table 4.20 Correlation Analysis Results ... 124

Table 4.21 Model Fitting Index ... 127

Table 4.22 Path Coefficient between Variables ... 128

Table 4.23 The Mediation Effect Test ... 133

Table 4.24 Model Fit Index ... 136

Table 4.25 Path Coefficient between Variables ... 136

Table 4.26 Mediation Effect Test ... 141

Table 4.27 Parameter Estimates of Each Model 1 ... 145

Table 4.28 Parameter Estimates of Each Model 2 ... 151

Table 4.29 CMIN ... 157

Table 4.30 Baseline Comparisons... 157

Table 4.31 RMSEA ... 157

Table 4.32 Assuming Model Unconstrained to be Correct... 158

Table 4.33 Assuming Model Measurement Weights to be Correct ... 158

Table 4.34 Assuming Model Measurement Intercepts to be Correct ... 158

Table 4.35 Assuming Model Structural Covariances to be Correct ... 159

Table 4.36 CMIN ... 168

Table 4.37 Baseline Comparisons... 168

Table 4.38 RMSEA ... 169

Table 4.39 Assuming Model Unconstrained to be Correct... 169

Table 4.40 Assuming Model Measurement Weights to be Correct ... 170

Table 4.41 Assuming Model Measurement Intercepts to be Correct ... 170

(13)

Table 4.42 Assuming Model Structural Weights to be Correct ... 170

Table 4.43 Assuming Model Structural Covariances to be Correct ... 171

Table 4.44 Assuming Model Structural Residuals to be Correct ... 171

Table 4.45 Summary of Hypothesis... 173

(14)

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 1.1 Research Limitations and Future Prospects ... 12

Figure 2.1 Discrepancy Model of Phycological Contract Violation ... 25

Figure 2.2 Dynamic Development Model of Psychological Contract Violation ... 26

Figure 2.3 Employee Reactions to Psychological Contract Violation ... 32

Figure 2.4 Theoretical Model of Affective Events ... 47

Figure 2.5 Theory Model ... 61

Figure 2.6 Conceptual Framework Model ... 62

Figure 3.1 Diagrams of the Psychological Contract Violation of Dimension ... 73

Figure 3.2 Organization Commitment Dimension Diagram... 74

Figure 3.3 Dimensional Diagram of Counterproductive Work Behavior... 75

Figure 4.1 Confirmatory Factors Analysis of Model Graph (diagram of CFA) ... 112

Figure 4.2 Confirmatory Factors Analysis of Model Graph ... 120

Figure 4.3 Standardization Way Estimate of SEM ... 126

Figure 4.4 Standardized Path Estimation of Structural Equation Model ... 135

Figure 4.5 Unconstrained SEM for China Group ... 161

Figure 4.6 Unconstrained SEM for Thailand Group ... 161

Figure 4.7 Measurements Weights Congruent Model for China Group ... 162

Figure 4.8 Measurement Weights Congruent Model for Thailand Group ... 162

Figure 4.9 Measurement Intercept Congruent Model for China Group ... 163

Figure 4.10 Measurement Intercept Congruent Model for Thailand Group ... 163

Figure 4.11 Structural Weights Congruent Model for China Group ... 164

Figure 4.12 Structural Weights Congruent Model for Thailand Group ... 164

Figure 4.13 Structural Covariances Congruent Model for China Group ... 165

Figure 4.14 Structural Covariances Congruent Model for Thailand Group ... 165

Figure 4.15 Structural Residuals Congruent Model for China Group ... 166

Figure 4.16 Structural Residuals Congruent Model for Thailand Group ... 166

(15)

Figure 4.17 Completely Congruent Model for China Group ... 167 Figure 4.18 Completely Congruent Model for Thailand Group ... 167

(16)

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Research Background

With increasing market competition, firms also face great challenges. How to maintain a good employment relationship is a timeless issue that firms have to face because a poor employment, which leaves employees with negative emotions, can even harm the organization. counterproductive work behavior, as an implicit and pervasive problem, is the explicit or implicit harmful behavior that employees implement in the workplace to the organization and the stakeholders of the organization (Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001). The term "counterproductive work behavior" was first coined by Fallon, Avis, Kudisch, Gornet, and Frost (2000), who suggested that this term was more consistent with a managerial perspective, and then it gradually attracted much attention from scholars at home and abroad.

counterproductive work behavior has a dual impact on the organization with its employees, interfering not only with the organization's health development but also with the development of human society.

Harper (1990) research shows that 33% to 75% of employees in the United States have engaged in anti-productive activities such as theft, computer fraud, corruption, damage to property, and deliberate absenteeism. Taking 20 enterprise employees in China as the research objects, Zhang and Wang (2008) mainly conduct research analysis on 13 counterproductive work behaviors, such as rudeness, violence, steal, and destruction in the workplace, and the results show that in the workplace, employees counterproductive work behaviors exist in the organization in different degrees. Na-Nan, Pukkeeree, Sanamthong, Wongsuwan, and Dhienhirun (2020), focusing on 386 enterprise employees in Thailand, pointed out that fraud existed in 39% of the organizations, while 89% of the fraud was all caused by their own staff operations, and internal fraud has become a significant barrier against competitiveness

(17)

in Thailand. With the development of science and technology, the advent of the big data era, employee counterproductive work behavior is more implicit and destructive, and such employee counterproductive work behaviors as cybercrime, data Exodus, and illegal theft of user information are frequent, causing irreversible losses to enterprises and society, which becomes the most difficult problem for modern enterprises.

With the global economic integration and the promotion of China's "One Belt, One Road" policy, the number of Chinese-Thai multinational enterprises is increasing continuously, and China ranked second (Japan's first) in terms of direct investment to Thai between January and June 2019, reaching 24.2 billion Thai baht, which increased to 5.3 fold compared with the previous year (Zeng & M., 2020). Therefore, it is urgent for multinational companies to study employee behavior in order to effectively manage employees from different cultural backgrounds. Among the existing studies, there are few studies based on comparing the differences in the counterproductive work behaviors of employees of firms under different national and cultural contexts based on cross-cultural contexts. Kickul, Lester, and Belgio (2004), using 60 US employees and 76 Hong Kong Chinese employees, showed that employees from both cultures differ in their perception of the psychological contract, with US workers having weaker perceptions of breach than Hong Kong employees, as well as more negative reactions to the perceived undermining of intrinsic outcomes, and Hong Kong employees responded more negatively to perceived disruption of external outcomes. Y. Xu and Hong (2010) conducted a study on China's over-investment chemical enterprises in Thailand. The results show that there are significant differences in behaviors, incentive patterns and cultural factors between China and Thailand. Chinese employees pay more attention to salary, benefits and career development, while Thai employees pay more attention to having adequate vacation and relaxed and friendly work environment. Y. Zhu (2014) conducted a cross-cultural study of a group in China operating companies in Thailand, and the study showed that Thai employees differ from Chinese managers in values, thinking styles, and communication patterns, which lead to suboptimal business objectives for Thai companies. For example: While China is oriented toward performance goals and communication models focus on collective decision making, Thai employees like

(18)

long-term goals, the comparative nature of accomplishing tasks, frequent delays, unprovoked absenteeism, diffuse work, and reluctance to overtime, all pose challenges to Chinese managers. Therefore, based on the cross-cultural scenario, it is urgent to examine the influencing factors for the differences in counterproductive work behaviors between employees in China and Thailand.

However, why do employees implement counterproductive work behaviors?

What are the variables that induce counterproductive work behavior? By sorting out the existing literature, from the results of previous studies, there are three types of factors in general: First, personal factors, such as: personal personality traits (De Clercq, Haq, & Azeem, 2019), self-awareness (Schreurs, Hamstra, Jawahar, &

Akkermans, 2020), values (Naseer, Raja, Syed, & Baig, 2020), interpersonal relationships (Yang & Diefendorff, 2009), and so on; Second, organizational factors, such as the organization's environment (Clark & Walsh, 2016), organization's culture (Zheng, Wu, Chen, & Lin, 2017), and leadership change (Osei, Asiedu-Appiah, &

Amoah, 2020); Third, work factors, such as job stress (Devonish, 2013) and job characteristics (Hackman & Lawler, 1971).

However, less research has been done on the internal psychological factors of individuals, such as the employee's perception of organizational accountability (S. L.

Robinson & Rousseau, 1994). Since it is individuals who implement counter productive actions, there must necessarily be a psychometric process in the processes by which counter productive actions arise, such as: employees perceive that pay is not proportional to pay off, or expect to vary greatly from reality, employers' promises and responsibilities are not redeemed or foretells, and employees experience disappointment, anger, and thus elicit the generation of negative behaviors in employees (Morrison & Robinson, 1997). So, why do employees perceive organizational inequity? And how are the psychological processes that lead from employee perceptions to the implementation of counterproductive work behavior generated? Are there paths to lower employee counterproductive work behavior generation? These questions above all require an employee based psychological perspective to ask what are employees' intrinsic motivations to implement counter productive behaviors and what psychological factors shape them. In this regard, Argyris (1960) first proposed the "Psychological Contract" and defined it as an

(19)

unwritten commitment of the organization to employees and the expectation of the organization, which is a default agreement between employers and employees. A psychological contract, as a subjective form of contract, may have its contents in relation to which contractual provisions are made under a formal written contract, but more informally, aspects not covered by a written contract (Rousseau, 1995). From the early stages of theory, studies based on the theory of psychological contract are all those of a static model, and it seems very reasonable to state theoretically that a psychological contract exists on both subjects, but there is a dilemma of operability difficulties when it is applied to the study of scenarios. For example: How do you expect to be measured? How do I balance the expectations of both parties? In this confused context, Morrison and Robinson (1997) proposed a dynamic development model of psychological contract violation, which illustrates the process of psychological contract violation. When an organization breaks its promise, fails to fulfil its promise or employers have poor communication due to different understanding, employees will form perception differences based on their own perception, and then make psychological comparisons. If employees perceive that they have not been treated fairly and the organization has not fulfilled their promise, they will perceive the breach of the psychological contract and finally experience the process of psychological contract violation. In this process, employees will produce a series of complex psychological perception process and emotional reaction process, and each stage of Psychological Contract Violation will be affected by the complex cognitive processing of employees. Whereas Turnley and Feldman (1999) proposed the outcome variable model of psychological contract violation and shows that psychological contract violation leads to the production of four types of behavior (withdrawal, reduction of in role behavior, reduction of extra role behavior, and antisocial behavior), it can be seen that psychological contract violation leads to the implementation of productive behavior by employees. Therefore, this study argues that psychological contract violations have a predictive role for counterproductive work behavior. Morrison and Robinson (1997) proposed that breaking a psychological contract reduces an employee's organizational commitment. Research by Meyer and Allen (1991) shows that organizational commitment is positively correlated with organizational citizenship behavior. Thus, organizational commitment plays a

(20)

mediating role between psychological contract violation and counterproductive work behavior.

At the same time, the psychological contract is not only influenced by individual, organizational, economic, political, and cultural factors, but also different from the times, which has the characteristics of the times (Chen et al., 2003). In the past compared to the present, the psychological contract has varied no matter from the focus of concern, the form of the contract, the contractual relationship, as well as professional life management, eg, the past contract focused on the guarantees of the work, ei, the working relationship, and the present contract focused on the transaction and employability, ei, the salary benefits and the development opportunities.

Therefore, based on the modern enterprise scenarios and the background of the times, the research on psychological contract violation and employee counterproductive work behavior still deserves attention, especially the mediating effect of "organizational commitment", which needs further study.

1.2 Statement of Questions

Counterproductive work behavior are prevalent among Chinese firms (Zhang

& Wang, 2008). With the rapid economic development and the arrival of big data era, counterproductive work behavior exhibits a more implicit and destructive behavior pattern, for example, Alibaba employees trade user information, leading to the disclosure of information from Alipay 10 million registered users (Yun, 2015), therefore, the study of such counterproductive work behavior is urgent in the current era context.

Why do employees implement counterproductive work behaviors? Since counterproductive work behaviors of employees are harmful to the organization, researchers have been exploring the factors that influence employees' counterproductive work behaviors, hoping to find solutions to reduce the harm to the organization. Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) found that work events occurring in the workplace can affect employees' affective reactions, which in turn can affect employees' job attitudes and behaviors, e.g., the work environment, working conditions, as well as job characteristics can influence employees' job attitudes and,

(21)

consequently, driving behaviors. Morrison and Robinson (1997) believed that when organizations break their words, fail to deliver on their promises or employers fail to communicate smoothly due to differences of understanding, employees will have a series of complex psychological perception and emotional reaction processes, which ultimately lead to violation of psychological contract. Turnley and Feldman (1999) found that when a psychological contract violation occurs, employees respond in four ways: quitting, reducing performance within roles, reducing performance outside roles, and anti-social behavior. Therefore, individual characteristics, organizational practices, and work events all affect employees' work attitudes and behaviors. What are the factors that influence employees' counterproductive work behavior? What is the internal mechanism of its influence? These all need to be further validated in the current context.

How to reduce employee counterproductive work behavior? In the actual workplace, when an employee perceives a breach of the psychological contract, some will behave in an extremely negative manner, whereas some will not experience much emotional fluctuation and will even proactively remonstrate, waiting for the organization to change. Freese and Schalk (1996) holds that the higher an employee perceives "organizational self-responsibility", the higher the employee's commitment to the organization. Employee high affective commitment to the organization will inhibit employee negative behavior generation (Zhou, Long and Wang, 2016), and therefore, whether employee organizational commitment has a mediating role between psychological contract violations and employee counterproductive work behaviors and whether it can inhibit the occurrence of counterproductive work behaviors by enhancing employee commitment to the organization deserves thorough study.

In addition, current group contrast studies on employee counterproductive work behaviors are less lacking in cross-cultural scenarios. H. Yu and A. (2008) based his sample on 231 employees in China and America, the results show that Chinese employees value the relational dimension more, whereas US employees value the transaction and work dimensions more, and US employees are more likely to develop negative job attitudes when the psychological contract is violated. Existing research on employee behavior differences in Chinese-Thai enterprises is scarce, mainly

(22)

focusing on employee lateness, work performance and other aspects (Y. Xu & Zhao, 2010). Chinese enterprises value the achievement of task objectives and are dominated by performance management, therefore Chinese enterprise employees are more stressful to work, pay attention to personal development and job challenges, and have a strong sense of competition, while Thai enterprises value the harmony of interpersonal relationships and advocate easy completion of work tasks, therefore, Thai enterprise employees are mostly self-disciplined, like to follow nature and do not advocate competition (Hang, 2020). Based on two different cultural backgrounds, it is a matter of concern to study the differences of counterproductive work behaviors of employees in Chinese-Thai enterprises and their internal mechanism. At the same time, this study can help Chinese-Thai multinational companies effectively manage local employees and provide suggestions with theoretical and practical value.

1.3 Research Purpose

The purpose of this study is to explore the impact of psychological contract violation on employee counterproductive work behavior and the underlying influencing mechanisms, aiming to analyze from the perspective of psychological contract why employees would implement counterproductive work behavior, and introduce "organizational commitment" as a mediating variable to provide a theoretical basis for preventing and reducing the occurrence of employee counterproductive work behavior. Meanwhile, to compare the differences in employee counterproductive work behaviors between China and Thailand, and provide a theoretical basis for the management practices of the Chinese-Thai multinational enterprises. The purpose of the study was as follows.

1) To explore the impact of psychological contract violation on employee counterproductive work behavior and further explain, where each dimension is related to the impact of counterproductive work behavior, and to systematically and comprehensively reveal the relationship between psychological contract violation and employee counterproductive work behavior, in an attempt to explore the main factors that lead to employee implementation of counterproductive work behavior.

(23)

2) Examining the impact of psychological contract violation on organizational commitment and further revealing the correspondence across dimensions, while verifying that psychological contract violation reduces employee commitment to the organization and affects the relationship between the organization and the employee, and breaks through the existing single dimension research model (De Clercq et al., 2019; Ma, Lassleben, & Ma, 2019), expands the multidimensional relationship model of psychological contract violation and counterproductive work behavior.

3) Identify the impact of organizational commitment on employees' counterproductive work behavior, and further reveal the relationship between dimensions of organizational commitment and employees' counterproductive work behavior, in order to explore the internal mechanism of employees' counterproductive work behavior, provide a feasible path to reduce employees' counterproductive work behavior, and enrich existing research.

4) To explore the difference in the impact between psychological contract of employees and employee counterproductive work behaviors between China and Thailand, and analyze the factors contributing to the difference in employee behaviors between the two countries, so as to provide theoretical basis and feasible suggestions for resolving the existing differences between Chinese and Thai multinational enterprises in HRM.

1.4 Research Questions

This study treats "psychological contract violation" as the independent variable, organizational commitment as the mediating variable, and employee counterproductive work behavior as the dependent variable to construct the research model. The research questions were as follows.

1) Does psychological contract violation have a significant impact on employees' counterproductive work behavior?

2) Is there a negative relationship between psychological contract violations and organizational commitment?

(24)

3) Is there a negative relationship between organizational commitment and employee counterproductive work behavior?

4) Is there a mediating role for organizational commitment in the relationship of psychological contract violation to employee counterproductive work behavior?

5) In cross-cultural context, are there significant differences between the effects of psychological contract violations on employees' counterproductive work behaviors between China and Thailand?

1.5 Research Significance

1.5.1 Theoretical Significance

This study is based on Turnley's (1999) psychological contract breach theory, as well De Clercq et al. (2019); Ma et al. (2019) psychological contract breach model, and extends it theoretically. The theoretical significance of this study is mainly reflected in the following three aspects.

1) It enriches the theory of psychological contract violation

This study builds on Turnley's (1999) theory of psychological contract violation to verify the impact of psychological contract violation on employee counterproductive work behavior and, combined with the current research context, defines each dimension of psychological contract violation. At the same time, in view of the insufficiency of the existing research models, this study introduces organizational commitment into the research model as an intermediary variable, which helps to understand the mechanism of psychological contract violation on employees' counterproductive work behavior, Meanwhile, an exploratory test is conducted to examine whether organizational commitment plays a mediating role between psychological contracts and counterproductive work behaviors, which further expands the mediating effect model of organizational commitment and enriches psychological contract violation single dimension model (De Clercq et al., 2019; Ma et al., 2019).

(25)

2) Expanding the study of the relationship between psychological contract violations and counterproductive work behavior in a cross-cultural context.

Multinational enterprises continue to increase as the economy develops, while comparative studies of employee counterproductive work behavior based on the cross-cultural context are lacking in the available studies, and the research field is mainly focused on cross-cultural studies in European and Asian countries. Therefore, in this study, employees' counter-productive behaviors of enterprises in China and Thailand are studied, and a SEM model is constructed to make a group comparative analysis to supplement the current research field on employees' counter-productive behaviors in cross-cultural context, especially in Asian countries, which expands the relationship between psychological contract violation and employees' counter-productive behaviors in cross-cultural context.

1.5.2 Practical Significance

This study explores the Counterproductive Work Behavior of employees from the perspective of psychological contract violation, and its practical value to enterprises is reflected in two aspects.

1) Provide theoretical support for organizations that need to pay attention to the relationship between employee's psychological contract and counterproductive work behavior

For the research perspective of psychological contract, current findings mainly focus on the perspective of individuals (De Clercq et al., 2019) and organizations (Zheng et al., 2017), as well as the perspective of individuals and organizations (Ma et al., 2019), but rarely take into account whether individual perceptions match with those of organizations, and whether the responsibilities and obligations fulfilled by firms are really required by employees, such as: the knowledge of training, not required by staff, resulting in academic non use. Therefore, it is important to focus on employee psychological violation perceptions and enhance HRM practices. This study aims to explore its relationship with employee counterproductive work behaviors from the perspective of employee psychological contract and provide a theoretical support for how to improve the employment relationship in organizational reality.

(26)

2) Provide countermeasures for Chinese and Thai multinational enterprises to prevent and reduce employees' counterproductive work behavior.

The study of counterproductive work behavior, in which the investigators base their studies on different epochs, also makes all the differences in findings. Then, based on the current big era data context, employee counterproductive work behavior is more implicit and extremely injurious to the organization. This paper focuses on employees of Chinese and Thai enterprises and tries to explore differences in the psychological, emotional and behavioral aspects of employees under different cultural scenarios to provide feasible suggestions and solutions for HRM in Chinese and Thai multinational enterprises.

1.6 Technical Route and Overall Framework

1.6.1 Technical Route

The technical route of this research is shown in Figure 1.1.

(27)

Figure 1.1 Research Limitations and Future Prospects

The research methods Introduction

Literature Review

Psychological contract violation

Organizational commitment

Counterproducti ve behavior

Cross-cultural research

Theoretical basis

Research model and

research

Research design

Variable definitions

Questionnaire design and compilation

Data collection

Pre-test analysis

Results analysis and discussion testing

Discussion The data analysis

Conclusion

The research conclusion Management implications Research limitations and future prospects

(28)

1.6.2 Overall Framework

According to the research technical route, this study is divided into five chapters, and the main content of each chapter is as follows:

Chapter 1, Introduction. Introduce the research background, state the problem and significance of the research, list the technical route and overall framework of the research, and propose innovation points for the paper.

Chapter 2, Literature Review. To sort out the relevant research literature of this study, which includes the concepts, dimensions, measurements of three variables, namely psychological contract violation, organizational commitment, and employee counterproductive work behavior, and summarize the relationship between psychological contract violation and organizational commitment, the relationship between psychological contract violation and employee counterproductive work behavior, and the relationship between organizational commitment and employee counterproductive work behavior, and the inadequacy of existing studies. Explain the theoretical basis of this study including psychological contract difference model, psychological contract response model and emotional event theoretical model, describe the research model and conceptual framework model of this study, and put forward the research assumptions of this study.

Chapter 3, Research Method. To define the three variables of psychological contract violation, organizational commitment, employee counterproductive work behavior, to describe the design of the scale, the determination of the sample size, and the collection and research methods of the data, and to analyze the sample distribution, reliability, and validity of the predictive data.

Chapter 4, Result and discussion. To describe the sample basic situation, sample descriptive statistical analysis, scale reliability analysis, exploratory factor analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis of the formal test data. To conduct group difference analysis on the Chinese and Thai samples through independent sample T- test, and to validate the relationship among psychological contract violation, organizational commitment and employee counterproductive work behavior one by one through building SEM model, correlation analysis and regression analysis.

Discuss the results of hypothesis validation and analyze the reasons for the supported and unsuccessful hypotheses.

(29)

Chapter 5, Research conclusions. To summarize the conclusions drawn from this study, indicate the implications of the findings for corporate management practices, and make management recommendations, as well as point out the limitations of the study and give an outlook on the future.

1.7 Research Innovations

1) Organizational commitment is introduced into the model as an intermediary variable for the first time, which expands the theory of psychological contract violation.

This study addresses the current situation in which the mediating variables are under researched to introduce organizational commitment into the research model as the mediating variable, which is helpful for understanding the mechanism of the psychological contract violation's action on employee counterproductive work behavior, supplemented with a theoretical model of psychological contract violation, and examined the mediating role of organizational commitment between psychological contract and counterproductive work behavior by explorative testing, further extends the mediating effects model of organizational commitment and enriches Turn's (1999) psychological contract violation theory, as well as (Ma et al., 2019) and De Clercq et al. (2019) theory model of psychological contract violation.

2) Provide a new theoretical basis for the influence path of psychological contract violation on counterproductive work behavior in combination with the current research background.

This research divides psychological contract violation and counterproductive work behavior into multi-dimensions based on the complex and sensitive employment relationship faced by both employers in the new era, and analyses the influence path of each dimension, confirms the importance of psychological contract violation on counterproductive work behavior, and explores the influence path of three dimensions of psychological contract violation on counterproductive work behavior on two dimensions, as well as provides a new theoretical basis for influencing factors of counterproductive work behavior in the workplace.

(30)

3) This is the first time to explore the differences between employees in Chinese-Thai enterprises in the relationship between violation of psychological contract and counterproductive work behavior, expanding the relationship between violation of psychological contract and counterproductive work behavior under cross- cultural background.

Based on the cross-cultural context in which there is a paucity of studies on employee counterproductive work behaviors in the available studies, and the research area is mainly focused on cross-cultural studies in European and Asian countries, this study firstly makes a group comparative analysis on counterproductive work behaviors of employees in Chinese and Thai enterprises, and further supplements the current research field on counterproductive work behaviors of employees in cross- cultural context, especially in Asian countries, which expands the relationship between psychological contract violation and counterproductive work behaviors of employees in cross-cultural context.

4) Providing practical guidance for realizing the differential management of human resources in Chinese-Thai multinational enterprises.

This paper takes the employees of enterprises in China and Thailand as research objects, and tries to explore the differences of psychological, emotional and behavioral of employees under different cultural situations, which provides effective solutions for the differentiated management of human resources of both Thai enterprises invested in China and Chinese enterprises invested in Thailand to achieve HRM. In addition, the research model can also be used to study the differences of employee productive behavior in other multinational enterprises.

(31)

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Psychological Contract Violation

Psychological contract theory is the bond that maintains the employment relationship between the employee and the organization, and the degree of fulfillment of the psychological contract has a positive or negative effect on employee behavior, in which the negative effect is mainly caused by psychological contract violations, and therefore, the development of psychological contract theory also contains the development of psychological contract violations.

2.1.1 Summary of Psychological Contract Theory

2.1.1.1 Connotation and Development of Psychological Contract Theory………..

By sorting out the existing literature, the development of the theory of psychological contract can be divided into the early stage of the theory generation and the development stage, in which the early stage is mainly the budding stage of the psychological contract concept, represented by scholars such as Chris Argyris and Levinson, while the developmental stage is the formation and development of the psychological contract concept, mainly represented by Rousseau's narrow psychological contract theory and Guest's generalized psychological contract theory.

1) The early stage of psychological contract theory (1960s - 1970s)

The theory of psychological contract was first traced to Barnard's (1938) equity theory, which suggested that employee perceptions of organizational fairness are a basic prerequisite for maintaining employment, and thereafter, March and Simon (1958) indicated that after entering the organization, employees would accept a series of job duties requirements, such as adhering to

(32)

organizational rules, performing job duties, and so on. Most of these job elements are clearly marked, but there are also implicit forms in employment contracts, such as employee loyalty and identity to the organization, and the existence of this "unspoken contractual responsibility" in the employment relationship, which forms the basis for maintaining the employment relationship. Thereafter, in 1960, Chris Argyris first proposed the term "Psychological Work Contract" in Understanding Organizational Behavior, describing it as an implicit understanding and tacit relationship between workers and foremen, a process of social exchange (Argyris, 1960). Although he did not give a specific definition of the concept and content of psychological contract, he opened the door of psychological contract research, and then triggered a research upsurge of scholars in different fields on psychological contract. Levinson, Munden, Price, Mandl, and Solley (1962), through a qualitative study of 874 employees at a U.S. plant, found that workers had various expectations toward the employer and that the employer's duty to help the employee in fulfilling it comes from the employee's perception of what responsibilities the organization should perform. Thus, for the first time, he academically proposed the term "psychological contract", which is defined as an "unwritten contract", referring to the sum of a series of expectations between the employer and the employee in the employment relationship, which is not publicly stated and precedes the written contract and is the default commitment in both parties.

Because Levinson first provided a more comprehensive interpretation of the concept of psychological contract, he was lauded as the father of psychological contract. As for Kotter (1973), he defined the connotation of psychological contract more clearly through quantitative research method, considered that psychological contract is an implicit agreement between employers and proposed the concept of match to express the coupling of expectations between employers. The study shows that the degree of matching is positively related to job satisfaction and performance, but negatively related to employee departure. On the basis of research by Argyris (1960); (Levinson et al., 1962; Schein, 1980) further explored the concept of psychological contract, which was defined as a set of unwritten expectations between individuals and organizations based on the principle of reciprocity that encompassed both the job itself and the amount of compensation, as well as the rights, obligations and responsibilities of both employers. Schein argues that the psychological contract

(33)

includes elements from both the employee's and the employer's perspectives, and changes over time and in the organizational context. For example, from an organizational perspective, the psychological contract will change as the organization changes in its own responsibilities and obligations to cope with itself and in its work requirements for the employee, whereas from an employee perspective, the psychological contract will not only be affected by personal needs, life experiences, work experiences, social practices, but will also change as a result of changes in the environment leading to changes in occupational demands. Thus, the psychological contract is in fact a psychological game between employ EES, and when an employee perceives that his or her psychological contract is violated, such as organizational maxima, the employee creates a sense of disappointment with the organization, which will ultimately lead to negative attitudes and behaviors by the employee.

To sum up, different researchers hold different views on the definition of psychological contract in the early stages of its development, but in essence, its theoretical basis is social exchange theory and fair theory (Anderson &

Schalk, 1998). Scholars have argued that a psychological contract exists in the exchange relationship between employ EES, which encompasses both employee and organizational levels, as an understanding and perception of both employ EES' expectations in relation to each other.

2) The development stage of psychological contract theory (late 1980s - now)

From the early stages of theory, it seems very reasonable to state theoretically that a psychological contract exists for both subjects, but operationalizing it is difficult when it is used in situational research. For example:

how are expectations measured? How to balance the expectations of both employers and employees? In the context of this perplexity, Rousseau (1989) opens the developmental antecedents of the second phase of the psychological contract and re- assigns a new connotation to the psychological contract, which Rousseau (1995) puts the perspective of the psychological contract, based on the individual, arguing that the psychological contract is merely an employee's subjective understanding of the exchange relationship, including organizational commitment to employees (e.g., salary benefits) and standards of work (e.g., job duties) and also included subjective

(34)

perceptions of coworker attitudes and behaviors. If these subjective perceptions are accepted by the employee, both employ EES develop a psychological contract, which is specifically formulated as: a psychological contract is an employee's understanding of the responsibilities to cope with themselves and the organization, which is committed and reciprocal (Rousseau, 1989, 1995). Overall, the unilateral definition of psychological contract proposed by Rousseau is more operable and supported by many researchers, which promotes the research progress in this field. However, some researchers have questioned this theory and adhered to the bilateral perspective of early psychological contract. Schalk, Campbell, and Freese (1998) propose that a psychological contract is an exchange between employ EES and therefore requires simultaneous consideration of the expectations and responsibilities of both parties.

Whereas Herriot and Pemberton (1997) argue that Rousseau's narrow theory of psychological contract, which does not take into account the process of contractualization, but should be the subjective understanding of the value both employers provide to each other. As for Tsui (1995), he proposes to replace an organizational side with an "organizational agent". Guest and Conway (2002) notes that a psychological contract is a suitable tool for analyzing employment, which is a two-way exchange, so both the expectation and the perception of responsibility of the hire should be taken into account.

Generally speaking, the unilateral theory and the bilateral theory of psychological contract form two kinds of schools, namely, Rousseau school and the "classical school" which advocates following the early theory of psychological contract. Although scholars have different research perspectives, there is a consensus that psychological contract includes the responsibilities and obligations of organizations and employees.

2.1.1.2 Content and Structure of Psychological Contract

The contents of the psychological contract include job characteristics, salary benefits, organizational context and challenge opportunities. The structure of the psychological contract has previously been divided into two, three-dimensional as well as multi-dimensional structures by different methods.

(35)

1) Two dimensional structure theory of psychological contract S. L. Robinson and Rousseau (1994) proposed that psychological contract contains two dimensions: transaction dimension and relationship dimension, in which transaction contract is characterized by short-term, outward-going and transactional nature, and its contents are clear, definite, easy to observe and understand, mainly including the enrichment of work, salary and welfare, working environment, working facilities and resources. Whereas relational contracts are more often implicit, ambiguous, subjective, and emotional in nature and include growth opportunities, career advancement, relationships, organizational identity, and support. Millward and Hopkins (1998) then validated the reliability of Rousseau (1995) two-dimensional structure of psychological contract (transaction dimension and relationship dimension) with 1000 British business employees as the subjects.

Tsui, Pearce, Porter, and Tripoli (1997) argued that the psychological contract incorporates both material and mental factors, with material factor referring to extrinsic expectations such as material transaction conditions and mental factor referring to intrinsic expectations such as employee self-worth fulfillment. As far as Kickul (2001) is concerned, it further confirms the internal and external factors of psychological contract, which is divided into "external contract" and "internal contract", in which the former is related to work tasks, such as working conditions, salary and treatment, and the latter is related to work characteristics, such as job challenge and autonomy.

2) A three-dimensional structural theory of the psychological contract

The two-dimensional theory of psychological contract is mainly represented by transaction dimension and relationship dimension put forward by S. L. Robinson and Rousseau (1994), while the three-dimensional theory of psychological contract is a further extension of the two-dimensional theory. Rousseau and Tijoriwala (1996) on the basis of two-dimensional theory, classified psychological contract into three factors, namely, transaction type, relationship type and team member type. This study argues that cooperation among team members is a major factor in employee growth and development, and performance is most notable in a work model dominated by team forms, which expands Rousseau (1995) two-

(36)

dimensional structure of the psychological contract. In contrast, Coyle and Kessler (2000) further expanded on S. L. Robinson and Rousseau (1994) two-dimensional structure of the psychological contract, drawing on middle and low-level employees in the UK and refining three public factors through exploratory factor analysis:

Trading type (indicative of economic factors such as salary benefits); Relational type (indicating environmental factors such as work safety and career growth); Training type (denotes learning factors such as job training, skill advancement), and the importance of learning factors was considered for the first time. Thompson and Bunderson (2003) then considered that psychological contract should not be merely about remuneration and work, but should contain personal ideals. Therefore, Thompson and Bunderson (2003) added the dimension of "conceptual psychological contract" on the basis of transaction and relationship dimensions. The study argues that employees may harbor a vision for the future in addition to their focus on job pay and work environment, and that employees' perceptions of future development and personal accomplishment are also a major source of psychological contracts, such as corporate culture, organizational affiliation, and so on. Y. Li and Guo (2002), two Chinese scholars, further complemented the three-dimensional theory of psychological contract, dividing the psychological contract into: normative (the enterprise should fulfill the responsibility of material protection, the employee should fulfill the responsibility of conservative), interpersonal (the enterprise should fulfill the responsibility of interpersonal care, while an employee should fulfill the responsibility for maintaining interpersonal relationships) and development type responsibilities (the enterprise should fulfill the responsibility for career development and the employee should fulfill the responsibility for the work contribution).

3) Multidimensional structure of psychological contract

In addition to two-dimensional theory and three-dimensional theory, some researchers also put forward multi-dimensional theory, such as Rousseau and Tijoriwala (1996), which mapped four quadrants of psychological contract type mode: transaction type, balance type, relationship type and transition type according to whether employee performance requirements are clear and the length of contract period, which provided an extremely convenient path of explanation for a better understanding and coping with the phenomenon and problems of employment

(37)

relations. By using a qualitative analysis, Y. Chen (2007), a Chinese scholar, examines the psychological contract from both the organizational and employee perspectives and proposes four dimensions: work support, internal development, involvement in management, and external development, which create a novel analytical framework for a deeper dissection of the relationships between organizations and employees.

By sorting out the previous literatures, this study finds that from the perspective of theoretical construction, the definition of organizational agent is ambiguous and organizational expectations are difficult to measure. Therefore, this study agrees with the definition of Rousseau (1995)'s narrow psychological contract theory and only studies the organizational commitment and the perception of organizational obligations from the perspective of employees. These include organizational commitment to employees (e.g., salary benefits), standards of work (e.g., job duties), and subjective perceptions of coworker attitudes and behaviors. If these subjective perceptions are accepted by the employee, both employ EES develop a psychological contract, which is specifically formulated as: a psychological contract is the employee's understanding of his or her responsibilities to cope with itself and the organization, which is committed and reciprocal. Although the 2D, 3D as well as multidimensional theories of psychological contract have been derived previously through different research methods, this study argues that whether 2D, 3D or multidimensional, the included contents mainly include compensation, benefits, job characteristics, interpersonal relations, organizational work conditions and climate, etc. By combining S. L. Robinson and Rousseau (1994) two-dimensional and (Y. Li &

Guo, 2002) three-dimensional theories, this study delineates psychological contract violation into three dimensions: the Relationship dimension (interpersonal relationship, organizational climate and a sense of belonging, corporate culture and other spiritual factors), the trading dimension (factors involved in material transactions such as pay, welfare and working conditions), the developmental dimension (job characteristics, personal growth realized personal value factors such as professional achievement), to explore the mechanism by which psychological contract violations occur against the employee's counterproductive work behavior.