EMPLOYER’S BEHAVIOUR LEADS TO JOB INSECURITY: A

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT PERSPECTIVE

Dr. Farhina Sardar Khan1, Kainat Akhtar Usmani*2, Dr. Syed Shahid Mazhar3
1
Assistant Professor, Department of Commerce and Business Management, Integral University, Lucknow. (Mo: 829915333,
[email protected])
*2
Visiting Faculty and Research Scholar, Department of Commerce and Business Management, Integral University, Lucknow.
(Corresponding Author) (Mo: 9696520124, [email protected])
3
Associate Professor, Head of the Department, Department of Commerce and Business Management, Integral University,
Lucknow. (Mo: 9415081949, [email protected])

Abstract
Objectives: This study examines employer’s behaviour that causes job insecurity in their employees and analyzes
employee’s reactions in case of job insecurity that aroused because of breach of psychological contract.

Methods/Statistical analysis: The data for the study is collected through structured questionnaire from two specific
private sector companies of Lucknow region which are Education and Pharmaceuticals. Pearson’s Chi-square test is
applied to know the association between employer’s behaviour and employee’s reaction in case of breach of
psychological contract that leads to job insecurity.

Findings: The result of chi-square analysis shows that there exists an association between employer’s behaviour and
employee’s started feeling job insecurity after breach of psychological contract. The p-value is less than 0.05 which
means that statistically these variables are associated with each other. Result of the study clearly shows that
employer’s behaviour lead to breach of psychological and that ultimately defamed their employment relationship.

Application/Improvements: Study shows that if employer doesn’t shows concern for their employees it creates job
insecurity within them and becomes reason for switch over intentions so in order to maintain long term employment
relation psychological contract should be fulfilled.

Keywords: Employer’s behaviour, psychological contract, Job insecurity

INTRODUCTION

Maintaining a sustainable growth in an increasingly worldwide concern, it is distinguished by aggressive competition,

is a serious concern faced by almost all contemporary organizations. Free flow of proprietary information has
resulted in development of a ‘flat’ world [1]. In a flat-world raising entry barriers by means of technological
advancements or generation of financial resources are no more the sufficient determinants of securing competitive
advantage, since these resources are easily replicable. Similarly, traditional approach of studying dysfunctional work
behaviors may eliminate negative aspects of work behaviors. However, cultivation of positive outcomes (e.g.,
performance, job satisfaction etc) is far from reality [2]. For example, a classical work of [3] on eliminating low wages,
poor working situations, and oppressive management, did not suggest automatic cultivation of positive outcomes like
performance, inspiration, and job likings. Therefore, [4] argue that minimizing what is wrong or following a deficit
reduction approach has limited scope. They affirm that a positive quality based methodology would help in
augmenting human potential. Such initiatives would lead to more positive results in performance, improve job
satisfaction, develop leadership capabilities, and would thereby help an organization to obtain competitive
advantage. Under this context, it is imperative to note that work stress, job insecurity, declining employee efficiency,
and job unlikeness, are the major problems faced by organizations.

The employee’s reduction process because of situations existing within and outside the organizations example:
financial crisis, changing work performance, and external recruitments etc as often as possible happens because
companies want to stay aggressively competitive market. Therefore, work instability is a noteworthy business related
stressor, which influences a growing number of employees. Presence of job insecurity has been connected to various
negative health results, especially emotional wellness. This study starts with characterizing job insecurity. Sought
after by, a review of the exploration for examining relationship in the middle of job insecurity and other concerned
outcomes. Furthermore, a scholarly exchange of data will be expressed on some helpful procedures or it tends to be
said that the best conceivable choice to handle the issue of job insecurity from a various leveled perspective and
pondering it concerning breach of psychological contract.

Job Insecurity

Job insecurity is considered as the 'general worry about the sustained continuation in a same job for a longer
duration within same organisation'. Despite the fact that there are various definitions of job insecurity are available
but they all have shared opinion that job insecurity is an emotional recognition. In a similar objective occasion, for
example, corporate changes or poor monetary execution, it influences different employee in an unexpected different
way. Some probably won't consider this to be a danger despite the fact that they may finish up losing their positions,
while others may feel that their occupations are defenseless when this isn't the situation.

The subjectivity comes from the instability encompassing the future as insecure employees don't know whether they
will sustain their position within the organisation or will lose it, and subsequently may battle between anticipating a
future inside their present organization or getting ready to look for other job in some other company. Accordingly,
job insecurity contrasts from representatives who have been advised of repetition, because of certainty they are able
to focus on their current job and prepare themselves for joblessness.

This article centers around job insecurity, which is characterized as ‘the emotionally seen probability of automatic
employment loss’ [5]. Therefore, job insecure workers end up in an undesired strange place among job and
joblessness. As anyone might expect, job insecurity results in different pressure responses, for example, on edge
emotions, wretchedness and mental side effects [6]. Concerning social results, job insecurity is related with work
amputation practices [7], diminished Organisation Citizenship Behaviour [8] and turn over intentions of the best
employees [9]. Feeling of frailty about future probability of job loss is the focal part of job insecurity encounter. [10]
have exactly distinguished between biased and arousing job insecurity. He characterized biased and arousing job
insecurity as ‘consciousness regarding likelihood of loss of job or privilege; emotional job insecurity is the passionate
experience of being stressed or sincerely troubled over these potential misfortunes’.[11] classifies precursors of job
insecurity into three dimensions (Large scale level factors, singular foundation qualities, and identity characteristics).
Large scale level factors incorporate national or territorial level of joblessness and predominant changes in the
authoritative structure. Singular foundation qualities, for example, age of the representative, length of administration
rendered, and work level. These factors are objective in nature. Nevertheless, particular personality traits like locus
of control and adverse affectionate impact is evident in occupation flimsiness. These personality properties have
differential impact on employment frailty experience.

Besides having focus on the quick association between job insecurity and employer's conduct, this investigation
further intends to dismember the technique through which these elements are associated, by including breach of
psychological contract as a medium engaged with this framework. Psychological contract breach is obtained from
psychological contract hypothesis [12], and is characterized as ‘the eccentric arrangement of equal desires held by
representative’s employees concerning their commitments and their privileges’ [13]. These comparative
commitments constitute the soul of the psychological contract, and most of the part is comprise of commitments of
the employee regarding time, exertion and work frame of mind, versus guaranteed advantages with respect to the
business, for example, professional stability, pay, thankfulness, testing work or prospects for advancement [14].
When one or the two party feel that the other party did not satisfy his/her guarantees, psychological contract breach
happens [15] .

Breach of Psychological Contract

Worker's commitment is presumably a standout among the most basic yet complicated factors in the work
environment. It's difficult to depict, yet we all surely realize it when we experience this situation. Individuals go from
completely siphoned situation and drew in to genuinely flatten and withdrew as resultant of Psychological contract
breach.

This situation is an individual's conviction about the common commitments that exist between a employer and its
employee, some expressed and some unsaid (like you give me pay and advantages and I'll give you work yield, time
and hours) and some implicit and impalpable (like you will furnish me with a positive work culture and opportunity
and I'll give you duty, reliability and exertion). This agreement clearly advances, both routes, as desires create and as
we begin merging into the way of life.

Separation frequently occurs when psychological contract breach happens on regular basis. Also, few employees
have encountered these breaches and come to fruition for an assortment of reasons like infringement of trust,
activities that uncover an absence of trustworthiness and honesty, practices that disregard morals or the law, accord
that get broken, assignments that interfere with individual time, sets of expectations and desires that are poorly
characterized, situations that are troublesome and discouraging, and leaders who radically adjust the deal.

These breaches that lead to withdrawal are crucial because researches has reliably demonstrated that separation can
prompt a decrease in efficiency, execution, working environment well being, dedication and maintenance,
organisation citizenship practices etc. Some studies has even discovered that breach of contract also impact
distinctive age groups in an unexpected way. More youthful workers lose their feeling of trust and responsibility;
more established ones lose their feeling of employment fulfillment. Notwithstanding what it impacts, inquiries about
the scenario have demonstrated that when an employee is separated, their withdrawal can adversely affect the
group and at last, contrarily affect client commitment and maintenance.

The motivation behind this situation is a scenario called as Emotional Contagion, which is an extremely basic idea: in
the event that you grin and are certain around somebody, they will feel better and in all likelihood convey that
energy to the every spot where they go, which can make a gradually expanding influence. It's truly stunning when
you understand how incredible a little positive signal can be! A similar gradually expanding influence can obviously
happen while anticipating cynicism. Example, think about scenario that whether you feel better or awful around a
constructive individual as well as antagonistic individual. It doesn't take a mind specialist to make sense of this one.

[16] saw that ‘Individuals are strolling state of mind inductors, consistently affecting the dispositions and afterward
the decisions and practices of others’. In her exploration she has discovered that when members are presented to
somebody acting brightly in a gathering the gathering carries on more happily. At the point when members were
presented to somebody acting in a furious way, the gathering wound up angrier. Positive feelings made more
collaboration; negative feelings expanded clash and diminished helpful basic leadership. The impact happens in each
kind of association, in each industry, and in each expansive and little work gathering. This exploration affirms that
withdrawal, regularly brought about by psychological contract breach, can have unbelievably critical unintended
results. If a breached psychological contract is left unrepaired it just declines the effect and outcomes. Recognizing
the breach and making endeavors to fix it is basic to recapturing commitment and interfering with the impacts of
enthusiastic disease. It's an easy decision.

This research adds new dimensions to the existing literature in the accompanying ways. Initial, a conceivable result of
job insecurity is presented due to employer's conduct, in setting of psychological contract. Second, when the concept
of job insecurity is observed minutely by exploring the connection between job insecurity and observing employer's
responses, that is, the manner by which manager's responds in various a circumstances it prompts impression of
breach. Thus, by performing this we are actually helping in settling the debate of the comparability of the
predecessors of the two phases. At last, we plan to propel bits of knowledge in the system basic the negative results
of job insecurity by investigating whether psychological contract breach mediate the relation in between job
insecurity and employer's behavior. This investigation may be considered as creative since the connections of both
occupation infirmity and contract breach with manager's conduct are under-looked theme.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Under this head job insecurity is characterized in various ways. [17] makes reference to meanings of this idea,
delimiting it as: a propelling element, a reward, a frame of mind, a need, a guarantee, and as a feature of the
hierarchical setting. [18] Treats work instability as an apparent part of the hierarchical condition. Their depiction of
occupation instability depends on three angles. To commence with, job insecurity is a conceptual initiative. Secondly,
it is a concerns that what's has to come. Third, job insecurity has concerns with individual maintenance of the activity
and not simply the continuation of the activity. Along with these lines it is an individual worry about the coherence of
the activity. [19] express that two measurements offer ascent to job insecurity: the apparent likelihood and the
apparent seriousness of losing one's employment.

Earlier research has shown that hierarchical rebuilding is essentially identified with view of psychological contract
violations, mainly because of broken promises in respect of job security [20]. Since the guarantee of job security is
incorporated into the conventional psychological contract [21], workers may expect that when they satisfy their
piece of the arrangement, the association will respond by offering professional firmness[22] (De Cuyper and De
Witte, 2006).

In the review of literature it was demonstrated that the key build in psychological contract hypothesis as far as its
association with results is concerned it is breach of psychological contract. It depends on the person's impression of
what an association has promised and how well the association has fulfilled these promises. Transitory employees
were portrayed as having transactional psychological contracts, inferring that they will just put in what they believe.
They will get out for instance; extend periods of time and additional work in return for high pay. The literature
demonstrates that impermanent workers' psychological contract may have transformed from the thought of a
'vocation' and has been relinquished for 'independence' and 'flexibility'. The research study has additionally
uncovered that apparent control or then again, worker decision over business status moderately affects job
insecurity. It has appeared impermanent employees who turned out to be temporary worker out of need or absence
of different choices has poorer dispositions towards their employments and it might negatively affect their activity
uncertainty. Unforeseen laborers were likewise recognized to contrast demographically from full-time workers. It
was explained that in what way the two variables one of which is psychological contract and other one is job
insecurity of the temporary employees are identified with their demography to comprehend their work frames of
mind by utilization of the psychological contract and statistic information.

[23] said that job insecurity and psychological contract breach are two interconnected variables. According to the
second finding of his study negative relationship exists between breach of psychological contract and the outcomes
related with work within the organisation.

[24] in his study explored the impact of psychological contract fulfillment on organizational citizenship behavior.
This research has been conducted through two surveys, one was with employers and the other one was with
employees. The sample was of local authorities in the South East of Britain. Study concluded that if psychological
contract is fulfilled it will results in positive organisational citizenship behaviour.

[25] says that half of the workers in their investigation revealed that their psychological contract is violated. The
merging of individual distinction explore and the new field of PCs appears to be intriguing. Numerous analysts have
analyzed the advantages of fulfilling PC, however spotlight is ought to be on the best way to oversee it. On the off
chance that specific kinds of individuals are inclined to the impression of an infringement it would be valuable for
chiefs to recognize this potential issue with the goal that it is tended to.

[26] found and perceived relationship between psychological contract motivator and the five-factor model of
identity. The consequences of this research demonstrates that two factors of identity viz. anxious and pleasant
participation related with outward contract things and unreservedness and meticulousness were emphatically
connected with intrinsic contract results. He said there is no affiliation found between honesty to encounter and
the psychological contract instigation scales.

[27] observed that the trust of an employee in his employer completely intercede the connection between PC break
and the representative practices of municipal excellence and undertaking execution, yet halfway intervened the
association with turnover aims. PC breach decreases trust since it undermines the social bond between a worker
and boss. At the point when breach happens, laborers question the dependability of the employer and it end up
being overwhelmingly distrustful, negative or compromising toward the affiliation's drives, which are altogether
markers of uncertainty.

[28] proposed that correspondence will limit apparent contract breach by means of incongruence. The more a
worker and manager delegate with lucidity, less would be misperception over understood and unequivocal parts of
Psychological Contract. As a result, the representative will be less inclined to see that his or her Psychological
Contract has been broken. More correspondence does not really suggest increasingly sensible data or precise
recognitions.

[29] found that with the support of new technologies organizations have started substituting manpower
requirement with ultra modern technologies. To take advantage of these conditions and for the requirement of cost
optimization, organizations have increasingly resorted to downsizing. In such a scenario workforce are susceptible
to the troubles associated with job insecurity. Study reveals that nowadays job insecurity has been increasingly
found in working class of the organisation.

[30] suggested that Job insecurity has comprehensive impact on individual and organizational results like poor
employee well-being, job satisfaction, absenteeism, attrition, and performance.

[31] have extensively characterized job insecurity as, the emotionally saw and undesired plausibility to lose the
present occupation later on, along with that the dread or stresses identified because of probability of occupation
misfortune.
[32] observed that working in an organisation when start experiencing job insecurity they do not want to lose their
job willingly but because of that they start having feared that they may lose their job in near future or they may not
get the benefits associated with their jobs.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. To find the impact of employer’s trivial behavior which causes job insecurity and that may lead to employee’s
start having perception of breach.
2. To analyze impact of employer’s behaviour with respect to change in employee’s perception before and after the
occurrence of actual breach.
3. To examine the effect of job insecurity that contributes in perception of breach with respect of job outcomes.
4. To recommend the steps that could be opted to limit job insecurity in representative's or employee’s of the
company.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Collection of data
The objectives of this study were furnished by survey method. Data collection method used for collecting primary
data is through Structured Questionnaire. It was designed on the basis of variables defined by [33] in his study.
According to him these variables are mainly responsible for breach of psychological contract. The questions included
in the survey are based on five-point Likert scale, and following are the five responses:

‘1: Strongly Disagree’, ‘2: Disagree’, ‘3: Not decided’, ‘4: Agree’ and ‘5: Strongly Agree’.

Area and time of Survey

The motive of the study is to analyze impact of employer’s behaviour that results in creation of job insecurity within
the employees of the same organisation. This ultimately creates a perception of breach from employee’s perspective.
The time frame of the study was from June 2018 to August 2018.

Size of the Sample & Sampling Procedure

The researcher has formulated 600 questionnaires out of which 544 responses were complete and used for the
analysis. Two sectors of private companies in Lucknow region has been selected for the study one of which is
Education sector and the other one is Pharmaceutical sector. These two sectors form a stratum (location-wise) and
by using stratified random sampling a sample was gotten from each organization to procure data to know (an) effect
of employer's conduct that makes job insecurity inside the workforce (b) relationship of job insecurity and impression
of contract breach (c) discovering the impact of employer's conduct on business relationship.

Data Analysis

The Survey was conducted on a sample size of 600 Indian employees’ of private sector companies of Educational and
Pharmaceutical sectors, primarily from Lucknow City. Researcher found some uncompleted questionnaire, so finally
544 questionnaires both from online and offline mode was selected for analysis of the data. They are categorized as
shown in Table 1.
A Questionnaire is designed with an aim to determine job insecurity existing between the employees as a result of
employer’s behaviour, impact of this insecurity in perception of Psychological contract breach. This questionnaire has
two measures one of job insecurity and other one are variables of perception of breach of psychological contract.
Both of these are measured on a five-point Likert scale.

Hypothesis Formulated
In order to know the job insecurity on employee’s perception of breach following hypothesis has been formulated:
H1: There is no association of sector of Organization with uncertainty about employer’s behavior that how he will
treat me in coming future.
H2: There is no association of type of Organization with feel insecure/ uncertain about my future because of my
employer’s relation.
H3: There is no association of type of Organization with uncertainty in my employer’s commitments towards me.
Pearson’s Chi Square test is applied on all three hypotheses. Table no.2 clearly shows the responses given by the
employees in context of above hypotheses.
The analysis of data in the above table indicates that among the Educational sector industry, 10.7% respondent
strongly agree that his/her uncertain about my employer’s behavior that how he will treat me in coming future.
Similarly, 30.2% respondent says agree, 19.5% respondent are disagreed, 14.4% respondent are strongly disagreed
for this statement and 25.1% respondent are Neutral for this statement. In Pharmaceutical sector industry, 14.2%
respondent strongly agree that his/her uncertain about my employer’s behavior that how he will treat me in coming
future. Similarly, 15.7% respondent says agree, 29.1% respondent are disagreed, 20.1% respondent are strongly
disagreed for this statement and 20.9% respondent are Neutral for this statement.

The analysis of data in the table no. 3 indicates that among the Educational sector industry, 1.2% respondents
strongly agree that his/her feel insecure/ uncertain about my future because of my employer’s relation. Similarly,
26.1% respondent says agree, 34.1% respondent are disagreed, 22.0% respondent are strongly disagreed for this
statement and 16.6% respondent are Neutral for this statement. In Pharmaceutical sector industry, 23.9%
respondents strongly agree that his/her feel insecure/ uncertain about my future because of my employer’s relation.
Similarly, 11.2% respondent says agree, 26.9% respondent are disagreed, 29.1% respondent are strongly disagreed
for this statement and 9.0% respondent are Neutral for this statement.

The analysis of data in the table no. 4 indicates that among the Educational sector industry, 1.0% respondent strongly
agree that his/her uncertainty in my employer’s commitments towards me. Similarly, 31.5% respondent says agree,
29.0% respondent are disagreed, 18.0% respondent are strongly disagreed for this statement and 20.5% respondent
are Neutral for this statement. In Pharmaceutical sector industry, 21.1% respondent strongly agree that his/her
uncertainty in my employer’s commitments towards me. Similarly, 17.2% respondent says agree, 21.6% respondent
are disagreed, 21.6% respondent are strongly disagreed for this statement and 19.4% respondent are Neutral for this
statement.

FINDINGS AND RESULTS

1. The result of chi-square analysis in table no. 5 shows that yes there is an association between sectors of
Organization and uncertain about my employer’s behavior that how he will treat me in coming future. The p-
value is less than 0.05 which means that statistically these variables are associated with each other.
Ho-There is no association of type of Organization with uncertainty about employer’s behavior that how
he will treat me in coming future.
H1- There is association of type of Organization with uncertainty about employer’s behavior that how he
will treat me in coming future.
Graph 1 show that null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted.
2. Here Chi-Square test statistic (χ2) = 16.19. Since χ2(4) =16.19, p < 0.05 at 5% level of significance then there is
significant association of breach of psychological contract get the employee attention to switchover to
another Organization.
3. The chi-square analysis result for hypothesis two is shown in table 6. It shows that yes there is an association
between sectors of Organization and feels insecure/ uncertain about my future because of my employer’s
relation. The p-value is less than 0.05 which means that statistically these variables are associated with each
other.
Ho-There is no association of type of Organization with feels insecure/ uncertain about my future because
of my employer’s relation.
H1- There is association of type of Organization with feel insecure/ uncertain about my future because of
my employer’s relation.
Graph 2 shows that null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted.
4. Here Chi-Square test statistic (χ2) = 94.08. Since χ2(4) =94.08, p < 0.05 at 5% level of significance then there is
significant association between breach of psychological contract and the employee tends to switchover from
current company .
5. The chi-square analysis table for hypothesis three is shown in table no. 7. It shows that yes there is an
association between sectors of Organization and uncertainty in my employer’s commitments towards me.
The p-value is less than 0.05 which means that statistically these variables are associated with each other.
Ho-There is no association of type of Organization with uncertainty in my employer’s commitments
towards me.
H1- There is association of type of Organization with uncertainty in my employer’s commitments towards
me.
Graph 3 shows that null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted.
 6. Here Chi-Square test statistic (χ2) = 75.31. Since χ2(4) =75.31, p < 0.05 at 5% level of significance then there
is significant association of breach of psychological contract get the employee attention to switchover to
another Organization.

7. All the above hypotheses clearly show that major respondents support the fact that they don’t feel secure
in their present organisation because of their employer’s uncertain behaviour. It results in perception of
breach of psychological contract and results in employee switch over to the other organisation.

CONCLUSION
Implications of the study
This research demonstrates that Psychological Contract idea is very helpful for the Indian associations not only in
terms of money but also in the HR point of view. It gives a chance to the employer's to comprehend workers' for their
assumption about their job stability and in the event if it is furnished it prompts Job fulfillment inside them and
furthermore motivates organisation citizenship conduct. Satisfied workers work in a vastly improved manner when
contrasted with unsatisfied one. So this research encourages the business to comprehend their representatives’
desires and give chance of work in secure condition for better working of the companies.
Limitation and scope for future research
The information for study was gathered in a cross-sectional manner; consequently causal supposition was made with
judiciousness. Additionally, the information were gathered from a solitary city and time compel was likewise there.
So there is a huge scope for future examinations. There are various regions that should be tended to in future
research on Job insecurity and employer's behavior.

In light of the consequences of this investigation, it is prescribed that more than one customer organization ought to
be incorporated into the examination populace so as to look at results and the adequacy of the estimating
instruments utilized. An increasingly intelligible picture on the psychological contract and job instability of
impermanent workers may likewise be gathered utilizing a longitudinal report with intercessions. The Assignment
Duration Contract question and resultant statistical differences that were extracted serves as a good example and
meaningful deductions could have been made if it had been studied as an intervention in a longitudinal study.
Questions should be integrated in either the biographical questionnaire or the instrument measuring the
psychological contract that more clearly differentiate between the employer and supervisors/superiors. Questions
that draw on the subjective and objective situation as cited by [34] model should also be included to expound on the
controllability of the temporary employee's situation. A possible reason the temporary employees in this study
population have shown to be optimistic of continued tenure might be promises or innuendos experienced that they
may be appointed permanently in due course. This could not be confirmed in the battery of instruments used in this
study and questions alluding to this should be built-in. A question relating to Voluntary Status should be used again in
any further studies. The wording of the question in this study may have forced respondents to answer in a certain
manner and this may have caused a prejudiced result.
TABLES USED IN THE STUDY

Table 1.Age wise classification of Respondents

AGE

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid 20 to 25 Years 82 15.1 15.1 15.1

26 to 30 Years 150 27.6 27.6 42.6

31 to 35 Years 201 36.9 36.9 79.6

36 to 40 Years 50 9.2 9.2 88.8

41 to 45 Years 26 4.8 4.8 93.6

> 45 Years 35 6.4 6.4 100.0

Total 544 100.0 100.0

Table No.02:- Association of sector of Organization with uncertainty about employer’s behavior that how he will
behave in future with me (respondent).

Crosstab

I am uncertain about my employer’s behavior that how he

will behave in future with me.

Strongly Undecid Strongly

Disagree Disagree ed Agree Agree Total

Sector of Educationa Count 59 80 103 124 44 410

Organizat l
% within 14.4% 19.5% 25.1% 30.2% 10.7% 100.0
ion
Sector of %
Organizatio
n

Pharmace Count 27 39 28 21 19 134

utical
% within 20.1% 29.1% 20.9% 15.7% 14.2% 100.0
Sector of %
Organizatio
n

Total Count 86 119 131 145 63 544

% within 15.8% 21.9% 24.1% 26.7% 11.6% 100.0

Sector of %
Organizatio
n
Table No. 03:- Association of sector of organization with feels insecure/ uncertain about my (respondent) future
because of my employer’s relation

Crosstab

I feel insecure/ uncertain about my future because

of my employer’s relation with me.

Strongly Undecid Strongly

Disagree Disagree ed Agree Agree Total

Sector of Education Count 90 140 68 107 5 410

Organization al
% within Sector 22.0% 34.1% 16.6% 26.1% 1.2% 100.0
of Organization %

Pharmace Count 39 36 12 15 32 134

utical
% within Sector 29.1% 26.9% 9.0% 11.2% 23.9% 100.0
of Organization %

Total Count 129 176 80 122 37 544

% within Sector 23.7% 32.4% 14.7% 22.4% 6.8% 100.0

of Organization %
Table No. 04:- Association of sector of organisation with uncertainty in my employer’s commitments towards me
(respondent)

Crosstab

I have observed uncertainty in my employer’s

commitments towards me.

Strongly Undeci Strongly

Disagree Disagree ded Agree Agree Total

Sector of Education Count 74 119 84 129 4 410

Organization al
% within Sector 18.0% 29.0% 20.5% 31.5% 1.0% 100.0
of Organization %

Pharmace Count 29 29 26 23 27 134

utical
% within Sector 21.6% 21.6% 19.4% 17.2% 20.1% 100.0
of Organization %

Total Count 103 148 110 152 31 544

% within Sector 18.9% 27.2% 20.2% 27.9% 5.7% 100.0

of Organization %

Table:5 Chi Square analysis result for Hypothesis 01

Chi-Square Tests

Asymptotic Significance (2-

Value df sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 16.198a 4 .003

Likelihood Ratio 16.780 4 .002

Linear-by-Linear 5.289 1 .021

Association

N of Valid Cases 544

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is
15.52.
Table:6 Chi Square analysis result for Hypothesis 02

Chi-Square Tests
Asymptotic Significance (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 94.086a 4 .000

Likelihood Ratio 83.048 4 .000

Linear-by-Linear 3.498 1 .061

Association

N of Valid Cases 544

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 9.11.

Table:7Chi Square analysis result for Hypothesis 03

Chi-Square Tests

Asymptotic Significance (2-

Value df sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 75.314a 4 .000

Likelihood Ratio 65.153 4 .000

Linear-by-Linear 4.029 1 .045

Association

N of Valid Cases 544

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 7.64.
Graph 1: Statistics showing results for hypothesis 1

Graph 2: Statistics showing results for hypothesis 2

Graph 3: Statistics showing results for hypothesis 3

REFERENCE

1. Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farrar, Straus
and Giroux.
2. Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. (2009). Positive workplaces. In C. R. Snyder and S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Oxford
handbook of positive psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Herzberg, F. et al (1959). The motivation to work. New York. John Willey and sons.
4. Luthans F, Youssef-Morgan CM, Avolio B. 2015. Psychological Capital and Beyond. New York: Oxford
University Press.
5. Sverke, M., Hellgren, J., & Näswall, K. (2002). No security: A meta-analysis and review of job insecurity and its
consequences. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7, 242-264.
6. Boya, F. Ö., Demiral, Y., Ergör, A., Akvardar, Y. and De Witte, H. (2008). Effects of Perceived Job Insecurity on
Perceived Anxiety and Depression in Nurses. Industrial Health46: 613–619,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.46.613
7. Probst, T. M. (2005). Countering the negative effects of job insecurity through participative decision making:
Lessons from the demand-control model. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 10(4):
320.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.10.4.320
8. Reisel, W. D., Probst, T. M., Chia, S.-L., Maloles, C. M. and König, C. J. (2010). The Effects of Job Insecurity on
Job Satisfaction, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, Deviant Behavior, and Negative Emotions of
Employees. International Studies of Management and Organization 40(1): 74–91,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2753/IMO0020-8825400105
9. Berntson, E., Näswall, K. and Sverke, M. (2010). The moderating role of employability in the association
between job insecurity and exit, voice, loyalty and neglect. Economic and Industrial Democracy,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831X09358374
10. Huang, G., Zhao, H., Niu, X., Ashford, S., & Lee, C. (2013). Reducing job insecurity and increasing performance
ratings: Does impression management matter?. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98 (5), 852-862.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033151
11. De Witte, H. (2005). Job Insecurity: Review of the international literature on definitions, prevalence,
antecedents and consequences. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology 31(4): 1–6,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v31i4.200
12. Rousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and
Rights Journal 2(2):121–139, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF01384942
13. McLean Parks, J. , Kidder, D. L. and Gallagher, D. G. (1998), Fitting square pegs into round holes: mapping the
domain of contingent work arrangements onto the psychological contract. J. Organization Behaviour, 19:
697-730. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(1998)19:1+<697::AID-JOB974>3.0.CO;2-I
14. Rousseau, D. M. and McLean Parks, J. (1993). The contracts of individuals and organizations. Research in
Organizational Behavior 15: 1–43.
15. Robinson, S. L. and Morrison, E. W. (2000). The development of psychological contract breach and violation:
a longitudinal study. Journal of Organizational Behavior 21(5):525–546.
16. Barsade, S. G. (2002). The Ripple Effect: Emotional Contagion and its Influence on Group
Behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(4), 644–675. https://doi.org/10.2307/3094912
17. Van Vuuren, C. V., & Klandermans, P. G. (1990). Individual reactions to job insecurity: An integrated model. In
P. J. D. Drenth, J. A. Sergeant, & R. J. Takens (Eds.), European perspectives in psychology, Vol. 3. Work and
organizational, social and economic, cross-cultural (pp. 133-146). Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons.
18. Klein Hesselink, D.J. & Van Vuuren (1999), T. Job Flexibility and Job Insecurity: The Dutch Case. European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 27-293.
19. Bert Klandermans & Tinka van Vuuren (1999) Job Insecurity: Introduction, European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 8:2, 145-153, DOI: 10.1080/135943299398294
20. Turnley, W. H. and Feldman, D. C. (1998). Psychological contract violations during corporate
restructuring. Human resource management 37(1): 71–83.
21. De Witte, H. (1999). Job insecurity and psychological well-being: Review of the literature and exploration of
some unresolved issues. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 155-177
22. De Cuyper, N. and De Witte, H. (2006). The impact of job insecurity and contract type on attitudes, well-being
and behavioural reports: A psychological contract perspective. Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology 79(3): 395–409
23. De Cuyper, N. and De Witte, H. (2006). The impact of job insecurity and contract type on attitudes, well-being
and behavioural reports: A psychological contract perspective. Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology 79(3): 395–409
24. Coyle-Shapiro, J., & Kessler, I. (2000) Mutuality, stability and psychological contract breach: A longitudinal
study. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Toronto
25. Robinson, S. L., Kraatz, M., & Rousseau, D. M. (1994). Changing obligations and the psychological contract: A
longitudinal study. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 137-152.
26. Nikolaou I, Tomprou M, Vakola M, (2007) "Individuals' inducements and the role of personality: implications
for psychological contracts", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 22 Issue: 7, pp.649-
663, https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710820082
27. Robinson, S. L. (1996). Trust and Breach of the Psychological Contract. Administrative Science
Quarterly 41(4): 574–599,
28. Morrison, E. W., & Robinson, S. L. (1997). When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological
contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review, 22: 226-256.
29. Lee B, Spector V, Paul E. (2006). The social stressors-counterproductive work behaviors link: Are conflicts
with supervisors and coworkers the same? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11(2), 145-156.
30. Ashford S. J., Lee C., and Phillip B. (1989) Content, Cause, and Consequences of Job Insecurity: A Theory-
Based Measure and Substantive Test, Academy of Management Journal 1989 32:4, 803-829
31. Vander Elst, T., De Witte, H. and De Cuyper, N. (2014). The Job Insecurity Scale: A psychometric evaluation
across five European countries. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 23(3): 364–380
32. De Witte, Hans. "Job Insecurity: Review of the International Literature on Definitions, Prevalence,
Antecedents and Consequences." South African Journal of Industrial Psychology 31.4 (2005): 1-6. Web.
33. Morrison, E., & Robinson, S. (1997). When Employees Feel Betrayed: A Model of How Psychological Contract
Violation Develops. The Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 226-256.
34. Hellgren, J. and Sverke, M. (2003), Does job insecurity lead to impaired well‐being or vice versa? Estimation
of cross‐lagged effects using latent variable modelling. J. Organiz. Behav., 24: 215-236. doi:10.1002/job.184