Dependability And Social Exchange Theory

1330 Words3 Pages

defined as, ‘a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behavior of another’ (Rousseau, Sitkin, Burt & Camerer, 1998). These expectations are based upon a set of beliefs about the other party’s trustworthiness. In Mayer, Davis and Schoorman’s (1995) model, these comprises an evaluation of the other’s ability, benevolence and integrity. What follows the ‘intent to accept vulnerability’, is a risk-taking act with respect to the trusted party, such as relying on them to do something on one’s behalf or the disclosure of sensitive information (Dietz & den Hartog, 2006). Human resource management (HRM), to a significant extent determines how much employees trust their …show more content…

Organ (1990) argued that social exchange is necessary for OCB because the mutual trust that underlies social exchange relationships ensures that OCB is reciprocated in the long run. Social exchange requires trusting others to discharge their obligations; it tends to engender feelings of personal obligation, gratitude and trust (Blau, 1964). SET proposes that an exchange relationship develops between two parties when one provides a contribution to the other, creating an obligation upon the recipient to provide something beneficial to the donor, in return (Blau, 1964). Further, a sequence over time, evolve into loyalty and mutual commitments characterized by trust (Whitener, Brodt, Korgaard & Werner, …show more content…

Therefore, an organization’s SR-HRM can be viewed as setting many rules of the employment relationship from recruitment, through career progression and development, to reward and exit from the organization. Employees interpret the SR-HRM in their workplace, especially the intentions behind it and the benefits to be accrued from it. On the basis of these beliefs, they decide to take the risk to engage in extra effort on behalf of their employer, and to continue to work for their employer despite alternatives (Vanhala & Dietz, 2015). If the employer demonstrates benevolence and support for its employees through its SR-HRM, particularly if it is perceived as, ‘beyond the normal bounds of employment contracts,’ employees will be expected to reciprocate with proactive effort and greater commitment and loyalty in response. Put another way; if employees believe that their employer organization is committed to operating competently (i.e. ability), demonstrating concern for staff well-being (i.e. benevolence) and treating stakeholders honestly and fairly (i.e. integrity) and has policies and practices in place to uphold this commitment (i.e. SR-HRM), this should this in turn should induce effective work behaviors such as OCB. Alternatively, employees may feel that the SR-HRM does little to inspire confidence or, the promises and obligations perceived to

Open Document