Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T23:50:53.229Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What about ‘MEE’: A Measure of Employee Entitlement and the impact on reciprocity in the workplace

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2016

Kristie M Westerlaken ,
Peter J Jordan  and
Sheryl Ramsay
Kristie M Westerlaken
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
Peter J Jordan*
Affiliation:
Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Nathan, Australia
Sheryl Ramsay
Affiliation:
Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Nathan, Australia
*
Corresponding author: Peter.Jordan@griffith.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A basic underlying assumption of the psychological contract is that both parties come to a mutual agreement about the expectations and obligations of a contract of employment. Recent research provides evidence of the potential for employees to develop unrealistic expectations from this contract and this has been described as a sense of entitlement. In this article, we outline two studies. In the first study, we test the internal structure and reliability of a scale we developed and named the Measure of Employee Entitlement. In the second study, we test the predictive validity of the Measure of Employee Entitlement against a measure of reciprocity. The development and validation of the Measure of Employee Entitlement extends our knowledge of sense of entitlement in the workplace and situates entitlement as a factor that may impact on the development of psychological contracts. This research provides a platform from which researchers and practitioners can continue to coherently and consistently investigate the phenomenon of employee entitlement.

Keywords

psychological contractemployee entitlementscale developmentreciprocity
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , May 2017 , pp. 392 - 404
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 27–58.Google Scholar
Bal, P. M., De Lange, A. H., Jansen, P. G., & Van Der Velde, M. E. (2008). Psychological contract breach and job attitudes: A meta-analysis of age as a moderator. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, 143–158.Google Scholar
Bankins, S. (2014). Delving into promises: Conceptually exploring the beliefs constituting the contemporary psychological contract. Journal of Management & Organization, 20, 544–566.Google Scholar
Bartlett, M. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various chi square approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16, 296–298.Google Scholar
Bell, E., & Bryman, A. (2007). The ethics of management research: An exploratory content analysis. British Journal of Management, 18, 63–77.Google Scholar
Brouer, R. L., Wallace, A. S., & Harvey, P. (2011). When good resources go bad: The applicability of conservation of resource theory to psychologically entitled employees. In P. L. Perrewé, & D. C. Ganster (Eds.), The role of individual differences in occupational stress and well being (pp. 109–150). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
Campbell, W. K., Bonacci, A. M., Shelton, J., Exline, J. J., & Bushman, B. J. (2004). Psychological entitlement: Interpersonal consequences and validation of a self-report measure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83, 29–45.Google Scholar
Chang, L. (1994). A psychometric evaluation of 4-point and 6-point Likert-type scales in relation to reliability and validity. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18, 205–215.Google Scholar
Chowning, K., & Campbell, N. J. (2009). Development and validation of a measure of academic entitlement: Individual differences in students’ externalized responsibility and entitled expectations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 982–997.Google Scholar
Conway, N., Kiefer, T., Hartley, J., & Briner, R. B. (2014). Doing more with less? Employee reactions to psychological contract breach via target similarity or spillover during public sector organizational change. British Journal of Management, 25, 737–754.Google Scholar
Dabos, G. E., & Rousseau, D. M. (2004). Mutuality and reciprocity in the psychological contracts of employees and employers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 52–72.Google Scholar
Dawis, R. V. (1987). Scale construction. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 34, 481–489.Google Scholar
DeVellis, R. F. (2011). Scale development theory and applications (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.Google Scholar
Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2000). Fairness and retaliation: The economics of reciprocity. Journal of Economic Perspective, 14, 159–181.Google Scholar
Fida, R., Paciello, M., Tramontano, C., Fontaine, R. G., Barbaranelli, C., & Farnese, M. L. (2015). An integrative approach to understanding counterproductive work behavior: The roles of stressors, negative emotions, and moral disengagement. Journal of Business Ethics, 130, 131–144.Google Scholar
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). London, UK: Sage Publications Inc.Google Scholar
Fisk, G. M. (2010). I want it all and i want it now! An examination of the etiology, expression, and escalation of excessive employee entitlement. Human Resource Management Review, 20, 102–114.Google Scholar
Gable, R. K., & Wolf, M. B. (1993). Instrument development in the affective domain: Measuring attitudes and values in corporate and school settings (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
Gakovic, A., & Tetrick, L. E. (2003). Psychological contract breach as a source of strain for employees. Journal of Business and Psychology, 18, 235–246.Google Scholar
Harvey, P., & Harris, K. J. (2010). Frustration-based outcomes of entitlement and the influence of supervisor communication. Human Relations, 63, 1639–1660.Google Scholar
Harvey, P., Harris, K. J., Gillis, W. E., & Martinko, M. J. (2014). Abusive supervision and the entitled employee. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 204–217.Google Scholar
Harvey, P., & Martinko, M. J. (2009). An empirical examination of the role of attributions in psychological entitlement and its outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 459–476.Google Scholar
Hochwarter, W. A., Meurs, J. A., Perrewé, P. L., Royle, M. T., & Matherly, T. A. (2007). The interactive effect of attention control and the perceptions of others’ entitlement behavior on job and health outcomes. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 506–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herriot, P., Manning, W. E. G., & Kidd, J. M. (1997). The content of the psychological contract. British Journal of Management, 8, 151–162.Google Scholar
Jordan, P. J., Ashkanasy, N. M., & Härtel, C. E. J. (2002). Emotional intelligence as a moderator of emotional and behavioral reactions to job insecurity. Academy of Management Review, 27, 361–372.Google Scholar
Kaiser, H. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31–36.Google Scholar
Kopp, J. P., Zinn, T. E., Finney, S. J., & Jurich, D. P. (2011). The development and evaluation of the academic entitlement questionnaire. Measurement and Evaluation in Counselling and Development, 44, 105–129.Google Scholar
Lee, J., & Paek, I. (2014). In search of the optimal number of response categories in a rating scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 32, 663–673.Google Scholar
Lessard, J., Greenberger, E., Chen, C., & Farruggia, S. (2011). Are youths’ feelings of entitlement always bad?: Evidence for a distinction between exploitive and non-exploitive dimensions of entitlement. Journal of Adolescence, 34, 521–529.Google Scholar
Miller, K. B., & Konopaske, R. (2014). Dispositional correlates of perceived work entitlement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29, 808–828.Google Scholar
Myers, K. K., & Sadaghiani, K. (2010). Millennials in the workplace: A communication perspective on millennials’ organizational relationships and performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 225–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naumann, S. E., Minsky, B. D., & Sturman, M. C. (2002). The use of the concept entitlement in management literature: A historical review, synthesis, and discussion of compensation policy implications. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 145–166.Google Scholar
Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS Survival Manual (4th ed.). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Perugini, M., Gallucci, M., Presaghi, F., & Ercolani, A. (2003). The personal norm of reciprocity. European Journal of Personality, 17, 251–283.Google Scholar
Ponterotto, J. G., & Ruckdeschel, D. E. (2007). An overview of coefficient alpha and a reliability matrix for estimating adequacy of internal reliability coefficients with psychological research measures. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 105, 997–1014.Google Scholar
Raskin, R. N., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal-components analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and further evidence of its construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 890–902.Google Scholar
Restubog, S. L. D., Bordia, P., & Bordia, S. (2009). The interactive effects of procedural justice and equity sensitivity in predicting responses to psychological contract breach: An interactionist perspective. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24, 165–178.Google Scholar
Restubog, S. L. D., Bordia, P., & Tang, R. L. (2007). Behavioural outcomes of psychological contract breach in a non‐western culture: The moderating role of equity sensitivity. British Journal of Management, 18, 376–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, M. (1989). Society and the adolescent self-image (revised ed.). Middletown, UK: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
Rousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2, 121–139.Google Scholar
Schaufeli, W. B., Dierendonck, D. V., & Gorp, K. V. (1996). Burnout and reciprocity: Towards a dual-level social exchange model. Work and Stress, 10, 225–237.Google Scholar
Sedikides, C., Rudish, E. A., Gregg, A. P., Kumashiro, M., & Rusbult, C. (2004). Are normal narcissists psychologically healthy? Self-Esteem Matters, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 400–416.Google Scholar
Smith, S. R., & Archer, R. P. (2014). Introducing personality assessment. In R. P. Archer, & S. R. Smith (Eds.), Personality assessment (2nd ed., pp. 1–36). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.Google Scholar
Tett, R. P., & Guterman, H. A. (2000). Situation trait relevance, trait expression, and cross-situational consistency: Testing a principle of trait activation. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 397–423.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, E., & De Cremer, D. (2006). Self-benefiting in the allocation of scarce resources: leader-follower effects and the moderating effect of social value orientations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1352–1361.Google Scholar
Van Horn, J. E., Schaufeli, W. B., & Taris, T. W. (2001). Lack of reciprocity among Dutch teachers: Validation of reciprocity indices and their relation to stress and well-being. Work and Stress, 15, 191–213.Google Scholar
Watkins, M. (2000). Monte Carlo PCA for parallel analysis. State College, PA: Ed & Psych Associates.Google Scholar
Wei, Y. C. (2013). Person–organization fit and organizational citizenship behavior: Time perspective. Journal of Management & Organization, 19, 101–114.Google Scholar
Zhao, H. A. O., Wayne, S. J., Glibkowski, B. C., & Bravo, J. (2007). The impact of psychological contract breach on work‐related outcomes: A meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60, 647–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar