Managing the Psychological Contract A tool for Supervisors and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

managing the psychological
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Managing the Psychological Contract A tool for Supervisors and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Managing the Psychological Contract A tool for Supervisors and Doctoral Students Sally Sambrook & Clair Doloriert Bangor Business School Who are we? Professor Sally Sambrook & Dr Clair Doloriert Weve been using &


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Managing the Psychological Contract

A tool for Supervisors and Doctoral Students Sally Sambrook & Clair Doloriert Bangor Business School

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Who are we?

  • Professor Sally Sambrook & Dr Clair Doloriert
  • We’ve been using & revising our PC forms for

a number of years

  • Our collaborative research between ourselves

and others explores various aspects of doctoral supervision and the PC

  • We hope our toolkit enhances your

supervision relationships and we welcome your feedback (see supervisor toolkit).

slide-3
SLIDE 3

What is the Psychological Contract?

  • Argyris (1960 p22) defines the psychological

contract as, ‘the perception of both parties to the employment relationship, organisation and individual, of the reciprocal promises and

  • bligations implied in that relationship’.
slide-4
SLIDE 4

PC and Doctoral Supervision?

  • The element of the psychological contract (PC) has been generally

neglected in PhD supervision (Wainwright, 2010)

  • Wade-Benzoni and Rousseau (1998) firmly argue that psychological

contracts do exist between supervisors and supervisees in the doctoral process

  • Iphofen (2001) has proposed a personal contract from supervisor

to student.

  • We offer a reciprocal contract informed by our work and extant

literature

slide-5
SLIDE 5

How does it work?

  • Breaches of PC occur when a student perceives that

an agent (supervisor, school, university) has failed to fulfil one or more of its obligations comprising the psychological contract.

  • The emotional ‘fallout’ of a breach is a felt violation

which can break down a supervisory relationship.

  • Our PC forms help ‘out’ implicitly held expectations

(of both student and supervisor(s) and manage for possible breaches with obligations.

  • It enables students and supervisors to discuss

violations from an academic perspective, helping all parties take a step back, sometimes, from the emotional side of the perceived breach and work towards a successful resolution.

slide-6
SLIDE 6

What do you have to do?

  • 2 sets of forms

– Initial meeting: 1 form for student, 1 for supervisor(s) – Review meetings: 1 form for student, 1 for supervisor(s)

  • Explain basics of PC to student & invite

them to complete Initial meeting form

  • Supervisors to complete their version of

forms, too

  • All parties meet to discuss, negotiate and

agree PC

  • It is important that all parties have a copy of

completed student and supervisor(s) forms

  • If a felt breach occurs we encourage a

review meeting and that the completed forms are used as a platform for discussion

  • We also recommend annual PC review

meetings, where changes to PC can be identified and renegotiated.

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Completing the forms

– The forms consist of closed and

  • pen questions

– All questions should be answered – Questions can be adapted to suit individual circumstances – All parties are asked to submit genuine responses rather than trying to second guess ‘ideal’ answers – The forms can be used by more than one supervisor – The forms should take around 15 minutes to complete – Student and supervisor should ensure that the details on the form remain confidential between both parties

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Further Reading

  • Doloriert C & Sambrook S (2009) ‘Ethical confessions of the ‘I’ of Autoethnography: the student’s

dilemma,’ Journal of Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 4 (1), 27-45

  • Doloriert C, Sambrook S, Stewart J (forthcoming) The power and emotion of doctoral supervision,

European Journal of Training and Development

  • Doloriert D & Sambrook S (2011) ‘Accommodating an Autoethnographic PhD: The Tale of the Thesis, the

Viva Voce, and the Traditional Business School, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 40 (5), 582-615

  • Sambrook S, Doloriert C & Stewart J (2010) Doctoral supervision: Towards a typology of supervisory

relationships, 11th International Conference on Human Resource Development Research and Practice across Europe, Pecs, Hungary, 2-4- June

  • Sambrook, S and Wainwright, D (2010) The psychological contract: Who’s contracting with whom?

Towards a conceptual model Bangor Business School working papers series BBSWP/10/013 accessed from http://www.bangor.ac.uk/business/docs/BBSWP10013.pdf on April 2012

  • Sambrook, S., Doloriert, C and Stewart, S (2009a) “Doctoral Supervision: Towards a typology of supervisory

relationships” a UFHRF/BMAF study accessed from http://ufhrd.staging.creode.co.uk/wordpress/?p=1909

  • n April 2012
  • Sambrook, S., Doloriert, C.H., and Stewart, J. (2009b) ' Innovative Approaches to Supporting Learning and

Teaching in HRD presented at the 10th International Conference on Human Resource Development Across Europe, Newcastle Business School, 10th-12th June, 2009 WON ALAN MOON PRIZE BEST PAPER.

  • Sambrook, S., Doloriert, C.H., and Stewart, J. (2009c) “The power and emotion of doctoral supervision – a

critical perspective”, presented at the 6th International Critical Management Conference, 13th-15th July, 2009.

  • Sambrook, S., Stewart, J and Roberts, C (2008) Doctoral Supervision: Glimpses from Above, Below and in

the Middle, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 32, (1) 71-84