Managing the Psychological Contract A tool for Supervisors and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
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 &
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).
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’.
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
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.
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.
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
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