Talent Management in Private Schools

Today is called as the age of increasing competition among the organizations against the limited resources (Payambarpour & Hooi, 2015). These days, organizations reached higher perception that talented human resources are valuable resources and if they can be managed well (Saadat & Eskandari, 2016). It is clear that getting benefits from talented human resources requires proper management and this is one of the major challenges for organizations (Sayyad , et al., 2011). 

Therefore, Talent Management as a system of identification, recruitment, training, promotion, and retention of talented people has been proposed with the aim of optimizing the organization and to achieve business results (Saadat & Eskandari, 2016). Today, Organizations fully recognized that it is required the best talent human resources and perceive the business environment. Parallel understating the talents are the critical resources that need management for getting the best results (Saadat & Eskandari, 2016).

‘Talent management contains strategies and protocols for the systematic attraction, identification, development, retention and deployment of individuals with high potential who are of particular value to an organization’ (Tansley & Tietze, 2013). As in this view, individuals with high potential and it is usual achieved organizations goals.

According to (Lewis & Heckman, 2006), talent management is defined in three ways: 1) as a combination of standard human resource management practices such as recruitment, selection and career development; 2) as the creation of a large talent pool, ensuring the quantitative and qualitative flow of employees through the organization ; 3) as a good based on demographic necessity to manage talent.  

Not only that but also talent management is a new idea or simply a bundle of existing practices has been questioned (Iles & Preece, 2010). Talent management is an idea that has been around a long time. It’s been relabeled (Warren , 2006). Talent was defined by (Michaels, et al., 2001) as the sum of a person’s abilities his or her intrinsic gifts, skills, knowledge, experience, intelligence, judgment, attitude, character and drive. It also includes his or her ability to learn and grow. Talent is what people must have in order to perform well in their roles and make a difference to organizational performance through their immediate efforts (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014).

There are different types of who should be involved with organization talent. According to (Iles & Preece, 2010) identified following three perspectives.

1.      Exclusive people – key people with high performance and/or potential irrespective of position.

2.      Exclusive position – the right people in the strategically critical jobs.

3.      Inclusive people – everyone in the organization is seen as actually or potentially talented, given opportunity and direction.

As first two perspectives are most common (Iles & Preece, 2010). For example, the organization in which I work, a leading international school, practices formal qualification based technique to allocate teachers to different sections such as diploma holders for preschool section, higher national diploma holders and graduates for primary section and upper school consists with only graduates. Sectional heads are appointed based on their experience and performance by the principal. Deputy Principal and principals are appointed by the board of directors headed by the chairman. End of each academic year the salary increments are decided via principals’ recommendation and performance appraisals by the school management.

I suggest that strategic planning has to be introduced with attracting, recruiting, developing and deploying. The school management should invest significantly in developing and training high potential teachers. The selection criteria should concern cultural fit as formal qualifications are not always the best predictor of performance and retention.

According to (Clarke & Winkler, 2006), the inclusive people approach is comparatively rare in practice, although there have been strong advocates of it such as (Buckingham & Vosburgh, 2001), who wrote that talent is inherent in each person: HR’s most basic challenge is to help one particular person increase his or her performance; to be successful in the future we must restore our focus on the unique talents of each individual employee, and on the right way to transfer those talents into lasting performance.

The process of Talent Management & Talent Pipeline

According to (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014) explained that the process of talent management and talent pipeline parameters mainly affected to the organizations. The following illustrated (Figure 1 & Figure 2) expounded that, to develop and maintain a pool of talented people through the talent pipeline, which consists of the processes of resourcing, career planning and talent development that maintain the flow of talent needed by the organization.

Figure 1 The Talent Management Pipeline

Sources: (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014)

 

Figure 2 The Talent Management Process

Sources: (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014)

·         Talent planning - The process of establishing how many and what sort of talented people are needed now and in the future.

·         Resourcing − the outcomes of talent planning are programmes for obtaining people from within and outside the organization (internal and external resourcing).

·         Talent identification – the use of talent audits to establish who is eligible to become part of the talent pool and to benefit from learning and development and career management programmes.

·         Talent relationship management – building effective relationships with people in their roles.

·         Talent development – learning and development policies and programmes are key components of talent management.

·         Talent retention – the implementation of policies designed to ensure that talented people remain as engaged and committed members of the organization.

·         Career management –this is concerned with the provision of opportunities for people to develop their abilities and their careers so that the organization has the flow of talent it needs and they can satisfy their own aspirations.

·         Management succession planning – as far as possible, the objective is to see that the organization has the managers it requires to meet future business needs.

·         The talent pipeline – the processes of resourcing, talent development and career planning that maintain the flow of talent needed to create the talent pool required by the organization.

·         The talent pool – the resources of talent available to an organization.

According to (Cappelli, 2008) suggested that the signs of a successful talent management strategy are that it is inclusive and that it can address and resolve any incongruity between the supply and demand of talent. He identified that too many firms have more employees than they need for available positions, or a talent shortfall, and always at the wrong times.

Not only that but also talent management is key to engage with employee (Mcdonnell, et al., 2017) . Talent management can lead to elevated levels of employee engagement. This relationship between talent management and employee engagement is mediated by psychological empowerment, since talent management practices increase employees’ perception of empowerment, which may increase their levels of engagement in the organization (Kluijtmans , 2019). The fulfillment of the psychological contract also moderates the relationship between talent management and employee engagement, as employees can adjust their input based on a reciprocal relationship between them and the organization (Tarique & Schuler, 2010).

Talent management practices should foster and increase perceived psychological empowerment for employees to experience this empowering workplace in which they are showing increasing amounts of engagement to the organization (Kuvaas, 2008). Talent management as a whole is a tool that emphasizes organizational activities and processes that involve identification of key positions, development of a talent pool of high potential and performing individuals and the development of HR practices to facilitate the fulfilment and continuance of these positions (Collings, et al., 2009).

Conclusion

The typical focus on talent management is on differentiated performance .This differentiation related to individual employee performance. The Most of the organizations grant most of the rewards, incentives and attention on their top talent ‘Best’; give less recognition, financial awards, and development attention to the majority of other employees ‘Average’; and work blindly to weed out employees who do not meet with expected performance and are classified to have poor potential ‘Poor’. Since isolation of employees can be counterproductive organizations should develop and train high potential   individuals. It is really appreciated if the organizations can think of more inclusive approach and attempt to address the needs of employees at all levels of the organization. Core values and business principles can be integrated into the talent management process such as recruitment and selection methods, leadership development activities and benefit programs. Through differentiation step in talent management organization manage to establish branding which help them to stand apart from other competitors.

References

Armstrong, M. & Taylor, S., 2014. Armstrong's Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice. 13 ed. UK: Ashford Colour press Ltd.

Buckingham, M. & Vosburgh, R. M., 2001. The 21st century human resources function: it’s the talent, stupid. Human Resource Planning, 24(4), pp. 17-23.

Cappelli, P., 2008. Talent on Demand – Managing Talent in an Age of Uncertainty. Boston : Harvard Business School Press .

Clarke , R. & Winkler, V., 2006. Reflections on Talent Management. London: CIPD .

Collings, D. G., Scullion, H. & Vaiman, V., 2009. European perspectives on Talent Management. European Journal of International Management, 5(5), pp. 453-462.

Iles, P. A. & Preece, D., 2010. Talent management and career development. In: Hand Book of Leadership and Management Development. Gower: Farnham, pp. 243-260.

Kluijtmans , T. J., 2019. Increasing Employee Engagement through Talent Management, as moderated by Psychological Contract Fulfillment and mediated via Psychological Empowerment., Tilburg: Tilburg School of Social and Behavioural Sciences .

Kuvaas, B., 2008. An exploration of how the employee–organization relationship affects the linkage between perception of developmental human resource practices and employee outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), pp. 1-25.

Lewis, R. E. & Heckman, . R. J., 2006. Talent management: A critical review. Human Resource Management Review, 16(2), pp. 139-154.

Mcdonnell, A., Collings, D. G., Mellahi, K. & Schuler, R. S., 2017. Talent management: A systematic review and future prospects. European Journal of International Management, 11(1), pp. 86-128.

Michaels, E. D., Handfield-Jones, . H. & Axelrod, B., 2001. The War for Talent. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press; Illustrated edition.

Payambarpour , S. A. & Hooi, L. W., 2015. The impact of talent management and employee engagement on organisational performance. International Journal of Management Practice, 8(4), pp. 311-335.

Saadat, V. & Eskandari, Z., 2016. Talent management: The great challenge of leading organizations. International journal of Organizational Leadership , Volume 5, pp. 103-109.

Saadat, V. & Eskandari, Z., 2016. Talent management: The great challenge of leading organizations. Industrial Management Institute , Volume 5, pp. 103-109.

Sayyad , S., Mohammadi , M. M. & Nikpour, A., 2011. Talent management as a key concept in organizational domain. Monthly of Work & Society, Volume 135, pp. 81-86.

Tansley, C. & Tietze, S., 2013. Rites of passage through talent management progression stages: an identity work perspective. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(9), pp. 1799-1815.

Tarique, I. & Schuler, R. S., 2010. Global talent management: Literature review, integrative framework, and suggestions for further research. Journal of world business, 45(2), pp. 122-133.

Warren , E. C., 2006. Curtain call. People Management, 23 March, pp. 24-29.

 

 

 

Employee Engagement in Private Schools

 Defining Employee Management.

Employee Management as the harnessing of organization members’ selves to their work roles; in engagement, people employee and express themselves physically, cognitively and emotionally during role performance (Kahn, 1990).

According to (Kahn, 1990) engagement means to be both psychologically and physically present when occupying and performing an organizational role. Employee engagement can be defined simply as passion for work (Truss , et al., 2006).

Further employee engagement is defined as employee willingness and ability to help their company succeed; largely by providing discretionary effort on a sustainable basis (Perrin , 2003). Engagement was individual’s involvement and satisfaction with as well as enthusiasm for work (Harter, et al., 2002).

The components of Employee Engagement.

Engagement consists of three overlapping namely Motivation, Commitment and Organizational Citizenship.

Figure 1 IES Model of Employee Engagement

Source: (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014)

 

Commitment

Engagement contain many of the elements of commitment (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014). Organizational commitment is the degree to which an individual identifies with an organization and is committed to its goals (Little & Little , 2006).

Motivation

When the work itself is meaningful it is also said to have intrinsic motivation (Macey, et al., 2009).

Organizational Citizenship Behavior

Organizational citizenship behavior as originally defined by (Organ, 1988) is employee behavior that goes above and beyond the call duty and contributes to organizational effectiveness.

Organizational citizenship is defined as being respectful of and helpful to colleagues and willingness to go the extra mile (Robinson , et al., 2004) or working longer hours, trying harder, accomplishing more and speaking positively about the organization (Kumar & Swetha , 2011).

Drivers of Employee Engagement

According to (Crawford, et al., 2013) listed the following drivers which effect on employee engagement.

·         Job Challenge

Job challenge takes place when the scope of jobs is broad, job responsibility is high and there is a high work load.

·         Autonomy

The freedom, independence and discretion allowed to employee in scheduling their work and determining the procedures for carrying it out. It provides a sense of ownership and control over work outcomes.

·         Variety

Jobs which allow individuals to perform many different activities or use many different skills.

·         Feedback

Providing employees with direct and clear information about the effectiveness of their performance.

·         Fit

The existence of compatibility between an individual and a work environment.

·         Opportunities for development

These make work meaningful because they provide pathways for employee growth and fulfillment.

·         Rewards and recognition

These present both direct and indirect returns on the personal investment of one’s time in acting out a work role. 

The drivers can increase employee engagement level (Markos & Sridevi, 2010). Therefore, (Robinson , et al., 2004) points out that the key drivers of employee engagement is a sense of feeling valued and involved which has the components such as involvement in decision making the extent to which employee feels able to voice their ideas, the opportunities employee have to develop their jobs and the extent to which the organization is concerned for employees’ health and well-being. 

Figure 2 Engagement Drivers

 Sources: (Smith & Markwick, 2009)

Outcomes of Engagement

The following outcomes were listed by (Stairs & Galpin , 2009).

·         Lower absenteeism and high employee retention

·         Increased productivity

·         Improve quality and reduced error rates

·         Enhance customer satisfaction and loyalty.

·         Faster business growth

According to 2007, cited in Levison, 2009 (Smith & Markwick, 2009) found that employees who are happy in their work are more likely to stay in the organization. Engagement is not manly forcing employees to work hard but about providing the necessary conditions in which they will work more effectively through releasing employee’s discretionary behavior (Demerouti & Bakker, 2014).

Employee engagement leads to both individual outcomes such as quality of people’s work and their own experiences of doing that work, as well as organizational level outcomes for example growth and productivity of organizations (Kahn, 1992 ).

Different measures of engagement such as involvement and enthusiasm connect to such variables as employee turnover, customer satisfaction loyalty, and safety and to a lesser degree, productivity and profitability criteria (Harter, et al., 2002).

The basic requirement of education is enhancing knowledge, skills and attitude among students and teachers are highly responsible for maintaining high standards in academic, extracurricular activities and sports. In context of academics teaching, marking of books and conducting examinations termly are done my teachers. Organizing extracurricular activities and sports events provides more opportunities for children to showcase their talents and sharpen them.

All above mention duties are generally performed by the typical teachers in the Network of schools where I work in. if employee engagement is brought to the organization, the teachers may go beyond discharging fundamental duties and do extra work in order to uplift the educational standard of slow learners by working along with extra hours. Subject teachers can think out of the box and can implement a leadership training sessions in order to inculcate leadership qualities among students rather than teaching only the subject matters.

References

Armstrong, M. & Taylor, S., 2014. Armstrong's Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice. 13 ed. UK: Ashford Colour press Ltd.

Crawford, E. R., Bitch, R. L., Buckman, B. & Bergeron, J. J. M., 2013. The antecendents and drivers of employee engagement in (eds) . In: Employee Engagement in Theory and Practice. London : Routledge, pp. 57-81.

Demerouti, E. & Bakker, A. B., 2014. Job Demands-Resources Theory. Wellbing: A complete Reference Guide, Volume 3, pp. 37-64.

Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L. & Hayes , T. L., 2002. Business-unit level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, Volume 87, pp. 268-279.

Kahn, W. A., 1990. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, Volume 33, pp. 692-724.

Kahn, W. A., 1992 . To be full there: psychological presence at work. Human Relations, Volume 45 , pp. 321-349.

Kumar , P. D. & Swetha , G., 2011. A Prognostic Examination of Employee Engagement from its Historical Roots. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 2(3).

Little, B. & Little , P., 2006. Employee engagement: conceptual issues. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict, 10(1), pp. 111-120.

Macey, H., Schneider, B., Barbera, K. M. & Young , S. A., 2009. Employee Engagement: Tools for Analysis, Practice, and Competitive Advantage. Personnel Psychology , 65(1).

Markos , S. & Sridevi, S. M., 2010. Employee Engagement: The Key to Improving Performance. International Journal of Business and Management , 5(12), pp. 89-96.

Organ, D. W., 1988. Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Good Soldier Syndrome. Lexington: Lexington Books/D. C. Heath and Com.

Perrin , T., 2003. Working Today: Understanding What Drives Employee Engagement, USA: Scarlett survey.

Robinson , D. L., Perryman, S. & Hayday, S., 2004. The Drivers of Employee Engagement. Brighton: Institute for Employment Studies.

Smith , G. R. & Markwick, C., 2009. Enabling Engagement in Practice . In: Employee Engagement A review of current thinking. Brighton: Institute for Employeement Studies   , pp. 28-42.

Smith , G. R. & Markwick, C., 2009. Outcomes of Engagement . In: Employee Engagement A review of current thinking . Brighton: Institute for Employment Studies, pp. 16-22.

Stairs, M. & Galpin , M., 2009. Positive Engagement: From Employee Engagement to Workplace Happiness  . In: N. Garcea, S. Harrington & P. A. Linley, eds. Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology and Work. New York: The Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology and Work,Oxford University Press .

Truss , C. et al., 2006. Working Life: Employee Attitudes and Engagement, London: Kingston Business School.

 

The Impact of Psychological Contract in Private Schools

 

Concept of Psychological Contract

A psychological contract is concerned with the perceptions of both parties to the employment relationship, organization and individual of the reciprocal promises and obligations implied in that relationship (Wangithi & Muceke , 2012). According to (Knights & Kennedy, 2005 ) a psychological contract as a set of individual beliefs or perception regarding reciprocal obligations between the employees and the organization.

Moreover, psychological contract can be defined as the existence of the psychological contract is the indicator of the employee’s commitment to the organization (Schalk & Roe, 2007). It has been proposed that psychological contract is a very important motivator for employees and if the responsibilities of the organization were neglected the employee trust and organizational commitment decrease while turnover rates increase (Buyens et al., 2005).

In a psychological contract as a set of obligations of individuals and organizations (Knights & Kennedy, 2005 ). The employee has expectations in the areas of promotion, pay, training, job security, career development and support with personal problems. In return the organization expects the employee to be willing to work extra hours, be loyal, volunteer to do non required tasks give advance notice when quitting be willing to accept transfer to refuse to support. Competition to protect company information (Wangithi & Muceke , 2012).   

Figure 1 Psychological Contracts "Iceberg" Model

 Source: (Naywinaung, 2014)

As private school teachers work on contact basis private school teachers seemed to perceive their employment relationship as more economical and less guaranteed (Cuyper et al., 2008).The private school teachers are possibility influenced by performance based factors such as, losing their job and not exceeding their specially limited obligations (Demirkasımoğlu, 2014).

Violation of Psychological Contract

Violation occurs when one party in a relationship perceives another to have failed to fulfil promised obligations. Since contract emerge under assumptions of good faith and fair dealing (Macneil , 1985). Violation of the psychological contract is distinct from unmet expectations and perceptions of inequity. Employees initially hold impractical expectations and when these expectations go unmet, employees may become less satisfied (Robinson & Rousseau, 1994). Expectancies are the perceived probabilities of outcomes resulting from employee behavior (Mitchell, 1974). Unfulfilled promises deprive employees of desired outcomes, an issue of distributive or outcome fairness. Often associated with perceptions of inequity. Violations also involve issues of procedural fairness, reflecting the quality of treatment employees’ experience (Robinson & Rousseau, 1994). Failure to honor a contract creates a sense of wrongdoing, deception and betrayal with pervasive implications for the employment relationship (Rousseau, 1989).

Violations decrease trust. When rules of friendship are violated, trust and respect decline (Davis & Todd, 1985). If the employer reneges on a promise, that employer’s integrity is questioned. Trust may be also lost in the employer’s motives because a violation signals that the employer’s original motives to build and maintain a mutually relationship have changed or were false to begin with. The violation of psychological contract results in a decline in willingness to contribute and intention to stay in an organization (Nelesh & Parumasur, 2014).

Types of Violations

According to (Robinson & Rousseau, 1994) there are different types of violations can be observed in organizations .such as,

·         Training / Development

Absence of training or training experience not as promised.

·         Compensation

Discrepancies between promised and realized pay benefits bonuses.

·         Promotion

Promotion or advancement schedule not as promised.

·         Nature of job

Employer perceived as having misrepresented the nature of the department or the job.

·         Job Security

Promises regarding degree of job security one could expect were not met.

·         Feedback

Feedback and reviews inadequate compared to what was promised.

·         Responsibility

Employee given less responsibility and/ or challenge than promised..

Psychological Contract on Employee Retention

The psychological contract is a concept plays a role in employees’ decisions to stay or leave (Turnley & Feldman, 1998).Employee retention practices are successful if they are in tandem with what employee value and consider when deciding to stay or leave the organization. There are many reasons why employee leave an organization. These include lack of challenging opportunities work schedule (Raja et al., 2004).

Employee retention involves taking measures to encourage employees to remain in the organization for the maximum period of time (Griffeth & Hom, 2001). Employees are difficult to retain because they give more importance for their career development rather achievement of organizational goals and being loyal to the organization develop to reduce voluntary turnover rates (Mitchell & Lee, 2001). Psychological contract is a construct of both scientific and practical importance and that it is especially relevant for Human Resources managers concerned with the retention of employees (Vos et al., 2006).   

 Conclusion

Psychological contract is not as simple as “work” and “pay”. Both employees and employer are expected to play their roles along with mutual understanding between the two parties. The organizations can achieve the panel goals if the psychological contracts proceeds well. Where the psychological contract is weak or violated it will pave the way for low performance and high turnover.

Psychological contract can be violated. Psychological contract violations are attend negatively associated with satisfaction, trust and employees’ intentions to remain with their employer and positively associated with actual turn over. During employee recruitment and selection the interview should clearly communicate the responsibilities and expectations of the employee since the establish meet of psychological contract begins during the hiring process.

Realistic job previews that contain a detailed description of relevant job aspects, including negative as well as positive features, will contribute to the formation of pragmatic psychological contract and reduce turnover (Knights & Kennedy, 2005). 

The leading international school which I work, one of the employee “inputs” of the psychological contract are being fulfilled by the teachers. Such as, effort, performance results, commitment and loyalty. If teachers can equipped with innovation, management, leadership and tolerance the institute will perform better and students will be benefitted.

Moreover, the school management maintains the employee “rewards” such as, security, training, safety, workplace, promotion, responsibility and respect, but flexibility, pension and ownership employee rewards are lacking. If the management can rectify the above weakness the organization will be strengthen for its smooth functioning.

References

Buyens, , Schalk, & Vos , A.D., 2005. Making Sense of a New Employment Relationship: Psychological Contract‐Related Information Seeking and the Role of Work Values and Locus of Control. International Journal of Selection and Assesment , 13(1), pp.41-52.

Cuyper, N.D., Rigotti, , Witte , H.D. & Mohr, G., 2008. Balancing psychological contracts: Validation of a typology. The International Journal of Human Resource Management , 19(4), pp.543-61.

Davis, K. & Todd, M.J., 1985. ‘Friendship and love’. Advances in Descriptive Psychology, 2.

Demirkasımoğlu, N., 2014. Teachers’ Psychological Contract Perceptions and Person-Environment Fit Levels. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, (56), pp.45-68.

Griffeth, & Hom, , 2001. Retaining Valued Employees (Advanced Topics in Organizational Behavior). 1st ed. SAGE Publications, Inc; 1st edition.

Knights, A. & Kennedy, , 2005. Psychological contract violation: impacts on job satisfaction and organizational commitment among Australian senior public servants. Applied H.R.M. Research, 10(2), pp.57-72.

Macneil , , 1985. Relational Contract: What We Do and Do Not Know. Wisconsin Law Review, 4, pp.483-526.

Mitchell, R., 1974. Expectancy models of job satisfaction, occupational preference and effort: A theoretical, methodological, and empirical appraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 81(12), pp.1053-77.

Mitchell, & Lee, , 2001. The unfolding model of voluntary turnover and job embeddedness: Foundations for a comprehensive theory of attachment. Research in Organizational Behavior, pp.189-246.

Naywinaung, T., 2014. www.slideshare.net. [Online] Available at: https://www.slideshare.net/ThureinNaywinaung/psychological-contractsicebergdiagram [Accessed 8 January 2014].

Nelesh , & Parumasur, , 2014. Re-establishing the psychological contract as a precursor to employee retention. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 12(4).

Raja, , Ntalianis, & Johns, , 2004. The Impact of Personality on Psychological Contracts. The Academy of Management Journal, 47, pp.350-67.

Robinson, S.L. & Rousseau, D.M., 1994. Violating the psychological contract : not the exception but the norm. Journal of Organizational Behaviour , 15, pp.245-59.

Rousseau, , 1989. Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal , 2, pp.121-39.

Schalk, & Roe, E., 2007. Towards a Dynamic Model of the Psychological Contract. Journal of the Theory of Social Behavior, 37(2), pp.167-82.

Turnley, & Feldman, , 1998. Psychological contract violations during corporate restructuring. Human Resource Management , 37(1), pp.71-83.

Vos, A.D., Meganck, & Buyens , , 2006. The role of the psychological contract in retention management: Confronting HR-managers’ and employees’ views on retention factors and the relationship with employees’ intentions to stay. Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School.

Wangithi , & Muceke , , 2012. Effect of Human Resource Management Practices on Psychological Contract in Organizations. International Journal of Business and Social Science , 3(19), pp.177-22.