THE STUDY ON MEMBER INCENTIVE OF SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH GROUP IN UNIVERSITY BASED ON
PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACTS
Feng Haiyan
School of Economics and Management, Beijing Jiaotong University
No.3 Shang Yuan Cun, Hai Dian District, Beijing, China
Keywords: Member Incentive, Scientific Research Group, Psychological Contracts, University.
Abstract: As development on scientific technology and socialization on the scientific research, the management on
exoteric and collective scientific research becomes more difficult. The paper gives the subjects of 670
teachers coming from some universities from Jiangsu province. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) has
conducted to underlying constructs regarding an individual’s obligation to the university. Three underlying
factors were found and are referred to as meet‘academic expectations’, ‘commitment’ and finally ‘above
and beyond’. The qualitative research of the paper identified four key foci of academic responsibility-the
university, the discipline, society and students, which greatly influenced the formation and effects of
member incentive of scientific research group based on psychological contracts.
1 INTRODUCTION
Since the 1980s, as development on scientific
technology and socialization on the scientific
research, the management on exoteric and collective
scientific research becomes more difficult. The
increasingly competitive environment and
technological developments in university have
engendered more and more organizational
restructuring resulting in “changes in employment
relationships with employees at all levels” (Tsui &
Wang, 2002).
In the past, the organizational contractures of
research team are not adapted by the current changes
and challenges, which need to be performed by
collective wisdom. the construction of research team
and the achievements are not satisfied. Therefore,
how to develop research team is more and more
important.
The changes have stimulated much scholarly
interest, particularly the study of employee
responses to different types of employment
relationships (Tsui, Pearce, Porter & Tripoli, 1997)
and psychological contracts (Shore & Barksdale,
1998).
A psychological contract is the mutual
expectations held by a number of members or staff
scientists with different levels of scholarly
development and a leader or research director (often
a prestigious head professor) regarding the terms and
conditions of the exchange relationship.
In the studies of member incentive of group
based on psychological contracts, there is a large
number of literature addressing psychological
contract violation or breach.
Many studies of member incentive of group
have generally shown that perceived psychological
contract breach reduces members’ commitment to
the group, willingness to engage in group citizenship
behavior, productivity, job satisfaction, job
performance, and enhance the intent to leave the
group and actual turnover. Common across these
researches is that they examined perceived
psychological contract breach and its consequences
only from the perspective of members of group.
The paper gives the subjects of 670 teachers
coming from some universities from Jiangsu
province, the qualitative research of the paper
identified four key foci of academic
responsibility-the university, the discipline, society
and students, which greatly influenced the formation
and effects of member incentive of scientific
423
Haiyan F..
THE STUDY ON MEMBER INCENTIVE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH GROUP IN UNIVERSITY BASED ON PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACTS.
DOI: 10.5220/0003590604230431
In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (KMKSSC-2011), pages 423-431
ISBN: 978-989-8425-54-6
Copyright
c
 2011 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

research group based on psychological contracts.
2 THE RELATED DEFINITIONS
2.1 The Term ‘Scientific Research’
The involved respects in this term include: stability,
innovative, progress, series, continuation and
systematicness.
I. Stability. An academic team, or persons
who really strive to the research must insist on the
long-term work and study attentively in a certain
field, direction or subject. But at the same time, team
or persons should follow the teaching principle to
pay attention to consider things professionally and
extensively. And must know about the knowledge of
the relative subjects or the adjoin fields. For example,
the achievements of the physics can be introduced to
the computer field, which is like the introduction of
science of heredity at last caused the production of
the hereditary algorithm. We can’t ignore the
benefits which are bought from the extensive
accumulation of knowledge in the relevant field.
II. Innovative. The innovative of the scientific
research covers five levels which is sorted by the
creativity extent: innovation with a new field,
innovation with a new branch of a certain field (new
direction), innovation with a certain subject in a
branch, innovation with the reinforcement and
development of the original skills in a certain subject,
innovation with the integration of original theories
and techniques.
III. Progress. It means the researcher should
stand by the front of science and follow it all the
time, and compare the research results with the
original achievements in order to see whether his
research can surmount the original achievement and
reach the advanced level in the world.
IV. Series. In the relatively stable condition,
the study work needs the characteristic of series, and
the research results need to be developed from a
rudimentary level to an advanced level. If the
research result is expected to be series of theory, we
must gradually build up the research system: the
basic theory----the engineering application----the
development of the technology.
V. Continuation. Since a new research
direction (branch) is formed, there must be
psychological need of sustainable development and
research route of sustainable development. The
source of every special topic is the inevitability that
the theory itself will develop and the objective
stimulus from reality. On the basis of our research
results now, the following topic of research could be
listed here: web-structure mining, image mining,
audio mining, video mining, cause and effect
automaton, etc.
VI. Systematicness. The research we engaged
in such as structuring data mining, complicated type
data mining and knowledge database-based data
mining is all organized according to the six layers
structure below. Thus, our research work can show
some relatively completely systemic characteristics.
2.2 The Definition of Psychological
Contract
Psychological contract represents the mutual beliefs,
perceptions, and informal obligations between an
employer and an employee. It sets the dynamics for
the relationship and defines the detailed practicality
of the work to be done. It is distinguishable from the
formal written contract of employment which, for
the most part, only identifies mutual duties and
responsibilities in a generalized form. During the
recruitment process, the employer and interviewee
will discuss what they each can offer in the
prospective relationship. The psychological contract
is defined as an employee’s beliefs about promises
and their related obligations/expectations that
comprise the informal exchange agreement between
an employee and their organization (Conway and
Briner, 2005). Perceived breach refers to the
cognition that one’s organization has failed to meet
one or more obligations within one’s psychological
contract in a manner commensurate with one’s
contributions (Morrison and Robinson, 1997).
EVLN frameworks such as Turnley and Feldman
(1999) suggest that employees will respond to
psychological contract breach by increased exit
(leaving the firm altogether), increased voice (taking
initiative with supervisors to improve conditions),
decreased loyalty (decreasing the number of
extra-role behaviors they engage in) or increased
neglect (putting in half-hearted effort, more
absenteeism and lateness, less attention to quality).
Antecedents of breach are those factors that are
thought to cause breach (Conway and Briner, 2005).
Feldhiem (1999) reflects these two strands by
dividing the psychological contract into:
1) Transactional: this is the economic or monetary
base with clear expectations that the
organization will fairly compensate the
ICEIS 2011 - 13th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems
424


performance delivered and punish inadequate or
inappropriate acts; and
2) Relational: this is a socio-emotional base that
underlies expectations of shared ideals and
values, and respect and support in the
interpersonal relationships.
3 THE CHARACTERISTIC AND
PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT
OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
GROUP
3.1 The Characteristic of Scientific
Research Group
As mentioned above, the characteristics of scientific
research group are reflected and followed ‘SIPSCS’.
1. Generally, a scientific research team is
established based on key lab or institute center. For
example, vehicle technology institute team in Hunan
University relies on domestic vehicle cabin design
and produce key lab. This may reflect ‘stability’,
‘constitution’ above. The person in scientific team
can stay at a institute till the project is accomplished.
The long-term project brings stability for the
members and requires constant process.
2. The direction of research toward basic and
applications
Because of limitations on the foundation and
condition in research, the scientific teams are
centralized applications on biology, chemistry and
physics. It requires series and innovative technology
in the research. The research results need to be
developed from a rudimentary level to an advanced
level and has innovation with the integration of
original theories and techniques.
3. The members in the team are familiar with
each other
The team in the school is generally formed by
the researcher in this school. They have already
researched with the common method and come to an
agree. This makes it better to deduct duration of a
mission or project.
4. The key leaders are outstanding young
scientist
School research team is generally formed by
outstanding young scientist and makes 3 or 5 core
member to lead. They have a reasonable professional
structure and age structure. To do so can make the
research team members to complement each other
and complete tasks better.
Based on these characteristics, a scientific
research team is uniquely and particularity, different
from other team. Under these characteristics, the
achievements and expression of scientific team is
more or less influenced by psychological contract.
3.2 Psychological Contract in Scientific
Research Group
The university-based research centers consisted of a
leader or research director (often a prestigious head
professor) and a number of members or staff
scientists with different levels of scholarly
development. Moreover, they benefited from a great
deal of autonomy, functioning as truly independent
small-scale organizations. The relationship between
research director and center scientists captures a
substantial portion of the employment relationship.
Although certain aspects of the employment
relationship are still managed at the university level
(e.g., benefits administration), an important number
of contract expectations are instantiated at the center
level (e.g., performance requirements, scholarly
development, access to promotions and incentives).
In general, research center directors are the primary
“contract makers”
(Rousseau, 1995; Rousseau & Greller, 1994) in
this employment relationship. Research centers exist
in a variety of venues, from universities and
government agencies to private enterprises (de
Hemptinne & Andrews, 1979; Lambright & Teich,
1981; Payne, 1990). Despite the variety of
organizational types, the social structure of research
organizations is strikingly similar (P. B. Cohen,
Kruse, & Anbar, 1982; Mintzberg, 1979). This
similarity has been attributed to the ethos of science
and its specific norms regarding appropriate
behavior for scientists in organizations (Pelz &
Andrews, 1966; Storer, 1966). Research
organizations tend to allow scientists a great deal of
autonomy and control over their own tasks. As
Lambright and Teich (1981) pointed out, “The
standard model for a research setting is the
university, a self-consciously egalitarian
organization that emphasizes autonomy, individual
entrepreneurship, peer evaluation of performance,
non-uniformity, and minimal administrative control”
(p. 305). The broader organization, whether it is a
university or a school within the university, a
government agency, or a research and development
facility of a large corporation, often acts as an
THE STUDY ON MEMBER INCENTIVE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH GROUP IN UNIVERSITY BASED ON
PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACTS
425

umbrella hosting a number of research centers.
Knorr, Mittermeir, Aichholzer, and Waller (1979)
reported that university-based research centers retain
most of the structural power in terms of goal setting,
budget and resource allocation, promotions and
incentives, and control over research tasks. In effect
they “constitute more or less independent
small-scale organizations” (p. 97). Research
directors (center leaders) play a crucial role, acting
in effect as the primary agent of the employer and
foremost contract maker in expressing commitments
and evaluating performance of staff scientists (center
members). The opportunities staff scientists have for
funding, publication, participation at conferences,
accessing promotions, or career development are
largely determined by the research director and his
or her personal management style, competence, and
power (Knorr et al., 1979). At the same time,
directors depend on contributions from center
scientists for accomplishing research goals and
scientific productivity. Directors retain considerable
control over administrative decisions affecting their
centers by taking part in various academic
committees or by influencing the selection of other
colleagues who occupy critical managerial positions
in the hierarchy. Thus, as critical players of
organizational politics, the role of research directors
is “much more similar in structural terms to the role
of top management than to the role of a departmental
head in an industrial firm” (Knorr etal., 1979, p. 98).
4 THE EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
ON MEMBER INCENTIVE OF
SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
GROUP BASED ON
PSYCHOLOGICAL
CONTRACTS IN UNIVERSITY
The subjects of this study are 670 teachers coming
from some universities from Jiangsu province.
Effective sample as follows: Doctors were 138,
accounting for 25.5%; Master 301, accounting for
55.5%; undergraduate 103, accounting for 19%., 306
were males, accounting for 56.5%; women, 236
people, accounting for 43.5%.People to work for
two years were 168, accounting for 31%; for 2-5
years, 210 people, accounting for 37.7%;work for
5-10 years, 158 persons, accounting for 30.1%; 10
years or more 6 people, accounting for 1.2%.
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was the
following table 1, which conducted to determine
underlying constructs regarding an individual’s
obligation to the university. Three underlying factors
were found and are referred to as meet ‘academic
expectations’, ‘commitment’ and finally ‘above
and beyond’. Again the factor analysis was
satisfactory, with a KMO of 0.765 and a Bartlett’s of
0.00. The eigenvalues indicated that a three factor
model was present. Equally, the variance explained
was 58%, whilst generally 60% is required, which
Table 1: University’s obligations to the members of scientific research group: Exploratory factor analysis.
Item 1 2 3
Comply with university rules and regulations 0.74
Act ethically at work 0.65 0.40
Advance your discipline 0.62 0.58
Publish scholarly research 0.58
Work effectively and efficiently 0.57 0.45
Stay employed by the university for the next 2 years 0.77
Travel for work 0.73
Act collegially 0.61
Work long hours to complete tasks 0.52 0.51
Complete tasks that are not strictly part of your job 0.78
Complete tasks that are asked of you 0.66
Provide teaching quality 0.52 0.61
Enhance student development 0.58 0.59
ICEIS 2011 - 13th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems
426

means the figure is near enough to suggest a three
factor model. Some of the colorations in the
coloration matrix were also greater than 0.30. Hence,
factor analysis is deemed appropriate for use.
By psychological contracts nature,
psychological contracts vary significantly across
groups and even across different sections or units of
the same group. Hence, the many literatures suggest
that greater use of idiographic methods to assess
member psychological contracts of scientific
research group would be appropriate in order to
access and understand the varied member experience
of the psychological contract in scientific research
group.
The qualitative research identified four key foci
of academic responsibility that greatly influenced
the formation and effects of member incentive of
scientific research group based on psychological
contracts and the four key foci of academic
responsibility were: a) the university b) the
discipline c) society d) students
Members of scientific research group join the
university with a strong work ethic and this is
evidenced by many comments relating to a
willingness to work outside ‘normal’ working hours,
to be flexible in taking on various roles and to
engage emotionally with their work:
'. . .a willingness to work beyond the stated
hours and a willingness to take on Faculty and
University roles that are not sustained in one’s duty
statement and that aren’t remunerated.'
The members of scientific research group feel
that the breadth of knowledge they bring to their
work is an important contribution to the University.
It was consistently stated that disciplinary
knowledge, teaching and industry knowledge and
experience, and industry contacts and networks, are
highly valuable, but are not equally recognised by
management. Conscience, personal ethics, integrity
and a desire to make society a better place were
strong motivators for staff and represented
commonly discussed aspects of personal qualities
that staff felt they were bringing to their academic
work. Motivation and enthusiasm were frequently
discussed in terms of ‘ making a difference’,
‘making society a better place’, and generally
expressing a desire to advance social justice and
ethics.
These responses demonstrate that it would be
limiting to attempt to understand the formation of
the psychological contract only in terms of what the
member of scientific research group feels they owe
the university. The commitment and concerns of
academics are often directed more toward the
students and society with the institution providing a
means of serving those higher goals. If they are
frustrated with unmet expectations and promises, it
is likely that these frustrations will occur in areas
that impinge upon their ability to fulfil their personal
mission of attaining these higher goals.
Building upon perceived promises of mutual
exchange the members of scientific research group
spoke at length regarding what they were expecting
of the University in return for what they bring to
their job. A common theme that emerged from the
statements is that academics want to be recognised
and treated as professionals. Much of the discussion
centred on the expectations of leadership, fairness
and transparency in promotion and recognition of
one’s personal commitment to the profession, the
university and the students.
Beyond the more tangible benefits that would
normally be associated with employer
responsibilities employees expect good leadership
and sound management skills. Issues related to
leadership such as trust clear and honest
communication, transparency, advocacy, individual
consideration and respect were prominent
throughout the conversations. Generally, there was a
realistic acceptance of the constraints within which
management must make decisions, and that such
constraints can lead to broken promises and failure
to meet expectations from staff. What was not
accepted, and this raised considerable emotion, was
failure to address such situations in an honest
manner and communicate outcomes effectively:
'Part of the transparency is the explanation for
decisions that are made, clear justification and
reasons why the decision was made rather than ‘this
is the decision’ and nothing else.'
Commitment to teaching and the desire to
contribute to society provide powerful motivators
for academic staff and the need for academic
freedom and job discretion were linked to these
motivations. Staff expressed a strong expectation of
autonomy, job discretion and inclusion in decision
making and this was related to their professional
identity:
'There's an expectation that our professionalism
will be respected, that we're not going to be treated
as if we've got nothing to add and that we're just
automatons in the machine'
‘Fairness in all things’ was an expectation
consistently expressed by the members of scientific
THE STUDY ON MEMBER INCENTIVE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH GROUP IN UNIVERSITY BASED ON
PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACTS
427

research group, which included equitable pay,
impartiality, fairness in promotion, consistency in
applying rules, acceptance of union involvement,
reciprocity, and an expectation that family and
outside commitments should not cause disadvantage.
The members of scientific research group also
perceived their role as being equally involved in
teaching, researching and administration and expect
to be rewarded accordingly. This expectation of
recognition for effort and achievement goes beyond
the desire for a fair promotion and remuneration
system, and addresses a basic need to be affirmed,
appreciated and acknowledged by others:
‘ Recognition and acknowledgement
particularly when you go beyond …the normal call
of duty which I think we do frequently’.
Key areas where the University was considered
to have fulfilled or exceeded its implicit promises of
employment included support in such areas as
research, outside activities, training and
development and with regard to personal and
emotional issues. While the support was appreciated,
staff recognised that it was a reciprocal relationship:
'I think it’s a recognition that they are willing to
do something for you to help you out, that you will
pay them back [agreement from group] tenfold down
the track . . . it makes it sound like an exchange
relationship but still I think it is more than just that '
Even the groups who spoke more positively
about their psychological contracts had much that
they wanted to speak about with regard to when
these contracts had been violated. The most striking
consistency across the three focus groups of
academics carried out for this research was the
unprompted repetition of the phrase ‘changing the
goalposts’ at each of the focus groups.
There were also many references to
dysfunctional aspects of the organisational culture
such as: competitiveness, bureaucratic centralised
control, short-term focus, and lack of customer (i.e.
student) focus.
‘We have talked about who are our customers
and who we are building relationships with. I have
seen [the university] do this and once again I expect
it happens at other institutions that the student are
not the main focus and I think it’s a pity.’
Administrative rules and regulations constituted
one of the two key issues that were at the heart of
most of the reports of psychological contract
violation. Many members of scientific research
group perceived an encroachment of administrative
systems stressing compliance, conformity,
rationality and efficiency upon their practice as
academic professionals who require flexibility,
personal discretion and autonomy.
More broadly, the negative effects of the
psychological contract violation were shown to be
mediated by the nature of the academic work that
involved a commitment to the students even when
frustration with the institution was high:
‘there is that third dimension which plays a
huge part in [the] psychological contract with the
students. . . our responsibility and caring for the
students that locks us into that contract …’
The most frequently cited responses to
psychological contract violation were loss of loyalty
and neglect behaviours. Some said that the
decreased loyalty was resulting in their ‘giving up’
and feeling helpless. Others referred to behaviour
that saw them less likely to engage in extra-role
behaviour:
'You concentrate more on your own interests
instead of the broader interests than you have in the
past.’ Increased neglect, particularly decreased
attention to teaching quality, was a prominent topic
of discussion:
‘ It goes back to equity theory of
motivation . . . You’ll do one of two things. You’ll
either withdraw your labour totally . . . or you will
slow down …'
However, for some members of scientific
research group the violation event gave them
impetus to adapt to the new system and even
enjoyment of the opportunities it offered. These
adaptations to the new priorities and demands of the
University showed that internal and external
catalysts during an organisational restructure lead to
renegotiations in which the contract evolves.
5 THE SOLUTIONS AND
SUGGESTIONS
Following are three aspects to manage psychological
contract in scientific research team.
5.1 The Type of Interpersonal
Psychological Contract
1. Establish Effective Communication Channels
In the scientific research team, understanding and
recognition of team goal are different while the
status are not equal. Therefore, the rights or
ICEIS 2011 - 13th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems
428


responsibilities and individual cognition are likely
not the same. Communicate timely and accurate
communication is necessary to avoid psychological
contract violation caused by the inconsistent of
responsibilities and obligations between members
and organizations. The majority of members are well
educated workers. They pursuit independence,
autonomy, diversity and innovation. Therefore, it
should not only establish effective communication
channels, but also promote the two-way
communication between managers and team
members. Enhance the managerial level through
improving horizontal and vertical two-way
decision-making system, thus stimulating
enthusiasm and creativity during their work.
2. Establish Trust and Cooperation Team
Culture
Sometimes the tasks are relatively urgent and limited
on time. Trust and cooperation culture needs to be
established rapidly. Establishing and maintaining
trust is not only the core element in scientific
research team management but also the basis for any
team management. The trust from team to team
member is to show the confidence on their abilities
and loyalty. The trust among the team members is to
show that one trust the other that he can accomplish
mission on time. To build confidence in the team and
cooperation culture, team members must firstly
recognize the individual differences, that is, to
accept the recognition and respect for individual
skills, attitudes, as well as cultural backgrounds.
First, at the beginning of the team established, team
must allow free interaction and communication and
freedom to talk about their ideas and opinions perish.
On this basis, to deepen mutual understanding
among the members, achieve trust among members.
Meanwhile, regular face-to-face or top-to-down
communication conference is essential. During
completing organizational mandates process, to
enhance awareness of teamwork spirit and
encourage team joint efforts as well as strengthening
the impotence of corporation as establishment of a
cooperative culture.
5.2 The Type of Transaction-based
Psychological Contract
1. A Fair and Diversified Payment System
An equity theory predicts that inspiring is not
influenced only by the absolute returns, but also by
the relative returns. Therefore, the results emphasize
the equitable distribution should also be emphasized
that the fair allocation process, also combine the
economy in the short-term incentive compensation
(such as wages and bonuses) with long-term
incentive. In addition, a wide range of economic
rewards contains the salary system and other
compensation, such as joined this opportunity, honor,
information sharing social status, etc. Therefore, to
manage the scientific research team must use
diversity payment system according to individual
contribution to the team and based on physical
inspiring and strengthen spirit of motivation in order
to achieve more effect.
2. Competition System
Stable status may cause no motivation in the team.
Under integration of human resources in the global
and increasingly fierce market competition,
competition makes people really stand out, people in
the competition to gain recognition of their abilities.
For reflecting their abilities in the competition, the
members have to rationally choose working hard. A
stable job is competitive job itself, which will be
pursuit by everyone. Therefore, it can be treated as
valuable thing itself to inspire members to keep this
job by constantly compete with each other.
5.3 The Type of Relationship-based
Psychological Contract
1. Establish Perfect Member Career
Development and Training System
A theory indicates that people are always inspired by
their expectation. They always make action relying
on the expectations on the future outcome. During
the economy and information period, Learning,
growth and development are great significance for
each member.
Members hope to improve their quality to meet
the social development through continuous learning.
To realize their own value in order to create more
opportunities, which is dominated by fulfilled
scientific knowledge workers is especially important.
Therefore, mid level managers must be given
adequate space for personal development to meet the
needs of members of self-development request. They
can treat the team goal as a starting point, offer
members training and learning opportunities
according to the characteristics of their status.
Therefore, the corporation may not only help
members improve their skills and improve team
efficiency, but also increase understanding and
THE STUDY ON MEMBER INCENTIVE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH GROUP IN UNIVERSITY BASED ON
PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACTS
429

support among members. Also to do this can
stimulated and encourage members apply their
knowledge, and active new technologies and new
methods in daily work.
2. Proper Separation of Powers and Authority
There is a trend in the management concept that
Separation of powers and authority through
appropriate to motivate employees.
Knowledge-based staff members of research teams
are not only a premium on good relationships,
reasonable pay and personal growth, but also treat
working independently. They are generally very
strong self-awareness and hope for working with
their favorite way to spend their free time in a job,
and collect the information according to their own
self-control decisions according to these
characteristics of independence and strong demand
for autonomy. Managers must strive to create trust,
harmony, relaxed atmosphere, with full respect for
the personality development of members,
professional characteristics, creativity and autonomy,
and everyone's working style. Furthermore,
Managers must granted greater autonomy and the
autonomy of members, and use members of the
self-management, self-monitoring instead of the
mandatory scheme and close supervision, to
mobilize the enthusiasm of members to create desire
and motivate members to improve the team's overall
performance, as well as reduce management costs.
3. Provide Meaningful Works to Members
In general, the basic needs have been satisfied
among members of the research team. Therefore, the
most inspiring things is to meet the high level of
achievement. Most of them want to get the status to
gain their spirit and performance satisfaction. They
expected reflect their own value through a creative
and challenging work. Therefore, managers should
be to provide members with professional work
evolved challenges of their work to meet their
pursuit of psychological success, so that they have
the greatest satisfaction.
6 CONCLUSIONS
By psychological contracts nature, psychological
contracts vary significantly across groups and even
across different sections or units of the same group.
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) has conducted to
underlying constructs regarding an individual’s
obligation to the university. Three underlying factors
were found and are referred to as meet‘academic
expectations’, ‘commitment’ and finally ‘above and
beyond’. The qualitative research of the paper
identified four key foci of academic
responsibility-the university, the discipline, society
and students, which greatly influenced the formation
and effects of member incentive of scientific
research group based on psychological contracts.
REFERENCES
Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M. & Robson, K.
(2001) Focus groups in social research. London:
SAGE Publications.
Conway, N. C. & Briner, R. B. (2005) Understanding
psychological contracts at work: A critical evaluation
of theory and research. Oxford: O.U.P.
Coyle-Shapiro, J. A-M. & Conway, N. (2005) ‘Exchange
relationships: Examining psychological contracts and
perceived organizational support’, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 90, Issue 4, pp. 774-781.
Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutman, M. L. &
Hanson, W. E. (2003) Advanced mixed methods
research designs. In Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C., eds,
Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioural
research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE publications,
209-240.
Currall, S. C. & Towler, A. J. (2003) Research methods in
management and organizational research: Toward
integration of qualitative and quantitative techniques.
In Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C., eds, Handbook of
mixed methods in social & behavioural research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE publications, 513-527.
Dabos, G. E. & Rousseau, D. M. (2004) ‘Mutuality and
reciprocity in the psychological contracts of
employees and employers’, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 89, No. 1, pp. 52-72.
de Vos, A., Buyens, D. & Schalk, R. (2003)
‘Psychological contract development during
organisational socialisation and the role of
reciprocity’, Journal of Organisational Behaviour,
Vol. 24, pp. 537-559.
DelCampo, R. (2007) ‘Psychological contract violations:
an individual difference perspective’, International
Journal of Management, Vol. 24, pp. 43-52.
Guest, D. E. & Conway, N. (2002) ‘Communicating the
psychological contract: An employer perspective’,
Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 12, No.
2, pp. 22-38.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babib, B. J., Anderson, R. E. &
Tatham, R. E. (2006) Multivariate data analysis.
Upper Saddle River, N. J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Janssens, M, Sels, L. & Van den Barnde, I. (2003)
‘Multiple types of psychological contracts: A
ICEIS 2011 - 13th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems
430


six-cluster solution’, Human Relations, Vol. 56, No.
11, pp. 1349-1378.
Kenyon, A J. (2004) ‘Exploring phenomenological
research’, International Journal of Market Research,
Vol. 46, No. 4, pp. 427-441.
Krivokapic-Skoko, B., Ivers, J. & O'Neill, G. (2006)
‘Psychological contracts: Conceptual and empirical
considerations’. Charles Sturt University, Bathurst,
NSW: Faculty of Commerce Working Paper Series,
No. 01/06.
Malhotra, N., Hall, J., Shaw, M. & Oppenheim, P. (2002)
Marketing research: An applied orientation. Malaysia,
Prentice Hall.
Morgan, D. L. (2006) ‘Practical strategies for combining
qualitative and quantitative methods; Applications to
health research’. In Hesse-Biber, S.N. & Leavy, P.,
eds, Emergent methods in social research. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE publications, pp. 165-183.
Morse, J. M. (2003) ‘Principles of mixed methods and
multimethod research design’. In Tashakkori, A. &
Teddlie, C., eds, Handbook of mixed methods in
social & behavioural research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE publications, pp. 189-209.
Nadin, S. & Cassell, C. (2007) ‘New deal for old?
Exploring the psychological contract in a small firm
environment’, International Small Business Journal,
Vol. 25, 417-443.
Newton, J. (2002) ‘Barriers to effective quality
management and leadership: Case study of two
academic departments, Higher Education, Vol. 44, pp.
185-212.
O’Donohue, W., Sheehan, C., Hecker, R. & Holland, P.
(2007) ‘The psychological contract of knowledge
workers’, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol.
11, pp. 73-82.
Pate, J. (2006) ‘The changing contours of the
psychological contact: Unpacking context and
circumstances of breach’, Journal of European
Industrial Training, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 32-47.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2003) Research
methods for business students. 3rd edn, Harlow,
England:Pearson Education Limited.
Taylor, S. M. & Teklab, A. G. (2004) Taking stock of
psychological contract research: Assessing progress,
assessing troublesome issues, and setting research
priorities. In Coyle-Shapiro J, Shore L, Taylor, M. S.
& Tetrick, L., eds, The employment relationships:
Examining psychological and contextual perspective.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp 253-283.
Thompson, J. A. & Bunderson, J. S. (2003) ‘Violations of
principle: Ideological currency in the psychological
contract’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 28,
No. 4, pp. 571-586.
Tipples, R. S. & Verry, J. (2006) How to manage
university staff with individual contracts: Some
experience with academic psychological contracts in
New Zealand In Basu, P., O’Neill, G. & Travaglione,
A., eds, Engagement and change: Exploring
management, economic and finance implications of a
globalizing environment. Brisbane, Australia:
Australian Academic Press, pp. 105-116.
Tsui, A. S., & Lau, C. M. 2002. The management of
enterprises in the People's Republic of China. Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Winter, R. P. & Sarros, J. C. (2002) ‘Corporate reforms to
Australian universities: Views from the academic
heartland’, Journal of Institutional Research, Vol. 11,
No. 2, pp. 92-104.
THE STUDY ON MEMBER INCENTIVE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH GROUP IN UNIVERSITY BASED ON
PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACTS
431