April of last year marked a new era for public sector services in the UK as the government seeks to address the deficit and reduce the cost of its public sector workforce. Traditional entitlements for public servants have been heavily scrutinised in a way not seen in the last decade with the announcements of job losses, pay freezes and reduced pension provision.
The traditional lure of job and financial security within the civil service is a focal point of public sector worker discontent and is at the heart of what is known as the psychological contract. This is best explained as a series of unwritten and unconscious reciprocal expectations that the employee and employer have of each other.
For example, an implied (though unofficial) agreement may exist whereby in exchange for diligence and loyalty, an employee may feel assured in his or her job and financial security. It has been suggested that public sector workers often have stronger psychological contracts, placing greater emphasis on long-term involvement and fair treatment, than their private sector counterparts.
But what happens when the employer does not fulfil its end of the bargain? If an employee recognises that the employer’s actions are inconsistent with its obligations, then this breach of the psychological contract has a severely detrimental effect on the employee’s attitudes and behaviour. Research has shown that violating the psychological contract can lead to a lack of trust in the employer, lower performance levels, reduced desire to remain in the organisation and decreased employee satisfaction.
These types of reactions, however, can be moderated by how much procedural justice employees perceive there to be in the organisational restructuring. That is to say, they will be less likely to react negatively to changes in psychological contracts if they are able to attribute the breach to a legitimate need and that the process of implementing the changes was fair. So, the extent to which employers consult with their staff and not simply communicate the changes in employment arrangements will, in large part, influence their employees’ morale and behaviour following any restructuring process.
Unfortunately, of the 330,000 jobs expected to be cut in the public sector, one key area of staff reductions is likely to be managerial posts and in particular senior managers. Potentially it could be an over-stretched and under-qualified pool of public service managers, with little experience dealing with the costs of cuts and redundancies that will be left with the task of delivering to a high standard, whist morale is low.
It will be vital for public service employers to effectively manage change within their organisations. In the long term, reduced commitment to the employer, resulting from a breach of the psychological contract, could lead to difficulty in retaining skilled employees internally. Further difficulties will lie in recruiting talented individuals externally. Bear in mind, these changes are occurring within a wider series of austerity measures such as the substantial increases in university tuition fees. I suspect young people’s career intentions to be further shaped unfavourably against opting for work in the civil service as graduates abstain from low paying public service jobs for higher paying positions in the private sector.
At this time of year the ringing of the tills in shopping centres is almost as loud as the chiming of Christmas bells and the tinkling of Santa's sleigh. Despite the recession we are predicted to spend £48.9 billion over the festive period this year. However, despite the old adage 'money can't buy you love', some research I came across this week shows that money may just be able to buy you happiness.
Although most studies of happiness find that having more money doesn't necessarily make you happier, how you spend your money does appear to have an influence. This research[1] found that spending money on other people has a more positive impact on our happiness than if we spend the money on ourselves. This was found to be the case across the country, which throws into questions the stereotypes about tight-fisted Yorkshire folk. Even though when I go Christmas shopping I tend to buy one present for myself for every gift I buy, I shouldn't find this too surprising. Altruism; the good feeling we get when we do something for someone else, can and does make us feel more positive emotions.
So, for those of you who haven't finished your Christmas shopping yet, don't think of it as a chore; a hellish experience full of thronging crowds and stressful decisions. Think of it as an opportunity to make yourself (and others if you get the right gift!) feel happy - albeit after you've finished making stressful decisions - within the thronging crowds! And, in the spirit of the recession, if that doesn't work, you can always just make do with a kind deed for someone this Christmas. I suspect random acts of kindness work in exactly the same way, only cheaper, with fewer crowds and guaranteed to keep you feeling good until New Year.
[1] Spending Money on Others Promotes Happiness, Elizabeth W. Dunn 1 ,* , Lara B. Aknin 1 and Michael I. Norton 2
The relationship between money and well-being is unusual. The common wisdom is that the more we have the happier we become. However, consider this analogy. Over the Christmas period, it is tradition to stuff our faces with turkey and chocolates until we feel satisfied and happy (and probably sick). Come January though, I for one will be glad to see the back of it and will avoid probably avoid eating the stuff for several months...alright, maybe not the chocolates, but you get my point. As humans, we tend to consume something to the point where our needs are met and then we take a break.
Not so, it seems, with money. To quote Adam Smith, the founder of modern economics, "the desire for food is limited in every man by the narrow capacity of his stomach. But the desire of [money] seems to have no limit or certain boundary."
Economists and psychologists have been wrestling with the relationship between money and happiness for decades. Humans devote much of their time and energy to earning it, seemingly motivated by the belief that money will have a substantial impact on their overall life satisfaction. However, given the current economic crisis is leading most organisations to freeze pay increases and withdraw bonus packages, this is undoubtedly going to lead to feelings of frustration and anxiety.
Research shows that people tend to drastically overestimate the impact that income has on well-being. For example, recent research in the Journal of Positive Psychology, found that people are notoriously bad at predicting the levels of happiness associated with differing levels of income. It is true that individuals who live on or below the poverty line tend to display lower levels of well-being - i.e. it hurts to be cold, hungry and tired. However, once people have achieved a threshold level of income to buy their way out of hardship, then our prediction that money and happiness grow together breaks down. Studies actually show that increases in income have increasingly less of an impact on actual levels of happiness.
So, why do we hold on to the erroneous belief that more money means more happiness? Why do we continue to stuff our pockets when we would not continue to stuff our faces?
The answer to these questions will be a continuing topic of debate amongst economists, psychologists, philosophers and...well, everyone for many years to come. However, what I do know is that people tend to attribute too much emphasis to this one variable, and overlook the plethora of other variables that positively impact global life satisfaction (love, friendship, esteem, variety, achievement, challenge, recognition...the list goes on). Perhaps the festive period is a chance for all of us to take stock and consider what really matters (in between mouthfuls of turkey).
This week is anti bullying week and while the media has focused on the plight of children who are bullied at school, the unfortunate fact is that bullying behaviour doesn't stop after GCSEs.
Unison estimate up to five million workers are bullied at work each year and developments in technology have meant that 'cyber bullying' is on the increase. A survey of over 1000 employees found that one in five had been bullied by e-mail, and one in twenty by text message.
From a psychological view point this isn't surprising. Research shows that people are more likely to lie, be rude and aggressive when they are on the phone versus being face to face - there is more distance and greater anonymity. In cyber space the distance and anonymity is increased further; bullies can't see or hear the distress of their victims, nor gauge the impact of their actions.
In addition, the technology involved in cyber bullying means that the impact on the victim can be much greater than more traditional forms of bullying:
The speed and ease with which we can communicate with a large number of people means that the bully's message can be delivered to devastating effect. For example, in one company a revealing photograph of a worker was circulated to all its staff via e-mail; this just simply wouldn't have been possible in most organisations 25 years ago.
The blurry lines between home and work created by social networking sites, phones and blackberries mean that people can easily be reached when not physically at work.
However, technology also presents an opportunity to the victims of bullying for increased control; e-mails, texts and web posts can all be saved and documented, as evidence in cases of bullying. On social networking sites such as Facebook, there are options to report abuse, delete inappropriate comments and block individual's access.
We need to ensure that these technological advancements are working for victims of bullying, rather than against them. For business, this means understanding cyber bullying, having a clear plan for addressing it and being willing to take action. This won't necessarily be easy; with the blurred boundaries of home and work, this will involve some difficult conversations about where organisational involvement should start and end. But if we don't take action bullying will continue to plague peoples' lives.
There's a subtle but important difference between trying to reduce stress, and trying to promote well-being.
Click here to read the original blog in full on the Management Today website - Psychology at Work Blog, a blog page about the psychology of business, management and leadership written by Pearn Kandola.
Feed
This week is anti bullying week and while the media has focused on the plight of children who are bullied at school, the unfortunate fact is that bullying behaviour doesn't stop after GCSEs.