Towards Discovering Employee-Worker Interactions - Aspects of Conclusion of Psychological Contract

• Autorzy: Anna Rogozińska-Pawełczyk
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The psychological contract refers to presumed and subjective beliefs in relation to the exchange relationship, considered mainly between employees and employers. An immanent part of the psychological contract is its subjectivity and the relationship of exchange of expectations, promises or commitments of both parties to the employment relationship. The conditions in which modern organisations have to operate justify the use of the psychological contract for the analysis of employment relationships, but do not yet take into account the emerging new form of relationship at the workplace. Currently, thanks to the development of new technologies, including artificial intelligence, the role of robots in the workplace is growing. The aim of the article is to outline the framework for building the involvement of employees in technologically, socially and emotionally advanced forms of artificial intelligence. The manifestations of workers' interactions with social robots within the framework of a contractual partnership will be defined. To this end, the arguments for the possibility of concluding a psychological contract between a human and a robot based on the theory of exchange and the standard of reciprocity, which can set new directions for research in this area, are reviewed.(original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

PL

Interakcje społeczne; Robotyzacja; Człowiek a praca; Sztuczna inteligencja; Kontrakt psychologiczny

EN

Social interaction; Robotization; Human and labour; Artificial intelligence; Psychological contract

• Czasopismo: Edukacja Ekonomistów i Menedżerów : problemy, innowacje, projekty
• Rocznik: 2020
• Numer: nr 4(58)
• Strony: 9-20

Twórcy

autor

Anna Rogozińska-Pawełczyk

• University of Łódź, Poland

Bibliografia

• Blau, P. M. (2006). Exchange of power in social life. New York: Transaction Publishers.
• Breazeal, C. (2003). Toward sociable robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42, 167-175.
• Carter, M. Z., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., & Mossholder, K. W. (2012). Transformational leadership, relationship quality, and employee performance during continuous incremental organizational change. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
• Darling, K. (2012). Extending legal rights to social robots: The effects of anthropomorphism, empathy, and violent behavior towards robotic objects. Paper presented at We Robot Conference. University of Miami, April 23. Retrieved from: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2044797 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2044797
• Darling, K. (2014). Extending legal protection to social robots. In: R. Calo, M. Froomkin, I. Kerr (Eds.), Robot Law Cheltenham. UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 212-232.
• De Cuyper, N., Schreurs, B., Vander Elst, T., Baillien, E., & De Witte, H. (2014). Exemplification and perceived job insecurity. Associations with self-rated performance and emotional exhaustion. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 13 (1), 1-10.
• Demoulin, S., Leyens, J.-Ph., & Yzerbyt, V. Y., (2006). Lay theories of essentialism. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 9 (1), 25-42.
• Emerson, R. M. (1972). Exchange theory, Part I. In: J. Berger, M. Zelditch, B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological theories in progress, 2. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 38-57.
• Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114 (4), 864-886.
• Fink, J. (2012). Anthropomorphism and human likeness in the design of robots and HRI. In: S. S. Ge (Ed.), Social robotics, 7621. Berlin: Springer, 199-208.
• Flandorfer, P. (2012). Population ageing and socially assistive robots for elderly persons: The importance of sociodemographic factors for user acceptance. International Journal of Population Research, 1-13.
• Gibbard, K., Griep, Y., De Cooman, R., Hoffart, G., Onen, D., & Zareipour, H. (2017). One big happy family? Unraveling the relationship between shared perceptions of team psychological contracts, person-team fit and team performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1966.
• Griep, Y., Cooper, C., Robinson, S., Rousseau, D., Hansen, S. D., Tomprou, M., & Linde, B. J. (2019). Psychological contracts: back to the future. In: Y. Griep, C. Cooper (Eds.), Handbook of research on the psychological contract at work. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 397-415.
• Guest, D. (2004). The psychology of the employment relationship: An analysis based on the psychological contract. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53 (4), 541-555.
• Guest, D. (2007). HRM and the worker: Towards a new psychological contract? In: P. Boxall, J. Purcell, P. Wright (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of human resource management. New York: Oxford University Press, 128-146.
• Gunkel, D. J. (2017). Mind the gap: Responsible robotics and the problem of responsibility. Ethics and Information Technology, 1-14.
• Kanda, T., & Ishiguro, H. (2013). Human-robot interaction in social robotics. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
• Komatsu, T., Kurosawa, R., & Yamada, S. (2012). How does the difference between users' expectations and perceptions about a robotic agent affect their behavior? International Journal of Social Robotics, 4 (2), 109-116.
• Laulié, L., & Tekleab, A. G. (2016). A multi-level theory of psychological contract fulfillment in teams. Group & Organization Management, 41, 658-698.
• Lee, S. A., & Liang, Y. (2016). The role of reciprocity in verbally persuasive robots. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19 (8), 524-527.
• Ma, G., Blenkinsopp J., & Armstrong S. (2020). Same words, different worlds: Exploring differences in researcher and participant understandings of promise and obligation in the psychological contract. Journal of Management and Organization, 26 (1), 95-109.
• Ma, Y., Deng, J., Hao, J., & Wu, Y. (2012). Scale development of customer psychological contract. In: D. Jin, S. Lin (Eds.), Advances in electronic commerce, web application and communication. Berlin: Springer, 179-183.
• Marks, A. (2001). Developing a multiple foci conceptualization of the psychological contract. Employee Relations, 23, 454-467.
• Meckler, M., Drake, B. H., & Levinson, H. (2003). Putting psychology back into psychological contracts. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12, 217-228.
• Menninger, K. (1958). Menninger clinic monograph series. Theory of psychoanalytic technique. Basic Books.
• Molm, L. D., Schaefer, D. R., & Collett, J. L. (2007). The value of reciprocity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 70, 199-217.
• Mori, M. (1970). The uncanny valley. Energy, 7, 33-35.
• Moyle, W., Cooke, M., Beattie, E., Jones, C., Klein, B., Cook, G., & Gray, C. (2013). Exploring the effect of companion robots on emotional expression in older people with dementia: A pilot RCT. Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 39 (5), 46-53.
• Pocztowski, A. (2019). Kontekst ZZL w praktyce i badaniach naukowych. Zarządzanie Zasobami Ludzkimi, 6 (131), 17-33.
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. I. (1996). The media equation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Rousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2, 121-139.
• Rousseau, D. M. (2001). Schema, promise and mutuality: The building blocks of the psychological contract. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 511-541.
• Sverdrup, T., & Schei, V. (2015). The psychological contract as a foundation for understanding team charters. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 51, 451-478.
• Tsui, A. S., & Wang, D. (2002). Employment relationships from the employer's perspective: Current research and future directions. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 17, 77-114.
• Venter, R., & Levy, A. (2011). Labour relations in South Africa, 3 rd edn. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
• Wellin, M. (2013). Zarządzanie kontraktem psychologicznym. Zaangażowanie pracowników w zwiększanie wydajności firmy. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer business.
• Yunkyung, K., & Bilge, M. (2014). How social distance shapes human-robot interaction. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 72 (12), 783-795.

Identyfikatory

DOI

https://doi.org/10.33119/EEIM.2020.58.5