UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA

FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

Tatjana Žilič 21080663, Sanja Medved 21080330, Tamara Petelinek 21080407, Urška

Lipovž 21080297, Blažka Čar 21080070

THE INFLUENCE OF THE LEVEL OF EDUCATION ON THE CONTENT OF A PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT

dr. Miroljub Ignjatović

mag. Vida Zorko

dr. Aleksandra Kanjuo Mrčela

Trg delovne sile in zaposlovanje

Sociologija dela

Prvi tuji jezik: angleščina

Ljubljana, 7th of April 2010

Contents

INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................3

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT..................................................................................................................4

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT VIOLATIONS AND ITS IMPACT...............................................................7

EDUCATION............................................................................................................................................8

FORMAL EDUCATION AND ITS LEVELS IN SLOVENIA..........................................................................9

LEVELS OF EDUCATION IN SLOVENIA............................................................................................10

EMPIRICAL PART...................................................................................................................................12

PROBLEM DEFINITION, PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE OF THE RESEARCH.............................................12

FINDINGS AND DISSCUSION.............................................................................................................13

CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................................20

APPENDIX.............................................................................................................................................24

2

INTRODUCTION

In the past, the only existing and valid employment contract between an employer and an

employee was the formally written one, which could not contain all the necessary facts, while

some were perceived as self-evident and redundant. To fill in this contextual gaps, there was a

new term introduced instead, called a psychological contract. It refers to an informal mental

construction of expectations and commitments of both, employers and employees. Nowadays

the psychological contract is becoming more and more noteworthy as it is considered as one

of the main motivating factors in every organization. Consequently it has a large meaning

especially to employers who are striving to build a good organizational climate and thus

contribute to organization's success. Today, as the human factor is becoming increasingly

influential, investigating the psychological contract of employees can produce a number of

important findings that could be helpful in creating a successful company (CIPD 2009).

Various researches point out that education has a great influence on the individual's

behavioral and cognitive component and consequently on the psychological contract.

According to them, employees with a higher level of education feel more associated and

satisfied with the organization they work in than those less educated. We find this

problematic, while the less educated represent the majority of the active population.

Considering the previously done researches we are mainly interested in ascertaining

concretely how the level of education influences the concept of the psychological contract,

especially today – at time of an economic crisis.

Our research work is made of two main parts, theoretical and empirical. With an empirical

research we will try to confirm or disprove the hypothesis in which we claim that employees

with a higher level of education feel more associated and satisfied with organization they

work in than those who are less educated. In first part of our research work we will describe

the term psychological contract and determine which factors influence it. In continuation the

educational system will be presented and it will be shown how previous researches connected

the terms of education and work satisfaction of employees. The following chapter will reveal

the results of our survey which was made among Slovenian employees with different

educational background. We will then try to determine which factors of motivation influence

employees’ behavior with regard to the level of their education, we will also find out where

the greatest differences are and why. According to that, we will try to indicate some solutions

and suggestions for reducing those differences.

3

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT

Nowadays we are surrounded by different obligations and also expectations, which are often

presented as contracts. For those who work, there is a contract of employment, there is also

marriage contract, we have contracts with the electricity or telephone companies and by

reading these words it is likely that you will have entered into a contract. However, what the

contracts all have in common is that they all involve exchange. Contracts do not have to

include only the exchange of physical goods or services, exchanges can be important in a

psychological sense, nevertheless, they influence how people feel and behave (Cooper et al.

1996, 3‒4).

The first time, a psychological contract was formally mentioned was in 1960 by Argyris.

That was the time, when not only expectations of the individual, but also the expectations of

the organization were involved (Van de Ven 2004, 1). But Rousseau focused mainly on the

individual and gave a definition, where the individual is presented as a central element:

»Psychological contracts are defined as the beliefs individuals hold regarding the terms and

conditions of the exchange agreement between themselves and their organisations« (Rousseau

cited in Van de Ven 2004, 1).1 This represents the employees' expectations from the

organization and beside that, also shows what they think they owe to the organization. There

are also other definitions: »The concept of a contract expanded to the psychological domain

may be defined as an unwritten set of expectations operating at all times between every

member of organization and the various managers and others in that organization« (Schein

cited in Cooper et al. 1996, 4).2

Robinson and Rousseau suggest that the psychological contract is characterised not only by

obligations but also expectations. On one hand, psychological contract refers to obligations

between an employer and an employee. On the other hand, there are expectations that tell us

what the employee expects to receive from his employer. Even though these two concepts

seem to be related, perceived obligations are stronger than expectations. Thus, when these

obligations are broken, the reactions are more emotional and extreme. In comparison with the

weaker expectations, when obligations are broken, they produce more emotional and extreme

1 Rousseau, Denise M. 1989. New hire perceptions of their own and their employer's obligations: A study of psychological contracts. Journal of organizational behaviour 11 (5). Cited in Van de Ven (2004, 1).2 Schein, Edgar H. 1980. Organizational psychology. Prentice-Hall  (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.). Cited in Cooper et al. (1996, 4).

4

reactions. Expectations only produce feelings of disappointment. Broken obligations, on the

other hand, produce feelings of anger in the individual's relationship with the organization

(Robinson and Rousseau 1994, 246−7).

Expectations and obligations, both economic and psychological are two way. As well as

individual having expectations of the organization, the organization will also have

expectations of the individual. Combining the type of contract with the source of expectations

gives us figure 1.

Individual expectations Organization expectations

Economic contract Money Work

Psychological contract Consideration Citizenship

Figure 1 (Cooper et al. 1996, 6)

We see that considering economic contract an indivudual emphasizes the money, apart from

psychological, where an individual expects to be considerated. On the other side, in the

economic view, organization expects that the work is done and sees it as the most important

part of the contract. Psychological contract, for the organization means citizenship, or we

could also refer to it as membership. Organization expects that its members feel firmly

associated with it and feel integrated as a whole.

However, just the existance of the psychological contract does not guarantee that members

and organization will perform well. The contract that develops also deepends on different

factors, values, norms and the type of control system. There is another model (see figure 2),

which explains how the type of control system influences the contract and

involvement/membership of employees. Basically, in the organizations are three types of

control system: coercive, remunerative and normative. If organizations use coercive type of

control system, they are known as the ones that threat and punish their employees and that

consequently causes alienative involvement of the employees. The contract is forced.

Individuals are not well connected with the organization and only force defines their

membership. The second type of control system is different and connected with the rational-

legal authority. Typical for it is the reward system, where economic or other kinds of rewards

are used in exchange for strong involvement, membership and performance. The contract is

here extrinsic and employees are calculative. Employees have the opinion that for the work

5

you do, you should get an appropriate reward – a pay. Finally, the normative type of control

system uses symbolic rewards such as recognition, prestige, respect. The normative type of

control system produces moral involvement, where the employee is commited to his work and

also defines himself with his workplace. The contract is intrinsic. Organizations with such

'normative-moral bond' are usually non-profit or voluntary types of organizations.

Nevertheless, this table represents very 'pure types' of relationship in the organizations, which

are basically very hard to find in actual situations. Thus, the commitment of the employees to

the organization does not depend only on the dominant control system, but also on the

management (Etzioni, 1961).3

Control system Contract Involvement

Coercive Forced Alienative

Remunerative Extrinsic Calculative

Normative Intrinsic Moral

Figure 2 (Etzioni, 1961)3

As we see, the way people expect to be treated and how they are actually treated, can have an

enormous impact on the way they work. As Schein4 comments: »Though it remains unwritten,

the psychological contract is a powerful determiner of behaviour in organizations.« If the

relationship between the two parties lasts longer and if they interact more often, then is more

likely that they will know the contributions and obstacles that might be included in the

contract (Rousseau, 1989).

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT VIOLATIONS AND ITS IMPACT

Psychological contract violation can occur if employees find out that their organization did

not fulfill what was promised, or vice versa. Broken promises cause anger and destroy trust

between the parties and thus, they are also expected to have more significant consequences.

3 Etzioni, Amitai. 1961. A comparative analysis od complex organizations. Glencoe, IL. Cited in Černigor Sadar and Nadoh Bergoč (2010, 87).4 Schein, Edgar H. 1980. Organizational psychology. Prentice-Hall  (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.). Cited in Cooper et al. (1996, 6).

6

Employers or employees who recognize the contract has been violated are likely to react

negatively. Reactions may form as reduced loyalty, reduced commitment and it also may

happen that the behaviour among the whole organization changes. Perceptions that a

psychological contract has been violated may emerge soon after the employee joins the

organization or even after long and satisfied years of employment in the same organization.

The violation can affect only an individual, but if it has a moral character it affects more

generally, thus the whole performance can be ruined. Further on, if the violations in the

organization happen to be immoral or unjust, such as downsizing or outsourcing that cause

unexpected unemployment, its brand reputation and public image may be damaged too

(Robinson and Rousseau 1994, 247−9). Since contracts appear due to expectations of honesty

and good faith and include relationship, built on trust, violations may cause significant

consequences for the both sides. Initially, the employees form unrealistic expectations and

when that does not fulfill, their satisfaction with the work consequently diminishes, they also

perform less well and it is more likely that they will eventually leave the organization. There

is also a way when neglect to the work increases; employees put just a half effort to their

work, they are often absent or late and they pay less attention to the quality of their work.

Sometimes they try to find easier ways to solve the problem. They take initiative to talk with

the superiors in order to improve the working conditions. Even though contracts may be

violated in many ways, there are a few common. Employers may 'over-promise' the

opportunity of the job for growth, development or challenge. Consequently, eager job seekers

may in the employer's words hear exactly what they want. Agents in the organization who say

one thing and unexpectadly do the other, all portray the main producers and the cause for the

breach (Rousseau 1989, 390).

Conway et al understand three main causes of a psychological contract violation, also named

a breach. The first cause of breach is inadequate human resourse management. The second

cause of breach is when employees feel unsupported by either the organization or their

supervisors. In other words, when employees believe that their organization is supportive, by

doing such things as showing concern for their employees' well-being and offering help when

they need it, they are more likely to believe that the organization has fulfilled its promises.

The third type of cause of employee breach are events happening outside the organization or

before the employee became a member of the organization. That also includes previous or

possible further employments. In that case an employee can compare his own psychological

contract to that of another employee and concludes whether he is getting a better deal.

7

Nevertheless, by comparing his own psychological contract with the others, can an employee

finally recognize a violation in his own contract (Conway et al. 2005, 66−8).

According to Rousseau, breaches can take three forms: inadvertently, disruptive or reneging

(see Figure 3).

Inadvertent Able and willing (divergent interpretations made in good faith)Willing but unable (inability to fulfill contract)Able but unwilling (reneging)

DisruptionBreach of contract

Figure 3 (Rousseau 1989, 393)

After explaining that a psychological contract represents the mutual beliefs, perceptions, and

informal obligations between an employer and an employee, we will connect it with the level

of education. By knowing the causes of psychological contract violations it is our object to

perceive some interesting findings of that matter.

EDUCATION

Dewey sees the facts of birth and death, which are inevitable for every member of the society,

as factors which determine the need for education (Dewey 2005, 3). Knowledge has always

been a valuable component of the society, for it has and still is the foundation of progress.

Nowadays in the so-called ‘knowledge society’ education and its components, which include

a level of formal education as well the quantity of informal experiences are becoming not only

ever more important determinant of individual's personal life and the most relevant in relation

individual-organization, but also a life essentiality. Requirements for ever larger competency

in various spheres create an ever notable meaning of formal education and also general

inventiveness on the individual and social basis. Formal education is nowadays merely the

foundation of individual's success. Dewey believes, that the central purpose of education with

organized structures of information and standardized forms of explanation of relevant subject

is preparing individuals for the future responsibilities and consecutive success (Dewey 1998,

3). Formal education is therefore, as stated before, only the preparation for one's appearance

on the labor market, however it is not likewise an assurance for successful appearance. Flere

8

and Lavrič agree while claiming that education is undoubtedly becoming a meaningful social

advantage and source, although it is sometimes merely a legitimation of other sources of

social power (Flere and Lavrič 2005, 451).

The fact is therefore obvious: knowledge has undeniably replaced the capital and work as two

basic sources of the capitalist social settlement and is therefore becoming a basis for social

and individual competitiveness and thus survival in this harsh environment. Political bodies of

several countries are manifestly dealing with the average population level of education and

investing in the human capital with the end of creating competitive global economy. The

evidence of this on the basis of the European Union could be found in the findings of Eurostat

(EU 2009), which show, that the general educational level of population is rising, and so does

the culture and the number of scholars.

Kramberger distinguishes three notions of education: 1.) Formal education, which is taking

place in educational institutions and leads to publicly acknowledged degrees and

qualifications. 2.) Informal education, which is happening out of the educational systems and

does not necessarily lead to formalized certifications, and 3.) Aformal learning, which is a

natural attender of daily life, it is not necessarily intentional (it may be integrated in some

other activity or perceived as frequent task) and recognized by the actors. Kramberger also

claims that is formal education in Slovenia, in contrast to informally gained experiences, very

highly valuated, therefore it seems appropriate analyzing the notions of 'formality' and 'formal

education' further in depth (Kramberger and Pavlin 2007, 174-5).

FORMAL EDUCATION AND ITS LEVELS IN SLOVENIA

While is the formal education a fundamental notion that implies individual competences,

knowledge and skills and an essential element of formal employment for it represents the

portfolio of every individual, let us define its parts and display the levels of education in

Slovenia according to the Bologna Process.

Term 'formal' refers to »such, which satisfies regulations and requests irrespective of actual

state« (Abecednik 2008). Formal education is defined as:

9

»/.../ intentional, institutionalized, systematic, planned beforehand and organized educational

activity, which usually means 'scale-system' regular education of children and adolescents; it

generally starts at 5 to 7 years and continues until 20 to 25 years. This activity is often

composed of educational programs with clearly defined object and which result is publicly

valid qualification. For educational activities of formal education is significant that they have

fixed duration, hierarchical structure with chronological succession of classes and levels,

clearly defined terms of admission and formal registration procedure. Traditionally it is

performed in kinder gardens, schools, faculties and others pedagogical educational

institutions. Dual-education is also a part of it. Formal education offers formal publicly valid

education (it changes educational or qualification status) and publicly valid degree, report or

certificate« (Mojaizbira.si 2008).

LEVELS OF EDUCATION IN SLOVENIA

1. Level of education – unfinished primary school

2. Level of education – finished primary school, unfinished secondary school

3. Level of education – finished second or third level of secondary school; unfinished the

fourth level of secondary school

4. Level of education – unfinished secondary school

5. Level of education – finished secondary school

6. Level of education – /

7. (7/I) Level of education – academia, university, college, academy

(7/II) Level of education – master of science or specialist by fields of science

8. Level of education – doctor of science

(Ministrstvo za visoko šolstvo, znanost in tehnologijo 2006)

Theorists and researchers attach education to various others components of individual's

behavior. Svetlik, for example, links it with individual's socio-economical position. In his

research ascertains, that the educational system and system of employment are tightly

10

connected together which leads to an assumption that self-employed are an economically and

politically marginal group and are poor in education, and that higher education means better

working conditions (less laboriously, monotone and with greater feeling of independency),

but greater psychical burden which comes with autonomy. He also believes that higher

education brings better material and socio-political position, and therefore concludes that

appropriate education is a vigorous announcer of individuals' material and political status

(Svetlik 1986, 43).

Others connect it with work satisfaction, as Vila and Garcia-Mora (2005), where they

ascertain:

a) »Causal connection of better education and greater job satisfaction.

b) Increased content with payment, working hours and work itself, along with finished

university.

c) Increased satisfaction with stability of work and working time, along with finished

shortened education program.

d) Decreased level of content, except the level of satisfaction with working time, along

with finished merely primary education program.

e) Discordance between the actual level of education and required one, decreases the

level of satisfaction at work.«

(Vila in Garcia-Mora 2005, 416)

It can be seen from stated, that higher level of education increases the possibility of acquiring

a good job that brings satisfaction and therefore greater meaning to an individual. But at the

same time the disproportion of the actual level of education and level of required one in both

cases, let it be for higher or lower level of education, decreases work satisfaction. On one

hand, workers who feel overqualified for their employment are unpleased, for their

expectations are not fulfilled; they believe that they should be either performing less

pretentious tasks or be better rewarded. On the other hand, workers whose actual educational

level fits with the required one feel satisfied, as their knowledge and skills are being used

11

properly (Vila in Garcia-Mora 2005, 420). Jerovšek stresses another view of educational

relevance, namely the likelihood, that the more capable individuals would better affect

organizational effectiveness than those with lower level of capacities within the same

profession, or even in relation to higher educational categories (Jerovšek 1980, 37).

These findings lead us to our research problem. In the empirical section of the seminar paper

we will try to ascertain to what degree an educational level influences the content of

psychological contract and which are the other motivators which affect emotions and behavior

of individual in an organization. The research was carried out with surveys, for we believed it

would be the most optimal and for such problem most effective method of gaining sources

and data. Before turning to the empirical part, let us quote Bevc's remark, who says, that while

“observing and analyzing economical views of education it is, due to its ultimate

characteristic of being tangent to almost all aspects of life, impossible and incorrect

eliminating all its other points of view” (Bevc 1991, 15). She argues as well, that “the quality

of human factor, education and research-developmental activity would contribute to

economical development of society only if they will be active within and connected with the

environment, and under the condition of quality and optimal use of the mentioned potential”

(Bevc 1991, 15). In conclusion we will try to, according to the previously stated, introduce the

suggestions and solutions of problematic view of education, which we are dealing with.

EMPIRICAL PART

PROBLEM DEFINITION, PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE OF THE RESEARCH

In the empirical work we will define the research problem, purpose and the objective of

research. What we are interested in, is the impact of education level on the content of the

psychological contract, or whether the employees with lower levels of education are more

motivated to work and associated to the company they work in, than those with higher levels

of education. In order to confirm or deny the hypothesis, we conducted a poll survey in which

participated 43 randomly selected employees from different regions in Slovenia (Celje,

Ljubljana and Zasavje). The poll is a closed type (see Annex 1) with possible answers type

YES – NO. Two answers are structured so that the answers are already offered. The

questionnaire consist of eight questions relating to content and the four questions from which

12

we collected individual’s age, educational level, name of the company in which he /she is

employed and the title of workplace. The first three questions are relating on individual’s

loyalty to the company in which they work. The following five are set in the way that we can

figure if the employees are satisfied with their work. Person who participated in the survey

study are employed such as in service sector, public services, private enterprises, trade

organizations such as in organizations with predominant production activity. People were

different ages (23 to 58 years) and had different levels of education (from primary school to

magister). The goal of our research is to find out, if the randomly respondents feel any loyalty

to the companies in which they work, which are the important factors of motivation that affect

their affiliation, what the work represent to them (is this a joy or merely necessary evil) and

how they feel at their workplace. We will try to interpret the obtained data under the level of

education on individuals.

We recognize that our analysis based on poll has many limits, because many people did not

wish to participate and therefore our population is small. We also thought about limiting

ourselves on only one company, but we did not get any obtain approval from the leadership of

the company.

FINDINGS AND DISSCUSION

Membership to the company is today, when we deal with the Great Depression, more and

more important for successful management of the company. Employed people sometimes do

more than is expected from them, not because of the possible reward, but only because of the

internal feelings connected to the company. From Graph 1 is shown that 90, 7% respondents

feel being a member of the company and 9, 3% do not feel being a member of the company in

which they work. Reasons for feeling a member who belongs to the organization are different.

The results of our survey show that those employed people, who do not feel they belong, are

in average older than 48 years and they have lower level of education (I – V) and younger up

to 28 years with higher level of education (V – VII). Under this data we conclude that

younger employed people who just entered on labor market do not have many working

experiences, some are part-time employed, they are still in the phase of knowledge and

because of that they do not feel to be a part of the company. As we summarize the data we can

13

see that their work is monotonous and boring, because they are working in the production

company.

BELONG

NOT BELONG

Graph no. 1: Shows a share of respondents who feel they belong to the company and the share

of respondents who do not feel they belong to the company.

Membership as itself cannot be defined without knowing the reasons and factors which affect

on it. As in the research and also in the survey we have defined eight different factors which

affect on the employed people belonging to the company. These factors are:

FACTOR 1: safety of continuous employment

FACTOR 2: organizational clime

FACTOR 3: workplace

FACTOR 4: salary, income

FACTOR 5: different benefits

FACTOR 6: flexible working hours

FACTOR 7: possibility of promotion

FACTOR 8: participation by important decisions

14

From Graph no. 2 we see the next results. The most important is safety of continuous

employment. No one employed wants to be a part-time employed which is absolutely

understandable. Fear of losing their job is mostly present by the older people and those who

have lower level of education. According to the data, the safety of continuous employment

follows the organizational clime (good relations with colleagues, rules, events, good relation

with boss etc.). Organizational clime is important for company achievement, but the level of

education should not affect the organizational clime. The third most important factor is a

salary. We were a bit surprised, because we thought that the income will be on the first place.

The salary and level of education are very relativ. Next factor is the working place. Namely

no one wants to work in impossible situations such as exposure to various radiations, toxic

gases, working in moist places, working at very high temperatures and vice versa. To these

situations are mainly exposed people with lower level of education and they do not have any

chances in progressing. On the fifth place we found different benefits such as paid leave,

organization picnics and trips, thirteen salary, preventions, sports activities etc. The next

factor is flexible working hours. Mostly it makes use of people with higher level of education.

It happens that employees become unproductive and then is no use to sit in the office.

Employed people prefer to work whenever, they are motivated and their efficiency is much

higher. The penultimate factor on the scale is the possibility for promotion. Mostly they want

to advance those who do not have many experiences. In this case level of education does not

play a major role. Finally, the last factor that affects on participation to the company is taking

important decisions.

FACTO

R 1

FACTO

R 2

FACTO

R 3

FACTO

R 4

FACTO

R 5

FACTO

R 6

FACOTR

7

FACTO

R 80

5

10

15

20

25

30

FACTORS THAT AFFECT ON THE LOYALTY TO THE COMPANY

FACTORS THAT AFFECT ON THE LOYALTY TO THE COMPANY

15

Graph no. 2: Shows the factor that affects the individual’s loyalty to the company (factor 1

affects the most, at least factor 8).

In addition, to the factors that affect the individual’s loyalty to the company, we also included

factors which would influence on the employees’ decision to leave his workplace. This

situation shows Graph no. 3. Again we have reasonably defined six different factors, and

these are:

FACTOR 1: renounce personal happiness

FACTOR 2: better organizational clime in another company

FACTOR 3: higher salary for equal work by another employer

FACTOR 4: requiring extra efforts

FACTOR 5: reduction in salary

FACTOR 6: condition for keeping the job is further education

The most frequent response was to leave a job if they have to renounce their personal

happiness, such as family and leisure time. As the second most common reason for failure at

work is a better organizational clime in any other company. Organizational clime again is

followed by an increase in salary for equal work in another company. The third factor because

of which the employed people would leave their jobs is the higher payment, the fourth is

requiring extra efforts and then follows the factor which is reduction in salary. At the last

place the respondents find wage reduction factor, and if they would have to educate to keep

their job. It is an interesting fact that 39% respondents irrespective to the factors, would not

live their workplace. These are mostly those with lower education and older than 35 years.

The reasons for that could be the current times of Great Depression and the intensive

pressures on the labor market. The reason lies also in the age, because older people with low

educational level have minimal chances to find a new job. Overall, the vast majority are

willing to bear it at their work place every day again and again.

16

FACTOR 1 FACTOR 2 FACTOR 3 FACTOR 4 FACTOR 5 FACTOR 602468

101214

FACTORS WHICH AFFECT ON FAILURE OF THE WORKPLACE

Graph no. 3: Shows the factors because of which the employed people could leave their job /

work place (the most common response was to a factor 1 and at least to a factor 6).

Definitions of formal employment are various and every individual would define it

differently. What is meaningful about employment is how an employer values it. Does it

makes him happy or is it merely a necessity? Respondents' opinions were heterogeneous and

are presented in Graph no. 4. Majority, 86% of respondents claims that they like their jobs. To

the minor group of respondents their employments represent the necessary evil. These are

mainly subjects with the lowest levels of education.

LIKE

NECESSARY EVIL

Graph no. 4: It demonstrates the portion of employees in view of manner valuing the work in

terms of pleasure or necessary evil.

Great Depression has affected not merely Slovenian companies, but the whole economy and

consequently also the labor market. We believe that it is important that worker is acquainted

with the condition and the position of a company in economy respectively, in terms of

whether it operates successfully or it sinks in losses. For this purpose we proposed the fifth

question, whose data are shown in Graph no. 5. Majority, that is 81% of respondents, claim

17

that they are acquainted with the condition of the company, 19% have no such information.

Again, the minority is represented by workers with lower level of education and who are

employed at self-dependent contractor. To workers dignity assists a datum which indicates the

pride of an employee working in his employment company. Such situation is presented in

graph no. 6. Again we can notice that those who are not proud at their employment company

have a lower level of education.

ARE AC-QUAINTED

ARE NOT AC-QUAINTED

Graph no. 5 presents the portion of employees in view of acquaintance with the position and

condition respectively of a company they work in.

ARE PROUD

ARE NOT PROUD

Graph no. 6: Shows the portion of employees in view of whether they are proud to be a part of

a company they work in.

Motivational factors encourage active participation of both the individual and the group. In

the survey we asked a question relating to the factor, which we consider as one of the most

important, that is a reward. The seventh question was raised to get two opposite answers,

whether employees feel that they are sufficiently rewarded for the work or not. 80% of

respondents believe that they are not rewarded enough for their work. These are mainly the

18

ones, who have the VII level of education and less. 20% consider to be sufficiently rewarded

for the work. They are the employees with a university degree and completion of postgraduate

studies. An example is illustrated in Graph no. 7.

SUFFICIENTLY REWARDED

NOT REWARDED ENOUGH

Graph no. 7: Shows the percentage of employees in relation to their sense of whether they are

sufficiently rewarded for their work.

Graphs no.2 and no.3 show that employed people highly value positive organizational climate

within the company. It is important to have good relations both with subordinated as well as

with superiors and other colleagues. For this purpose we asked our respondents how they

(only by a sense) feel compared with other employees in the company. Consequently, in

Graph no. 8 there is apparent that more than half of them consider be in a subordinate

position. They are again those with lower levels of education (II to IV). 40% of them believe

that compared with colleagues in the workplace, they are equivalent. These are mostly

employees with V to VI level of education. About 10%, mainly with university and higher

education feel as superior in the company where they work.

EQUIVALENT

JUNIOR

SUPERIOR

Graph no 8: Shows the proportion of employees in relation to their sense of whether, in

comparison with other colleagues, feel subordinate, equal or superior.

19

CONCLUSION

Psychological contract is becoming very important notion of employment relationship. It

contains unwritten expectations of the employee and employer and has a strong influence on

motivation in organization. Although it is separated from the legal contract of individual’s

employment it can be more influential and effective than the formal one.

Our hypothesis, which was based on the previously done researches was that employees with

a higher level of education feel more associated and satisfied with the organization they work

in than those with a lower level of education. The results of our research work showed a

slightly different picture. According to them employees with a lower level of education feel

approximately same amount of association with the organization they work in, as the

employees with a higher level of education. We have ascertained that the level of education

does not influence the reasons and factors which affect the loyalty to the company and on

factors which would contribute on leaving the working place, as much as we hypothetically

believed. But it is true that majority of employees who claim that they like their job, have

more information about company, are more proud of their work, consider to be sufficiently

rewarded, feel equivalent or superior in comparison to their colleagues and some other factors

that influence on satisfaction with the organization they work in, are employees with a higher

level of education (university degree and completion of postgraduate studies).

As we found out, very important is that expectations between employees and employers

reduce. If the psychological contract is broken the consequences can be seen in motivational

decline, dissatisfaction occurrence, reduction of organizational affiliation, increased work

absence and notices due to finding a better job. We can prevent this with an extensive

communication and qualifying employees. Regardless on the level of education, all

employees have to be introduced with condition and position of organization they work in.

This way they will be able to create realistic picture about organization and change their

mentality more easily.

Finally, we agree that the psychological contract should be written. That is a proper solution,

which offers the employees and personnel in employment relationship to know exactly what

to expect from each other. According to that, the work will be done better and it is more likely

that employees and employers will be satisfied and strongly associated with the organization.

20

LITERATURE

Abecednik. 2008. Accessed on: http://f.abecednik.com/formalen.html (20th of March 2010).

Bevc, Milena. 1991. Ekonomski pomen izobraževanja. Radovljica: Didakta.

CIPD. 2009. The psychological contract. Accessed on:

http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/empreltns/psycntrct/psycontr.html (2nd of April 2010).

Cooper, L.  Cary and Peter J. Makin, Charles J. Cox. 1996. Organisations and the

psychological contract. Oxford: BPS Blackwell. Dostopno prek:

http://books.google.com/books?

id=EgJvkY52bQQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Cooper+organisations+and+the+psychologica

l&ei=AhCQS4CaGIfsyASymsCwBQ&cd=1#v=onepage&q=Cooper%20organisations

%20and%20the%20psychological&f=false (5th of March 2010).

Černigoj Sadar, Nevenka and Jana Nadoh Bergoč. 2010. Organizacijsko vedenje 2009/2010,

zbirka člankov.

Dewey, John. 1998. Experience and education. Indianapolis: Kappa Delta Pi. Accessed on:

http://books.google.com/books?

id=UE2EusaU53IC&printsec=frontcover&dq=education&ei=NQqlS9yyGKXmygS0pdjTCA

&cd=3#v=onepage&q=&f=false (20th of March 2010).

Dewey, John. 2005. Democracy and education: an introduction to the philosophy of

education. New York: Cosimo, Inc. Accessed on: http://books.google.com/books?

id=MwuJc_wjRaYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=education&ei=NQqlS9yyGKXmygS0pdjTC

A&cd=2#v=onepage&q=&f=false (20th of March 2010).

Flere, Sergej and Miran Lavrič. 2005. Educational studies. Social inequity and educational

expansion in Slovenia. 31(4). London: Routledge. Accessed on:

http://web.ebscohost.com.nukweb.nuk.uni-lj.si/ehost/pdf?vid=4&hid=13&sid=3548fbed-

21c1-49ea-8b57-f847d953ff96%40sessionmgr13 (20th of March 2010).

Iskalec. 2009. Stopnje izobrazbe. Accessed on: http://www.iskalec.info/stopnje-izobrazbe/

(20th of March 2010).

21

Jerovšek, Janez. 1980. Izobrazba in ekonomska uspešnost. Ljubljana: DDU univerzum.

Ministrstvo za visoko šolstvo, znanost in tehnologijo. 2006. Spremembe zakona o visokem

šolstvu. Accessed on: http://www.mvzt.gov.si/index.php?id=11789&no_cache=1 (6th of

April 2010).

Mojaizbira. 2008. Formalno izobraževanje. Accessed on:

http://www.mojaizbira.si/vsebina/slovar.htm (20th of March 2010).

Pavlin, Samo. 2007. Zaposljivost v Sloveniji – analiza prehoda iz šol v zaposlitve: stanje,

napovedi, primerjave. Vloga kompetenc v družbi znanja: profesionalizacija poklicev.

Ljubljana: Založba FDV.

Robinson, Sandra L. and Denise M. Rousseau. 1994. Violating the psychological contract:

Not the exception but the norm. Journal of organizational behaviour 15 (3): 245−59.

Accessed on: http://www.jstor.org.nukweb.nuk.uni-lj.si/stable/pdfplus/2488448.pdf (21st of

March 2010).

Rousseau, Denise M. 1989. New hire perceptions of their own and their employer's

obligations: A study of psychological contracts. Journal of organizational behaviour 11 (5):

389−400. Accessed on:

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/113470084/PDFSTART (21st of March

2010).

Slovar pojmov. Accessed on: http://www.mojaizbira.si/vsebina/slovar.htm (20th of March

2010).

Stopnja izobrazbe v EU se z generacijami povečuje. 2009. Accessed on:

http://www.evropa.gov.si/si/vsebina/novica/select/izobrazevanje/news/stopnja-izobrazbe-v-

eu-se-z-generacijami-povecuje/a36e74bb11/ (20th of March 2010).

Svetlik, Ivan. 1986. Družboslovne raziskave: Izobraževanje in družbenoekonomski položaj.

3(4). Ljubljana: FDV. Accessed on:

http://www.druzboslovnerazprave.org/media/pdf/clanki/Rdr4Svetlik1.PDF (21st of March

2010).

Van de Ven, Cyril. 2004. The psychological contract; a big deal? Behavioral sciences service

centre. Accessed on: http://www.internationalmta.org/Documents/2004/2004024P.pdf (22nd

of March 2010).

22

Vila E., Luis and Belen Garcia-Mora. 2005. Education Economics: Education and the

determinants of job satisfaction. 13(4). London: Routledge. Accessed on:

http://web.ebscohost.com.nukweb.nuk.uni-lj.si/ehost/pdf?vid=4&hid=13&sid=3548fbed-

21c1-49ea-8b57-f847d953ff96%40sessionmgr13 (20th of March 2010).

APPENDIX

SURVEY

We are students of the Faculty of Social Sciences and we conduct the seminar paper on the

impact of educational level on the content of psychological contract. Please to participate in

the survey because with your help we would write this short and to the enhanced survey data.

The survey is anonymous and will be used solely for the purpose of research.

AGE: years

LEVEL OF EDUCATION:

Name of the company where you are EMPLOYED (not necessary):

NAME OF WORKPLACE:

1. Do you feel loyalty to the company where you work?

Yes/ No

2. Outline factors for you (not)loyalty to the company:

a) Salary

b) Flexible working hours

c) Organizational climate

d) Work atmosphere

e) The various benefits

f) The possibility of progression

g) Participation in taking important decisions

23

h) The safety in terms of continuity od employment

3. Would you be ready to leave job:

a) If the employer would provide you another little higher salary for the equal work

b) To improve the organizational climate in another company

c) You should give up personal happiness

d) In the condition of your employment to maintain continuing education

e) If your employer reduces salary

f) If you require the extra efforts (without higher pay)

4. Do you like your job?

Yes /No

5. Are you familiar with the situation and position of an enterprise in which you work?

Yes / No

6. Are you proud that you are a part of the company in which you work?

Yes / No

7. Do you feel enough rewarded for your work?

Yes / No

8. In company you feel

a) Equivalent

b) Superior

c) Junior

Only by a sense of wonder, not necessarily after the actual situation

Thank you for your cooperation!

24