FINAL Research Project

UP715478
1
Assessing the impact of psychological
contracts on the affective commitment of
National team cricketers in Kenya
By Veer Dave
Department of Sport and Exercise Science
BSc (Hons) Sports Development
U20076
Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Veer S Dave, Department
of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Portsmouth, Spinnaker Building,
Cambridge road, Portsmouth PO1 2ER, United Kingdom.
Email: up715478@myport.ac.uk

UP715478
2
Abstract
The interest surrounding psychological contracts has been growing over the last 20 years and
this is evident through the increased amount of research dedicated to the subject area. This
research project explores the impact that the use or breach of psychological contracts has on
the affective commitment of national team cricketers in Kenya. It compares the perceived and
fulfilled psychological contracts at Cricket Kenya and assesses whether they have a
significant impact on the affective commitment of the players.
Literature Review
Introduction
The term ‘psychological contract’ is used to refer to the tacit or unspoken relationship
between an employee and their employer, and the corresponding expectations of behaviour
and obligation (Wefald, 2008, p. 47; Banfield & Kay, 2013, p. 161). Generally speaking, a
positive relationship between an employer and employee will result in a strong psychological
bond, meaning that the employee displays a high level of commitment and engagement, and a
willingness to apply their skills and capabilities to further organisational objectives.
Conversely, perceived breaches of the psychological contract by either party have a
detrimental effect. Understandably, the tacit nature of the psychological contract is also
informed by extrinsic conditions such as social and cultural expectation (Epitropaki, 2013, p.
67). These issues are briefly explored in this concise literature review, with particular
reference to the implications of the psychological contract on affective commitment in a
professional sporting setting in Kenya.
Defining a Psychological Contract
One of the most popular definitions of the psychological contract is presented by Guest and
Conway (2002, p. 23) who describe it as "the perceptions of the two parties, employee and
employer, of what their mutual obligations are towards each other”. Armstrong and Taylor
(2014, p. 117) suggest that it is "the unwritten understanding and informal obligation
between an employer and its employees regarding their mutual expectations of how each will
perform their respective roles”. Interestingly, Chao, Cheung and Wu (2011, p. 67) observe
that while academic explanations and definitions of the psychological contract are balanced,

UP715478
3
suggesting a mutual and reciprocal level of expectation between an employer and an
employee, they believe that in practice this expectation has become increasingly unbalanced
with greater obligation placed upon the organisation to offer meaningful and fulfilling work,
as well as treating employees with levels of autonomy beyond that traditionally expected in
earlier definitions of the term. Inkson and King (2011, p. 41) concur that it is indeed a
delicate balance, and is also informed by personal and social factors such as the individual
skills and preferences of employees, the nature of the work they conduct, and the culture of
the organisation. They argue that all of these factors must be included in an understanding of
what constitutes a psychological contract.
Why Does the Psychological Contract Matter?
In contemporary organisations the psychological contract matters a great deal because of the
need for organisations to leverage unique employee competences as a source of competitive
advantage (Rockstuhl, Dulebohn, Ang & Shore, 2012, p. 1097). In traditional manufacturing
industries, the psychological contract was less prevalent because the nature of work was
highly transactional. However, in high skilled or service-based industries requiring a great
deal of employee input, and often relying on a very unique set of skills held by employees,
Rosen and Levy (2013, p. 49) argue that the balance of power in the psychological contract
has shifted in favour of the employee, effectively meaning that they are in a stronger
bargaining position in terms of tacit expectations. Ariss, Cascio and Paauwe (2014, p. 175)
believe that another factor which influences this shift in power is improvements in
technology, meaning that it is much easier to work flexibly and remotely such that there
needs to be a high level of trust and mutual respect between an employer and employee,
factors which are crucial in maintaining a strong and mutually beneficial employer-employee
relationship.
Extensive empirical research has demonstrated the existence of the psychological contract,
with broadly equal amounts of research devoted to the positive and negative impacts. For
example, it is proven by Noon, Blyton and Morrell (2013, p. 196) that the presence of a
positive psychological contract means that employees display higher levels of organisational
commitment and engagement, which in their own right, are widely proven to positively
influence organisational behaviour and outcomes. Conversely, the absence or void of the
psychological contract has correspondingly detrimental results, which Sparrow and Cooper

UP715478
4
(2012, pp. 116-118) argue, are in fact exponentially more damaging to a business. The lack
of a positive psychological contract is shown by Wilkens and Nermerich (2011, pp. 72-73) to
result in highly undesirable employee behaviours such as repeated sickness absence, and bare
minimum working engagement (i.e. work to rule, or working just enough to satisfy basic job
requirements). The additional damaging effect is that this negative relationship permeates
throughout the workforce, creating additional momentum and making it very hard to recover
a positive working relationship.
The Psychological Contract in a Sports Setting
Surprisingly, there is relatively little research which investigates the role and value of the
psychological contract in a professional sports setting, which according to Agergaard and
Ryba (2014, p. 230) is a major lacuna in understanding in this field. Particularly because of
the complete reliance upon the psychological contract between a professional athlete and
commitment to their team, which, in this instance, is a proxy for an organisation.
Professional athletes have an entirely unique skillset, which cannot be readily replicated or
even necessarily taught, as the skills of world leading athletes illustrate (Tanaka & Gould,
2015, p. 5). It is also widely proven that to function effectively, professional athletes are
reliant upon the rest of their team to help and support them, which can logically only occur if
there is a strong and mutually reciprocated bond of trust between players and the support staff
in a professional setting (Douglas & Careless, 2014, pp. 38-39). Given the damage which can
be caused by the absence of a positive psychological contract, it is therefore vital to
understand how professional athletes form a strong psychological relationship with their
team, and vice versa, and the impact that this has on their affective commitment.
Application in Kenya
Although the psychological contract is now quite widely recognised as a vital component of
good employer-employee relationships, there is less research which examines how it
functions in organisations in emerging and developing economies (Ojiambo and Bii, 2013, p.
44). Kenya has developed and grown rapidly in recent years, improving its economic position
year on year. Kagaari (2014, p. 71) reports that many Kenyan organisations are keen to adopt
good practice in organisational management, extending to all aspects of business

UP715478
5
functionality, and with Human Resources Management (HRM) being no exception. In recent
years a number of studies into the implications of breaching the psychological contract within
Kenyan organisations have been undertaken (Ongalo and Tari, 2015, p. 57-58), but little
research has been conducted from a positive perspective regarding psychological contracts in
Kenyan organisations, such as affective commitment. This therefore represents another
interesting angle of research, which this study will strive to investigate.
This indicative literature review has touched upon the definition of the psychological
contract, its importance in an organisational setting, its role for professional athletes, and also
the functionality of the psychological contract within Kenyan organisations. Bringing all of
these aspects together arguably represents an entirely novel angle of research which will be
the focus of the main investigation.

UP715478
6
Methodology
The research conducted throughout this project looks to assess whether the psychological
contract of national team cricketers in Kenya affects their commitment to Cricket Kenya
(CK). This section highlights the research method that was used and touches on the research
design, the Tilburg Psychological Contract Questionnaire (TPCQ) and Affective
Commitment Questionnaire (ACQ), the study sample, data analysis and validity.
ResearchDesign
This research was conducted using a quantitative research method where data was gathered
using the TPCQ, which was developed by Freese and Schalk (2008, p. 284) to gauge the
perceived obligations between employees and employers, and the ACQ, which was designed
by Freese (2007) to assess the affective commitment of employees. This was all carried out in
compliance with ethics protocol, which was submitted previously.
The Tilburg Psychological Contract Questionnaire
The TPCQ distinguishes five perceived organisational obligation scales using a factor
analysis and these are: contents of work, career development, social atmosphere,
organisational policy, work-life balance and rewards. When considering the perceived
employee obligations, two scales were distinguished, namely: in-role behaviour and extra-
role behaviour (Freese & Schalk, 2008, p. 284). The items for perceived employer and
employee obligations were measured on a 5-point Likertscale (ranging from 1 = no obligation
at all to 5 = very strong obligation). The TPCQ is used because it is adaptable and can be
used in the context that this research required, as shown in appendix 2. Boynton and
Greenhalgh (2004, p. 1313) explained that a difficulty with using such a questionnaire was
that the questions might be misinterpreted. For example, what one participant may interpret
as ‘good’ may be interpreted as poor to another.

UP715478
7
The Affective commitment Questionnaire
Affective commitment is defined as “identification with, involvement in, and emotional
attachment to the organization” (Meyer & Allen, 1997, p. 253) and it is measured by using
the ACQ, which was designed by Freese (2007). Questions 3, 4 and 5 of this questionnaire
relate to identification with Cricket Kenya, whereas questions 1, 2 and 7 relate to their
involvement with the organisation. The items were measured on a 5-point likert/summated
attitude scale (ranging from 1 = totally disagree to 5 = fully agree).
Sample
The researcher was presented with a unique dilemma while collecting research because he
was only in Kenya for a limited amount of time, and during a majority of that time frame, the
national team players were on tour in Ireland and Namibia. Once the players were back, the
researcher took this window of opportunity to gather the required information. A total of
twenty-eight staff members were contacted, and in compliance with the ethics protocol,
participants that were under the age of 18 were not contacted. 19 of these responded (n=19),
which yielded a response rate of 67.8571%. Each of these players were given a copy of the
participant information sheet, the TPCQ and ACQ, and a consent form (shown in appendix
1). The majority of the respondents were players who had been at the organisation for an
average of 4.6723 years.
Data Analysis
Once the questionnaires were filled out, the questionnaire data was first uploaded on to
Microsoft Excel and descriptive statistics such as mean and standard deviation were derived.
In order to examine whether the psychological contract between the national team cricketers
in Kenya and the National governing body affects their commitment to the organisation,
regression analysis was performed. However, since regression models can be liable to yield
false positive results if too many variables are entered as independent variables, it was first
necessary to refine the key constructs (Draper & Smith, 2014, p. 64). In this first stage,
composite measures of the perceived and fulfilled TPCQ scales, and the affective
commitment scales were created by summing and averaging the various dimensions of the
scales. This yielded three main variables. In the second stage of the analysis, the perceived

UP715478
8
and fulfilled psychological contracts were entered as independent variables into a regression
model in which affective commitment was entered as the outcome measure. There are a
number of ways in which regression analysis can be performed (Seber & Lee, 2012, pp. 70 -
74). For this analysis, the enter method was used, in which both of the independent variables
are forced into the model at the same time. This method is recommended where there are a
small number of independent variables (Seber & Lee, 2012, p. 71).
Validity and Reliability analysis
A lecturer, who was experienced in the subject area, validated the questionnaires before any
of them were handed out. The TPCQ and ACQ scales are comprised of a number of different
dimensions. One of the pitfalls of statistical analysis that use multi-dimensional constructs is
a lack of internal consistency of the scales (Draper & Smith, 2012, p. 28). Internal
consistency measures the extent to which each variable is assessing a similar aspect, and it is
a contributing factor to the overall reliability and validity of the data (Seber & Lee, 2012, p.
45). In order to assess the scale reliability and internal consistency of the TPCQ and ACQ
scales, it was first necessary to perform Cronbach’s alpha analysis (Santos, 1999, pp. 1 – 5).
The standard Cronbach’s alpha cutoff point accepted among statisticians is 0.7, although
some statisticians have suggested that a lower cutoff point is acceptable (Santos, 1999, pp. 1
– 5). For the perceived employer obligations TPCQ data, α was low at 0.285, indicating that
this is an unreliable scale. The corresponding figure for the employee and employer
fulfillment of obligations (TPCQ) data, α was higher 0.562, but this figure still does not
approach that recommended as a minimum by Nunnally (1978, pp. 245 – 246). Likely, these
low alpha figures are a consequence of the very small sample size, which comprises just 19
respondents (de Winter, Dodou & Wieringa, 2009, pp. 147 -181). It is acknowledged that the
poor internal consistency could have ramifications for the accuracy of the results reported
below.
Ophelders (2011, p. 17) explained that one of the main difficulties with using questionnaires
is that the respondents are susceptible to social desirability bias. Grim (2010, p. 24) explained
that social desirability bias is generated by the unwillingness of respondents to provide honest
answers and this stems from the participant’s desire to provide answers which are socially
acceptable in order to avoid embarrassment. This type of bias was expected in sections G and
H of the TPCQ and questions 2, 6 and 7 of the ACQ. In order to counter this, the researcher

UP715478
9
attempted to create a tone, which is tactful and non-judgemental, in these sections (Nederhof,
1985, p. 265).
Additionally, throughout the project and in accordance with convention, analyses are
determined to be statistically significant if they yield a p value that is at, or lower than a 0.05
level of significance in order to eliminate any type 1 errors (Seber & Lee, 2012, p. 74). In
other words, the analyst can be 95 per cent certain that the result did not occur by chance.

UP715478
10
Results
Data Analysis
Descriptive statistics
Table 1 presents the descriptive data pertaining to the eight dimensions of the perceived
employee and employer obligations (TPCQ) scale. The table displays the mean and standard
deviations in addition to the minimum and maximum scores for each aspect. The most
interesting observations are now described. The variables pertaining to job content were
scored fairly high, with all variables receiving a mean score of above 3, which indicates that
respondents perceive that employers should provide these aspects. No respondent selected the
lowest score for variables in this category, and the range for some variables fell between 3
and 5. The lowest mean for variables in this category was for the variable ‘autonomy’ which
received a mean score of 3.1579. The highest mean was for the variable ‘the possibility to
deliver quality’ which received a mean score of 4.2105.
The variables in the category ‘career development’ also received high mean scores, which
suggests that these are aspects that players at Cricket Kenya perceive should be provided by
the employer. The highest mean score for variables in the ‘career development’ category was
for the variables ‘professional development’ and ‘training and development’ which both
received mean scores of 4.4211. Variables in the category ‘social atmosphere’ also received
relatively high mean scores, as exemplified by the scores for ‘training and performing
atmosphere’ (mean = 4.3684) and ‘support from coaches’ (mean = 4.1579)
Of the eight dimensions, the highest mean scores were attributed to variables in the
organisational policies category. The lowest mean score in that category was for
‘participation in important decisions’ (mean = 3.6842), but even this score indicates that
respondents believe that the employer is obliged to provide this aspect of work. All other
mean scores for variables in this category were above 4. Interestingly, the aspects pertaining
to work life balance received the lowest mean scores. This would suggest that players at
Cricket Kenya do not believe that it is the responsibility of the employer to offer employees
work-life balance.
Overall, however, the descriptive data reveals huge variations in the scores accorded to each
measure – perhaps further indication of the lack of reliability of the TPCQ scale among this
sample. For instance, within the work-life balance dimension, mean scores ranged from 2

UP715478
11
(standard deviation = 0) for ratings accorded to “opportunity to schedule your own holidays”
through to 4.1053 (standard deviation = .65784) for “acknowledgment of personal
circumstances”. There was also considerable variation in the scores attributed to variables in
the extra-role behaviour category. In general, however, most aspects were rated above 3,
indicating that respondents believe that the employer is at least somewhat obligated to offer
the corresponding aspect. Just a few aspects, such as “opportunity to schedule your own
holidays”, “being cost conscious when dealing with organisational properties” and “working
weekends” received lower mean scores.
Table 1: Perceived employee and employer obligations (TPCQ), descriptive data
Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Job Content
Variation in work (i.e. in
training sessions, match
schedules, etc.)
2.00 5.00 3.4211 1.16980
Challenging work 3.00 5.00 3.5789 .76853
Balanced workload 3.00 5.00 3.9474 .77986
Interesting activities 3.00 5.00 3.9474 .77986
Autonomy 3.00 4.00 3.1579 .37463
The possibility to deliver
quality
3.00 5.00 4.2105 .85498
Career Development
Career opportunities 2.00 5.00 3.6316 1.06513
Training and education 4.00 5.00 4.4211 .50726
Coaching on the job 2.00 5.00 3.5263 1.34860
Professional development 4.00 5.00 4.4211 .50726

UP715478
12
Opportunity to fully utilise
your skills
3.00 5.00 3.5789 .76853
Social Atmosphere
Good training and performing
atmosphere
3.00 5.00 4.3684 .95513
Opportunity to pleasantly
cooperate with teammates.
3.00 5.00 4.0000 .74536
Support from teammates. 3.00 4.00 3.7368 .45241
Appreciation and recognition. 3.00 4.00 3.7368 .45241
Support from coaches 4.00 5.00 4.1579 .37463
Organisational policies
Participation in important
decisions
2.00 4.00 3.6842 .74927
A fair coach 4.00 5.00 4.1579 .37463
Feedback on performance 4.00 5.00 4.2632 .45241
Clear and fair rules 4.00 5.00 4.5263 .51299
Keeping you informed of
developments
3.00 5.00 4.1053 .65784
Open communication 4.00 5.00 4.8421 .37463
Being able to have confidence
in Cricket Kenya.
4.00 5.00 4.8421 .37463
Work-life balance
Acknowledgment of personal
circumstances
3.00 5.00 4.1053 .65784
Opportunity to schedule your
own holidays
2.00 2.00 2.0000 .00000

UP715478
13
Working at home (training on
your own, gym, fitness, etc)
3.00 4.00 3.8421 .37463
Ability to adjust working
hours to private life
3.00 4.00 3.8421 .37463
Rewards
Job security 3.00 4.00 3.7368 .45241
Appropriate salary 4.00 5.00 4.5263 .51299
Reward for exceptional
performance
4.00 5.00 4.2632 .45241
Reimbursement of training
costs
2.00 5.00 3.9474 .97032
Good benefits package 3.00 5.00 4.1053 .65784
Pay for performance 4.00 5.00 4.2632 .45241
In-role behaviour
Good cooperation 4.00 5.00 4.8421 .37463
Helping teammates 3.00 5.00 4.0000 .74536
Speaking to fans and media in
a respectful manner
4.00 5.00 4.6842 .47757
Still performing well on tasks
you do not like to do1
4.00 5.00 4.6842 .47757
Performing with integrity 5.00 5.00 5.0000 .00000
Performing with dedication 5.00 5.00 5.0000 .00000

UP715478
14
Being cost conscious when
dealing with organisational
properties (e.g. water
consumption, electricity for
bowling machines, etc.)
2.00 4.00 2.5789 .76853
Dealing with private matters
away from the organisation
3.00 5.00 3.8947 .65784
Respecting organisational
rules and regulations
3.00 4.00 3.7368 .45241
Contribute to a positive
organisational image
4.00 4.00 4.0000 .00000
Contributing to a pleasant
performing atmosphere
4.00 5.00 4.1579 .37463
Extra-role behaviour
Keeping skills up to date to be
able to deal with changing
environments (e.g. learning to
face/bowl different variations)
4.00 5.00 4.7368 .45241
Participating in training
outside working hours that is
important to improve
appropriately
4.00 5.00 4.4737 .51299
Making suggestions for
improvement.
3.00 4.00 3.8421 .37463
Volunteering to do additional
tasks.
3.00 4.00 3.8421 .37463
Train extra hours, if that is
necessary (e.g. extra fitness
sessions)
4.00 4.00 4.0000 .00000

UP715478
15
Working weekends 2.00 4.00 2.8947 .65784
The willingness to perform in
different positions.
4.00 4.00 4.0000 .00000
The flexibility to change
positions.
4.00 4.00 4.0000 .00000
Willingness to work in another
region.
4.00 4.00 4.0000 .00000
Stay with the organization for
several years.
2.00 3.00 2.7368 .45241
Table 2 presents the descriptive data pertaining to the eight dimensions of the employee and
employer fulfilment of obligations (TPCQ) scale. The data reveals a very mixed assessment.
Clearly, respondents believe that some obligations, such as those in the in-role behaviour, and
extra-role behaviour dimensions are being fulfilled. For instance, the variable ‘being cost
conscious when dealing with organisational properties (e.g. water consumption, electricity for
bowling machines, etc.)’ received a very high mean score of 4.6316, while ‘performing well
on tasks you do not like to do’ scored, on average, 4.3158.
However, many other aspects, particularly in the career development, organisational policies
and rewards dimensions, receive much lower mean scores. The mean score for autonomy, for
instance, was just 2.9474 which suggests that on average, players do not believe that this
aspect is being fulfilled. Similarly, low scores were received for the variables pertaining to
‘training and education’ (mean = 2.7895), ‘reward for exceptional performance’ (mean =
2.9474), and ‘keeping you informed of developments’ (mean = 2.2632).

UP715478
16
Table 2: Employee and employer fulfilment of obligations (TPCQ), descriptive data
Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation
Job Content
Variation in work (i.e. in training sessions,
match schedules, etc.)
3.00 3.00 3.0000 .00000
Challenging work 3.00 3.00 3.0000 .00000
Balanced workload 3.00 3.00 3.0000 .00000
Interesting activities 3.00 3.00 3.0000 .00000
Autonomy 2.00 3.00 2.9474 .22942
The possibility to deliver quality 3.00 3.00 3.0000 .00000
Career Development
Career opportunities 3.00 4.00 3.3158 .47757
Training and education 2.00 4.00 2.7895 .53530
Coaching on the job 3.00 4.00 3.0526 .22942
Professional development 2.00 3.00 2.9474 .22942
Opportunity to fully utilise your skills 3.00 4.00 3.0526 .22942
Social Atmosphere
Good training and performing atmosphere 3.00 4.00 3.3158 .47757
Opportunity to pleasantly cooperate with
teammates.
3.00 4.00 3.0526 .22942
Support from teammates. 3.00 4.00 3.0526 .22942
Appreciation and recognition. 3.00 4.00 3.0526 .22942
Support from coaches 3.00 5.00 4.1053 .80930

UP715478
17
Organisational policies
Participation in important decisions 2.00 3.00 2.9474 .22942
A fair coach 3.00 4.00 3.5789 .50726
Feedback on performance 3.00 4.00 3.3158 .47757
Clear and fair rules 3.00 4.00 3.3158 .47757
Keeping you informed of developments 2.00 3.00 2.2632 .45241
Open communication 2.00 3.00 2.6842 .47757
Being able to have confidence in Cricket
Kenya.
2.00 3.00 2.9474 .22942
Work-life balance
Acknowledgment of personal circumstances 3.00 4.00 3.2632 .45241
Opportunity to schedule your own holidays 3.00 4.00 3.2632 .45241
Working at home (training on your own, gym,
fitness, etc)
3.00 4.00 3.2632 .45241
Ability to adjust working hours to private life 3.00 4.00 3.2632 .45241
Rewards
Job security 3.00 3.00 3.0000 .00000
Appropriate salary 1.00 3.00 2.8947 .45883
Reward for exceptional performance 2.00 3.00 2.9474 .22942
Reimbursement of training costs 2.00 4.00 3.2632 .56195
Good benefits package 1.00 3.00 2.8947 .45883
Pay for performance 2.00 3.00 2.9474 .22942
In-role behaviour
Good cooperation 4.00 4.00 4.0000 .00000

UP715478
18
Helping teammates 3.00 5.00 3.8421 .68825
Speaking to fans and media in a respectful
manner
4.00 5.00 4.1579 .37463
Still performing well on tasks you do not like
to do
4.00 5.00 4.3158 .47757
Performing with integrity 3.00 5.00 4.1579 .89834
Performing with dedication 4.00 5.00 4.1579 .37463
Being cost conscious when dealing with
organisational properties (e.g. water
consumption, electricity for bowling machines,
etc.)
4.00 5.00 4.6316 .49559
Dealing with private matters away from the
organisation
4.00 5.00 4.3158 .47757
Respecting organisational rules and
regulations
4.00 5.00 4.1579 .37463
Contribute to a positive organisational image 4.00 5.00 4.1579 .37463
Contributing to a pleasant performing
atmosphere
4.00 5.00 4.4737 .51299
Extra-role behaviour
Keeping skills up to date to be able to deal
with changing environments (e.g. learning to
face/bowl different variations)
4.00 5.00 4.4737 .51299
Participating in training outside working hours
that is important to improve appropriately
3.00 4.00 3.6842 .47757
Making suggestions for improvement. 4.00 5.00 4.3158 .47757
Volunteering to do additional tasks. 4.00 5.00 4.4737 .51299

UP715478
19
Train extra hours, if that is necessary (e.g.
extra fitness sessions)
4.00 5.00 4.3158 .47757
Working weekends 4.00 5.00 4.6316 .49559
The willingness to perform in different
positions.
4.00 4.00 4.0000 .00000
The flexibility to change positions. 4.00 5.00 4.1579 .37463
Willingness to work in another region. 3.00 4.00 3.8421 .37463
Stay with the organization for several years. 3.00 4.00 3.4737 .51299
Table 3 presents the descriptive data pertaining to the level of affective commitment
demonstrated by the sample. As before, the range, mean and standard deviation of scores are
presented. The minimum score for some aspects, such as ‘I really care about the fate of
Cricket Kenya’ was 4, while other aspects, such as ‘I find that my values and Cricket Kenya’s
values are very similar’ had a constrained range. In general, these descriptive results
demonstrate a relatively high level of affective commitment among the respondents toward
their employer. Respondents indicate that they are glad they “chose to perform for Cricket
Kenya” (mean = 4.3684, standard deviation = .49559), “care about the fate of Cricket Kenya
(mean = 4.6842, standard deviation = .47757) and feel loyal to the organisation (mean =
1.000, standard deviation = .000). The positive assessment of the affective commitment
levels provides a good opportunity to ascertain the extent to which the varying evaluations of
perceived and fulfilled employer and employee obligations impact this assessment. This is
considered in the final stage of the analysis.
Table 3: Affective commitment, descriptive data
Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation
I am extremely glad that I chose to
perform for Cricket Kenya
4.00 5.00 4.3684 .49559

UP715478
20
I really care about the fate of
Cricket Kenya
4.00 5.00 4.6842 .47757
Deciding to work for Cricket Kenya
was a definite mistake on my part
1.00 1.00 1.0000 .00000
I find that my values and Cricket
Kenya’s values are very similar
3.00 4.00 3.6842 .47757
For me this is the best of all
possible organizations to play for
3.00 3.00 3.0000 .00000
I feel very little loyalty to Cricket
Kenya
1.00 1.00 1.0000 .00000
I don’t feel part of Cricket Kenya 1.00 1.00 1.0000 .00000
The results of the regression analysis are displayed in table 4. This table reports the beta
values (B) and standard errors (SEB) of the regression analysis. In addition, the standardized
beta values (β) are reported, enabling a comparison of results (Seber and Lee, 2012, p.74). As
table 4 shows, neither perceived psychological contract (t=.626, p=.758), nor fulfilled
psychological contract (t=.828, p=.420), exert a statistically significant impact on the
affective commitment of the sample.
Table 4: Regressionmodel, psychological contract and affective commitment
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1
(Constant) .571 1.820 .314 .758
Perceived .230 .367 .154 .626 .540
Fulfilled .338 .408 .203 .828 .420
R2=.078, F=.680, p=.521

UP715478
22
Discussion and Conclusion
While it has been proven by Noon et al., (2013, p. 196) that the presence of a positive
psychological contract means that employees display higher levels of affective commitment,
the regression analysis revealed that neither the perceived psychological contract (t=0.626,
p=0.758), nor fulfilled psychological contract (t=0.828, p=0.420), exert a statistically
significant impact on the affective commitment of the sample. There are a number of possible
explanations for this finding. First, it is likely that the sample size used to conduct this
analysis is too small. Research shows that in linear regression analysis, explanatory power
and sample size are correlated (Dupont & Plummer, 1998, pp. 589 – 601). Second, the
insignificant F test suggests that this regression model is a poor approximation to the data
(Seber & Lee, 2012, p. 72). Third, the reliability analysis conducted earlier suggested that
each scale lacked internal consistency.
Taylor, Darcy, Hoyle & Cuskelly (2006, p. 24) explained that in exchange for loyalty,
employees usually expect to receive fair compensation, rewards for hard work and
achievements and training and development as required. This concurs with the perceived
TPCQ, where the highest mean scores were attributed to ‘Reward for exceptional
performance’, ‘professional development’ and ‘training and development’. However, there
were significant differences between the perceived and fulfilled psychological contracts
regarding the career development, organisational policies and rewards dimensions. This
shows that there is a breach in the psychological contract when considering these aspects.
Despite this breach, the descriptive results indicate that there is a relatively high level of
affective commitment among the cricketers towards CK. Respondents indicate that they are
glad they “chose to perform for Cricket Kenya” (mean = 4.3684, standard deviation =
0.49559), “care about the fate of Cricket Kenya” (mean = 4.6842, standard deviation =
0.47757) and feel loyal to the organisation (mean = 1.000, standard deviation = 0.000). Law
(2014, p. 46) explained that it is normal for players that are representing their countries feel
loyal despite the breaches in their psychological contract because these loyalties are not based
in logic.
When considering whether the players are fulfilling their obligations, they revealed that they
are fulfilling what the organisation should expect of them. This was highlighted in
dimensions G and H of the fulfilled TPCQ. For instance, the variable ‘being cost conscious

UP715478
23
when dealing with organisational properties (e.g. water consumption, electricity for bowling
machines, etc.)’ received a very high mean score of 4.6316, while ‘performing well on tasks
you do not like to do’ scored, on average, 4.3158. However, it was noted that this may be due
to the participant’s desire to provide answers which are socially acceptable in order to avoid
embarrassment rather than answering truthfully (Grim, 2010, p. 46).
Concluding Remarks
This research project has presented a concise review of literature surrounding psychological
contracts in the required context, a methodology demonstrating how the research was
conducted, results showing the responses of the national team cricketers and a
discussion/conclusion to analyse these results. Overall, despite the links between the
perceived and fulfilled psychological contracts and the players’ affective commitment to CK,
they are not statistically significant enough. It is therefore difficult to reach any firm
conclusions with regards to whether the psychological contract between the national team
cricketers in Kenya and the National governing body affects their commitment to the
organisation. This project does, however, provide a stepping-stone for future research into
psychological contract in the context of sports in Kenya.

UP715478
24
Reference List
Agergaard, S., & Ryba, T. V., (2014) Migration and career transitions in professional sports:
Transnational athletic careers in a psychological and sociological perspective. Sociology of
Sport Journal, 31(2), 228-247.
Al Ariss, A., Cascio, W. F., & Paauwe, J., (2014) Talent management: Current theories and
future research directions. Journal of World Business, 49(2), 173-179.
Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S., (2014) Armstrong's handbook of human resource management
practice. (13th Ed) London: Kogan Page Publishers.
Banfield, P., & Kay, R., (2013) Introduction to human resource management. (2nd Ed)
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Boynton, P. M., & Greenhalgh, T. (2004). Selecting, designing, and developing your
questionnaire. Bmj, 328(7451), 1312-1315.
Chao, J. M., Cheung, F. Y., & Wu, A. M., (2011) Psychological contract breach and
counterproductive workplace behaviors: testing moderating effect of attribution style and
power distance. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(04), 763-
777.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2008). Collecting and interpreting qualitative
materials (Vol. 3). Sage.
De Winter, J. C. F., Dodou, D., & Wieringa, P. A. (2009). Exploratory factor analysis with
small sample sizes. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44(2), 147-181.
Douglas, K., & Carless, D., (2014) Life story research in sport: Understanding the
experiences of elite and professional athletes through narrative. London: Routledge.
Draper, N. R., & Smith, H. (2014). Applied regression analysis. John Wiley & Sons.

UP715478
25
Dupont, W. D., & Plummer, W. D. (1998). Power and sample size calculations for studies
involving linear regression. Controlled clinical trials, 19(6), 589-601.
Epitropaki, O., (2013) A multi‐level investigation of psychological contract breach and
organizational identification through the lens of perceived organizational membership:
Testing a moderated–mediated model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 65-86.
Freese, C., & Schalk, R. (2008). How to measure the psychological contract? A critical
criteria-based review of measures. South African Journal of Psychology, 38(2), 269-286.
Galletta, A. (2013). Mastering the semi-structured interview and beyond: From research
design to analysis and publication. NYU Press.
Grimm, P. (2010). Social desirability bias. Wiley International Encyclopedia of Marketing.
Guest, D. E., & Conway, N., (2002) Pressure at work and the psychological contract.
London: CIPD.
Inkson, K., & King, Z., (2011) Contested terrain in careers: A psychological contract
model. Human Relations, 64(1), 37-57.
Kagaari, J., (2014) Psychological Contract Violation Management and Organizational
Citizenship Behaviours in Selected Commercial Banks in Kampala District. Global Journal
of Human-Social Science Research, 14(4), 67-79.
Kvale, S. (2007). Doing interviews. London: Sage.
Law, T. (2014). Competing for the Motherland: Sports Spectacle and Nationalism During the
2014 Sochi Winter Olympics.
Longhurst, R. (2003). Semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Key methods in
geography, 117-132.

UP715478
26
Meyer, J. P. (1997). Organizational commitment. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management.
Nederhof, A. J. (1985). Methods of coping with social desirability bias: A review. European
journal of social psychology, 15(3), 263-280.
Noon, M., Blyton, P., & Morrell, K., (2013) The realities of work: Experiencing work and
employment in contemporary society. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ojiambo, J. B., & Bii, B. C., (2013) The effects of psychological contract violation on
employee-employer relationship in organisations: A case of Ketepa Limited Kericho
Kenya. ZENITH International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 3(6), 42-52.
Ongalo, E. A., & Tari, J., (2015) Effect of Employee Motivation Strategies on Organizational
Performance: A Case of Electricity Generating and Distribution Firms in Kenya. European
Journal of Business and Management, 7(8), 55-65.
Ophelders, R. (2011). Talent Management and psychological contract content: differences
caused by talent segmentation and type of employment relationship.
Rabionet, S. E. (2011). How I Learned to Design and Conduct Semi-Structured Interviews:
An Ongoing and Continuous Journey. Qualitative Report, 16(2), 563-566.
Rockstuhl, T., Dulebohn, J. H., Ang, S., & Shore, L. M., (2012) Leader–member exchange
(LMX) and culture: A meta-analysis of correlates of LMX across 23 countries. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1097.
Rosen, C. C., & Levy, P. E., (2013) Stresses, swaps, and skill: An investigation of the
psychological dynamics that relate work politics to employee performance. Human
Performance, 26(1), 44-65.
Richards, L. (1999). Data Alive! The Thinking Behind NVivo. Qualitative Health Research,
9(3), 412-428.

UP715478
27
Santos, J. R. A. (1999). Cronbach’s alpha: A tool for assessing the reliability of scales.
Journal of Extension, 37(2), 1-5.
Seber, G. A., & Lee, A. J. (2012). Linear regression analysis. New York: John Wiley &
Sons.
Sparrow, P., & Cooper, C. L., (2012) The employment relationship: Key challenges for HR.
London: Routledge.
Tanaka, S., & Gould, D., (2015) Psychological skills usage among Japanese rugby
players. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, (ahead-of-print), 1-11.
Wefald, A. J., (2008) An examination of job engagement, transformational leadership, and
related psychological constructs. York: ProQuest.
Wilkens, U., & Nermerich, D., (2011) “Love it, change it, or leave it"—Understanding
Highly-skilled Flexible Workers' Job Satisfaction from a Psychological Contract
Perspective. Management Revue, 65-83.

UP715478
28
Appendices
Appendix 1 – ConsentForm
CONSENT FORM
Principal Investigator: Veer S Dave
Telephone: 07932581909 Department of Sport & Exercise Science
Email: up715478@myport.ac.uk Spinnaker Building, Cambridge
Road PORTSMOUTH, PO1 2ER
If Principal Investigator is a student:
Supervisor: Mike Rayner
Telephone: 023 9284 5381
Email: mike.rayner@port.ac.uk
STUDY TITLE:
Assessing the impact that the psychological contracts have on the affective commitment of
players’ under contract with Cricket Kenya
SFEC Reference No: Please initial each box if content
1. I confirm that I have read and understood the attached information sheet
for the above study. I confirm that I have had the opportunity to consider the
information, ask questions and that these have been answered satisfactorily.
2. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw
at any time without giving any reason.
3. I understand that the results of this study may be published and / or
presented at meetings, and as an research project. I give my permission for my
anonymous data, which does not identify me, to be disseminated in this way.
4. Data collected during this study could be requested by regulatory
authorities. I give my permission to any such regulatory authority with legal
authority to review the study to have access to my data, which may identify me.
5. I agree to the data I contribute being retained for any future research that
has been approved by a Research Ethics Committee.
6. I agree to take part in this study

UP715478
29
Name of Participant: Date: Signature:
Name of Person taking Consent: Date: Signature:

UP715478
30
Appendix 2 – TPCQ and ACQ
NAME:
AGE:
ROLE IN ORGANISATION: (PLAYER/COACH/MANAGEMENT):
LENGTH AT ORGANISATION:
Instructions of the A to E scales: These questions concern to what extent you feel that your
employer is obligated to do certain things for you as an employee. Write a mark on the line
before the statements indicating to what extent you feel this is an obligation for your
employer:
1 = not at all obligated
2 = slightly obligated
3 = somewhat obligated
4 = fairly obligated
5 = very obligated
A. Job Content
1. Variation in work (i.e. in training sessions, match schedules, etc.)
2. Challenging work
3. Balanced workload
4. Interesting activities
5. Autonomy
6. The possibility to deliver quality
B. Career Development
7. Career opportunities
8. Training and education
9. Coaching on the job

UP715478
31
10. Professional development
11. Opportunity to fully utilise your skills
C. Social Atmosphere
12. Good training and performing atmosphere
13. Opportunity to pleasantly cooperate with teammates.
14. Support from teammates.
15. Appreciation and recognition.
16. Support from coaches
D. Organisational Policies
17. Participation in important decisions
18. A fair coach
19. Feedback on performance
20. Clear and fair rules
21. Keeping you informed of developments
22. Open communication
23. Being able to have confidence in Cricket Kenya.
E. Work Life Balance
24. Acknowledgment of personal circumstances
25. Opportunity to schedule your own holidays
26. Working at home (training on your own, gym, fitness, etc)
27. Ability to adjust working hours to private life
F. Rewards
28. Job security
29. Appropriate salary
30. Reward for exceptional performance
31. Reimbursement of training costs
32. Good benefits package

UP715478
32
33. Pay for performance

UP715478
33
Instructions of the G and H scales: These questions concern to what extend you feel
obligated to do certain things for the organization or not. Write a mark on the line before the
statements indicating to what extend you feel this is an obligation for you from a scale of 1 =
not at all obligated to 5 = very obligated
G. In-Role Behaviour
34. Good cooperation
35. Helping teammates
36. Speaking to fans and media in a respectful manner
37. Still performing well on tasks you do not like to do1
38. Performing with integrity
39. Performing with dedication
40. Being cost conscious when dealing with organisational properties (e.g. water
consumption, electricity for bowling machines, etc.)
41. Dealing with private matters away from the organisation
42. Respecting organisational rules and regulations
43. Contribute to a positive organisational image
44. Contributing to a pleasant performing atmosphere
H. Extra-role Behaviour
45. Keeping skills up to date to be able to deal with changing environments (e.g. learning
to face/bowl different variations)
46. Participating in training outside working hours that is important to improve
appropriately
47. Making suggestions for improvement.
48. Volunteering to do additional tasks.
49. Train extra hours, if that is necessary (e.g. extra fitness sessions)
50. Working weekends
51. The willingness to perform in different positions.
52. The flexibility to change positions.
53. Willingness to work in another region.
54. Stay with the organization for several years.

UP715478
34
Instructions for the A – E scales: These questions concern to what extent you feel that your
employer is doing certain things for you as an employee. Write a mark on the line before the
statements indicating to what extent you feel your employer is fulfilling these on a scale
ranging from 1= not fulfilling to 5= completely fulfilling:
A. Job Content
1. Variation in work (i.e. in training sessions, match schedules, etc.)
2. Challenging work
3. Balanced workload
4. Interesting activities
5. Autonomy
6. The possibility to deliver quality
B. Career Development
7. Career opportunities
8. Training and education
9. Coaching on the job
10. Professional development
11. Opportunity to fully utilise your skills
C. Social Atmosphere
12. Good training and performing atmosphere
13. Opportunity to pleasantly cooperate with teammates.
14. Support from teammates.
15. Appreciation and recognition.
16. Support from coaches
D. Organisational Policies
17. Participation in important decisions
18. A fair coach
19. Feedback on performance

UP715478
35
20. Clear and fair rules
21. Keeping you informed of developments
22. Open communication
23. Being able to have confidence in Cricket Kenya.
E. Work Life Balance
24. Acknowledgment of personal circumstances
25. Opportunity to schedule your own holidays
26. Working at home (training on your own, gym, fitness, etc)
27. Ability to adjust working hours to private life
F. Rewards
28. Job security
29. Appropriate salary
30. Reward for exceptional performance
31. Reimbursement of training costs
32. Good benefits package
33. Pay for performance

UP715478
36
Instructions of the G and H scales: These questions concern whether or not you are fulfilling
the possible obligations from you to Cricket Kenya. Write a mark on the line before the
statements indicating to what extent you feel you are fulfilling these possible obligations on a
scale ranging from 1= not fulfilling to 5= completely fulfilling:
G. In-Role Behaviour
1. Good cooperation
2. Helping teammates
3. Speaking to fans and media in a respectful manner
4. Still performing well on tasks you do not like to do
5. Performing with integrity
6. Performing with dedication
7. Being cost conscious when dealing with organisational properties (e.g. water
consumption, electricity for bowling machines, etc.)
8. Dealing with private matters away from the organisation
9. Respecting organisational rules and regulations
10. Contribute to a positive organisational image
11. Contributing to a pleasant performing atmosphere
H. Extra-role Behaviour
12. Keeping skills up to date to be able to deal with changing environments (e.g. learning
to face/bowl different variations)
13. Participating in training outside working hours that is important to improve
appropriately
14. Making suggestions for improvement.
15. Volunteering to do additional tasks.
16. Train extra hours, if that is necessary (e.g. extra fitness sessions)
17. Working weekends
18. The willingness to perform in different positions.
19. The flexibility to change positions.
20. Willingness to work in another region.
21. Stay with the organization for several years.

UP715478
37
The following 7 statements describe your degree of attachment and loyalty towards the
Organization you are now employed with. Please respond by indicating the degree to which
each of the statements applies to you ranging from 1 = Totally disagree to 5 = Fully agree.
Affective commitment
1. I am extremely glad that I chose to perform for Cricket Kenya
2. I really care about the fate of Cricket Kenya
3. Deciding to work for Cricket Kenya was a definite mistake on my part
4. I find that my values and Cricket Kenya’s values are very similar
5. For me this is the best of all possible organizations to play for
6. I feel very little loyalty to Cricket Kenya
7. I don’t feel part of Cricket Kenya

FINAL Research Project

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (18)

Similar to FINAL Research Project

Similar to FINAL Research Project (20)

FINAL Research Project