Ismoro Reza Prima Putra, P. Tommy Y.S. Suyasa, Raja Oloan Tumanggor
| Abstract views: 240 | views: 166


Counterproductive work behavior occured in Indonesia, especially in companies. Companies that have many employees with counterproductive work behavior will have a negative impact on the productivity and business of the company. Counterproductive work behavior can be explained by psychological contracts held by each employee. Therefore, this study has examined the role of relational and transactional psychological contracts as predictors of organizational and interpersonal counterproductive work behavior. Counterproductive work behavior was defined as behavior that violates organizational norms and is detrimental to the organization and the individuals within it. Meanwhile, employee psychological contracts were defined as employee perceptions of behavioral obligations that must be given to the organization. Participants in this study were 378 employees in one company in Jakarta. Counterproductive work behavior measurement tool used a workplace deviance scale with a total of 48 items. Meanwhile, psychological contract measurement tools consist of 33 items. The analytical method that has been used is regression and bootstrapping. The results showed that relational psychological contracts play a negative role in predicting organizational counterproductive work behavior (β = -0.308, p <0.01) and interpersonal (β = -0.307, p <0.01). Meanwhile, transactional psychological contracts play a positive role in predicting counterproductive organizational work behavior (β = 0.199, p <0.01) and interpersonal (β = 0.221, p <0.01). Through the Mann-Whitney U test there were differences in relational psychological contracts (U = 6179.00, p <0.05), organizational counterproductive work behavior (U = 3332.50, p <0.05), and interpersonal counterproductive work behavior (U = 4491.00, p <0.05) between male employees and female employees. Meanwhile, there was no difference in the transactional psychological contract between male and female employees (U = 8321.00, p> 0.05). Implications for theory and practice are discussed.


Perilaku kerja kontraproduktif banyak terjadi di Indonesia khususnya di perusahaan. Perusahaan yang banyak memiliki karyawan dengan perilaku kerja kontraproduktif akan memiliki dampak negatif terhadap produktivitas dan bisnis perusahaan. Perilaku kerja kontraproduktif dapat dijelaskan oleh kontrak psikologis yang dimiliki oleh setiap karyawan. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini menguji peran kontrak psikologis relasional dan transaksional sebagai prediktor terjadinya perilaku kerja kontraproduktif organisasi dan interpersonal. Perilaku kerja kontraproduktif didefinisikan sebagai perilaku yang melanggar norma-norma organisasi dan merugikan organisasi maupun individu di dalamnya. Sementara itu, kontrak psikologis karyawan didefinisikan sebagai persepsi karyawan terhadap kewajiban perilaku yang harus diberikan kepada organisasinya. Partisipan dalam penelitian ini adalah 378 karyawan di salah satu perusahaan di Jakarta. Alat ukur perilaku kerja kontraproduktif menggunakan workplace deviance scale dengan total 48 item. Sementara itu, alat ukur kontrak psikologis terdiri dari 33 item. Metode analisis yang digunakan adalah regresi dan bootstrapping. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa kontrak psikologis relasional berperan negatif dalam memprediksi perilaku kerja kontraproduktif organisasi (β=-0.308, p < 0.01) dan interpersonal (β=-0.307, p < 0.01). Sementara itu, kontrak psikologis transaksional berperan positif dalam memprediksi perilaku kerja kontraproduktif organisasi (β=0.199, p < 0.01) dan interpersonal (β=0.221, p < 0.01). Melalui uji Mann-Whitney U terdapat perbedaan kontrak psikologis relasional (U=6179.00, p < 0.05), perilaku kerja kontraproduktif organisasi (U=3332.50, p < 0.05), dan perilaku kerja kontraproduktif interpersonal (U=4491.00, p < 0.05) antara karyawan laki-laki dan karyawan perempuan. Sementara itu, kontrak psikologis transaksional antara karyawan laki-laki dan karyawan perempuan tidak terdapat perbedaan (U=8321.00, p > 0.05). Hasil dari penelitian ini, baik secara teori maupun praktik, akan didiskusikan lebih lanjut.



kontrak psikologis relasional; kontrak psikologis transaksional; perilaku kerja kontraproduktif organisasi (CWB-O); perilaku kerja kontraproduktif interpersonal (CWB-I)

Full Text:



Ali-Shah, T. & Ali-Shah, S.Z. (2016). Combined Effects of Psychological Capital and Psychological Contract on Employees' Job Level Outcomes. European Journal of Business and Management, 8(26), 5-19.

Aubé, C., Rousseau, V., & Tremblay, S. (2011). Team size and quality of group experience: The more the merrier? Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 15(4), 357–375.

Bennet, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (1995). A Typology of deviance workplace behaviors a multidimensional scaling study. The Academy of Management Journal, 38, 2. doi:

Bennet, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 349-360. doi:

Bordia, P., Restubog, S. L. D., & Tang, R. L. (2008). When employees strike back investigating mediating mechanisms between psychological contract breach and workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1104-1117.

Erkutlu, H., & Chafra, J. (2013). Effects of trust and psychological contract violation on authentic leadership and organizational deviance. Management Research Review, 36, 828-848. doi:

Fox, S., Spector, P. E., & Miles, D. (2001). Counterproductive work behavior (cwb) in response to job stressors and organizational justice: some mediator and moderator tests for autonomy and emotions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 291-309. doi:

Griep, Y., Vantilborgh, T., & Jones, S. K. (2018). The relationship between psychological contract breach and counterproductive work behavior in social enterprises do paid employees and volunteers differ. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 1-19.

Mai, K. M., Christian, J. S., Ellis, A. P. J., & Porter, O. L. H. (2016). Examining the effects of turnover intentions on organizational citizenship behaviors and deviance behaviors a psychological contract approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101. doi:

Millward, l. J., & Hopkins, L. (1998). Psychological contracts, organizational and job commitment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1530-1556. doi:

Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenships behavior: Its construct cleanup time. Human Performance, 10, 85–97.

Robinson, S. L., & Morrison, E. W. (1997). When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological contract violation develops. The Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 226. doi:

Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Under- standing written and unwritten agreements. London, UK: Sage.

Scandura, T.A., & Lankau, M.J. (1997). Relationships of gender, family responsibility and flexible workhours to organizational commitment and job satisfaction, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 377-391. doi:<377::AID-JOB807>3.0.CO;2-1

Suyasa, P.T.Y.S. (2018). Convergent evidence: Construct validation of an Indonesian version of interpersonal and organisational deviance scales. London: Taylor & Francis Group.

Penney, L. M., & Spector, P. E. (2005). Job stress, incivility, and counterproductive work behavior (CWB): The moderating role of negative affectivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(7), 777-796. doi:

Yang, L. Q., Johnson, R. E., Zhang, X., Spector, P. E., & Xu, S. (2012). Relations of interpersonal unfairness with counterproductive work behavior the moderating role of employee self-identity. Journal Business Psychology, 28, 189-202. doi:

Copyright (c) 2020 Jurnal Muara Ilmu Sosial, Humaniora, dan Seni
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.


  • There are currently no refbacks.