Keywords

Jordan, Five-Star Hotels, Negative Behavior, Psychological Contract.

Introduction

Workers are considered one of the most important elements that distinguish the services provided by the organization (Akramovich, & Muratovna, 2019). Organizations focus mainly on the opinions of their customers, the quality of their product, and the provided service, so they support the affiliation of employees in general, and those who concerns with customer service management in particular. Those employees are considered an essential part of the organization's strategic options, whose role is to focus on customers and provide excellent service for them. The strong psychological contract will dominate the relationship between the employees and their organization (Chambel & Castanheira, 2012; Dong et al., 2018). The worker hopes that this non-codified agreement will make him\ her feel safe and stable in an organization that has all the elements of trust. Consequently, job satisfaction, the organization commitment and the qualified performance of the employees will be noted (Bal & Smit, 2012; Pawirosumarto et al., 2017). Despite the importance of the psychological contract between the organization and the worker, many business organizations build their relationship with workers base on the terms of a written or unwritten work contract (Wangithi & Muceke, 2012; Udin & Yuniawan, 2020; Hermawan et al., 2020). Otherwise, this leads to disputing between the two parties (the organization and its employees) which may produce a high rate of employees' turnover and a low rate of job satisfaction (Freese et al., 2011). In contrast, the worker who belongs to his\her work has high energy and can positively deal with the factors that affect his\ her professional and personal life (Schaufeli et al., 2008).

On the other hand, the negative behaviour of workers such as failure to use resources properly, theft, and verbal and physical abuse harm the organization. The reasons behind this behaviour are (i) the lack of confidence between the organization and its employees, (ii) Non-compliance of the organization with the employment contract. Thus, the negative work behaviours can be bad behaviour, aggression, and hostile work behaviour (Yang & Treadway, 2016; Goh & Kong, 2018). Studies discuss that positive behaviour is related to the employers' appreciation of their workers and their keenness to take care of them (Newman et al., 2011). Because the psychological contract is considered a modern administrative issue in the Arab environment, which has not been sufficiently studied, this study comes to show the role of the psychological contract in attracting workers to work at Jordanian five-star hotels and reducing their negative behaviour that comes from breaching psychological work. Accordingly, the problem statement can be shown more clearly through the following questions:

1. What is the level of breach of the psychological contract for workers of five-star Jordanian hotels?

2. What is the level of the negative behaviour of workers of five-star Jordanian hotels?

3. What is the effect of breaching a psychological contract on the negative behaviour of workers in Jordanian five-star hotels?

Literature Review

The Psychological Contract

The concept of psychological contract is one of the modern concepts of managerial thought so, few attempts define an accurate concept of the psychological contract, for example, Argyris, (1960) believes that the psychological contract is an explanation of the relationship between employees and their managers within the facility and it is a form of implicit understanding that goes beyond the written formal contract. Moreover, Levinson (1962) explains that there is a reciprocal relationship between the employer and the worker. While Rousseau (1989) confirms that the psychological contract refers to the individual's beliefs about the terms of the mutual agreement between the worker and the organization. Schalk & Roe (2007) discuss that the psychological contract is not fixed but rather flexible and can be changed over time. This leads to changes in the behaviour of workers, and this is the reason why there is no unified concept of the psychological contract, so everyone sees it from his\ her point of view, even if they all deal with expressions of promise, commitment, and expectations in their definitions (Dadi, 2012). Based on the above concepts, it can be summarized that the concept of a psychological contract means that the workers and the organization can get their rights if they follow the terms of the contract. This study adopted the following concept of breaching the psychological contract: it is an emotional reaction that results from the anger and disappointment of the worker due to the non-compliance of the organization to the terms of the contract.

Types of Psychological Contracts

Despite the difference and lack of clarity between scholars in defining a specific concept of the psychological contract, they agreed on the types of contracts mentioned by Rousseau (2001, 2004), these are: Transactional contracts: it is the mutual, and outright consent between two or more parties that determine the fundamental operating conditions of the relationship. It includes the employment procedures and arrangements that depend on a limited or short term period. This contract is based mainly on the economic exchange and the specified tasks of the worker that he\ she should do at a specific time in the organization. According to these contracts, the workers are concerned only with the material aspects which are served their interests and they do not have any ability to provide any additional service. Relational contract: it is also called cooperative contracts. It is unlike transactional contracts since it is based on long-term duration. It is characterized by the lack of clarity of tasks. Workers are obligated to support the firm, manifest loyalty and commitment to the organization. Balanced contract: this type is characterized by being concerned with the needs of the worker and the organization. Employment procedures and arrangements are opened, flexible and approved with the success of the organization. Thus, both workers and the organization participate in the process of developing each other. Workers are rewarded based on their role in achieving competitive advantage.

Breach of psychological contract

As a reaction to the non-compliance of the organization to the contract, the psychology of the workers and their emotion will be affected by the breaching of the contract. (Suazo & Stone-Romero, 2011). The breach of the psychological contract is negatively reflected in the behaviour of workers as a reaction to their feeling of betrayal by the organization. Ishaq & Shamsher (2016) summarized these reflections as following:

1. Emotional effects: these come in the form of offended, betrayed and angry feeling.

2. Directional effects: these come in the form of dissatisfaction and non-commitment.

3. Behavioral effects: these come in the form of silence, leaving work, vocal expression, and threats.

The relationship between breaching the psychological contract and negative behaviour of workers

Negative behaviors in the workplace have various forms such as absenteeism, late arriving, poor effort, sexual harassment, unethical decision-making, hesitating to follow manager's instructions, slowing of work, sabotage and the spread of rumours (Appelbaum et al., 2007; Mowafi, 2011). Therefore, the organization has to study the reasons behind the negative behaviours of the employees (Le Roy et al., 2012) Nobin & Gupta (2018) believe that workers have psychological contracts with their boss since the working interview and remain with them throughout their working in the organization. They expect that their boss will inform them about their duties and rights in the interview. If the psychological contract is implicit and not fully understood by both parties (the employer and the employees), the employees will have doubt and bad impression about their organization which leads them to engage in negative behaviours. Bies & Tripp (1996) argue that workers behave negatively at work due to several breaches of psychological contracts such as injustice, self-threat, mistrust and personal humiliation. Those workers will resort to adopt the negative behaviour and consider it a logical reaction to the breaches. Accordingly, the main hypothesis of the study can be formulated as follow

H0: There is no statistically significant effect at (α≤ 0.05) for breaching the psychological contract (transaction contract, relational contract, and balanced contract) on the negative behaviour of workers in fivestar hotels in Jordan.

Methodology of The Study

As it is one of the causal explanatory studies, this study used a descriptive and analytical approach that relies on studying the phenomenon. This approach includes the scholar interacting with society as well as a human which help them collect rich data on the investigated phenomenon (Khalid et al., 2017). Based on the research questions, this study used a descriptive and analytical approach. The tool for collecting data is the questionnaire and SPSS 20 is used to analyze the data which explain the relationships between the independent variable (the breach of the psychological contract), and the dependent variable (the negative behaviour of the workers). The questionnaire is designed based on (Sekaran, 2003), literature reviews, and the standards developed by researchers, which showed high reliability and stability. The questionnaire consists of three parts: The first part: includes the demographic information about the sample such as age, gender, experience. The second Part: contains (26) paragraphs to measure the impact of breaching the psychological contract. Various measures and studies used, such as Wangithi & Muceke, (2012), Rousseau, (2004) this part consists of three dimensions: the relational contract, the balanced contract, and the transactional contract. The third part: contains (15) paragraphs to measure the negative behaviour of the workers, which have been developed with the help of measures of (Gruys & Sackett, 2003; Robinson & Bennett, 1995). This part has two dimensions: the negative behaviour towards the organization, and the negative behaviour towards colleagues. The answers are divided into five levels in the questionnaire according to the five Likert scales, ranging from strongly agree which is given (5) degrees, agree which is given (4) degrees, agree with a moderate degree which is given (3) degrees, disagree which is given (2) degrees, strongly disagree which is given (1) degree: As for the levels adopted by this study to the mean of the variables to determine the degree of agreement, the researchers identified three levels (high, medium, low) based on the following formula: Length of Period = (Upper Limit Alternative - Minimum Alternative) ÷ Number of Levels (5-1) ÷3 = 1.33, so the levels will be as follows:(Low level from 1 to less than 2.33, Medium level from 2.33 to less than 3.66, and a high level from 3.66 to5). To verify the validity of the tool of data collection (questionnaire) and its reliability for collecting data, it is tested by a group of Jordanian university professors who are expert and specialized in the field of study. Based on their suggestions, some amendments are made. The reliability of the study tool is also verified by the reliability coefficient using Chronbach Alpha for all sub-dimension items of the field of study, as shown in Table 1. The above Table shows that all correlation coefficients are statistically significant at the significance level of α≤ 0.05 for all fields of study, which indicates that all fields of study are true for what they are designed for. The table also shows that the Cronbach alpha values are high for all fields, ranging from (0.838 to 0.906), and all the items of the questionnaire are (0.948) so that the questionnaire is in its final form and ready to be distributed to the participants. To ensure the validity and reliability of the study tools and data are collected, the following statistical methods are used:

Table 1 Reliability of Dimensions
Dimensions	No. items	Chronbach Alpha
Transactions contract	6	%83.8
Relational contract	8	%84.3
Balanced contract	11	%83.8
Psychological contract as a whole	25	%90.9
Negative behaviour towards the organization	7	%88.2
Negative behaviour towards people	8	%90.6
Negative behaviour as a whole	15	%94.8

1. Frequencies and percentages of personal and functional variables for the study sample.

2. Cronbach alpha coefficient and Pearson correlation coefficient to find the retest reliability for all fields of study.

3. Mean and (S.D of the responses for all fields of study.

4. Variance inflation factor (VIF) and Torrance.

5. Results of applying the multiple regression equation to study the effect of breaching the psychological contract (transaction contract, balanced contract, and relational contract) on the negative behaviour of workers in five-star hotels in Jordan.

Population of the Study

There are 47 five star hotels in Jordan (Al-Gharaibah, 2020). This study selects 12 hotels in Amman\ Jordan. These hotels are Radisson SAS Hotel, Sheraton Amman Hotel, The Regency Palace Hotel, Kempinski hotel & Resorts, Amman Marriott Hotel, Four Season Amman Hotel, Grand Hyatt Amman Hotel, Holiday Inn Hotel, Intercontinental Jordan Hotel, Le Meridian, Amman Hotel, Le Royal Hotel, Crown Plaza Amman. The population of the study consisted of all workers (2800) of 12 five-star hotels in Jordan,

Sample of the Study

Based on Krejcie and Morgan table (1970), the sample is 258 workers. Therefore, 25 surveys are distributed to each hotel. 262 surveys are received (% 87.3) and 249 are valid for statistical analysis, at a rate of 83% of the total distributed questionnaires as shown in the Table 2: Table 2 shows that the majority of workers in five-star hotels are males, as their percentage is (79.51%), while the percentage of female workers is low, at a rate of (20.481%). The researcher believes that this is due to the nature and culture of Jordanian society which does not accept this kind of job for females. The table also shows that the percentage of (39.35%) of the respondents are young people whose ages are less than (30), which indicates that five-star hotels are looking for young people to hire and train them so that they stay with them for a long time. while the age group (30 years - to less than 40 years old) occupies the second place in the ranking with a percentage of (32.93%) of the total sample, while the percentage of the age group from (40- to less than 50) is (40.09%). This group is the one whose children completed their high secondary school and joined the university. Consequently, they suffer from financial problems due to insufficient pension. Therefore, they look for a job that increases their income and improves their living conditions .Also, the authors note that there are only (9) workers over the age of (50) years who work in five-star hotels in Jordan. The reason behind a few old workers (9) is attributed to their ages are unsuitable to this kind of work since it needs strong people who can work for long hours and under pressures. It is also clear from the table that the majority of workers has (5 to less than 10 experience years), which constitutes (40.160%), then a group (less than 5 years), constitutes (32,128%), followed by a group (From 10 to less than 15 years) as it constitutes (21.68%), and a group (15 years or more), which constitutes (6.024%).

Table 2 Distribution of the Study Sample According to Variables
Variable	Groups	Frequency	Percentage
Gender	Male	198	79.51
	Female	51	20.481
	Total	249	100.0
Age	Less than 30 years	98	39.35
	30years -less than 40 years	82	32.93
	40years-less than 50 years	60	24.09
	More than 50 years	9	3.61
	Total	249	100.0
Years of experiences	Less than 5 years	80	32,128
	5years-less than 20 years	100	40,160
	10 years-less than 15 years	54	21,68
	More than 15 years	15	6,024
	Total	249	100.0

Questions of the Study

1. What is the level of breach of the psychological contract for workers in five-star hotels in Jordan?

The results in Table 3 indicate positive agreement for this variable at the mean level of the study sample, with a mean of (4.04), which is higher than the mean for assessing the levels of the responses of the sample. And a relatively simple standard deviation of (0.467), which gives a clear indication of the psychological contract variable for the study sample in five-star hotels in Jordan.

Table 3 Results for the Transactional Contract and the Balanced Contract Dimensions
Means and (S.D) for the transactional contract dimension
N	Rank	Items	Mean	SD	Degree
1	3	The hotel considers the employee an important person to keep.	4.06	0.711	High
2	2	The hotel responds to employees' interests.	4.12	0.717	High
3	1	The hotel assigns the staff clear tasks.	4.14	0.750	High
4	6	The hotel appreciates the efforts and extra work of the workers.	3.79	0.647	High
5	5	The hotel provides training opportunities for employees to develop them.	3.84	0.800	High
6	4	The hotel cares about the employee well-being	3.93	0.735	High
Total			3.98	0.541	High
Mean and (S.D) of the balanced contract dimension
N	Rank	Items	Mean	SD	Degree
7	4	The hotel stimulates high performance.	3.97	0.698	High
8	2	The hotel applies standards of excellence.	4.12	0.613	High
9	1	The hotel provides all the work requirements.	4.18	0.629	High
10	3	The hotel allows employees to develop themselves.	4.10	0.769	High
11	7	The hotel provides training and education to meet the performance requirements.	3.91	0.715	High
12	6	The hotel helps the staff improve their educational level and obtain educational degrees.	3.92	0.723	High
13	8	The hotel helps employees build an external relationship which may be exploited by them to find an alternative job.	3.84	0.671	High
14	5	The hotel provides privileges to the workers and their families	3.96	0.502	High
Total			4.00	0.462	High

Transactional Contract

The results in Table 3 indicate that there is an increase in the mean of the transaction contract dimension, reaching (3.98), and a relatively simple mean standard deviation of (0.541). Also, it is found that the mean is more than the statistical significance; which means that this type of psychological contract is very clear among the study sample. So, this type of psychological contract occupies the third rank between the sample in the aforementioned hotels. Among the most important items that contribute to enriching this variable is No (3) which states that (the hotel assigns employee’s clear tasks) with a mean of (4.14) and SD of (0.541), this is an indication of the clarity of the employees' tasks, thus alleviate the psychological and work pressures of the work. While the lowest percentage in this variable is for item No (4), which states that (the hotel appreciates the efforts and extra work of the workers with a mean of (3.79) and a standard deviation (0.647). This indicates that the hotel cares about what achieves its goals as an organization without caring for the workers and their desires. Thus it will negatively affect their morale, performance and behavior. The results in Table 3 points out an increase in the mean of the balanced contract dimension, which is (4.00), and the standard deviation is (0.462). We note that the mean is more than the level of significance which points out that this type of psychological contracts should be clear between the workers. The balanced contract regarding the study sample is the second rank between the sample in the aforementioned hotels. Among the items that contributed to the enrichment of this type of contract is No. (9), which states (The hotel provides all the work requirements), as it is ranked the first between the other items with a mean of (4.18) and a standard deviation (0.629), which indicates a discrepancy in the study sample answers. While item No. (13) is the lowest, which states that (The hotel helps employees build an external relationship which may be exploited by them to find an alternative job.) with a mean of (3.84) and a SD of (0.671), which indicates that the hotel does not allow any relationships with other customers or other organizations that the worker may find it an option or an alternative if he\ she finds a better offer. The results of Table 4 points out that the mean of the relational contract dimension is high, which is (4.15), and a SD is (0.399). It is found that the mean is higher than the level of significance, which means that this type of psychological contracts is clear and significance between the workers. This type of psychological contract occupied the first rank of the sample in the aforementioned hotels. Item No. (16), which states (The hotel rewards the employees who deserve). It is ranked the first with a mean (4.33) and a SD (0.692). This indicates the hotel’s commitment to reward the employees. While item No. (23) is ranked at the last which states (the employees feel that the hotel will fulfil its future duties to them) with a mean of (4.01) and the SD is (0.672). It explains that despite the hotel pays bonuses, but the employees have a feeling that the hotel will not fulfil its duties to them. As a summary of what is stated in the tables above, we can draw the following conclusions regarding the mean and (S.D) of the dimensions of the independent variable (the psychological contract):

Table 4 Mean and (S.D) of the Relational Contract Dimension
N	Rank	Items	Mean	SD	Degree
15	7	The hotel provides job security and stability for employees.	4.10	0.570	High
16	1	The hotel rewards the employees who deserve it.	4.33	0.692	High
17	5	The hotel pays attention to its staff well-being.	4.15	0.580	High
18	2	The hotel seeks to strengthen the relationship between the employees.	4.27	0.720	High
19	11	The hotel cares about its employees ’future goals and ambitions.	4.06	0.632	High
20	4	The hotel provides a healthy, safe and risk-free work environment for the employees.	4.18	0.587	High
21	3	The hotel assigns staff to tasks that suit their capabilities	4.26	0.614	High
23	12	The staff feel that the hotel will fulfil its future duties to them	4.01	0.672	High
24	9	Workers understand their duties towards the hotel.	4.09	0.589	High
25	10	Employees expect to increase wages or bonuses for their performance and contributions to the hotel business	4.09	0.818	High
26	6	The hotel   pays   salaries   that   equal   the   efforts   of   the employees.	4.11	0.599	High
Total			4.15	0.399	High

1. The mean for all dimensions of the psychological contract is (4.04) and the standard deviation is (0.467). The mean is higher than the default mean which examined the response levels of the study sample.

2. The relational contract is ranked first in terms of importance with a mean of (4.15), followed by the balanced contract, then the transactions contract.

What is the level of the negative behaviour of workers in five-star hotels in Jordan? Table 5 explains the analysis of the opinions of the workers, about the dimensions of the dependent variable (negative behaviour). The results are a negative agreement for this variable and the mean is (2,28), which is less than the default mean to assess the levels of the responses of the study sample, and a SD is (0.683), which is less than (1) according to (Hair et al., 2010). This indicates that the sample agrees with this result. Table 5 is a detailed description of the views and responses of the study sample on each negative behaviour dimension of workers in five-star hotels in Jordan: Table 5 shows that the mean of negative behaviours of workers is low (2.23), which is less than the default mean, and a SD is (0.705) which points out that there is a great agreement in the responses of the sample, as the values of the (S.D) are less than 1 according to what is suggested by Hair et al, (2010). The authors attribute this low result to the level of negative behaviour in the hotels. While item No. (33) states: (Ignoring the instructions and orders of the direct official is the highest mean (2.45), and a medium degree, and a standard deviation is (0.802), which shows no discrepancy between the responses. While item No. (27) which states: acquisition of business property without prior permission is the lowest, with a mean of (2.16) which is less than the default mean and a standard deviation of (0.931) which is less than (1). Thus, it indicates that there is honesty and sincerity between the employees of the hotels so that they do not take anything that belongs to the hotel without getting permission. Table 5 shows that the mean level of negative behaviours for workers towards their colleagues in the aforementioned hotels is low, as the mean for this field is (2.33), which is less than the default mean and a standard deviation (0.661), which indicates that there is a large agreement in the responses of the study sample, as the (S.D) is less than 1 according to (Hair et al., 2010). The authors attribute this low result to the level of negative behaviours of workers towards their colleagues at work due to the good relations between workers at the workplace, but it can be said that workers in those hotels have negative behaviour in their daily life. While item no. (41) Which states (insulting their colleagues at work) is in the first rank between the other items of the same field, with the mean (2.45) and a SD is (0.802), which indicates no discrepancy between the responses. As for item no. (35) which states (discussing confidential work issues with unauthorized people) is ranked the last of the items with a mean of (2.19) which is less than the mean and a SD (0.988) which is less than 1. This indicates a strong agreement between the responses.

Table 5 Results of Negative Behavior Towards the Organization and Colleagues at Work Negative Behaviour Towards the Organization
N	Rank	Items	Mean	SD	Degree
27	7	Acquisition of business property without prior permission.	2.16	0.931	Low
28	4	Spending a lot of time on issues that is unrelated to work.	2.25	0.923	Low
29	3	Take a break during work more than the time allowed	2.26	0.870	Low
30	6	Late arrival to work without prior permission	2.19	0.988	Low
31	2	Presenting fake receipts or invoice to obtain additional funds	2.30	0.872	Low
32	5	Slow performing of the work	2.21	0.811	Low
33	1	Ignoring the instructions and orders of the direct official.	2.45	0.802	Low
Total			2.23	0.705	Low
Negative behaviour towards colleagues at work
N	Rank		Mean	SD	Degree
34	6	Drug and alcohol abuse at work.	2.26	0.870	Low
35	8	Discussing confidential work issues with unauthorized people	2.19	0.988	Low
36	5	Not achieving their full potentials and abilities to work.	2.30	0.872	Low
37	7	Delay in doing their job to get overtime wages.	2.21	0.811	Low
38	2	Rude joking with colleagues and disrespecting them.	2.45	0.872	Medium
39	4	An appropriate behaviour towards the colleagues	2.35	0.780	Medium
40	3	Creating problems when talking about sectarian issues and social norms with colleagues.	2.44	0.869	Medium
41	1	Insulting colleagues at work.	2.45	0.802	Medium
Total			2.33	0.661	Low

Test Hypothesis

Table 6 shows that the values of the variance factor test for all variables are less than (10), while the value of the tolerance test for all variables is more than (0.05), therefore it can be said that there is no high correlation between the variables, thus, this indicates the absence of a statistically significant correlation between the independent variables mentioned in the (correlation) table, so, this supports the possibility of using them in the form, as what mentioned by Gujarati (2004). To answer this hypothesis, multiple regression analysis is performed as shown in Table 7. Table 7 clarifies the results of multiple regression analysis of psychological contract in the negative behaviour of workers in five-star hotels in Jordan. The correlation coefficient (R = 0.760a) explains a strong relationship between the dimensions of the independent variable and the dependent variable, and the value of the coefficient of determination is (R2 = 0.578) points out that 57.8% of the differences in negative behaviour are due to the existence of the psychological contract. While (42.2%) is due to other variables that are not included in the study. The (f) value for the regression analysis model is (111.96) with a level of significance (0.000), This points out that this model is valid for predicting the dependent variable (negative behaviour) through the independent variable, the psychological contract with its dimensions (the transactions contract, the relational contract, and the balanced contract). Accordingly, the main null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis is accepted, which states that “there is no statistically significant effect at significance (α≤ 0.05) for commitment to psychological contract (transaction contract, relational contract, balanced contract) on the negative behaviour of workers in five-star hotels in Jordan.” The table indicates that (B) value of the dimension of the transaction contract is (- 0.548), while (t) value is (-4.552) with a significance level (.000). This indicates that the dimension is significant and rejects the first sub-null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis which states that "there is a statistically significant effect at the significance level (α≤ 0.05) of the commitment of the transactions contract between the negative behaviour of workers in five-star hotels in Jordan." The negative (t) value also indicates that the relationship is negative, which means that when the commitment to transaction contract is increased in the hotels, the less negative behaviour among workers. The Table also shows that (B) value of the relational contract dimension is (-0.330), and (t) value is (3.095) with a significance level (0.002). This indicates that the dimension is significant, and rejects the second null hypothesis and accepting the alternative hypothesis which states, {there is a statistically significant effect at the significance level (α≤ 0.05) of commitment to the relational contract of the negative behaviour of workers. A negative (t) value also indicates that the relationship is negative, which means that the more the commitment of the relational contract in five-star hotels in Jordan, the less negative behaviour among workers in these hotels. As for (B) value of at the dimension of the balanced contract is (-0.370), while (t) value is (-4.552) with the level of significance (.000), which indicates that the dimension is significant, and rejectsg the third sub-null hypothesis and accepts the alternative hypothesis which states that there is a statistically significant effect at the significance level (α≤ 0.05) of commitment to a balanced contract in the negative behaviour of workers. The negative (t) value also indicates that the relationship is negative, which means that the more committed to the balanced contract in five-star hotels in Jordan, the less negative behaviour among workers in these hotels.

Table 6 Results of Multicollinearity Tests
Dimension	Tolerance	(VIF)
Transactional contract	0.38	2.633
Relational contract	0.317	3.157
Balanced contract	0.725	1.38

Table 7 Results of Multiple Regression Analysis of Psychological Contract
Model		R	R2	Adjusted R2	SEE	Durbin- Watson
Negative behavior		0.760a	0.578	0.573	0.436	2.072
ANOVA
Model		Sum of Squares	Df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Negative behaviour	Regression	63.950	3	21.317	111.96	0.000b
	Residual	46.646	245	0.190
	Total	110.597	248
Coefficients
Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	T	Sig
Negative behaviour	Consistent	B	Std. Error	Beta	23.498	0.000
	Transaction contract	7.316	0.311		-6.597-	0.000
	Relational contract	-0.548-	0.083	-0.444-	-3.095-	0.002
	Balanced contract	-0.330-	0.107	-0.228-	-4.552-	0.000

Findings

The psychological contract is very clear between the workers in five-star hotels in Jordan. The hotel management does not take a good interest in appreciating the extra work efforts of the staff. 2. The hotel assigns a clear task for its employees which clarifies the required role of the employees, facilitates the performance of work and reduces mistakes. 3. The hotel provides all the necessary supplies and tools which makes the work easy for workers 4. The hotel does not help its employees build external relationships that the worker could exploit it to find an alternative job. 5. The hotel is obligated to provide the rewards that the employees deserve, which motivates them to double their efforts and provide high-quality services. 6. Hotel employees feel that the hotel will not fulfil its future duties to them; in addition to that, it does not care about the employees' future goals and aspirations. 7. There is a clear awareness between the workers of the five-star hotel about the relational contracts which focus on the human factors within the organization. This dimension is ranked the first of the sample. 8. Workers in five-star hotels in Jordan have a clear vision regarding a balanced contract that combines the advantages of a transaction contract and a relational contract, and this type of psychological contracts occupies a second place between the sample in the aforementioned hotels. 9. The mean level of practicing negative behaviours for workers in five-star hotels in Jordan towards the hotel in which they work is low. 10. The mean level of the negative behaviour of workers in five-star hotels in Jordan towards their colleagues at the aforementioned hotels is low. 11. The psychological contract in all its dimensions is positively related to the negative behaviour of workers in five-star hotels in Jordan. This means that the increased interest in implementing the provisions of the psychological contract contributes to reducing the negative behaviour of workers in five-star hotels.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Five-star hotels should commit to psychological contracts for employees and fulfil them because of their clear impact on reducing negative employee behaviour. 2. Five-star hotels should pay more attention to transactional contracts, that is, contracts relate to the financial gains of employees because they have a great impact on their personal lives and their families, which will positively affect their behaviour and their work in the hotel. 3. Hotels should focus on relational contracts, which are concerned with the human aspects of the lives of individuals. 4. Hotels should appreciate the employees' additional efforts to raise their morale and increase their loyalty. 5. Five-star hotels must be aware of the importance of the confidence of the employees which will contribute to their stability and satisfaction. 6. Five-star hotels must provide a state of compatibility by implementing psychological (spiritual) and transactional (physical) contracts.

References

1. Akramovich, I.M., & Muratovna, N.N. (2019). Importance of Peculiarities of Services in Management of Enterprises. Asian Journal of Technology & Management Research, 9(1), 43-48.
2. Al-Gharaibah, O. (2020). Customer retention in five-star hotels in Jordan: The mediating role of hotel perceived value. Management Science Letters, 10(16), 3949-3956.
3. Appelbaum, S.H., Iaconi, G.D., & Matousek, A. (2007). Positive and negative deviant workplace behaviors: causes, impacts, and solutions. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, 7(5), 586-598.
4. Argyris, C. (1960). Understanding organizational behavior. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Bal, P.M., & Smit, P. (2012). The older the better! age-related differences in emotion regulation after psychological contract breach. Career Development International, 17(1), 6-24. https://doi .org/10 .1108/13620431211201300.
5. Bies, R.J., & Tripp, T.M. (2005). The study of revenge in the workplace: Conceptual, ideological, and empirical issues. In S. Fox & P.E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work behaviors: Investigations of actions and tactics: 65-82. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
6. Chambel, M.J., & Castanheira, F. (2012). Training opportunities and employee exhaustion in call centres: mediation by psychological contract fulfilment. International Journal of Training and Development, 16(2), 107-117.
7. Dadi, V. (2012). Promises, Expectations, and Obligations-Which Terms Best Constitute the Psychological Contract. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(19), 88-100.
8. Dong, L.N.T., & Phuong, N.N.D. (2018). Organizational justice, job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior in higher education institutions: A research proposition in Vietnam. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 5(3), 113-119.
9. Freese, C., Schalk, R., & Croon, M. (2011). The impact of organizational changes on psychological contracts: A longitudinal study. Personnel Review, 40(4), 404-422. doi:doi:10.1108/00483481111133318
10. Goh, E., & Kong, S. (2018). Theft in the hotel workplace: Exploring frontline employees’ perceptions towards hotel employee theft. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 18(4), 442-455.
11. Gruys, M.L., & Sackett, P.R. (2003). Investigating the dimensionality of counterproductive work behavior. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11(1), 30-42.
12. Gujarati, D.N. (2004). Basic Econometrics. 4th Edition, New York, NY McGraw-Hill Companies.
13. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham RL. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis Seventh Edition Prentice Hall, 2010. Upper Saddle River, NJ. Pearson Prentice Hall.
14. Hermawan, H., Thamrin, H., & Susilo, P. (2020). Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Performance: The Role of Employee Engagement. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 7(12), 1089- 1097.
15. Ishaq, H.M., & Shamsher, Q. (2016). Effect of breach of psychological contracts on workplace deviant behaviors with the moderating role of revenge attitude and self-control. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS), 10(1), 69-83.
16. Khalid, T.B., Kouhy, R., & Hassan, A. (2017). The impact of corporate characteristics on social and environmental disclosure (CSED): The case of Jordan. Journal of Accounting and Auditing: Research and Practice, 2017(1), 1-28.
17. Krejcie, R.V., & Morgan, D.W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607-610.
18. Le Roy, J., Bastounis, M., & Poussard, J.M. (2012). Interactional justice and counterproductive work behaviors: The mediating role of negative emotions. Social Behavior and Personality. International Journal, 40(8), 1341-1355.
19. Levinson, H., Price, C.R., Munden, K.J., Mandl, H.J., & Solley, C.M. (1962). Men, Management and Mental Health. Boston: MA: Harvard University.
20. Newman, A., Thanacoody, R., & Hui, W. (2011). The impact of employee perceptions of training on organizational commitment and turnover intentions: A study of multinationals in the Chinese service sector. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(8), 1765-1787.
21. Nobin, T., & Gupta, S. (2018). Organizational cynicism – what every manager needs to know. Development and Learning in Organizations, 32(2), 16-19. doi: 10.1108/DLO-01-2017- 0005
22. Pawirosumarto, S., Sarjana, P.K., & Gunawan, R. (2017). The effect of work environment, leadership style, and organizational culture towards job satisfaction and its implication towards employee performance in Parador Hotels and Resorts, Indonesia. International Journal of Law and Management, 59(6), 1337-1358.
23. Robinson, S.L., & Bennett, R.J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 555-572.
24. Rousseau, D.M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2(2), 121-139.
25. Rousseau, D.M. (2001). Psychological contract inventory: Technical report. Boston, MA: British Library.
26. Rousseau, D.M. (2004). Psychological contracts in the workplace: Understanding the ties that motivate. Academy of Management Perspectives, 18(1), 120-127.
27. Schalk, R., & Roe, R.E. (2007). Towards a dynamic model of the psychological contract. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 37(2), 167-182.
28. Schaufeli, W.B., Taris, T.W., & Van Rhenen, W. (2008). Work holism, burnout, and work engagement: Three of a kind or three different kinds of employee wellbeing?. Applied Psychology, 57(2), 173-203.
29. Sekaran, U. (2003). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach. 4th edn. John Wiley: Hoboken, NJ.
30. Suazo, M.M., & Stone?Romero, E.F. (2011). Implications of psychological contract breach. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2(5), 167-181.
31. Udin, N., & Yuniawan, A. (2020). Psychological capital, personality traits of big-five, Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), and task performance: Testing their relationships. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 7(9), 781-790. https://doi.org/10.13106/ jafeb2020vol7.no9.781
32. Wangithi, W.E., & Muceke, N.J. (2012). Effect of human resource management practices on psychological contract in organizations. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(19), 117-122.
33. Yang, J., & Treadway, D.C. (2018). A social influence interpretation of workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(4), 879-891.