The role of wasta in repatriates’ perceptions of a breach to the psychological contract: a Saudi Arabian case study

Abstract

This study examines the influence of a national cultural dimension, specifically a strong orientation towards collectivism/reliance on network relationships, referred to as ‘wasta’, on the way in which psychological contracts form and change in a Saudi organisation. Specifically, it focuses upon how the psychological contract is perceived to have been breached by repatriates because of the role that wasta plays in shaping formal and informal HR practices pre- and post-assignment. The analysis demonstrates that prior to international assignment, wasta was taken for granted and only implicitly acknowledged as influencing selection criteria for assignments and individuals’ expectations and obligations associated with their psychological contract. Once repatriated, wasta was foregrounded and perceived as highly problematic in terms of career advancement. This shaped repatriates’ perceptions that their psychological contract had been breached, influencing their intentions to leave. These findings suggest that the psychological contract can be viewed as highly context-specific, as well as a person-centred phenomenon. We consider the implications of our research in terms of the influence of national cultural characteristics on individual’s perceptions of breaches to the psychological contract and highlight the possible implications generally for Saudi Arabia, which is aiming to be less reliant on foreign labour.

Keywords:

• international assignment
• national culture
• psychological contract
• repatriation

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. In the second organisation, participants also recognised that wasta influenced selection for international assignment. However, another strong national cultural value which has been identified in Arab countries (i.e. adherence to rules and regulations (House et al., 2004), influenced HR practices with respect to career development following repatriation. This difference was strongly associated with each leader’s influence on the both the development of organisational culture and HR practices in both organisations (for a complete analysis see Author, 2015).