Most organisations try to improve the wellbeing of their employees by reducing problems. The assumption that if issues are addressed then employees will naturally feel better at work. But wellbeing doesn’t just improve if we focus on only what’s wrong. The global level of employee wellbeing has fallen to 33% after steadily increasing since 2016 and this raises an important question. Does wellbeing only depend on the absence of problems and negative experiences or is there something more to it?
I conducted a short study to answer this question to understand employee wellbeing through psychological contract while focusing how the breach or fulfilment of expectations at work impact their experiences.
A psychological contract refers to unwritten expectations or promises that employees have about their organisation. Hence, it often goes beyond formal job roles and employees may perceive that they will be supported, treated fairly, recognised and be given opportunities for growth. These are not random expectations that employees have, employers may insinuate these while interviewing or during the onboarding process without realising that they are overpromising.
However, when these expectations are met, employees experience fulfillment which might result in positive feelings like they are being valued. Contrastingly, when the expectations remain unmet employees perceive a breach which can often lead to negative feelings and they may get disengaged or dissatisfied. There is a high focus on the negative impact of breach but it is equally important to understand the role of fulfillment in shaping the experience of employees at work.
This study used a mixed method approach to understand the relationship between psychological contract and employee wellbeing in India. Data was collected from employees across roles and levels of experiences. It focused on 3 key variables: breach, fulfilment and employee wellbeing. The quantitative analysis examined relationships between variables, along with extreme group and coexistence comparisons while the qualitative responses were gathered through semi structured interviews to get a deeper insight into how employees described their experiences.
The findings showed how fulfillment and breach is related to employee wellbeing. Breach had a weak negative relationship while fulfillment had a stronger positive relationship which suggests that even though negative experiences impact employees, positive experiences possibly have a more significant role in shaping their overall wellbeing.
Additionally, after comparing employees with different levels of wellbeing there was a difference in wellbeing. Employees with high levels of wellbeing reported fulfillment levels of approximately 4.6 (on a 5 point scale) while those with lower levels had levels close to 2.6. However, the difference between breach in these groups was relatively small. This suggests that fulfillment might be a stronger differentiating factor in employee wellbeing as compared with breach.
Moreover, a coexistence analysis showed that fulfilment and breach can exist together but they don’t influence wellbeing equally. So when fulfilment was high, employee wellbeing remained high (at around 4.25) even when levels of breach were also high. But when fulfilment was low, wellbeing remained relatively low (at around 3) even when breach was minimal. This suggests that fulfillment does more than enhance positive experiences as it appears to mitigate the impact of negative ones.
Furthermore, the qualitative responses reflected a similar pattern. Some employees described their experience at work as “unstructured” and that their workplace lacked clarity or appreciation which highlighted their frustration and disengagement. Whereas others emphasised the importance of support, growth and meaningful work. Some statements such as those in which participants described feeling valued by the organisation or feeling success from seeing others grow showed a deeper sense of fulfillment. All these responses suggest that the experiences of employees is not just shaped by the absence of problems but also because of the presence of meaningful and supportive interactions at their workplace. So together the findings suggest that fulfilment plays a more critical role in shaping employee wellbeing than breach.
Hence, reducing negative experiences is important but it might not be sufficient alone as employees appeared to respond more strongly to the presence of positive experiences than to the absence of negative ones.
Therefore, employee wellbeing is influenced more by what their organisations create instead of what they fix. A possible explanation for this pattern is that employees are driven by experiences that provide meaning, growth and recognition. While reducing stress or dissatisfaction can prevent negative outcomes, it doesn’t necessarily create a positive work experience. But fulfillment contributes to a sense of purpose, competence and connection. These factors play an important role in how employees perceive and interpret their feelings towards their organisation.
As a result, fulfillment enhances positive experiences along with helping employees to deal with challenges more effectively. So these findings show that maybe organisations need to rethink how they are approaching employee wellbeing. Instead of focusing primarily on identifying and fixing problems, there is possibly more value in trying to actively create conditions which promote fulfillment at the workplace.
Also, while this study gives useful insights it is necessary to acknowledge its limitations. The findings are based entirely on self reported data which could be influenced by individual perceptions and bias. The study is also cross sectional which does not allow it to make conclusions about the long term impacts unlike longitudinal studies. Additionally, the sample consists only of Indian employees and may not completely represent all organisations or industries.
All in all, employee wellbeing is often seen as a problem that needs to be solved but this study sees this as an incomplete view. The presence of positive experiences at work is needed to shape wellbeing. So improving wellbeing is about consistently creating what works instead of just fixing issues when things get wrong.
Sign in to your account or sign up for a membership to view the insights from our study, here:
Please note: If you try to download the insights without signing up with any of our membership options, it will not allow you to access the exclusive content for our members only.
References:
Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. (2004). Beyond money. Gothic.net, 5(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00501001.x
Gallup. (2025). State of the Global Workplace: 2025 Report.
Rousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2(2), 121–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01384942
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.55.1.68
Topa, G., Aranda-Carmena, M., & De-Maria, B. (2022). Psychological Contract Breach and Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Reviews. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(23), 15527. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192315527