Search results

1 – 10 of over 13000
To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 11 June 2021

Qinxuan Gu, Dongqing Hu and Paul Hempel

Drawing on social information processing theory, the purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between team reward interdependence and team performance…

Abstract

Purpose

Drawing on social information processing theory, the purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between team reward interdependence and team performance, treating shared leadership as mediator and team average job-based psychological ownership as moderator.

Design/methodology/approach

Data were collected from a field sample of 72 knowledge-based work teams comprised of 466 team members and their team leaders. Data were analysed using hierarchical regression analysis and moderated path analysis.

Findings

Team reward interdependence was positively related to team performance through shared leadership. Team average job-based psychological ownership moderated both the relationship between team reward interdependence and shared leadership, and the indirect relationship between team reward interdependence and team performance.

Research limitations/implications

The shared leadership literature is extended by exploring the antecedents of shared leadership from the perspective of team reward interdependence, and by examining the moderating role of team average job-based psychological ownership.

Practical implications

Organizations and managers should pay attention to team pay system design and be aware of the importance of employees' psychological ownership towards their jobs in promoting shared leadership in teams.

Originality/value

This study sheds light on the antecedents of shared leadership from the perspective of team incentives and examines antecedent boundary conditions through the moderating role of job-based psychological ownership.

Details

Personnel Review, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0048-3486

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 15 December 2015

Erik Poutsma, Coen van Eert and Paul E. M. Ligthart

This paper investigated the effect of employee share ownership, mediated through psychological ownership, on organizational citizenship behavior. The analysis included the…

Abstract

This paper investigated the effect of employee share ownership, mediated through psychological ownership, on organizational citizenship behavior. The analysis included the possible complementary role of High Performance Ownership systems. This paper investigated these relationships by analyzing employee survey data from a Dutch organization that has implemented employee share ownership. We used PLS, a variance-based structural equation model to test the hypotheses. The results showed a direct influence of employee ownership on organizational citizenship behavior, but the relationship was not mediated by psychological ownership. Unexpectedly, the results show that a High Performance Work System bundle without employee ownership generates psychological ownership, but this does not influence organizational citizenship behavior. This research could not confirm the comprehensive model in which employee ownership, HRM system, and psychological ownership are positively related to each other. We choose a deliberate set of HR practices on theoretical grounds, but future research could investigate other sets of HR practices that may produce the expected effects. This research showed that employee ownership has a positive influence on organizational citizenship behavior. Organizations are therefore advised to consider implementing employee ownership. The results also show that a set of HR practices positively influences psychological ownership. The results suggest that organizations should strive for a consistent message, which makes the employees feel that they are taken serious as and deserve to be owners. We analyzed the influence of a configuration of high performance ownership system on psychological ownership and organizational citizenship behavior that is not done before.

Details

Advances in the Economic Analysis of Participatory & Labor-Managed Firms
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78560-379-2

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 23 March 2020

Yan Kou and Samart Powpaka

In the advertising strategy called pseudo-ownership advertising appeal, ownership-implying language (e.g. my, our or your) is used to induce consumers’ “ownership” of a…

Abstract

Purpose

In the advertising strategy called pseudo-ownership advertising appeal, ownership-implying language (e.g. my, our or your) is used to induce consumers’ “ownership” of a brand. This study aims to investigate the influence of pseudo-ownership advertising appeal on brand psychological ownership and consequent brand attitude, purchase intention and choice. This study also assessed the relative effectiveness of different types of possessive pronouns in different customer segments.

Design/methodology/approach

Four experiments, involving both students and non-students, were conducted to test the hypotheses. Experiments 1 and 2 investigated the effects of the first-person singular and plural possessive pronouns (“my” and “our”) on psychological ownership and on brand attitude, purchase intention and choice. Experiment 3 investigated the interacting effects of self-construal (independent vs interdependent) and possessive pronoun (singular vs plural) on psychological ownership and brand attitudes. Experiment 4 investigated the interacting effects of customer type (potential vs current) and possessive pronoun (first-person vs second-person) on psychological ownership and brand attitudes.

Findings

Pseudo-ownership advertising appeal resulted in the development of brand psychological ownership, as well as inducing favorable attitudes, purchase intentions and brand choice. Furthermore, consumers with interdependent self-construal developed stronger psychological ownership when pseudo-ownership advertising appeal incorporated plural possessive pronouns, and consumers with independent self-construal developed stronger psychological ownership when pseudo-ownership advertising appeal incorporated singular possessive pronouns. Potential consumers developed stronger psychological ownership when pseudo-ownership advertising appeal incorporated second- vs first-person possessive pronouns, and current consumers developed the same psychological ownership for first- and second-person possessive pronouns.

Originality/value

Possessive pronouns used in advertising can enhance brand psychological ownership. Conditions that moderate the relative effectiveness of first- vs second-person and singular vs plural possessive pronouns on brand psychological ownership and consequential consumer responses can be identified. These findings extend research focusing solely on the self-referencing effects of second-pronoun use (“you”) in advertising on consumer attitudes and behaviors by paying attention to the “ownership” effects of possessive pronouns.

Details

Journal of Product & Brand Management, vol. 30 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1061-0421

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 7 August 2009

Sheng‐Tsung Hou, Mu‐Yen Hsu and Se‐Hwa Wu

The primary purpose of this paper is to verify the importance of psychological ownership in the organisational context of a franchise by testing predicted relationships…

Abstract

Purpose

The primary purpose of this paper is to verify the importance of psychological ownership in the organisational context of a franchise by testing predicted relationships concerning feelings of ownership towards branding, legal ownership of complementary assets, organisational commitment, and a willingness on the part of franchisees to diffuse a franchise brand to peers.

Design/methodology/approach

Evidence is presented from an empirical study on the largest taxi franchise fleet in Taiwan. Two formal questionnaires/surveys were conducted in May 2005 and September 2005, from which data were collected from 147 franchisees. Regression analysis is employed to test seven hypotheses.

Findings

The empirical results demonstrate that analysing the psychological ownership of a franchise brand from two dimensions (i.e. the degree of psychological ownership and the self‐centred propensity towards psychological ownership) sees an increase in explained variance in organisational commitment and brand diffusion in the context of the franchise organisation. It also illustrates that both dimensions of psychological ownership are negatively affected by the ownership of the non‐brand‐specified complementary assets owned by a franchisee.

Research limitations/implications

The majority of previous research has investigated the phenomenon of franchising from the perspective of the agency theory or of resource scarcity; and has focused on the franchisor's concerns. A major implication of this study indicates that these perspectives, while essential, are insufficient in explaining the growth through franchising strategies. Researchers need to consider how to integrate asset ownership (or property rights) and affect elements in order to influence a franchisee's cognition and behaviour entrepreneurially. A limitation of this study is that it is conducted within the respective boundaries of cultural, professional, and industrial factors.

Practical implications

This study indicates that entrepreneurs can achieve better brand diffusion effects for franchise growth if they engage in merging the structures of asset ownership and psychological ownership.

Originality/value

This is the first paper to examine the psychological ownership of branding within the setting of a franchise organisation and highlights the importance of a sense of ownership in entrepreneurship.

Details

International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, vol. 15 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1355-2554

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 3 April 2018

Kyongji Han and Andrea Kim

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the additive and differential effects of short-term-oriented group incentives (STOGIs) and long-term-oriented group incentives…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the additive and differential effects of short-term-oriented group incentives (STOGIs) and long-term-oriented group incentives (LTOGIs) on psychological ownership and organizational commitment.

Design/methodology/approach

This study analyzed data from 17,255 US employees in the 2005 data set of the National Bureau of Economic Research Shared Capitalism Research.

Findings

Both additive indices of group incentives have direct positive relationships with psychological ownership and organizational commitment, as well as indirect positive relationships with organizational commitment through psychological ownership. STOGIs have a stronger relationship with organizational commitment and LTOGIs have a stronger relationship with psychological ownership.

Originality/value

The value of this research lies in exploring the differential effects of short-and long-term group incentives, which provides new insight into the theory of group incentives and practical implications for their effective utilization.

Details

Employee Relations, vol. 40 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0142-5455

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 27 May 2014

Kumar Alok

Authentic leadership and psychological ownership appear to be at somewhat similar stage of construct evolution. In the present study, the author asks two research…

Abstract

Purpose

Authentic leadership and psychological ownership appear to be at somewhat similar stage of construct evolution. In the present study, the author asks two research questions: first, how authentic leadership relates to psychological ownership and second, how dyadic duration influences this relationship. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Design/methodology/approach

Using correlational research design, the author collected cross-sectional data from 182 Indian professionals working in various organizations in India. The author used structural equation modeling to test the study hypotheses.

Findings

The results showed that authentic leadership positively influenced organization-based promotive psychological ownership; however, it shared no relationship with preventive psychological ownership or territoriality. Relational transparency and self-awareness factorials of authentic leadership influenced belongingness and self-efficacy factorials of psychological ownership beyond what authentic leadership as the second-order factor could account for. Leader self-awareness negatively related to follower self-efficacy. Authentic leadership completely accounted for the effects of moral perspective and balanced processing factorials on psychological ownership. Dyadic duration was not found to have significant moderation effect.

Research limitations/implications

Overall, the findings imply that authentic leadership may make followers dependent and allow less relational substitutability. Moral perspective may be more central to authentic leadership construct than self-awareness. Moreover, it may not be appropriate to consider territoriality as a part of psychological ownership construct.

Originality/value

The author believes that it is the first study to investigate the factorial-level interrelations between authentic leadership and psychological ownership. It can help in advancing authentic leadership theory and refining psychological ownership construct.

Details

Leadership & Organization Development Journal, vol. 35 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0143-7739

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 9 March 2015

He Peng and Jon Pierce

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between job- and organization-based psychological ownership. In addition, the authors explored the emergence…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between job- and organization-based psychological ownership. In addition, the authors explored the emergence and outcomes of psychological ownership in Chinese context.

Design/methodology/approach

Time-lagged survey data from 158 Chinese participants were used to test several hypothesized relationships employing partial least square techniques.

Findings

Job-based psychological ownership appeared to mediate the relationship between experienced job control and organization-based psychological ownership. In addition, a statistically significant relationship between job-based psychological ownership and job satisfaction, organizational citizenship behaviors and turnover intentions, and a statistically significant relationship between organization-based psychological ownership and job satisfaction were observed. A negative relationship between organization-based psychological ownership and knowledge withholding was also observed.

Practical implications

Managers who want to enhance employees’ job- and ultimately organization-based psychological ownership should empower their employees by enabling them to exert control over their work.

Originality/value

This paper examined how organization-based psychological ownership emerges from control over work via job-based psychological ownership. The authors also investigated the impact of psychological ownership in Chinese context.

Details

Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol. 30 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0268-3946

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 29 May 2018

Ting Xu and Zhike Lv

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of employees’ perceptions of high-performance work systems (HPWS) on unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB), and…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of employees’ perceptions of high-performance work systems (HPWS) on unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB), and explores the mediating role of psychological ownership and the moderating role of moral identity.

Design/methodology/approach

The hypotheses were tested by using two-wave survey data that were collected from 306 employees in Chinese enterprises.

Findings

This study found that HPWS were positively related to UPB, and psychological ownership partially mediated this relationship. Results also revealed that moral identity negatively moderated the relationship between psychological ownership and UPB, and the indirect effect of HPWS on UPB via psychological ownership was weaker for employees high in moral identity.

Research limitations/implications

The generalizability of the findings is limited, and the cross-sectional data cannot draw any clear causal inference among variables.

Practical implications

Managers should pay attention to the “dark side” of HPWS and incorporate ethics in the HPWS. Moreover, organizations should provide correct guidance for their pro-organizational behaviors to avoid employees doing bad things for good reasons.

Originality/value

This study first extends HPWS research to employee’s UPB, uncovers employees’ psychological ownership toward organizations as the pivotal mechanism underlying this relationship, and indicated moral identity can regulate employees unethical behavior.

Details

Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol. 33 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0268-3946

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 12 September 2016

Weiwei Huo, Zhenyao Cai, Jinlian Luo, Chenghao Men and Ruiqian Jia

The purpose of this paper is to examine why employees hide knowledge and how organizations intervene and influence the negative effects of knowledge hiding. This study…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine why employees hide knowledge and how organizations intervene and influence the negative effects of knowledge hiding. This study builds and tests a theoretical model at both individual and team level.

Design/methodology/approach

Data were collected from universities, research institutes and enterprises’ research and development (R&D) teams in China via a two-wave survey. The final sample contained 417 cases. Hierarchical linear modeling was used to test hypotheses.

Findings

The results show that territoriality plays a mediating role between psychological ownership and knowledge hiding, and that organizational result justice negatively moderated the relationship between territoriality and knowledge hiding. Procedure justice negatively moderated the relationship between territoriality and rationalized hiding, and that between territoriality and evasive hiding. Interactive justice negatively moderated the relationship between territoriality and rationalized hiding, and that between territoriality and evasive hiding. There were thus interactive effects among territoriality, perceived knowledge value and psychological ownership; the relationship between individual psychological ownership and territoriality was weaker when perceived knowledge value was lower and task interdependence was higher, and stronger with higher perceived knowledge value and lower task interdependence.

Research limitations/implications

Territorial behaviors, such as knowledge hoarding and misleading within R&D teams, are the primary challenges for organizations’ positive activities, including internal sharing, teamwork and organizational goal accomplishment. Researching knowledge territoriality in the Chinese cultural context will help to distinguish territorial behaviors and to take preventive measures. In addition, this study not only enables managers to understand clearly the precipitating factors of knowledge territoriality and the relationships among them but also provides constructive strategies for reducing the negative effect of organizational intervention in knowledge territoriality.

Originality/value

This study adopts a multilevel modeling method and not only reveals the “black box” of interaction among psychological ownership, territoriality and knowledge hiding at the individual level but also probes the three-way interaction of perceived knowledge value, team task dependency and psychological ownership with territoriality at both individual and team levels, and then discusses the mediation effect of organizational justice on the relationship between territoriality and knowledge hiding. The conclusion of this study not only enriches the literature on knowledge hiding in the field of knowledge management but also helps to elucidate the function and intervention mechanism of knowledge hiding.

Details

Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 20 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1367-3270

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 11 June 2018

Wouter Broekaert, Bart Henssen, Johan Lambrecht, Koenraad Debackere and Petra Andries

The purpose of this paper is to analyze how the sense of control, psychological ownership and motivation of both family owners and non-family managers in family firms are…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to analyze how the sense of control, psychological ownership and motivation of both family owners and non-family managers in family firms are interrelated. This paper analyzes the limits set by family owners when delegating control to their non-family managers and the resulting potential for conflict and demotivation of the non-family managers.

Design/methodology/approach

Building on the existing literature, first, an overview of the literature on psychological ownership and control is presented. Second, the paper analyzes the insights gained from interviews with 15 family owners and non-family managers in five family firms.

Findings

This study finds that motivating non-family managers is not merely a matter of promoting a sense of psychological ownership throughout the company. A strong sense of psychological ownership may facilitate but also hinder the cooperation between family and non-family. Family owners are often only willing to delegate operational control, while non-family managers also feel entitled to participate in strategic decision making. This leads to the proposition that non-family managers’ psychological ownership in family firms’ conflicts with family owners’ desire to maintain control.

Originality/value

This study answers the calls to seek additional insight in how non-family managers function within family firms. By shedding light on the complex relationship between control, psychological ownership and motivation in family firms, the study responds to the calls for more empirical validation of the psychological ownership framework and for more research into the potential negative effects of psychological ownership in the family business.

Details

Journal of Family Business Management, vol. 8 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2043-6238

Keywords

1 – 10 of over 13000