Employees That Think and Act Like Owners: Effects of Ownership Beliefs and Behaviors on Organizational Effectiveness

Abstract

A model of the psychological experience of employee ownership in work groups was developed to investigate antecedents (participation in a 401 (k) program and a climate of self‐determination) and consequences (employee attitudes and financial performance) of psychological ownership. Based on data from a large retail organization, results showed that working in a climate supporting self‐determination and 401(k) participation were positively related to the level of ownership beliefs in the 204 work groups studied. Ownership beliefs were positively related to ownership behaviors and employees' attitudes toward the organization, whereas ownership behaviors were positively related to financial performance. Implications of psychological ownership for organizational behavior and performance are discussed.

Payment method and perceptions of ownership

“…Psychological ownership was assessed by three items (e.g., 'I feel like this is MY rather than THE piece of clothing') that were adapted from Peck and Shu (2009) and Wagner et al (2003). This measure proved reliable (alpha time 1 = .84, alpha time 2 = .78).…”

“…Mostly psychological ownership has been studied in the context of the workplace (e.g., Wagner et al 2003). Recently it has found its way into consumer literature (e.g., Peck and Shu 2009) and it has emerged as an important driver underlying other consumer perceptions and behavior (e.g., Reb and Connolly 2007).…”

Psychological ownership: theoretical extensions, measurement and relation to work outcomes

“…Human resource practitioners have typically been limited to employee stock ownership plans, stock options, or compensation schemes such as 401ks (e.g. Wagner et al, 2003) to promote feelings of ownership. However, these techniques appear to have contributed relatively little to the understanding of psychological ownership or to developing psychological ownership in employees (Rousseau, 2003).…”

“…This ''sense'' of ownership, and this ''motivation'' to protect and improve the object of the ownership, has stimulated organizational behavior scholars to better understand the positive construct of psychological ownership. For example, recent interest has focused on what constitutes employee ownership and the outcomes it may produce (Cram & Paton, 1993;Dirks, Cummings, & Pierce, 1996;Pierce, Kostova, & Dirks, 2001;Pierce, O'Driscoll, & Coghlan, 2004;Pierce, Rubenfeld, & Morgan, 1991;Pratt & Dutton, 1998;Rousseau, 2003;Wagner, Parker, & Christianson, 2003).…”

Researching at the Intersection of Innovation, Operations Management, and Entrepreneurship

“…Indeed, there is a substantial literature providing evidence of individuals' (including innovation managers [Patzelt & Shepherd, 2008]) and organizations' persisting with losing courses of action and even escalating commitment to it (Brockner, 1992;Staw, 1981Staw, , 1997Staw, Barsade, & Koput, 1997). Biases toward persistence, especially as it relates to stage gates, mean that decision makers are likely to lower the hurdle of a particular gate (i.e., exercise the condition of a conditional gate) in their mind, for example, to recoup a return on the time, effort, and money already invested in the entrepreneurial project (i.e., a sunk cost effect) (e.g., Pierce, Kostova, & Dirks, 2001;Wagner, Parker, & Christiansen, 2003). Alternatively, they justify the previous decision to start the project, pass it through previous gates, and invest additional resources in its development (i.e., norms for consistency) (Staw, 1981).…”