Psychological Ownership in Small Family-Owned Businesses: Leadership Style and Nonfamily-Employees’ Work Attitudes and Behaviors

Bernhard, Fabian; O’Driscoll, Michael P.

doi:10.1177/1059601111402684

Cited by 208 publications

(212 citation statements)

References 90 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

184

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These four aspects -participative decision-making, distributive justice, succession planning and extra-role behaviours -are driven by either transactional or relational obligations between the family firm and its family-member employees. Each aspect can influence the psychological contract between family-member employees (Bernhard and O'Driscoll, 2011), ultimately resulting in impacts to the family firm's financial performance.…”

Section: Literature Review and Theoretical Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although certain behaviours may be considered extra role by the employee and employer, they are nonetheless important to the performance of the primary tasks of the organisation (Organ, 1997;Pearce and Gregersen, 1991), and these extra-role behaviours contribute to the overall work environment, especially in the case of family firms where extrarole behaviours are associated with higher levels of involvement and identification (Bernhard and O'Driscoll, 2011). Within the framework of social exchange theory and psychological contracts, these behaviours constitute transactional obligations from the family-member employee towards the organisation, thus fulfilling this portion of the psychological contract.…”

Section: Extrarole Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Psychological contract and social exchange in family firms

Madden

Strickling

et al. 2017

IJMED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study tests a social exchange theory model that links firm family members' transactional and relational psychological contract obligations to firm performance. Evidence supports the hypotheses that organisational obligations are antecedents of individual contributions to firm performance in the psychological contract model. When family firms meet the employees' perceived obligations to their employees, the employees meet their perceived obligations to their employers. Participative decision-making and succession planning are of particular importance to maintain transgenerational control and evidence is found to support succession planning as fully mediating the relationship between participative decision-making and firm performance.

show abstract

Section: Literature Review and Theoretical Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Extrarole Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological contract and social exchange in family firms

Madden

Strickling

et al. 2017

IJMED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, Pierce and colleagues argue that feelings of ownership for a particular target will be strongest when all three routes are operating, and that control and investment of self in the target may be more potent than intimate knowledge. Very little empirical evidence is available regarding what the most effective routes may be, or ESO's potential to enhance a possession based definition of PO (those that have include Bernhard & O'Driscoll, 2011;Brown et al, 2013;Chi & Han, 2008;McCarthy & Palcic, 2012). Despite Pierce et al's (1991) theoretical work depicting a relationship between ESO and PO, no known study has explored with employees how they make sense of their ESO experiences and feelings of ownership.…”

Section: Eso and The Routes To Psychological Ownershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Employee share ownership, psychological ownership, and work attitudes and behaviours: A phenomenological analysis

McConville

Arnold

Smith

2016

J Occupat & Organ Psyc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

• This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: MCCONVILLE, D., ARNOLD, J. and SMITH, A., 2016 John ArnoldLoughborough University, UK Alison SmithNottingham Trent University, UK AcknowledgementThe authors would like to acknowledge with thanks the financial support provided to the study by ifs Proshare, BT and PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC).The authors would also like to thank the ESO Administrators who helped in attracting companies to participate in the study. Keywords:Psychological ownership, employee share ownership, control, knowledge, investment. Psychological Ownership and Employee Share Ownership 1 AbstractThis study uses qualitative data to explore how employees perceive the relationships between employee share ownership (ESO) scheme participation, their attitudes and behaviours at work, and their feelings of psychological ownership (PO). We contribute to two areas of (largely quantitative) research literature. First, we advance understanding of PO by examining participants' explanations of how they feel their sense of PO is affected by participating in a company ESO scheme. Second, we examine the role of PO in employees'explanations of the attitudinal and behavioural changes they feel they have experienced as a consequence of participating in an ESO scheme. To explore the subjective meaning of ESO participation and its PO impact, 37 semi-structured interviews were conducted in nine companies with participants in three tax-advantaged ESO schemes in the United Kingdom:SIP, SAYE and EMI. Data were coded and analyzed using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Participants perceived little effect of ESO schemes on PO or on the organizational features anticipated to give rise to these feelings. In turn, PO was found to play little or no part in employees' explanations of how share schemes had, or did not have, an attitudinal or behavioural impact. Psychological Ownership and Employee Share Ownership 2 Practitioner Points• Interviewees reflected on their experiences of joining employee share ownership (ESO) schemes, holding options, exercising options and owning shares in the company. There was very little evidence that employees felt that any of these stages of ESO participation had any noticeable effect on their feelings of psychological ownership (PO). Other factors seemed to satisfy PO routes before, and possibly better than, ESO.• PO played little or no part in employees' explanations of how the ESO scheme impacted upon their attitudes or behaviours.• The findings contrast with the conventional wisdom, that participating in an ESO scheme inevitably causes employees to feel a sense of ownership over the company.• We find that ESO had very little to do with ownership in the minds of employees.Instead, it was much more about investment. ESO was not seen as a mechanism for employees to have a sense of ownership over the company and employees did not appear to regard ESO as providing experiences of the three ownership rights, or the routes to PO which parallel these.

show abstract

“…Psychological ownership implies that individuals are psychologically intertwined and emotionally attached with their organization (Bernhard & O'Driscoll, 2011). Actually, the self and the target of possession are so interrelated to such an extent that it becomes difficult to separate them, so people may define themselves by possessions they own (Avey et al, 2009 Moreover, people develop a sense of Psychological ownership to fulfill several basic and important needs including sense of control, home (comfort and security), and self-identity.…”

Section: Workplace Bullying-psychological Ownershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lastly, we enumerate empirical results supporting the claim that workplace bullying can curtail the sense of psychological ownership. Bernhard and O'Driscoll, (2011) found that leaders behaviors exhibited toward their followers affect the employees' feeling of psychological ownership. Another study in different, but related field of study, found that fair treatment is related to organizational attachment (Haque & Asalm, 2011).…”

Section: Workplace Bullying-psychological Ownershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Workplace Bullying and Unethical Behaviors: A Mediating Model

Aleassa¹,

Megdadi²

2014

IJBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Workplace bullying and unethical behaviors are increasingly being recognized as serious problems that warrant attention. However, there is no previous research has investigated the possible effect of workplace bullying on employees unethical behaviors. So, this study is an attempt to fill this void. Moreover, we investigated whether this effect is mediated by psychological ownership. The model of this study was tested using survey data collected from a sample of 295 commercial bank employees. Results provided support for the proposed model, as workplace bullying predicted employees unethical behaviors and psychological ownership partially mediated the workplace bullying-unethical behaviors relationship. Recommendations and directions for future research are provided.

show abstract

Psychological Ownership in Small Family-Owned Businesses: Leadership Style and Nonfamily-Employees’ Work Attitudes and Behaviors

Cited by 208 publications

References 90 publications

Psychological contract and social exchange in family firms

Psychological contract and social exchange in family firms

Employee share ownership, psychological ownership, and work attitudes and behaviours: A phenomenological analysis

Workplace Bullying and Unethical Behaviors: A Mediating Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About