A Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis of Psychological Ownership and Job Satisfaction

of 38
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Information Report
Category:

Healthcare

Published:

Views: 0 | Pages: 38

Extension: PDF | Download: 0

Share
Description
This paper analyzes the impact of effect size or the coefficient correlation of psychological ownership and job satisfaction. Twenty-three studies were selected based on the characteristics of the knowledge worker and six psychological ownership
Transcript
  ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR ISSN: 2394-0409;DOI:10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/ISSN.2394-0409;Volume 2 Issue 1 (2015) 1 A RESEARCH SYNTHESIS AND META-ANALYSIS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL OWNERSHIP AND JOB SATISFACTION   Abdul Hafiz Jones, PMP DBA in Management (USA), MBA in Management (USA), BBA in Finance (USA) Assistant Professor in College of Business Administration, University of Ha’il, Saudi Arabia , a.jones@uoh.edu.sa; alshams@msn.com  Aslam Mohammed Wali PhD in Public Administration (India), Masters in Public Administration, (India), BA in English / Political Science (India) Assistant Professor in College of Business Administration, University of Ha’il, Saudi Arabia , aslamwali21@gmail.com  Ajay Singh PhD in Management (India), MBA in Human Resources, LLB (Labor & Industrial) BSc. (Mathematics) Assistant Professor in College of Business Administration, University of Ha’il, Saudi Arabia,  a.singh@uoh.edu.sa; drajaysingh9@gmail.com  Muhammad Abdul Saboor MA in English (UK), BSc. in Psychology (USA), Lecturer in English at College of Medicine University of Ha’il, Saudi Arabia,     msaboor@gmail.com; ryanemcdonald@yahoo.com   ABSTRACT Keywords:  Psychological Ownership, Job Satisfaction, Meta-Analysis, Research Synthesis   1.   Introduction What makes an employee exert efforts above and beyond for an organization? How does an employee reconcile knowing they have no ownership in the organization, but still exert efforts above and beyond for that organization? Some studies have identified this psychological ownership state as the key to achieving organizational competitiveness (e.g., Brown, 1989). Past studies on this psychological state focused on  possession as understood by an employee’s  psychological ownership state (e.g., Isaacs, 1933) and (e.g., Dittmar, 1992). These studies  provided the much-needed evidence that people can achieve high levels of productivity in this mind state. In fact, recent studies began to focus on several work-related attributes such as organizational commitment, job satisfaction, autonomy, and profit sharing in relation to  psychological ownership (e.g., Chui, Hui, & Lai, 2007; Mayhew, Ashkanasy, Bramble, & Gardner, 2007; Van Dyne & Pierce, 2004; Pierce, Kostova, & Dirks, 2001). One study in  particular, Pierce et al  . (2001) provides a framework for future research on psychological   This paper analyzes the impact of effect size or the coefficient correlation of psychological ownership and job  satisfaction. Twenty-three studies were selected based on the characteristics of the knowledge worker and six  psychological ownership dimensions of distinctiveness. Average organizational tenure and education level were used to assess the significant dispersion between the studies that existed. Average organizational tenure accounted for none of the dispersion between studies variance. Studies that used degree holders for sampling accounted for 77% of real heterogeneity representing 13 out of the 23 studies. 15 out of the 23 studies that conducted regressions, and reported the coefficient determination or R 2 results explained 58% of the 95%  proportion of real observed dispersion between the 15 studies with a p-value of .000. These results indicate  significant gaps in the existing literature pertaining to the relationship between psychological ownership and job  satisfaction. The gaps in the existing literature show the need to reset the study of the relationship between  psychological ownership and job satisfaction towards the area of organizational effectiveness as oppose to the  psychology of possession from the perspective of the human mind.   ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR ISSN: 2394-0409;DOI:10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/ISSN.2394-0409;Volume 2 Issue 1 (2015) 2 ownership, job satisfaction, as well as the other work related behaviors and attitudes previously mentioned. The purpose of this research synthesis and meta-analysis is to identify gaps in the association between psychological ownership and job satisfaction, and possible paths toward understanding catalysts for achieving superior organizational competitiveness. This research used twenty-three studies to examine the summary effect size, the pattern of effects, and the determinants that impact the excess dispersion in the effect size. The underpinnings of this research are based on Pierce et al  . (2001) managerial implications of psychological ownership theory inside organizations. The last section of Pierce et al  . (2001) states: Although manipulation of “roots” of ownership is not within managerial control, managers could develop the attributes of the potential targets of ownership by making them visible, attractive, malleable, and accessible, which should increase the potential for psychological ownership. Managers could also work on the “routes” to psychological ownership ( p.308). Pierce et al  . (2001) defines six dimensions of distinctiveness of psychological ownership based on questions answered for the conceptual core, individual, motivational bases, development, type of state, and select consequences. The answers where categorized under  psychological ownership, commitment, identification, and internationalization. The six dimension of distinctiveness will be the justification for extending the definition of  psychological ownership by means of proxy variables. Cooper (2010) identifies the use of  proxy variables as operational measures or manipulations relevant to the main idea in a research synthesis. Cooper further states: It is important to consider whether the operations associated with these different constructs are relevant to your synthesis, even if they have been labelled differently. When relevant operations associated with different abstract constructs are identified, they most certainly should be considered for inclusion in your synthesis. In fact, different concepts and theories behind similar operations can often be used to demonstrate the robustness of results (p. 30). The proxy variables contribute to the criteria for inclusion and exclusion, and coding moderating and mediating variables in this research synthesis. This topic is discussed in the inclusion criteria and exclusion section in this research synthesis. 1.1 The Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis Outline The introduction of this research synthesis and meta-analysis begins with the theoretical framework from Pierce et al  . (2001) and Drucker (1970/2008). Second, the extension of  psychological ownership and job satisfaction by way of proxies are established. Third, the discussion of education and the average organization tenure as a meta-regression dummy variable and covariate respectively, closeout the introduction section of this research. Upon laying the theoretical groundwork, this research establishes five questions that are answered using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) Version 2 software. However, before the results are presented, commonalities and contrasts among key studies are discussed in the literature review. In addition, the distinction between study and synthesis generated evidences  ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR ISSN: 2394-0409;DOI:10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/ISSN.2394-0409;Volume 2 Issue 1 (2015) 3 are discussed to enhance the understanding of the results. The methods section hypothesize two key research questions previously mentioned and highlights the inclusion criteria, search strategy, coding procedures, and statistical methods. The conclusion recaps the results in terms of answers to the research questions and offers recommendations for analyzing the relationship  between psychological ownership and job satisfaction for future researchers. 1.2 The Theoretical Framework for Psychological Ownership The theoretical framework presented in Pierce et al  . (2001) and Pierce & Rodgers, (2004) shows the psychology behind the motives of “ownership” in the minds of people. However these two studies do not extend beyond this point but rather place the onus on the manager to explore the attributes that could possible foster psychological ownership. The twenty-three studies analyzed in this paper examine the role of psychological ownership and  job satisfaction under the premise of exploring what attributes influence performance effects. However, in thirteen out of the twenty-three studies the employee average organizational tenure and educational level were used to analyze how much variation in effect sizes existed between the studies. 1.3 The Knowledge Worker The organizational tenure and educational level are key characteristics of a management  paradigm foretold in Drucker, (1970/2008) that would change the assumptions of management forever. Drucker, (1970/2008) identified one of several assumptions of management as,”… there is only one right way to manage people ” . This particular assumption considers people who work for an organization as subordinates; many of which have little or no skills and must  be told what to do by management. In the new management paradigm, subordinates are replaced by knowledge workers. Knowledge workers are loyal to their profession and not necessarily to the organization they maybe currently working for. They value learning with the sole intent of knowing their job better than anyone in their organization including their boss (Drucker, 1970/2008). 1.3.1 Value Learning Valued learning srcinates from a combination of education and work experience inside the organization. Social learning customizes this combination into specialized effective knowledge suited solely for the organization Gibson et al  ., (2012) and Drucker, (1970/2008). This is what Drucker meant when he stated, “…knowledge workers need access to an organization---a collective that brings together an array of knowledge workers and applies their specialties to a common end-  product” (  p.39). This access forms the basis of valued learning by way of organizational tenure and continuing education. These two categories of need are key characteristics and are mentioned along with eight more characteristics of knowledge workers in (Drucker, 1970/2008) which are: 1.   Pay is determined by their knowledge. 2.   They own the means of production. 3.   They consider themselves professionals. 4.   Their knowledge is specialized; they must have access to an organization. 5.   They have two main needs: a)   Formal education (college)  b)   Continuing education 6.   They identify themselves by their knowledge.  ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR ISSN: 2394-0409;DOI:10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/ISSN.2394-0409;Volume 2 Issue 1 (2015) 4 7.   They are highly mobile with their knowledge. 8.   Their loyalty is to their specialized branch of knowledge which supersedes attachment to an organization. 9.   To them money do not substitute personal performance and achievement. 10.   To them social affluence is more important than financial security. Based on these ten characteristics, formal education (college) and tenure or average organizational work-years best capture the essence of the knowledge workers within the twenty-three selected studies for this research. Furthermore, Pierce et al  ., (2001) use organization tenure to describe the investment of one’s self into the target, as the feelings of ownership associated with the control of the target of ownership. Therefore, on the basis of Pierce et al  ., ( 2001) investment of one’s self-into the target and the ten characteristics in Drucker, (1970/ 2008), this research hypothesizes education and organizational average year’s impact on the effect size. 2.   Problem Statement and Objectives of the Study Before highlighting the hypotheses for this research synthesis, definitions for Effect Size ( r  ), Heterogeneity, Dispersion, Q-Statistic ( Q ), Tau ( T  ), Tau-Squared ( T  2 ), and I-Squared (  I  2 ) are presented at this point to show clarity of the results. Also, this research synthesis use Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software (CMA) version 2.2 for calculating the meta-analysis which makes the presentation of key definitions critical. Table 1 represents Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, & Rothstein, (2009) definitions of terms needed to understand the meta-analysis and meta-regression results. 2.1 Research Questions This research synthesis and meta-analysis resets the association between psychological ownership and job satisfaction towards the area of organizational effectiveness as oppose to  psychology of possession by people in the workplace. This paper is the first of a three research synthesis and meta-analysis studies on the current state of psychological ownership since the recommendations for further research in Pierce et al  . (2001) and Pierce et al  . (2004). The research questions are focused of the variance and heterogeneity in the true effect size (  R ), dispersion, and how much does average organizational tenure and education can be attributed to the real dispersion between the selected studies. The first four research questions were taken directly from Borenstein et al  . (2009) while the fifth question is based on the existence on heterogeneity and the variance of the true effect size in terms of average organizational tenure  by educational level. 1. Is there evidence of heterogeneity in the true effect size? 2. What is the variance of the true effect size? 3. What are the substantive implications or how significant is this heterogeneity? 4. What proportion of the observed dispersion is real? 5. How much of the real observed dispersion is attributed to organizational average years and education 1 ? In terms of true heterogeneity, “The statistics T  2  and T   reflect the true heterogeneity while  I  2  reflects the proportion of observed dispersion that is due to this heterogeneity” (Borenstein et 1   Education variable acts as a dummy variable.    ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR ISSN: 2394-0409;DOI:10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/ISSN.2394-0409;Volume 2 Issue 1 (2015) 5 al  ., 2009: p.120). Evidence of dispersion exists between the selected studies when Q-Statistic is greater than the degrees of freedom ( df  ) Borenstein et al  . (2009). 3.   Literature Review Of the twenty-three studies selected for this research synthesis, not all of the studies directly test the relationship between psychological ownership and job satisfaction. In fact, nine out of the twenty-three studies directly test the relationship between psychological ownership and job satisfaction while the remaining fourteen studies used proxy variables for  psychological ownership, job satisfaction, or both. It is important to identify the studies that directly test the relationship between both variables so statements on causality can be made  based on these studies solely (Cooper, 2010). Table 2 lists the author and year of publication, the study characteristics, and identifies the dependent, independent, and mediating variables. It also lists whether or not the sample directly tests the relationship between psychological ownership and job satisfaction. The column shows the construct direction or which variable influence the other is also listed. Table 2 information lays the foundation upon which the results of the meta-analysis are understood. 3.1 Study and Synthesis Generated Evidences From the perspective of the generated evidence, the procedures of all twenty-three studies were analyzed to identify variations that may have impacted the summarized effect size. Tables 3 and 4 present the research designs of each study segmented by the relationship characteristics between the variables. Table 3 shows the primary research studies that analyzed the association between psychological ownership and job satisfaction directly. Table 3  provides study-generated evidence which can be used to make inferences on causality Cooper, (2010). Whereas Table 4 represents the primary research studies that analyzed the association  between job satisfaction and psychological ownership by way of proxy variables. Table 4  provides synthesis-generated evidence which focuses on the differences in procedures that cannot be used to makes inferences on causality between job satisfaction and psychological ownership. There is a general commonality among the studies in Table 3 in regards to which variable impacts the other. The common procedures across five out of the eight research designs are, Cronbach alpha reliability tests on selected survey questions, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), descriptive statistics, Pearson Correlation, and hierarchical multiple regression. Three out of the nine research designs had modifications whereby structural equation modelling (SEM) was use in their confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) statistical procedures, which resulted in higher correlation coefficients than the summary effect size for the entire random effect model. 3.1.1 The Direct Relationship Given the clear commonality across the studies in Table 3, the association with regards to which variable impacts the other, psychological ownership was hypothesized as the independent variable impacting job satisfaction. This means that psychological ownership was treated as an antecedent of job satisfaction. From a psychology perspective this treatment is understandable when viewed in terms of investing of oneself into the target with the target being “…different facets such as jobs, products, customers, project s, work teams, or assignments” Pierce et al  .
Recommended
View more...
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks
SAVE OUR EARTH

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!

x