THE EFFECT OF THE DIMENSIONS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL OWNERSHIP IN ACHIEVING HARMONY IN THE WORKPLACE A study of the opinions of a sample of university professors
Abstract
The current study aims to determine the nature of the relationship between psychological ownership and its combined dimensions (self-efficacy - self-identity - sense of belonging - accountability - interconnectedness - autonomy - responsibility) and harmony in the workplace with its combined dimensions (positive influence - attribution of benign motives - balancing behaviors) in a college complex University of Kufa. The methodology was designed based on the stratified sample, so 175 questionnaires were distributed to the professors who are in the college complex at the University of Kufa. Only 150 valid questionnaires were obtained for statistical analysis with a response rate of 85%, and they were analyzed by smart v.3 and SPSS v.20 programs. The problem of the study showed the existence of a knowledge gap about the interpretation of the nature of the relationship between the variables of the current study represented by the independent variable psychological ownership and the dependent variable harmony in the workplace. The study reached a set of practical results, including that there is a direct moral influence relationship between psychological ownership and harmony in the workplace. The university's chances of achieving its goals and objectives The first topic: research methodology First, the study problem: Higher education is the foundation and mechanism that works to develop society in all its aspects because it revolves around the human being, who is the axis of development, and it is the supreme goal that higher education institutions seek through their future mission. Psychological ownership, which contributes in a way to the creation of the facilities provided to the university professor and pushes them in a positive direction to perform the tasks entrusted to them and the emergence of harmony in the workplace. In order to know the prospects for the availability of these ingredients in the higher education environment at the University of Kufa, specifically in its faculties, it is necessary to study some of the problems that the university professor is going through, which is that the lack of psychological ownership leads to a lack of harmony in the workplace Organizations must take into account the construction of the social identity of the workers, whose presence gives more positive view of individuals towards their organizations, - when the individual realizes that he is a valuable member of the organization, and that he is an integral part of it, which contributes to its harmony in his workplace.
Keyword : #
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Josephb F. Hair, G. Tomas M. Hult, Christian M. Ringle, Marko Sarstedt-A Primer (2014) Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM)-SAGE Publications Mukoroi, A. S. (2013). Improving industrial harmony and staff performance in a school organization through effective communication. An International Journal of Scientific Research in Education, 6(3), 263-270. Wang, L. & Shi, J. 2009. When do objects become more attractive? The individual and interactive effects of choice and ownership on object evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35:713-724. [Online] Available from: http://www.sagepublications.com. Maritz, L. (2012). Experiencing psychological ownership: a qualitative study (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pretoria). 1. Avey JB, Avolio B, Crossley C, Luthans F.2009.1- Psychological Ownership: Theoretical Extensions, Measurement, and Relation to Work Outcomes. J. Org. Behav., 30: 173-191. 2. Brown, G., Lawrence, T. B., and Robinson, S. L.2- 2005.Territoriality in organizations.Academy of Management Review, 30, 577-594. Brown, T. L. 1989. What will it take to win? Industry Week, 3. 3- June 19, Dittmar, H. 1992. The social psychology of material 4. 4- Possessions: To Have is to be. New York: St. Martin Press. Drummond, H. 2000. Introduction to Organizational . Behaviour, Oxford: Oxford University Press . 5. 5-Furby, L. 1976. The socialization of possession and ownership among children in three cultural groups: Israeli kibbutz, Israeli city, and American. In S. Modgil and C. Modgil (Eds.), Piagetian Research: Compilation and Coammentary, (8, pp. 95-127). 6. Windsor: NFE .Publishing 6-Furby, L. 1978. Possessions: Toward a theory of their meaning and function throughout the life cycle. In P. B. Baltes (Ed.), Life Span Development and Behavior (1, pp. 297-336). New York: Academic Press. 7. 7- Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., and Dirks, K. T. Forthcoming,.2001. Towards a theory of psychological ownership in organizations.Academy of Management Review, 26: 298-310. 8. 8- Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., and Dirks, K. T. 2003. The state of psychological ownership: integrating and extending a century of research. Review of General Psychology, 7, 84–107. 9. 9- Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., and Dirks, K. T. Forthcoming,.2001. Towards a theory of psychological ownership in organizations.Academy of Management Review, 26: 298-310. 10. 10-Pierce, J. L., O’Driscoll, M. P. and Coghlan, A. 2004. Work environment structure and psychological ownership: The mediating effects of control. The Journal of Social Psychology, 144(5), 507-534. 11. 11-Rochberg-Halton, E. 1984. Object relations, role models, and cultivation of the self. Environment and Behavior, 16(3), 335-368. 12. 12-Van Dyne, L. and Pierce, J.L. 2004.Psychological Ownership and Feelings of Possession: Three Field Studies Predicting Employee Attitudes and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, (25):439-459 13. 13-Bandura, A. 1997.Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. turnover and absenteeism. Academy of Management Review, 12, 288-300 14. 14-Lerner, J. S., and Tetlock, P. E. 1999.Accounting for the effects of accountability.Psychological Bulletin, 125, 255–275. 15. 15-Abrams, D., and Hogg, M. A. 2004. Meta-theory: Lessons from social identity research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 98–106. 16. 16-Beggan, J. K. 1992. On the social nature of nonsocial perception: the mere ownership effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 229–237. 17. 17-Mehta, R., and Belk, R. 1991. Artifacts, identity and transition: Favorite possessions of Indians and Indian immigrants to the U.S. Journal of Consumer Research, 7, 398–411. 18. 18- YILDIZ, Bora& Harun .(2015) THE EFFECT OF SERVANT LEADERSHIP ON PSYCHOLOGICAL OWNERSHIP: THE MODERATOR ROLE OF PERCEIVED ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT, Journal of Global Strategic Management | V. 9 | N. 2 19. 19-Tarela, Okpu. Ph.D.(2015) Managing Employee Trust Perceptions for Sustained Workplace Harmony in the Nigerian Banking Industry, International Journal of Managerial Studies and Research (IJMSR) ISSN 2349-0330 (Print) & ISSN 2349-0349. 20. 20-Nwinyokpugi, Dr. Patrick N(2015) Employee Engagement and Workplace Harmony in Nigeria Civil Service ISSN 2278 – 0211 (Online). 21. 21- Mukoro, Akpoyovwaire Samuel (2013) Improving Industrial Harmony and Staff Performance in a School Organization through Effective Communication International Journal of Scientific Research in Education, SEPTEMBER. 22. 22- Puttapalli, A.K. & Vuram, I.R. (2012). Discipline: The tool for industrial harmony. International journal of multidisciplinary educational research, 1(1), 146 – 151. 23. 23-Ladan, M.T. (2012). The imperatives of industrial harmony and academic excellence in a productive educational system. A paper presented at the flag-off of the “Do the right thing: Campus focus” students re-orientation programme, organized by the National Orientation Agency, held at the University of Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria, 13th November, 2012. 24. 24-Olagunju, Y. A. (1999). Role of managers in managing conflicts”. The Nigerian accountant, 34(4), 66 –74. 25. 25-Fashoyin, T. (1992). Industrial relations in Nigeria (2nd Ed.). Lagos: Longman. 26. 26-Hirszowicz, M.. Industrial sociology: An introduction. Oxford: M. Robertson (1981). 27. 27-Etzioni, A. A Comparative Analysis of Complex Organizations. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe (1961). 28. 28-Mosavi, S.A., Abedi, M. & Ghaedi M. Reviewing the relationship between perception of trust in organization with employee extra-role behaviour. African Journal of Business Management, 7(35), pp. 3620-3629(2013). 29. 29-Seok, C.B. & Chiew, T.C. Trust, trustworthiness and justice perception toward the head of department. Global Journal of Arts Humanities and Social Sciences, 1 (1) pp.20-29(2013). 30. 30-Akume, A.T & Abdullahi, Y.T. Challenges and prospects of effective industrial conflict resolution in Nigeria. Journal of Social Science, 36 (2) 199 – 208 (2013). 31. 31-Gabriel, J. & Kpakol, A.. Mediating role of power distance on the association of perceived managerial competency and employee trust in the Nigerian manufacturing industry. International Journal of Managerial Studies and Research, 2(10), 1 – 12 (2014). 32. 32-Blomqvist K, Ståhle P. Building organizational trust. Telecom Business Research Center, Lappeenranta University of Technology and Sonera Research, FINLAND (2000). 33. 33-Li, P.P. (2012), ‘Toward an Integrative Framework of Indigenous Research: The Geocentric Implications of Yin-Yang Balance,’ Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29, 849–872. 34. 34-Kramer, R. M. 1999. Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, Enduring Questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50: 569–598. 35. 35-Lee, Y. T., Han, A. G., Byron, T. K., & Fan, H. X. 2008. Daoist leadership: Theory and application. In C. C. Chen & Y. T. Lee (Eds.). Leadership and management in China: Philosophies, theories, and practices: 51–79. New York: Cambridge University Press. 36. 36-Man, M. M., & Bond, M. H. 2005. A lexically derived measure of relationship concord in Chinese culture. Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, 6: 109–128. 37. 37-Mooney, A. C., Holahan, P. J.,& Amason, A. C. 2006. Don’t take it personally: Exploring cognitive conflict as a mediator of affective conflict. Journal of Management Studies, 44(5): 733–758. 38. 38-Nisbett, R., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. 2001. Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108: 291–310. 39. 39-Rokeach, M. 1973. The nature of human values. New York: Free Press. Schaubroeck, J. M., Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B. J., Kozlowski, S. W. J., Lord, R. G., Treviño, L. K., Dimotakis, N., & Peng, A. C. 2012. Embedding ethical leadership within and across organization levels. Academy of Management Journal, 55(5): 1053–1078. 40-Yang, X. H., Peng, Y. Q., & Lee, Y. T. 2008. The Confucian and Mencian philosophy of benevolent leadership. In C. C. Chen & Y. T. Lee (Eds.). Leadership and management in China: Philosophies, theories, and practices: 31–50. New York: Cambridge University Press