Psychological Ownership Theory

Ownership refers to a feeling that somebody owns something and it arises mainly because of ability of controlling, level of awareness and self-investment on the object. Psychological ownership indicates ‘psychological state in which individuals feel that they own material or immaterial artefacts which are achieved through targets’ (Pierce et al., 2001: p. 14–15). Mainly, it does not necessary to be owned by legally. Psychological ownership theory (Etzioni, 1991; Pierce et al., 1991) which explains human behaviour of psychological ownership has emphasized several human motives like efficacy, self-identity and privacy that assist in creating psychological ownership. When psychological ownership is concerned in the organizational context, Pierce

Accordingly, self-efficacy, accountability, belongingness, and self-identity are identified as roots of the theory. Self-efficacy as the first root is defined as the belief of people about a specific task or action which can be completed and implemented successfully (Bandura, 1977). Control of an action is identified as the prime motive of efficacy as controlling of an action brings the pleasure of owning something (Pierce et al., 2001). Accountability as the second dimension is meant as an expectation of a person’s justification about some one’s views, feelings and behaviours. Two aspects namely the expectation of others to be accountable and self-accountability towards others in the firm have made the psychological ownership (Pierce et al., 2001). In general, knowledge and information sharing among members of a firm would assist to create accountability. Belongingness is considered as the third dimension. This has been defined as the feeling of owning something. When a firm is concerned, individual or group feeling that they belong in a firm is identified as belongingness (Avey et al., 2009). When employees have belongingness, they feel like owners and they become so attached thinking that ‘have a place’ in the firm. Self-identity is the last dimension of psychological ownership theory. Possession of something symbolically reflects the

Researchers in family business generally agree that family involvement makes family business different to non-family business (Miller & Rice, 1983). However, family involvement describes the influence of members of the owner family in managerial decision making and operational activities in functional areas of the business. This influence can be seen in business ownership, management and governance (Chrisman et al., 2003; Klein et al., 2005) and creates typical business goals, behavioural, and performance differences even among family firms (Chrisman, Chua, et al., 2005; Dyer, 2006). This happens mainly as members from owning family involve in strategic and operational decision making process of the business (Le Breton-Miller & Miller, 2009). Further, some studies have emphasized family involvement as workers in non- managerial positions (Kuruppuge, 2013). Yet, many empirical research evidences in family businesses suggest that family involvement in operational activities is more important than the other involvement activities such as ownership and governance (Chrisman et al., 2005). Family involvement in operational or management activities indicates the way of carrying out duties and tasks by the family members. Behaviour of family members from owning family is connected with family involvement (Kim, & Gao,