Original Article
Psychological Ownership, Territorial Behavior, and Being Perceived as a Team Contributor: The Critical Role of Trust in the Work Environment
Graham Brown,
Craig Crossley, Sandra L. Robinson,
Corresponding Author
Graham Brown
University of Victoria
Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to Graham Brown, Peter B. Gustavson School of Business, University of Victoria, PO Box 1700 STN CSC Victoria, BC, Canada V8W 2Y2; [email protected].Search for more papers by this authorGraham Brown,
Craig Crossley, Sandra L. Robinson,
Corresponding Author
Graham Brown
University of Victoria
Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to Graham Brown, Peter B. Gustavson School of Business, University of Victoria, PO Box 1700 STN CSC Victoria, BC, Canada V8W 2Y2; [email protected].Search for more papers by this authorWe wish to thank the members of the Organisational Behaviour and Human Resources group at Singapore Management University for their constructive comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript. The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada supported this research with a grant (410–2011–1697) to the first author.
Abstract
In this field study, we develop and test a theory regarding the role of trust in the work environment as a critical condition that determines the relationship between psychological ownership, territoriality, and being perceived as a team contributor. We argue that, dependent upon the context of trust in the work environment, psychological ownership may lead to territorial behaviors of claiming and anticipatory defending and that, dependent upon the context of trust, territorial behavior may lead coworkers to negatively judge the territorial employee as less of a team contributor. A sample of working adults reported on their psychological ownership and territorial behavior toward an important object at work, and a coworker of each provided evaluations on the level of trust in the work environment and rated the focal individual's contributions to the team. Findings suggest that a work environment of trust is a “double-edged sword”: On the one hand, a high trust environment reduces the territorial behavior associated with psychological ownership; on the other hand, when territorial behavior does occur in high trust environments, coworkers rate the territorial employee's contributions to the team significantly lower. We discuss the nature and management of territorial behavior in light of these findings.
REFERENCES
- Altman I. (1975). Environment and social behavior: Privacy, personal space, territory, and crowding. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
- Arrow KJ. (1974). The limits of organization. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
- Baer M, Brown G. (2012). Blind in one eye: How psychological ownership of ideas affects the types of suggestions people adopt. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 118, 60–71.
- Barnard CI. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Beaglehole E. (1932). Property: A study in social psychology. New York, NY: Macmillan.
- Becker FD, Mayo C. (1971). Delineating personal space and territoriality. Environment and Behavior, 3, 375–381.
- Belk RW. (1988). Possessions and the self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 139–168.
- Blau PM. (1964). The dynamics of bureaucracy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
- Brown G. (2009). Measuring territoriality in organizations. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 44–52.
- Brown G, Lawrence TB, Robinson SL. (2005). Territoriality in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 3, 577–594.
- Brown G, Robinson SL. (2011). Reactions to infringement. Organization Science, 22, 210–224.
- Crossley CD. (2009). Emotional and behavioral reactions to social undermining: A closer look at perceived offender motives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 14–24.
- Crossley CD, Bennett RJ, Jex SM, Burnfield JL. (2007). Development of a global measure of job embeddedness and integration into a traditional model of voluntary turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1031–1042.
- Das G. (1993). Local memoirs of a global manager. Harvard Business Review, 71, 38–47.
- Delgado-Márquez BL, Hurtado-Torres NE, Aragón-Correa JA. (2012). The dynamic nature of trust transfer: Measurement and the influence of reciprocity. Decision Support Systems, 54, 226–234.
- Dipboye RL. (1977). A critical review of Korman's self-consistency theory of work motivation and occupational choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 18, 108–126.
- Dirks KT. (1999). The effects of interpersonal trust on work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 445–455.
- Dirks KT, Ferrin DL. (2001). The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization Science, 12, 450–467.
- Dittmar H. (1992). The social psychology of material possessions: To have is to be. New York, NY: St. Martin's Press.
- Dyson-Hudson R, Smith EA. (1978). Human territoriality: An ecological reassessment. American Anthropologist, 80, 21–41.
- Edney JJ. (1976). Human territories: Comment on functional properties. Environment and Behavior, 8, 31–47.
- Edwards JR, Lambert LS. (2007). Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12, 1–22.
- Gough JW. (1963). The social contract. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
- Hall ET. (1966). The hidden dimension. New York, NY: Doubleday.
- Hazer JT, Highhouse S. (1997). Factors influencing managers' reactions to utility analysis: Effects of SDy method, information frame, and focal intervention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 104–112.
- Homans G. (1961). Social behavior: Its elementary forms. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace & World.
- Inkpen AC, Currall SC. (2004). The coevolution of trust, control, and learning in joint ventures. Organization Science, 15, 586–599.
- Johns G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31, 386–408.
- Jøsang A, Presti S. (2004). Analysing the relationship between risk and trust. Trust Management, 2995, 135–145.
- Judge TA, Erez A, Bono JE, Thoresen CJ. (2003). The core self-evaluation scale: Development of a measure. Personnel Psychology, 56, 303–331.
- Kelley HH. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D Levine (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (Vol. 15, pp. 192–240). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
- Knapp ML. (1978). Non-verbal communication in human interaction. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
- Korman AK. (1970). Toward a hypothesis of work behavior. Journal of Psychology, 54, 31–41.
- Langfred CW. (2004). Too much of a good thing? The negative effects of high trust and autonomy in self-managing teams. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 385–399.
- Liao H. (2007). Do it right this time: The role of employee service recovery performance in customer-perceived justice and customer loyalty after service failures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 475–489.
- Lorini E, Castelfranchi C. (2007). The cognitive structure of surprise: Looking for basic principles. Topoi, 26, 133–149.
- Luhmann N. (1990). Familiarity, confidence, trust: Problems and alternatives. In D Gambetta (Ed.), Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations (pp. 94–107). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
- Lyman SM, Scott MB. (1967). Territoriality: A neglected sociological dimension. Social Problems, 15, 236–249.
- Mayhew MG, Ashkanasy NM, Bramble T, Gardner J. (2007). A study of the antecedents and consequences of psychological ownership in organizational settings. Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 477–500.
- Miceli M, Castelfranchi C. (2002). The mind and the future: The (negative) power of expectations. Theory Psychology, 3, 335–366.
- Parker SK, Wall TD, Jackson PR. (1997). “That's not my job”: Developing flexible employee work orientations. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 899–929.
- Pearce JL, Branyiczki I, Bigly GA. (2000). Insufficient bureaucracy: Trust and commitment in particularistic organizations. Organization Science, 11, 148–162.
- Pendleton A, Wilson N, Wright M. (1998). The perception and effects of share ownership: Empirical evidence from employee buy-outs. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 36, 99–123.
- Piccolo RF, Colquitt JA. (2006). Transformational leadership and job behaviors: The mediating role of core job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 327–340.
- Pierce JL, Jussilla I. (2010). Collective psychological ownership. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 477–496.
- Pierce JL, Jussilla I, Cummings A. (2009). Psychological ownership within the job design context: A revision of the job characteristics model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 477–496.
- Pierce JL, Kostova T, Dirks KT. (2001). Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26, 298–310.
- Pierce JL, Kostova T, Dirks KT. (2003). The state of psychological ownership: Integrating and extending a century of research. Review of General Psychology, 7, 84–107.
- Pratt MG, Dutton JE. (2000). Owning up or opting out: The role of identities and emotions in issue ownership. In N Ashkanasy, C Hartel, W Zerbe (Eds.), Emotions in the workplace: Research, theory, and practice (pp. 103–129). New York, NY: Quorum.
- Rempel JK, Holmes JG, Zanna MP. (1985). Trust in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 95–112.
- Robinson SL. (1996). Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 574–599.
- Rousseau DM, Sitkin SB, Burt RS, Camerer C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393–404.
- Salancik GR, Pfeffer J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224–253.
- Schneider, B. (1975). Organizational climate: An essay. Personnel Psychology, 28, 447–479.
- Smith CS, Tisak J, Hahn SE, Schmieder RA. (1997). The measurement of job control. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 225–237.
- Spector PE. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9, 221–232.
- Stasser G, Titus W. (1987). Effects of information load and percentage shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 81–93.
- Van Dyne L, Pierce JL. (2004). Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: Three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 439–460.
- VandeWalle D, Van Dyne L, Kostova T. (1995). Psychological ownership: An empirical examination of its consequences. Group & Organization Management, 20, 210–226.
- Wagner SH, Parker CP, Christiansen ND. (2003). Employees that think and act like owners: Effects of ownership beliefs and behaviors on organizational effectiveness. Personnel Psychology, 56, 847–871.
- Welbourne TM, Johnson DE, Erez A. (1998). The role-based performance scale: Validity analysis of a theory-based measure. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 540–555.
- Williamson OE. (1974). Markets and hierarchies. New York, NY: Free Press.
- Wilpert B. (1991). Property, ownership, and participation: On the growing contradictions between legal and psychological ownership concepts. In R Russell, V Rus (Eds.), International handbook of participations in organizations: For the study of organizational democracy, co-operation, and self management (Vol. 2, pp. 149–164), New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
- Wollman N, Kelly BM, Bordens KS. (1994). Environmental and intrapersonal predictors of reactions to potential territorial intrusions in the workplace. Environment and Behavior, 26, 179–194.
- Wong P, Weiner B. (1981). When people ask “why” questions, and the heuristics of attributional search. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 650–663.
- Zucker LG. (1986). The production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure, 1840–1920. In BM Staw, LL Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 8, pp. 55–111). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
