Investigating the Concept of Psychological Ownership from the Buyers’ Perspective

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PhD Candidate, Department of Business Management, Faculty of Economics, Management and Accounting, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran.

2 Associate Prof, Department of Business Management, Faculty of Economics, Management and Accounting, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran.

3 Assistant Prof, Department of Business Management, Faculty of Economics, Management and Accounting, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran.

Abstract

Objective
Given the relative impact and effectiveness of psychological ownership among the buyers on customer satisfaction, loyalty, word-of-mouth advertising, and willingness to pay more, there are very only a few studies that are generally based on customer control over goods or services. Hence, it is difficult to respond to the reason and conditions for the creation of a sense of psychological ownership. This study, based on a qualitative approach, aims to determine the factors and conditions which develop a sense of mental ownership towards a company among the buyers. The researchers attempt to address the following questions: What concepts should organizations develop in order to form a sense of mental or psychological ownership among the buyers? What conditions are necessary for the formation of a sense of psychological ownership among the buyers?
 
Methodology
The present qualitative study is exploratory in terms of certainty of information and is applied in terms of purpose. Various aspects of the concept of psychological ownership will be described and explained from the buyers’s perspective using grounded data theory. The statistical population of the study consists of Iranian industrial companies and the interviewees and industry and university experts were selected for the interview using the non-probabilistic sampling method. According to grounded theory approach, three coding steps were used in the present study: open coding, axial coding and selective coding for data analysis. The analytical tool of paradigm was used in all the stages of the research, from the beginning to the formation of the theory which includes the conditions, interaction and consequences. In addition, MAXQDA software was used to organize the findings.
 
Findings
10 main components and 27 sub-components were extracted and presented in the form of a theoretical model based on the grounded theory approach. The findings of the present study highlighted the determining concepts of buyers’ psychological ownership. Besides, the identification and conceptualization of various effective variables were emphasized.
 
Conclusion
According to the results of the identification of the conditions for the formation of psychological ownership from the buyers’ perspective in the present study, the final model shows that, in a holistic view, various aspects in manufacturing companies, especially the choice of structure of the product characteristics and company policies, the characteristics of the goods and services, social identities, participation in value creation and other factors are among the causal concepts in achieving a clear definition of psychological ownership from the buyers’ perspective. Based on the research results, creating a sense of satisfaction and the possibility of creating value with the participation of the organization and buyers, as well as creating a social identity for the buyers are the most important things to address. Yet, other factors such as market conditions and the nature of the goods and services are also important in establishing strategies.

Keywords

References

Avey, J.B., Avolio, B., Crossle, C., & Luthans, F. (2009). Psychological ownership: Theoretical extensions, measurement and relation to work outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(2), 173-191.
Azizi, SH., Ghareche, M., & Barati, A. (2018). Model of Successful Branding in the 
Ceramic and Tile Industry Using Grounded Theory Approach.Journal of Business Management, 9(4), 807- 826. (in Persian)
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current directions in psychological science, 9(3), 75-78.
Belk, R. W. (2018). Ownership, the extended self, and the extended object. In J. Peck & S. B. Shu(Eds.), Psychological ownership and consumer behavior (pp. 53–63). Cham: Springer
Brown, G., Pierce, J.L., Crossley, C. (2014). Toward an understanding of the development of ownership feelings. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(3), 318-338.
Chu, C. K. (2018). Psychological ownership in hoarding. In J. Peck & S. B. Shu (Eds.), Psychological ownership and consumer behavior. Cham: Springer. (pp. 135–142).
Danayi, H., Emami, S. M. (2006). Qualitative Research Approaches, Review on Grounded Theory. Management Thought, 1(2), 69- 97. (in Persian)
Eisingerich, A.B., Auh, S., Merlo, O. (2014). Acta non verba? The role of customer participation and word of mouth in the relationship between service firms’ customer satisfaction and sales performance. Journal of Service Research, 17(1), 40–53.
Elahi, Sh., Heydari, S. M. (2011). Customer Relationship Management. Tehran, Commercial Print and Publications Company. (in Persian)
Gineikiene, J., Schlegelmilch, B. B., & Auruskeviciene, V. (2017). “Ours” or “theirs”? Psychological ownership and domestic products preferences. Journal of Business Research, 72, 93-103.
Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical Sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Publisher: Chicago: Aldine.
Hillenbrand, C., & Money, K.G. (2015).Unpacking the mechanism by which psychological ownership manifests at the level of the individual: A dynamic model of identity and self. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 23(2), 148-165.
Jussila, I., Tarkiainen, A., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J.F. (2015). Individual psychological ownership: concepts, evidence, and implications for research in marketing. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 23(2), 121-139.
Kovacheva, A., & Lamberton, C. (2018). Whose experience is it, anyway? Psychological ownership and enjoyment of shared experiences. In Psychological ownership and consumer behavior (pp. 195-210). Springer, Cham.
Kroth, M., & Keeler, C. (2009). Caring as a managerial strategy. Human Resource Development Review, 8(4):506–531
Li, D. (2018). To have, or to feel like having: the effect of psychological ownership on consumer well-being. (Doctoral dissertation).
Long, D.R. (1993). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (2th ed)., Sage Pub.
Marakhimov, A., & Joo, J. (2017). Consumer adaptation and infusion of wearable devices for healthcare. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 135-148.
Martinaityte, I., Sacramento, C., & Aryee, S. (2019). Delighting the customer: Creativity-oriented high-performance work systems, frontline employee creative performance, and customer satisfaction. Journal of Management, 45(2), 728-751.
Naddafi, T. M., Abooyee Ardakan, M., & Gholipoor, A. (2018). Investigation of Managers’ Mental Modeling regarding Strategic Thinking. Journal of Business Management, 10(2), 461-486.
(in Persian)
Paré, G., et al. (2006). "The effects of creating psychological ownership on physicians' acceptance of clinical information systems." Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 13(2): 197-205.
Pierce, J.L., & Rodgers, L. (2004). The psychology of ownership and worker-owner productivity. Group & Organization Management, 29(5), 588-613.
Pierce, J.L., Jussila, I., & Cummings, A. (2009). Psychological ownership within the job design context: Revision of the job characteristics model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(4), 477-496.
Pierce, J.L., Kostova, T. &  Dirks, K.T. (2001). Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of management review, 26(2), 298-310.
Pierce, J.L., Rubenfeld, S.A. & Morgan, S. (1991). Employee ownership: A conceptual model of process and effects. Academy of Management review, 16(1), 121-144.
Qiu, M., Hu, B., Zhang, X., & Li, Y. (2015). Employees' psychological ownership and self-efficacy as mediators between performance appraisal purpose and proactive behavior. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 43(7), 1101-1109.
Rupsiene, L., & Pranskuniene, R. (2010). The variety of grounded theory: Different versions of the same method or different methods? Social Sciences, 4(70), 7-19.
Seyed Javadin, S. R., Moghimi, S.M., Seyed Amiri, N. (2017). Entrepreneurial marketing model for SMEs. based on Classic Grounded Theory. Journal of Business Management, 7(1), 101- 125.
Seyed Javadin, S. R., Safari, M., Raei, R., Iravani, M.J. (2017). A Conceptual Model to Explain the Readiness of Iranian Commercial Banks towards Islamic Banking Implementation: Using Grounded Theory Strategy. Journal of Business Management, 9(1), 129-154. (in Persian)
Shafiee, M., Zareian, M., Zarei Matin, H., & Firoozi, M. (2019). Understanding and Modeling Industrial Marketing Managers “Behavioral Distress” using Grounded Theory Approach. Journal of Business Management, 11(1), 179-200. (in Persian)
Shu, S.B., & Peck, J. (2011). Psychological ownership and affective reaction: Emotional attachment process variables and the endowment effect. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(4), 439-452.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory.
Sun, Y., Guo, Y., Liu, D., & Wang, N. (2019, January). Exploring Consumers’ Continuance Intention to Use Peer-to-Peer Accommodation Service: The Role of Psychological Ownership. In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
Zarei, A., Asadi, M. (2018). Identification of Key Success Factors - in Developing a Character Merchandising in the Iranian Marketplace using Grounded Theory Method. Iranian Business Management, 10(3), 567-582. (in Persian)
Journal of Business Management
Volume 12, Issue 2
2020
Pages 399-421

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics