The effects work characteristics on psychological ownership and the influence of psychological ownership on employee performance in businesses in Vietnam

ration between the object (the company) and the owner (staff), for example of this integration is organization commitment. When there is a combination between the owner and the subject, the team's output and the individual are promoted. The model of Pierce et al. (1991) is demonstrated through experimental studies. Pendleton et al. (1998) when research on formal ownership in the British bus industry has shown formal ownership (the number of ownership stocks) positive impact on feeling of ownership (psychological ownership). Then, the psychological ownership positively impacts the integration, organizational commitment and negative impact on the intention to leave. Besides, the psychological ownership positively impacts the job satisfaction and behaviour in the work. Buchko (1992) has tested that employees who receive more financial value from their employee ownership program will commit more to the company and intend to leave lower. Coyle-Shapiro, Morrow, Richardson, and Dunn (2002) in the long-term research shows (longitudinal research) officially positively impacts organizational commitment. 2.2.2. Psychological ownership theory Pierce et al. (2001) proposed psychological ownership theory and proposed 3 characteristics of psychological ownership include: firstly, the psychological ownership is 1 part of the human; Secondly, the object of ownership can be many different objects including physical and non-material and ultimately psychological ownership has a positive impact on the behaviors, attitude and human emotions. In addition, the authors also pointed out the root cause and the mechanism that led to psychological ownership. The root causes that lead to psychological ownership include: the need for efficiency and potency, the need for personal identification and the need for a place. At the same time Pierce et al. (2001) pointed out that psychological ownership appeared in the following 3 roads: first, when individuals control the goal then they will feel the goal is their. Second, when individuals know deeply about goals, they will feel the goal is theirs. Thirdly, when the individual endeavours and public dedication to the goal, the psychophysical ownership towards the goal appears. Studies aimed at proving this theory showed different outcomes. The psychological ownership has a positive impact on organizational commitment (Mayhew et al., 2007), a positive impact on extral role behavior (Han et al., 2010; Van Dyne & Pierce, 2004b; Vandewalle et al., 1995). Dislike the above result, Mayhew et al. (2007) shows that psychological ownership does not impact employee performance. However, other studies have shown, psychological ownership positive impacts on employee performance 2.2.3. Adjusted Work Characteristics Model 2.2.3.1. Diagnostic model of the work charateristics of Hackman and Oldham (1975) In this model two authors on only put 5 main characeristics of work include: skill diversity, task identification, task significance, autonomy and feedback. In the job characteristics model, Hackman and Oldham (1975) believe that the outputs of work and individuals are manipulators by the key psychological states. In turn, key psychological statuses will be influenced by the core characteristics of the work including 5 characteristics: skill diversity, task identification, task significance, autonomy and feedback. Finally, 2 authors Hackman and Oldham (1975) claim that the power of employee 7 development needs coordinates the relationship between the impact of group elements of work on the psychological elements group, while simultaneously governing the relationship between the group of factors belonging to the psychological outcome of work and personal. The model of Hackman & Oldham (1975) has been tested and demonstrated in practice through research (Fried & Ferris, 1987; J Richard Hackman & Oldham, 1976; Saavedra & Kwun, 2000). For example, in meta -analysis ( Fried & Ferris, 1987) shows the elements of the work positively impact the key psychological factors, in turn, key psychological factors affect the outputs of the human. 2.2.3.2. Diagnostic Work characteristic model In the diagnostic model work revision,Pierce, Cummings, et al. (2009) has argued that work characteristics also impact the mechanisms leading to psychological ownership. This mechanism includes: controlling, deeply understanding, and investing for yourself. In the model after the factors belonging to the work characteristics impact job - based psychological ownership, job - based psychological ownership impacts the outputs include: internal motivation, work satisfaction, self- esteem, sense of responsibility, burden of responsibility, performance of work (in role and extra role), promoting change, resisting change, personal risk and sacrifice, and territorial behavior. After the model is launched, Brown, Pierce, et al. (2014) indicates the complexity of the work of positive impact on job - based psychological ownership, then job - based psychological ownership positively impacts th employee performance. Besides, Brown, Pierce, et al. (2014) also proves that the revised model is better than the original model in anticipation of doing the job. 2.3. Factors affecting psychological ownership 2.3.1. Factors that impact organization – based psychological ownership Studies of organization – based psychological ownership accounted for largely in studies of psychological ownership (Dawkins et al., 2017). These studies focus on the factors that act on psychological ownership such as leadership, participation in decision-making processes, participating in stock ownership or dividing profits, autonomy, and work environment structure. 2.3.2. The factors that impact job – based psychological ownership Of the few studies of job - based psychological ownership, these studies focus on the factors that impact psychological ownership towards work such as: job characteristics (Brown, Pierce, et al., 2014; Mayhew et al., 2007) (The complexity of work, autonomy), leadership and (Fabian Bernhard & Michael P O'Driscoll, 2011), working environment structure(O'Driscoll et al., 2006; Pierce et al., 2004) and emotional intelligence and spritual intelligence of employees (Kaur et al., 2013). 2.4. The impact of psychological ownership 2.4.1. The impact of psychological ownership on attitude, feeling A series of studies have shown the connection between psychological ownership and attitudes and feelings of individuals including: commitment to the Organization (Han et al., 2010; Liu et al., 2012; Mayhew et al., 2007; Sieger et al., 2011; Van Dyne & Pierce, 2004; Vandewalle et al., 1995); Satisfying in work (Fabian Bernhard & Michael P O'Driscoll, 2011; James et al., 2012; Knapp et al., 2014; Mayhew et al., 2007; Peng & Pierce, 2015; Sieger et al., 2011); Self-esteem(Liu et al., 2012; Van Dyne & Pierce, 2004); Commitment to work (Ramos et al., 2014) and intention to stay (Zhu et al., 2013). Besides the positive attitudes, researchers also verify the effects of psychological ownership on negative attitudes at work. The two studies of Fabian Bernhard and Michael P O'Driscoll (2011) and 8 Knapp et al. (2014) show that psychological ownership of the organization reduces the intention of taking a job. In addition, the study of Peng and Pierce (2015) possesses psychological for work to reduce the intention to leave, however, the relation of psychological ownership to the organization and the job engagement is not statistically significant. 2.4.2. The impact of psychological ownership on behavior Experimental studies show a psychological impact on the manner of work-related behaviors (Brown, Pierce, et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2012; Van Dyne & Pierce, 2004; Vandewalle et al., 1995). These studies demonstrate psychological ownership that positively impacts acts in addition to duty (Fabian Bernhard & Michael P O'Driscoll, 2011; Park et al., 2013; Ramos et al., 2014; Van Dyne & Pierce, 2004; Vandewalle et al., 1995; Zhu et al., 2013). Finally, researchers also began to study on the negative side of psychological ownership. Brown, Crossley, et al. (2014) shows that psychological ownership leads to territorial behaviour towards important subjects, territorial behaviour will result in coworkers underestimate the teamwork (Baer & Brown, 2012) 2.5. Research gaps. Firstly, studies on the factors that predict psychophysical ownership for very little work include only factors such as self-employment in the work (Mayhew, Gardner, Bramble, & Ashkanasy, 2007), the complexity of the work (variable synthesis of 5 core characteristics of the work) (Brown, Pierce, & Crossley, 2014), working environment structure (O'Driscoll, Pierce, & Coghlan, 2006), leader (Bernhard & O'Driscoll, 2011), and intelligent culture and intelligence of religion (Kaur, Sambasivan, & Kumar, 2013). It is necessary to have a deeper study of how the child factors of the work characteristics or cultural structure affect the psychological ownership of the work. Secondly, the results of the impact of psychological ownership for the execution of non-uniform work in the study. Therefore, for different sample groups, this impact should be reappreciated. Finally, the study of psychological ownership on work is concentrated in Western countries with little research in Asia, and there are no studies of psychological ownership in Vietnam. Therefore, a study in Vietnam would be to fill this gap. 2.6. Theories and research models 2.6.1. The hypothesis. 2.6.1.1. Characteristics of the impact on the psychological ownership of the work H 1a hypothesis: diversity of positive tasks for psychological ownership of work Hypothesis H1b: getting to know the work of positive impact on the psychological ownership of the work Hypothesis of H1c: The importance of the task of positive impact on psychological ownership of the work Hypothesis H 1d: Self-employment in positive impact to psychological ownership of work Hypothesis H1e: A positive impact on the psychological ownership of the work 2.6.2.2. A psychological ownership of work that impacts on tasks Hypothesis H2: The psychological ownership of impact work to perform work in the task. 2.6.1.3. To have a psychological ownership of the work and conduct of the Hypothesis H3: Psychological ownership of a positive impact on the voiced behavior. 9 2.6.2. Research model. From the above arguments and the above hypotheses, the proposed research model is as follows 10 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1. Research Sample The official questionnaire is submitted in both forms online and sent directly. The total number of people filling the form online is 70. For direct questionnaire, author to 10 companies in the north and broadcast 402 votes, collected on 385 votes. The response rate for the questionnaire directly is 95.77%. Thus, the author collects about 455 who responded to the questionnaire. However, out of 455 respondents the questionnaire has 26 people filling missing information in the questionnaire. In 26 people lack this information, there are 23 people who lack the answer to important questions about turning work traits and doing the job. Thus, the author decides to quit 23 observations. With 3 remaining information, missing information is a non-important information including missing name and email address. After consideration, the author decides to retain these three observations for later analyses. As such, total observations included in the analysis include 432 observations Table 3.1: Demographic information Norminal and ordinal variables No Variable name, number of observations missing Criteria Frequency Percent 1 Sex Number of observations missing: 0 Male 224 51,9 % Female 208 48.1 % Total 432 100% 2 Work position Number of observations missing: 0 Employees 296 68.5 % Base level Management 79 18.3 % Middle management 49 11,3 % Senior Management 8 1,9 % Total 432 100% 3 Work area Number of observations missing: 0 Northern 369 85.4 % Central 28 6.5 % Central 35 8.1 % Total 432 100% 4 Education level Number of observations missing: 0 Under high school 1 0,1 % high school 8 1,9 % Intermediate 2 0,5 % College 11 2,5 % University 314 72,7 % Graduate 96 22,2 % Total 432 100% Scale variable 11 No Variable name Min Max Range Mean Standard deviation 1 Age 22 56 34 31,556 6.88 2 Seniority 01 35 34 7.713 6.34 Note: The seniority variable is measured by years 3.2. Measure 3.2.1. Job based psychological ownership Psychological ownership of the original scale use of Van Dyne and Pierce (2004) proposed. Initially, this scale was designed for psychological ownership for the organization, then, when switching to a psychological ownership for work, Mayhew et al. (2007) edited to suit for work. In this study, the author used the scale of Mayhew et al. (2007) edit and translate to Vietnamese. The Conbach Alpha Index of the psychological-owning scale for the work is: 0.447. At the same time the author noticed the Question No. 2 , 5, 6, 7 if removed from the model, there is a Cronbach's Alpha index of psychological ownership variables for the work of 0.816. The author decides to type the last question out of the analysis later. So, Cronbach's Alpha index after variable type 2, 5, 6.7 is 0.816. 3.2.2. Skill variety The skill variety was adapted to a scale by the Sims Jr, Szilagyi, and Keller (1976) . The number of variables only in this scale is 5 variables. The internal linking index for the working scale is: 0.863. 3.2.3. Task identity Task identity is made by the Sims Jr et al. (1976) measured in 3 variables. The reliability of the scale is: 0.876. 3.2.4. Task significance The importance of the mission led by Hackman and Oldham (1975) is measured in 3 variables. The reliability of the scale of the task is: 0.826. 3.2.5. Autonomy Sims Jr et al. (1976) measures autonomy in 5 variables. The Crobach Alpha index for the autonomy scale at work is: 0,801. However, if it is JA3, the credibility of the JA scale increases significantly from 0.801 to 0.865. The author after reviewing the content of JA3 shows that in the context of Vietnam it is possible to regularly receive feedback from the direct management of uncertainty concerning the self- employment and decide to quit JA3 out of the scale of JA. 3.2.6. Job feedback Feedback in work is Sims Jr et al. (1976) measured in 3 variables only. The reliability of the work feedback scale is 0.816. 3.2.7. In-role performance Performing work in a mission was measured by Larry J. Williams and Anderson (1991) with 7 variables. The reliability of the performance scale in the task is: 0.578. With the above result, the scale of the work done in the task does not reach acceptable reliability of 0.7. Besides, if the 6.7 scales are abandoned, the reliability of the scale increases. The author decides to abandon the 6.7 measuring scale and analyzes the reliability of its performance scale in the task and conducts the reliability analysis after 12 removing the 6 and 7 scales, continuing the author of the number 5 scale out from the scale and the reliability of the scale is 0, 803. 3.2.8. Voice bahvior The behavior voiced by Van Dyne And LePine (1998) includes 6 variables. The reliability of the performance scale performs the improvement activities are: 0.636. If the type only turns IP5 out of the IP variable then the reliability of the scale increases. Therefore, the author decides to leave only IP5 out of the analysis later. After the reliability analysis of the measured behavior measurement scale, the voice of Cronbach's Alpha is 0.752 and the only variables that are retained include IP1, IP2, IP3, IP4, IP6. 3.2.9. Variables of personal information There are also questions about personal information in the questionnaire. Respondents questionnaire asked about the name, email address, gender, age, seniority of work by year, position, and education level. 3.3. Research procedure The author conducts research on the suggestion of De Vaus (2013) for investigating questionnaires in sociology studies. In which De Vaus (2013) suggests there are 4 phases of the questionnaire study including: Phase 1: Research overview; Phase 2: Data collection; Phase 3: Set up data for analysis; and Phase 4: Data analysis and report writing. The author conducts learn the scales used in the model, questionnaire design, conducting Pilot test and editing questionnaire; and formal investigation. Initially, when translating the questionnaire from English to Vietnamese, then the questionnaire, which includes English next to Vietnamese, was sent to the first 10 people to be rated as good English skills for comments on questionnaires. After the reception of the opinion of 10 people, the author proceeds to edit the first question sheet. The author then sends the first edited questionnaire that only includes Vietnamese for 30 people and continues to receive feedback on the questionnaire. At the end of this period, the author had a formal questionnaire. The author conducts online questionnaire on Google form and prints the questionnaire directly. The author then sends the questionnaire link to the workers in the business that the author knows and asks them to send to the people in the agency. In addition, the author also has seven businesses in the north to play the questionnaire directly. 13 C H A PTER 4 : R ESU LTS O F R ESEA R C H 4 .1 . S cal reliability 4 .1 .1 . A n alysis of th e fa cto rs of th e w o rk ch a ra cteristics va riable 4 .1 .1 .1 . E xplo rato ry fa cto r a n alysis of th e w o rk ch a ra cteristics va riable Th e lo ad facto r results sh o w v ariables in th e job ch aracteristics th at are q uite sep arate fro m th e v ariables of th e child v ariables of th e job ch aracteristics th at are lo ad ed o n 5 elem ents . T able 4 .1 . E xplo rato ry fa cto r a n alysis of th e w o rk ch a ra cteristics va riable C od e Th e v a riables F a cto r1 F a cto r2 F a cto r3 F a cto r4 F a cto r5 SV 1 0 ,780 SV 2 0 ,781 SV 3 0 ,811 SV 4 0 ,761 SV 5 0 ,841 TI1 0 ,834 TI2 0 ,812 TI3 0 ,889 TS1 0 ,865 TS2 0 ,855 TS3 0 ,852 JA 1 0 ,784 JA 2 0 ,858 JA 4 0 ,819 JA 5 0 ,792 JF1 0 ,885 JF2 0 ,815 JF3 0 ,800 N ote: Th e lo ad fa cto r la rg er th a n 0 , 3 is p resent in th e table . Th e isla nd ele m ents h a ve b ee n recalculted by th e fo rm ula eq u al to 8 m in u s th e isla nd valu e . 4 .1 .1 .2 . Th e co nfirm ato ry fa cto r a n alysis fo r job ch a ra cteristics va riables W h en th e facto r an aly sis co nfirm s th e auth o r p ro ceed s to co m p are th e co nfo rm ity of th e 5 m od els in tu rn M od el 1 : W o rk ch aracteristics divid ed into 5 ind ep end ent v ariables , M od el 2 : W o rk ch aracteristics divid ed into 4 v ariables , M od el 3 : W o rk ch aracteristics divid ed into 3 v ariables , M od el 4 : Job ch aracteristics are divid ed into 2 v ariables and m od el 5 : Job ch aracteristics are divid ed into 1 g ro ss v ariable . A cco rding to th e in stru ctio n s of H air et al. (2006) w h en co m p aring th e tw o m od els can lo ok at ind ex ∆ χ 2 and ∆ D F . W h en co m p aring 5 m od els sh o w ed , M od el 1 red u ced th e sm all am o u nt of v ariables b ut ag ain sig nificantly χ red u ced 2 . Sp ecifically , w h en co m p ared to th e 2 , ∆ χ 2 / ∆ D F m od el is 342 ,623/4; W h en co m p aring M od el 3 , ∆ χ 2 / ∆ D F is 791 ,551/7; W h en co m p aring M od el 4 , 14 ∆ χ 2 / ∆ D F is 1258 ,571/9; W h en co m p aring M od el 5 , ∆ χ 2 / ∆ D F is 1987 ,930/10 d em o n strates m od el 1 b etter th an th e M od el 2 , 3 , 4 .5 . Th u s , w ith th e V ietn am ese m od el g ro up , th e w o rk ch aracteristics are divid ed into 5 ind ep end ent v ariables . 4 .1 .2 .1 . E xplo rato ry fa cto r a n alysis fo r d ep end ent va riables R esults of th e explo rato ry facto r an aly sis fo r th e d ep end ent v ariables as follo w s T able 4 .7 . Th e load facto r of th e 2 nd d ep end ent fa cto r N ote: L o ad fa cto r la rg er th a n 0 , 3 is p resent in th e table . C od e F a cto r F a cto r 1 F a cto r 2 IR P1 0 ,810 IR P2 0 ,803 IR P3 0 ,730 IR P4 0 ,781 IP1 0 ,767 IP2 0 ,724 IP3 0 ,734 15 Ta bl e 4. 5. C o m pa ri so n o f m o de ls w ith 5 o pt io n s to di v id e th e w or k ch ar a ct er ist ic s v a ri a bl es Ba se m o de l χ χχχ2 /d f ∆ ∆∆∆χ χχχ 2 v à ∆ ∆∆∆d f G FI C FI R M SE A SR M R R es u lt A cc ep te d le v el ∆ ∆∆∆χ χχχ 2 ∆ ∆∆∆d f R es u lt A cc ep te d le v el R es u lt A cc ep te d le v el R es u lt A cc ep te d le v el R es u lt A cc ep te d le v el Ba se m o de l 1 : Jo b ch ar ac te ris tic s in to 5 in de pe n de n t v ar ia bl es 1, 44 9 ≤ ≤≤≤ 3 0, 95 5 ≥ ≥≥≥ 0, 9 0, 98 1 ≥ ≥≥≥0 ,9 0, 03 4 ≤ ≤≤≤ 0, 08 0, 03 61 ≤ ≤≤≤0 ,0 8 B as e M o de l 2 : Jo b ch ar ac te ris tic s di v id ed in to 4 in de pe n de n t v ar ia bl es 4, 11 2 ≤ 3 34 2, 62 3 4 0, 87 0 ≥ 0, 9 0, 87 7 ≥ 0, 9 0, 08 5 ≤ 0, 08 0, 07 09 ≤0 ,0 8 Ba se M o de l 3 : Jo b ch ar ac te ris tic s di v id ed in to 3 in de pe n de n t v ar ia bl es 7, 41 6 ≤ 3 79 1, 55 1 7 0, 78 8 ≥ 0, 9 0, 74 1 ≥ 0, 9 0, 12 2 ≤ 0, 08 0, 10 82 ≤0 ,0 8 B as e M o de l 4 : Jo b ch ar ac te ris tic s di v id ed in to 2 in de pe n de n t v ar ia bl es 10 , 79 1 ≤ 3 12 58 , 57 1 9 0, 71 7 ≥ 0, 9 0, 60 0 ≥ 0, 9 0, 15 1 ≤ 0, 08 0, 13 40 ≤0 ,0 8 B as e m o de l 5 : W o rk ch ar ac te ris tic s di v id ed in to 1 in de pe n de n t v ar ia bl e 16 , 11 3 ≤ 3 19 87 , 93 0 10 0, 58 7 ≥ 0, 9 0, 37 7 ≥ 0, 9 0, 18 7 ≤ 0, 08 0, 16 60 ≤0 ,0 8 No te : Ac ce pt a bl e le ve ls a re ba se d o n (H a ir et a l., 20 06 b), th e ∆ χ 2 ∆ D F is ca lc u la te d ba se d o n χ th e ac tu al 2 D F va lu e o f th e m o de l m in u s th a t v a lu e o f ba se m o de l 1 , • Th e di vi sio n o f in de pe n de n t v a ri a bl es o n di ffe re n t g ro u ps is ba se d o n th e di sc o ve ry fac to r a n a ly sis w ith th e ex tr a ct io n m et ho d ba se d o n fix ed n u m be r o f va ri a bl es re sp ec tiv el y 4, 3, 2, 16 4.1.2.2. The confirmatory factor analysis for dependent variables. The author in turn conducts an audit factor analysis for the dependent variable. Only the mid- variables are included in the CFA analysis with two models respectively. Base model 6, the variables that perform the work are separated into 2 factors and a base model 7, the variables that do the work are grouped into 1 factor. The result compares 2 models that show the 6 base model better than the base model 7. Table 4.8. Compare 2 base models of dependent variables Model χ2 Df χ2/df GFI CFI RMSEA SRMR Base model 6: Doing the job in the task and the behavior of the language is two independent