Affective Commitment and Job Satisfaction among Non-family Employees: Investigating the Roles of Justice Perceptions and Psychological Ownership

Due to numerous characteristics often attributed to family firms, they constitute a unique context for non-family employees’ justice perceptions. These are linked to non-family employees’ pro-organizational attitudes and behaviors, which are essential for family firms’ success. Even though scholarly interest in non-family employees’ justice perceptions has increased, more research is still needed, also because the mechanism connecting justice perceptions and favorable outcomes is not fully understood yet. We address this gap by explicitly investigating non-family employees’ justice perceptions and by introducing psychological ownership as a mediator in the relationships between justice perceptions (distributive and procedural) and common work attitudes (affective commitment and job satisfaction). Our analysis of a sample of 310 non-family employees from Germany and German-speaking Switzerland reveals that psychological ownership mediates the relationships between distributive justice and affective commitment as well as job satisfaction. This represents valuable contributions to family business research, organizational justice and psychological ownership literature, and to practice.

Psychological Ownership of Employees as a Mediator in the Justice - Affective Commitment Relationship

Numerous scholars have accumulated evidence on the positive effects that employees’ organizational justice perceptions exert on work-related outcomes such as affective commitment. However, research still lacks understanding of the underlying mechanisms connecting the two constructs. In this article we aim to narrow this gap by examining the concept of psychological ownership as a possible mediator between organizational justice perceptions and affective commitment. Investigating a sample of 619 employees, we find distributive justice to be positively related to psychological ownership, and observe psychological ownership as a full mediator of the distributive justice and affective commitment relationship. These insights offer a new explanation in understanding the justice-commitment connection, contributing to both organizational justice and psychological ownership literature and opening up ways for promising future research.

The Committed and the Happy: Exploring the Effects of Justice and Ownership Perceptions among Non-family Employees

A main challenge that family businesses face is fostering non-family employees' val-ue-creating attitudes, such as affective commitment and job satisfaction. While justice perceptions have been identified as being critical in the creation of these outcomes, the process how they actually evolve is less clear, especially in family firms. We address this gap by introducing psychological ownership as a mediator in the relationships between justice perceptions (distributive and procedural) and common work attitudes (affective commitment and job satisfaction). Our analysis of a sample of 310 non-family employees from family firms in German-speaking Switzerland and Germany reveals that psychological ownership mediates the relationships between distributive justice and affective commitment as well as job satisfaction. This leads to valuable contributions to family business research, organizational justice and psychological ownership literatures, and to practice.

Psychological Ownership of Employees as a Mediator in the Justice - Affective Commitment Relationship

Numerous scholars have accumulated evidence on the positive effects that employees' organizational justice perceptions exert on work-related outcomes such as affective commitment. However, research still lacks understanding of the underlying mechanisms connecting the two constructs. In this article we aim to narrow this gap by examining the concept of psychological ownership as a possible mediator between organizational justice perceptions and affective commitment. Investigating a sample of 619 employees, we find distributive justice to be positively related to psychological ownership, and observe psychological ownership as a full mediator of the distributive justice and affective commitment relationship. These insights offer a new explanation in understanding the justice-commitment connection, contributing to both organizational justice and psychological ownership literature and opening up ways for promising future research

Illegitimate Tasks: Accumulating Evidence for a New Stressor Concept

INTRODUCTION: Task stressors typically refer to characteristics such as not having enough time or resources, ambiguous demands, or the like. We suggest the perceived lack of legitimacy as an additional feature of tasks as a source of stress. Tasks are “illegitimate” to the extent that it is perceived as improper to expect employees to execute them – not because of difficulties in executing them, but because of their content for a given person, time, and situation; they are illegitimate because a) they are not conforming to a specific occupational role, as in “non-nursing activities” (called unreasonable) or b) there is no legitimate need for them to exist (called unnecessary; Semmer et al., 2007). These features make illegitimate tasks a unique task-related stressor. The concept of illegitimate tasks grew from the “Stress-as-Offense-to-Self” theory (SOS; Semmer et al, 2007); it is conceptually related to role stress (Kahn et al., 1964; Beehr & Glazer, 2005) and the organizational justice tradition (Cropanzano et al., 2001; Greenberg, 2010). SOS argues that a threat to one’s self-image is at the core of many stressful experiences. Violating role expectations, illegitimate tasks can be regarded as a special case of role conflict. As roles shape identities, this violation is postulated to constitute a threat to one’s professional identity. Being assigned a task considered illegitimate is likely to be considered unfair. Lack of fairness, in turn, contains a message about one’s social standing, and thus, the self. However, the aspects discussed have not received much attention in the role stress or the justice/fairness tradition. OBJECTIVE: Illegitimate tasks are a rather recent concept that has to be established as a construct in its own right by showing that it is associated with well-being/strain while controlling for other stressors, most notably role conflict and lack of justice. The aim of the presentation is to present the evidence accumulated so far. METHODS AND RESULTS: We present several studies employing different designs, using different control variables, and testing associations with different criteria. Study 1 demonstrates associations of illegitimate tasks with self-esteem, feelings of resentment against one’s organization, and burnout, controlling for distributive justice, role conflict, and social stressors (i.e. tensions). Study 2 yielded comparable results, using the same outcome variables but controlling for distributive as well as procedural / interactional justice. Study 3 demonstrated associations between illegitimate tasks and feelings of stress, sleeping problems, and emotional exhaustion, controlling for demands, control, and social support among medical doctors. Study 4 showed that feeling appreciated by one’s superior acted as a mediator between illegitimate tasks and job satisfaction and resentments towards the military in Swiss military officers. Study 5 demonstrated an association of illegitimate tasks with counterproductive work behavior (Semmer et al. 2010). Studies 1 to 5 were cross-sectional. In Study 6, illegitimate demands predicted irritability and resentments towards one’s organization longitudinally. Study 7 also was longitudinal, focusing on intra-individual variation in multilevel modeling; occasion-specific illegitimate tasks predicted cortisol among those who judged their health as comparatively poor. Studies 1-3 and 6 used SEM, and measurement models that used unreasonable and unnecessary tasks as indicators (isolated parceling) yielded a good fit. IMPLICATIONS & CONCLUSIONS: These studies demonstrate that illegitimate tasks are a stressor in its own right that is worth studying. It illuminates the social meaning of job design, emphasizing the implications of tasks for the (professional) self, and thus combining aspects that are traditionally treated as separate, that is, social aspects and task characteristics. Practical implications are that supervisors and managers should be alerted to the social messages that may be contained in task assignments (cf. Semmer & Beehr, in press).

Long-term Success of Family Firms: Investigating Specific Aspects of Firm-level Entrepreneurship and Individual-level Antecedents

Long-term success of family firms is of utmost social and economic importance. Three of its determinants are in the center of this Dissertation: firmlevel entrepreneurial orientation (EO), managers' entrepreneurial behavior, and value-creating attitudes of non-family employees. Each determinant and respective research gaps are addressed by one paper of this cumulative dissertation. Referring to firm-level EO, scholars claim that EO is a main antecedent to firms' both short- and long-term success. However, family firms seem to be successful across generations despite rather low levels of EO. The first paper addresses this paradox by investigating EO patterns of long-lived family firms in three Swiss case studies. The main finding is that the key to success is not to be as entrepreneurially as possible all the time, but to continuously adapt the EO profile depending on internal and external factors. Moreover, the paper suggest new subcategories to different EO dimensions. With regard to entrepreneurial behavior of managers, there is a lack of knowledge how individual-level and organizational level factors affect its evolvement. The second paper addresses this gap by investigating a sample of 403 middle-level managers from both family and non-family firms. It introduces psychological ownership of managers as individual-level antecedent and investigates the interaction with organizational factors. As a central insight, management support is found to strengthen the psychological ownership-entrepreneurial behavior relationship. The third paper is based on the fact that employees' justice perceptions are established antecedents of value-creating employee attitudes such as affective commitment and job satisfaction. Even though family firms are susceptible to nonfamily employees´ perceptions of injustice, corresponding research is scarce. Moreover, the mechanism connecting justice perceptions and positive outcomes is still unclear. Addressing these gaps, the analysis of a sample of 310 non-family employees reveals that psychological ownership is a mediator in the relationships between distributive justice perceptions and both affective commitment and job satisfaction. Altogether, the three papers offer valuable contributions to family business literature with respect to EO, entrepreneurial behavior, and value-creating employee attitudes. Thus, they increase current understanding about important determinants of family firms' long-term success, while opening up numerous ways of future research.