Study On The Relationship Of Employees’ Perceived Organizational Support, Psychological Ownership And Voice Behavior

In recent years, behaviors of employees’ expressing opinions (named “voice behavior” inthe academic field) are becoming the focus continually. Voice behavior means that employeesexpress their own opinions about their organization or other elements,in order to improve thecurrent organization situation (Premeaux&Bedeian，2003；Van Dyne,1998). Researches showsthat,Voice behavior can bring positive impacts on organizations. For example, It is the key “firststep” for organizational innovation(LePine et al,1998);It is conducive to team learning(Edmondson,1999);It helps to make the improvement and innovation for work process (Argyris&Schon,1978); It helps to realize the early warning of organization crisis (Schwartz&Wald,2003);Also, it helps to improve the work outcome of employees, such as job satisfaction,organizational commitment and so on (Tangirala&Ramanujam,2008).On the contrary, lack ofvoice behavior may result in serious problems.The value of voice behavior and its positive effects on organizations have been admittedwidely. However, in management practices, employees often “know but not to say”. They wouldkeep silent and not to express their opinions. That is a problem. It draws the attention ofmanagers, and causes such hot discussions in the academic field. The existing literatures havediscussed from different perspectives, such as the individual perspective, leadership perspective,organizational contextual perspective, and cultural values perspective and so on. However, it isnot enough to cover all possible influencing factors. As some researches have shown, beforevoicing, employees may have so many worries (offending authorities, destroying interpersonalharmony and so on). Therefore, voice behaviors require employees to take personal risks. Theauthor believes that when an employee decides to voice, he or she prefers to take personal risksand has expects that the organization should benefit from his\her voice. This means that theemployee have a strong “motive of benefit the organizations”(voicing based on instrumentalmotive is not included in this study). Based on the theory of social exchange, behaviors of“benefit the organization” can be regarded as a way to reward the organization. It also means thatthe employee may have received “positive organization treatment”. Therefore, discussing voice behavior from the perspective of“positive organization treatment” is possible and reasonable.The construct “Perceived organizational support” can be very good to describe “positiveorganization treatment”which is perceived by employees. Therefore, this study discusses how topromote voice behavior from the perspective of “perceived organizational support”.Accordingto literature reviews, only a few study have discussed the relationship between “perceivedorganizational support” and “voice behavior”. For example, some research discusses therelationship between “perceived organizational support” and “OCB-voice” by regarding voicebehavior as one dimension of OCB(not an independent construct)(Farh et al,2007);Some otherresearch believes that “perceived organizational support” is a mediator between “abusivesupervision” and “voice behavior”(Li Rui et al,2009).Although studies above confirm that“perceived organizational support” has positive effects on “voice behavior”, they did not explainthe mechanism between the two. Meanwhile, few studies have focused on this issue. Accordingto social exchange theory,“perceived organizational support” means employees’ perceptionstowards “organizational positive treating”. Therefore,“perceived organizational support”canpredict reward behaviors of employees (such as voice behavior or other extra-role behaviors).Specifically, if we can explain the mechanism between “perceived organizational support” andvoice behavior, it will not only contribute to understand voice motives deeply,but also contributeto understand how “perceived organizational support” take effects.To explain this problem better, based on literature reviews, this research will explain themechanism of how “perceived organizational support” have effects on “voice behavior” from theperspective of psychological ownership. This research will build the theoretical model of“perceived organizational support-psychological ownership-voice behavior”. In addition,leader-member exchange can be regarded as an important variable describing the interaction ofemployees and their superior. Lord et al (2001) confirmed that leaders can shape and influencethe work-situation of their subordinates. This result has also been approved by other scholars(Shao et al,2011). Especially in Chinese organizations, the relationship between leaders and theirsubordinates becomes the main factors affecting the work-situation of employees (Zheng Boxun,1999). The work-situation dominated by leaders may affect the employees’ attitudes andperceptions to the organization. Therefore, leader-member exchange may become thecontingency factor of the relationship between “perceived organizational support”and“psychological ownership”. But there is no any other discussion about this issue in the existingliterature. In addition, because of significant cultural differences, the function and mechanism of voicebehavior in China context and in Western context may be different. For example, sometraditional culture variables may make the relationship between “perceived organizationalsupport”and “voice behavior” different. As one of variables which can reflect the Chinesetraditional values well (Hui et al.,2004),“Traditionality” may play a moderating role in therelationship of “perceived organizational support-voice behavior”. So it is necessary to verifythe model from theoretical perspective and empirical perspective.In view of the issues above, this study discusses moderating effects of LMX andTraditionality in the model of “Pos-psychological ownership-voice behavior”.In-depth interview was carried out by10employees of7companies, and over779validquestionnaires from20cities in China were collected. This study verifies the theoretical modelby means of some methods such as Descriptive analysis, ANOVA analysis, factor analysis andregression analysis.The following are the conclusions of this study:1. Perceived organizational support has apositive impact on voice behavior and its dimensions. Specifically: POS has a positive impact onvoice behavior, promotive voice and prohibitive voice.2. Psychological Ownership and itsdimensions play a mediating role in the relationship of POS-voice behavior(and itsdimensions).That is: Psychological ownership plays a full mediator role between POS andvoice behavior; Psychological ownership plays a part mediator role between POS and promotivevoice; Psychological ownership plays a full mediator role between POS and prohibitive voice;Dimensions of psychological ownership, self-efficacy, sense of responsibility, sense of belonging,self-identity play a part mediator role in the relationship of POS-voice behavior(and itsdimensions).3. Leader-Member Exchange and its dimensions play a positive moderate rolebetween perceived organizational support and psychological ownership. That is: LMX plays apositive moderate role between POS and psychological ownership; each dimension ofleader-member exchange, including emotion, loyalty, contribution, and professionalrespect,plays a positive moderate role between perceived organizational support andpsychological ownership. In addition, the data shows that, professional respect has the strongestmoderating effect, and loyalty has the weakest moderating effect.4.Traditionality plays apositive moderate role in the relationship of “POS-voice behavior”and “POS-promotive voice”.But the moderating effect of Traditionality in the relationship of “POS-prohibitive voice” is notsignificant. Theoretical contribution of this study lies in the following points:1. This study enriches theresearch about Influencing factors of voice behavior. From a theoretical point of view, based onsocial exchange theory, discussing the prediction of POS on voice behavior is feasible, and hasgood explanatory power.2. This study promotes the progress of psychological ownership theory.First of all, this study Identify “psychological ownership” as a mediator between POS and voicebehavior. Secondly, this study verifies LMX’s positive moderating effect in the relationship of“POS-psychological ownership”. This provides the theoretical thinking for discussion aboutnew generating path of psychological ownership. In addition, in the measurement ofpsychological ownership, this study selects the multi-dimension scale of psychologicalownership, and confirms that, each dimension of psychological ownership (self-efficacy, sense ofresponsibility, sense of belonging, self-identity) mediates the relationship of POS and voicebehavior. The discussions above promote empirical progress of psychological ownership inconstructs, measurements and generating paths.3. This study identifies the cultural value as aninfluencing factor of voice behavior in Chinese context. This study tested that Traditionalitymoderates the relationship of “POS-voice behavior”, and “POS-promotive voice”. However, themoderating effect of Traditionality in the relationship of “POS-prohibitive voice” is notsignificant. It proves that promotive voice and prohibitive voice may be different. Therefore,dividing voice behavior into promotive voice and prohibitive voice is meaningful in theory.The conclusions of this study can bring the following implications for managementpractice:1. Factors which can promote voice behavior should be paid close attention inorganizations. For example:managers should pay attention to Perceived organizational supportof employees, and satisfy their social emotional needs.2. Managers should pay attention toownership feeling towards organizations of employees. Because Psychological Ownership meansestablishment of “sense of ownership”and it will make employees think and act like owners ofthe organization.3. Results of this study show that, promotive voice and prohibitive voice meandifferent degree of psychological stress which employees confront. Prohibitive voice requiresemployees to eliminate more psychological worries. Managers should provide more support forthe employees, help them to eliminate worries for voice, so that they can voice freely.