Back to All Research

School of Business and Management · Research Dossier

Plain-language research synthesis · Organizational behavior

Psychological Ownership

In simple terms, psychological ownership is the feeling that something is "mine" or "ours" even without legal ownership. This page explains how that feeling connects to commitment at work.

Abstract

This report summarizes peer-reviewed studies and clearly separates what is strongly supported from what is still uncertain in the UEH model.

2023 - 2024 UEH Research Research Assistant

Scope

How "mine/ours" feelings affect commitment

What is solid

Peer-reviewed findings with links

What is missing

No public UEH structural equation model (SEM) coefficients yet

Newcomer guide

Start Here

Psychological Ownership in Plain Language

Psychological ownership is a feeling, not a legal contract. People feel ownership when they can shape work, understand it deeply, and see it as part of who they are.

"Mine"

I feel personal responsibility and control.

"Ours"

Our team feels shared responsibility.

Why it matters

Higher ownership often aligns with stronger commitment.

Simple example

A team designs a process and then protects and improves it.

Quick tip: when reading this page, map each result to either individual ownership ("mine"), collective ownership ("ours"), or commitment outcomes.

Verification protocol

Research Integrity Check

What We Know for Sure vs. What Still Needs Data

Prior studies support the ownership-commitment link. However, UEH model outputs (sample, fit, and coefficients) are not publicly available, so UEH-specific effect sizes are still unconfirmed.

Validated Window

2001 to 2025 literature

Core Constructs

Individual + collective ownership

Supported Link

Ownership is linked with commitment attitudes

Unverified Item

Study-level effect size values

Evidence note: online figures below are from published studies, not UEH coefficients.

Literature evidence matrix

Evidence Check

Key Research Findings (Simple Read)

Strong evidence

Core ownership construct is established

Researchers have used this concept reliably for many years across organizational settings.

Pierce, Kostova, & Dirks (2001)

Strong evidence

Individual ownership links to commitment attitudes

When people feel "this is my work," they tend to report stronger commitment and engagement.

Van Dyne & Pierce (2004)

Moderate evidence

Affective commitment pathway is context-dependent

Ownership can raise emotional commitment, but the strength of the effect changes by context.

Bernhard & O'Driscoll (2003)

Emerging evidence

Collective ownership evidence base is still developing

The "ours" pathway is conceptually strong, but needs more direct testing in field data.

Pierce, Lee, & Li (2025, in press)

Applied context review

Industry Signal

Industry Context: Engagement, Retention, and Ownership

Recent workplace data shows a persistent engagement gap. This is where ownership-focused interventions are often most useful.

31%

U.S. engagement is flat

Gallup reports 31% of U.S. employees engaged in 2025 (unchanged from 2024).

Gallup, Jan 28, 2026

View source

21%

Global engagement slipped

Gallup shows worldwide engagement declined to 21% in 2024, only the second annual drop in 12 years.

Gallup SOGW 2025 report

View source

$438B

Economic drag of low engagement

Gallup estimates low engagement cost the global economy $438 billion in lost productivity in 2024.

Gallup SOGW 2025 report

View source

6,609

Ownership systems already scale

The U.S. had 6,609 ESOPs with 15.1M participants and over $2T in assets in the latest benchmark.

NCEO update, Jan 2, 2026

View source
U.S. engaged employees (2025) 31%
Global engaged employees (2024) 21%
U.S. actively disengaged employees (2025) 17%

Published figure audit

Online Figures

Matched Quantitative Figures from Published Studies

Published model linking psychological ownership, territoriality, and turnover intention
Model from Tong et al. (2017): psychological ownership, territoriality, and turnover intention.
Published interaction plot showing territoriality and work relationship closeness effects on turnover intention
Interaction result from Tong et al. (2017): stronger work closeness reduces turnover intention at high territoriality.
Published moderation figure showing the interaction of job crafting and psychological ownership on organizational commitment
Moderation plot from Wang et al. (2025): Job Crafting x Psychological Ownership on Organizational Commitment.

Sample

n = 341 (Tong et al., 2017)

Interaction slope

beta = -0.53, p < .001

Sample

n = 457 (Wang et al., 2025)

Moderation effect

beta = 0.17, p < .001

Decision guidance

3 Quick Actions

Practical Use (Beginner Version)

  • Identify the main gap first: weak personal ownership ("mine") or weak team ownership ("ours").
  • Begin with individual-level levers, then add team-level levers in highly interdependent teams.
  • Measure commitment and retention over time; avoid strong causal claims until UEH SEM details are disclosed.

Bibliography

Verification Sources

Core References

Validated on February 24, 2026.

  1. Pierce et al. (2001) - ownership theory foundation
  2. Van Dyne & Pierce (2004) - field evidence on ownership outcomes
  3. Avey et al. (2009) - measurement and work outcomes
  4. Pierce & Jussila (2010) - collective ownership construct
  5. Bernhard & O'Driscoll (2003) - affective commitment link
  6. Tong et al. (2017) - model and interaction figures used above
  7. Wang et al. (2025) - organizational commitment moderation figure used above
  8. Pierce et al. (2025) - collective ownership review
  9. Gallup (2026) - U.S. engagement and disengagement trend update
  10. Gallup State of the Global Workplace (2025 report) - global engagement and productivity cost
  11. NCEO (2026) - U.S. ESOP scale and participant benchmark

Scope note: figures in the Online Figures section are directly sourced from published papers.

Back to All Research