Organizational identity

Last updated

Organizational identity is a field of study in organizational theory, that seeks the answer to the question: "who are we as an organization?" [1] [2] The concept was first defined by Albert and Whetten (1985) and later updated and clarified by Whetten (2006),

Contents

According to Whetten (2006) the attributes of an organizational identity are central, enduring, and distinctive/distinguishing (CED).

An attribute of a company must satisfy all three of these requirements in order to be considered an organizational identity.

Organizational identity often attempts to apply sociological and psychological concepts and theories about identity to organizations. [3] As a research topic, organizational identity is related to but clearly separate from organizational culture and organizational image (Hatch and Schultz, 1997). [4] It assumes a larger perspective than work identity (the identity individuals assume when in a work-related context) and organizational behavior (the study of human behavior in organizational settings).

Public Perceptions of Organizational Identity

Organizational identity is formed by top leaders' establishment of the core values and beliefs that guide and drive the organization's behavior. An organization's top leaders must be able to answer the question "Who are we?" as an organization because it affects how they interpret issues, identify threats, craft strategy, communicate about the organization, and resolve conflicts. [5] Public perceptions are often swayed via media attention, while once a member of the organization, an employee may have a completely different perception. Organizations use four identity-building actions when identifying and discussing: storytelling, use of analogies, procuring social evaluations and establishing alliances. [6]

Managing Organizational Identity

According to the work of Albert and Whetten, the task of managing organizational identity is often neglected until an organization reaches a point where it is unavoidable. This may happen in situations when an organization has experienced significant growth, downsizing, or fostered multiple identities that have become irreconcilable.  When addressing this question, an organization must undertake the task of identifying which of their aspects truly define themselves and how they should react to those characterizations. This may result in various actions such as setting an agenda to change an identity that has become negative, building on an identity to promote growth or influence in a community, or deciding which aspects to preserve while making budget cuts. [1]

Identity Change and Instability

Organizational identity is sometimes viewed as a social construction under constant creation through interactions [7] between combinations of internal and external actors. [8] [3] This view sees organizational identity as unstable and changeable rather than enduring. [7] [8] Identity instability is theorized to be beneficial in allowing organizations to adapt to changing operating environments. [7] [8]

Gioia et al. theorize that the basic components of identity endure, but their meanings are reinterpreted over time. [7] Internal actors can influence organizational identity through reinterpretation of or disagreement with the stated or official identity. [8] Powerful members may try to stabilize or officialize organizational identity, resulting in a tension between members with different views of the organization. This tension may be expressed as identity instability. [8]

External factors can also cause change or contribute to identity instability. External perceptions of the organization’s identity may contribute to change or instability when those perceptions conflict with internal views of the organization’s identity. [7] Critical questions about the organization from external actors [8] or critical evaluations of the organization [6] [7] may also contribute to identity change.

There are multitudes of external factors that may influence an organizations identity. For example, a city with oppressive civil rights laws is likely to affect the diversity of an organizations identity within its jurisdiction accordingly and vice versa. Factors such as competition also play a major role in the identity an organization may assume. This is observable in the way that companies often point out distinct characteristic in their products when compared to others that may be almost entirely the same. For example, a burger chain may point out its antibiotic free meat compared to its competitors.

Albert and Whetten theorized that certain parts of an organization's life cycle are important for the formation or reformation of an organization's identity, such as the initial founding of the organization, removal of an important element of the organization, completion of the organization’s main goal, rapid growth or decline, mergers, or splits. [3]

Identity change can be used intentionally to guide organizational change. [7] For example, rather than seeking to answer the question: "who are we as an organization?" an organization may ask "is this who we want to be [as an organization]?" [7] Albert and Whetten identified three main paths organizational identity may take over time: [3]

Changes in an organizations identity often take years to manifest into observable results. This can be attributed to many factors such as deeply rooted cultures in an organization and strong leaders that are resistant to change. While an organization can quickly change its mission statements and marketing techniques in the short term, altering the actual cultural interworking of an organization to correlate with these new goals and images is usually much more of a long-term project. It requires members to buy in to the organizations new goals and desired direction, and for members who are unwilling to conform to either gradually retire or be pushed out of the organization.

Managing Multiple identities

Much like individuals, organizations can often have multiple identities. This exists when there are more than one conceptualization of what is central, distinctive, and enduring to an organization. Multiple organizational identities may or may not be consciously held by organizational leaders and can be holographic or ideographic. [1] [9] Holographic being an identity that is universally accepted throughout an organization, and ideographic being an identity that is assumed only in one department or sub-group of an organization. The existence of multiple identities in an organization can provide benefits such as increased flexibility when reacting to complex environmental factors and greater appeal to multiple internal stake holders, or become negative when identities conflict and cause inaction or inconsistencies. When addressing the task of managing multiple identities there are two strategic concepts organizational managers should address: [9]

When addressing the plurality of identities in an organization a manager may evaluate the significance and impact each identity has on an organization. If certain identities are not seen as essential, they may be left unattended with intention of essentially letting go of the identity in order to consolidate the ones that are more important in order to create a lower plurality of identities. However, if each identity is seen as essential and necessary for adapting to different environmental factors and stakeholders, managers may emphasize the need to attain a high plurality of identities. When undertaking this task, managers must evaluate the amount of resources and funding they have and what is practical to take on in terms of funding their organizational approaches to obtaining and fostering their identities. [9]

When addressing the synergy of identities in an organization, managers must determine how much interaction between differing identities is desirable and feasible. If it is essential for two identities to cooperate with each other for the well being of an organization, a manager may seek to create a high amount of synergy between the two. If two identities are not seen as essential or productive when interacting with each other, a manager may seek to departmentalize each identity within an organization to limit the amount of synergy between the two in order to reduce conflict. [9]

Communication Management of Organizational Identity

Organizational Identity is to not simply be an organization that provides commodities and services or to take stands on the salient issues of the day, but to do these things with a certain distinctiveness that allows the organization to create and legitimize itself, its particular "profile," and its advantageous position [1]. [10] Any number of companies can offer the same product to the consumer, but it is the objective of communication to illustrate why one specific company should have more sales, growth, and development than the others.

Ashforth and Mael's approach to Organizational Identity

According to Ashforth and Mael, identity is communicated by intrinsic factors such as the formation of identity, its relation to organizational culture and its projected image. [11] However, identity never remains stagnant. It is undergoing constant adjustments, and is negotiated through the narrative told by the company. This phenomenon is known as Narrative Design. Just as narratives build organizational identity, identity itself is the basis of narratives and goes deep into its conception. This is the new way to the self-opinion. These stories communicate the distinctive values and attributes of the organization in a more or less subtle way. It is only when we considered the notion of identity as a narrative that we can observe references to the history and traditions of the organization. This narrative can also transform the internal organizational culture. Depending on the narrative chosen by the organization, the management style of the company will inspire different beliefs and social values. [12] By telling their stories themselves, organizations have the power to control narrative storytelling. It is they who have the power to minimize their present and past mistakes, which have had an impact on the public's perception of the companies image. [13]

Related Research Articles

Historically there have been differences among investigators regarding the definition of organizational culture. Edgar H. Schein, a leading researcher in this field, defined "organizational culture" as comprising a number of features, including a shared "pattern of basic assumptions" which group members have acquired over time as they learn to successfully cope with internal and external organizationally relevant problems. Elliott Jaques first introduced the concept of culture in the organizational context in his 1951 book The Changing Culture of a Factory. The book was a published report of "a case study of developments in the social life of one industrial community between April, 1948 and November 1950". The "case" involved a publicly-held British company engaged principally in the manufacture, sale, and servicing of metal bearings. The study concerned itself with the description, analysis, and development of corporate group behaviours.

In business management, micromanagement is a management style whereby a manager closely observes and/or controls and/or reminds the work of his or her subordinates or employees.

Corporate branding refers to the practice of promoting the brand name of a corporate entity, as opposed to specific products or services. The activities and thinking that go into corporate branding are different from product and service branding because the scope of a corporate brand is typically much broader. Although corporate branding is a distinct activity from product or service branding, these different forms of branding can, and often do, take place side-by-side within a given corporation. The ways in which corporate brands and other brands interact is known as the corporate brand architecture.

Self-perception theory Account of attitude formation developed by psychologist Daryl Bem

Self-perception theory (SPT) is an account of attitude formation developed by psychologist Daryl Bem. It asserts that people develop their attitudes by observing their own behavior and concluding what attitudes must have caused it. The theory is counterintuitive in nature, as the conventional wisdom is that attitudes determine behaviors. Furthermore, the theory suggests that people induce attitudes without accessing internal cognition and mood states. The person interprets their own overt behaviors rationally in the same way they attempt to explain others' behaviors.

Perception management is a term originated by the US military. The US Department of Defense (DOD) gives this definition:

Actions to convey and/or deny selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning as well as to intelligence systems and leaders at all levels to influence official estimates, ultimately resulting in foreign behaviors and official actions favorable to the originator's objectives. In various ways, perception management combines truth projection, operations security, cover and deception, and psychological operations.

Impression management is a conscious or subconscious process in which people attempt to influence the perceptions of other people about a person, object or event by regulating and controlling information in social interaction. It was first conceptualized by Erving Goffman in 1959 in The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, and then was expanded upon in 1967.

Identity management (IdM), also known as identity and access management, is a framework of policies and technologies to ensure that the right users have the appropriate access to technology resources. IdM systems fall under the overarching umbrellas of IT security and data management. Identity and access management systems not only identify, authenticate, and control access for individuals who will be utilizing IT resources but also the hardware and applications employees need to access.

Escalation of commitment is a human behavior pattern in which an individual or group facing increasingly negative outcomes from a decision, action, or investment nevertheless continues the behavior instead of altering course. The actor maintains behaviors that are irrational, but align with previous decisions and actions.

Corporate communication is a set of activities involved in managing and orchestrating all internal and external communications aimed at creating favourable point of view among stakeholders on which the company depends. It is the messages issued by a corporate organization, body, or institute to its audiences, such as employees, media, channel partners and the general public. Organizations aim to communicate the same message to all its stakeholders, to transmit coherence, credibility and ethics.

Attribution is a term used in psychology which deals with how individuals perceive the causes of everyday experience, as being either external or internal. Models to explain this process are called attribution theory. Psychological research into attribution began with the work of Fritz Heider in the early 20th century, and the theory was further advanced by Harold Kelley and Bernard Weiner. Heider first introduced the concept of perceived 'locus of causality' to define the perception of one's environment. For instance, an experience may be perceived as being caused by factors outside the person's control (external) or it may be perceived as the person's own doing (internal). These initial perceptions are called attributions. Psychologists use these attributions to better understand an individual's motivation and competence. The theory is of particular interest to employers who use it to increase worker motivation, goal orientation, and productivity.

Sensemaking or sense-making is the process by which people give meaning to their collective experiences. It has been defined as "the ongoing retrospective development of plausible images that rationalize what people are doing". The concept was introduced to organizational studies by Karl E. Weick in the 1970s and has affected both theory and practice. Weick intended to encourage a shift away from the traditional focus of organization theorists on decision-making and towards the processes that constitute the meaning of the decisions that are enacted in behavior.

Onboarding Management jargon for introducing new employees to employers policies and practices

Onboarding, also known as organizational socialization, is management jargon first created in the 1970s that refers to the mechanism through which new employees acquire the necessary knowledge, skills, and behaviors in order to become effective organizational members and insiders. In the United States, for example, up to 25% of workers are organizational newcomers engaged in an onboarding process.

Greenberg (1987) introduced the concept of organizational justice with regard to how an employee judges the behavior of the organization and the employee's resulting attitude and behaviour. For example, if a firm makes redundant half of the workers, an employee may feel a sense of injustice with a resulting change in attitude and a drop in productivity.

Harold Kelley's covariation model is an attribution theory in which people make causal inferences to explain why other people and ourselves behave in a certain way. It is concerned with both social perception and self-perception.

Organizational identification (OI) is a term used in management studies and organizational psychology. The term refers to the propensity of a member of an organization to identify with that organization. OI has been distinguished from "affective organizational commitment". Measures of an individual's OI have been developed, based on questionnaires.

Professional Identification is a type of social identification and is the sense of oneness individuals have with a profession and the degree to which individuals define themselves as profession members. Professional identity consists of the individual's alignment of roles, responsibilities, values, and ethical standards to be consistent with practices accepted by their specific profession.

Interpersonal communication Exchange of information between two or more people who are interdependent

Interpersonal communication is an exchange of information between two or more people. It is also an area of research that seeks to understand how humans use verbal and nonverbal cues to accomplish a number of personal and relational goals.

Work motivation "is a set of energetic forces that originate both within as well as beyond an individual's being, to initiate work-related behavior, and to determine its form, direction, intensity, and duration." Understanding what motivates an organization's employees is central to the study of I–O psychology. Motivation is a person's internal disposition to be concerned with and approach positive incentives and avoid negative incentives. To further this, an incentive is the anticipated reward or aversive event available in the environment. While motivation can often be used as a tool to help predict behavior, it varies greatly among individuals and must often be combined with ability and environmental factors to actually influence behavior and performance. Results from a 2012 study, which examined age-related differences in work motivation, suggest a "shift in people's motives" rather than a general decline in motivation with age. That is, it seemed that older employees were less motivated by extrinsically related features of a job, but more by intrinsically rewarding job features. Work motivation is strongly influenced by certain cultural characteristics. Between countries with comparable levels of economic development, collectivist countries tend to have higher levels of work motivation than do countries that tend toward individualism. Similarly measured, higher levels of work motivation can be found in countries that exhibit a long versus a short-term orientation. Also, while national income is not itself a strong predictor of work motivation, indicators that describe a nation’s economic strength and stability, such as life expectancy, are. Work motivation decreases as a nation’s long term economic strength increases. Currently work motivation research has explored motivation that may not be consciously driven. This method goal setting is referred to as goal priming. Effects of primed subconscious goals in addition to goals that are consciously set related to job performance have been studied by Stajkovic, Latham, Sergent, and Peterson, who conducted research on a CEO of a for-profit business organization using goal priming to motivate job performance. Goal priming refers to the achievement of a goal by external cues given. These cues can affect information processing and behaviour the pursuit of this goal. In this study, the goal was primed by the CEO using achievement related words strategy placed in emails to employees. This seemingly small gesture alone not only cost the CEO very little money, but it increased objectively measured performance efficiency by 35% and effectiveness by 15% over the course of a 5 day work week. There has been controversy about the true efficacy of this work as to date, only four goal priming experiments have been conducted. However, the results of these studies found support for the hypothesis that primed goals do enhance performance in a for-profit business organization setting.

Job characteristics theory is a theory of work design. It provides “a set of implementing principles for enriching jobs in organizational settings”. The original version of job characteristics theory proposed a model of five “core” job characteristics that affect five work-related outcomes through three psychological states.

David Allred Whetten is an American organizational theorist and Professor of Organizational Leadership and Strategy at the Marriott School of Management at the Brigham Young University. He is known for his work on organizational identity research methodology, and organizational effectiveness.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Albert, S.; Whetten, D. A. (1985). "Organizational identity". Research in Organizational Behavior. 7: 263–295.
  2. ↑ Whetten, D. A. (2006). "Albert and Whetten Revisited: Strengthening the Concept of Organizational Identity". Journal of Management Inquiry. 15 (3): 219–234. doi:10.1177/1056492606291200.
  3. 1 2 3 4 Albert, Stuart; Whetten, David A. (January 1985). "Organizational Identity". Research in Organizational Behavior. 7: 263–293.
  4. ↑ M. J. Hatch and M. Schultz. "Relations between organizational culture, identity and image." European Journal of Marketing, 31(5/6):356–365, 1997
  5. ↑ Voss, Zannie Giraud; Cable, Daniel M.; Voss, Glenn B. (2006-01-01). "Organizational Identity and Firm Performance: What Happens When Leaders Disagree about "Who We Are?"". Organization Science. 17 (6): 741–755. doi:10.1287/orsc.1060.0218. JSTOR   25146074.
  6. 1 2 Snihur, Yuliya (2016-03-14). "Developing optimal distinctiveness: organizational identity processes in new ventures engaged in business model innovation". Entrepreneurship & Regional Development. 28 (3–4): 259–285. doi:10.1080/08985626.2016.1155745. ISSN   0898-5626.
  7. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Gioia, Dennis A.; Schultz, Majken; Corley, Kevin G. (2000-01-01). "Organizational Identity, Image, and Adaptive Instability". Academy of Management Review. 25 (1): 63–81. doi:10.5465/AMR.2000.2791603. ISSN   0363-7425.
  8. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Kozica, Arjan M. F.; Gebhardt, Christian; Müller-Seitz, Gordon; Kaiser, Stephan (2015-04-01). "Organizational Identity and Paradox: An Analysis of the "Stable State of Instability" of Wikipedia's Identity". Journal of Management Inquiry. 24 (2): 186–203. doi:10.1177/1056492614553275. ISSN   1056-4926.
  9. 1 2 3 4 Pratt, Michael G.; Foreman, Peter O. (2000). "Classifying Managerial Responses to Multiple Organizational Identities". The Academy of Management Review. 25 (1): 18–42. doi:10.5465/amr.2000.2791601. JSTOR   259261.
  10. ↑ Cheney, George; Christensen, Lars. Organizational Identity: Linkages Between Internal and External Communication. pp. 231–268.
  11. ↑ Ashforth, B.E.; Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization (14(1) ed.). Academy of management review. pp. 20–39.
  12. ↑ Ashforth, B.E.; Mael, F. (1996). Organizational Identity and Strategy as a Context for the Individual (13 ed.). Advances in strategic management. pp. 19–64.
  13. ↑ Ashforth, B.E.; Mael, F. (1996). Organizational Identity and Strategy as a Context for the Individual (13 ed.). Advances in strategic management. pp. 19–64.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.