Wrzus, C. (2020). Processes of personality development: An update of the TESSERA framework. In J. Rauthmann (Ed.), The handbook of personality dynamics and processes (pp. 101-123). Elsevier.

No abstract

Little is known about the impact of family ownership and management on corporate social performance. Some scholars have suggested that family firms are not likely to act in a socially responsible manner, while others have indicated that socially responsible behavior on the part of the family firm protects the family's assets. This preliminary study compares the degree to which family and nonfamily firms are socially responsible using data from 1991 to 2000 from the S&P 500. Two hundred sixty-one firms (202 nonfamily and 59 family) appeared in the S&P 500 for the 10-year period. Findings show that family firms are more socially responsible than nonfamily firms along several dimensions. This is likely due to family concern about image and reputation and a desire to protect family assets.

The objective of this article is to formulate the concept of organizational identity in such a way that it can be distinguished analytically from related concepts, such as organizational culture and image, and can be used operationally to identify bona fide organizational identity claims referents and associated identity-referencing discourse. The proposal amounts to a stronger version of Albert and Whetten (1985), in that the implicit links between the elements of their composite, tripartite, formulation are made explicit and their treatment of organizational identity as a defined construct is emphasized. Although the proposal eschews conceptions of organizational identity formulated from the perspective of individuals, it treats organizational identity as an analogue of individual identity, drawing attention to the parallel functions identity plays for both individual and collective social actors, as well as the parallel distinguishing structural features of individual and organizational identity referents. The principle recommendation is to conduct the study of member-agents' answers to the question, “Who are we as an organization?” within the parameters of a defined identity-claim conceptual domain (what) and associated phenomenological markers of identity-referencing discourse (how, when, why).

Many scholars across various academic disciplines are investigating the following questions: What do individuals know or believe about an organization? How does a focal organization (and/or other interested entity) develop, use, and/or change this information? and How do individuals respond to what they know or believe about an organization? Cross-disciplinary research that centers on these questions is desirable and could be enhanced if researchers identify and develop consistent terminology for framing these questions. The authors work toward that end by identifying four central “viewpoints” of an organization and proposing labels to represent each of these viewpoints: identity, intended image, construed image, and reputation.