Damaged identities: Examining identity regulation and identity work of Gulf project managers

Abstract

Research on the human side of project management is largely overshadowed by its technically focused counter-part. This results in a dangerous neglect of the impacts of a demanding project life and project managers' efforts to construct and sustain a valuable and valued identity at work. In this study of one Middle Eastern IT company, drawing on project management guides, company documents and interview responses from project managers, we examine the regulation of project manager identity using the lens of 'identity work'. We show that intense identity work can be triggered from project life within a challenging environment, and identify various coping strategies employed by the managers interviewed. In some cases, however, we found that these pressures may lead to the project manager experiencing a temporarily "damaged" self-identity. We discuss the practical implications arising from our analysis for project management associations and organizations alike, and opportunities for future research.

Identity work in organizations and occupations: Definitions, theories, and pathways forward

“…First, scholars suggest that identity work is usefully viewed as an ongoing process (Davies & Thomas, ; Lucas, ), involving “continuing experiments” (Brown & Toyoki, , p. 876) and “constant reconstruction” (Fachin & Davel, , p. 371). Second, however, scholars have also suggested that certain triggers such as role transitions (e.g., Ibarra, ), tensions between different identities (e.g., Koerner, ), and challenging work environments (e.g., Cowen & Hodgson, ; Petriglieri, ) can initiate more intense identity work. Third, identity work occurs at the intersection of the person and the external environment, meaning that although individuals may have some agency in the identities they choose (Frandsen, ), these choices are also interpersonally negotiated (Lucas, ) and constrained by social context (Brown & Toyoki, ; Costas & Kärreman, ; Marlow & McAdam, ).…”

“…For instance, Frandsen (2015) demonstrated that call center employees Ashforth et al (2007) In their study on employees and managers engaged in dirty work, these authors found that behavioral tactics such as blaming, condemning condemners and distancing from clients/roles that highlighted the dirty aspects of their jobs were used by employees to manage their occupational identities Scott et al (2009) In their actor-focused model of justice, these authors theorize that managers may enact behaviors that adhere to or violate the norms of organizational justice to create and maintain a desired identity in the workplace (e.g., Managers may enact behaviors that align with norms of justice to promote the identity of being a good and fair boss. Alternately, they can also enact behaviors that violate norms of justice to promote an identity of being a tough boss) Koerner (2014) In her work exploring workplace courage as a form of identity work, the author suggests that courageous acts such as voicing one's opinion, reporting misconduct, disobedience, circumvention, and resigning in protest can contribute to the crafting of an individual's identity Cowen and Hodgson (2015) They document the behaviors that project managers enact to strengthen their identities as project managers such as avoiding overload of work and deflecting non-project manager responsibilities to others, as well as "window dressing" their performance in front of auditors. Berger et al (2017) They found that Muslim women in a firm in Netherlands worked hard and achieved all their targets to signal that they were hard working professionals and to justify them taking a day off on the festivals of Islam, which were not national holidays in their organization.…”

“…Other studies suggest that in contrast to increased identification, identity work may lead to a weakened (Gendron & Spira, 2010), ambivalent (Kärreman & Alvesson, 2004), split (Gutierrez et al, 2010), schizo, or neutral (Humphreys & Brown, 2002b) identification with the collective. Further still, sometimes identity work ends in damaged identities (Cowen & Hodgson, 2015), or even a sense of self-alienation (Costas & Fleming, 2009). Thus, identity work does not always culminate in positive identity states, and in fact, recent work is beginning to question whether identity work is even always aimed at creating coherent, validated identities.…”

The logic of projects and the ideal of community development

“…Projectification, a term originally coined by Midler (1995), is a phenomenon that has been studied not only in terms of ever more activities being labelled as projects and companies doing more projects, but also as a form of colonising logic and power that comes with so prevailing project / PM discourse which is simultaneously being produced by, and itself perpetuates, the values and discourses of the dominant socio-economic system of capitalism and neo-liberal doctrines (Cicmil et al, 2016). It has also been suggested that realities of projectified work life are often at odds and in conflict with the rights of individuals to have a voice, to make informed choices and to live with dignity (Lindgren and Packendorff, 2007, Cicmil et al, 2009, Lindgren et al, 2014, Cowen and Hodgson, 2015. Business 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 Developmentalism is criticized as an approach to community development that places an overly strong emphasis on the Euroentric beliefs and values as they relate to society, the economy and the political rights of people (Shahidullah et al, 2013).…”

“…Projectification, a term originally coined by Midler (1995), is a phenomenon that has been studied not only in terms of ever more activities being labelled as projects and companies doing more projects, but also as a form of colonizing logic and power that comes with a prevailing project/PM discourse which is simultaneously being produced by, and itself perpetuates, the values and discourses of the dominant socio-economic system of capitalism and neo-liberal doctrines (Cicmil et al, 2016). It has also been suggested that realities of projectified work life are often at odds and in conflict with the rights of individuals to have a voice, to make informed choices and to live with dignity (Lindgren and Packendorff, 2007;Cicmil et al, 2009;Lindgren et al, 2014;Cowen and Hodgson, 2015).…”