Identification in Organizations: An Examination of Four Fundamental Questions

Abstract

The literature on identification in organizations is surprisingly diverse and large. This article reviews the literature in terms of four fundamental questions. First, under “What is identification?,” it outlines a continuum from narrow to broad formulations and differentiates situated identification from deep identification and organizational identification from organizational commitment. Second, in answer to “Why does identification matter?,” it discusses individual and organizational outcomes as well as several links to mainstream organizational behavior topics. Third, regarding “How does identification occur?,” it describes a process model that involves cycles of sensebreaking and sensegiving, enacting identity and sensemaking, and constructing identity narratives. Finally, under “One or many?,” it discusses team, workgroup, and subunit; relational; occupational and career identifications; and how multiple identifications may conflict, converge, and combine.

Ethical leadership and follower voice and performance: The role of follower identifications and entity morality beliefs

“…Relational identification seems to be particularly important because, especially for supervisory leaders, regular interaction with the leader is likely, and the relationship to the leader is psychologically closer than is the relationship to the organization. Therefore relational identification should play a particularly important mediating role in the relationship between ethical leadership and employee outcomes (Ashforth, Harrison, & Corley, 2008;Carmeli, Atwater, & Levi, 2011;Sluss & Ashforth, 2008;Zhang, Chen, Chen, Liu, & Johnson, 2012).…”

Organizational Identification and Commitment: The Impact of POS and Prestige

“…• AC mediates the relaIonship between OI and extra--role performance but is not related to in--role performance → consistent with (a) the idea that AC is a more proximal determinant of aotudes at work than OI is (Ashforth, Harrison, & Corley, 2008), (b) the idea that in--role performance is less affected by the employee--employer relaIonship than extra--role performance (van Knippenberg, 2000), (c) previous research indicaIng that AC is not significantly related to in--role performance (Vandewalle, van Dyne, & Kostova, 1995).…”

Introducing organisational heritage: Linking corporate heritage, organisational identity and organisational memory

“…It should be noted that the main thrust of the organisational identity focuses on individual identification -and its effects -vis-à-vis their group membership or role within the organisation (Ashforth et al 2008). For some organisational behaviourists/management scholars, the enduring criterion of Albert and Whetten (1985) has been questioned = and subject to considerable debate-within the organisational identity field (Gioia, et al 2000;Whetten and Godfrey, 1998).…”

“…Research in this mature area of business identity studies has primarily an internal focus and mainly comprehends identity as a socially-constructed/social-psychological phenomenon at the level of individuals and/or groups or the dynamics between them in a work context (see Corley at al. 2006;Ashforth et al 2008).…”