Identity Realization and Organizational Forms: Differentiation and Consolidation of Identities Among Arizona's Charter Schools

Abstract

Organizations in an emerging organizational population face an identity problem. Collectively, organizations cannot yet rely on a coherent and stable definition of what membership in that new industry means. Individually, each organization must also establish its own distinctive identity to differentiate itself from competitors and secure resources. To explore the relationship between differentiation and the consolidation of recognizable identity element clusters, we examine the emergence of organizational form in the early years of the Arizona charter school industry. This industry is particularly interesting for scholars studying institutional processes because the legislative mandate of the new industry was for schools to experiment and provide education in an unconventional manner. Thus, the legislative definition of the organizational form or template for the charter school identity was intentionally underspecified. Using inductive analysis and regression models, we examine the process of identity realization occurring among charter schools and assess how the local institutional context of charter schools affected the realization process. The analyses demonstrate that new industries may come to be characterized by multiple element clusters; a single label for an organizational form may be linked to different combinations of identity elements. Our results also demonstrate that identity realization at the organizational level occurs through mimicry and differentiation processes and is facilitated by the local institutional context. In particular, the diversity of organizational resources available to industry entrepreneurs enables identity differentiation from one's peers.

Same same, but different? Exploring the organizational identities of Swedish voluntary sports: Possible implications of sports clubs’ self-identification for their role as implementers of policy objectives

“…As shown by King et al (2011), organizational identity is highly path-dependent in the sense that 'much of what an organization becomes is imprinted at founding ' (p. 556) in an interplay between founders' visions and the institutional conditions available at the time of founding. However, given the changing institutional conditions, organizational identities are continuously adapted.…”

Identity Claims and Diffusion of Sustainability Report: Evidence from Korean Listed Companies, 2003–2010

“…Researchers identify two main components of organizational identity (Gioia et al 2010): One originating from the founder or the top management's value and vision which reflects unique attributes, i.e., core, distinctive, and enduring aspect of self-definition (Albert and Whetten 1985) and the other obtained through social identity inferred from an association with membership in a group or embedded network (King et al 2011). The first component of organizational identity rests on the assumption that organizations are social actors analogous to the individuallevel role identity (Whetten 2006).…”

Organizational Actors, Character, and Selznick’s Theory of Organizations

“…As an organization matures, its informal structure becomes increasingly internally coherent. Commitments that are less central to an organization's character may be cast off, while those that are definitive tend to be amplified and inform future strategic decisions (King, Clemens, & Fry, 2011).…”