Managing Identity Conflicts in Organizations

Abstract

How nonprofit organizations manage multiple and conflicting identities is not well understood. In a case study of a nonprofit welfare organization, we use Pratt and Foreman's (2000) framework of identity management responses to illuminate different ways that nonprofit organizations can seek to manage and potentially resolve identity conflicts. We focus on the actual practices nonprofit organizations use to manage multiple identities and, in particular, reveal the important role of organizational routines and artifacts in facilitating or constraining particular identity management responses.

Inside “Pandora’s Box” of Solidarity: Conflicts Between Paid Staff and Volunteers in the Non-profit Sector

“…As described before, previous research pointed out that the differences between volunteers and paid staff regarding which are their duties and responsibilities, as well as their different criteria on how things should be done in the organization, are regular sources of conflict (Netting et al, 2008;Kreutzer and Jäger, 2011). Indeed, as it was previously mentioned, these criteria's disparities may even lead to a sense of identification in two different groups in the organization, paid staff and volunteers, that based on the social comparison theory (Festinger, 1954) and the equity theory (Adams, 1963(Adams, , 1965 justify their different perspective when it comes to describing conflicts (Chenhall et al, 2016). Considering that the new trends in NPOs are increasing paid staff demands and responsibilities (e.g., professionalization; Maier et al, 2016), but their returns, in terms of recognition in the organization, salary, reputation, or sense of achievement, are still the same -or less -compared to volunteers, their perception of conflict and the negative effect of those perceptions on their satisfaction may be higher.…”

“…Furthermore, previous research on this matter pointed out as a regular source of conflict the differences between volunteers and paid staff regarding which are their duties and responsibilities and their different criteria on how things should be done in the organization, for instance, in terms of volunteerism and professionalism clashes (Netting et al, 2008;Kreutzer and Jäger, 2011). Additionally, these disparities in criteria and even diversity among team members in the organization (e.g., in terms of backgrounds, age, and also roles) may even lead to a sense of identification in two different groups in the organization, paid staff and volunteers, that may justify a different perspective when it comes to described conflicts (Chenhall et al, 2016). This situation can also be a potential source of relationship conflicts, defined as the experience of personal incompatibilities or tensions that provoke feelings such as frustration or irritation (Jehn and Mannix, 2001).…”

Managing Dual Identities in Nonprofit Rebranding: An Exploratory Study

“…Equally, the tension between identities in hybrid organizations is well documented (Billis, 1993;Chenhall, Hall & Smith, 2015;Kreutzer & Jager, 2011;Young, 1991), but its relationship with branding decisions and intended image in a change context is largely overlooked.…”

“…The extent to which multiple identities engender conflict will depend on factors such as their diversity and their congruence, and the passion for each identity held by organizational members and other stakeholders (Chenhall, Hall & Smith, 2015;Glynn, 2000;Hasenfeld & Gidron, 2005). Managers may attempt to manage multiple identities through: 'compartmentalization', the preservation and separation of multiple identities; 'deletion', the active shedding of one or more identities; 'integration', the combining of identities; and 'aggregation', the linking together of identities perhaps with an overarching 'meta-identity' (Pratt & Foreman 2000).…”

“…The approach emphasizes a direct connection between the brand and the organization's core identity that, for nonprofits, is typically grounded in ideology, social concern and compassion ( Lindgreen et al, 2009). The need to balance business and social needs leads to the development of 'hybridity' (Billis, 1993;Chenhall, Hall & Smith, 2015;Hasenfeld & Gidron, 2005;Minkoff, 2002;Moss et al, 2011), and gives rise to dual organizational identities.…”