Occupational boundary play: Crafting a sense of identity legitimacy in an emerging occupation

Abstract

Summary In emerging occupations, individuals are given very little prepackaged identity “content”—for example, occupational values, legitimating ideologies, clear goals, tasks, and/or routines—to help them build their individual‐level occupational identities. By contrast, individuals in well‐established occupations (e.g., professions) are given ample identity content, and prior identity research has examined identity work processes almost exclusively in the context of such occupations. Consequently, prior theory assumes that identity work is mostly a matter of tailoring prepackaged identity content to fit one's individual‐level preferences and objectives. Prior theory is therefore of limited use in emerging occupations, where the key identity problem is not one of tailoring identity content effectively but creating an identity in the first place—more specifically, an identity whose existence feels justified and valid. Thus, in this paper, we ask: how do individuals in emerging occupations construct an internal sense that “who they are” is necessary, desirable, and appropriate (i.e., legitimate) within the broader occupational landscape? On the basis of a grounded theory study of health coaches, we suggest that individuals in such circumstances can craft this sense of “identity legitimacy” via a sensemaking process we call occupational boundary play. This process consists of both “occupational boundary setting” and “occupational boundary blurring,” the former providing for individuals a sense of identity novelty and the latter providing a sense of identity familiarity. Taken together, this subjective experience of both novelty and familiarity provides for individuals the sense that “who they are” is legitimate within the broader occupational landscape.

A quasi‐experimental examination of knowledge‐sharing interventions enhancing service performance: The roles of time, occupational identity, and image

“…Employees are encouraged to use this title when they introduce themselves to customers. Previous research suggests that occupational identity and image is formed when employees reflect on their occupation's core characteristics such as tasks, skills, goals, values, and growth opportunities (Murphy & Kreiner, 2020). By making sense of the content of occupation, individuals develop varying levels of occupational identity (Kielhofner, 2007; Skorikov & Vondracek, 2011).…”

From lone wolves to members of the pack: Exploring interpersonal identity work within identity workspaces

“…Identity work has proven salient for work and career transitions and for particularly demanding work circumstances such as assuming a new role, facing involuntary career transitions, or taking up an emergent occupation (e.g. Ibarra, 1999; Kulkarni, 2020; Murphy & Kreiner, 2020). It is salient also if the individual perceives that what is required in the role does not match with who she is or would like to be (Brown & Coupland, 2015; Mattarelli & Tagliaventi, 2015; Pratt et al, 2006).…”

“…It is salient also if the individual perceives that what is required in the role does not match with who she is or would like to be (Brown & Coupland, 2015; Mattarelli & Tagliaventi, 2015; Pratt et al, 2006). Several identity work tactics can be initiated to claim a role, ranging from the development of repertoires of provisional selves (Ibarra, 1999), to identity customization strategies (e.g., Mattarelli & Tagliaventi, 2015; Pratt et al, 2006), to managing occupational boundaries in order to craft a sense of identity legitimacy (Murphy & Kreiner, 2020). Alongside elucidation of identity work tactics, scholars have investigated the paramount function of role models or role partners for providing validation of the newly formed identity.…”

“…As a result, scholars have long been interested in understanding how people construct their work identities and engage in identity work processes, i.e., the activities that people carry out to attain, repair, sustain, or strengthen a coherent sense of self (Snow & Anderson, 1987; Sveningsson & Alvesson, 2003), and the various types of social relationships, resources, and contextual conditions that may support or constrain them in this endeavor (e.g., Ibarra, 1999; Pratt et al, 2006; Snow & Anderson, 1987; Sveningsson & Alvesson, 2003). As contemporary careers become more fluid and the influx of emerging occupations increases, individuals are able to envision repertoires of desired work selves which they are driven to enact (e.g., Barley et al, 2017; Murphy & Kreiner, 2020; Obodaru, 2017; Petriglieri et al, 2018; Strauss et al, 2012). This is making a better understanding of these issues especially relevant.…”

What kind of leader am I? An exploration of professionals' leader identity construal

“…We identified patterns of professional identity and leader identity dimensions that are likely to predict when professionals reject, accommodate, incorporate, or emphasize a formal leader role. That way, our research goes beyond previous frameworks describing either professional and occupational identity construction without considering a leader role (see Ibarra, 1999;Murphy & Kreiner, 2020;Pratt et al, 2006) or differences in leader identity dimensions without explaining how they occur (see Hammond et al, 2017).…”