The Effects of Multi-Level Group Identification on Intergroup Cooperation and Performance

Brown, Jerry L.; Sprinkle, Geoffrey B.; Way, Dan

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2948658

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As discussed in our development of H2, stronger group identity is associated with increased salience and perceived importance of group outcomes, which in turn is associated with increased concern for others in the group (e.g., Tajfel and Turner 1979;Oakes 1987;Oakes and Turner 1990;Hornsey 2008). Consistent with these principles, prior research consistently finds that stronger identification lead to more cooperation within the group (e.g., Brewer and Kramer, 1986;Wit and Kerr, 2002;Ashforth et al 2008;Brown et al 2020), and so we propose the following hypothesis:…”

Section: Cooperationsupporting

confidence: 53%

“…We also find that the use of non-insulating cost allocations can build stronger group identification as compared to insulating allocations which, in turn, increases cooperation in our public goods game. Since stronger identification has been shown to help resolve other social dilemmas in organizations, such as motivating helping and other-regarding behaviors (e.g., Brewer and Kramer 1986;Ashforth, Harrison, and Corley 2008;Kelly and Presslee 2017;Brown, Sprinkle, and Way 2020), our results suggest that non-insulating allocations may be one way for firms to improve performance without the need for additional controls or incentives geared toward these behaviors. Conversely, this result also suggests that firms using insulating cost allocations are more likely to need to use other mechanisms to enhance group identification -such as some form of group incentives or group recognition, or providing groups with increased decision rights (e.g., Ashforth et al 2008;Luft and Shields 2009) -to achieve similar outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 81%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Experimental Investigation of Insulating and Non-Insulating Cost Allocations.

Way¹

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Cooperationsupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 81%

An Experimental Investigation of Insulating and Non-Insulating Cost Allocations.

Way¹

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…According to Turner (1984), individuals identify and tend to increase intragroup cooperation. Brown et al (2017) confirmed that greater identification with the group has positive effects on the propensity of individuals to engage in intergroup cooperation. Ireland and Webb (2007) and Corsten et al (2011) found that the identification of suppliers in relation to their buyers positively influenced information sharing.…”

Section: Management Control Systems Identification and Interorganizat...mentioning

confidence: 61%

“…Interorganizational relationships are established in the search for mutually beneficial results for the parties that act in cooperation (Dekker, 2004), which requires the conception of management control systems (MCSs) that provide support in these relationships (Reusen & Stouthuysen, 2017). The perception of beneficial collective results by the members of the related organizations tends to intensify cooperative behaviors (Brown et al, 2017). According to Mael and Ashforth (1992), the more someone identifies with their group, the more they will act according to the group's views instead of individual interests, which suggests that a greater level of identification can intensify interorganizational cooperation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Control systems and interorganizational identification in technology parks cooperation

Pazetto

Beuren

2022

Rev. contab. finanç.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to analyze the influence of the design of management control systems (MCSs) on interorganizational cooperation and the moderating role of companies’ identification with their technology park. The conditions that promote the emergence of interorganizational cooperation are indicated in the literature as an important research gap, as well as the little evidence about how MCS design influences cooperation, especially in relationships based on innovation. MCSs in interorganizational partnerships have been shown to be relevant for the coordination and maintenance of the relationship, and this study reveals that MCSs promotes cooperative behaviors among the companies associated with the technology parks. The interorganizational identification of the companies with their park was moderately present, thus prompting the inclusion of social and relational aspects in interorganizational studies, which remain scarcely explored in the literature. The MCSs of the parks are focused on stimulating the companies’ cooperation, which is one purpose of this partnership. By not confirming the moderating effect of identification, it was verified that this construct drives cooperation in a way that is dissociated from the MCSs. A survey was conducted in organizations associated with Porto Digital and with the São José dos Campos Technology Park, and it had the participation of 187 managers. To analyze the data the partial least squares structural equation modeling technique was applied and the differences between the two parks were further analyzed. The MCSs design and interorganizational identification act as antecedents of the companies’ cooperation with their technology park. On the other hand, the direct and positive effect of the MCS design on cooperation is not moderated by how much these companies identify with the interorganizational relationship established. The paper contributes by identifying ways of fostering cooperation, one of the purposes of interorganizational agreements, as well as by providing evidence in a context that is scarcely addressed in the literature.

show abstract

“…Surprisingly, performance was actually better in the cooperative condition. However, there is sparse evidence whether this effect generalizes to other settings, such as organizational performance (Brown, Sprinkle, & Way, 2017).…”

Section: A Social Identity Model For Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Social Identity Model for Education

Abrams¹,

Houston²,

Masser³

et al. 2018

The Oxford Handbook of Group and Organizational Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much of the research on individual attainment in educational settings has focused on individual differences. This chapter sets out the role of groups and group processes. After reviewing evidence for the role of social comparison in the classroom, and theory and research on ethnic group differences, we consider the impact of category memberships, stereotypes, and threat on educational performance. We introduce social identity theory and explain its relevance to educational outcomes. We then offer an integrative social identity model for education (SIME) that incorporates three elements of education research: social comparison, stereotypes, and identity. The model provides a more comprehensive perspective on the role of intergroup and intragroup relations and indicates how (and which) group memberships can present barriers to, or reveal new horizons for, performance and achievement. We describe how these elements may work together in practice and conclude by considering prospects and approaches for future research.

show abstract

The Effects of Multi-Level Group Identification on Intergroup Cooperation and Performance

Cited by 10 publications

References 64 publications

An Experimental Investigation of Insulating and Non-Insulating Cost Allocations.

An Experimental Investigation of Insulating and Non-Insulating Cost Allocations.

Control systems and interorganizational identification in technology parks cooperation

A Social Identity Model for Education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About