The Experts below are selected from a list of 5796 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Kevin G Corley - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Organizational Identity formation and change
    The Academy of Management Annals, 2013
    Co-Authors: Dennis A. Gioia, Shubha Patvardhan, Aimeeg L Hamilton, Kevin G Corley
    Abstract:

    Theory and research concerning Organizational Identity (“who we are as an organization”) is a burgeoning domain within organization study. A great deal of conceptual and empirical work has been accomplished within the last three decades—especially concerning the phenomenon of Organizational Identity change. More recently, work has been devoted to studying the processes and content associated with Identity formation. Given the amount of scholarly work done to date, it is an appropriate time to reflect on the perspectives, controversies and outcomes of this body of work. Because Organizational Identity change has received the preponderance of attention, we first review that extensive literature. We consider the conceptual and empirical work concerning the three putative “pillars” of Identity (i.e. that which is ostensibly central, enduring, and distinctive). We devote particular attention to the most controversial of these pillars—the debate pitting a view that sees Identity as stable over time (a position ...

  • guiding Organizational Identity through aged adolescence
    Journal of Management Inquiry, 2006
    Co-Authors: Kevin G Corley, Celia V Harquail, Michael G Pratt, Mary Ann Glynn, Marlene C Fiol, Mary Jo Hatch
    Abstract:

    In this article, the authors reflect on the past two decades of research on Organizational Identity, looking to its history and to its future. They do not provide a review of the literature, nor do they promote a particular perspective on the concept. Instead, they advocate pluralism in studying Organizational Identity while encouraging clarity and transparency in the articulation of definitions and core theoretical suppositions. Believing there is no one best approach to the study of Organizational Identity, their intent is to establish a reference point that can orient future work on Organizational Identity. They focus on three questions they feel are critical: What is the nomological net that embeds Organizational Identity? Is Organizational Identity “real” (or simply metaphoric)? and How do we define and conceptualize Organizational Identity? Last, they try to anticipate Organizational Identity issues on the horizon to suggest future directions for theory and research.

  • Organizational Identity image and adaptive instability
    Academy of Management Review, 2000
    Co-Authors: Dennis A. Gioia, Majken Schultz, Kevin G Corley
    Abstract:

    Organizational Identity usually is portrayed as that which is core, distinctive, and enduring about the character of an organization. We argue that because of the reciprocal interrelationships between Identity and image, Organizational Identity, rather than enduring, is better viewed as a relatively fluid and unstable concept. We further argue that instead of destabilizing an organization, this instability in Identity is actually adaptive in accomplishing change. The analysis leads to some provocative, but nonetheless constructive, implications for theory, research, and practice.

Majken Schultz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Transparency and Identity: Modeling Organizational Identity Dynamics
    2020
    Co-Authors: Mary Jo Hatch, Majken Schultz
    Abstract:

    This paper presents a process-based theory of Organizational Identity dynamics. The view taken here is that Organizational Identity is an ongoing process that behaves like a conversation between the Organizational self (as expressed by its culture) and images held by key stakeholders. This view is an extension by analogy of Mead’s social Identity theory in which he posits that individual Identity is born of a conversation between the “I” and the “me”. Processes linking Organizational Identity to culture and image (mirroring, reflecting, expressing and impressing) are described as are their inter-relationships in cycles of Organizational Identity construction. Interest in Organizational Identity is positioned with respect to recent concerns about the effects of increased levels of Organizational transparency and the effects of transparency are examined as revelatory of two dysfunctions of Organizational Identity dynamics: Organizational narcissism and loss of Organizational self (or culture).

  • Organizational Identity Change and Temporality
    Oxford Handbooks Online, 2016
    Co-Authors: Majken Schultz
    Abstract:

    Discussions of what changes and what remains stable about Organizational Identity have been central to the field since Organizational Identity was defined as “enduring” by Albert and Whetten in 1985. This chapter provides an overview of these discussions by presenting three different views on Organizational Identity change: 1) Identity as enduring stability; 2) Identity as periodic change and 3) Identity as ongoing change. The chapter shows how each view includes different interpretations and elaborates the various mechanisms underpinning Identity stability or change based in empirical studies. The chapter argues how the view on Organizational Identity change itself has changed in the 30-year history of the field, and suggests how the recent development towards temporal and process-based views returns to a focus on the continuity provided by Organizational Identity, albeit from a different theoretical and empirical foundation than that suggested by Albert and Whetten.

  • Introduction: Organizational Identity
    Oxford Handbooks Online, 2016
    Co-Authors: Michael G Pratt, Majken Schultz, Blake E. Ashforth, Davide Ravasi
    Abstract:

    Since its formal entry to organization studies in 1985, the concept of Organizational Identity (OI) has had a long and fruitful development. We suggest OI is particularly appealing because it: 1) addresses fundamental questions of social existence about how we are both similar to and different from others; 2) is fundamentally a relational construct connecting apparent oppositions, such as “us” and “them”; 3) is a nexus concept forging relations with other theoretical constructs; and 4) is inherently useful to organizations. In the seven sections of this handbook, we trace conceptual, methodological, and practical challenges of theorizing and utilizing OI in organizations, including issues of the construct’s nomological net, its multi-level dynamics, the role time in OI (e.g., OI change), as well as its pluralistic manifestations (e.g., hybrid and multiple Organizational identities).

  • the dynamics of Organizational Identity
    Comunicação e Sociedade, 2012
    Co-Authors: Mary Jo Hatch, Majken Schultz
    Abstract:

    While many Organizational researchers make reference to Mead’s theory of social Identity, none have explored how Mead’s ideas about the relationship between the “I” and the “me” might be extended to Identity processes at the Organizational level of analysis. In this paper we define Organizational analogues for Mead’s “I” and “me” and explain how these two phases of Organizational Identity are related. In doing so we bring together existing theory concerning the links between Organizational identities and images, with new theory concerning how reflection embeds Identity in Organizational culture and how Identity expresses cultural understandings through symbols. We offer a model of Organizational Identity dynamics built on four processes linking Organizational Identity to culture and image. While the processes linking Identity and image (mirroring and impressing) have been described in the literature before, the contribution of this paper lies in articulation of the processes linking Identity and culture (reflecting and expressing), and of the interaction of all four processes working dynamically together to create, maintain and change Organizational Identity. We discuss the implications of our model in terms of two dysfunctions of Organizational Identity dynamics: narcissism and loss of culture.

  • Organizational Identity a reader
    2004
    Co-Authors: Mary Jo Hatch, Majken Schultz
    Abstract:

    Introduction SECTION I: THE ROOTS OF Organizational Identity IN SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 1. Society and the Individual 2. The Self 3. The Arts of Impression Management 4. An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict 5. Who is this 'We'? Levels of Colletive Identity and Self Representations SECTION II: EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF Organizational Identity THEORY 6. Organizational Identity 7. Amto-Social Actions of Committed Organizational Participants: An Existential Psychoanalytic Perspective 8. Social Identity Theory and the Organization 9. Organization: From Substance to Image? 10. Keeping an Eye on the Mirror: Image and Identity in Organizational Adaptation 11. Organizational Impression Management as Reciprocal Influence Process: The Neglected Role of the Organizational Audience SECTION III: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN Organizational Identity THEORY SECTION III.I: MULTIPLE IDENTITIES 12. Organizational Dress as a Symbol of Multilayered Social Identities 13. Breaches in the Boardroom: Organizational Identity and Conflicts of Commitment in a Nonprofit Organization SECTION III.II: STABILITY AND CHANGE IN Organizational Identity 14. Organizational Identity, Image, and Adaptive Instability 15. The Dynamics of Organizational Identity SECTION III.III: Identity AS NARRATIVE AND DISCOURSE 16. Identity Regulation as Organizational Control Producing the Appropriate Individual 17. Narratives of Individual and Organizational Identities SECTION III.IV: AUDIENCES FOR Identity 18. Members' Responses to Organizational Identity Threats: Encountering and Countering the Business Week Rankings 19. Organizational Identity: Linkages Between Internal and External Communication

Andrew D Brown - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Organizational Identity and Organizational identification
    Group & Organization Management, 2013
    Co-Authors: Hongwei He, Andrew D Brown
    Abstract:

    In this article, we present an overview of the literatures on Organizational Identity and Organizational identification. We provide overviews of four major approaches to Organizational Identity: functionalist, social constructionist, psychodynamic, and postmodern. The literature on Organizational identification, by contrast, exhibits greater consensus due to the hegemonic power of social Identity theory, and is predominantly functionalist. We review recent research on Organizational identification regarding performance outcomes and antecedents (mainly focusing on leadership and the social exchange perspective), and in relation to change and virtual contexts. Some suggestions for further research are then offered. Finally an overview of the articles in this special issue is presented.

Glenn B Voss - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Organizational Identity and firm performance what happens when leaders disagree about who we are
    Organization Science, 2006
    Co-Authors: Zannie Giraud Voss, Daniel M Cable, Glenn B Voss
    Abstract:

    This study examines how the Organizational success of 113 nonprofit professional theatres was affected when two top leaders responsible for different parts of the organization held divergent views about Organizational Identity. Focusing on five values that differentiate theatres, we find that leaders' disagreement about Organizational Identity was related to lower ticket revenues and lower net income, and that Organizational performance was lowest when disagreement about Identity was extreme. Although some findings suggest that minor Identity disagreement between leaders may not hurt organizations, results generally support the perspective that leaders should actively promote a single Identity.

David A. Whetten - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Identity Paradox and an Expanded Framework of Organizational Identity
    2020
    Co-Authors: Peter O. Foreman, David A. Whetten
    Abstract:

    This conceptual paper is guided by three objectives: First, to bolster the argument for Organizational Identity as a defined concept, as compared with a metaphor or paradigmatic perspective. Second, articulate a clearer and more fully developed connection between the concepts of individual Identity and Organizational Identity. Third, specify a distinctive, defensible conceptual domain for the concept of Organizational Identity and align the definition of Organizational Identity with that domain. Guided by these objectives, we argue that the tension between being similar and different is a fundamental and distinguishing feature of Identity – and that this “Identity paradox” exists at both the individual and Organizational levels. We then propose a two-dimensional form of this Identity paradox and suggest that the resulting framework serve as the conceptual domain of Organizational Identity. In the end, we examine the implications of the proposed conceptual space for Albert and Whetten’s (1985) definition of Organizational Identity and propose two new definitional elements.

  • Measuring Organizational Identity
    Oxford Handbooks Online, 2016
    Co-Authors: Peter O. Foreman, David A. Whetten
    Abstract:

    Although the concept of Organizational Identity has gained currency in the Organizational studies literature, and many conceptual issues have been addressed, there is an overall lack of attention to methodological concerns. Specifically, the field lacks a comprehensive and systematic review of how Organizational Identity is operationalized and measured. Given the disparate uses of the concept and the range of theories employing it, the means of measurement span the gamut of qualitative and quantitative methodologies. In this chapter, we review over 80 studies where Organizational Identity was operationalized and/or measured. We develop a descriptive classification framework of measurement approaches, noting the distinctive elements of the five major types that result. We then identify key patterns that emerge from the data, leading to insights and observations about the landscape of Organizational Identity research. We conclude with a discussion of critical implications and directions for future research.

  • albert and whetten revisited strengthening the concept of Organizational Identity
    Journal of Management Inquiry, 2006
    Co-Authors: David A. Whetten
    Abstract:

    The objective of this article is to formulate the concept of Organizational Identity in such a way that it can be distinguished analytically from related concepts, such as Organizational culture and image, and can be used operationally to identify bona fide Organizational Identity claims referents and associated Identity-referencing discourse. The proposal amounts to a stronger version of Albert and Whetten (1985), in that the implicit links between the elements of their composite, tripartite, formulation are made explicit and their treatment of Organizational Identity as a defined construct is emphasized. Although the proposal eschews conceptions of Organizational Identity formulated from the perspective of individuals, it treats Organizational Identity as an analogue of individual Identity, drawing attention to the parallel functions Identity plays for both individual and collective social actors, as well as the parallel distinguishing structural features of individual and Organizational Identity refere...