Organisational Identity Strength - Coursework Example

Scott Selwood Assessment 3 – Critical Essay Organisational Behaviour 200 – External Curtin University – Semester 2 Student Number 14388473 Introduction Various studies have demonstrated that there is existence of minimal consensus as far the definition and meaning of the term organizational identification. There is general absence of finality on universal agreement to the distinctiveness of the term which proves to be an impediment and creates obscurity among the finding of different researchers. Organisational identity strength is perceived to be an independent construct from organisational identity. Cole and Heike (2006. p.587) point out theoretically, organisational commitment and organisational identification are totally different concepts and various researches have tried to clearly the distinguish the differences between the two terms. Employees who hold organizational identification that is strong are more concerned with the organization’s well being. When the individuals identify strongly with their work organization, the organization’s survival is tied to the survival of the individuals. This relationship makes the individuals to direct efforts on their colleagues’ behalf and the entire organization. This is essentially what organizational identification entails and it has greater impact on the organization performance and employee satisfaction. Organisational identity strength revolves around the extent at which members of the organisation view the identity as being unique or special. Chughtai and Buckley (2010 p.243) argue that organisational identification is able to result into benefits that are widespread for both the organisation and the individual, relatively there have been few investigations carried out to establish the impact of this construct (p.243). Those members of the organization who care about the wellbeing of the organization possess a high level of organizational identification. The theory of social identity stipulates the premise that organizational identification has the high possibility of occasioning in-role performance owing to the fact that individuals who have a strong identity to their organization are likely to give all their best, exert themselves for the success of the social system, possess lower actual turnover and turnover intentions, cooperate, and they will demonstrate high degree of performance due to a strong feeling of belonging. Research that has been conducted has indicated relationship between job performance and organizational identification and provided substantial evidence for the part played by organizational identification in order to enhance job performance (Prieto & Phipps. 2011 p. 512). According to Edwards, (2009 p.11), the basic notion of organizational identity is the premise that the organization possess some kind of character that is identifiable. Some of the definitions of employer branding includes the notion of identity. The purpose of this paper is to give a critical analysis of implication of organizational identification exploring empirical evidence that has been gathered over the years and see whether they support or disagree with the role of organizational identification. Regardless of the surging popularity on organizational identification and organizational identity, research about the two concepts is still in many respects in the infant stage. Researchers on organizational matters have widely applied the social identity theory at the workplace. It is viewed that organizational identification shows the particular way in which people portray themselves in terms of them belonging to a certain organization. The emphasis on identification in the contexts of organization has continued to mount as it apparently seen to benefit, work groups, individuals and the entire organization. It has been noted that with the absence of organizational identification it would be difficult to talk about organizational communication that is effective, neither leadership nor meaningful planning. Yurchisin and Damhorst (2009 p.459) note that organizations of employment reap benefits from employee-organization identification since identification has been linked positively to job satisfaction. It has been challenging to define and measure organizational commitment. Recent evidence has demonstrated commitment to be responsible for a wide range of turnover intentions, job attitudes, and behavior of citizenship (Cole & Heike 2006 p. 587& 588). Employer Branding consequently involves identification the employment experience that is unique by putting in consideration the totality of intangible and tangible reward features that an organization is offering to its employees. This kind of branding enhances organizational identification (Edwards, 2009 p.7). Employees who are able to identify with the organization they work for tend to give their best efforts and consequently demonstrate a relatively higher degree of quality and performance level. Involvement in the job by the trainee influence positively learning transfer, which reflects on the level to which an individual can identify himself with the job, actively take part in it, and regard performance as important as opposed to self-worth. According to Prieto and Phipps (2011 p.513), organizational identification is a very significant construct in studies concerning organizations as it involves learning transfer due to the fact that identification of the employee with her/his organization might play a part in whether they are able to transfer their learning from an intervention of training into the place of work. Organizational identification is able to model the correlation training transfer and proactive personality in such a way that the higher the score of organizational identification, the more the number of people willing to transfer training to their work place. Effective communicating in regard to goals and strategy of the organization, enhancing decision-making participation, and providing information that is adequate can result to encouraging employees identify strongly with the organization in which they work for (Bartels et al. 2008 p.221).The level at which the appearance of the salesperson reflects the identity of the store could be in a way related to the level of employee-organization identification exhibited by him or her with that particular store. In case individuals identify with organizations that employ them, they usually like to utilize the same features contributing to their identity of organization to explain their individual identity (Yurchisin & Damhorst 2009 p.458) Empirical Work Conceding the fact that organization’s identity is constructed socially, theorists have commenced considering the concept of organizational identity to possess some sense of fluidity and continuity. Some researchers have agreed that owing to the reality that an identity is mutable, it can be represented to the members of the organization for revision and redefinition. The ongoing observations point out that it can not be identity per se, but merely the strength with which beliefs on identity are embedded in the members of the organization that may become of significance to the organizations concerned. Very scant studies have tried to establish perceptions’ strength-of-identity as a phenomenon that is unique, consequently very scant evidence is obtained concerning the impact of perceptions of organizational identity strength reflect on judgment of individuals and outcomes that are job related. In real sense this kind of knowledge could result into practical as well as theoretical insight. Organizational strength has been looked at in a few studies. Although relatively low level of research has investigated organizational strength, researchers have been intrigued with commitment and identification. Nevertheless, regardless of both empirical and theoretical unfolding, there exists confusion that is frequent between commitment and identification. Organizational commitment is viewed as reflection of relative strength of identification by an individual. Affective organizational commitment has been labeled as the emotional attachment of the employee to identification. With the mentioning of identification explicitly in the two largely cited commitment definitions, it is very apparent how researchers have time and again confused between organizational commitment and organizational identification. Many review articles have cited that it is implication of the identification of perception and self-concept of oneness with the firm that gives the difference between the construct of commitment and that of identification (Cole & Heike 2006 p. 588 & 589). In a particular research it was found out that employees tend to identify strongly with their profession as opposed to their organization of employment, there exist a connection that is positive between organizational identification and professional (Bartels et al. 2008 p.210). In a research conducted at a hospital in the Netherlands to determine the relationship between employee identification and communication it was established that the climate of communication relates positively to identification at the different organizational levels (Bartels et al. 2008 p. 220). Practitioners would like to select individuals that identify with the organization since they are likely to stand with the organization and to put more effort foe the organization; this has strong implications for development in human resource due to the fact that individuals who identity with the organization strongly will make sure they learn in an intervention of training and transfer successfully their learning to their place of work. In employee identification, organizations have a tendency to focus on training, selecting, and the development of proactive individuals owing to their desire to highlight opportunities, and consequently act on them, take action, demonstrate initiative, and are persistent until change that is meaningful happens (Prieto & Phipps. 2011 p. 514). Chughtai and Buckley (2010. p.253) argue that organizational identification has been identified as a core driver of effectiveness in any organization. The investigation of the correlation between organization identification and variable outcomes of error communication, feedback seeking behavior, and learning goal orientation has been reaffirmed. Evidently individuals will differ in what they enjoy and experience when working at an organization and in the real situation there will be an existence of a variation of values that are held by employees, but the core idea in employer branding is that there is possibility the totality of a shared or common experience in employment (Edwards, 2009, p.7). It may be very relevant to identity individuals who are proactive and are high self-monitors since the impression management goal is to influence positively evaluations of oneself and gain the others approval, making it precisely apt for settings that are work-related; the individuals possess a high desire to impress their peers and supervisors and may transfer learning successfully to the workplace driven with their need to appear favorable (Prieto & Phipps. 2011 p.514). The theory of symbolic interaction vividly permits for a relationship to exist between an individual identity and his appearance, and consequently it comes in handy when establishing the relationship between employee-organization identification and appearance in the apparel retail store context (Yurchisin & Damhorst 2009 p.461). People will normally work with the prospects of maintaining a social identity that is positive, enhance social prestige, and create an environment for more social interaction (Webber 2011 pg 120).Three studies that have been published tested specifically the discriminated validity of commitment and identification. Using undergraduates as a sample, confirmatory factors that were employed analyses to indicate that commitment and identification were distinct constructs empirically. A correlation of 0.77 was reported between one study on commitment in 1974 and another on identification in 1992. In the first study the data was collected from five Nepalese organizations’ employees and showed that identification could be empirically be distinguished from four commitment measures of the organization. Evaluated at the same time with the amount of variance that is unshared between commitment and identification variables (around 50%), it was found out that identification has a direct correlation, although empirically distinct from commitment. In the third study data was collected from faculty of Dutch University to look at further the differences between commitment and identification. Cole and Heike (2006 p.589) Point out that in agreement with the two previous studies, confirmatory factor analysis was used to show that commitment and identification were constructs that were empirically distinct. From literature review there is hardly any single study that has investigated the empirical distinctiveness of identification, commitment and organization identification strength. Commitment, identification and organizational identity strength can be assertively labeled as empirically and theoretically unique constructs. Studies have demonstrated that people who possess a high degree of organizational identification get involved in behaviors that benefit their organization and group positively. People have the ability of developing identification with many groups at the same time; this is labeled as dual identification, and they form identification with those groups that will enhance sense of self that is positive (Webber, 2011 p.121). Evaluation Despite of the empirical and theoretical evidence concerning organizational identification, organizational identification strength, and organization commitment, whether paired up or independently, there is hardly any general agreement of what each of them represents although they have been known to be distinct. The empirical data collected in the investigations of commitment and organizational identification has mainly involved institutions of high learning like universities. This brings out the possibility of there being totally different outcomes if the data was collected in different setting such as a steel factory or a tea factory. The members of the other organizations will be in different setting and it could yield different stunning results. There is need that more empirical evidence should be gathered in different setting to give more credibility and reliability to the findings (Olekalns & Travaglione, 2010). Varying contexts will add to the reliability of the empirical evidence. The different researches done have majorly revolved around organization identification and commitment and there is an effort to introduce organizational identification strength. This instigates some kind of confusion since the audience has not realized clearly the distinctiveness between commitment and identification and it is hurriedly confronted with other constructs like organizational identification strength. Another point of interest is that the empirical evidences seem to have been gathered only in Asia-Pacific, America, and Scandinavian countries which will limit applicability and the relevance of the studies. As it was observed in one of the article journals more research is required to investigate the relationship the correlation with a random sample of employees from more context of employment (Yurchisin & Damhorst 2009 p. 458). Conclusion In this critical analysis of implications of organizational identification it has been noted that there have numerous investigations on the concepts organizational identification and commitment despite it being in its infancy. Despite this fact the importance of organizational identification to the organizations is very evident. Transfer of learning in the workplace is enhanced when individual strongly identifies with the organizations. Little intentions turnover and turnover is experienced when the employees have a strong sense of identification with the organization. The empirical evidence substantiating the correlation between identification and commitment has been discussed. A critical evaluation of the research done on the concept of organizational identification has been outlines and this paper will give more insight into the constructs of identification, organizational identification strength and commitment. Self-reflection In this assignment I tried earnestly to demonstrate through discussion the implication of organizational identification. In my reviews and researches for this assignment I have looked at substantial journal articles containing empirical evidence concerning the organizational identification concept. I discovered that there has been a lot of empirical evidence that has been gathered on organizational identification and its application within the organization. This assignment has given be an opportunity to use my research skills and gain more insight on what propels many organizations to high levels of performance and profitability. I realized that commitment and loyalty can come automatically as a result of strong organizational identification. I believe this assignment will give more insight into the concept of organizational identification and elicit constructive discussion. References Cole S. Michael and Heike Bruch. 2006. Organizational Identity Streng, Identification, and Commitment and ther Relationships to Turnover Intention: Does Organizational Hierarchy Matter? Journal of Organizational Behaviour J. Organiz. Behav. 27:585-605. Prieto C. Leon and Phipps T. A. Simone. 2011. Self-Monitoring and Organizational Idendification as Moderators of the Effects of Proactive Personality on the Transfer of Learning in the Workplace: A Theoretical Inquiry. International Journal of Management Vol. 28 No. 2. Yurchisin Jennifer and Damhorst Lynn Mary. 2009. An Investigation of Salesperson Appearance and Organizational Identification. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management. Vol. 13 No. 3, 2009. Pp. 458-470. Bartels, Jos et al. 2008. Horizontal and Vertical Communication as Determinants of Professional and Orgaizational Identification. Review Vol. 39 No. 2, 2010. pp. 2010. Webber Sheila Simsarian. 2011. Dual Personnel Organizational Identification Impacting Client Satisfaction and Word of Mouth Loyalty. Journal of Business Research 64 (2011), 119- 125. Edwards R. Martin. 2009 An Integrative Review of Employer Branding and OB Theory. Department of Management, King’s College London, London,UK. Chughtai Ali Aamir and Buckley Finian. 2010. Assessing the Effects of Organizational Identification on in-role Job Performance and Learning Behaviour: The mediating Role of Learning goal Orientation. Personnel Review. Vol. 39. No. 2. Olekalns McShane, Steven, Mara and Travaglione Tony. 2010. Organizational Behaviour on the pacific Rim. 3rd ed. North Ryde NSW: McGraw-Hill Australia Read More