Predicting the different profiles of organizational identification: A case of shipyard subcontractors

The primary aim of this study was to investigate the predictors of different organizational identification profiles. Hypotheses based on the social identity approach and the literature on organizational commitment were formed and tested in a sample gathered from employees of 20 shipyard subcontractors. The results supported the idea that different subgroup characteristics (prestige, contact, and size) may be used to explain four different combinations of subgroup identification (with the subcontractor) and superordinate identification (with the shipyard). However, contrary to our hypotheses, none of the variables concerning relationships between the subgroups (intergroup competition, intergroup contact and perceived discrimination) emerged as significant predictors.

[1]  Steven L. Blader,et al.  Identity and Cooperative Behavior in Groups , 2001 .

[2]  Stephen M. Shortell,et al.  Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder: The Impact of Organizational Identification, Identity, and Image on the Cooperative Behaviors of Physicians , 2002 .

[3]  Itesh Sachdev,et al.  Status differenttals and intergroup behaviour , 1987 .

[4]  John P. Meyer,et al.  The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization , 1990 .

[5]  Michael G. Pratt,et al.  To be or not to be: Central questions in organizational identification. , 1998 .

[6]  J. Barling,et al.  Predicting employee commitment to company and union: Divergent models , 1990 .

[7]  Carol Reade,et al.  Antecedents of organizational identification in multinational corporations: fostering psychological attachment to the local subsidiary and the global organization , 2001 .

[8]  Rupert Brown,et al.  Explaining intergroup differentiation in an industrial organization , 1986 .

[9]  Fred A. Mael,et al.  Social identity theory and the organization , 1989 .

[10]  Yuen J. Huo,et al.  Superordinate Identification, Subgroup Identification, and Justice Concerns: Is Separatism the Problem; Is Assimilation the Answer? , 1996 .

[11]  Brian Mullen,et al.  Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance, and status: An integration , 1992 .

[12]  R. Spears,et al.  Rebels with a Cause: Group Identification as a Response to Perceived Discrimination from the Mainstream , 2001 .

[13]  Thomas E. Becker,et al.  Profiles of commitment: An empirical test , 1993 .

[14]  Jukka Lipponen,et al.  Subgroup Identification, Superordinate Identification and Intergroup Bias between the Subgroups , 2003 .

[15]  Brian Mullen,et al.  Group composition, salience, and cognitive representations: The phenomenology of being in a group. , 1991 .

[16]  E. V. Schie,et al.  Foci and correlates of organizational identification , 2000 .

[17]  Richard D. Harvey,et al.  Perceiving pervasive discrimination among African Americans: Implications for group identification and well-being. , 1999 .

[18]  M. E. Sheldon,et al.  Investments and Involvements as Mechanisms Producing Commitment to the Organization , 1971 .

[19]  Daan van Knippenberg,et al.  Work Motivation and Performance: A Social Identity Perspective , 2000 .

[20]  Bernd Simon,et al.  Perceived intragroup homogeneity in minority-majority contexts. , 1987 .

[21]  N. Conway,et al.  Full-Time versus Part-Time Employees: Understanding the Links between Work Status, the Psychological Contract, and Attitudes , 2002 .

[22]  Thomas Rotondi.  Organizational Identification and Group Involvement , 1975 .

[23]  Ulrich Wagner,et al.  Social identification among school teachers: Dimensions, foci, and correlates , 2002 .

[24]  T. Tyler,et al.  Understanding why the justice of group procedures matters: A test of the psychological dynamics of the group-value model. , 1996 .

[25]  John P. Meyer,et al.  AFFECTIVE, CONTINUANCE, AND NORMATIVE COMMITMENT TO THE ORGANIZATION: A META-ANALYSIS OF ANTECEDENTS, CORRELATES, AND CONSEQUENCES , 2002 .

[26]  Celia V. Harquail,et al.  Organizational images and member identification. , 1994 .

[27]  Daniel M. Eveleth,et al.  Foci And Bases Of Employee Commitment: Implications For Job Performance , 1996 .

[28]  Steve Hinkle,et al.  Recognizing group diversity: Individualist‐collectivist and autonomous‐relational social orientations and their implications for intergroup processes , 1992 .

[29]  Fred A. Mael,et al.  Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification , 1992 .

[30]  L. Porter,et al.  The Measurement of Organizational Commitment. , 1979 .

[31]  Arnon E. Reichers,et al.  A review and reconceptualization of organizational commitment. , 1985, Academy of management review. Academy of Management.

[32]  A. Pruyn,et al.  THE IMPACT OF EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION AND PERCEIVED EXTERNAL PRESTIGE ON ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION , 2000 .