Classifying Managerial Responses to Multiple Organizational Identities

By Michael G. Pratt, Peter Foreman. 2000

1,165 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Sociology and Political Science, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/68609656615c1478ba5b02181dec5bcbc85b9709

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Sociology and Political Science

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

The effects of the perceived external prestige of the organization on employee deviant workplace behavior: The mediating role of job satisfaction (2016, background): “Organizational identification serves as both a definitional and classification tool that guides organizational members in understanding who they are and what they stand for (Foreman and Parent, 2008; Pratt and Foreman, 2000; Whetten, 2006).”
Identification in Organizations: An Examination of Four Fundamental Questions (2008, background): “A particularly intriguing tactic may be termed identicide, where one suppresses and even kills an identity that is seen to impede other valued identities (cf. identity deletion, Pratt & Foreman, 2000; identity inhibition, Hugenberg & Bodenhausen, 2004).”
Multicultural Employees: A Framework for Understanding How They Contribute to Organizations (2013, background): “In contrast, the hybridizing ideal type identifies with the intersection of cultures, similar to intersection (Roccas & Brewer, 2002), aggregated (Pratt & Foreman, 2000), and blended patterns (Phinney & Devich-Navarro, 1997).”
Managing Intractable Identity Conflicts (2009, background): “For example, some have argued that under conditions where group identities are in conflict but must be maintained in an organization, identities should be compartmentalized (Pratt & Foreman, 2000) before attempting to reconcile or bridge them (Pratt & Corley, 2007).”
Firm Philanthropy in Small- and Medium-Sized Family Firms (2014, neutral): “Their interests and orientations are generally driven by different motivations and this in turn determines different preferences on how to run the business (Pratt & Foreman, 2000).”
“I Identify with Her,” “I Identify with Him”: Unpacking the Dynamics of Personal Identification in Organizations (2016, background): “The benefit of such identity holism is the integrative capabilities—the synergy and wisdom—that arise when the whole is greater than the sumof the parts (Pratt & Foreman, 2000; Wiesenfeld & Hewlin, 2003).”
SOCIAL IDENTITY IN INDUSTRIAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY: CONCEPTS, CONTROVERSIES AND CONTRIBUTIONS (2006, background): “As a result, to date only a small set of studies have explicitly focused on the way different multiple identities are interrelated, or how they can be managed (e.g., Jetten, O’Brien et al., 2002; Pratt & Foreman, 2000).”
Status Differentiation and the Protean Self: A Social-Cognitive Model of Unethical Behavior in Organizations (2011, background): “For example, a religious employee who accepts bribes at work may compartmentalize (Pratt and Foreman, 2000) his/her religious and business spheres to alleviate psychic distress.”
In the Horns of the Dilemma: Socioemotional Wealth, Financial Wealth, and Acquisitions in Family Firms (2018, background): “…bundles dissimilar products and unrelated technologies and serves dissimilar markets through an Gomez-Mejia et al. / Behavioral Theory of the Firm 1377 unrelated acquisition, it becomes more difficult for family members to derive a coherent family identity from the firm (Pratt & Foreman, 2000).”