Members' Identification with Multiple-Identity Organizations

By Peter Foreman, David A. Whetten. Organ. Sci., 2002

684 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7f54f25dd2a94f87e278b06fefb661764c5c6472

How researchers see this paper

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

In Gender Studies

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Testing and extending the group engagement model: linkages between social identity, procedural justice, economic outcomes, and extrarole behavior. (2009, neutral): “Examining this relationship can serve as a test of social identity’s motivational consequences and can fill a gap in organizational identity research that has resulted from more rapid theory development than theory testing (Corley et al., 2006; Dukerich et al., 2002; Foreman & Whetten, 2002).”
Affective Commitment in Co-operative Organizations: What Makes Members Want to Stay? (2012, background): “…researchers have contributed to the accumulation of knowledge in this field (e.g., Jiménez et al., 2010; Bijman, 2011; Unterrainer, Palgi, Weber, Iwanowa & Oesterreich, 2011; Byrne & McCarthy, 2005; Foreman & Whetten, 2002; Røkholt, 1999; Stryjan, 1989, 1994; Craig, 1980; Kanter, 1968, 1972).”
Category Stretching: Reorienting Research on Categories in Strategy, Entrepreneurship, and Organization Theory (2013, background): “Interestingly, goal-based categories open an entire new research area connecting various degrees of individualistic categorization (by a lay person, an employee, a client, an activist) with both organizations’ self-categorization (i.e. its strategy in terms of identification and positioning; Foreman”
When values backfire: Leadership, attribution, and disenchantment in a values-driven organization (2006, background): “Most organizations implicitly, and often explicitly, endorse bbusinessQ or performance-oriented values such as quality, efficiency, or profitability (Foreman & Whetten, 2002; Scott, 1992).”
What signals matter for social startups? It depends: The influence of gender role congruity on social impact accelerator selection decisions (2019, background): “267) and may ultimately lead to venture failure (Foreman and Whetten, 2002).”
The Social and Economic Mission of Social Enterprises: Dimensions, Measurement, Validation, and Relation (2015, methodology): “To measure the extent to which the social enterprises adhere to a normative and utilitarian identity, the operationalization of Foreman and Whetten (2002) was used.”
Construing Organizational Identity: The Role of Embodied Cognition (2010, neutral): “…OI is in use when the defining attributes of the organization are described as though they come directly from the organization’s features (e.g. Foreman and Whetten 2002) without an interpreter who has perceived them or an interlocutor who has proclaimed them (e.g. Brown and Starkey 2000;…”
The role of consumer–brand identification in building brand relationships (2013, background): “Organizational identity theory additionally confirms the impact of congruity on commitment by suggesting that identity congruence has a significant effect on member commitment (Dutton et al.,1994; Foreman and Whetten, 2002).”
Identification in Organizations: An Examination of Four Fundamental Questions (2008, background): “…identification are root constructs, Meyer, Becker, and Vandenberghe (2004; see also Bedeian, 2007; Bergami & Bagozzi, 2000; Cheney & Tompkins, 1987; Foreman & Whetten, 2002; Herrbach, 2006; Sass & Canary, 1991) proposed that OI actually fosters (affective) commitment—which we suspect may, in turn,…”
Understanding Organizations through Embodied Metaphors (2008, background): “Despite the increasing interest in the concept of organizational identity, few studies have investigated it empirically (Dukerich et al. 2002; Foreman and Whetten 2002).”