Kreiner, G. E., Hollensbe, E. C., & Sheep, M. L. (2006). Where is the “me” among the “we”? Identity work and the search for optimal balance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(5), 1031-1057.
The write up regarding qualitative methods is particularly good.
Summary
This paper is a qualitative study looking at identity amongst Episcopalian priests. Identity demands are defined as “situational factors that pressure individuals toward extreme integration or segmentation of personal and social identities.” Three such demands were prevalent amongst the sample: social identity as calling, identity demands, and strong situations. The first demand is illustrated by the fact that, to the priests themselves, the priesthood was more than just a job. This sense of calling pushed priests towards inclusion (high overlap of occupational and personal identities). The second demand deals with stakeholder expectations, which are viewed as “an identity that is forced upon people” - in this case, by the congregation. The final of the three deals with the demands of transient situations (“Every time the phone rings at three o’clock in the morning, I don’t answer it as a person, I answer it as a priest.”)
A second aspect of this conceptual identity model dealt with identity tensions, defined as “the stresses and strains experienced by an individual in relation to the interaction between her or his personal identity and a given social identity.” Overidentification is when the occupational identity begins to direct and reform the individual identity, resulting in imbalance. Important to note is that the authors conceptualize balance as dynamic, or what they term (borrowing from field theory) a “quasi-stationary equilibrium.” Identity intrusion occurred when certain parts of the personal identity were sacrificed on behalf of the organizational identity (“they had to give up important parts of themselves to be good priests”). Priests also felt that there were certain parts of their individual identities that they were not able to share, because they were un-priestlike. This is referred to as lack of identity transparency, and seems similar to inauthenticity.
The final aspect of this conceptual identity model deals with tactics used in identity work, or how people “actively respond and adapt to these intense demands.” Three types of identity work tactics emerge: differentiation, integration, and neutral or dual-function tactics. Differentiation tactics include actively separating the role from one’s identity, setting boundaries, enforcing an “identity hierarchy” (an order of importance placed on various identities), enacting transitory roles (“which involved temporarily escaping one’s predominant role set and stepping into an entirely different role”), and “flipping the on/off switch” (being explicit about whether one is acting in a role or not). Integration work consisted of fewer tactics than differentiation work. They included merging one’s role with one’s identity, “infusing self-aspects into tasks,” and “casting self as emblem.” The infusing tactic “involved taking aspects of oneself and infusing them into tasks of the role,” which seems to allow for nested or overlapping identities. The emblem tactic seems to include the identity being subsumed by one’s role – rendering them inseparable and indistinct. Finally, neutral or dual-function tactics included seeking refreshment (doing something not related to priestly duties - ephemeral roles engage another role, seeking refreshment simply disengages from the priest role), involving other people (either connected to or unconnected to one’s role), relying on spirituality, and changing over time.
Application
Like legs in a stool, having only a single identity can be problematic. Multiple identities seem to lend stability to an individual. At the same time, only mildly identifying with a role can produce negative outcomes as well. The tactics in this paper can be used to help employees (or one’s self) regardless of how strongly they identify with their work role.
Comments powered by Disqus.