This case study reveals how organization members communicatively manage multiple targets and sources of identification during a time of company transition. Interview accounts are used to examine how members discursively construct understanding as they discuss two competing value-based identity structures. Results reveal three distinct discursive strategies—comparison, logic, and support—that members use to manage identity tensions, and eight corresponding communicative tactics used to enact those strategies. This focus on communicative strategies and tactics is important because identities are expressed through language, and discourse is the means available to organization members for negotiating various identity structures. Discursive strategies are central to the identity formation process and provide a window into the sensemaking of participants.
References
1.
Bantz, C.R. (1993). Understanding organizations: Interpreting organizational communication cultures. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
2.
Barker, J.R. (1993). Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 408-437.
3.
Barker, J.R. (1999). The discipline of teamwork. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4.
Bullis, C., & Tompkins, P.K. (1989). The Forest Ranger revisited: A study of control practices and identification. Communication Monographs, 56, 287-306.
5.
Cheney, G. (1983a). On the various and changing meanings of organizational membership: A field study of organizational identification. Communication Monographs, 50(4), 342-362.
6.
Cheney, G. (1983b). The rhetoric of identification and the study of organizational communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 69, 143-158.
7.
Cheney, G. (1991). Rhetoric in an organizational society: Managing multiple identities. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
8.
Cheney, G. (1999). Values at work: Employee participation meets market pressure at Mondragón. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
9.
Cheney, G., & Christensen, L.T. (2001). Organizational identity: Linkages between internal and external communication. In F.M. Jablin & L.L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research and methods (pp. 231-269). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
Cheney, G., & Frenette, G. (1993). Persuasion and organization: Values, logics, and accounts in contemporary corporate public discourse. In C. Conrad (Ed.), Ethical nexus (pp. 49-73). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
11.
Cheney, G., & Tompkins, P.K. (1987). Coming to terms with organizational identification and commitment. Central States Speech Journal, 38, 1-15.
12.
Christensen, L.T., & Cheney, G. (1994). Articulating identity in an organizational age. Communication Yearbook, 17, 222-235.
13.
DiSanza, J.R., & Bullis, C. (1999). Everybody identifies with Smokey the Bear: Employee responses to newsletter identification inducements at the U.S. Forest Service. Management Communication Quarterly, 12(3), 347-399.
14.
Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
15.
Granovetter, M.S. (1976). Network sampling: Some first steps. American Journal of Sociology, 81, 1287-1303.
16.
Harré, R., & Secord, P.F. (1973). The explanation of social behavior. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adams.
17.
Holmer-Nadesan, M. (1996). Organizational identity and space of action. Organization Studies, 17(1), 49-71.
18.
Koch, L., & Deetz, S. (1981). Metaphor analysis of social reality in organizations. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 9(1), 1-15.
19.
Kuhn, T., & Nelson, N. (2002). Reengineering identity: A case study of multiplicity and duality in organizational identification. Management Communication Quarterly, 16(1), 5-38.
20.
Kunda, G. (1992). Engineering culture: Control and commitment in a high-tech corporation. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
21.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
23.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
24.
Larkey, L., & Morrill, C. (1995). Organizational commitment as symbolic process. Western Journal of Communication, 59, 193-213.
Lindlof, T.R. (1995). Qualitative communication research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27.
Pratt, M.G., & Foreman, P.O. (2000). Classifying managerial responses to multiple organizational identities. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 18-42.
28.
Russo, T.C. (1998). Organizational and professional identification: A case of newspaper journalists. Management Communication Quarterly, 12(1), 72-111.
29.
Scott, C.R. (1997). Identification with multiple targets in a geographically dispersed organization. Management Communication Quarterly, 10(4), 491-522.
30.
Scott, C.R. (1999). The impact of physical and discursive anonymity on group members’ multiple identifications during computer-supported decision making. Western Journal of Communication, 63(4), 456-487.
31.
Scott, C.R., Corman, S.R., & Cheney, G. (1998). Development of a structurational model of identification in the organization. Communication Theory, 8(3), 298-336.
32.
Simon, H. (1976). Administrative behavior (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press.
33.
Strauss, A.L., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
Tompkins, P.K. (1993). Organizational communication imperatives: Lessons of the space program. Los Angeles: Roxbury.
35.
Tompkins, P.K., & Cheney, G. (1983). Account analysis of organizations: Decision making and identification. In L.L. Putnam & M.E. Pacanowsky (Eds.), Communication and organizations: An interpretive approach (pp. 123-146). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
36.
Tompkins, P.K., & Cheney, G. (1985). Communication and unobtrusive control in contemporary organizations. In R. McPhee & P.K. Tompkins (Eds.), Organizational communication: Traditional themes and new directions (pp. 179-210). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
37.
Winkler, H., Rich, J., & Downing, S. (Producers). (1985-1992). MacGyver [Television series]. Los Angeles; Vancouver: ABC Television.
38.
Weick, K. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). New York: Random House.
39.
Yin, R.K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
40.
Zorn, T.E., Christensen, L.T., & Cheney, G. (1999). Do we really want constant change? San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Communications.
41.
Zorn, T.E., Page, D.J., & Cheney, G. (2000). Nuts about change: Multiple perspectives on change-oriented communication in a public sector organization. Management Communication Quarterly, 13(4), 515-566.
