“Define Yourself. . . #EXSTpride ”: Exploring an Organizational Hashtag Through the Structurational Model of Identification

Regionalization of Structures

Locales connect to another construct in structuration theory: regionalization. Locales have different regions. My kitchen has a range for cooking, an island for eating, and a corner for our kids’ art table. Each of those regions is critical in constituting the contexts of various interactions occurring in different spaces and at different times in our kitchen.

Scott et al. (1998) borrow Giddens’s notion of regionalization to describe how interaction (and identification) differs across time and space. All of us claim different identities (e.g., professor, mother, spouse, etc.) for unique purposes. Throughout organizational membership, individuals enact multiple identities and identifications which may be “nested” or embedded within one another, complicating the identification process (Meisenbach & Kramer, 2014).

Identity regionalization might also occur on social media which allow users to convey multiple identities. Interactions on Instagram, Facebook, and the like blur boundaries between work and personal life (Bartels et al., 2014). Individuals present a certain extent of their personal, group, organizational, and occupational or professional identities on social media because people use social media for work and to communicate with friends in the same collapsed context (Marwick & boyd, 2011; van Zoonen & Treem, 2019).

Similarly, organizational hashtags may shape and be shaped by different regionalized identities/identifications. Studies have illustrated how the same organizational hashtag can be used both for and against organizations (e.g., Albu & Etter, 2016). However, research has yet to demonstrate how such hashtags might be used to promote individuals’ front regions or “‘positive’ identifications” as well as back regions or “more ‘negative’ disidentifications” (Scott et al., 1998, p. 315). Because social media use is, at its core, an act of self-presentation, the identities/identifications we present on social media offer a multidimensional view of ourselves. Therefore, the final research question seeks to understand the role of multiple identities in individuals’ use of organizational hashtags:

RQ3: What different compatible and/or opposing identities/identifications are expressed through an organizational hashtag?

Data Collection

To answer these research questions, I analyzed a university’s organizational hashtag on Instagram, which included the University’s abbreviated name and the word “pride” (anonymized as Example State University and #EXSTpride). In 2019, a research assistant searched the hashtag and created a database of 150 (of 684 possible) posts using #EXSTpride, recording various aspects of each post (e.g., date, detailed image description, caption, location, etc.). The research assistant added posts to the database in the order they appeared on her timeline, determined by Instagram’s algorithm. The 150 posts spanned three and a half years of content using #EXSTpride.

Data Analysis

I qualitatively coded the images and texts of posts with the hashtag #EXSTpride using a phronetic iterative process (Tracy, 2020) which “alternates between emic, or emergent, readings of the data and an etic use of existing models, explanations, and other theories” (Tracy, 2020, p. 209). Data analysis involved drawing on existing theory and research while simultaneously paying careful attention to the emergent data. In other words, I entered data analysis with several sensitizing concepts from structuration theory and the structurational model of identification, and I alternated between these prevailing theories, on one hand, and the words and images seemingly used to express and create identification with #EXSTpride on the other hand.

I crafted a codebook in which I coded emerging themes or “categories” (Charmaz, 2014) from both the image descriptions (e.g., “holding up the hand sign”) and/or captions (e.g., “I love my new home”) of each post. At first, these primary-cycle codes were largely descriptive in nature (e.g., “starting freshman year”). I used constant comparisons to group data and modified code definitions to accommodate new data or create new codes (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Over time, through secondary-cycle coding, I synthesized and organized those initial categories (e.g., “orientation”) into broader, more interpretive themes, called hierarchical codes (e.g., “situated activities”) (Tracy, 2020). I stopped creating new codes after post 114 in the database, and I felt confident I had reached data saturation at post 150. Table 1 presents the final code structure, explained next.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Code Structure.

Primary-Cycle Codes	Secondary-Cycle Codes	Hierarchical codes
Pride	System of Identification	Duality of Structure (RQ1)
Mascot
Squad metaphors and connotations
External members
Distinctive	Structure of Identity
Central
Enduring
Extracurricular activities	Locales and Situated Activities (RQ2)
Orientation and graduation
Campus
Social activities
Individual identities	Regionalization of Structures (RQ3)
Work groups, teams, or department identities
Organizational identities
Occupational or professional identities

Duality of Structure

Posts using #EXSTpride demonstrated how the attachment process involves both system and structure. Although these components are presented separately for the purpose of analysis, keep in mind that there is a mutually implicative relationship between the system of identification and the structure of identity.

Locales and Situated Activities

Posts using #EXSTpride draw attention to locales activities that (re)produce identification. One of the most common situated activities connected to #EXSTpride in the posts I examined were extracurricular activities, including sports, band, and ROTC. For example, one post shared their experiences at “band camp,” complemented by a smiling selfie from band members holding instruments.

Finally, orientation and graduation posts highlighted boundary passages as a meaningful turning point for students’ identification. One post showed a student splashing in a University fountain with a black graduation cap. This post mentioned, “T-24 days until graduation [graduation emoji]. Thank you so much [photographer’s name] for running around campus with me and being silly and helping capture my time here at my favorite place [red heart emoji]. . .”

Furthermore, the University’s campus itself appeared to be a locale of situated activity, as posts with #EXSTpride frequently featured iconic sites on campus. All but two posts that tagged a location occurred at the University or in the college’s town. One wide-shot, artistic photo, for instance, showed a skater, leaping through the air under a well-known architectural feature on campus.

Finally, social activities were pervasive in the posts I examined, including posts of students hugging and hanging out in groups, while mentioning words like “squad” and “friends.” For example, three young women posed in University-colored shirts with Greek letters as the poster explained her excitement to be wearing “stitch shirts w/my beautiful littles [sorority sisters]! [red heart emoji] [state symbol emoji] [palms up emoji] #[Sorority].” These situated activities confirm prior findings that social media use strengthens acculturation-related activities (Thom-Santelli et al., 2011), and extend that work beyond enterprise social media to show how socialization efforts also transpire via personal social media use.

Regionalization of Structures

Giddens’s (1984) regionalization of structures provides insight into how multiple identities and identifications are expressed through #EXSTpride. This analysis confirmed the “four especially relevant identities in organizational life” (Scott et al., 1998, p. 313): individual, work group, organizational, and occupational or professional.

First, individual posts examined were personal statements focusing on posters’ individual identities: “personal interests that put the individual’s well-being above more social considerations” (Scott et al., 1998, p. 313). Sample individualized posts read, “All I do is win, win, win #EXST20,” and “I am truly excited to start college on Monday. Even though I know it’s going to be hard, I will get it done! GO EAGLES! #EXST #EXST20 #EXSTmovein #eagles #flyeagles #goeagles #[state symbol].” These posts elucidate the role of individuals’ identities in their connection to organizations.

Second, posts highlighted work groups, teams, or department identities, “where the interests of an immediate and acting group are strongly considered” (Scott et al., 1998, p. 313). For instance, one post depicted 16 smiling college students, packed in the Theater Department’s black-box show area. The poster wrote, “My directing 1 class. So proud of these mad geniuses.”

Third, organizational identities were also evident in posts using #EXSTpride. Here, the interests of the University as an organization were most salient (Scott et al., 1998). For example, one student posted a selfie in her room, showing off her outfit and sharing “I absolutely love this school [heart eyes emoji].”

Fourth, the #EXSTpride posts I examined also signaled occupational or professional identities. Several users chose #EXSTpride to communicate their occupational attachment as a(n) (incoming or outgoing) college student. One swimsuit-wearing student flashed a peace sign to the camera with the campus river flowing behind her. She lamented, “When you’re college AF [as fuck; a slang term to characterize something in the extreme] . . .”

Beyond representing a variety of identities, #EXSTpride allows for overlap between identities, as many posts clearly demonstrated multiple identities co-existing. For example, posts exemplifying individual identities were often compatible with hashtags highlighting group (e.g., #EXST20, #freshman) and organizational identification (e.g., #EXST, #goeagles). Opposing identities were also present, as one post displayed a student who conveys a neutral attachment with schoolwork but nonetheless expressed a sense of belongingness to the University: “Schools kinda whatever but these eagles sure aren’t! These 4 years are gonna be an adventure and I’m super excited!! [palms up emoji] Fly Eagles.” This finding adds to previous quantitative work demonstrating how organizational identification increases employees’ propensity to overlap their personal and professional identities online (Fieseler et al., 2014). Of note, individuals did not share any ambivalent or disidentification posts. All posts using the hashtag were overwhelmingly positive, highlighting front regions of individuals’ identities.

Theorizing Organizational Hashtag Use as House Organs 2.0

Early scholarship exploring identification analyzed house organs to show how organizational materials, like magazines and newsletters, communicated and induced identification (Cheney, 1983; DiSanza & Bullis, 1999). Similar to past studies, this project demonstrates how an organizational hashtag communicates identity and induces identification through both images and text. However, I theorize organizational hashtag use as a new kind of house organ.

Rather than being created by the organization, social media allow for house organs 2.0, which hail not only from leaders; they are co-created by stakeholders—including organizational members (current, prospective, and past), consumers, and even outsiders. By using organizational hashtags, stakeholders are not only identifying with the house organs, but creating them, too. In short, individuals experiencing identification are creating the very material that identifies them. Through social media, the identification process then becomes a form of prosumption: a portmanteau word combining “production” and “consumption.” Although Alvin Toffler coined the term prosumption in 1980—well before the advent of social media—scholars have more recently applied the concept to user-generated or Web 2.0 content, which would not exist without prosumers (Ritzer et al., 2012). By way of prosumption, co-created house organs are unique in that all stakeholders have the opportunity to communicate the organization’s identity and contribute to the identification process through organizational hashtags.

House organs 2.0 connect to and extend the concept of auto-communication: the notion that an organization’s external communication affects the organization’s identity. Past scholarship has primarily explored auto-communication in the context of marketing (e.g., advertisements) and corporate artifacts (e.g., mission statements), demonstrating how externally directed organizational messages can reinforce identification internally (for review, see Cheney et al., 2013). Organizational hashtag use expands our understanding of auto-communication, because individual stakeholders, in addition to organizations, are co-creating messages that self-communicate to promote identification.

Proffering Practical and Discursive Consciousness to the Structurational Model of Identification

This project extends Scott et al.’s (1998) model by demonstrating how the identification process unfolds over social media. Beyond an empirical validation of this theory in a new context, this research also demonstrates the role of practical and discursive consciousness, which are central features of Giddens’s work but not accounted for in the model of identification. Discursive consciousness is the coherent account we give ourselves of our reasons and goals for action. In short, it is explainable consciousness, involving “being able to put things into words” (Giddens, 1984, p. 45). Practical consciousness, on the other hand, involves a tacit knowledgeability, as when we will often act “without being able to express” what we know (Giddens, 1984, p. 49). This second form of reflexivity involves the unexplainable routines we execute without analytic attention.

Although Scott et al. (1998) do not address discursive and practical consciousness in their model, if we follow Giddens’s theorizing, most identity and identification work likely take place in one’s practical consciousness. Take, for example, Scott et al.’s (1998) extended example of John, whose identities as an associate professor and father both shape and are shaped by his social interactions in his daily life. Most of John’s actions need no explanation or critical evaluation.

Organizational hashtags like #EXSTpride extend the model, because structure (identity) and system (identification) are recursively ordered through discursive consciousness—that is, explicit claims of attachment. Through posting images and captions, individuals are accounting the organization’s identity and putting their identification into words. The hashtag #EXSTpride offers a discursive account of their action. The hashtag signals the social media post as both a marker of the organization’s identity and an expression of the individual’s identification. Because of this, users share a common, explicit understanding of the hashtag’s meaning, and very few posts deviate from it. As previously mentioned, only one examined post deviated in its use of #EXSTpride to talk about LGBTQ pride. In this way, the current study shows the role of discursive consciousness in implicating identity (structure) and identification (action).

Practical Contributions

This study’s findings illuminate several practical implications of organizational hashtags. First, these hashtags can benefit organizations by fostering identification and extending the reach of organizational identification beyond current employees or members. Managers and leaders should recognize the power of organizational hashtags in the process of identification—which can encompass prospective members, organizational alumni, consumers, competitors, and other outsiders—and might consider current or potential hashtags for stakeholders to express identities/identifications in their unique organizations. Particularly as more people work from home, organizations should consider how social media might sustain organizational bonds. In addition to organizationally driven technologies (e.g., email, Slack, etc.), members’ personal social media use might also be an avenue for creating and fostering identification. This is important, because identification leads to beneficial organizational and individual outcomes, like increased participation (for review, see Cheney et al., 2013).

Second, results from this research can influence organizational practices by distributing the work of fostering identification. Instead of employing entire teams of writers or social media content creators, leaders can rely on other stakeholders to promulgate the organization’s identity and the identification process. Recognizing the identification process on social media as a form of prosumption, managers can crowdsource identification efforts. Just as companies recruit brand ambassadors, leaders can enlist stakeholders to function as identity/identification ambassadors. Because of the structure of identity that exists in the collection of organizational hashtag posts, ambassadors will know what content to post that aligns with the existing narrative.

Limitations and Future Directions

Although my project focused solely on one institution and a singular hashtag, it provides a strong foundation for future work. Additional research should explore other organizational hashtags, such as those I have seen for products (e.g., #HARLEYpride), stores (e.g., #HEBproud), and military branches (e.g., #ARMYpride). Moreover, I analyzed only public posts; subsequent work might investigate users’ private posts with #EXSTpride or similar hashtags, which may convey disidentification. In the current study, no public #EXSTpride posts disparaged the organization or signaled back regions or more “negative” identifications. Future work should explore how organizational hashtags might function as a means of concertive control—a peer-based form of influence that has long served as a byproduct of identification and has recently been theorized as operating in online communities (Gibbs et al., 2021). Because the hashtag contained the word “pride,” it would contradict social norms if posters complained, showed disrespect, or scorned the organization. In this way, certain organizational hashtags might have the power to silence non-confirming identities, increasing the organization’s control over members and nonmembers.

In addition, interviews with social media users about their hashtag use could uncover insight about the identification process on social media, particularly acts of resistance and self-censored identities/identifications. Building upon research demonstrating how counter-institutional hashtags create a form of collective resistance (Kirkwood et al., 2019), future work might explore how counter-institutional hashtags could provide a voice for counter-identities/identifications.

In conclusion, this study helps explain how communication through social media fosters identification. Organizational hashtags help (re)produce identities and users’ attachments, further demonstrating the pivotal role of technology in organizational life.