Organizational identification among Brazilian public employees: a study of the cultural sector.
| Autor | Cavazotte, Flavia de Souza Costa Neves |
1 Introduction
When we observe Brazilian reality, management in public companies is often described as marked by routines that are full of bureaucratic principles, of technicalism and mechanicism that predominate over more modern administrative approaches (Cavalcanti, 2005; Pires & Macedo, 2006). This focus on formal aspects and routines has obscured the importance of the human aspects associated with the work environment, and particularly with people management in that context. However, attention to subjective elements such as the connections between employees and their organizations --through the study of organizational identification, of how it occurs and how it influences individuals and public organizations (Ashforth, Harrison & Corley, 2008)--can lead to the development of more effective policies as to performance in these organizations, by fostering the efficient accomplishment of their missions and the generation of a more positive atmosphere among employees (He & Brown, 2013).
This study seeks to better understand the importance of organizational identification among public employees by analyzing its determinants and consequences. The main objective of the study is to analyze whether organizational identification is influenced by the alignment of employee values with those of the company (P-O fit), whether it influences citizenship behavior and voluntary turnover, and if it mediates the relationship between P-O fit and employee behavior. Although organizational identification in public sector organizations has been studied in fields of executive management, such as secretaries of state (e.g. Marra, Fonseca & Marques, 2014), and service provision, such as higher education (e.g. Santos, Vieira & Garcia, 2013), research that seeks to empirically analyze the causes and effects of the organizational identification of public employees is rare. However, this type of analysis is important to reach a deeper understanding of how these connections are promoted and to verify their importance, and thus generate a more robust foundation to support human resource management policies in this sector.
This research contributes in this way, and advances the theoretical field by proposing that organizational identification is influenced by alignment between employee values and organizations' core values, that it is a key element bonding employees and public organizations, and that it can promote in them behavior that makes organizations more effective, specifically as to engagement in peer collaboration and intention to remain in these organizations. The propositions were investigated based on data collected from employees belonging to two public organizations from the cultural sector. In this paper, due to their characteristics and the need to protect their identities, these companies are referred to as the "Older Lady" and the "Young Executive". The results of this analysis are discussed in terms of their theoretical and practical implications, with recommendations for the management of people in Brazilian public companies.
2 Theoretical references
2.1 Individual identity
Human identity is one of the most fundamental notions of what constitutes essentially "being" for ourselves and in relation to the world. Although it is constituted in people's imaginary and is created in their minds, identity has concrete consequences for individuals and is reproduced in their actions and in their discourse (Bauman, 2005). Giddens (2002) discusses the aspects of human identity as part of a lifestyle, made up of choices made by a certain actor. During the process of creating a lifestyle, there are several alternatives, and these choices are influenced by the social context. The variations in choices made by a group of actors and others simultaneously generate differentiation and exclusion processes, to the extent that these actors seek their own ontological security, that is, "a sense of continuity and permanence to the self" (Giddens, 2002, p. 223).
The identification process is at the root of the construction of identity, for, when someone asks themselves "who am I?", that person is creating his or her identity based on what he or she recognizes and embraces as "his or hers" or as part of "himself or herself" (Bauman 2005, p.75). Thus, personal identity is formed by a continuous identification process with different elements, and is the result of constant dynamics between "being" and "becoming"; therefore, it is not predetermined, nor static in time (Jenkins, 2005).
Jenkins (2005) considers the identification process a basic mechanism that people use to distinguish themselves from each other; to him, the formation of identity occurs through systematic analysis of their similarities and differences in relation to other people and objects. In the process of individual identification, the evaluation of differences in relation to others are predominant, aiming at defining in what "I" differ from "them." With regard to collective identification, the author relates it to the similarities identified among the individuals that make up a group, in such a way that the group can be seen as a cohesive whole, expressing the idea of unity.
Other authors also reflect about identity in the postmodern age, and about its impacts on the different contexts in which individuals are immersed, among them the organizational context. Hall (2005), for example, believes that structural changes in society have led to the shifting and fragmentation of identities. According to Hall, an individual was considered a single subject that possessed a fixed identity. However, in postmodern times, scholars began to refer to the fragmentation of identity. In this way, room for the emergence of new identities was created, and they can be multifaceted and antagonistic, and manifest in individuals according to the context (Bauman, 1999).
Thus, authors have discussed the identity of an individual as unstable, mutant and, above all, dependent on how that individual belongs to each cultural system in which he or she participates. Bauman (2005), for example, presents the notion of multiple possibilities of identity, establishing a distinction between chosen identities and imposed identities. In the same sense, Ramarajan (2014) points out that identities are multiple, emphasizing that these categories of identities can be revealed in a simultaneous and conflicting way. However, to Bauman, they can coexist and reduce conflict, depending on the context and on the way in which individuals experience their multiple identities, even though, in some cases, they might express themselves in a conflicting way.
At the core of an individual's identity, a person's self-concept includes the various elements that are idiosyncratic to them, such as their interests and personal characteristics. It plays an essential role in the human interpretative structure, in how people feel and behave in the various domains of life. This self-concept is made up of the set of self-descriptions and self-assessments subjectively available to an individual (Hogg & Abrams, 1988). Social identities, on the other hand, are associated with the groups that an individual belongs to (Hogg, 1996), as explained below.
2.2 Social identities
According to Tajfel's social identity theory (1972, p. 293), "a system of social categorizations creates and defines an individual's own place in society." Social identity theory advances questions regarding how individuals incorporate belonging to social groups into their identities. People tend to classify themselves and others according to various social categories, such as members of organizations, religious affiliations, by sex and age group, and others (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). The set of social categories an individual considers him or herself to belong to makes up his or her social identities (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1986).
According to social identity theory, identification allows individuals to define themselves as members of social categories that differentiate them from each other as individuals, but also define them in terms of what they share with other members of the groups to which they belong. To Ashforth and Mael (1989), social categorization has two functions: one for cognitive segmentation and another for organization of the social environment. In this sense, an individual is defined by the archetype of the category in which he or she is classified (stereotypes) and by the social classification that enables him or her to be placed in the environment.
However, social identities are made up not only of representations that individuals make for themselves in their social environments, referring to the different groups to which they belong, but also by opposition groups, to which they do not belong. We can also observe that some social identities tend to be considered more positive the more an individual recognizes him or herself to be a valued person because of the group with which he or she share their social identity (Adler, 1986, Machado, 2003). The theory of social identification developed by Tajfel (1978, 1981) and Tajfel and Turner (1986) supported the later development of the organizational identification concept.
2.3 Organizational identification
According to Sluss and Ashforth (2007), the study of identities and identification within organizations paved the way for several reflections on how individuals define and position themselves in organizational contexts. The importance of organizational identification has been discussed by scholars since the late 1960s (Brown, 1969; Hall & Schneider, 1972; Kriekaard, 1993; Lee, 1971). However, it was in the 1980s that the concept was consolidated by propositions presented by Ashforth and Mael (1996), based on the social identity theory (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1986).
Organizational identification can be understood as a specific form of social identification (Ashforth & Mael, 1989), and...
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃOCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
