Content area
Full text
Introduction
Past literature suggests that people tend to organize into social groups to satisfy their needs to belong (Tajfel and Turner, 1986). Based on this assertion, scholars defined the construct of organizational identification as the degree of an employee’s belongingness to the organization that results in an individual’s self-perception being expressed in terms of group membership (Dutton et al., 1994; Mael and Ashforth, 1992). While investigating the antecedents of organizational identification, past studies already established that employees are more likely to identify with business organizations that enhance their self-image. Consequently, prior literature recognized such specific factors as an organization’s reputation, distinctiveness and prestige as the main determinants of employee identification (Dukerich et al., 2002; Elsbach, 1999). To contribute to past research, the objective of this study is to uncover new antecedents of organizational identification.
This paper aims to identify new factors related to the development of employee identification. To do so, the study applies social exchange theory – theory proposing that social exchanges between involved parties will generate reciprocity and mutual obligation (Emerson, 1976; Blau, 1964). Social exchange theory also explains that exchanges between involved parties are governed by the principle of quid pro quo. Therefore, it suggests that actions of one party should be recognized as direct responses to the deeds of another party, highlighting a strong interdependence between resource allocations and social interactions (Gergen, 1969). Not surprisingly, social exchange theory quickly found its application in the context of management studies. Based on this concept, scholars proposed that the quality of employee–employer exchanges should shape employees’ psychological processes, therefore impacting such job-related outcome variables as employees’ attitudes and behaviors (Eisenberger et al., 2004; Rousseau, 1998). To advance such findings, the present paper puts forward a new mechanism. It investigates whether organizational resources that employees obtain from their employers could explain a variance in levels of such employees’ identification. Consequently, this paper aims to identify new antecedents of organizational identification by testing the following relationships.
First, this paper explores the effect of structural empowerment on employee identification. Structural empowerment was defined in past literature in terms of enabling employees to successfully complete their job-related tasks by providing them with necessary organizational resources (Kanter, 1993). Past research found numerous organizational benefits associated with...