Understanding psychological bonds between individuals and organizations: the coalescence model of organizational identification

Citation

Treat, T. (2013), "Understanding psychological bonds between individuals and organizations: the coalescence model of organizational identification", European Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 598-600. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-05-2013-0062

Book synopsis

It is well documented that organisations are reshaping their long‐term commitment to employees in this era of economic uncertainty on both sides of the Atlantic. Employees today are faced with an environment of increased employment volatility, diminishing pensions, shifting healthcare burdens, and employer focus on skills acquisition as opposed to skill development within their existing workforce. Many employees are responding by rethinking their commitments to the organisations in which they serve, choosing to operate as an independent brand in pursuit of a protean career, rather than advancement within an organisation for which the worker has strong bonds. The dynamics operating in this transformation of the labour compact suggests a pressing urgency for a better understanding of the psychological bonds between individuals and the organisations they serve. Sebastian Fuchs has delivered just that.

The central construct around which Fuchs frames the book is that of organisational identification, the “self defining connection or bond between individuals and organisations […] imperative for organisations competing in marketplaces characterised by fierce competition (p. 1).” Organisations that are able to generate an increased sense of identification among their employees are more likely to see positive performance outcomes as “organisational identification predicts co‐operation, the motivation, contextual and task performance, lower employee turnover intent, job satisfaction and customer orientation, among others. Organisational identification, as such, seems to be an effective device for organisations to increase overall organisational functioning and performance […] (pp. 1‐2).”

Three explanations have been explored separately in the literature to explain the formation of organisational identification – identity, exchange, and justice. However, these theories have not been integrated or explored in ways that examine their relative role in predicting organisational identification. In developing the coalescence model of organisational identification, and testing the theory empirically using robust methods, Fuchs has advanced the understanding of the field providing significant potential for researchers and practitioners alike.

A comprehensive review of the literature addresses previous efforts to formulate organisational identification in terms of alignment between individual and organisational values, goals, and beliefs, as well as behavioural consequences of identification, such as engagement and citizenship behaviours. Fuchs navigates contested terrain carefully in the literature review to ensure that attributes of organisational identification are distinguished from organisational commitment. Organisational identification is a cognitive construct rooted in an individual's self‐concept, while organisational commitment is the psychological relationship of the individual to the organisation with emphasis on why an individual intends to stay with an organisation. Fuchs' deconstruction of attributes and concepts related to the topic provides a clear foundation for a new entrant into the field as well as addressing the need to his research.

Having defined organisational identification, Fuchs reviews a number of positive outcomes associated intuitively and empirically with organisational identification, such as higher motivation, involvement, and creativity; reduced turnover; enhanced task performance and decision‐making, and citizenship behaviours. Citizenship behaviours refer to actions not formally required of a role, but helpful to the organisation. Fuchs cautions that outcomes are too frequently measured without sufficient control and methodological rigour to establish links to identification as a substantial contributor. He addresses this shortcoming by exploring outcomes that are conceptually proximate to identification: individual initiative, turnover intention, and loyal boosterism – supporting the organisational brand externally.

Evaluation

Fuchs' book advances the field through three key findings. First, Fuchs' finds that organisational identification correlates positively to individual initiative and loyal boosterism, and negatively correlates to turnover intention, which he conceptualises in his Impact Model for Organisational Identification. These outcomes are suggestive of broader outcomes that lead to increased organisational performance. Second, Fuchs' coalescence model of organisational identification integrates identity, exchange, and justice‐based explanations for organisational identification. The model determines that both identity and exchange processes are at play in the development of deep psychological bonds to an organisation and that justice‐based explanations are either mediated or weak. Finally, Fuchs explores methodological approaches to issues of directional causality, method bias, and replicability. The context of this work is a major University in the UK, suggesting a need for inquiry in broader contexts.

Theoretically, Fuchs integrates and provides cohesion to previous work, filling gaps in the research rather than breaking new ground. The impact and coalescence models establish foundational concepts for new research that more accurately predict causal linkages to and proximate outcomes of organisational identification. Methodologically, Fuchs has established rigorous procedural approaches using cross‐sectional data to address issues of directional causality. Fuchs' careful and thorough quantitative methodological approaches deserve particular attention from researchers in the field.

While the book focuses on research questions, methods, and findings, there are practical implications to the work. Fuchs' findings provide clear recommendations related to “triggers” that can lead to enhanced organisational identification. Triggers include equitable salary and benefits, cultivation of employee perception of organisational support, development of employee agency as part of organisational branding in the community, and attention to the role modelling behaviours of upper management in signalling priorities. These triggers incorporate the significant operating elements of identity development and exchange behaviours within the organisation. Managers will find the book accessible, but will need to use reflective practice to translate its findings into human resource strategy.

Consistent with its origins as a dissertation study, the book is conceptually and methodologically rich. New entrants to the field will appreciate the comprehensive review and careful elucidation of the models, while established scholars will find careful methodological procedures and checks refreshing. In either case, researchers exploring the relationships between organisations and their employers, employees and their work, or the impact of human resource development these issues will find Fuchs' book both stimulating and a helpful reference

In the author's own words

Considerations of the breadth and depth of organisational identification both suggest that when organisational scholars study the notion of organisational identification, they may in fact be researching fundamentally different concepts under the same term. In this book, in response to such varied notions of organisational identification, I thus focus specifically on the elements of value, goal, and belief compatibility in terms of the breadth of organisational identification, and thereby reject the narrower conceptualisations. The narrower conceptualisations are rejected because they fail to incorporate any explanatory element for why individuals identify with organisations. To a large extent they are descriptive in nature and provide only limited information on the key mechanisms related to why individuals identify. The broader conceptualisations are similarly rejected because the […] behaviours are more likely to be an outcome of organisational identification than an element of it. The more balanced conceptualisation I adopt in this book provides both the explanatory mechanisms as to why individuals identify and also offers greater conceptual accuracy in term of behavioural components (pp. 7‐8).

A About the reviewer

Tod Treat is Adjunct Assistant Professor in the Department of Education Organisation and Leadership at the University of Illinois at Urbana‐Champaign and Vice President of Student and Academic Services at Richland Community College in Decatur, Illinois, USA. Tod Treat can be contacted at: todtreat@illinois.edu