Corporate identity and the effects of social identity theory on the
perception of organisations by the public.
Mick van Dalen 11393157 Master’s thesis
Graduate School of Communication
Master’s Programme of Communication Science Dhr. dr. Piet Verhoeven
2 Abstract
Organisations are focussing more on creating a strong corporate identity towards the public. The comparison between individual identities and corporate identities is often made, therefore it could be possible that the corporate identity could be affected by the social identity theory that favours members of the in-group. Expected was as well that the organisation was viewed more as a part of the in-group when it shared its values more explicitly This thesis aims to identify if organisations can be perceived as a part of the in-group based on the social identity theory and how explicitness of the shared values of the organisation influence this. It was furthermore researched how the perception of the organisation was influenced by being a member of the in-group. An experimental research has been performed where Dutch participants saw one of four conditions of a corporate story, explicit adventurous, implicit adventurous, explicit homey or implicit homey. The results of the experiment showed that organisations can be seen as a member of the in-group, however only for hominess led this identification also to a more positive attitude towards the organisation. Explicitness of the values also did not seem to have an effect on the identification with the organisation. Based on these values it can be assumed that certain values create a strong sense of belonging that leads to a better attitude towards an organisation that shares these values.
Introduction
Organisations have, over the years, developed from manufacturers of products to owners of media, organisers of major events that fit their own identity. A strong example in this case is Red Bull which organises extreme sport events all around the globe associating the brand strongly with adventure. When looking at Red Bull and the messages and content it spreads through its media it is clear that a lot of focus is aimed at adventure and extreme sports.
3
Branding a large organisation’s identity like Red Bull’s to positions the organisation in the market to target people who are adventurous themselves and who enjoy being exposed to the kind of content that Red Bull produces. However does this kind of extreme branding of the organisation provide the organisation with benefits? For Red Bull the investment in their resources to position themselves as an organisation that aims for the adventurous and extreme needs to provide the organisation with a stronger position in the market through the means of a better likeability or even, with the rise of importance of the corporate identity being
perceived as part of the in-group of people with the same values as the ones an organisation presents to the public.
Because of the evolving of these organisational identities over the years it has become a widespread phenomenon that has drawn the attention of both researchers as well as
organisations. Organisational identity “embodies the characteristics of an organisation that its members perceive to be central, distinctive and enduring (or continuing) in the organisation when the past, present and future are taken into account” (Albert and Whetten, 1985, as cited in Puusa & Kekäle, 2015). It is “the set of meanings by which a company allows itself to be known and through which it allows people to describe, remember, and relate to it” (Topalian, 1984 as cited in Melewar, 2003). Through corporate identity an organisation can express its core values and show the public what it stands for.
Because individuals have the tendency to achieve a positive self-concept through showing in-group favouritism (Tajfel & Turner 1986). With the increased emphasis on corporate identity this might hold true as well for organisations that have strong and unique values expressed clearly to the public. It can be beneficial for organisations to gain more knowledge on how the social identity theory interacts with the increased focus on corporate identity by organisations, organisations could adept their strategy to gain a competitive advantage. Furthermore this interaction of the social identity theory with the increase
4
emphasis on corporate identity may give more academic insight in what influences the perception of organisations by the public. Therefore the research question arises from this theory is:
To what degree does the public view organisations with a strongly or weakly expressed organisational identity as a part of the in-group/out-group and how does this social identity theory affect the perception of organisations?
Theoretical Framework Corporate identity
Corporate identity is “the set of meanings by which a company allows itself to be known and through which it allows people to describe, remember, and relate to it” (Topalian 1984 as cited in Melewar 2008: 35). Abbratt & Klein (2012) described corporate identity as the strategic choices an organisation makes and how an organisation expresses these choices. They also described that core values of an organisation are the base of how organisations interact with the public. Corporate identity has over the years evolved, starting in the past as being a part of the advertising mix through recognition of logo’s and corporate design to the way an organisation presents itself to different stakeholder groups (Kleyn, Abratt, Chipp & Goldman, 2012).
Because many different terms are being used to describe corporate identity it is important to distinguish the most relevant terms that are used most frequent in the corporate identity mix. The corporate identity mix can be perceived by four sub-groups namely visual identity, corporate identity, organisation’s identity and organisational identity (He & Balmer, 2007). Each of these have a different conceptualisation, locus of analysis and key issues. Where the visual identity stands for organisation’s symbolism, the corporate identity stands for the organisation’s distinctive characteristics, while organisation’s identity can be
5
described by the defining characteristics of organisations through the eyes of the public.
Lastly the organisational identity can be described as “an individual’s social identity with an organisational context” (Ashforth and Mael, 1989 (as cited in He & Balmer, 2007).
When Hatch & Schultz (2002) describe organisational identity, they use a term that Toplalian (1934) would describe as corporate identity. In their eyes organisational identity can be described as a combination of the reflection of internal culture of the organisation and the process in which the image of organisation is mirrored. Hatch & Schultz (2002) argued that organisational identity “needs to be theorized in relation to both culture and image in order to understand how internal and external definitions of organizational identity interact.” They argued that organisational identity comes from interaction with the public. A corporate identity is therefore formed based on the internal culture of an organisation, and the image of the organisation and how the organisation interacts with the public.
Corporate identity serves several purposed for an organisation. Simões and Dibb 2002 found a positive correlation between a positive corporate identity and the performance of its employees. Researchers also found a correlation between the reputation of organisations and their historical performance (Melewar, 2008) Furthermore corporate identity may function as an enabler and constrainer on organisation’s successes (Leitch & Davenport, 2011).
Therefore it is important for organisations to build a strong corporate identity for both the employees and the public. The way organisations can build a strong identity towards their employees and the public is through corporate branding.
Corporate branding
Similar to branding products it is possible for organisations to brand their
organisational identity. However defining and aligning an organisational identity is often more complex than branding products given the complexity and distinctive characteristics of a
6
corporate brand (Knox & Bickerton, 2003). Organisations have several different stakeholders with different interest which leads to more interests in the organisation. From a management point of view, defining and aligning the corporate brand identity has to be looked at with a strategic intent namely how the organisation wants its corporate brand to be perceived by both internal and external stakeholders. The stakeholders’ image of the organisation is defined by Kleyn et al. (2012) as the conceived identity. Conceived identity is one of the four identities that are differentiated in the AC³ID test of Balmer (2004). The AC³ID test was created to identify identity misalignments between the several forms of identity that the corporation holds. The AC³ID test ((Balmer, 2004) consists of the actual identity, communicated identity, conceived identity, covenanted identity, ideal identity and desired identity. The actual identity holds the organisation’s distinctive attributes such as the ethos and corporate style.
Communicated identity describes the message that organisations try to send considering what kind of organisation they are through corporate advertising and visual identity such as logo’s. Conceived identity is the image an organisation holds by its customers and stakeholder groups. The covenanted identity holds the underlying associations with the name of an organisation. Ideal organisation is more oriented towards what management of an
organisation perceives as the ideal positioning of an organisation while the desired identity holds the vision of the perfect identity of an organisation in the future as perceived by the leaders of on organisation.
For an organisation to gain a strongly branded corporate identity the communicated identity has to be clear and rid of uncertainties to get rid of misalignments between the communicated identity and the conceived identity. Therefore when branding an organisation it seems important to get rid uncertainties by communicating the identity of an organisation as explicit and clearly as possible.
7
Creating a corporate brand identity, when done properly, will provide the organisation with an important strategic asset (Dinnie, 2009). Simões and Dibb (2002) provided evidence in their literature that there is a positive correlation between the image of an organisation and their performance. However in this process it is important for organisations not to hyper-adapt or fall into a form of organisational narcissism (Hatch & Schultz, 2002). Hyper-adaptation is a form of adaptation to the public’s criticism on the organisation resulting in a constant process of internal changes. Corporate narcissism on the other hand completely ignores the publics criticism on the organisation and occurs when organisations are unwilling to adapt to the image the public has of an organisation.
Once an organisation is has a strongly branded corporate identity an organisation may see several benefits from this. A strongly branded organisation identity can be used to attract employees through employer branding (Alnıaçık. Alnıaçık, Erat & Akçin, 2014).However branding an organisational identity may also be used to build an image, express core values that are associated with the organisation and help individuals create and express their identity through the consumption of brands (Balmer & Gray, 2003).
Where a corporate identity is always present and necessary for an organisation, a corporate brand is not a necessity for all organisations. Organisations that have a monopoly or are working in a sector where corporate brands are redundant may choose to not brand
themselves because they see no financial benefits to it (Balmer & Gray, 2003). These are often organisations in the public sector or sometimes the business to business market. For the commercial sector however the increased focus on branding because brands are focussed on ‘logical structures’ that influence the consumers perception based on their earlier experiences with said brand, resulting in providing a meaning for customers (Kay, 2006). The amount of earlier experiences and the positivity of these experiences both contribute to how strong a brand can be.
8 Corporate identity linked to individual identities
Corporate identities are being compared more with individual identities. Hatch and Schultz (2002) compared the corporate identity to Mead’s (1934) literature on the mind, self
and society, known “primarily for his theory of the social nature and genesis of the self, as the
quintessential forerunner of the Symbolic Interactionist perspective, and as a central
theoretical resource for the Chicago School of sociology” (Huebner, 2012). In this literature by Hatch & Schultz (2002) based on Mead (1934) it is argued that identity is a social process for organisations, consisting of two phases; the ‘I’ and the ‘me’. The ‘I’ in this literature based on Mead (1934) can be described as “the response of an organism to the attitudes of others” while the ‘me’ can be described as “is the organized set of attitudes of others which one himself assumes” (Hatch & Schultz, 2002). Translating this to the organisation Hatch & Schultz (2002) state that the ‘me’ could be seen as the image of the organisation towards the public while the ‘I’ is something that the members of the organisation are unaware of but simultaneously responsive to the attitude of others, the culture within the organisation.
When combining the ‘I’ & ’me’ as described in Hatch & Schultz (2002) an Identity is created in an organisation. By expressing this identity explicitly the image of the organisation is branded to the public. This leads to individual’s impressions of the organisation and leads to the public forming an image of the organisation (Andreassen, 2001). Sharing the
organisational culture can make an important contribution to how organisations are perceived by the public and therefore changing the impression of an organisation (Hatch & Schultz, 2002).
With the mentioned human aspect of organisations it could be possible that the social identity theory not only creates in-groups for employees based on the values presented internally but organisation might in turn be perceived as part of the in-group by the public based on how
9
strongly the culture of the organisation is expressed. The ‘me’, as explained by Hatch & Schultz (2002), could if expressed strongly enough be seen as a part of the in-group if the values that are expressed through the ‘me’ of the organisation are values that individuals care strongly about Ashforth & Mael (1989).
Social identity theory
Social identity theory has been described by Tajfel (1974) as a way ”individuals strive to achieve a positive self-concept, they show in-group favouritism, i.e., they favour the in-group over the out-group in perceptions, evaluations and behaviour” (as cited in Wahl, Pollai & Kirchler, 2013). People tend to classify themselves and others into different social categories such age, religion and other classifiable categories (Ashford & Mael, 1989)
Social identity theory is the individual’s self-perception based on the social categories to which they belong (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). This leads to a more positive perception of people who are part of the in-group compared to people who are part of the out-group. Social identity theory could therefore possibly be used by organisations to create a better reputation with more loyal fans if social identity theory affects the perception of organisations for their external branding plan.
Social identity theory has already been proven to have a positive effect on the perception of the organisation from an employee’s point of view. Organisations that scored high on several attractive attributes were found to be viewed as more attractive employers than organisations who scored lower on these attributes because possible future employees felt that by working for an organisation that carries out these attributes these attributes would reflect on them (Dearmand & Crawford, 2011). Organisational membership is another category where individuals classify themselves under, since working for an organisation is a part of one’s identity Ashforth & Mael (1989) Working for an organisation that is associated
10
with positive attributes positively affects the identification with this organisation. Highhouse (2007) suggests that people strive to regulate impressions of one’s self presentation in a positive way and therefore want to be associated with positive characteristics of the
organisations that they work for. Furthermore evidence was found by Tom (1971) that people select organisations that are similar to their own values and personalities.
While social identity theory and the organisation has been researched often for employees and their identification with the organisation little research has been done on the social identity theory and the effects corporate identity can have on the perception of the organisation and how consumers identify with said organisation. As Ashforth & Mael (1989) stated that each individual belongs to an infinite number of groups or social categories. However how much individuals identify with each category is dependent on how much value individuals ascribe to each of these categories.
That organisations are linked to personal identities is nothing new, consumers are using brands to express their identity (Escalas and Bettman, 2005). Brands that increase the self-expressiveness that are part of a consumer’s identity are likely to weaken future brand preferences for other brands (Chernev, Hamilton & Gal, 2011). Consumers express themselves through the brands they purchase, consume and desire. Since this can be an important incentive for preference and choices (Wallström. Steyn & Pitt, 2010) it might be possible that consumers identify themselves with organisation to a degree where they can view the organisation as a part of the in-group. By branding an organisational image to the audience of an organisation it can be measured whether the social identity theory is a relevant theory for organisations to implement in their strategy. Through expression of certain values organisations could be regarded as part of an in-group or out-group because they share these values with the public. Therefore hypothesis 1 will be:
11 H1. Organisations can be regarded as part of an in-group/out-group by the public based on their expressed identity depending on high/low the importance of these values is for the receiver.
Through expressing the corporate identity an image of the organisation is created in the eyes of the public (Andreassen, 2001). This image is dependent on how strongly certain values are expressed. As the AC³ID test by Balmer (2004) showed, to ensure there are no misalignments between the conceived and communicated identity of an organisation it is important to
communicate the identity of an organisation clearly. When there is room for different interpretations it might result in a differently conceived identity. For branded corporate identity it is therefore expected that clearly communicated values in a strongly branded corporate identities will be recognised better by individuals and therefore lead to a better perception of the organisation as part of the in-group, if individuals share these values with the organisation. Therefore hypothesis 2 will be:
H2. Organisations with a more explicitly branded corporate identity will be perceived as part of the in-group more than organisations with a more implicitly branded organisational identity.
Since individuals cared for positive characteristics of an organisation and felt that carried out these organisations were more attractive than others (Dearmand & Crawford, 2011) social identity theory might have a same effect on values that are important to consumers that identify with organisations. Social identity theory is based on the individual’s self-perception on the social categories to which individuals belong (Tajfel & Turner, 1986) and is used as a way to achieve a more positive self-concept (Tajfel, 1974). It is therefore expected that this influences the perception of consumers towards the organisations that share values with the organisation . Hypothesis 3 states the following:
12 H3. The image of the organisation that are being perceived as part of the in-group will be regarded as more positive than the organisational identities that will be regarded as part of the out-group.
Method section Sample
Data was collected from 209 participants who all voluntarily participated in an online
experiment without any reward for their participation. Age of the participants ranged from 18 to 75 with a mean age of 28. A total of 109 (52,2%) of the participants were male while 100 (48,8%)were female Of the participants 46,9% finished university, while 28,7% finished a higher education and 14,8% a higher secondary or pre-university education, the remaining 9,8% finished a lower education or lower secondary education.
Material
The material that was manipulated were four versions of a corporate story of a soda
manufacturer. Each of the versions was written in a different style, there were two versions written where the organisation, named Blauw Cola was an organisation that valued adventure and two versions where Blauw Cola was presented as an organisation that values hominess. For both the adventurous and hominess versions one was written with the value presented explicitly while the other implied the value of the organisation. A pre-test was performed to make sure that the right values were being recognised in each of the texts and that the difference between the explicit and implicit version was sufficient.
The texts that were presented to the participants consisted of two short paragraphs and a logo of Blauw Cola. To guarantee the internal validity of the experiment the introduction
paragraph in the corporate story was written identical in each of the four versions containing some standard information about Blauw Cola. The manipulation was performed in the second
13
paragraph and was thus written in one of the four styles mentioned above. This ensured that every participant saw the same organisation but with different values and levels of
explicitness.
A total of 61 participants saw the explicit adventurous version and 55 participants saw the implicit adventurous version while 47 participants saw the explicit homey version and 46 participants the implicit homey version. The texts of the four versions can be found in the appendix.
The texts being adventurous or homey was not an independent variable in the research because seeing the organisation as a part of the in-group is not solely based on the value that the organisation expresses but also on the values the participants in this research hold. The first independent variable of the research was therefore the degree of shared personality traits
with the organisation. To regard the organisation as a part of the in-group, participants had to
share the value that was presented in the corporate story with the organisation. To measure the degree of participants’ shared values with the organisation the independent variable degree of
shared personality traits with the organisation was created. To measure the degree of shared personality traits with the organisation participants were asked to what degree they felt
adventurous/homey. This was measured with 4 items on a 5-point likert scale based on items used in a research regarding social identity theory by Schmidt et al. (2009). The questions measured the degree to which participants felt adventurous/homey (In welke mate bent u huiselijk?), the degree of importance of adventurousness/hominess (In welke mate is huiselijkheid belangrijk voor u?), the bond with other adventurous/homey people (In welke mate voelt u een band met huiselijke mensen?) and to what degree participants felt personally criticized if someone not adventurous/homey criticized adventurous/homey people (In welke mate voelt u zich bekritiseerd als een niet huiselijk persoon huiselijke mensen bekritiseert?). Participants were able to answer these questions ranging from ‘not at all’ to ‘very much’.
14
When scoring low on these scales, participants did not share the same values as the organisation and were expected to see the organisation as a part of the out-group while scoring high on these scales would give the participants a high degree of shared values with the organisation and were expected to view the organisation as part of the in-group. A Cronbach’s was performed to measure the reliability of these four items. The reliability of degree of shared personality traits with the organisation consisting of four items was good, α=.78.
To not give away the purpose of the research, degree of shared personality traits with the organisation was measured after participants answered the items regarding perception of the
organisation as part of the in-group & attitude towards the organisation which will be
operationalised in the instrumentation section.
The second independent variable in this research was the degree of explicitness of the
organisational identity. This was operationalised by writing an explicit and implicit version of
a corporate story. The explicit version for both the adventurous and homey had at least once the value it stood for mentioned explicitly while the implicit version implied the values through use of language.
Design
The experiment was performed with a 2x2 between subject design, participants were only exposed to one of the conditions. The factors in the design were ‘’level of explicitness’ (explicit/implicit) and ‘shared values with the organisation’ (shared values/no shared values).
Instrumentation
For hypothesis 1, to measure if participants identified with the organisation and perceived the organisation as a part of the in-group a dependent variable was created named perception of
15
The participants’ perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group was measured with two items on a seven-point likert scale. These questions consisted of the identification with the organisation (‘Ik identificeer me met deze organisatie’) and the connection felt to the organisation (‘Ik voel me verbonden met deze organisatie’). These items were taken from a research by Schmidt et al. (2009) researching social identity theory and were adapted to this research. To measure the reliability of the reliability of these two scales. The reliability for perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group consisting of 2 scales was excellent, α=.95
To participants’ perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group was also used as a dependent variable for hypothesis 2. For this hypothesis degree of explicitness of the
organisational identity was used as the independent variable to measure the effects on the
identification with the organisation.
For hypothesis 3, to measure the attitude towards the organisation for the participants who regarded the organisation as either the in-group or out-group a dependent variable was conducted namely attitude towards the organisation.
Attitude towards the organisation was measured with 3 questions on a seven-point likert scale
ranging from totally disagree to totally agree. The questions measured the likeability (‘Ik vind deze organisatie leuk’), favourability (‘Ik vind deze organisatie gunstig’) and desirability of the product of the organisation (‘Ik vind de producten van deze organisatie aantrekkelijk’). These items were translated from questionnaire used by Ajzen & Fishbein 1980; Klink and Athaide, 2010 & Punjatoya et al., 2014. To measure the reliability between the scales a Cronbach’s alpha was performed. The reliability for attitude towards the organisation consisting of three items was excellent, α=.93.
16
After the questions that measured the identification with the organisation and the attitude towards the organisation degree of shared personality traits with the organisation was measured as mentioned in the material section.
Lastly, participants were asked for some additional information. All participants were asked for their age, gender and highest completed education.
Analysis
To analyse the results a combination of several statistical analyses was performed. For hypothesis 1 a linear regression was performed to identify how the strength of certain personal values affects the identification with an organisation that shares these values.
Hypothesis 2 was analysed using an independent samples t-test to compare the mean levels of identification between the explicit and implicit versions of the corporate story. Afterwards another 2 t-tests were performed to analyse whether for one of the values (adventurous & homey) the identification with the organisation was stronger for one of the values.
For hypothesis 3 an independent samples t-test was performed to compare the mean levels of attitude towards the organisation between participants who perceived the organisation as a part of the in-group and participants who perceived the organisation as a part of the out-group. After the initial t-test to measure the effect for all participants, 2 seperate t-tests were
performed to analyse whether the adventurous or homey versions showed significant results for the attitude towards the organisation.
Results
H1. Organisations can be regarded as part of an in-group/out-group by the public based on their expressed identity depending on high/low the importance of these values is for the receiver.
17
To measure if organisations can be viewed as a part of the in-group by the public based on the expressed identity and the importance of the values of the participants a linear regression was performed with perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group as dependent variable and degree of shared personality traits as independent variable. By performing a linear regression it can be shown how an increase in a certain personality trait will lead to an increase in identification with an organisation.
A regression model with perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group as dependent variable and degree of shared personality traits with the organisation as independent variable is significant (F(1,206) = 9.63, p = .002). The regression model can therefore be used to predict perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group , but the strength of the
prediction is rather small: 5 percent of the variation in perception of the organisation as a part
of the in-group can be predicted on the basis of game addiction (R2 = .05).
Degree of shared personality traits with the organisation (b = 0.38, b* = 0.21, t = 3.10, p)
= .002, has a significant, positive association with the perception of the organisation as a part
of the in-group. For every unit increase in degree of shared personality traits with the
organisation, the level of perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group increases by
0.29 units.
These results provide evidence that when organisations carry out certain values, identification with the organisation will increase when these values are more important for the participants while identification with the organisation will decrease if the values are not important for the participants. Therefore these results show significant proof for hypothesis 1.
H2. Organisations with a more explicitly branded organisational identity will be perceived as part of the in-group more than organisations with a more implicitly branded organisational identity.
18
Hypothesis 2 was aimed at measuring if there were any significant differences in
identification with the organisation if the corporate story that was presented to the participants mentioned the value it stood for explicitly or implicitly. To measure this an independent-samples T-test was conducted with the perception of the organisation as a part of the
in-group as an dependent variable and degree of explicitness of the organisational identity
(explicit/implicit) as the independent variable.
An independent-samples T-test model with perception of the organisation as a part of the
in-group as dependent variable and degree of explicitness of the organisational identity as
independent variable was not significant for both participants who had a high degree of
shared personality traits with the organisation (t (137) = 1.11, p = .271) as for participants
who had a low degree of shared personality traits with the organisation (t (67) = .10, p = .921).
Consecutive an independent-samples T-test was conducted with the perception of the
organisation as part of the in-group as the dependent variable and degree of explicitness of the organisational identity (explicit/implicit) as the dependent variable for only the
adventurous and homey versions.
An independent-samples T-test model with perception of the organisation as a part of the
in-group as dependent variable and degree of explicitness of the organisational identity as
independent variable was not significant for the adventurous versions (t (114) = .91, p = .366).
An independent-samples T-test model with perception of the organisation as a part of the
in-group as dependent variable and degree of explicitness of the organisational identity as
independent variable was not significant for the homey versions (t (90) = .07, p = .945).
Therefore no significant evidence was found that the explicitness of the values an organisation embraces affect the identification of participants with the organisation.
19
Hypothesis 2 which stated that explicitly branded organisation will be perceived more as part of the in-group than implicitly branded organisations is therefore rejected. The explicitness of branding for the organisation does not have an effect on both adventurous organisations as well as homey organisations.
H3. The image of the organisation that are being perceived as part of the in-group will be regarded as more positive than the organisational identities that will be regarded as part of the out-group.
Hypothesis 3 measured if, after identifying with an organisation and seeing it as a part of the in-group, participants had a more positive attitude towards the organisation. To measure this an independent-samples T-test was conducted with the attitude towards the organisation as an dependent variable and perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group as an
independent variable. By comparing the attitude of participants who regarded the organisation as a part of the in-group and participants who regarded the organisation as a part of the out-group an observation could if these out-groups differed significantly.
An independent-samples T-test model with attitude towards the organisation as dependent variable and perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group as independent variable was not significant (t (207) = 1.41, p = .161).
For this analysis an independent-samples T-test was also conducted with attitude towards the
organisation as the dependent variable and perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group as the dependent variable for only the adventurous and homey versions.
An independent-samples T-test model with attitude towards the organisation as dependent variable and perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group as independent variable was not significant for the adventurous versions (t (114) = .-20, p = .839).
20
However an independent-samples T-test model with attitude towards the organisation as dependent variable and perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group as
independent variable was significant for the homey versions (t (91) = 2.42, p = .018). Participants who perceived the organisation as a part of the in-group (M=4.52, SD=1.23) scored higher on attitude towards the organisation than participants who perceived the
organisation as a part of the out-group (M=3.89 , SD=1.20).
These results show that perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group does indeed positively affect the attitude towards the organisation for people who identified themselves as homey, however the same was not the case for people who identified themselves as
adventurous. These results show that homey people who regard and organisation with the same trait as in-group will have a more positive attitude towards the organisation.
Furthermore the results of hypothesis 1 & 3 provide evidence that people who score high on the scale of adventurousness/hominess will view an organisation more as a part of the in-group than people who score low on these scales. In turn this identification with the organisation will lead to an improved attitude towards the organisation if people value the trait hominess a lot. However this is not the case for people who value
Conclusion
Overall two out of the three hypotheses were (partially) confirmed, hypothesis 1 & 3 whereas hypothesis 2 has been rejected.
As the results of the study suggest, identification with organisations could increase when the public shares the values of this organisation. This might therefore lead to a perception of the organisation as being part of the in-group of individuals. These findings confirm hypothesis 1 which stated that organisations can be regarded as part of an in-group/out-group by the public
21
based on their expressed identity. The perception of the organisation as a part of the in-group increased when the importance of these values is higher for individuals.
Regarding how explicit an organisation brands its identity to the public there appears to be no differences between an explicitly branded organisation and an implicitly branded organisation for both organisations who value adventure and hominess. Therefore hypothesis 2 has been rejected. Branding the organisation’s identity more explicitly or implicitly does not affect the identification with the organisation of the public the way the identity of individuals, as mentioned in hypothesis 1, affects the identification.
The expectations on how the social identity theory affected the attitude towards the
organisation has been partially met. When the public regards the organisation as a part of the in-group because both share the value of hominess, the attitude towards the organisation will be more positive than when the public views the organisation as a part of the out-group. However this is not the case for adventurous individuals and adventurous organisations where there is a minimal difference between the attitude towards the organisation as a member of the out-group and the organisation as a member of the in-group. Therefore hypothesis 3 has been partially confirmed.
Discussion
The results of hypothesis 1 show that the public can identify with an organisation and subsequently regard the organisation as a member of the in-group. This finding will bring a broader insight in how the social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986) interacts with
organisations. Until now organisations have been involved in the social identity theory only in a regard as employer. Organisations that showed several attractive attributes were found to be interesting to work for (Dearmand &Crawford, 2011), however they did not investigate whether individuals also identified with the organisation in question. This research provides
22
evidence that individuals have the possibility to identify with organisations and view them as a part of an in-group. This research therefore also builds further on the theory of Hatch & Schultz (2002) who compared the organisational identity to Mead’s (1934) literature of the mind, self and society, where they took aspects of the human identity and compared these to organisational identities. The ‘I’ as mentioned in Hatch & Schultz’s (2002) could be seen as the image of the organisation towards the public while the ‘me’ is the set of attitudes of the organisation. . By expressing the organisation identity the image of the organisation is branded to the public, and as is shown in this research the public may identify with this research and regard the organisation as a part of the in-group if the values are values that the public cares about.
Hypothesis 2 was not confirmed in contrary to the expectations since the image of the
organisation is created through expressing the identity of the organisation (Andreassen, 2001). While the image of the organisation is dependent on how strongly certain values are
expressed, it could be possible that the public does not care about how explicitly certain values are communicated because they still recognise the values in a more implicit way. This research has provided evidence that the identification with the organisation does not come from how organisations communicate their values, as long as there is a connection between the values of the organisation and the public. These finding are also in not in line with the AC³ID test described by Balmer (2004) which helps to identify misalignments between different identity types an organisation has to differentiate in communicating a corporate identity. The misalignment between the communicated identity and the conceived identity in the implicit version of the corporate stories was expected to lead to a lesser understanding of the values of the organisation while in this research there were no significant results to confirm these expectations.
23
Hypothesis 3 was partially confirmed, after perceiving an organisation as a part of the in-group individuals with a homey personality will have a more positive attitude towards an organisation that expresses this value as well compared to individuals perceive the
organisation as a part of the out-group. However this appears to only happen for the homey value, while for the adventurous value no differences were found between the in-group and out-group. A possible explanation for this could be that adventure is an overall more interesting value, which leads to individuals having a more positive attitude towards
adventurous organisations even though they do not see themselves as adventurous. This is a finding that might need further research in the future where different values could be analysed to research if there are values where perceiving the organisation as a member of the in-group may lead to a more positive attitude towards the organisation than other values. The findings of hypothesis 3 partially confirm the linking of the social identity theory to the organisation. Individuals that had a homey personality showed to they show in-group favouritism by favouring the in-group over the out-group in term of perception & evaluation like the explanation of Tajfel (1974) claimed. Individuals will have a more positive attitude towards organisations that share their own values to strive and achieve a more positive self-concept.
A possible limitation to this research might be that the experiment was initially planned to consist of two smaller experiments that both measured identity with the organisation in a different way. For the other manipulation a Facebook page was shown to all participants including questions regarding identification and attitude towards this organisation that did or did not show that the organisation shared several interests on Facebook. However because this experiment did not research completely the initial intention, this experiment was dropped. However seeing this organisation before the manipulation of Blauw Cola might have affected the identification with and attitude towards Blauw Cola. Since all participants were shown the
24
other manipulation as well it is expected that this did not have a significant influence on the research but the results might have become slightly skewed because of this.
As mentioned earlier a possible future research might focus on which values will create a more positive attitude towards in-group members. This could be done by recreating the current study but adding different values and aiming the study at participants that share a broad spectrum of values. Furthermore future research could be performed on what other benefits being perceived as a member of the in-group may hold for organisations.
Overall the results give a clear insight in what the research question was questioning. It seems possible for organisations to become seen as a part of the in-group of individuals. However depending on what values are important to the public this does not automatically mean that the attitude towards the organisation improves. It appears that the explicitness of the shared values of the organisation does not influence whether or not individuals identify with the organisation. This thesis provides evidence that the social identity theory (Tajfel, 1974). might not only focus on human individuals but might also favour organisations. This broadens the literature of Hatch & Schultz (2002) which stated that the identity of an organisation is social process and gives more depth to the comparison of corporate identities and individual identities and opens up possible future research towards how the social identity theory may affect organisations. The findings in this study may benefit organisations that target specific audiences by giving them more insight in how to brand a strong organisational identity.
Literature
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Abbratt, R. & Klein, N. (2012). Corporate Identity, corporate branding and corporate
reputations. European Journal of Marketing, 46, 7/8, 1048 – 1063.
25
Journal of Service Research, 4 (1), 39–49.
Alnıaçık, E., Alnıaçık, Ü., Erat, S., & Akçin, K. (2014). Attracting talented employees to the company: Do we need different employer branding strategies in different
cultures?. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 150, 336-344.
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of
management review, 14(1), 20-39.
Balmer, J.M.T. and Gray, E.R. (2003), “Corporate brands: what are they? What of them?”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37 Nos 7/8, 972.
Balmer, J. M., & Stuart, H. (2004). British Airways and Balmer's AC3ID Test of Corporate
Brand Management. University of Bradford School of Management.
Balmer, J.M.T., Stuart H. & Greyser, S.A. (2009). Aligning identity and strategy: corporate branding at British airways in the late 20th century. California Management Review, 51(3), 6-23.
Chernev, A., Hamilton, R., & Gal, D. (2011). Competing for consumer identity: Limits to self-expression and the perils of lifestyle branding. Journal of
Marketing, 75(3), 66- 82.
DeArmond, S., & Crawford, E. C. (2011). Organization Personality Perceptions and Attraction: The role of social identity consciousness. International Journal of
Selection and Assessment, 19(4), 405-414.
Dinnie, K. (2009). Taking brand initiative: How companies can align strategy, culture, and identity through corporate branding. Journal of Brand Management, 16(7), 496. Escalas, J. E., & Bettman, J. R. (2005). Self-construal, reference groups, and brand
meaning. Journal of consumer research, 32(3), 378-389.
Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2002). The dynamics of organizational identity. Human
relations, 55(8), 989-1018.
He, H.-W. and Balmer, J.M.T. (2007), “Identity studies: multiple perspectives and
26
Nos 7/8, 765-85.
Huebner, D. R. (2012). The Construction of Mind, Self, and Society: The Social Process Behind GH Mead'S Social Psychology. Journal of the History of the Behavioral
Sciences, 48(2), 134-153.
Kay, M. J. (2006). Strong brands and corporate brands. European Journal of
Marketing, 40(7/8), 742-760.
Kleyn, N., Abratt, R., Chipp, K., & Goldman, M. (2012). Building a strong corporate ethical identity. California Management Review, 54(3), 61-76.
Klink, R. R., & Athaide, G. A. (2010). Consumer innovativeness and the use of new versus extended brand names for new products. Journal of Product Innovation
Management, 27(1), 23-32.
Knox, S., & Bickerton, D. (2003). The six conventions of corporate branding. European
Journal of Marketing, 37(7/8), 998-1016.
Leitch, S., & Davenport, S. (2011). Corporate identity as an enabler and constraint on the pursuit of corporate objectives. European Journal of Marketing, 45(9/10), 1501-1520. Melewar, T. C. (2008). Facets of corporate identity, communication and reputation.
Routledge.
Simões, C. and Dibb, S. (2002) Corporate Identity: Defining the Construct. Warwick Business School Research Papers, 350.
Punyatoya, P., Sadh, A., & Mishra, S. K. (2014). Role of brand globalness in consumer evaluation of new product branding strategy. Journal of Brand Management, 21(2), 171-188.
Puusa. A. & Kekäle. J. (2015) Feelings over facts – a university merger brings
organisational identity to the forefront, Journal of Higher Education Policy and
27
Schmid, K., Hewstone, M., Tausch, N., Cairns, E., & Hughes, J. (2009). Antecedents and consequences of social identity complexity: Intergroup contact, distinctiveness threat, and outgroup attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 1085-1098. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter group behavior in S
Worchel & WG Austin (Eds) Psychology of intergroup relations. Chicago:
Nelson.Tom, V. R. (1971). The role of personality and organizational images in the
recruiting process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 6, 573–559. Tajfel, H. (1974). Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Information (International Social
Science Council), 13(2), 65-93.
Topalian, A. (1984). Corporate identity: beyond the visual overstatements. International
Journal of Advertising, 3: 56.
Urde, M. (2013). The corporate brand identity matrix. The Journal of Brand
Management, 20(9), 742-761.
Wahl, I., Pollai, M., & Kirchler, E. (2013). Status, identification and in-group favouritism of the unemployed compared to other social categories. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 43, 37-43.
Wallström, Å., Steyn, P., & Pitt, L. (2010). Expressing herself through brands: a comparative study of women in six Asia-Pacific nations. The Journal of Brand Management, 18(3), 228-237.
28 Appendix
Appendix 1. The explicit adventurous texts used as manipulation in the experiment.
Blauw Cola is in 1995 opgericht in Amsterdam en is sindsdien uitgegroeid tot een van de populairste frisdranken in de BeNeLux. Om de ervaring van Blauw Cola zo
geweldig mogelijk te maken zijn kwaliteit en smaak belangrijke onderdelen voor ons als bedrijf.
Blauw Cola staat voor avontuur. Daarom streven wij er als organisatie naar om tot het uiterste te gaan. Of dit nu avontuur in het buitenland is of juist dichtbij, op de pistes of in de zee. Blauw Cola houdt van avontuur. Wij maken daarom onze drankjes voor iedereen die op zoek is naar avontuur en daarbij wil genieten!
Appendix 2. The explicit homey text used as manipulation in the experiment.
Blauw Cola is in 1995 opgericht in Amsterdam en is sindsdien uitgegroeid tot een van de populairste frisdranken in de BeNeLux. Om de ervaring van Blauw Cola zo
geweldig mogelijk te maken zijn kwaliteit en smaak belangrijke onderdelen voor ons als bedrijf.
Blauw Cola wordt gemaakt door en voor de mensen die na een dag werken lekker thuis op de bank willen genieten van een lekkere frisdrank, de mensen die in het weekend niet allerlei gekke dingen hoeven te doen om zichzelf te vermaken, maar zich thuis gewoon thuis voelen. Daarom proberen wij onze producten hierop af te stemmen, zodat iedereen ervan kan genieten tijdens alledaagse activiteiten, zoals lekker in de tuin tijdens het lezen van een goed boek of tijdens je favoriete serie!
Appendix 3. The implicit adventurous text used as manipulation in the experiment.
Blauw Cola is in 1995 opgericht in Amsterdam en is sindsdien uitgegroeid tot een van de populairste frisdranken in de BeNeLux. Om de ervaring van Blauw Cola zo
geweldig mogelijk te maken zijn kwaliteit en smaak belangrijke onderdelen voor ons als bedrijf.
29
Blauw Cola is er voor de mensen die graag hun eigen grenzen verleggen en niet bang zijn om nieuwe dingen te proberen. Voor hen die het leuk vinden om de spanning op te zoeken. De oprichters van Blauw Cola vonden dat frisdranken niet spannend
genoeg waren en zijn er daarom altijd mee bezig om het drinken van Blauw Cola tot een ervaring te maken!
Appendix 4. The implicit homey text used as manipulation in the experiment.
Blauw Cola is in 1995 opgericht in Amsterdam en is sindsdien uitgegroeid tot een van de populairste frisdranken in de BeNeLux. Om de ervaring van Blauw Cola zo
geweldig mogelijk te maken zijn kwaliteit en smaak belangrijke onderdelen voor ons als bedrijf.
Blauw Cola wordt gemaakt door en voor de mensen die na een dag werken lekker thuis op de bank willen genieten van een gezonde frisdrank. Wij richten ons op de gezinnen die in de avond samen een verfrissing drinken en vertellen over hun dag. Een frisdrank die niet gek doet, maar juist gefocust is op de gezellige kant van het leven.
