Determinants for Willingness of Organization Members to Support the Transitional Identity of the Merged Organization

(1)

Determinants for Willingness of Organization

Members to Support the Transitional Identity of the

Merged Organization

A Case Study Research Concerning Setting up Child Centers

Master Thesis MscBA, Specialization Change Management

University of Groningen, Facility of Economics and Business

December 3rd, 2013

Cyril Roels S2076160 Tressenplaats 22 9722XC Groningen c.roels@student.rug.nl Supervisor University: Dr. B.J.M. Emans

Secondary Assessor University: Dr. J. Rupert

Supervisor Field of Study: Dr. S. Sol

Acknowledgements:

(2)

Determinants for Willingness of Organization

Members to Support the Transitional Identity of the

Merged Organization

A Case Study Research Concerning Setting up Child Centers

ABSTRACT

This paper researched what determinants had the most impact on willingness of organization members to support a temporary identity, to get from the pre-merger identity towards the desired identity of the merger. This temporary identity was called the transitional identity in this research. The aim of the study was to explore what determinants influence the willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of a merged organization and how much impact these determinants had. The determinants that were chosen for this research were 1) perceived status of the own organization during the merger, 2) perceived employee threat, 3) trust in future colleagues, 4) perceived necessity of the merger and 5) willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization. Data was gathered at a public school organization, a Christian school organization and a daycare organization, who were talking about setting up several child centers together but were still in the pre-merger stage. Questionnaires with correlational data processing were conducted for quantitative evidence. Simple linear regression and the multiple regression analysis method were used to process the quantitative data. Interviews were conducted to collect qualitative evidence. Interview data focused on finding stories, themes, issues and topics that emerged from multiple interviews. Questionnaire data showed that perceived status of the own organization in the merger and employee threat had a high impact on the willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization. Perceived necessity of the merger had a moderate impact on the willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization. Interview data showed that perceived status of the own organization in the merger and willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization had a high impact on the willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization. Trust in future colleagues had a moderate impact. It was concluded that perceived status of the own organization in the merger, perceived employee threat and willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization were the most impactful determinants on willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization. This study has implications for the theorization of the willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization variable.

Keywords: Transitional identity, Merger, Willingness to change, Willingness to preserve

identity, Trust, Perceived status during a merger, Employee threat, Necessity of the merger

(3)

Table of Content

1. INTRODUCTION ... 5

1.1 Transitional identity ... 6

1.2 Research question ... 7

2. THEORY ... 7

2.1 Determinants of willingness to support the transitional identity ... 7

2.1.1 Perceived status of the own organization in the merger ... 8

2.1.2 Perceived employee threat ... 9

2.1.3 Trust in future colleagues ... 10

2.1.4 Perceived necessity of the merger ... 11

2.1.5 Willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization ... 11

3. METHOD ... 12

3.1 Field context ... 12

3.2 Questionnaire ... 13

3.2.1 Scale willingness to support the transitional identity ... 13

3.2.2 Scale perceived status of the own organization in the merger ... 15

3.2.3 Scale perceived employee threat ... 16

3.2.4 Scale trust in future colleagues ... 18

3.2.5 Scale perceived necessity of the merger ... 19

3.2.6 Scale willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization ... 20

3.3 Transformation and translation of the items ... 21

3.4 Multicollinearity between items ... 21

3.5 Interview ... 22

3.5.1 Format interviews ... 22

4. RESULTS ... 23

4.1 Results Questionnaires ... 23

4.1.1 Outcome simple linear regression analysis ... 24

4.1.2 Outcome multiple regression analysis ... 25

4.2 Results interviews ... 27

4.2.1 Perceived status of the own organization in the merger ... 27

4.2.2 Perceived employee threat ... 28

4.2.3 Trust in future colleagues ... 28

4.2.4 Perceived necessity of the merger ... 29

(4)

4.2.6 Bycatch: Discrepancies between pre-merger identities ... 31

4.2.7 Bycatch: Anchoring changes ... 32

4.3 Results questionnaires and interviews ... 34

5. DISCUSSION ... 34

5.1 Conclusion determinants of willingness to support the transitional identity ... 37

5.2 The causality question and usability of scales ... 38

5.3 Practical translation of the findings ... 39

5.4 Implications of the research ... 42

5.5 Limitations and future research ... 43

6. REFERENCES ... 44

7. APPENDICES ... 48

(5)

1. INTRODUCTION

According to strategic management literature, mergers are primarily strategically driven events that have the intention of improving organizations. This is done by enhancing competitive abilities in an industry, providing entry into a new industry or by building or repairing a reputation (Daly, Pouder & Kabanoff, 2004; Dunn & Schweitzer, 2005; Lubatkin, 1987). Although mergers have the intention of improving organizations, there are several problem areas when organizations are merged into a new organization. One of these problem areas is that organizational mergers often decrease employees’ identification with, and support for, the newly merged organization (van Dick, 2004). This decrease in employees’ identification happens because the employees have to adjust themselves to the new identity of the merged organization. This new identity is the identity that is desired by the merging organizations. The organizations will have to incorporate the new identity into their old identity and implementing the required changes might be problematic.

In academic literature, different terms are used when looking at combining identities during a merger. The terms that are used most often are combined identity (Zaheer, Schomaker & Genc, 2005), permeability (Giessner, 2011a), intergroup relational identity (Van Knippenberg, Hogg & Rast, 2012) and superordinate identity (Amiot, Terry & McKimmie, 2012; Anastasio, Bachman, Gaertner, & Dovidio, 1997). All of these terms touch upon the topic of combining identities during a merger, but some are more applicable to this topic than others. Out of these terms, the superordinate identity seemed to fit best for this research.

The superordinate identity is a new identity that is created by members of multiple organizational groups that are recategorized into a new common in-group (Amiot et al., 2012). This new in-group develops a new social identity over time, which is the identification with the new organization. All groups should feel included in the new identity and the main focus of the superordinate identity is to give member a sense of belonging to an overarching group (Kane, 2010). Intergroup tensions would be reduced by creating or emphasizing a shared superordinate identity which included all groups (Van Knippenberg et al., 2012).

However, two major problems regarding the superordinate identity have come up in academic literature recently. As stated by Knippenberg et al. (2012), the first problem for a leader who tries to emphasize a shared collective identity, is that he will be associated more closely to one group than other groups and would therefore be favoring one group. Even for leaders that have not been part of any of the groups, it is hard to be seen as neutral. The second problem is concerning several sources of resistance to groups embracing the overarching identity. For instance, group members can place enormous value on preserving the distinctiveness of their group or organizational identity. Trying to create an overarching identity can therefore be seen as a threat to the distinct identity of the group and this will cause resistance (Hornsey & Hogg, 2000).

(6)

1.1 Transitional identity

A transitional identity is ‘an interim sense held by members of the different organizations in a merger about what their organizations will become’ (Clark, Gioia, Ketchen & Thomas, 2010). The transitional identity helps people to get away from the ‘us versus them’ mentality by focusing on learning to understand what the new organization will be and it facilitates the early stages of a merger process. The transitional identity is a tool to work towards a desired identity, it is ambiguous enough to allow multiple interpretations of what the merged organization would become and helps to create and evolve towards a common understanding.

The transitional identity is temporary, but it helps all parties involved in the merger to focus on how the new organization sees its own future and therefore makes it easier to work towards a shared identity. Therefore, it helps people to suspend their pre-existing identities and work towards creating a shared, new identity (Clark et al., 2010). It can be seen as a tool to bridge differences during merger negotiations (Langely, Golden-Biddle & Reay, 2012).

The transitional identity is useful for identity change during mergers, because the temporary identity retains some sense of current identities, while simultaneously helping to progress towards a desired identity for the new organization. It provides a strong conceptual foundation for identity change, which has been regarded as wrenching by academic literature (Fiol, 2002; Gioia, Price, Hamilton & Thomas, 2010; Ravasi & Schultz, 2006).

In this research, the transitional identity will focus on the identity experienced by the employees of the organizations involved in a merger. There is also a transitional identity for stakeholders, but this will not be part of the research.

(7)

1.2 Research question

This research will focus on the willingness of the organization members involved in a merger to support the transitional identity of the merged organization. It is expected that several determinants influence the willingness of the organization members to support the transitional identity. The impact of the determinants that are expected to influence the willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization will be researched in this report. Therefore, the research question of this report is:

Which determinants influence the willingness of organization members to support a transitional identity during a merger and what impact do the determinants have?

The determinants that are expected to influence the willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization will be discussed in the following chapter: theory. Henceforth, the willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization will be referred to as willingness to support the transitional identity.

2. THEORY

2.1 Determinants of willingness to support the transitional identity

As stated in the introduction, incorporating the new identity in the old identity of an organization might be problematic. In order to enhance the transition of the organizational identity during a merger, the research will focus on the positive side of change. This is done by looking at willingness to change.

As stated by Metselaar (1997), willingness to change focuses on a positive behavioral intention towards the implementation of modifications in an organization’s structure, or work and administrative processes. This positive focus results in efforts from the organization member’s side to support or enhance the change process. A negative focus on change, also known as resistance to change, is defined by Metselaar (1997) as ‘a negative behavioral intention towards the implementation of modifications in an organization's structure, or work and administrative processes, resulting in efforts from the organization member's side to hinder or impede the change process’. Because of that, willingness to change will be more beneficial to supporting the transitional identity of a merged organization than resistance to change.

Willingness to change is a term that is part of the change management literature, therefore the determinants that have been chosen for this research are determinants that are linked often to the willingness to change variable in literature. When applying these determinants from the change management literature to the dependent variable of this research, the willingness to support the transitional identity of the merged organization, several determinants seem influential.

(8)

organization are more contextual, like the likeliness that the merger will have a negative impact on an employee’s career (employee threat), the amount of trust people have in employees of the other organizations or whether or not the employees perceive the merger as necessary. These were the determinants that were chosen as the independent variables for this research. Henceforth, the independent variables will be referred to as determinants.

In the following paragraphs, a clear definition of the determinants will be provided and there will also be an explanation as to why the determinants are expected to have impact on the willingness to support the transitional identity.

This research will look at the willingness to support the transitional identity in the pre-merger stadium. A model of the determinants of the willingness to support the transitional identity can be found in Figure 1: Determinants of Willingness to Support the Transitional Identity.

2.1.1 Perceived status of the own organization in the merger

The perceived status of the own organization in the merger concerns power relations between the organizations involved in the merger. When organizations merge, there will always be an organization that is dominant in the new organizational identity and an organization who is dominated in the new organizational identity. The organization that is dominated in the new organizational identity will have to implement a lot of changes to their current organizational identity (Van Knippenberg & Van Leeuwen, 2001).

When a company has the dominant status in the identity of the merged organization, the pre-merger identity resembles the new identity (Van Knippenberg & Van Leeuwen, 2001). Several small changes to the pre-merger identity might be necessary, but employees in the dominant organization already work according to a pre-merger culture that somewhat resembles the new culture. Members from the dominated organization will have to implement several large changes to their pre-merger organizational identity and will have to adapt to a way of working to which the employees are not yet used to. Changes are more drastic in the dominated organization. Because of that, members from dominating organizations identify more strongly with the merged organization than members from the dominated organization (Van Knippenberg & Van Leeuwen, 2001).

The dominated organization will identify less with the desired identity of the merged organization and will have to adjust its identity a lot to convert to the desired merged identity. This makes dominated organizations less optimistic than their counterparts. (Amiot et al., 2012). Dominated organizations perceive more threats because their identity might be erased fully or partially. This decreases identification with the identity of the merged organization

Willingness of Organization Members to Support the Transitional Identity of the

Merged Organization

Perceived Employee Threat Willingness to Preserve the

Identity of the Own Organization Trust in Future Colleagues

Perceived Status of the Own

Organization in the Merger Perceived Necessity of the _Merger

(9)

and blocks development of a common in-group identity in the merged organization. Furthermore, a perceived dominated status of the organization in the merger will cause stress and dominated organizations generally fare worse during the merger than dominating organizations (Amiot et al., 2012).

It is theoretically possible to let all different organizations have the same status in the newly merged identity, which is known as a merger of equals, but in practice this is not realizable. During a merger in practice, one of the organizations will have the perceived dominant status and other parties will perceive a dominated status in the merger (Drori, Wrzesniewski & Ellis, 2011). As stated before, this will lead to less identification with the identity of the merged organization and causes resistance towards the merger. Continuity in identity is therefore associated with merger acceptance (Ullrich, Wieseke & Van Dick, 2005) and because of that, the status of the organizational identity in the identity of the merger will most likely affect the willingness to support the transitional identity. Because of this, the first hypothesis that will be tested in this report is:

H1: Perceived status of the own organization in the merger is positively related to willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization.

2.1.2 Perceived employee threat

Employee threat concerns factors that have a negative impact on the career of an employee. This can be concerning perceptions of likeliness that an employee will lose his job or individual job autonomy (Mottola, Gaertner, Bachman & Dovidio, 1997), perceptions of likeliness that there will be a disruption in personal relations (Holt, Achilles, Field & Harris, 2007), likeliness that there will be a change in job satisfaction (Amiot, Terry, Jimmieson & Callan, 2006) or perceptions of likeliness that there will be a negative impact on the future career (Malo & Muñoz-Bullón, 2008). Therefore, for this report, employee threat is described as perceptions of likeliness that an employee will lose his or her job, job autonomy, personal relations, job satisfaction or experiences a negative impact on his future career.

As stated in the introduction chapter, mergers are primarily strategically driven events that have the intention of improving organizations. There are a multitude of reasons for mergers, and one of them is out of financial reasons (Daly, Pouder & Kabanoff, 2004). When this is the case, the organizations are merged together in order to improve the financial results. One of the consequences here is that it is likely that several people will lose their jobs to decrease the costs of the organization. Furthermore, it is also possible for employees to keep their job, but to get a lower position at the new organization (Robbins & Coulter, 2007). Here, the employee experiences a loss of job autonomy. Furthermore, during a merger, personal relations are likely to be disrupted. When this disruption of personal relationships is large, this may cause employees to resist the merger (Cartwright & Cooper, 2005).

When employees face a loss of job or job autonomy, this has a negative influence on their future career. Malo and Muñoz-Bullón (2008) state that these employees will not only lose wages, but also experience loss of prestige. According to Reitman and Schneer (2005), the impact of these negative effects last for 20 to 25 years after they occurred. These employees experience less job satisfaction later on in their career.

(10)

adjust easier to the new way of working and have more job satisfaction than when the employees perceive a merger to be implemented in a negative matter. Here, employees have to cope with more stress, have a harder time adjusting to the new organization and will experience less job satisfaction than before the merger.

When employees feel like they are going to lose either their job, individual job autonomy, job satisfaction, personal relations or experience a negative impact on their future career, they are likely to resist the change and therefore will not support the transitional identity of the merged organization. Therefore, if people are perceiving employee threat, willingness to support the transitional identity will mostly likely be lower. The second hypothesis of this research will therefore be:

H2: Perceived employee threat is negatively related to willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization.

2.1.3 Trust in future colleagues

Trust in future colleagues concerns the likeliness that the organization members that are involved in the merger can work well together with the organization members of the other organizations (Wagner & Muller, 2009).

When two or more groups are brought together, there may be a clash concerning loyalties and distinctive cultures. Also, there may be lack of rapport while the work load increases because of the integration of the groups. In order to let the different groups work well together in the new in-group, trust must occur between the people of the new in-group. Trust can only be established through experience when all parties involved make sacrifices in order to deliver what the other parties expects. Some key factors in the foundation of trust are signaling cooperative intentions in order to understand the other parties’ perceptions, avoiding hostile assumptions and fulfilling early agreements. Trust is an important factor in mergers, because in nearly every study of failed mergers or alliances, lack of communication or miscommunication is one of the key reasons for the failure. (Wagner & Muller, 2009).

Academic literature shows that people tend to be attracted to people and groups whose attitudes and values are similar to their own (Byrne, 1971; Darr & Kurtzberg, 2000). Research on interpersonal trust development has shown that shared norms, ideologies and values facilitate the emergence of trust and limits the potential of conflict (Lewicki & Bunker, 1995). Also, when a person or group is perceived as not sharing key values, trust can erode and the potential for conflict increases (Stahl & Voigt, 2008).

Because of basic cognitive processes and perceptual biases such as social categorization, negative characters and intentions are often attributed to members of the out-group (Kramer, 1999). Members of the out-out-group may be evaluated as ‘uniformly unethical or malevolent, incompetent and ill-informed’ and this may generate or increase feelings of suspicion (Sitkin & Stickel, 1996). Furthermore, the in-group is viewed in the opposite terms. Based on the data above, it is presumed that when people trust others in the new in-group, willingness to support the transitional identity will increase. Therefore, the third hypothesis of this research will be:

(11)

2.1.4 Perceived necessity of the merger

According to Kotter (1995), establishing a sense of urgency is the first step in a change process. People should see the necessity for the change and after members understand the sense of urgency, there should be more willingness to cooperate with the change.

By understanding the necessity of the merger, employees of the organizations involved in the merger are more able to reconstruct a strong sense of organizational identity, even when they experienced a discontinuity of their previous identity (Giessner, 2011b).

In order to increase the perception of necessity of the merger, communication efforts should focus on explaining the underlying motives for the merger and this communication should be open, balanced, honest and rapid (Giessner, Viki, Otten, Terry & Täuber, 2006). Total openness and honesty from the start of the merger process can be disruptive at the current work situation, but it helps people to get an understanding for the necessity of the merger and also provides prospects for career advancement. This openness of communication should improve the perceived necessity of the merger, will reduce uncertainty concerning the future situation and helps employees to make sense of the identity of the merged organization (Giessner, 2011b). Therefore, it is expected that when the perceived necessity of the merger increases, the willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization will also increase. Based on this information, the fourth hypothesis of this research will be:

H4: Perceived necessity of the merger is positively related to willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization.

2.1.5 Willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization

Willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization is defined as the likeliness that organization members do not want to adjust the identity of the own organization to the merged identity (Marks and Mirvis, 1997). As stated by Marks and Mirvis (1997), when organizations are merging, each organization tries to preserve its own values, practices and identity. Because mergers involve multiple organizations, the different pre-merger identities might clash with the identity of the merged organization. Particularly in unequal mergers, the dominant culture may be perceived as threatening and thus be rejected by the less dominant culture (Cartwright & Cooper, 1993). The less dominant organization feels a discontinuity of identity during the merger, which causes uncertainty and stress. An organizational identity reflects a cognitive and affective bond between the individual and the group and because of this, threats to a group’s identity can generate emotional responses in the group that is threatened (Zaheer et al., 2005).

Similar believes and values are associated with attractiveness and trustworthiness (Lewicki & Bunker, 1995). This association often results in the development of in-group versus out-group bias, which is likely to be amplified in conditions of ambiguity and uncertainty of the future (Van Knippenberg & Van Leeuwen, 2001; Terry, 2001). Because of this, people in merged organizations often do not understand or may distrust people from the other organization (Vaara, 2003). Here, willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization will be strong.

(12)

will be split in several groups, for instance, one subgroup for each organization (Lau & Murnighan, 1998).

Because of the aforementioned reasons, high willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization will most likely result in a low willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization. Therefore, the final hypothesis for this research is:

H5: Willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization is negatively related to willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization.

3. METHOD

As stated in the introduction chapter, the research question of this research was ‘Which

determinants influence the willingness of organization members to support a transitional identity during a merger and what impact do the determinants have?’. To give an answer to

this question, two kinds of data collection were used. Quantitative data was collected by conducting questionnaires and qualitative data was collected by conducting interviews. By combining the outcomes of both data collection methods, a well-substantiated answer to the research question can be given. This chapter will start with the field context in which the data collection took place. After that, both the questionnaire and interview will be discussed.

3.1 Field context

This study was performed at public school organization X (194,55 FTE), Christian school organization Y (102,74 FTE) and child care center Z (90,7 FTE). Schools and daycare centers in the North of Groningen are aligned under these organizations. In this area, the amount of children that will attend primary or secondary education can decrease up to 50 percent and this will cause several schools in these problem areas to lose their right of existence (Niessen et al., 2010). Furthermore, daycare centers in this area are also affected heavily.

Because of both financial and idealistic reasons, the organizations want to merge several schools and daycare centers into child centers. In the child center, children between zero and twelve years old are offered education, daycare and development from 7 am to 7 pm. The child center combines education, childcare, playgroups, preschool care and afterschool care and provides children a place to develop themselves during the first twelve years of their lives at the same location.

Currently, the organizations are looking into the possibility of merging several of their schools and daycare centers into child centers and the merger is in its pre-merger state. The research population is defined as ‘all managers, teachers and pedagogic employees that are working at organization X, organization Y and organization Z.’ The census size of the research was 300 and the time dimension was cross-sectional, because the study is carried out once in the pre-merger stage and therefore represents a snapshot of one point in time.

(13)

3.2 Questionnaire

The questionnaire measured the determinants of willingness to support the transitional identity and the willingness to support the transitional identity variable itself. Multi-item scales were used to collect data. The scales used in this research were numerical scales, these were seven-point scales on which participants could rate each item (Blumberg, Cooper & Schindler, 2008). Furthermore, the questionnaire was structured, each participant got the same questions in the same order. In the following paragraphs, the scales used to collect data for the determinants and the dependent variable itself will be presented.

The questionnaire data was obtained by conducting online questionnaires. This questionnaire was available to all managers, teachers and pedagogic employees that were working at organization X, organization Y and organization Z. All participants of the questionnaires were informed that their responses to the questionnaires were confidential and that at no time they would be made available to the organization in which they worked.

A month before the questionnaires were available, an e-mail was send to all school directors and directors of daycare centers concerning the questionnaires. This e-mail was send by the directors of the organizations, to ensure that the school directors and directors of the childcare centers would notify the e-mail. When the questionnaires were available online, a second e-mail was send by the directors of the organizations with the request to complete the questionnaire within two weeks. A reminder was send by the directors of the organizations after a week.

The amount of returned questionnaires was 41. The response rate was 76% for the managers of the organizations, schools and daycare centers. The response rate for the teachers and pedagogic employees of organization X, organization Y and organization Z was 9%. The total response rate of the questionnaire was 14%. The response rate among teachers and pedagogic employees was low because of the timing of the questionnaire. The questionnaire was available two weeks before the summer vacation and because of that, several people did not want to participate or did not have time to finish a questionnaire.

For this research, variables were used that were not yet fully operationalized in academic literature. Several scales from academic literature covered a part of one of the variables, but never covered the whole variable. The researcher did not find it wise to design all scales by himself, because validity and reliability of the items could not be guaranteed. Validity and reliability could be guaranteed when several scales were put together, therefore the researcher chose to put items of scales together that covered a part of one of the variables. Together, these items would cover the whole variable. By doing so, items for this research were valid, reliable and applicable to the variables of this research.

The scales used for the determinants and the dependent variable will be discussed next. The scales are displayed in a table per determinant or dependent variable. These tables will show the items for this research, the original items on which the items for the research were based and the article and scale from which the original items were taken. When an item was designed by the researcher, the English translation of the item can be found in the original item column. After that, the transformation and translation of the items will be explained.

3.2.1 Scale willingness to support the transitional identity

(14)

intentions on helping becoming part of the same group and feelings concerning the merged organization.

Item two and three focused on the expectancy of respondents to become part of the same group. These two items focused on likeliness of creating a the transitional identity. Item four to seven looked at the intentions on helping becoming part of the same group, item one and items eight to fourteen focused on the feelings concerning the merged organization. Item four to fourteen focused on the willingness to support the transitional identity. The items for the scale willingness to support the transitional identity can be found in Table 1: Items Scale Willingness to Support the Transitional Identity.

Item Original item Taken from

1) Ik heb het gevoel dat de nog te

vormen kindvoorzieningen op de manier zullen gaan werken zoals ik dat ook graag zou willen

1) How much do you think that you will identify with the new merged hospital?

Amiot et al. (2012) Identification measures scale 2) Ik heb het gevoel dat de drie

verschillende organisaties samen één groep zullen vormen, ondanks de verschillende achtergronden

2) Despite the different hospital backgrounds, it feels as though the two hospitals are all just one group

Amiot et al., (2012) Common in-group identity scale

3) Ik heb het gevoel dat de drie verschillende organisaties drie verschillende groepen zullen blijven

3) Despite the different hospital backgrounds, it feels as though the two hospitals are two separate groups

Amiot et al., (2012) Common in-group identity scale

4) Ik ben van plan om anderen aan te moedigen om het opzetten van de

kindvoorzieningen goed te laten verlopen

4) How strongly do you intend to encourage others to make this change effective?

Szabla (2007) Positive Intentional Response scale 5) Ik ben van plan om zelf ervoor te

zorgen dat het opzetten van de kindvoorzieningen goed zal verlopen

5) How strongly do you intend to make sure this change is effective?

Szabla (2007) Positive Intentional Response scale 6) Ik ben van plan om over de voordelen

van het opzetten van de kindvoorzieningen te praten

6) How strongly do you intend to speak up about the advantages of the change?

Szabla (2007) Positive Intentional Response scale 7) Ik ben van plan om het implementeren

van de kindvoorzieningen te steunen

7) How strongly do you intend to support the implementation of the change? Szabla (2007) Positive Intentional Response scale 8) Ik word blij wanneer ik aan de nog te

vormen kindvoorzieningen denk

8) When I think about the change I feel happy

Szabla (2007) Positive Emotional Response scale 9) Ik ben enthousiast over de nog te

vormen kindvoorzieningen

9) When I think about the change I feel excited

Szabla (2007) Positive Emotional Response scale 10) Ik voel me opgelucht wanneer ik aan

de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen

10) When I think about the change I feel relieved

(15)

denk Emotional Response scale 11) Ik put goede hoop uit de nog te

vormen kindvoorzieningen

11) When I think about the change I feel hopeful

Szabla (2007) Positive Emotional Response scale 12) Het opzetten van de

kindvoorzieningen doet mij persoonlijk niet zoveel

12) This change does not matter much to me personally

Szabla (2007) Cognitive Response scale 13) Ik vind het belangrijk om te weten

welke invloed het opzetten van de kindvoorzieningen gaat hebben op mijn dagelijkse werkzaamheden

13) I care about how this change will affect my daily work

Szabla (2007) Cognitive Response scale 14) Het opzetten van de

kindvoorzieningen gaat ervoor zorgen dat organisatie X beter gaat functioneren

14) This change will probably improve the way this department works

Szabla (2007) Cognitive Response scale Table 1: Items Scale Willingness to Support the Transitional Identity

3.2.2 Scale perceived status of the own organization in the merger

Perceived status of the own organization in the merger concerns power relations between the organizations involved in the merger. When organizations merge, there will always be an organization that is dominant in the new organizational identity and an organization who is dominated in the new organizational identity. Therefore, items for this scale looked at the perceived required changes for the own organization to become part of the merged organization. Furthermore, the influence of the own organization when setting up the merged organization is measured.

The perceived status of the own organization was measured by eight items. The first two items were taken from the sense of continuity scale by Giessner (2011b). Item three to six were based on the identity threat scale by Amiot et al. (2012). Items seven and eight were based on an interview protocol question by Drori et al. (2011) concerning the merger being ‘a merger of equals’. The items for the scale perceived status of the own organization in the merger can be found in Table 2: Items Scale Perceived Status of the Own Organization in the Merger.

1) Ik denk dat de identiteit van

organisatie X nog steeds zichtbaar zal zijn in de nog te vormen

kindvoorzieningen

1) In the new

organization the identity of the former organization is still visible Giessner (2011b) Sense of continuity scale

2) Ik denk dat de nog te vormen

kindvoorzieningen erg gaan lijken op de identiteit organisatie X

2) The new organization is very similar to my former organization I worked for Giessner (2011b) Sense of continuity scale

3) Ik denk dat organisatie X zich in een zwakke onderhandelingspositie zal bevinden tijdens het opzetten van de nog

3) To what extend did you experience fear that your hospital will be in a

(16)

te vormen kindvoorzieningen weak position in the merged hospital? 4) Ik verwacht dat de belangen van

organisatie X goed behartigd zullen worden tijdens het opzetten van de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen

4) To what extend do you experience concern that your hospital’s interests will not be well-represented in the merged hospital?

Amiot et al., (2012) Identity threat scale

5) Ik verwacht dat het belang van

organisatie X goed behartigd zal worden in de hogere leidinggevende functies bij de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen

5) To what extend did you experience concerns that your hospital’s interests will not be well-represented in the senior positions in the merged hospital?

Amiot et al,. (2012) Identity threat scale

6) Ik verwacht dat organisatie X op waarde geschat zal worden binnen de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen

6) To what extend did you experience not feeling that your hospital is being valued in the new merged hospital?

7) Ik verwacht dat de drie verschillende organisaties allemaal evenveel zullen moeten veranderen

7) Was this merger a merger of equals?

Drori et al., (2011) Interview protocol 8) Ik verwacht dat organisatie X veel zal

moeten aanpassen om te werken volgens de principes van de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen

8) Was this merger a merger of equals?

Drori, Wrzesniewski et al., (2011) Interview protocol

Table 2: Items Scale Perceived Status of the Own Organization in the Merger

3.2.3 Scale perceived employee threat

Perceived employee threat was described as ‘perceptions of likeliness that an employee will lose his job, job autonomy, personal relations or experiences a negative impact on his future career’. Therefore, the items for the perceived employee threat determinant focus on the expectancy of organization members to lose their job, job autonomy, disruption of personal relationships, personal benefits and long-term effects.

(17)

Item Original item Taken from 1) Ik denk dat mijn baanzekerheid zal

verminderen binnen de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen

1) I would be worried that I would lose my job

Mottola et al., (1997) Employee threat scale 2) Ik denk dat mijn

doorgroeimogelijkheden minder zullen zijn binnen de nog te vormen

kindvoorzieningen dan op dit moment binnen organisatie X het geval is

2) I would feel that the future of my career was uncertain

Mottola et al., (1997) Employee threat scale

3) Ik denk dat mijn financiële en medische voorwaarden zullen

verslechteren binnen de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen

3) I would be

concerned that I would lose important medical and financial benefits

4) Ik denk dat de status en autoriteit van mijn baan zullen verminderen binnen de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen

4) I would worry that my job status and authority would be jeopardized by the merger

5) Het is aannemelijk dat ik een positie met minder verantwoordelijkheid en autoriteit krijg binnen de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen dan dat ik nu binnen organisatie X heb

5) It is likely that I will have a position of lower responsibility and authority in the merged organization than I held in my original company

6) Ik heb er problemen mee wanneer ik een functie met minder

verantwoordelijkheid en autoriteit zal krijgen binnen de nog te vormen

kindvoorzieningen dan dat ik nu binnen organisatie X heb

6) It would upset me when I will have a position of lower responsibility and authority in the merged organization than I held in my original company

Designed by the researcher

7) Ik denk dat het management van organisatie Y mij zal achterstellen ten opzichte van het eigen personeel, wanneer de kindvoorzieningen opgezet zijn

7) I would be concerned that upper management of the other company would discriminate against me

8) Ik denk dat het management van organisatie Z mij zal achter stellen ten opzichte van het eigen personeel, wanneer de kindvoorzieningen opgezet zijn

8) I would be concerned that upper management of the other company would discriminate against me

9) Op de lange termijn zie ik voor mezelf de voordelen van het opzetten van de kindvoorzieningen

9) In the long run, I feel it will be worthwhile for me if the organization adopts this change

Holt et al., (2007) Appropriateness scale

10) Het werken in de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen zal mijn baan gemakkelijker maken

10) This change makes my job easier

(18)

11) Ik heb niet het idee dat ik profijt zal hebben van het werken in de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen

11) When this change is implemented, I don’t believe there is anything for me to gain

12) De nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen zullen ervoor zorgen dat veel van de persoonlijke banden die ik heb opgebouwd, verstoord zullen worden

12) This change will disrupt many of the personal relationships I have developed

Holt et al., (2007) Personally Beneficial scale

13) Ik denk dat het opzetten van de kindvoorzieningen ervoor zal zorgen dat de voldoening in het uitvoeren van mijn baan toeneemt

13) This change seems likely to improve my satisfaction with my job

Szabla (2007) Cognitive Response scale

14) Het opzetten van de kindvoorzieningen maakt het aannemelijker dat ik hier zal blijven werken

14) This change makes it more likely that I will continue working here

15) Het is aannemelijk dat ik een positie met meer verantwoordelijkheid en autoriteit in de nog te vormen

kindvoorzieningen zal krijgen dan dat ik binnen organisatie X heb

15) It is likely that I will have a position of lower responsibility and authority in the merged organization than I held in my original company

Table 3: Items Scale Perceived Employee Threat

3.2.4 Scale trust in future colleagues

Trust in future colleagues concerns the degree to which member of one organization trust members of the other organizations. Therefore, items for this determinant focus on the perceived trust an organization member has in members of the other merging organizations.

Unfortunately, the researcher could not find data sets that were applicable to this determinant. Therefore, item one to four were designed by the researcher. The item for the scale trust in future colleagues can be found in Table 4: Items Scale Trust in Future Colleagues.

1) Ik heb het gevoel dat er naar mij zal worden geluisterd door mijn toekomstige collega’s

1) I have the feeling that my future

colleagues will listen to me

Designed by the reseacher

2) Ik heb het gevoel dat ik in de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen goed zal kunnen samenwerken met mijn toekomstige collega’s

2) I have the feeling that I will collaborate well with my future colleagues

3) Ik heb het gevoel dat mijn

toekomstige collega’s open en eerlijk naar mij toe zullen zijn

colleagues will be open and honest towards me

4) Ik heb het gevoel dat mijn

toekomstige collega’s mij in mijn waarde laten

colleagues will accept me as I am

(19)

3.2.5 Scale perceived necessity of the merger

Perceived necessity of the merger concerns whether or not people see the necessity for the change. Therefore, the scale perceived necessity of the merger measures whether or not organization employees find merging the organizations necessary.

The perceived necessity of the merger was measured by nine items. The first two questions were based on the necessity of the merger scale by Giessner (2011b). Items three to seven were based on the Appropriateness scale by Holt et al., (2007). The last two items were based on the cognitive response scale and empirical change leadership strategy scale by Szabla (2007). This last item was taken from a change leadership strategy scale, but it focuses on communicating about the necessity of the merger, which was seen as having a high impactful on the perceived necessity of the merger (Giessner et al., 2006). Therefore, all items focused on the necessity of the merger. The items can be found in Table 5: Items Scale Perceived Necessity of the Merger.

1) Ik denk dat het opzetten van de kindvoorzieningen noodzakelijk is voor organisatie X om te overleven

1) ) I think the merger has been necessary for the preservation of my former organization

Giessner (2011b) Necessity of the merger scale

2) Ik denk dat het opzetten van

kindvoorzieningen noodzakelijk is om de groei van organisatie X te behouden (bijvoorbeeld betere condities, meer middelen, etc.)

2) I think the

integration has been necessary to support the growth (i.e. better conditions, more resources, etc.) of my former organization

Giessner (2011b) Necessity of the merger scale

3) Ik denk dat organisatie X voordeel zal hebben bij het opzetten van de

kindvoorzieningen

3) I think that the organization will benefit from this change

4) Ik denk dat het opzetten van de kindvoorzieningen de totale efficiëntie van de drie organisaties zal verbeteren

4) This change will improve our

organization’s overall efficiency

5) Er zijn een aantal rationale redenen om de kindvoorzieningen op te zetten

5) There are a number of rational reasons for this change to be made

Holt et al., (2007) Appropriateness scale 6) De tijd die we gebruiken om de

kindvoorzieningen op te zetten, zou aan iets anders besteed moeten worden

6) The time we are spending on this change should be spent on something else

7) Het opzetten van de

kindvoorzieningen komt overeen met de prioriteiten van organisatie X

7) This change matches the priorities of our organization

Holt et al., (2007) Appropriateness scale 8) Ik zie de potentiële voordelen van het

opzetten van de kindvoorzieningen

8) I can see the

potential advantages of this change

9) Ik merk dat degenen die leiding hebben over de nog te vormen

9) To get employees to change, those leading

(20)

kindvoorzieningen ons door middel van logische argumenten en feitelijke bewijzen proberen te overtuigen van de noodzaak van de kindvoorzieningen

the change are using logical arguments and factual evidence to carry out this change

Leadership Strategy scale

Table 5: Items Scale Perceived Necessity of the Merger

3.2.6 Scale willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization

Willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization was defined as the likeliness that organization members do not want to adjust the identity of the own organization to the merged identity. This determinant measures the likeliness that organization members want to preserve the current identity of their current organization.

The willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization was measured by five items. Four items have been based on the Identity threat scale by Amiot et al., (2012) and one item has been added by the researcher to add more substance to the questionnaire. The added question follows on the first four questions and can be seen as a concluding question for the willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization determinant. The items for the willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization scale can be found in Table 6: Items Scale Willingness to Preserve the Identity of the Own Organization.

1) Ik hecht eraan dat het eigene van organisatie X behouden blijft binnen de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen

To what extend did you experience loss of

identity for your hospital?

Amiot et al., (2012) Identity threat scale 2) Ik hecht eraan dat de unieke rol die

organisatie X binnen de gemeenschap vervult, behouden blijft binnen de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen

To what extend did you experience loss of distinctive role for your hospital in the community?

3) Ik hecht eraan dat de historie en de onderscheidende cultuur van organisatie X behouden blijft binnen de nog te vormen kindvoorzieningen

To what extend did you experience loss of history and distinctive culture of your hospital?

4) Ik vrees dat de reputatie van

organisatie X zal verzwakken door het opzetten van de nog te vormen

kindvoorzieningen

To what extend did you experience concern that the merger will

weaken the reputation of your hospital

5) Het zou een groot verlies zijn als het eigene van organisatie X verloren gaat binnen de nog te vormen

kindvoorzieningen

It would be a great loss if the identity of the current organization would be lost in the merged organization

(21)

3.3 Transformation and translation of the items

The items for this research were based on original items from academic literature, but in order to let the items be applicable to the research, they had to be transformed. The original items were either already specified to a certain field context or were not specified and could be used in a broad context. For instance, the items of Amiot et al., (2012) were specified to a field context in which two hospitals were merging together, while items by Holt et al., (2007) were not specified and looked at a certain change, without specifying the field context.

When transforming the original items to make them applicable for this research, the original items were specified to the field context of this research. The field context of this research was that three organizations were looking at the possibility of merging their schools and daycare centers into several child centers. Therefore, items that were already specified to a certain field context were transformed to the field context of this study. Items that were not yet specified and could be used in a broad context were also specified to the field context of this study. This ensured that the items of this research were applicable to the field context of this research and ensured that it would be clear for respondents what the items were about.

For the questionnaire items, there were no Dutch translations available. Because of that, the researcher collaborated with colleague researcher Dümmer, J., who was using similar items. The collaboration was regarding translating items for Holt et al,. (2007) and Szabla (2007). In order to increase the quality of the translated items, it was agreed that both researchers translated the items separately, before they would discuss them together. When discussing the items, the researchers compared the two translations made for the items. When the translations were similar, the researchers moved on to the next translation. When there was a difference between the translations, consensus concerning translation of the item was necessary before moving on to the next item. All items used from Holt et al., (2007) and Szabla (2007) were discussed according to this procedure. Our researches both had a different focus and because of that, the transformation of the translated items differs between our researches. Still, the translation of the items is similar.

3.4 Multicollinearity between items

When the researcher checked for multicollinearity by doing a factor analysis, the model showed that there was overlap (R > .9) between two items of the scale willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity and two items of the scale status of the own organization in the merger. For the willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity scale, this was concerning item 8 (original item: when I think about the change I feel happy) and item 9 (original item: when I think about the change I feel excited). Both items were taken from the positive emotional response scale by Szabla (2007). For the perceived status of the own organization in the merger scale, this was concerning question 4 (original item: to what extend do you experience concern that your hospital’s interests will not be well-represented in the merged hospital?) and question 5 (original item: to what extend did you experience concerns that your hospital’s interests will not be well-represented in the senior positions in the merged hospital?). Both items came from the identity threat scale by Amiot et al. (2012).

When the researcher did the factor analysis, there were problems concerning the sample size. There is a lot of discussion concerning the minimum amount of samples to perform a factor analysis, but the absolute minimum sample size is estimated at 100 (Gorsuch, 1983; Kline, 1979). The sample size for this research was 41. Because of this, the research had only 41% of the absolute minimum amount of samples to perform a factor analysis.

(22)

multicollinearity intact. The analyses that will be performed with the data are the simple linear regression analysis and the multiple regression analysis.

3.5 Interview

The interview focused on finding mechanisms between relations of the conceptual model. This was done by asking about thoughts, stories, manifestations and examples concerning the impact of one of the determinants of this research and the willingness to support the transitional identity variable. During the interviews, it was important that multiple interviewees had the same point of view, which was backed up by examples. It was important that the same stories, themes, issues and topic emerged from the interviews. In that way, the impact of each determinant on the willingness to support the transitional identity of the merged organization could be researched.

Interview data was obtained by conducting twelve interviews with school directors and directors of the daycare centers. Four interviews were conducted per organization. Participants of the interviews were selected based on the amount of students that studied at their school or daycare center and the area in which they were operating. This was done to ensure that the whole operating area of the organizations was represented and both small, medium or large schools were represented in the research. Participants received an e-mail a month in advance and were asked whether or not they wanted to be interviewed. After a week, these participants were contacted by the researcher and an appointment for the interview was made.

The interviews were not anonymous, because data provided by respondents was so specific that each school, daycare center or participant could be tracked.

The format that was used for the interviews will be discussed next.

3.5.1 Format interviews

As stated before, the interviews sought to find out the impact of each determinant on the dependent variable. This was done by asking about thoughts, stories, manifestations and examples concerning possible relationships between one of the determinants of this research and the willingness to support the transitional identity variable. The format of the interviews can be found in appendix A: Format interviews.

The interviews used a funnel method. This made it easier for both the interviewee and the interviewer to focus on the required information and ensured that the participant would start thinking in the boundaries of the research. The interview would start off with several introduction questions. If participants already touched upon one of the determinants, the researcher could use probing questions to get more information about the determinant and could get all the required information before starting off with the rest of the interview questions (Blumberg et al., 2008). Furthermore, if participants told something during the interview that was touching upon the area of one of the other determinants, the researcher was free to expatiate on that topic. This was done to keep the natural flow of the interview going.

After the introduction questions, an explanation about the determinants of the willingness to support the transitional identity was provided. After the explanation, each determinant was discussed, starting with the impact of perceived status of the own organization in the merger. After that, the impact of the other determinants on the willingness to support the transitional identity were discussed. To make analyzing the data easier, each determinant that was discussed ended with a concluding question.

(23)

was easy to see how often thoughts, stories, manifestations and examples occurred in the interview data and this made analyzing the interviews easier. The researcher looked at the possibility to do a within-case analysis or a cross-case analysis, but chose for the coding process described above due to time difficulties. The time window of the research was estimated around 8 months and the research combined data from questionnaires and interviews. Because of this, the coding process that was described above was used for the research.

A summary of the research design can be found in Table 7: Research Design.

Population All managers, teachers and pedagogic employees that are working at organization X, organization Y and organization Ze.

Census size 300 Degree of research

question crystallization

Formal study

The research started out with a description of the case and involves precise procedures and data source specifications.

Method of data collection Interrogation/communication

Questionnaires (quantitative data) were used for collecting information for evidence by impersonal means, in-depth interviews (qualitative data) were used for collecting information for evidence by personal means

Researcher control of variables

Ex-post facto design

Researcher has no control over the variables in the sense of being able to manipulate them, but can only report what has happened or is happening

Purpose of the study Causal study

Attempts to reveal the relations between the variables Time dimension Cross-sectional study

The study is carried out once and represents a snapshot of one point in time Topic scope Case study

Emphasizes the full and detailed contextual analysis of fewer events or conditions and their interrelations for a single subject or respondent

Research environment Field condition

The research study occurs under actual environmental conditions Table 7: Research Design

4. RESULTS

4.1 Results Questionnaires

(24)

Total sample: 41

Variable items α mean SD 2 3 4 5 6

1) Willingness of Organization Members to Support the Transitional Identity of the Merged Organization

14 .90 4.70 1.00 .57** -.50** .45** .53** -.05

2) Perceived Status of the Own Organization in the Merger

8 .88 4.65 .92 -.14 .71** .46** -.03 3) Perceived Employee Threat 15 .80 3.73 .85 -.23 -.22 .14 4) Trust in Future Colleagues 4 .95 5.01 1.14 .53** .14 5) Perceived Necessity of the

Merger

9 .88 4.58 1.03 .12

6) Willingness to Preserve the Identity of the Own Organization

5 .84 5.43 .95

** p < .01 SD : Standard deviation α : Cronbach’s alpha

Table 8: Characteristics and Inter-correlations of the Variables in This Study

4.1.1 Outcome simple linear regression analysis

A simple linear regression analysis was conducted for each determinant of willingness to support the transitional identity, except for the willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization variable. This variable was removed from the analysis because the correlation between willingness of organization members to support the transitional identity of the merged organization and willingness to preserve the identity of the own organization was not significant.

The outcomes of the simple linear regression analysis shows that all other determinants are significant. Table 9: Simple Linear Regression Analysis Perceived Status of the Own Organization in the Merger shows that the model explains 33% of the willingness to support the transitional identity, while perceived status of the own organization in the merger had a strong positive relationship with willingness to support the transitional identity (β = .63, p < .000).

Table 10: Simple Linear Regression Analysis Perceived Employee Threat shows that the model explains 25% of the willingness to support the transitional identity. There was a strong negative relationship between perceived employee threat and willingness to support the transitional identity (β = -.59, p < .001).

Table 11: Simple Linear Regression Analysis Trust in Future Colleagues shows that the model explains 20% of the willingness to support the transitional identity, while trust in future colleagues has a relatively strong positive relation with the constant (β = .40, p < .004).

The final simple linear regression analysis can be found in table 12: Simple Linear Regression Analysis Perceived Necessity of the Merger. The model explains 28% of the willingness to support the transitional identity, while perceived necessity of the merger has a strong positive relation with willingness to support the transitional identity (β = .52, p < .000). Even though all simple linear regressions show a high positive relationship between the determinants and willingness to support the transitional identity, perceived status of the own organization in the merger, perceived employee threat and perceived necessity of the merger had the most impact on the willingness to support the transitional identity.

Simple linear regression, R square = .328 sig. = .000

Variable β Significance

Constant 1.80 .013

Perceived Status of the Own Organization in the Merger

.63 .000

β : Beta

(25)

Constant 6.92 .000

Perceived Employee Threat -.59 .001

β : Beta

Table 10: Simple Linear Regression Analysis Perceived Employee Threat

Constant 2.71 .000

Trust in Future Colleagues .40 .004

β : Beta

Table 11: Simple Linear Regression Analysis Trust in Future Colleagues

Constant 2.33 .001

Perceived Necessity of the Merger .52 .000

β : Beta

Table 12: Simple Linear Regression Analysis Perceived Necessity of the Merger

4.1.2 Outcome multiple regression analysis

A forced entry multiple regression analysis on the willingness to support the transitional identity was conducted (see Table 13: Multiple Regression Analysis). The forced entry method was chosen over the hierarchical regression and stepwise methods, because ‘stepwise techniques are influenced by random variation in the data and so seldom give replicable results if the model is retested’ (Field, 2009). The model explains 59% of the willingness to support the transitional identity of the merged organization. Data of three variables were significant. According to the data, perceived status of the own organization in the merger had a strong positive relationship with willingness to support the transitional identity (β = .55, p < .01), while perceived employee threat had a strong negative relationship with willingness to support the transitional identity (β = -.52, p < .01). Perceived necessity of the merger had a moderate positive relationship with willingness to support the transitional identity (β = .28, p < .05). The data of trust in future colleagues was not significant.

Multiple regression analysis model: R square = .59 sig. = .000

Constant _3.55 _.000

Perceived Status of the Own Organization in the Merger

.55 .004

Perceived Employee Threat _-.52 _.001

Trust in Future Colleagues _-.14 _.354

Perceived Necessity of the Merger _.28 _.043

β : Beta