Albert and Whetten Revisited Article by Whetten

Being relatively close to CI definitionally, organizational identity (OI) relies on the actual understandings and claims of employees pertaining to the organization’s unique character rather than being built upon the organization’s expressions of its desired identity. As a theoretical concept, OI is carefully addressed in an article by Whetten (2006) in which the author details and elaborates on his previous OI theory developed in collaboration with S. Albert. Committed to strict quality standards pertaining to theory development, Whetten (2006) seeks to resolve an identity crisis pertaining to OI by instrumentalizing the CED definition of the term, according to which OI’s essential attributes must be central, enduring, and distinguishing.

What this new definition adds to the scientific community’s understanding of organizational theory’s subfields is a thought-provoking question. Two components of the proposed definition, including organizational attributes’ centrality and enduring, could make OI’s essence inseparable from the organization’s unique history and features that have directed its growth and development. This move probably strengthens the idea of OI as something incredibly stable and achieved through suffering and taking risks rather than promoting the perspective that any recent claims can alter the entity’s OI immediately. To be counted as parts of the organization’s OI, enduring/central attributes should “distinguish it from other organizations” (Whetten, 2006, p. 220). The combination of these three factors, including an emphasis on the role of uniqueness promotion in OI development, could further clarify the difference between time-honored and immature identities in business contexts, thus making the OI concept tied to historical reality rather than a desired organizational image. To some degree, this position could support decision-makers in strategic planning by drawing a line between components and features that have already become the elements of their teams’ OIs or only have some potential to gain this status.

References

Whetten, D. A. (2006). Albert and Whetten revisited: Strengthening the concept of organizational identity. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15(3), 219-234.

Cite this paper

Select style

Reference

StudyCorgi. (2023, February 4). Albert and Whetten Revisited Article by Whetten. https://studycorgi.com/albert-and-whetten-revisited-article-by-whetten/

Work Cited

"Albert and Whetten Revisited Article by Whetten." StudyCorgi, 4 Feb. 2023, studycorgi.com/albert-and-whetten-revisited-article-by-whetten/.

* Hyperlink the URL after pasting it to your document

References

StudyCorgi. (2023) 'Albert and Whetten Revisited Article by Whetten'. 4 February.

1. StudyCorgi. "Albert and Whetten Revisited Article by Whetten." February 4, 2023. https://studycorgi.com/albert-and-whetten-revisited-article-by-whetten/.


Bibliography


StudyCorgi. "Albert and Whetten Revisited Article by Whetten." February 4, 2023. https://studycorgi.com/albert-and-whetten-revisited-article-by-whetten/.

References

StudyCorgi. 2023. "Albert and Whetten Revisited Article by Whetten." February 4, 2023. https://studycorgi.com/albert-and-whetten-revisited-article-by-whetten/.

This paper, “Albert and Whetten Revisited Article by Whetten”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal. Please use the “Donate your paper” form to submit an essay.