Search results

Organizational identification could play an important role during crises if it contributes to individuals' perceptions of control. This study examines this relationship and unpacks some of its complexities by investigating the mediating role of job satisfaction and citizenship behaviors that have previously been examined as outcomes of organizational identification in noncrisis contexts. The authors also investigate the moderating role of the perceived severity of the crisis on the relationships between organizational identification and job satisfaction and citizenship behaviors. There is limited empirical research on these relationships in a crisis context, and studying them is important for understanding the role of identification in diverse contexts and for crisis management research and practice.

Using the survey method, quantitative data were collected from 354 individuals from a nonprofit organization that filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. This was supplemented with qualitative data from respondents' comments in the survey.

Using process analysis, the authors find the following: (1) job satisfaction fully mediates the relationship between organizational identification and perceived control; (2) the perceived severity of the crisis moderates the relationship between organizational identification and job satisfaction; (3) citizenship behavior is associated with organizational identification but is not a significant mediator in the relationship between organizational identification and perceived control and (4) the perceived severity of the crisis is not a significant moderator of the relationship between organizational identification and citizenship behaviors.

This study’s model can be further tested in public and private organizations that are experiencing bankruptcies to examine the robustness of our findings. Also, due to the cross-sectional design of this study, the findings need to be tested in a longitudinal study to examine if they persist over time during the recovery and growth phases of a crisis.

Leaders can rely on individuals who identify with their organizations during a crisis, such as bankruptcies because they experience job satisfaction and a sense of control. Additionally, these individuals also demonstrate citizenship behaviors in these challenging situations.

This study is one of the first to empirically examine the association between organizational identification and perceived control, the mediating role of job satisfaction and citizenship behaviors and the moderating role of perceived severity in the context of an organizational crisis. An additional strength of this study is that it provides empirical evidence from individuals in an actual crisis rather than from laboratory studies.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate followers’ judgments of the culpability of their leaders and the organization’s external stakeholders in causing a crisis. The authors study the differences in effects of these judgments on their trust toward their leaders, their emotional exhaustion, and their levels of organizational identification.

Using the survey method the authors collected data from 354 individuals from an organization that filed for bankruptcy. Respondents’ comments also provided qualitative data that was used to triangulate the findings.

The authors find that individuals’ judgments that their leaders were culpable led to reduced trust, increased emotional exhaustion, and contrary to expectations reduced organizational identification. Therefore, it appears that in situations of perceived leader culpability during a crisis, followers tightly couple their leaders with the organization as a whole. In contrast, their judgments that external stakeholders were culpable were associated with increased trust toward their leaders, increased organizational identification, and they had no relationship with their levels of emotional exhaustion. The analysis of the qualitative data provides some insights into their judgments and the dependent variables.

Organizational members’ judgments of culpability are important factors that should be considered in crisis management research, and in research on trust, emotional exhaustion, and organizational identification. A limitation of the study is that it is cross-sectional in nature. Therefore, future research could test the findings in a longitudinal study.

Leaders need to understand the judgments of their followers during an organizational crisis. These judgments have implications for when and how leaders can mobilize their followers and the leadership tasks during crisis containment.

Extant research tends to focus on the judgments of external stakeholders during a crisis. This study is one of the first to examine the effects of internal stakeholders’ judgments of culpability for causing a crisis on their trust, emotional exhaustion, and organizational identification. Further, existing empirical studies on followers’ attributions during a crisis tend to be laboratory based. The study provides empirical evidence from individuals in an actual organization in crisis.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a framework for predicting the role and effects of perceived organizational identity (POI) on organizational members' perceptions and behaviors during crisis and change situations, and the scope of the resulting POI changes that may occur.

The paper brings together research on crisis, change, threat/opportunity, and POI, along with case study data to create a threat/opportunity framework for making these predictions.

Based on whether threat or opportunity is perceived during crisis and change situations, different aspects of individuals' POIs will become salient. In threat situations, individuals will focus on perceptions of “who we are.” In opportunity situations, individuals will also focus on “who we could be.” The focus of attention and the threat/opportunity context will influence organizational identification, learning, and openness to change; and whether incremental or transformational POI change occurs. The perception of “who we could be” will motivate more change than the ideal organizational identity or the image of “who we want to be” that is typically studied in the literature. The scope of POI change is also dependent on perceptions of identity cost and the identity gap.

Future research can test the hypotheses suggested here in various crisis and change contexts. Also, differentiating between threat and opportunity contexts is important for understanding the role of POI, and the extent to which POI changes can occur in crisis and change situations. Studies of resistance to POI change could consider whether individuals perceived the identity cost and the identity gap as being too low. More research on POI in opportunity contexts could expand understanding of the POI image of “who we could be” in motivating POI change. Finally, further integration of the literature on crisis and change can benefit both fields.

Practitioners can predict which aspects of POI will become salient in threat and opportunity conditions, and manage their different effects. For individuals to learn and change their POIs during crisis and change situations, managers need to diminish heightened perceptions of threat and shift the focus of attention to “who we could be.” Top managers' claims of “who we could be” need to be perceived by organizational members as being desirable and attainable in order to be motivating. Finally, to create transformational POI change, executives need to highlight the identity cost of not changing, and the size of the identity gap.

The threat/opportunity framework enables new predictions of the role and effects of POI in crisis and change situations. The paper highlights the POI image of “who we could be,” defines incremental and transformational POI change, redefines the identity gap concept, and introduces the notion of identity cost to provide a framework for predicting the scope of POI change that has received limited research attention. Finally, the paper contributes to research on POI in opportunity‐oriented conditions, and integrates research on crisis and change.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate followers’ judgments of leader culpability and learning during a crisis, and the extent to which judgments of culpability create hopelessness and reduce crisis learning. The authors also study factors that moderate these relationships.

Using the survey method the authors collected data from 354 individuals from a nonprofit organization that filed for bankruptcy. Respondents’ comments also provided qualitative data that was used to triangulate the findings.

The authors find that followers made judgments of leader culpability and reported crisis learning. However, followers’ judgments have no direct effect on their crisis learning, but have an indirect effect by increasing hopelessness. The authors also find that followers’ job satisfaction and perceptions of sufficient crisis communications moderate this relationship. The qualitative data provides insights into the areas on which leaders were judged, and what was learned during the crisis.

More research on internal stakeholders’ judgments of their leaders during organizational crises is important as they affect followers’ psychological states and behaviors. Future research can test the findings in a longitudinal study.

Leaders need to pay attention to the judgments of their followers during a crisis as they could foster hopelessness and reduce learning. Providing sufficient crisis communications and enabling job satisfaction could lessen these negative effects.

Extant research tends to focus on the judgments of external stakeholders during crises. This study is one of the first to examine the effects of internal stakeholders’ judgments of leader culpability on their sense of hopelessness and crisis learning, and the moderating factors that reduce their negative effects. The authors also contribute to understanding what aspects of leadership are judged by followers during a crisis, and what followers learn from a crisis. These are areas that have not been previously examined in crisis management research. The authors also provide evidence from individuals in an actual organization in crisis which tends not to be the norm in crisis attribution and crisis learning research.

This paper aims to investigate the extent to which individuals' identification with a changed organizational artifact is associated with their cognitive, behavioral, and affective support for change in the later stages of a change effort, and the role of contextual variables in mediating these relationships.

Primarily quantitative with some qualitative data from an online organization that had acquired the non‐personnel assets of its competitor.

The paper finds that: artifacts can be an important part of employees' perceptions of their organizations; artifact identification is associated with cognitive and behavioral support in the later stages of a change effort; a positive perception of the change mediates between identification and cognitive and behavioral support, and also facilitates affective support; emotional exhaustion is a marginal mediator; and trust towards top managers does not play a mediating role.

Future research could study the factors that influence artifact identification. Studies of support for change must address its various dimensions to more accurately assess support.

During the later stages of change, managers can foster artifact identification, highlight the positives, and reduce emotional exhaustion to ensure support.

This study is one of the first to examine the relationship between artifact identification and support for change in the later stages of a change effort, and the mediating role of contextual factors. In addition, it investigates the multi‐dimensional aspects of support for change, an area that has received limited empirical research attention.

Academics and practitioners are increasingly discussing the role of crowdsourcing initiatives in dealing with the challenges imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, along with their role in an emergency context in general. However, empirical evidence about the role of crowdsourcing initiatives in an emergency context is still scarce. This paper aims to address this gap in knowledge.

The authors adopted an inductive approach to investigate how companies leveraged crowdsourcing initiatives to address the issues posed by COVID-19. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews. The selection of the interviewees was based on a purposive sampling strategy. Data were analysed through thematic analysis.

The analysis led to the identification and examination of drivers (e.g. preserving relationships with customers), advantages (e.g. increased demand for services) and disadvantages (e.g. increased platform cost) of implementing crowdsourcing initiatives during COVID-19. By leveraging the findings, this paper suggests future research opportunities. Relevant future research opportunities include: (1) quantitatively evaluating the economic impact of crowdsourcing initiatives during a disruptive event and (2) examining how the sector in which the company operates influences the beneficial and detrimental effects of crowdsourcing initiatives on company performance.

The involvement of crowds as innovation partners has provided unique opportunities for companies to innovate and address the challenging scenario. The scientific literature about the role of crowdsourcing during COVID-19 is growing. However, there is still a scarcity of empirical evidence about the mechanisms underpinning the use of crowdsourcing during the pandemic. By leveraging semi-structured interviews, this paper addresses this relevant gap in knowledge.