The objective of this study was to develop a conceptually and methodologically sound measure of employee identification with the work group. A three-phase analysis approach was used. First, a content analysis was conducted with subject matter experts (SMEs) in the field of organizational behavior and psychology. Second, an exploratory factor analysis of the factor structure was conducted using a sample of employees from a credit union (N = 140). Finally, confirmatory analyses using LISREL 8 were conducted with a sample of employees derived from four insurance organizations (N = 309). The exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported the factor structure of the identification measure and the scale scores showed acceptable levels of internal consistency in both samples ([.alpha] = .78; [.alpha] = .79, respectively). We also demonstrated that the construct of work group identification is distinct from but related to both work group cohesiveness and work group communication.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, J. C. , & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.
2.
Ashforth, B. E. , & Mael, F. A. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14, 20-39.
3.
Bass, B. M. (1960). Leadership, psychology, and organizational behavior. New York: Harper.
4.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
5.
Brown, R. , Condor, S., Mathews, A., Wade, G., & Williams, J. (1986). Explaining intergroup differentiation in an industrial organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 59, 273-286.
6.
Brown, R. , & Williams, J. (1984). Group identification: The same thing to all people?Human Relations, 37, 547-564.
7.
Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, D., & Klesh, J. (1979). The Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
8.
Cronbach, L. J. , & Meehl, P. C. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281-302.
9.
Dutton, J. E. , Dukerich, J. M., & Harquail, C. V. (1994). Organizational image and member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 239-263.
10.
Foote, N. N. (1951). Identification as the basis for a theory of motivation. American Sociological Review, 16, 14-21.
11.
Gould, S. B. (1975). Organizational identification and commitment in two environments.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, Lansing.
12.
Gully, S. M. , Devine, D. J., & Whitney, D. J. (1995). A meta-analysis of cohesion and performance: Effects of level-of-analysis and task interdependence. Small Group Research, 26, 497-520.
13.
Guzzo, R. A. , & Shea, G. P. (1992). Group performance and intergroup relations in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 269-313). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
14.
Hall, R. H. (1982). Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
15.
Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of the scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of Management, 5, 967-988.
16.
Jöreskog, K. G. , & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIM PLIS command language. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
17.
Kenny, D. A. (1979). Correlation and causality. New York: John Wiley.
18.
Mael, F. A. , & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 103-123.
19.
Mael, F. A. , & Tetrick, L. E. (1992). Identifying organizational identification. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 813-824.
20.
March, J. G. , & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley.
21.
Mulaik, S. A. , James, L. R., Van Alstine, J., Bennett, N., Lind, K., & Stilwell, J. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indexes for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 430-445.
22.
Mullen, B. , & Cooper, C. (1994). The relationship between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 210-227.
23.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
24.
Price, J. L. , & Mueller, C. W. (1986). Handbook of organizational measurement. Marshfield, MA: Pitman.
25.
Riordan, C. M. (1995). An empirical comparison of three operationalizations of the construct of demographic similarity through the test of a theoretical model of relational demography. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, Atlanta.
26.
Rotondi, T., Jr. (1975a). Organizational identification: Issues and implications. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 95-109.
27.
Rotondi, T., Jr. (1975b). Organizational identification and group involvement. Academy of Management Journal, 18, 892-897.
28.
Rotondi, T., Jr. (1976). Identification, personality needs, and managerial position. Human Relations, 29, 507-515.
29.
Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173-180.
30.
Stogdill, R. M. (1965). Group productivity, drive, and cohesiveness. Columbus, OH: Bureau of Business Research.
31.
Stogdill, R. M. (1972). Group productivity, drive, and cohesiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 8, 26-43.
32.
Tannenbaum, A. S. (1968). Control in organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill.
33.
Tolman, E. C. (1943). Identification and the post-war world. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38, 141-148.
34.
Tucker, L. R. , & Lewis, C. A. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1-10.
35.
Widaman, K. F. (1985). Hierarchically nested covariance structure models for multitrait multi method data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 1-26.
