This study investigates organizational identity and member identification in a hidden organization operating within a crowd-based collective. Specifically, it draws from Scott’s hidden organization framework to examine the role of the Yelp Elite Squad, an invitation-only organization that receives access to free monthly parties and other rewards organized by a local employee of Yelp. Analyses of qualitative interviews and participant observation indicate that through limited information, restricted channels of communication, and framing participation as “community,” Yelp is able to conceal the Elite Squad organizational identity from both the public as well as members of the Elite Squad. Further analysis reveals tensions emerging from expressing and suppressing organizational identification among members of the Elite Squad. Finally, Yelp is shown to broker (in)visibilities of the Elite Squad with local businesses to create value for the organization.
BenklerY. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
3.
BennettW. L.SegerbergA. (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
4.
BiernackiP.WaldorfD. (1981). Snowball sampling: Problems and techniques of chain referral sampling. Sociological Methods & Research, 10, 141-163.
5.
BimberB. A.FlanaginA.StohlC. (2012). Collective action in organizations: Interaction and engagement in an era of technological change. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
CaverleeJ. (2013). Exploitation in human computation systems. In MichelucciP. (Ed.), Handbook of human computation (pp. 837-845). New York, NY: Springer.
9.
CharmazK. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London, England: SAGE.
10.
ClaryE. G.SnyderM. (1999). The motivations to volunteer theoretical and practical considerations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 156-159.
11.
CorbinJ. M.StraussA. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13, 3-21.
12.
CoxL. P. (2011). Truth in crowdsourcing. IEEE Security & Privacy, 9(5), 74-76.
DukerichJ. M.KramerR.ParksJ. M. (1998). The dark side of organizational identification. In WhettenD. A.GodfreyP. (Eds.), Identity in organizations: Building theory through conversations (pp. 245-256). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
15.
FairhurstG. T.PutnamL. (2004). Organizations as discursive constructions. Communication Theory, 14, 5-26.
16.
FernandezR. M.GouldR. V. (1994). A dilemma of state power: Brokerage and influence in the national health policy domain. American Journal of Sociology, 99, 1455-1491.
MeisenbachR. J.KramerM. W. (2014). Exploring nested identities: Voluntary membership, social category identity, and identification in a community choir. Management Communication Quarterly, 28, 187-213.
26.
MetzgerM. J. (2007). Making sense of credibility on the web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 2078-2091.
27.
PattonM. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
SavageM.WilliamsK. (2008). Elites: Remembered in capitalism and forgotten by social sciences. The Sociological Review, 56(s1), 1-24.
30.
SchoenebornD.SchererA. G. (2012). Clandestine organizations, Al Qaeda, and the paradox of (in) visibility: A response to Stohl and Stohl. Organization Studies, 33, 963-971.
31.
SchultzM.HatchM. J.LarsenM. H. (2000). The expressive organization: Linking identity, reputation, and the corporate brand: Linking identity, reputation, and the corporate brand. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
32.
ScottC. R. (2013). Anonymous agencies, backstreet businesses, and covert collectives: Rethinking organizations in the 21st century. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
33.
ScottC. R.CormanS. R.CheneyG. (1998). Development of a structurational model of identification in the organization. Communication Theory, 8, 298-336.
34.
ScottC. R.StephensK. K. (2009). It depends on who you’re talking to . . . : Predictors and outcomes of situated measures of organizational identification. Western Journal of Communication, 73, 370-394.
35.
ShawA.HillB. M. (2014). Laboratories of oligarchy? How the iron law extends to peer production. Journal of Communication, 64, 215-238.
36.
StohlC. (2014). Crowds, clouds, and community. Journal of Communication, 64(1), 1-19.
37.
StohlC.StohlM. (2011). Secret agencies: The communicative constitution of a clandestine organization. Organization Studies, 32, 1197-1215.
38.
TretheweyA.AshcraftK. L. (2004). Special issue introduction: Practicing disorganization: The development of applied perspectives on living with tension. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 32, 81-88.
VeilS. R.SellnowT. L.PetrunE. L. (2012). Hoaxes and the paradoxical challenges of restoring legitimacy: Dominos’ response to its YouTube crisis. Management Communication Quarterly, 26, 322-345.
