Examining Antecedents and Consequences of Organizational Identification and Occupational Identification

Abstract

급변하는 경영환경에서 조직은 생존 및 경쟁력 확보를 위해 끊임없는 노력을 필요로 한다. 빠른 속도로 변화하는 시장환경에 발맞춰 경쟁력을 확보하기 위해서는 조직구성원들의 자발적이고 적극적인 참여가 필수적이다. 조직과 조직구성원들의 관계는 조직동일시(organizational identification)를 통해 설명할 수 있다. 조직동일시는 조직구성원들이 소속된 조직과 심리적인 일체감을 인지하는 정도를 뜻한다. 선행연구에 의하면 조직동일시는 조직구성원의 조직 내 전반적인 태도와 행동에 긍정적인 영향을 주는 것으로 나타났다 (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Bednar et al., 2020; Dutton et al., 1994; Edwards, 2005; He & Brown, 2013; Pratt, 1998; Riketta, 2005). 그러나 최근 들어 조직 내 조직동일시가 약화되어 가고 있어 이에 대한 연구가 필요하다는 주장이 제기되었다 (Ashforth, 2020; Lian et al., 2022). 이에 본 연구는 조직구성원 개개인이 각기 다른 동일시 대상을 가질 수 있다는 주장에 근거하여 (Vough, 2012) 조직구성원들의 조직동일시와 직업동일시(occupational identification)를 각각 측정하였으며, 선행요인과 결과요인을 사회정체성이론을 바탕으로 분석하였다. 분석내용은 다음과 같다. 실증분석을 통해 조직동일시와 직업동일시에 대한 전반적인 이해를 증진하고, 각각의 형성요인들(집합주의, 개인주의, 조직의 외부인지도, 직업의 외부인지도, 인지된 내부인사이동 가능성, 인지된 이직가능성)을 비교하였다. 또한 각각의 동일시가 조직구성원의 조직 내 행동(변화준비성, 역할 외 행동, 적극적 행동, 잡 크래프팅 및 발언행동)에 미치는 영향을 분석하였다. 아울러 조직과 직업의 근속기간과 인지된 직업불안정성이 조직동일시와 직업동일시 형성에 미치는 조절효과를 분석하였다. 본 연구는 국내 기업 3곳에 대한 직원 설문조사를 통해 진행되었다. 설문은 조직구성원을 대상으로 한 두 번의 설문과 직속 상사를 대상으로 한 설문으로 구분하여 진행하였으며, 최종적으로 300명의 설문응답이 분석에 사용되었다. 경로분석을 활용하여 분석한 결과, 조직동일시와 직업동일시의 형성요인과 그 영향은 다른 양상을 보이고 있음이 확인되었다. 조직동일시 형성에는 집합주의와 조직의 외부인지도가 영향을 미쳤으며, 직업동일시 형성에는 집합주의, 개인주의 및 직업에 대한 외부인지도가 영향을 주는 것으로 분석되었다. 또한, 조직동일시의 경우, 변화준비성과 잡 크래프팅의 3가지 측면 중 인지크래프팅 및 관계크래프팅에 정(+)의 관계를 갖는 것으로 나타났다. 직업동일시의 경우에는 잡 크래프팅 3가지 측면(과업, 인지, 관계) 모두 정(+)의 관계를 보였으며, 그 외의 결과요인에는 영향이 없는 것으로 나타났다. 조직내부에서의 인사이동가능성, 이직가능성은 조직동일시 및 직업동일시 형성에 영향이 없는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 조직동일시는 역할 외 행동, 적극적 행동 및 촉진적 발언행동에 제한적이지만 정(+)의 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 반면 억제적 발언행동와 조직동일시 및 직업동일시의 관계는 유의미하지 않은 것으로 분석되었다. 상황요인으로 설정한 직원들의 조직근속기간, 직업근속기간 및 인지된 직업불안정성의 조절효과 역시 조직동일시 및 직업동일시 형성에 유의하지 않았다. 본 연구는 조직동일시와 직업동일시의 형성에 영향을 주는 선행요인과 조직동일시 및 직업동일시가 조직구성원들의 행동과 태도에 미치는 영향을 동시에 분석 및 비교함으로써 조직동일시와 직업동일시에 대한 포괄적인 검증을 시도했다는데 의의가 있다. 그러나 통합적인 연구모형의 통계검증 과정에서 밝혀지지 않은 경로가 존재할 가능성이 있기 때문에 향후 모형을 세분화하여 조직동일시와 직업동일시의 경로를 분석할 필요가 있다. 또한 조직동일시 및 직업동일시에 영향을 미칠 수 있는 추가 변수들도 고려해야 할 과제이다.

As the market changes at a rapid pace, organizations strive not only to survive but also to attain competitiveness in this dynamic environment. To ensure competitiveness, employees proactive engagement is essential. For employees to be voluntarily engaged and work for organizational betterment, organizational identification (OID) could be adopted to examine the relationship between employees and their employing organizations because it illustrates the dynamics between employing organizations and their members and has been examined by scholars for over 30 years (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Bednar et al., 2020; Dutton et al., 1994; Edwards, 2005; He & Brown, 2013; Pratt, 1998; Riketta, 2005). OID includes organizational members processes of creating meaning and connecting themselves to their affiliated organizations, enhancing their overall attitudes toward and behaviors within organizations. Because OID directly affects employees satisfaction with, attitudes toward, and behaviors in their work, it has attracted interest in the field of organizational studies (Dutton et al., 1994; Edwards, 2005; Riketta, 2005; He & Brown, 2013; Lee et al., 2015). However, recently, it is believed that OID has eroded in organizations and therefore requires assessment (Ashforth, 2020; Lian et al., 2022). To understand OID more fully and examine identification with another target, this study was examined OID and occupational identification (OCID) to compare and differentiate various antecedents and consequences of OID and OCID and determine the best fit for organizations and employees attitudes and behaviors. In seeking a holistic understanding of OID and OCID, from their antecedents to their consequences, this study was aimed to determine how organizations can promote OID and encourage employees to develop it; what other types of identification, such as OCID, could encourage employees to exhibit desired organizational outcomes, like OID does; and whether OCID can produce organizational outcomes similar to OIDs. Therefore, this study was aimed to examine the antecedents of OID and OCID, how different factors (such as personal orientations, perceived prestige, and perceived mobility) lead to different types of identification through the perspectives of social identity theory (SIT), and how those identifications lead to various dimensions of organizational outcomes (e.g. change readiness, extra-role behavior, proactive behavior, job crafting, and voice behavior). Examining different identification paths into different dimensions of organizational outcomes broadens the understanding of OID and OCID antecedents and their consequences. As the current literature lacks an explanation of each identifications promoting factors, especially occupations in organizations, this study was intended to expand the understanding of OID and OCID by examining various paths from antecedents and how OID and OCID may lead to different dimensions of organizational outcomes to provide a sound understanding of OID and OCID in organizations. This study was adopted the concepts of personal orientation (collectivism and individualism), perceived prestige (organization and job), and job mobility (intraorganization and interorganization) to examine how those factors influence the formation of OID and OCID, and this study was investigated how identification with different targets may lead to different employee attitudes and behaviors, such as change readiness, extra-role and proactive behaviors, job crafting, and voice behaviors in organizations, by putting them into a comprehensive framework and simultaneously testing them empirically. This study was conducted this study via surveys from employees and their supervisors in organizations in Korea to test hypotheses empirically from the conceptual framework. With the final sample of 300 cases, the analysis was conducted a multilevel path analysis to test and examine the phenomena empirically. The results indicate that although an alternative to OID has not been suggested, as hypothesized, collectivism and perceived organizational prestige can lead to OID and individualism and perceived job prestige can lead to OCID. It is interesting to note that collectivism was also significant in predicting OCID. However, neither internal nor external job mobility has significance in OID or OCID. Regarding the consequences, OID significantly affected change readiness, cognitive crafting, and relational crafting and marginally affected extra-role behavior, proactive behavior, and promotive behavior whereas OCID significantly affected three dimensions of job crafting (task crafting, cognitive crafting, and relational crafting) and was insignificant in all other constructs. The results indicate that multiple antecedents affect the development of OID and OCID and that although they overlap in some ways, OID and OCID lead to different consequences in organizations. OCID influences job crafting behaviors, but OID impacts organizations in general. When this study was examined direct effects from antecedent to consequences without OID or OCID, the results indicated that mediations such as OID and/or OCID positively affect employees attitudes and behaviors in organizations, and although OCID benefits organizations, as employees with OCID improved in all three dimensions of job crafting behaviors, it did not enhance other aspects of employees attitude and behaviors in organizations; therefore, compared to OID, OCID yields similar outputs, but it is focused on job-related areas, not organization-centered behaviors. Based on my findings, practitioners should encourage employees to develop OID and OCID by utilizing personal orientations and the organizations and jobs perceived prestige. The results indicate that OID has a larger impact, but management could determine its importance based in their need to improve organizational performance. Management could encourage employees by creating an environment that emphasizes the job to increase perceived job prestige and develop OCID, which could be beneficial in job-related areas. This study was aimed to provide a sound understanding of OID and OCID and how they are affected by and affect organizations. The findings could help organizations effectively and efficiently develop employees identifications and navigate them for the betterment of the workforce.