Article

Educational Management
Administration & Leadership
Paradoxical Change and 41(2) 165–178
ª The Author(s) 2013

Construction of Identity in an Reprints and permission:

sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1741143212468347
Educational Organization emal.sagepub.com

Anu Puusa, Matti Kuittinen and Pekka Kuusela

Abstract
This article focuses on the construction of organizational identity and the strategic change in an
educational organization. The aim of this empirical study is to examine how the members of an
educational organization construct the meaning of ‘who we are’ during an ongoing change. In
addition, we examine whether it is reasonable to expect that a loosely coupled educational
organization can possess a coherent organizational identity. This thematic template analysis is
based on themed interviews consisting of the members’ conceptions of (1) the manifestation of
organizational identity and (2) changes concerning the organization. In the article, the differences
between the management and the personnel are then examined and interpreted through theories
of organizational subcultures and loosely coupled systems. The management and the teachers
structure organizational identity differently in relation to time, which has a strong effect on the
incompleteness of the planned change.

Keywords
educational organizations, loosely coupled systems, organizational identity, organizational change

Introduction
As an approach to organizational research, organizational identity has proven to be relevant and
intriguing both theoretically and practically. In addition to organizational structure, management
and control mechanisms, a shared identity can be seen as a precondition for organized collective
action. Effective communication, interaction, cooperation, planning and management always
require some degree of identification with the organization. Haslam et al. (2003: 365) even main-
tain that organizational identity actually enables organizational behaviour. Consequently, organi-
zational identity is a very important concept to consider when management aspires to enhance the
utilization of the organization’s collective capacity. Whetten and Godfrey (1998) see the concept
of identity as a way to contemplate and explore organizations from a fresh new angle that is closer
to their real nature. Whetten and Mackey (2002: 396) argue that the very basic prerequisite of

Corresponding author:
Anu Puusa, Univercity of Eastern Finland, PO Box 111 80101, Joensuu, Finland.
Email: anu.puusa@uef.fi

165
166 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 41(2)

identity articulation for purposes of social intercourse and social accountability is to distinguish
the self from the other both in general and in specific comparisons.
In this article we analyse the question of how management and personnel, which we define here
as teaching staff, in an educational organization differ with regard to their perceptions of an
organization’s identity. This question is decisive when organizational change initiatives are imple-
mented. According to He and Baruch (2009: 593), to enable successful identity change, it is not
enough for senior managers to have a cognitive map – it must be disseminated to the wider group
of organizational members. Bouchikhi and Kimberly (2003) state that in many cases, strategy or
operational changes are not enough to achieve organizational renewal or even survival. It is also
necessary to achieve fundamental change at the organizational identity level. In our case study,
several institutions were merged into totally new multidisciplinary polytechnics. This process
forced the staff to construct of a new kind of organizational identity and abandon the old way
of operating that were used in former institutions located lower in the educational hierarchy. The
methodological approach of this study is a thematic template analysis and the interpretative
research paradigm. The data were collected via themed interviews with 24 members of manage-
ment (n ¼ 6) and personnel (n ¼ 18) from one educational organization.
As Margolis and Hansen (2002: 277) state: ‘The essence of organization is its identity.’ It forms the
core of action in the organization and effects the interactions of its members. However, the literature on
organizational identity contains many perspectives and theoretical orientations, due to the different
methodological approaches employed. In this study, based on interpretative and constructionist
approaches, organizational identity is understood as a social and symbolic construction whose purpose
is to give meaning to an experience. It is constructed in the interactions and by the perceptions of the
involved actors. In this study, change is understood to be a natural part of an organization, as the mem-
bers constantly contemplate, shape and evaluate the meanings related to the organization.

Theoretical frame of reference

According to the classical definition by Albert and Whetten (1985), organizational identity embodies
the characteristics of an organization that its members perceive to be central, distinctive and enduring
(or continuing) in the organization when the past, present and future are taken into account. Organiza-
tional identity is an answer to the question ‘Who are we as an organization?’ Building a coherent orga-
nizational identity is believed to make activities more predictable and consistent; consequently, it
reduces uncertainty and the need for continuous negotiation (Pratt, 2000). In this sense, organizational
identity can also be used as a control mechanism. The researchers of the critical management studies
school of thought have examined how managers now try to lead people from the inside out and to create
committed, dedicated and loyal employees by changing their identity (Alvesson and Willmott, 2002).
Albert and Whetten’s definition has clearly marked the entire 20-year history of research on orga-
nizational identity, but now its basic premises are floundering. First, the aspect of permanency is
diminishing, because the constant change in business environments makes the status quo and ‘ulti-
mate permanency’ impossible. Gioia et al. (2000) suggest that the concept of constancy would
describe the phenomenon better than permanency. Gagliardi (1986), in turn, states that, paradoxi-
cally, organizations face the constant need to change in order to be able to sustain identity, while
identity is maintained through specific organizational histories, namely the organizational culture.
Reger et al. (1994) introduce the concept of ideal organizational identity that expands the question
‘Who are we?’ to also concern ‘Who would we want to be?’ This definition would be better suited to
the rapidly changing business environment of today. Furthermore, the distinctive characteristics that

166
Puusa et al.: Organizational Identities of Different Organizational Groups 167

differentiate organizations from one another have been questioned, in that the actions and offerings
of different educational organizations are often rather similar, and it sometimes seems as if strategies
of imitation are deliberately chosen. Often, only some of the staff group work on a permanent basis,
and most of the staff are temporary employees, which makes identity building even more demanding.
Alongside this, the merging of the roles and responsibilities of managers and their subordinates has
forced managers to redefine their identities (Thomas and Linstead, 2002).
Evidently, changes in the operating environments of the organizations have drastically changed
identity definitions. Currently, organizational identity is most often conceived as a shifting,
process-like, discursively formed phenomenon (Sveningsson and Alvesson, 2003). Humpreys and
Brown (2002) consider narratives as the foremost means to work fragmented experiences into a
comprehensible and coherent form. Discourses are then used as the main instruments of identity
construction, and personnel can either adapt to or oppose, to differing degrees, the demands of their
organization (Kuhn, 2006: 1340–1341). Therefore, identification with the organization may have
several forms other than one of positive identification. Disidentification, for instance, illustrates
that people identify themselves with completely different values than those their organization
represents. Neutral identification, in turn, means a position with an apathetic attitude towards one’s
organization (Bhattacharya and Elsbach, 2002). According to Sveningsson and Larsson (2006:
207), identity can sometimes be regarded as a kind of fantasy-like belief that does not always bear
any direct relationship to actual behaviour.

Organizational subgroup cultures and change in expert organizations

The concept of organizational culture tries to capture those fundamental characteristics of an
organization that the personnel will identify themselves with. The concept of organizational identity and
organizational culture are comparable concepts, since they both normatively guide organizational beha-
viour. Herath (2007: 908) argues that organizational culture actually delineates what is permitted and
prohibited within an organization. The strength of organizational identification can be assessed by eval-
uating the extent to which an individual directs his own behaviour according to the organization’s norms
and values (Haslam et al., 2003: 360). Organizations are usually, and often unquestionably, believed to
have a coherent culture (basic assumptions of the world) and identity (basic assumptions of who I am
and who we are) – a notion thhat does not seem to match with the daily experiences organizational mem-
bers have of them. It has been common knowledge for a long time that different personnel groups in an
organization have difficulties in their mutual communication and understanding.
Edgar Schein (1996) was among the first scholars who tried to theorize on this question. He
differentiated three major occupational subcultures within an organization. The operators or the
shop-floor workers rely on their work-experience-based knowledge and social networks and try
to carry out their basic tasks in the best possible way. The designers and appliers of all kinds of
technologies, forming the engineering culture, believe that in their ideal world the organization has
well-planned processes, systems, procedures and regulations, which guarantee efficiency and
eliminate human errors. The executives’ culture, on the other hand, is directed towards maximizing
profits, and they often keep their distance from other groups, acting like lonely warriors, and there-
fore they must rely on control and information systems to manage their organization. For them,
people occupying the ranks and forming the hierarchy are necessary only in terms of making the
organization profitable and, therefore, do not hold an intrinsic value.
Schein (1996: 17) argues that these cultures are formed because they just do what they are
supposed to do in an organization. The operator’s culture is always organizational and work-

167
168 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 41(2)

task specific, but the other two are more universal, which, according to Schein (1996: 18), explains
failures in their mutual understanding, organizational change and learning. He claims that the most
harmful aspect is the implicit assumption of the engineering and executive culture, according to
which ‘people are the problem, either as costs or as sources of error’ (Schein 1996: 18). This
assumption obviously collides with the operator’s culture, with severe and well-known conse-
quences. Research conducted on personnel groups has convincingly confirmed the existence of
their different perspectives (Greene et al., 2001; Kejonen, 2006). Kärreman and Alvesson
(2004) see organizational identity as a multilevel concept, since a person may identify himself with
the entire organization, with a subgroup or only certain co-workers.
Several researches indicate that the interrelation between identity and change exists. Studies
have shown for example that by examining organizational identity, it is possible to understand and
better explain organizational behaviour and success during change (Gioia and Thomas, 1996;
Stimpert et al., 1998; Whetten and Godfrey, 1998; Oswick et al., 2005). However, for example
He and Baruch (2009) state that the literature is still thin on theoretical understanding on the inter-
relation, the process of identity change and its implications.
According to He and Baruch (2009), identity changes because it is intrinsically fluid, malleable
and subject to the influence of construed external images. They continue that due to identity s fluid
nature, changing organizational identity will be instrumental in enabling organizational change.
(He and Baruch 2009, 578) Also Corley and Gioia (2004) have reported that identity ambiguity
that refers to organizational members uncertainty about what the organization actually stands for
and where the organization is going, is at the core of the organizational identity change process.
He and Baruch (2009, 578-579, 593) continue, that changes can cause identity ambiguity. Identity
ambiguity might be triggered by change of social referents (to whom they compare their organi-
zation with), temporal identity discrepancy (Where are we now? How can we get from here
to there?) and construed external image discrepancy (not sure about how others see us). They ela-
borate that while organizational members tend to make sense of the changes and infer a new
identity, such changes might confound the sense-making mechanisms, due to confusion in terms
of the loci/objects of sense making, the social and relational referents, and perceived identity
dissonances.
An image of a coherent organizational structure has dominated recent thinking, and building
a really coherent organization is often regarded as the most important target in organizational
change initiatives. Although postmodern organizational theory has challenged this notion, it still
represents mainstream thinking. Orton and Weick (1990) elaborate an alternative theory to this,
which is based on the concept of loosely coupled systems. According to their theory, it is the spe-
cific nature of the basic task of an expert that lacks any magic solutions, and the fragmentation of
the internal and external environments that cause this kind of loose organizational structure. When
adding Schein’s (1996) notions to the loosely coupled nature of expert organizations, we get a pic-
ture of a fragmented and fluid organizational structure, in which individuals representing different
cultural, social or educational backgrounds can also form their own subcultures.

Context
The empirical data was collected in one Finnish university of applied science (formerly a polytech-
nic) — Polytechnic X. Polytechnics as institutions are relatively new among Finnish educational
institutions. According to Rask (2002), the polytechnics are expected to provide a high standard of
education that is close to working life as well as to promote the development of society. All the

168
Puusa et al.: Organizational Identities of Different Organizational Groups 169

same, the debate on the role, purpose, operation and even the legitimacy of the existence of the
polytechnics is still going on, although they were established at the beginning of the 1990s.
Polytechnic X, an expert organization, experienced a strategic organizational change. Doing
research in a context of this kind is important, because although the need to be able to change has long
been recognized in the business world, this kind of thinking is fairly new in educational and academic
institutions, and research concerning change has been exiguous. Change holds an extraordinary posi-
tion in these kinds of institutions, because traditionally their operations have not been based on stra-
tegic thinking (Gioia and Thomas, 1996; Reger, 1998). Until now, the research of identity has only
taken into account the perspective of the management. The basic assumption has been that the mem-
bers of the organization act consistently in relation to its identity. What if the interpretations of the iden-
tity vary? This notion was taken into account when the collection of the data was planned.
This research is a thematic template analysis, where the teachers and the management in the
department of business economics in Polytechnic X were interviewed. The interviews were not
heavily structured. The aim was to examine: (1) the factors that the members think of as focal
in regards to both their own work and the whole organization; (2) in their opinion, how their orga-
nization differs from others; and (3) what their experiences are of the change process. In this study,
the polytechnic is regarded as an example of an organization that is undergoing a fundamental
change process. As with many polytechnics, Polytechnic X developed through a pilot phase into
a permanent polytechnic. The process of change has been long lasting and strategic, and it has
affected the whole organization. It has forced the organization to re-evaluate the basis of its exis-
tence, its core tasks and the values that direct its operations.

Research design
The themed interviews of the senior lecturers (n ¼ 18) and of six managers were conducted by the
study’s lead author. The interviewees were classified into different subgroups according to either
their background or position. The first cohort consisted of teachers with lengthy teaching experi-
ence. The second group consisted of lecturers who had come to the organization from the business
world. The last group consisted of teachers who had only a little working experience in teaching or
in any other field. The interviewed managers represented different managerial groups according to
their position; top management, middle management and department supervisors. The intervie-
wees had also worked at Polytechnic X for different lengths of time. There were persons who had
been at Polytechnic X from the beginning. They had, therefore, experienced the whole trajectory
and had been part of developing Polytechnic X into what it had become. There were also intervie-
wees who had been working at Polytechnic X for a shorter time, some with less than a year’s
experience.
The interview data analysis was based on a thematic template analysis described by King and
Horrocks (2010: 142–174). This approach also allows the use of a priori themes, which in this
research were the fundamental dimensions of organizational identity introduced by Albert and
Whetten (1985). As King and Horrocks (2010: 168) state, a priori themes may have a connection
to important ‘theoretical concepts or perspectives that have informed the design and aims of the
research’. A reason for choosing this methodological orientation is the fact that the dimensions
of organization identity can be considered as essential for understanding the formation of organi-
zational identity, although the current research also contains a conceptual critique towards the orig-
inal formulation of Albert and Whetten (1985). The idea of data analysis is to show the differences
in the ways the managers and the teachers interpreted their organizational identity and change

169
170 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 41(2)

process. The analysis was done by first inductively identifying the differences in defining the rela-
tion to the organization, to other educational organizations and to the change process that has
occurred inside the organization. These themes formed the standpoint for further analysis regard-
ing the interviewees’ interpretations.
In order to provide a more vivid picture of the construction of organizational identity related to
the education organization, we will present several quotations from the data gathered in this study.
Selected quotations present the views agreed upon by the vast majority of staff. The focus of the
analysis will be on those views that illuminate the differences in the ways of making sense of orga-
nizational identity. Our analysis has similarities with Corley’s (2004) study based on the hierarch-
ical differences in organizational identity. In this sense, the differences in the forms of identities
reflect hierarchical levels of organizations. In the case of an education organization, the differences
were quite clear and the manager position can be defined as a hybrid. We also agree with Corley
(2004: 1170) that it is unrealistic to assume that members of an organization have a single coherent
identity in today’s kaleidoscopic organizational settings.

Findings
Interpretation of the Identity
The first goal was to get an overall understanding of how the organization members perceive their
organization. For example, the role of the polytechnics was discussed as well as the vision and
strategy of the organization. Interviewees explained their work tasks and what they believe to
be central from organizational perspective. Finally, the interviewees considered the cohesion of
the organization from various perspectives.
The basis of the existence of the organization was described in a similar way by both the teach-
ers and the managers. The basic task was seen as defined from outside. The justification for its
existence was not questioned. It was considered that polytechnics fulfil a well-grounded need and
have a special task in the field of Finnish education.

This is an educational institution, a school which gives our students excellent vocational competences;
here, the theory meets the practice and we are orientated towards the needs of the working life.
(A manager)

However, the managers and the teachers had a very different idea of how the central tasks of the
organization should be carried out in practice. The management tried to execute the collectively
interpreted core task. This interpretation was analysed very comprehensively when compared to
the teachers. Managers thought that the integration of three tasks (educational, regional develop-
ment and R&D) and the focus areas defined in the Polytechnic X strategy were focal in the orga-
nization. Moreover, they seemed to be strongly committed to both their organization and to the
ideology of polytechnics in general. All managers agreed upon that:

Polytechnic Xś’s aim is to enhance the effectiveness and competitiveness of our region in our priority
areas, which are social welfare services, business know-how, ICT, and sustainable development.

The management had put a lot of faith in the creation of vision and strategy, whereas the personnel
regarded the concepts as distant and abstract. In their interpretation, the vision and strategy
declared by the management did not describe the identity of their organization. The

170
Puusa et al.: Organizational Identities of Different Organizational Groups 171

management, in turn, relied on the managerial discourses of strategy and vision, offering them as
building blocks for the identity construction of their personnel. The managers also had a belief that
other members of the organization shared their interpretation of the organizational identity.
According to them, the construction of Polytechnic X’s identity was carried out with good coop-
eration and with the consensus of the personnel. Therefore, the management, unlike the personnel,
perceived that the organization was very coherent, and this was judged to be the characteristic and
important defining feature of their organization.
The teaching staff’s conceptualization of identity is marked by the perception of a gap between
the management’s and personnel’s interpretations of the present situation. It was reflected in the
answers concerning both their own focal tasks and those of the entire organization. The question
of ‘what is focal in the perspective of the organization?’ was typically answered with another ques-
tion: ‘Is, or should be?’ In addition, it reflects a gap between the present and ideal identities. The
contrasting interpretations can be sensed by reflecting, for instance, the following statements made
by a member of management and a member of personnel:

After thoroughly benchmarking all the competitors, we have built here a very different kind of educa-
tional organization than all the others have done. We will become the leading figure in the key areas we
represent in our region. (A manager)
Actually, the management has not bothered to tell us what our strategy is and what it means in our
daily work. They did send us a booklet to our home, and that was all the information we received.
(Female teacher of accounting, 8 years’ teaching experience)

While the management stressed the integration of three tasks, personnel, at the organizational and
individual levels, regarded the execution of the pedagogical task, the organizing of teaching, as the
primary and central task. The personnel felt that the management s perception of the core task has
become increasingly abstract, and that it regards the planning of the vision and strategy as their
central task, whereas, according to teachers. both should be enabled and implemented. The teach-
ers demanded resources and hoped that, in the future, teaching would become the core task of the
organization, with the other two tasks carried out through the pedagogic task. They thought that the
management should realize that, at a grass-roots level, the work is done ‘here and now’, and not in
the future. Teachers regardless of age, position or length of the working experience agreed this
opinion presented by a female teacher of accounting:

It is the students for whom we are here, and we will survive as long as we attract new students. R&D,
networking, regional development, etc. can become important for us in the future, and I don’t under-
estimate them, but an individual teacher cannot manage them all; no one can.

Teachers take pride in their work, are very committed to it and make efforts to develop their
professional skills. They did not, however, seem to be as committed as the management to the
organization. The commitment seemed to be weakened by the dissimilar interpretations of the
execution of the basic focal task.
In the discussions about what is characteristic for the organization, everybody brought up the major
changes that have taken place in the course of the organization’s history. Also mentioned was the fact
that Polytechnic X does not shy away from development and new innovations. On the contrary, man-
agers at Polytechnic X seek to be the pacesetter. In other words, the management and personnel shared
the perception of the organization as constantly developing and wanting to develop.

171
172 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 41(2)

Dimension of distinctiveness
Cutler (2010) states that for an identity to make sense to those who claim it, there must be some
way of recognizing ‘us’ in relation to ‘them.’ The core task of an organization and the core essence
that marks its existence can be understood to be defining how original the organization is perceived
to be and, through that, how it distinguishes itself from others. The teachers did not identify them-
selves with Polytechnic X, because they did not perceive Polytechnic X to be any different from
other polytechnics.

They say that we have distinctive priority areas, but I have noticed that the other polytechnics have
chosen exactly the same priority areas that we have. It is rather silly that everyone has chosen similar
priorities, and I can’t see any differences in these. On paper, we look really great, but so do all the
others. (Female, teacher of business administration, 14 years’ experience)
I have never felt that I identify myself with Polytechnic X, because Polytechnic X is not built on any
specific idea. Actually, we operate in the exact same way as other polytechnics do, and I believe that we
are neither better nor worse than the others. (Male, teacher of business administration, 3 years’
experience)

According to both the management and the personnel, the characteristic features of Polytechnic X
are its large size, the geographical location of its units, the diversity of fields of study and the con-
stant development that marks the whole organization. The last feature led to consideration of
whether change had become part of its identity. Change was considered as a natural part of the
organization, and suitable constant development was also hoped for in the future. The other
characterizations, in turn, seem very ‘external’ and led to wondering if such concrete factors really
describe an organization’s identity.
The management regarded their organization as unique and easily identifiable. Communality,
internal unity, individuality, constant development and chosen strategic focus points were consid-
ered as central. Clear differences between Polytechnic X and other polytechnics, as well as com-
mercial colleges, were found. Polytechnics were understood as parallel, complementary and equal
to universities. Consequently, it could be argued that a collectively interpreted identity has been
constructed among the management. They also believe in it, and this is reflected in their behaviour.
The teachers did not, however, consider the identity of polytechnics to be very strong or clear yet.
The differences between Polytechnic X and commercial colleges were, however, clear. The belief
in the distinctiveness and strength of the organization faltered when it was compared to universi-
ties. Universities were regarded as having a strong and established position. In addition, the teach-
ers brought up the perception of competition between the institutions.

Universities have a strong identity, because they have existed hundreds of years, and our history is very
short. (Female teacher of management, 7 years’ experience)

To sum up, there were three main factors that were interpreted very differently by the management
and the personnel. Firstly, the management described the distinctiveness both on an abstract and con-
crete level, whereas the personnel only identified a few concrete issues. Secondly, unlike the person-
nel, the managers were committed to the organization and believed in the distinctiveness of it. Thus,
the organizational identity of the teachers could be described as neutral (Bhattacharya and Elsbach,
2002). Identity was described through different features, but when examined explicitly, the personnel
did not interpret the organization as having a distinctive strong identity. On the other hand, the

172
Puusa et al.: Organizational Identities of Different Organizational Groups 173

personnel seemed to have a strong need to experience and feel the identity as original and differing
and that other than externally perceivable factors or structural ones could be related in its
interpretation.
Finally, the third major difference between management and personnel related to the time
aspect of identity: the personnel highlighted the future together with the past. The management,
in turn, constructed their perception of identity through the future.

Perceptions of organizational change

The third aim was to understand what kind of perceptions the interviewees had about the changes in the
organization. Interviewees were free to describe the changes according to their experience. In addition
to the general description of the change, the interviewees discussed their own roles in it. The teachers
also brought up their perceptions of the role of the management in the change. In the end, the intervie-
wees were asked to think of what the general attitude towards the change was at the organizational level.
All interviewees, regardless of the position, who had been working in Polytechnic X at its birth-
stage, can be interpreted being very committed to building up the organization and their descrip-
tions concerning the first phases of the change process were very consistent.

Gradually, we all have learned to leave behind the old ‘business institute’ way of thinking, and now, we
see ourselves as more academic. We have developed a great deal professionally, and we have become
more like the university teachers.

After this, the descriptions started to become differentiated. According to the management, the
change progressed in a way that was systematic, hoped for and target-oriented. The change and
the construction of identity can be interpreted as being connected to one another because, in
addition to structural factors, the values of the organization were also established. From the
beginning, the management aimed to establish practices and to construct a distinct identity in coop-
eration with other members of the organization and its stakeholders. Because the managers felt that
this construction succeeded collectively and in a way that made the identity strengthen, this
interpretation reflects their behaviour, for example, their decision-making ability.
Moreover, they interpreted the change process to have been a large one. Many factors
influenced their strong belief and commitment. First, their commitment to the organization, its
operations and development was strong from the beginning. In the discussion, many emotional ele-
ments were mentioned. For example, the belief of success in the operations was discussed and the
metaphor of the organization as their ‘own child’ was used. Second, all the managers believed that
the starting point had been worse than that of the other polytechnics. Despite this, the organization
has become an esteemed and recognized high school. This latter point helps in understanding why
managers perceived external recognition (awards, recognition and extra financial support from the
Ministry of Education) or numerical factors (the number of students, recruitment) to be more
important than the teachers did. Third, at the individual level, the management perceived that they
played an important role regarding change and the effectuation of that change.
In the interviews with the personnel, the examination of the individual level as a portrayer of the
change was mentioned. Based on this, it is possible to infer that the teachers are more committed to
teaching, in other words, to their professional identity, than to the organization (see Puusa 2009).
Many of the interviewed teachers brought up that according to their experience, the management
does not value their work in the way they would hope for. In addition, even though the

173
174 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 41(2)

organizational changes have a significant influence namely on the teachers’ daily work, they feel
that they were left out of the planning process and later, when the changes should have become
effective. This, they feel, collides with the fact that all organizational members should have a key
role in the execution of changes and organizational success as a whole. To sum up, it seems that the
more time passed and the further the change progressed, the more the interpretations concerning
both organizational identity and the change itself have become differentiated, even conflicting.

We had high expectations for the future, but in practice, then, we largely lived in the old business
institute or wherever we lived. At the beginning, the planning of Polytechnic X took nearly all our time,
and time for teaching was limited – they were very hard times. Still now, there is not enough time for
preparation and implementation of teaching. Anyhow, we have made huge progress since we started.
(Female teacher of accounting, 8 years’ experience)

A female teacher of management with 7 years’ experience described the matter this way:

We initiated many change projects, but they have not been finished, nor have they been brought to a
concrete level; therefore, they are mostly pure verbiage like innovativeness. The projects are often left
half way, and this really causes cynicism among the teachers. In the early days of Polytechnic X, we
were enthusiastic and managed to finish our development projects better. Now, most of the projects are
unrealistic and are not linked with our daily practices in any way.

When analyzing the answers of both the management and the personnel, it is reasonable to state
that during the change process many processes have been established and several structural
changes have been carried out. However, at the attitudinal level the organization has become much
more heterogeneous and incoherent.
Thus, there are (at least) two differently interpreted identities in the organization. This, in turn,
has weakened the commitment of the personnel to the organization. According to the data,
organizational change, manifestation of identity and commitment are strongly connected to one
another (Puusa, 2009).

Discussion
The formation and phenomenon of organizational identity
This study brought up the need to question and discuss how the features of identity and its man-
ifestation are described and how they are expressed in practice. Can a feature that is related in the
organization and its operations be regarded as focal if it is not ‘believed in’, and nothing is based on
it in practice? The question concerns whether the dimension of centrality is defined by its descrip-
tion, its manifestation in practice or by the belief in its importance. These questions are important,
and they should be discussed and examined further, so that centrality can be understood more
deeply. The discoveries from the data may be relevant in the conceptualization of organizational
identity in which the emotional element surfaced. Based on this study, the dimensions of belief or
emotions seem to be essential to the attempt to understand the concept of identity and the real
social phenomenon it represents. Previously only a few researchers, such as Whetten (1998) and
Albert et al. (2000), recognized that emotional questions were related to organizational identity.
The emotional elements or their importance have not, however, been researched in more detail
or even brought up in many prior studies.

174
Puusa et al.: Organizational Identities of Different Organizational Groups 175

In spite of the heterogeneous sample chosen in this study, there were ‘two mainstreams’
identifiable in the data. The managers and the personnel interpreted issues related to identity
differently. However, among the managers and among the personnel, the interpretations were very
much alike; in other words, the analysis revealed somewhat unitary notions of identity among these
groups. All parties agreed that the changes have become part of their identity. Paradoxically, the
change affects only the leadership at the behavioural level, but the personnel only at attitudinal
level, because the conceptions for implementing the change were so different.

The interpretation of the change process

Organizational change is a multi-faceted phenomenon. When the change type in the target organiza-
tion was examined among management, traces of planned change were detected. The change was
described and mainly understood as target-oriented, linear and manageable. This approach as adopted
by the management is reflected in their interpretations of organizational identity, for example, in the
fact that the interviewed managers thought that the other personnel shared their perceptions of the focal
features of the identity. Teachers’ interpretations were, however, in many cases, even contrary.
The organizational change can be interpreted as having several layers. Polytechnic Xś managers did
succeed in changing and establishing processes and practices which aim at minor modifications, so
they are incremental in nature. However, they only partly succeeded in implementing a strategic fun-
damental change that would have concerned the whole organization and affected it at a deeper level. A
change like this would also affect the identity of the staff, and it would then also reflect in their daily
functioning. The managers aimed to achieve this by creating a new vision and strategy. In addition to
orderliness, the managers also brought up the perspective of renewal in order to implement change in
strategic core tasks. The management is understood to have an important role in its success, as was also
understood in the target organization. This kind of process of organizational change is characterized by
the need and the ability of the managers to plan and implement the change.
The time perspective of managers and personnel also differed. Many of the managment’s activ-
ities were mainly future-oriented and, according to the employees, this seems to be at the cost of pres-
ent operations. This may be the consequence of great changes being pursued by using initial means
that are aimed at only minor modifications, that is, incremental change. This seems to be caused by
the fact that the perceptions of the management and the personnel about the core tasks and goals dif-
fer from one another (Schein, 1996). It is evident that this is also reflected in operational and orga-
nizational behaviour. Actions that do not fit into the change type may be inefficient because the
managers and the personnel interpret the factors relating to the core task and identity differently.
This research confirms the notion that organizational identity should always be examined from
the point of view of the past, present and future (Hatum and Pettigrew, 2004). As our results show,
time is the most relevant aspect when organizational change is analysed. Just as Schein’s (1996)
theory postulates, in the subculture of the personnel, the past and present were highlighted. The
management, on the other hand, constructed their perception of the organization and its identity
focusing and emphasizing more on the future. Thus, when implementing significant change, it
is important to build continuity between the organization’s past and future. This relates to manage-
ment’s ability to understand personnel’s ’hand’s-on reality’ while planning the vision and strategy
for the organization. Schein (1996) stresses the need for open dialogue between different sub-
groups, which is not easily achievable, due to their contrasting basic assumptions of the world.
Our results show that all the members of the organization regard change per se as a natural part of
the organization. Because this perception was collectively shared, even if the sample was quite

175
176 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 41(2)

heterogeneous, the results lead to a rethinking of the concept of resistance that is often cited in the
literature when change is discussed. It seems that, at least in this organization, the change itself is not
resisted. Instead, change can become a part of the organizational identity, and the organization’s core
existence is marked by constant development and change. Gagliardi (1986) has noted that, paradoxi-
cally, organizations that face constant change have real difficulties in building a coherent organiza-
tional identity, because identity is best preserved through organizational stability.
The personnel, however, disagreed as to how the management should act during the process of
change. This, in turn, is significant for the success and implementation of change. While change
cannot be managed, as such, due to their special position, the managers have the means to affect
the process of change and the interpretations of it. Thus, the management has special tasks con-
cerning the success of the change process. On the other hand, every member of an organization
takes part in managing the change as interpreters and implementers. This conclusion supports the
idea when placed in the framework where change is realized only in changed practices, and it is the
members of the organization that implement the change through their actions.
From the perspective of the personnel, the fragmentation of identity in the target organization can
be interpreted as a result of the existence of separate organizational subgroup cultures (Schein, 1996).
According to teachers, this leads to the inability of the managers to engage the personnel and to facil-
itate the execution of the basic task. The personnel did not feel that the enabling had succeeded in a
desired way when considering time, monetary resources, engagement or communication. Based on
this, the organizational identity of this organization can be interpreted as subgroup specific (Kärre-
man and Alvesson, 2004). In this situation, the management should pay special attention to the
enabling of the change process (Huff et al., 1992; Van de Ven and Poole, 1995).
Thus, in change, it is also important that managers try to reflect the assumptions of their executive
culture so that they can comprehend why the perspective of their staff is so dissimilar to their own.
Moreover, even if members of management act as catalysts and agents of the change, they are also
the targets of change. Thus, the management is prone to change in the same way that the whole orga-
nization, with its actors and processes, is. Based on this study, the concepts of time and change are
also closely connected to the recognition and construction of identity. On the grounds of the results, it
can also be argued that the pace of the change is defined and implemented by the actors in the
organization.
An organization’s identity is fractured when there are contrasting interpretations of what is central
and distinctive to it. Differing interpretations concerning organizational issues have led to a gap
between the management’s and the subordinates’ perceptions concerning both the vision and strategy
of the organization. The observed gap has led to a decreased level of motivation and organizational
commitment on the part of the employees (Puusa, 2009). The research results reveal that change can
be regarded as somewhat paradoxical: it appears to be important to preserve some things from the
past while trying to accomplish a change. Finally, it is important to recognize the dynamic nature
of the change process itself: managers need to pay attention to organizational issues, for example,
new personnel, that alter while the change process is in motion. When aiming for a fundamental orga-
nizational change, it is important not only to try to change the image, but also to consider the fun-
damental characteristics of the organization, its identity and the varying interpretations of it.

Conclusion
The most important contribution of the study is the broadening of the understanding of and the new
information about the concept of organizational identity in the context of educational organizations

176
Puusa et al.: Organizational Identities of Different Organizational Groups 177

and their subcultures. The two critical features – centrality and distinctiveness – that characterize
organizational identity seem not to be adequate enough to describe the target phenomenon of the
concept. It seems that organizational identity includes an emotional dimension that has not been
explicitly investigated in prior research. In this respect, this research increases the understanding
of the link between the organizational identity and organizational cultures. The interpretations of
organizational change construct the perception of identity. The different interpretations of the char-
acter, approach and type of change can lead to dispersion of identity. Controversial interpretations
of change and identity may result in difficulties in the implementation of change.
Furthermore, the discussion of change seemed to be interpretive, and the study revealed the
paradoxicality of change and produced three central perspectives. First, for the management of
change, it is important to be able to change while still maintaining some things from the past.
In other words, it seems to be important in change that the past and the future are linked in such
a way that the interpretations related to them are not in great conflict with the interpretations of the
present. Second, in order to achieve successful organizational change, the management should
choose means that are in accordance with the type, namely, the extent of the change. Third, it is
important to take into account the dynamic nature of the change process itself. Our study shows
the importance of examining the meaning of organizational identity in practice, because in a
situation of change, it is a concept with considerable explanatory power.

References
Albert S, Ashforth BE and Dutton JE (2000) Organizational identity and identification: Charting new waters
and building new bridges. The Academy of Management Review 25(1): 13–18.
Albert S and Whetten DA (1985) Organizational identity. In: Cummings LL and Staw BM (eds) Research in
Organizational Behavior. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 263–295.
Alvesson M and Willmott H (2002) Identity regulation as organizational control: Producing the appropriate
individual. Journal of Management Studies 39(5): 619–644.
Bhattacharya CB and Elsbach KD (2002) Us versus them: the roles of organizational identification and
disidentification in social marketing initiatives. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 21(1): 26–36.
Bouchikhi H and Kimberly JR (2003) Escaping the identity trap. MIT Sloan Management Review 44(3): 20–26.
Corley KG (2004) Defined by our strategy or our culture? Hierarchical differences in perceptions of
organizational identity and change. Human Relations 57(9): 1145–1177.
Gagliardi P (1986) The creation and change of organizational culture: a conceptual framework.
Organizational Studies 7(2): 117–134.
Gioia DA and Thomas JB (1996) Identity, image and issue interpretation: sensemaking during strategic
change in academia. Administrative Science Quarterly 41(3): 370–403.
Gioia DA, Schultz M and Corley KG (2000) Where do we go from here?. The Academy of Management
Review 25(1): 145–148.
Greene A-M, Ackers P and Black J (2001) Lost narratives? From paternalism to team-working in a lock
manufacturing firm. Economic and Industrial Democracy 22(2): 211–237.
Haslam A, Postmes T and Ellemers N (2003) More than a metaphor: organizational identity makes organiza-
tional life possible. British Journal of Management 14(4): 357–369.
Hatum A and Pettigrew A (2004) Adaptation under environmental turmoil: organizational flexibility in
family-owned firms. Family Business Review 17(3): 237–258.
He H and Baruch Y (2009) Transforming organizational identity under institutional change. Journal of
Organizational Change Management 22(6): 575–599.

177
178 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 41(2)

Herath SK (2007) A framework for management control research. Journal of Management Development
26(9): 895–915.
Huff JO, Huff AS and Thomas H (1992) Strategic renewal and the interaction of cumulative stress and inertia.
Strategic Management Journal 13: 55–76.
Humpreys M and Brown AD (2002) Narratives of organizational identity and identification: a case study of
hegemony and resistance. Organization Studies 23(3): 421–447.
Kejonen M. (2006) Kohtaavathan suoratkin avaruudessa. Tapaustutkimus teollizen työpaikan henkilöstöryh-
mien puhetavoista [Well, the Rectilinears Will Meet Each Other Somewhere in the space. A Case Study on
Discourses of Different Personnel Groups.]. Joensuu: Joensuun yliopisto.
King N and Horrocks C (2010) Interviews in Qualitative Research. London: SAGE.
Kuhn T (2006) A ‘demented work ethic’ and a ‘lifestyle firm’: discourse, identity, and workplace time
commitments. Organization Studies 27(9): 1339–1358.
Kärrreman D and Alvesson M (2004) Cages in tandem: management control, social identity, and identifica-
tion in a knowledge-intensive firm. Organization 11(1): 149–175.
Margolis SL and Hansen CD (2002) A model for organizational identity: exploring the path to sustainability
during change. Human Resource Development 1(3): 227–303.
Orton JD and Weick KE (1990) Loosely coupled systems: a reconceptualization. The Academy of
Management Review 15(2): 203–223.
Oswick C, Grant D, Michelson G and Wailes N (2005) Looking forwards: discursive directions in organiza-
tional change. Journal or Organizational Change Management, 18(4): 383–390.
Pratt MG (2000) The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: managing identification among Amway distributors.
Administrative Science Quarterly 45(3): 456–493.
Puusa A (2009) The meaning and implications of a fragmented organizational identity. a case study of a
Finnish University of applied sciences. Administrative Studies, 28: 16–29.
Rask M (2002) Ammattikorkeakoululaitoksen vakiintuminen ja uudet haasteet [The institutionalization of the
polytechnics and new challenges]. In: Liljander J-P (ed.) Omalla tiellä. Ammattikorkeakoulut kymmenen
vuotta [Following Their Own Path. Polytechnics after Ten Years]. Helsinki: Edita, 31–41.
Reger RK (1998) A strategy conversation on the topic of organization identity. In: Whetten AD and Godfrey
PC (eds) Identity in Organizations. Building Theory Through Conversations. London: SAGE, 273–294.
Reger RK, Gustafson LT, DeMarie SM and Mullane JV (1994) Reframing the organization: why implement-
ing total quality is easier said than done. The Academy of Management Review 19(3): 565–584.
Schein EH (1996) Three cultures of management: the key to organizational learning. Sloan Management
Review 38(1): 9–20.
Stimpert JL, Gustafson LT and Sarason Y (1998) Organizational identity within the strategic management
conversation. In: Whetten DA and Godfrey PC (eds) Identity in Organizations. Building Theory Through
Conversations. London: SAGE, 83–98.
Sveningsson S and Alvesson M (2003) Managing managerial identities: organizational fragmentation,
discourse and identity struggle. Human Relations 56(10): 1163–1193.
Sveningsson S and Larsson M (2006) Fantasies of leadership: identity work. Leadership 2(2): 203–224.
Thomas R and Linstead A (2002) Losing the plot? Middle managers and identity. Organization 9(1): 71–93.
Van de Ven A and Poole MS (1995) Explaining development and change in organizations. The Academy of
Management Review 20(3): 510–541.
Whetten DA and Godfrey PC (1998) Identity in Organizations. Building Theory Through Conversations.
London: Sage.
Whetten DA and Mackey A (2002) A Social Actor Conception of Organizational Identity and Its Implications
for the Study of Organizational Reputation. Business and Society 41(4): 393–414.

178