International Journal of Management Reviews
Call for Papers – Special Issue
Exploring the Registers of Identity Research
Submission Deadline: December 31, 2015
Special Issue Guest Editors:
Sandra Corlett, Northumbria University (sandra.corlett@northumbria.ac.uk)
Christine Coupland, Loughborough University (C.Coupland@lboro.ac.uk)
Peter McInnes, Strathclyde University (peter.mcinnes@strath.ac.uk)
Mathew Sheep, Illinois State University, (msheep@ilstu.edu)
Interest in the study of identity shows no sign of abating. In challenging a more traditional view of identity as a relatively stable set of attributes that can be isolated and measured, those conceiving identity as a socially constructed and performed phenomenon have explored the personal and interpersonal dynamics at play in organizational life. However, even amongst these scholars, scratch the surface and one discovers that there are significant differences between contributions not only in the 'level' of identity being scrutinised, but more fundamentally in their theoretical traditions of what constitutes an identity, where it resides, and how it might be known. Consequently, previous special issues on identity research such as Academy of Management Review (2000), Organization (2008), Human Relations (2009), and Scandinavian Journal of Management (2012) and literature review articles (e.g. Alvesson, 2010; Brown, 2015; Corley, Harquail, Pratt, Glynn, Fiol and Hatch, 2006; Ravasi and Canato, 2013) have, perhaps understandably, restricted themselves to particular branches of this diverse field. In contrast, by inviting contributions from across the spectrum of identity scholarship, this special issue will create a unique point of reference for those in, or looking to enter, the field. Our aims, therefore, are to provide the readership with an understanding of the diversity of the field, the debates within it, and the potential - where it exists - for cross-fertilisation between theoretical perspectives, levels and methods.
As a way of introducing what contributors might tackle in their manuscripts, we offer a view of the different 'registers' that might be seen to characterise identity research. We use this term to suggest the diverse range of approaches being taken, and voices through which ideas are being expressed, within the field. In this regard we see divergence around three issues.
First, the most immediate of these concerns the theoretical traditions informing the research. Social identity approaches, for example, consider identity as a cognitive structure formed and sustained through a network of identifications that differentiate self from other. Research in this tradition focusses on the way experience is shaped by evaluations of contrast and relative fit in dynamic organizational settings (e.g. Cascón-Pereira and Hallier, 2012). A similar commitment can be found in many of the cognitive and sensemaking studies informed by the American pragmatist tradition. There is, though, in this tradition additional emphasis placed upon conversation as key to understanding the way people make sense of themselves, others, and their organizations (Weick, Sutcliffe and Obstfeld, 2005). Approaches such as identity work take this further, viewing identity as something that, while organized around a particular narrative, is relatively open-ended and therefore subject to challenge, or amendment (Svenningson and Alvesson, 2003). This is not to say that such change is initiated by the individual, but may well reflect an identity struggle with the various ways in which others, and organizations, seek to regulate or change identity through the imposition of their expectations (e.g. Knights and Clarke, 2014). The more critical voice that features in such studies is equally reflected in work informed by poststructural theory. For these authors it is the way in which thematic movements in meaning, or discourses, operate at a local or societal level to shape the norms through which an identity is seen to be performed (Harding, Lee and Ford, 2014).
Second, the contrasting positions that inform the various theoretical traditions of identity research create challenges in establishing what one means by identity and the processes through which it is sustained or changed. Contributors may wish to consider the various ways in which these issues have been addressed within particular fields, or indeed consider points of similarity and difference between traditions. Such a comparison could usefully extend to examine how such issues are handled with respect to our second area of stratification; research considering particular - or the relationship between - 'levels' of identity. This manifests itself in two ways. In this first instance the literature is variously concerned with individual, group, professional, organizational, and (to a lesser extent) national identities. Such terms are themselves typically associated with one or more theoretical stances, creating complexity in interpreting the literature, and plurality in understandings of the way in which identities are nested within each other. Taking the field forward will, we feel, rest upon the clarity with which we delineate terms for use by particular theoretical stances (e.g. organizational identity, or collective identity), and how we handle the potential overlap where common points of focus occur (e.g. professional identity). Addressing such issues in submissions would allow the special issue to make a broader contribution to the future direction of the field than those narrowly focussing upon one type of identity. This similarly applies to the second way in which 'levels' are implied in identity research, that is, between a focus on micro, meso and macro level issues. As with the desire to see multi-level research, the call for research that 'ladders-up' and 'bears-down' between levels has attracted some recent responses (e.g. Ashforth, Rogers and Corley, 2011; Kreiner, Hollensbe and Sheep, 2006).
Third, a further contributor to the different registers of identity research, which is related to the previous distinctions, lies in where identity is being sought. Again, it is the epistemological question of what is taken as evidence of identity which comes to the fore (Ravasi and Canato, 2013), and it is equally where we suspect that identity scholarship will turn to next. For instance, how are identities locally performed in professional, organizational, institutional and societal contexts? What methodologies have researchers drawn upon to illustrate/demonstrate these processes? What methods can be best utilised to understand identities and how, if at all, can varying theoretical traditions be combined?
We hope that our discussion of identity scholarship provides insights into the diversity of the field and the potential issues that its complexity creates as we look to take the subject forward. Authors are asked to submit manuscripts that map the field in ways that reveal the, often subtle, differences between researchers' use of similar terminology and, crucially, point towards the issues that have yet to be grappled. This will allow the special issue to set agendas, as well as provide an important resource for those seeking to learn about identity.
We welcome literature-based papers that offer new insights about identity research that may inform and guide future research. These can be based on a traditional systematic literature review or be concentrated on a conceptual and theoretical contribution where the focus of analysis attends to a particular problem or debate within the identity field, its contradictions, conflicts and potential synergies and proposes new insights. (The journal does not publish primary research).
Relevant topics for submissions include those outlined above and the following (this is not a definitive list):
· Contributors may consider what are the current debates associated with specific traditions of identity research? Social identity theory, American pragmatist tradition, narrative identity work and poststructural theory all feature in contemporary studies of identity. What differentiates one approach from others and how do we advance our understanding of the productive possibilities (and impossibilities) of working between them?
· Have repeated calls for 'multi-level' research been fruitful or more divisive in the field? What synergies might be realized from more precisely theorizing across levels or at multiple levels of identity, particularly in terms of how identities 'ladder up' or 'bear down' on one another? Where does identity 'reside' at a given level or across levels?
· Does the concept of 'identity work' serve as a useful analytical tool for multi-level identity-focused studies? What are the patterns, gaps, and potential research trajectories for the further theoretical development of identity work especially across levels or at multiple levels?
· What are the debates on the potential ambiguities, contradictions but also opportunities for enriching identity studies by borrowing tools for data collection and analysis from different traditions? For example, how do discursive perspectives on identity differ from or inform more cognitive or sensemaking perspectives?
· How have scholars taken the opportunity to look beyond 'talk' to examine the literature and future direction that studies of embodied performance of identity might take?
· What difference has identity research made to advancing the field of management and organization studies? What theoretical and practical significance has it provided thus far for scholars and practitioners? What theoretical and practical benefits of studying identity remain unrealized but potentially fruitful if pursued further? What areas are most promising? Why?
Submission Process and Deadline:
Manuscripts should be submitted via online submission (http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ijmr), highlighting that you wish to be considered for the Special Issue, 'Exploring the Registers of Identity Research'. The manuscript should follow the author guidelines set out by the International Journal of Management Reviews available at:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2370/homepage/ForAuthors.html
Additionally see also:
Macpherson A. and Jones O. (2010). Editorial: strategies for the development of International Journal of Management Reviews. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00282.x
Jones O. and Gatrell C. (2014). Editorial: The future of writing and reviewing for IJMR. DOI: 10.1111/ijmr.12038
Contributors should send a copy of their submission to Sandra Corlett, to whom they might direct enquiries in the first instance should they wish to discuss suitability of submission for the Special Issue (sandra.corlett@northumbria.ac.uk)
Manuscripts should be submitted by December 31st 2015. The expected publication date of the Special Issue is April 2017.
The editors
Sandra Corlett is a Principal Lecturer in Organisation and Human Resource Management at Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University. Her work has been published in Gender in Management: An International Journal, Journal of Business Ethics, Management Learning, and Scandinavian Journal of Management. Her research interests broadly focus on identity and manager learning, and processes of identity work and becoming for managers and professionals. Sandra is currently Chair of the Identity Special Interest Group within the British Academy of Management.
Christine Coupland is a Professor of Organizational Behaviour at Loughborough University, School of Business and Management, UK. Her research interests centre on issues of identity at work. Her recent publications include articles in Organization Studies, Organization and Human Relations. She is currently Senior Editor for Organization Studies and Associate Editor for the Scandinavian Journal of Management. She is co-founder of the British Academy of Management, Identity Special Interest Group and regularly convenes a research stream at the BAM annual conference.
Peter McInnes is a Lecturer in Management and Change Leadership at the University of Strathclyde Business School. He sits on the Council of the British Academy of Management. His research examines the tensions and disconnects that emerge in the enactment of identity. His published research on identity work has appeared in the Scandinavian Journal of Management and on online emotions has featured in New Technology, Work and Employment.
Mathew Sheep is an Associate Professor of Management at Illinois State University (USA). His work has been published in Academy of Management Journal, Human Relations, Journal of Business Ethics, and others. His research interests focus on ways that people in changing organizational contexts construct competing versions of reality--and with what discursive, tensional, and material effects. His work spans a number of research areas in that regard, including individual and organizational identity, innovation, work-home balance, leadership, and spirituality in the workplace. Mathew is currently an Associate Editor for Human Relations.
References
Albert. S., Ashforth, B. E. and Dutton, J. E. (2000). Organizational identity and identification: charting new waters and building new bridges. Academy of Management Review, 25, pp. 13-17.
Alvesson, M. (2010). Self-doubters, strugglers, storytellers, surfers and others: images of self-identities in organization studies. Human Relations, 63, pp. 193–217.
Alvesson, M., Ashcraft, K. L. and Thomas, R. (2008). Identity matters: reflections on the construction of identity scholarship in Organization Studies. Organization, 15(5), pp.5-28.
Ashforth, B. E., Rogers, K. M. and Corley, K. G. (2011). Identity in organizations: exploring cross-level dynamics. Organization Science, 22(5), pp. 1144-1156
Brown, A. D. (2015). Identities and identity work in organizations. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(1), pp. 20–40.
Cascón-Pereira, R. and Hallier, J. (2012). Getting that certain feeling: the role of emotions in the meaning, construction and enactment of doctor managers' identities. British Journal of Management, 23(1), pp. 130-144.
Corley, K. G., Harquail, C. V., Pratt, M. G., Glynn, M. A., Fiol, C. M. and Hatch, M. J. (2006). Guiding organizational identity through aged adolescence. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15(2), pp. 85-99.
Coupland, C. and Brown, A. D. (2012). Identities in action: processes and outcomes. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 28(1), pp. 1-4.
Harding, N., Lee, H. and Ford, J. (2014). Who is 'the middle manager'? Human Relations 67(10), pp. 1213-1237.
Knights, D. and Clarke, C. (2014). It's a bittersweet symphony, this life: fragile academic selves and insecure identities at work. Organization Studies, 35(3), pp. 335–357.
Kreiner, G.E., Hollensbe, E.C. and Sheep, M.L. (2006). On the edge of identity: boundary dynamics at the interface of individual and organizational identities. Human Relations 59(10), pp. 1315-1341.
Ravasi, D. and Canato, A. (2013). How do I know who you think you are? A review of research methods on organizational identity. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(2), pp. 185–204.
Svenningsson, S. and Alvesson, M. (2003). Managing managerial identities: organizational fragmentation, discourse and identity struggle. Human Relations 56(10), pp. 1163-1193.
Weick, K.E., Sutcliffe, K.M. and Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), pp. 409-421.
Ybema, S., Keenoy, T., Oswick, C., Beverungen, A., Ellis, N. And Sabelis, I. (2009). Articulating identities. Human Relations, 62(3), pp. 299-322.