| This study describes organizational identity process during a strategic organizational alliance. Research questions addressed three areas: (a) the identity of each of the partner organizations in the alliance, (b) the resulting alliance identity, and (c) the processes by which the alliance identity develops. These questions were addressed using a descriptive case study of three non-profit organizations involved in an alliance.; Qualitative methods were used including Seidman's (1991) three interview series, as well as observation and document analysis. Albert and Whetten's (1985) definition of organizational identity was used as a framework to describe the alliance identity, as well as each of the partner organizations' identities. Subsequently, Hatch and Schultz's (2001) model of organization identity was used as an analytical framework to understand the alliance identity process. In order to explain the resulting identity processes, Giddens' (1979, 1984) structuration theory was the theoretical framework for the study.; Data indicated that an alliance identity was emerging. The alliance identity was distinct from the partner organizations' identities. The similarities between each organization's identity and the alliance identity included the type of organization (i.e. non profit), source of funding, the general focus, and the reliance of each organization on partnerships. Differences existed at a more operational level including the alliance's shared roles, responsibilities, and resources, the alliance's lack of history, the alliance's mission, and the need for the partners to work across organizational and geographical boundaries.; Empirical evidence supported Hatch and Schultz's (2001) model of organizational identity processes. The alliance identity was formed through internal processes of expression and reflection as well as external factors of mirroring and impressing. Several factors emerged that influenced identity formation processes including lack of complex organizational structures or integrating mechanisms, limited opportunities to build norms, power and contractual arrangements. As a result of these factors, identity formation processes were limited resulting in an alliance where members were unsure about who they were and the emergence of a confused image.; A model of identity processes is introduced that expands upon Hatch and Schultz's (2001) process model of identity by incorporating the findings of this study into the existing literature. The resulting model depicts identity development as a dynamic process that focuses on four areas: (a) who are we now, (b) who we want to be, (c) who we have been told to be through the contract and leadership, and (d) who the customers want us to be. The model highlights the role of structure, power, and the contract in shaping who an organization is.; Theoretical implications include support for the dynamic nature of identity and empirical evidence for identity processes. Practical implications include the importance of pre-alliance planning and contracting and alliance implementation issues related to human capital and developing employees and the organizations. Suggested areas for future research extend to examining identity in different contexts, applying alternative theoretical approaches, and studying organizational identity and associated outputs. |
