ABSTRACT
The social identity approach embodied by social identity theory (Hogg & Abrams, 1988; Tajfel, 1978a; Tajfel & Turner, 1986) and self-categorization theory (J. C.
Applying this approach to membership in organizations, Ashforth and Mael (1989) proposed that through organizational identification organizational membership reflects on the self-concept just as (other) social group memberships do (see also Dutton et aI., 1994; Haslam, 2001; Hogg & Terry, 2000; Pratt, 1998; A. van Knippenberg, van Knippenberg, van Knippenberg, & van Knippenberg, 2000). Organizational identification thus reflects "the perception of oneness with or belongingness to an organization, where the individual defines him or herselfin terms of the organization(s) in which he or she is a member" (Mael & Ashforth, 1992; p. 104). Because identification with a social category engenders a tendency to think in terms of that category membership, identification leads to activities that are congruent with that identity. As a consequence, higher levels of organizational identification are associated with a higher likelihood that employees will take the organization's perspective and will act in the organization's best interest (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Dutton et aI., 1994; D. van Knippenberg, 2000). Identification has, for instance, been proposed to lead to ingroup cooperation (R. M. Kramer, 1991; Tyler, 1999), organizational citizenship behavior (Dutton et aI., 1994), support for the organization (Mael & Ashforth, 1992), increased task performance (van Leeuwen & van Knippenberg, 1999), and lower likelihood of turnover (Abrams et aI., 1998; Mael & Ashforth, 1995). Therefore, the ability to elicit a certain level of identification can be considered to be important to an organization's functioning.
