Article

Predictors of change in postmerger identification during a merger process: a longitudinal study.

School of Psychology, University of Exeter, Exeter, England.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (Impact Factor: 5.08). 12/2008; 95(5):1095-112. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.95.5.1095
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Adopting an intergroup perspective, the authors examined predictors of change in postmerger identification throughout a merger. Data were collected over 3 points of measurement from 157 students of a newly merged university. The 1st questionnaire was distributed 4 months after the implementation of the merger; the following 2 were distributed 6 months and 1 year thereafter. With its longitudinal design, this study replicates and extends past results by revealing predictors of change in organizational identification for members of the dominant and subordinate organizations throughout a merger process. As predicted, postmerger identification increased only slowly for members of both the dominant and the subordinate organizations. Multilevel models for change confirmed that the predictive effect of premerger identification on postmerger identification for members of the dominant organization dissipates over time. The effect of in-group typicality unexpectedly varied as a function of organizational membership and was stable over time. Perceived fairness in the merger process positively influenced postmerger identification across members of both organizations; over time the effect of fairness amplified.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Ilka Helene Gleibs, Jul 02, 2015
2 Followers
 · 
444 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Past research provides evidence that organizational identification is a key factor predicting employees' behaviours during mergers and acquisitions. In particular, recent studies demonstrate that members of the subordinate merger partner, in contrast to the dominant group, often find it difficult to transfer their identification to the post-merger organization. To understand this difference between dominant and subordinate groups, we examined employees' sense of projected continuity in the future. We argue that projected continuity mediates the differential relationships between pre-merger and post-merger identification and propose that pre-merger identification relates positively to projected continuity in the dominant group but negatively in the subordinate group. As a result, the overall relationship between pre-and post-merger identification should be reduced or eliminated in the subordinate compared with the dominant group. We tested our hypotheses in a survey (N = 492) distributed in a merger of two international pharmaceutical companies at the beginning of the post-merger integration and 15 months later. Results were consistent with our assumptions of a moderated mediation effect. We conclude that a key challenge in merger integration is to support high identifiers in the subordinate group in developing a projected continuity or a focus on 'the bright tomorrow'. Focusing on the bright tomorrow? The role of projected continuity for post-merger identification in dominant and subordinate merging organizations Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are well-established corporate strategies for ensuring survival and growth. Nevertheless, most M&A do not live up to performance expectations (King, Dalton, Daily, & Covin, 2004; Pekar & Allio, 1994; for a differentiation between acquirer, target, and competitors, see Clougherty & Duso, 2009). Low identification with the post-merger organization is often cited as a key reason for M&A failure (Giessner, Viki, Otten, Terry, & T€ auber, 2006; van Dick, Ullrich, & Tissington, 2006; van Knippenberg, van
    British Journal of Social Psychology 12/2014; 53:752-772. DOI:10.1111/bjso.12056 · 1.76 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In 2007, the two most important Italian left-wing parties merged into a single political entity. This study intends to analyze the merging process. Specifically, and in line with the ingroup projection hypothesis of Mummendey & Wenzel, we have explored whether the identification and the favoritism toward the upcoming common group was affected by the perceivers' projection of specific and common stereotypical traits from the subordinate groups to the superordinate one. Political militants' (N = 132) levels of ingroup identification; their representations of the previous ingroup, outgroup, and of the new party; and their attitudes towards the common group were assessed. Results confirmed that the cognitive representation of the merged party was shaped much more on the basis of the typical traits of the ingroup than of the outgroup. Moreover, structural equation analyses showed that the identification with the superordinate category and the consequent favoritism toward the merger were related to the projection of ingroup attributes. The findings also suggested that the ingroup projection may be particularly crucial when the intergroup bias is high. Finally, political implications are discussed in terms of obstacles and resources inherent to the merging process.
    Political Psychology 02/2013; 34(1):91-105. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00921.x · 1.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Building on previous studies that documented psychological withdrawal or distancing from one's employing organization as one kind of response to major organizational change, this study developed and tested a dependence-regulation account of psychological distancing responses. This account was derived from social psychological analysis of interpersonal relationships and interdependence theory. It emphasizes the self-protective function of psychological distancing when the employment relationship is threatened by changes such as corporate mergers or acquisitions. The theory holds that people can reduce threatened losses to identity as a member of their organization or to the tangible benefits of organizational membership through psychological distancing actions such as devaluing the organization or disengaging cognitively or behaviourally (e.g. through reduced organizational identification, increased thoughts of quitting or absenteeism). Applicability of the theory to explain reactions to major organizational change was supported in findings of a survey of 62 bank employees whose organization was seeking a merger with another bank. Dependence on the employer (prospects for getting a comparable job elsewhere) was found to moderate the association between anticipated negative consequences of the merger (‘uncertainty’) and two indicators of distancing, namely affective commitment to the organization and satisfaction with the organization as employer. Other findings pointed to a degree of realism in employees' threat appraisals. Implications for management and for future research were derived, partly by considering the possible role of employee self-esteem in distancing oneself from the organization.
    Journal of Change Management 03/2012; 12(1):77-94. DOI:10.1080/14697017.2011.652376