Commentary: Does Organizational Image Matter? You Bet It Does

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12373
• Published date: 01 May 2015
• Date: 01 May 2015

Does Organizational Image Matter? You Bet It Does 431

Commentary

Stephen Harding is adjunct professor

at Northwestern University. Previously

he served as city manager of the Cities

of Murrieta and Jurupa Valley California,

president of San Diego ’ s Southeastern

Development Corporation, and executive

director of Santa Ana ’ s Redevelopment

Agency and Housing Authority. His private

sector experience includes vice presidencies

in the real estate development and munici-

pal consulting industries.

E-mail : stephen.harding@northwestern.edu

Does Organizational Image Matter? You Bet It Does

D oes an organization ’ s image matter to its

own employees? Does this image affect how

employees identify with their work organiza-

tion? Does image and organizational identification

influence employee behavior and productivity in

the workplace? According to the analysis conducted

by Eunju Rho, Taesik Yun, and KangBok Lee, the

answer to each of these questions is yes. While this

may appear self-evident, their academic constructs in

support are noteworthy. Indeed, they should be con-

sidered foundational, and will likely serve to generate

new organizational models on which to build stronger

relationships between workplace and workers.

Organizational image has usually been evaluated

in terms of reputation, mostly by external sources,

that is, the public, professional associations, peer

organizations, regulatory agencies, and the media.

Rho, Yun, and Lee, however, focus on the evaluation

of the image of their workplaces by the employees

themselves. That image derives primarily from two

different sets of perceptions: (1) the member ’ s own

evaluative understanding of the organization, and

(2) the member ’ s perception of others’ evaluations,

that is, perceived organizational identity and construed

external image . The former, when the employee ’ s indi-

vidual value system coincides with the demonstrated

values of the organization, coincides with strong

identification of the employee/organizational member

with the place of employment. As support for this

hypothesis, the authors cite stronger organizational

identification among employees of not-for-profit enti-

ties than among those in governmental agencies. The

not-for-profit organization employees appear on aver-

age to be more strongly motivated to alleviate varying

social, economic, cultural, or environmental inequi-

ties than the government employees. In consequence,

their personal and organizational value systems blend

more easily and consistently.

Why do we need to understand this cognitive process

that binds an organization with its members? It is the

general contention of the authors that a strong iden-

tification between the organization and its members

creates, among other things, a sense of pride, loyalty,

and belonging, thus building a sense of ownership

both individually and collectively. Herein lies the core

of the authors’ thesis: “The strength of an employee ’ s

identification with his or her organization is positively

associated with extra-role behavior.” An employee

is more willing to go above and beyond the basic

requirements of the job when driven by a strong sense

of organizational identity. In the authors’ analysis, the

converse is also true: a weaker level of organizational

identification results in employees who do little or

nothing beyond their primary functions.

Stephen Harding

Northwestern University

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 75, Iss. 3, pp. 431–432. © 2015 by

The American Society for Public Administration.

DOI: 10.1111/puar.12373.