Retiring: Role identity processes in retirement transition

• Published date: 01 June 2020
• Author: Prashant Bordia,Sarbari Bordia,Shari Read
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/job.2438
• Date: 01 June 2020

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Retiring: Role identity processes in retirement transition

Prashant Bordia | Shari Read | Sarbari Bordia

Research School of Management, The

Australian National University, Canberra, ACT,

Australia

Correspondence

Prashant Bordia, Research School of

Management, The Australian National

University, 26 Kingsley Street, Canberra, ACT

2601, Australia.

Email: prashant.bordia@anu.edu.au

Funding information

Australian Research Council, Grant/Award

Number: DP1096037

Summary

Retirement transition has become a prolonged process of adaptation, including

changes in role identity. However, there is a dearth of research on the process by

which retirees cope with the role transition, including how pre-retirement role

identities shape the transition, the forms of identity work undertaken by retirees,

and the unfolding nature of retirement transition. In an in-depth qualitative exami-

nation of the transition process, we identify pre-retirement role identity profiles

based on work and nonwork role identities. We then examine how pre-retirement

role identities influence the transition process, including the nature of

identity work in transition and the transition pathways demonstrated by retirees.

Our findings provide insights into strengths and limitations afforded by pre-

retirement identities: They facilitate agentic coping in which retirees shed old and

adopt new identities but also impose inertia and prolong the transition until iden-

tity crises force the retirees to undergo identity exploration and adoption of new

identities.

KEYWORDS

identity work, retirement adjustment, retirement pathways, retiring, role identity

1|INTRODUCTION

Retirement transition has profoundly changed in recent decades.

What was once a distinct switch from working life to retirement now

occurs over many years and includes periods of work, leisure,

retraining, and volunteering (Beehr, 2014; Kulik, Ryan, Harper, &

George, 2014; Sargent, Lee, Martin, & Zikic, 2013). The retirement

transition is now a process having a series of steps including exit,

reentry, and reexit from work and experimentation with new life roles

(Kloep & Hendry, 2006; Sargent, Bataille, Vough, & Lee, 2011; Wang &

Shultz, 2009).

In the research reported here, we contribute to a processual

understanding of retirement transitions by examining how individuals

navigate the exit from work role and transition into retirement. The-

ory and research on retirement transition need greater attention to

the processes involved in achieving adjustment in retired life (Sargent,

Lee, Martin, & Zikic, 2013; Wang & Shultz, 2009). Retirement is

emerging as a significant life stage with its own potential for produc-

tive outcomes for the self and society. The transition process

influences the quality of life and well-being of retirees (Dingemans &

Henkens, 2014). When managed well, it boosts the productive capac-

ity of the retiree in work and nonwork domains and enhances well-

being. When poorly done, it can stymie individual potential and well-

being.

Retirement-related research in management and behavioral sci-

ences has examined areas of retirement planning, retirement deci-

sion making, predictors of early retirement, predictors of

adjustment and well-being, and bridge employment (see Wang &

Shultz, 2009, for a review). This research has been aimed at identi-

fying various predictors (i.e., the “what”question): What predicts

engagement in retirement planning, what predicts early retirement,

or what predicts participation in bridge employment? It also pro-

vides insights into the underlying causes (the “why”question), such

as motivational needs (Zhan, Wang, & Shi, 2015), for bridge

employment. However, given the diverse, temporal, and often

nonlinear trends in retirement transition, there is a need for greater

attention to processes and unfolding mechanisms in the retirement

process (i.e., the “how”question; Sargent, Lee, Martin, &

Received: 15 August 2018 Revised: 17 February 2020 Accepted: 24 February 2020

DOI: 10.1002/job.2438

J Organ Behav. 2020;41:445–460. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/job © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 445

Zikic, 2013): For example, how do retirees cope with the loss of

status and meaning afforded by work; how do they utilize personal

and contextual resources to respond to a major life change such as

retirement?

In this study, we develop insights into how employees navigate

the transition from employment to retirement. We investigated

retirement transition using the role identity theory. Why the role

identity theory? Retirement adjustment and well-being are strongly

influenced by the existence of a desired role identity

(Atchley, 1989; Mutran & Reitzes, 1981). Role identification pro-

vides meaning and a sense of purpose and promotes well-being

(Thoits, 2012). Longer life expectancy and improved health care

allow more and more people to lead an active retired life, which

then leads to the question: What do I do? This may involve some

form of continuation of pre-retirement roles, adaptation of pre-

retirement roles to post-retirement life, or the development of new

roles. However, research on role identity transitions has noted that

exit from cherished roles and the adoption of new role identities

are not always easy (Ashforth, 2001; Ebaugh, 1988). When con-

fronted with the inevitability of an exit from work roles, how do

retirees manage this transition?

We were guided by a process view of retirement transition as we

were interested in the unfolding and temporal nature of transitions

(following Langley's, 2007, recommendation on process thinking, we

use the verb “retiring”in the title—as opposed to the noun “retire-

ment”—to emphasize the prolonged and processual nature of this phe-

nomenon). The role identity transition approach lends itself well to a

process-based analysis as it involves a series of steps: exit from a role,

negotiating the transition and the associated liminality, and entry into

a new role (Ashforth, 2001). Acknowledging the influence of the past,

we examined pre-retirement role identities and how they shaped the

transition process. In particular, we explored multiple forms of identi-

ties (work and nonwork) and their interactions. We found that

possessing multiple strong and well-developed identities served to

smoothen the transition, but singular work role identities (WRIs; or

the absence of any clear role identity) required significant identity

work to adjust to retirement. Noting their transition enabling (when

present) versus constraining effects (when absent), we theorize that

certain forms of pre-retirement role identities may act as resources in

retirement transition. We also examined specific role identity manage-

ment strategies (i.e., the identity work) used by the retirees in dealing

with the transition and crafting a post-retirement role identity. Finally,

emphasizing the temporal unfolding, we identified four distinct role

identity-based transition pathways taken by retirees in navigating the

transition.

We make several contributions to theory building on retirement

transitions. First, responding to calls for greater attention to multiple

identities (Ramarajan, 2014), we identify configurations of work and

nonwork pre-retirement role identities and demonstrate how these

identities shape the transition process. Developed nonwork role

identities (NWRIs) allow for a smooth exit from work and entry into

post-retirement life. Strong WRIs enable a more gradual withdrawal

from work (with some continued involvement in work while

nonwork identities are developed). Thus, role identities seem to act

as resources that facilitate transition. The retirement literature has

highlighted the effects of discrete resources (financial, health, social,

and psychological) on retirement outcomes (Kim & Moen, 2001;

Leung & Earl, 2012; Pinquart & Schindler, 2007; Wang, Henkens, &

van Solinge, 2011). Resources are important as they allow agency

and control over the form and timing of role exit, which in turn

makes role transition palatable (Ebaugh, 1988; George, 1993). Our

findings contribute by drawing attention to ways in which these

resources may be accumulated in pre-retirement roles and utilized—

by sustaining or creating new role identities—to achieve continuity

and adjustment in retirement.

Second, we identify specific forms of role identity work under-

taken by retirees in navigating the transition. We demonstrate that

retirees are not passive acceptors of life's changes but actively work

on their role identities (including work on themselves and the context)

to sustain, adapt, or create new role identities. Research is beginning

to recognize the take-charge or agentic element of retirement transi-

tion (Kloep & Hendry, 2006). Retirement is not the end of active

periods of life. Indeed, terms such as productive and active aging sug-

gest recognition of continued activity well beyond the traditional

retirement ages in the late fifth and early sixth decade of life (Sargent,

Bataille, Vough, & Lee, 2011; Zacher, Kooij, & Beier, 2018). By identi-

fying the specific strategies retirees use in response to the looming

challenge of role exit, we provide a deeper understanding of how

retirees seek to remain active, relevant, and meaningful contributors

to their social milieu as well as in their own self-conception.

Finally, by identifying a variety of transition pathways, we con-

tribute to a deeper understanding of how retirement unfolds. The

retirement literature points to a crisis-based versus continuity-based

characterization of retirement (Atchley, 1989; Beehr, 2014; Moen,

Erickson, & Dempster-McClain, 2000; Sargent, Lee, Martin, &

Zikic, 2013). As crisis, retirement can be associated with negative

outcomes such as loss of worth, status, and well-being. However,

not all empirical analysis reveals negative outcomes. Findings that

self-esteem remained consistent before and after retirement (Reitzes,

Mutran, & Fernandez, 1996) and that only about 25% of the people

demonstrated negative well-being after retirement (Wang, 2007)

support a continuity explanation. Research has also revealed a

nonlinear trend in well-being, where retirees alternate between posi-

tive and negative experiences during retirement transition

(Pinquart & Schindler, 2007; Wang, 2007). However, we know much

less about the underlying causes for these nonlinear patterns and

ways in which retirees respond to challenges of the transition. Our

analysis of the transition shows experiences of crises as well as con-

tinuity by the same individual, suggesting that instead of either/or,

transition can involve both experiences. More importantly, our find-

ings explain these patterns by demonstrating how the experience of

role identity challenges (crises) can instigate responses (in the form

of identity work) that help maintain a viable sense of self and achieve

continuity in retirement. In the following sections, we provide the

theoretical background and present the research questions guiding

this study.

446 BORDIA ET AL.