Abstract
Intergroup changes occur often between subgroups who are asymmetric in status (e.g., size, power, prestige), with important consequences for social identification, especially among the members of lower-status groups. Mergers offer an example of such changes, when subgroups (merger partners) merge into a common, superordinate group (post-merger group). Lower-status subgroups frequently perceive they are less represented in the post-merger group, therefore committing less to the changes a merger implies. Five studies offered an intergroup relations’ perspective on mergers (N’s = 479, 150, 266, 113, and 229, respectively), examining how functional indispensability (instrumental contribution of the ingroup) positively influences perceptions of representativeness in the post-merger group (relative ingroup prototypicality), which, in turn, affect post-merger identification and, finally, change commitment. Additionally, the role of cognitive information processing (heuristic vs. systematic) on prototypicality was explored. Results suggest that functional indispensability impacts relative ingroup prototypicality (Studies 1–5), and this may be moderated by information processing (Study 2). Moreover, prototypicality and identification with the superordinate post-merged group mediated the effect of functional indispensability on change commitment (Studies 1–3). These findings provide important theoretical insights into prototypicality perceptions held by lower-status merger partners and minority groups in general, by identifying functional indispensability as a source of prototypicality other than relative status. In addition, by proposing a functional approach to the relations between social groups, these findings suggest better practices for managing structural changes, such as combining sources of strategic/functional and identity fit when announcing an intergroup change.
Highlights
Mergers are a very common phenomenon, occurring in diverse groups
We frame this as functional indispensability (Guerra et al, 2015) and test it as a predictor of perceived representativeness in the merged group and as a potential facilitator of identification and commitment to change in members of lower-status merger partners
This framework can apply to intergroup relations in general, we focus on organizational mergers because they offer an optimal context to approach the role of functional indispensability
Summary
Mergers are a very common phenomenon, occurring in diverse groups (schools, municipalities, corporations, and even countries). Some groups are considered for a merger because they might have something valuable to attain a superordinate goal We frame this as functional indispensability (Guerra et al, 2015) and test it as a predictor of perceived representativeness (relative ingroup prototypicality; Wenzel et al, 2007) in the merged group and as a potential facilitator of identification and commitment to change in members of lower-status merger partners. We focused on the early stage of a merger, when it is announced, and explored cognitivemotivational aspects (Chaiken and Trope, 1999) influencing representativeness claims This framework can apply to intergroup relations in general, we focus on organizational mergers because they offer an optimal context to approach the role of functional indispensability
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
