Developments in organization studies downplay the role of bureaucracy in favour of more flexible arrangements and forms of organizational control, including socio-ideological control. Corporate culture and regulated social identities are assumed to provide means for the integration and orchestration of work. Knowledge-intensive firms, which typically draw heavily upon socio-ideological modes of control, are often singled out as organizational forms that use social identity and the corporatization of the self as a mode for managerial control. In this article we explore and discuss social identity and identification in a large IT/management consultancy firm with a strong presence of socioideological or normative control, but also with strong bureaucratic features. Structural forms of control—formal HRM procedures and performance pressures are considered in relation to socio-ideological control. We identify organizational and individual consequences of identification in a context of social, structural, and cultural ‘closures’ and contradictions, including the tendency to create an ‘iron cage of subjectivity’.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kärreman et al. (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: