
doi: 10.5539/ibr.v7n1p49
Organizational identification is the root construct of organizational phenomena. Many researchers have examined this concept in terms of identification (positive) and disidentification (negative). However, recently some researchers began focusing on ambivalent identification, which refers to the simultaneous appearance of both identification and disidentification. This new concept is likely to shed light on organizational phenomena that cannot be demonstrated by identification or disidentification alone. This study focuses on ambivalent identification. We started by creating a concrete definition for this concept. Further, we tried to develop a valid measurement for it through pilot and main studies. Consequently, we defined this concept in terms of cognitive and affective aspects and observed the complexity associated with ambivalent identification.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
