Discursive Practices Of Organizational Identity Negotiations

How do organizations discursively negotiate organizational identity? In a longitudinal interpretive case study, we investigate the discursive practices of identity negotiations in a non-profit organization. Drawing on semi-structured interviews, documents and participant observations, and in applying a discourse analytical framework, we first identify three distinct discourses that provide the discursive resources for three different identity propositions. Then and in order to understand how these discursive resources are activated and utilized, we reconstruct four distinct discursive practices of organizational identity negotiations: (1) external comparison and differentiation (2) denial of trade-offs and harmonization (3) historization, and (4) moralization. We discuss how this structure relates to other similarly pluralistic organizational contexts.

SwissScoring--a nationwide survey of NEMS assessing practices and its accuracy.

BACKGROUND The nine equivalents of nursing manpower use score (NEMS) is used to evaluate critical care nursing workload and occasionally to define hospital reimbursements. Little is known about the caregivers' accuracy in scoring, about factors affecting this accuracy and how validity of scoring is assured. METHODS Accuracy in NEMS scoring of Swiss critical care nurses was assessed using case vignettes. An online survey was performed to assess training and quality control of NEMS scoring and to collect structural and organizational data of participating intensive care units (ICUs). Aggregated structural and procedural data of the Swiss ICU Minimal Data Set were used for matching. RESULTS Nursing staff from 64 (82%) of the 78 certified adult ICUs participated in this survey. Training and quality control of scoring shows large variability between ICUs. A total of 1378 nurses scored one out of 20 case vignettes: accuracy ranged from 63.7% (intravenous medications) to 99.1% (basic monitoring). Erroneous scoring (8.7% of all items) was more frequent than omitted scoring (3.2%). Mean NEMS per case was 28.0 ± 11.8 points (reference score: 25.7 ± 14.2 points). Mean bias was 2.8 points (95% confidence interval: 1.0-4.7); scores below 37.1 points were generally overestimated. Data from units with a greater nursing management staff showed a higher bias. CONCLUSION Overall, nurses assess the NEMS score within a clinically acceptable range. Lower scores are generally overestimated. Inaccurate assessment was associated with a greater size of the nursing management staff. Swiss head nurses consider themselves motivated to assure appropriate scoring and its validation.

Beyond belief : Strategic taboos and organizational identity in strategic agenda setting

A comprehensive strategic agenda matters for fundamental strategic change. Our study seeks to explore and theorize how organizational identity beliefs influence the judgment of strategic actors when setting an organization's strategic agenda. We offer the notion of "strategic taboo" as those strategic options initially disqualified and deemed inconsistent with the organizational identity beliefs of strategic actors. Our study is concerned with how strategic actors confront strategic taboos in the process of setting an organization's strategic agenda. Based on a revelatory inductive case study, we find that strategic actors engage in assessing the concordance of the strategic taboos with organizational identity beliefs and, more specifically, that they focus on key identity elements (philosophy; priorities; practices) when doing so. We develop a typology of three reinterpretation practices that are each concerned with a key identity element. While contextualizing assesses the potential concordance of a strategic taboo with an organization's overall philosophy and purpose, instrumentalizing assesses such concordance with respect to what actors deem an organization's priorities to be. Finally, normalizing explores concordance with respect to compatibility and fit with the organization's practices. We suggest that assessing concordance of a strategic taboo with identity elements consists in reinterpreting collective identity beliefs in ways that make them consistent with what organizational actors deem the right course of action. This article discusses the implications for theory and research on strategic agenda setting, strategic change, a practice-based perspective on strategy, and on organizational identity.