Challenges for a Multiple Identity Organization: A Case Study of the Dutch Blood Supply Foundation

Abstract

An organization that gives several answers to the “who are you?” question is a multiple identity organization. When those identities are based on antithetic value systems, identification by organizational members may be complicated. In this case study the Dutch Blood Supply Foundation Sanquin serves as an example of a multiple identity organization. A mixed method approach is used to determine the multiplicity of organizational identity and thereby tries to enrich theory about identity and identification. Since identity is conceptualized as what organizational members find central, distinctive and enduring, the answer to the identity question is obtained by semi-structured interviews with employees and by a questionnaire. The Sanquin identities turn out to be the ones that are usually recognized in multi-identities: an ideological and a utilitarian identity. The multi-identity character of the organization hampers the identification of organizational members, but they still identify with the organization’s mission. The interview results provoke discussion about the enduring identity proposition. The utilitarian identity partly has displaced the ideological identity in a rather short period of time. Identity in a multiple identity is dynamic rather than enduring or continuous. Possible generalizations are discussed.

Appendices

Appendix 1

Respondents

	Sex	Age	Division (blood bank, pharma or other)	Length of service
1	Male	25–45	P	< 5
2	Male	> 45	P	5–15
3	Male	25–45	B	5–15
4	Male	> 45	B	> 15
5	Female	> 45	B	5–15
6	Male	> 45	B	5–15
7	Female	> 45	B	5–15
8	Female	> 45	B	> 15
9	Male	25–45	P	< 5
10	Male	25–45	P	5–15
13	Male	> 45	B	> 15
14	Female	25–45	P	5–15
15	Male	25–45	P	5–15
16	Male	> 45	P	5–15
17	Male	> 45	P	5–15
20	Female	25–45	O	< 5
21	Female	25–45	P	< 5
23	Male	> 45	O	< 5
24	Female	25–45	P	< 5
25	Female	25–45	P	< 5
26	Female	25–45	O	5–15
27	Male	25–45	P	> 15
29	Female	25–45	B	5–15
30	Female	> 45	O	> 15
32	Male	> 45	B	> 15
33	Male	> 45	O	5–15
34	Male	> 45	O	< 5
36	Female	> 45	B	5–15
37	Female	25–45	B	5–15
38	Female	< 25	B	< 5

Appendix 2

Propositions and scales

		1	2	3	4	5
		Totally agree	Agree	Agree nor disagree	Disagree	Totally disagree
A
4	Sanquin blows along internationally
5	Raising profits is an important goal
11	In the core Sanquin is and remains a typical Dutch organization
B
7	During my daily work, I always have the patient in mind
8	Sanquin should make profit in the first place. Without that we cannot start helping patients
9	During my daily work, I always have the donor in mind
12	I find the changes of the last few years at Sanquin positive
C
2	My boss tells me everything I need to know to understand where the organization is going to
6	The one business unit knows what the other is doing
7	Via the internal media, you know well what is going on at Sanquin
D
2	The Sanquin divisions work well in harmony
6	At Sanquin we fairly work at cross-purposes
10	The university graduates and the other employees are distant from each other at Sanquin
E
2	If we do not make any profit, we do not exist anymore soon

Appendix 3

Interview Guide

Interview

Date

Name

Division

Function

Length of service

• 1. What is:

  • 1.1 Central

  • 1.2 Distinctive

  • 1.3 Enduring

Blood Bank and Pharma

in common:

• 2. Agreement/attractiveness

• 2.1 Human material—Human material

• 2.2 Focus on product safety—Focus on product safety

• 2.3 Health care—Health care

• 2.4 Research-based—Research-based

• 2.5 Dutch—Dutch

• 2.6 Not for profit—Not for profit

more or less antithetical:

• 2.7 Human centred—Process centred

• 2.8 Donors as “clients”—Pharmaceutical industry as a client

• 2.9 National—International

• 2.10 Public—Private

• 2.11 Social—Business-like

• 2.12 Non for profit—Commercial

• 2.13 Other characteristics

• 3. What ties it together?

• 4. Identification with Sanquin

• 5. Conflicting values

• 6. Conflicting demands

• 7. Projected identity

• 8. Stakeholders

• 9. Managerial responses

  • 9.1 Compartmentalization

  • 9.2 Deletion

  • 9.3 Integration

  • 9.4 Aggregation

• 10. Customer gap + liaison with multiple identity

• 11. Further remarks