Second, to avoid the emotional consequences of hitting rock bottom, people can move their focus away from particular aims and results to overall processes. An injured military veteran, for example, may stop concentrating on reaching a higher military rank and thinking about “what might have been” and instead begin focusing on alternative career options, such as running a small organization, engaging in a new venture with other veterans, volunteering to speak to other people facing similar setbacks, and so on. Such an escape offers a process-oriented enabling space for identity play (Glynn 1994; Miller 1973) centered on means instead of ends such that one’s actions are circuitous and probing instead of linear and directed (Miller 1973). Due to this process focus, activities associated with identity play are not controlled by unyielding rationality or a strong desire for efficiency. Instead, these activities promote finding enjoyment in the journey and the decision process, “including intuition, emotion , and taking a leap of faith” (Ibarra and Petriglieri 2010: 13), all of which encourage creative thinking and action (Isen et al. 1987). Further, while pleasure is an important motivation for play (Ibarra and Petriglieri 2010), being present in the activity at hand may in and of itself lead to positive emotional experiences (Csikszentmihalyi 1997; Mainemelis and Ronson 2006), including enjoyment. Generating positive emotions can counteract lingering negative emotions (Fredrickson et al. 2000) and further expand one’s focus and cognitive processes (Fredrickson 2001; Fredrickson and Branigan 2005), thus encouraging the imaginative formation of alternative identities from identity play (Shepherd and Williams 2018).
Third, to avoid the emotional crisis and “meaning vacuum” associated with hitting rock bottom, people can concentrate less on distal goals (or on past unreached goals, for that matter, such as those stemming from identity loss) and focus more on proximal activities (i.e., what opportunities they can envision or play with in the proximal future). As mentioned earlier, identity play includes proximal activities and actions related to testing temporary identities as possible identities, which in turn leads individuals to uncover principles and skills “that are relevant in reality beyond play” (Senge 1990: 314) (see also Miller 1973; Sutton-Smith 2009). Such play involves activities related to investigating low-risk explorative notions of future identities (Brown and Starkey 2000), an enduring process until the individual at hand finds a positive identity (that is likely provisional in nature ) (Dutton et al. 2010) or an identity that at least could be positive (Maitlis 2009). For instance, after an entrepreneur loses his or her business, he or she may try numerous diverse identities, including entrepreneurship consultant or teacher, business angel, venture capital investor, employee in an entrepreneurial company, running a government agency promoting entrepreneurship, and so on, by visiting different locations and experimenting with these identities. Thus, getting away from the emotional weight triggered by the crystallization of discontent allows people like this to “play” by offering time and freedom from distal goals (e.g., for the last example, meeting conductor demands, performing at live events) to explore new identity possibilities. While the emphasis is on immediate trials, individuals test new notions of the self (created through play) by projecting them into the relatively near future. Without the constraints of distal goals, the failed entrepreneur can freely generate and strive for near goals, such as creating and trying on provisional identities developed through identity play.
Finally, while fantasy in a cognitively deconstructed state may be detrimental (Baumeister 1990), as part of identity play it may be very useful. Identity play “generally unfolds at the threshold between fantasy and reality, or the boundary between dreams (i.e., the possible selves in our heads) and reality (i.e., concrete possibilities available in the given world at any given time)” (Ibarra and Petriglieri 2010: 15). Thus, fantasy is insufficient for identity play as it requires flirtations across the boundary between dream and reality. Fantasy in a cognitively deconstructed state is problematic because it is free of any reality, thus making it rather ineffective in generating identity alternatives. However, when individuals play out identity fantasies, they are able to creatively explore (Brown and Starkey 2000) or flirt with ideas of a provisional future self that actually have meaning in reality, which can improve the chance of forming an identity that is positive (Shepherd and Williams 2018). For instance, the failed entrepreneur may play out his or her fantasy of working in a non-profit organization as an alternative new identity by working with a local non-profit for two weeks.
Discipline Following Open Identity Play
The association between play and the formation of a new positive work identity is likely shaped by the degree to which the cognitive process includes disciplined imagination. Disciplined imagination denotes an evaluation and selection process in which individuals introduce discipline through the “consistent application of selection criteria to trial-and-error thinking” and in which they trigger imagination through the “deliberate diversity introduced into the problem statements, thought trials, and selection criteria that comprise that thinking” (Weick 1989: 516; see also Shepherd and Williams 2018). The construction of these aspects of disciplined imagination—namely, the problem descriptions, thought experiments , and criteria applied for evaluation and selection—likely influences a person’s ability to form conceivable outcomes. The outcome is a plausible new identity that is worth additional identity refinement and validation. Without forming a suitably plausible new identity, the individual is unlikely to engage in identity refinement or socially validate his or her new identity and will continue to play, thus delaying recovery .
Although identity play can generate possible new work identities, before a new identity can be enacted fully, the individual will likely have to engage in finer-grained identity refinement and social validation. Individuals seem to undertake a deeper analysis of a possible identity conjecture beyond the testing involved in thought trials by assessing their new identity using internal standards of self-beliefs (Ibarra 1999; Rafaeli and Sutton 1989) and external feedback based on other people’s responses to their potential implementation of the new role (Ibarra and Petriglieri 2010; Meister et al. 2014). These internal and external forms of feedback provide information about the match between the alternative identity and the role it corresponds to (Bandura 1977; Weick 1979). A gap between the new possible work identity and the individual’s role when performing this work requires refinement to “close the gap.” In other words, the individual has to tailor the new identity to fit the new work role (Deaux 1991; Erez and Earley 1993). Pratt et al. (2006: 248) conducted a study on physician residents and showed that identity refinement includes three forms of identity customization. Physician residents used either splinting or patching to close a large gap between identifying a new work identity and performing its corresponding role. In this context, splinting refers to “a temporary identity to use until the identity develop[s] and [becomes] stronger (and then [can] be cast aside),” and patching refers to using one identity to mask holes or deficiencies in the new identity’s correlation with the new work tasks (Pratt et al. 2006). For smaller gaps (which may result from effectively employing splinting or patching), the physicians appeared to use enriching to further refine their new identity. That is, although the new identity’s basic features remain identical, through enriching, one obtains a more profound, richer, and more detailed understanding of the identity (Pratt et al. 2006). Overall, these refinement mechanisms enable identity adaptation (Ibarra 1999).
In addition to the three identity customization practices just listed, gaps can also be closed, and fit can be reached by altering characteristics of the work role to align it more closely with the new identity. Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001), for instance, revealed that people take part in job crafting to redefine and re-imagine their work roles and then more closely align those work roles with work they feel is more meaningful (at least vis-à-vis their identity). Returning to our previous example, a failed entrepreneur could attempt to refine his or h
er new identity in pedagogy by first limiting its scope. For instance, the entrepreneur could choose to limit him- or herself to only teaching high-potential or adult students with ambitious performance-related goals instead of taking on beginner students. Similarly, he or she could develop corporate training for executives in entrepreneurial organizations or new industries. These sorts of refining activities are likely to help individuals align their budding new identity with their desired work identity.
Further, a new identity must also be socially validated. Research has shown that identity construction involves interaction in social contexts (Ibarra 1999; Meister et al. 2014; Sveningsson and Alvesson 2003). Said differently, people can try an alternative identity and thus make identity claims in social contexts. The claims an individual makes about a new identity trigger a reaction from others—namely, this alternative identity is accepted, rejected, or renegotiated by these “others” (Conroy and O’Leary-Kelley 2014; Ibarra 1999). It is important to note that this validation stage follows periods of less-directed, more fluid exploration of possible identities that did not involve any (or only very minimal) social validation. For example, the failed entrepreneur from our example before may decide to explore working in various government organizations, such as the Small Business Administration. In the early stages of exploration , he or she may not share this idea with anyone. However, after realizing the idea is plausible compared to other identity options pursued during play, the entrepreneur may begin seeking social validation. The ensuring social interaction is likely to provide information about any lingering deficiencies, asymmetries, or holes in the budding new work identity and about the need for additional refinements (McNulty and Swann 1994; Meister et al. 2014).
Social interaction not only helps validate a new work identity, but it can also help an individual further refine the identity. By sharing a new identity with others, the individual not only gets feedback, but those others can also aid in coproducing a more conceivable version of the identity by supporting particular features, adding new information, and facilitating the establishment of middle ground (Boje 1991; Conroy and O’Leary-Kelly 2014; Ibarra and Barbulescu 2010; Polletta and Lee 2006). Role models are a particularly important source of social validation for an alternative work identity (Ashforth 2001; Ibarra 1999; Pratt et al. 2006). Role models display the skills, styles, and behaviors that are appropriate in a social setting, and individuals can adopt and develop these skills, styles, and behaviors as a basis for their new work identity (Ibarra 1999). For example, the failed entrepreneur who decided to work for the Small Business Administration may observe an employee who is a highly regarded mentor for new businesses. Observing this individual may provide the entrepreneur with an illustration of good mentoring skills and behaviors in talking to and promoting mentees, which the entrepreneur may adopt and use as a basis to build up his or her new work identity as a successful startup mentor.
When a new identity is socially validated, the individual can adopt it as a positive identity; however, when there is no social validation, the individual can either abandon it or further refine and test the identity through another validation round. For instance, the failed entrepreneur might turn to his or her instructors or role models for validation and guidance, enabling the entrepreneur to coproduce this new identity in mentoring while obtaining validation and legitimacy at the same time. Such social validation is likely to facilitate individuals’ transition to a new identity and serve as a continuing source of identity reinforcement and support.
Individuals can facilitate the refinement and validation of a new identity by occasionally drawing on identity play. For example, identity play can aid in splinting to overcome a major “boundary crossing” (Pratt et al. 2006; Van Maanen and Schein 1979) between a new identity and its associated work roles. Because splinting entails using a temporary identity until the new identity becomes more robust (Pratt et al. 2006), the challenge is “finding” a temporary identity that can serve as the splint while the primary identity develops. Just as identity play can aid in generating possible new identities, it can also likely help individuals generate possible “splints” when refining a new identity. Similarly, when one undertakes refinement through patching, he or she must generate an additional identity to make up for deficiencies with the new identity (Pratt et al. 2006). Identity play can be helpful in generating this “patch.” For instance, a failed entrepreneur pursuing a conventional identity as a corporate employee may experience deficiencies from a lacking entrepreneurial role. To patch these deficiencies, the entrepreneur may ask to take on project-style work in the new employee role and to lead/“own” the project. Thus, he or she would be able to choose a team and work with more autonomy within the larger corporate structure. While perhaps not ideal, these patches likely help the entrepreneur transition to the new corporate employee identity.
Identity play can even help failed entrepreneurs enrich a new identity. More specifically, through identity play , an individual can explore a new identity in perhaps more extreme contexts, which can provide more profound, richer, and more nuanced information about the new identity. An individual could play with taking on different role models, combining different role features, and/or combining and recombining various roles. An injured veteran, for example, may combine a more stable role of running a small business, which would have few connections to his or her former work identity, with a riskier work identity as a motivational speaker for other injured veterans or for people who have gone through hardship. By playing with the motivational speaker identity, the injured veteran will likely be exposed to others who have struggled, thus gaining a greater and deeper understanding about both the lost identity and the nuance and (possible) importance of the new identity.
Identity play can also be beneficial in helping entrepreneurs engage their social context to refine a new identity and receive social validation. For instance, other people can be involved in identity play, and through this more social form of play , rules and limits are formed and adjusted (Barrett 1998; Nachmanovitch 1990) in an interpersonal negotiation process. By “playing with others,” individuals can coproduce an outcome to help refine the new identity and ultimately obtain social validation. For instance, the failed entrepreneur may engage family members (Newman 1988) and other people he or she encountered during identity play in generating new versions of a budding identity. The end result of this coproduction process could be a more nuanced version of the identity as well as higher acceptance of the new identity among new professional and/or social circles. If the audience rejects the new provisional identity (generated through identity play ), the entrepreneur can re-engage in identity play to develop a new potential identity that can then be refined and socially validated.
So far, we have mainly discussed what paths entrepreneurs may take after the loss of a work identity. Now, we turn to why entrepreneurs choose one path over another and why there are likely varying levels of success among people attempting to create a new positive work identity. My (Dean) colleague and I (Shepherd and Williams 2018) argued that individuals with a stronger promotion focus are more likely to undertake identity play to escape the negative emotions stemming from identity loss—from rock bottom—than individuals with a weaker promotion focus.
Identity Conflict in Family Firms and an Expedited Entrepreneurial Process
Many businesses are run and owned by family members (Heck and Trent 1999; Rogoff and Heck 2003; Wortman 1994), which can lead to tension within both the family and the firm (Daily and Dollinger 1992; Harvey and Evans 1994; Kellermanns and Eddleston 2004). Family conflict can be the outcome of business issues, such as different goals related to financial targets or product/service offerings. Family conflict can also arise from seemingly routine issues such as hours of operation. In addition, business conflict may stem from family issues, including the amount of time family members are not at home, conflicts between spouses, or inattentiveness to crucial family matters. In these cases, conflicts are often d
irectly caused by the direct and frequent interaction between family members, the family, and the firm.
Exploring the behavioral expectations that come with both the family member identity and the entrepreneurial identity is key to understanding the implications of role conflict in entrepreneurial context settings.4 In the entrepreneurial context (e.g., family businesses), the boundaries between conflicting identities are often blurred and ill defined (Danes and Olson 2003). When the roles are considered independently (e.g., family member and business owner), the behavioral expectations for each role are developed based on input from the social environment. In other words, the social environment establishes “identity standards” related to what behaviors are acceptable for particular identities (Burke 2003). Although individuals may not universally share these socially ascribed standards (and they are certainly likely to vary across cultures (Choi et al. 1997)), individuals can compare their actions and behaviors to these social categories to determine if they are acceptable for a given identity. When an individual internalizes a particular identity and then acts counter to expectations for that role, identity conflict can result.
Entrepreneurial Cognition Page 24
