1050 LEE.PARK.AND KOO Attitudinal Outcomes nization (Raker Carson Car 2009;Erez Earle 3),but n s on job involvem nt.job satisfaction. ture (Brooke.Russell.Price.1988:Newman&Harrison.2008: inputs in shaping individual attitudes ar (Ge Job involve ingonwhether the nation o the"degree to which an employee psych cally rel culture.wherein the organiz rhe job an is em ng an e uative state that )In this stud we thus seek for meta-analytic evi- tment with,and positiv I how r ture derat es the relations es.We believe that our consideration of national culturewill ally contribu to th ation efrects a compre picture of organizationa vidual tends t The Effects of Organizational Identification 979 .In this vein, s h ed in thei e proposed sa dominant Tajfel of th of the Hack the Oldham.1980).Along the e line of rea (1978)defined social identity as"that part of an individual's c his en individual and organization (van Knippenb nal significan hed to that me ship”(p.63. usly mean buting to the achievement of the organization' vpical traits and thus de nalize their self-c .1995: urner.Hogg.Oakes.Reicher. olved in their job reviousstudies indeed h Hassan 2010:van Kni bergvan Schie.2000).We ocial domain orga xpect that organiza 2004 ootsindividasinh izational identification likely to enha ce an indi have as espo 105 me to es.goa actively inf ation to e ce their self-concept through the ry bet blurred. of the individua anization(Ashforth et.p.333).is likely to hav thus they are inclined to seel ttitudes and take netit the 98 Haslam Ellemers 2005:Pratt 1998:van Knippenber 2000 Their positive when a Google emplovee describes hersel f as cr atisfaction is dev from one's inte of the fcel tha organizational identification,and she is likely to think zation (van Dick et al 2004a).In ac and among p ic,se al p ual's work attitudes and behaviors are shaped by organiza- one's job an Dick. van knip ional identification erg.F 2008:van Knippenberg Researchers have noted that the cultural value system espoused in a certain national context has critical implications for the effects of identity/identification in the organization (Baker, Carson, & Car￾son, 2009; Erez & Earley, 1993), but no cumulative evidence, to our knowledge, exists in the literature. Building upon the notion from cross-cultural research that national culture provides consid￾erable inputs in shaping individual attitudes and behaviors (Gel￾fand, Erez, & Aycan, 2007; Taras, Kirkman, & Steel, 2010), we expect that the effects of organizational identification will vary depending on whether the national culture, wherein the organiza￾tional setting is embedded, concurrently values pursuing an iden￾tity overlap between an individual and a social collective (i.e., organization). In this study, we thus seek for meta-analytic evi￾dence of how national culture moderates the relations between organizational identification and its attitudinal/behavioral out￾comes. We believe that our consideration of national culture will substantially contribute to the organization identification literature by providing a comprehensive picture of organizational identifi￾cation effects. The Effects of Organizational Identification As a dominant psychological approach to identity and iden￾tification, social identity theory explains how individuals con￾struct their self-concepts from the identity of the collectives they belong to (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1985). Tajfel (1978) defined social identity as “that part of an individual’s self-concept which derives from his knowledge of his member￾ship of a social group (or groups) together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership” (p. 63). Social identities are shared by members and accentuate mem￾bers’ perceived similarity. Members share the group’s proto￾typical traits, and thus depersonalize their self-concepts (Hogg, Terry, & White, 1995; Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Weth￾erell, 1987); through this process of categorizing the self into a more inclusive social entity, “I becomes we” (Brewer, 1991, p. 476). As a salient social domain in modern society, organizations provide a significant social identity (Haslam, 2004; Hogg & Terry, 2000). Organizational identification thus roots individuals in the organization, leading organizational attributes such as espoused values, goals, and norms to become salient and self-defining for individuals; through organizational identification, the identity boundary between individual and organization becomes blurred. In turn, an organizationally identified employee, as a “microcosm of the organization” (Ashforth et al., 2008, p. 333), is likely to have attitudes and take actions that benefit the whole organization rather than benefitting individual self-interest (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Haslam & Ellemers, 2005; Pratt, 1998; van Knippenberg, 2000). To illustrate, when a Google employee describes herself as cre￾ative and innovative which are the attributes she ascribes to the Google organization (i.e., categorizing herself as a “Googler”), it reflects her organizational identification, and she is likely to think, feel, and behave in ways that are expected among prototypical Googlers. Below, we detail the theoretical rationales for how an individual’s work attitudes and behaviors are shaped by organiza￾tional identification. Attitudinal Outcomes Researchers have noted that organizational identification has significant impacts on individual attitudes in organizations. We focus on job involvement, job satisfaction, and affective organi￾zational commitment, the three classic work attitudes in the liter￾ature (Brooke, Russell, & Price, 1988; Newman & Harrison, 2008; Newman, Joseph, & Hulin, 2010). Job involvement and job satisfaction. Job involvement re￾fers to the “degree to which an employee psychologically relates to his or her job and to the work performed therein” (Cooper-Hakim & Viswesvaran, 2005, p. 244), and job satisfaction refers to an “evaluative state that expresses contentment with, and positive feelings about, one’s job” (Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012, p. 347). These two job attitude constructs are distinguishable in that job involvement reflects a cognitive belief state related to one’s job, while job satisfaction reflects an emotional state of liking the job that one performs (Brooke et al., 1988; Mathieu & Farr, 1991). Job involvement literature suggests that an individual tends to be more cognitively connected to one’s job when the job is perceived to be fulfilling one’s psychological needs (Kanungo, 1979, 1982). In this vein, researchers have proposed that individ￾uals become more involved in their jobs when the jobs are de￾signed to provide a sense of the meaningfulness—the sense that one’s contribution significantly influences the overall effective￾ness of the organization (Brown, 1996; Hackman & Lawler, 1971; Hackman & Oldham, 1980). Along the same line of reasoning, individuals with high organizational identification are more likely to find their jobs meaningful because, with identity merging be￾tween individual and organization (van Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006) or depersonalization (Brewer, 1991; Hogg et al., 1995), they are likely to sense that fulfilling their individual jobs simultane￾ously means contributing to the achievement of the organization’s objectives and missions. Accordingly, strong identifiers are more likely to be psychologically connected to or involved in their jobs, and several previous studies indeed have shown that organizational identification is positively associated with job involvement (e.g., Hassan, 2010; van Knippenberg & van Schie, 2000). We thus expect that organizational identification will increase job involve￾ment. Organizational identification is also likely to enhance an indi￾vidual’s emotional response to one’s job. Individuals have a basic need to view themselves positively (Allport, 1955; Steele, 1988) and actively pursue information to enhance their self-concepts (Baumeister & Jones, 1978; Tesser, 1988). For individuals with high organizational identification, the identities of the individual and the organization overlap, and thus they are inclined to seek positive aspects of their organization to attain a positive self￾concept (Bergami & Bagozzi, 2000; Dutton et al., 1994; Pratt, 1998). Their positive evaluation of the organization is, in turn, likely to lead them to feel satisfied with their jobs because job satisfaction is developed from one’s interpretation of the job circumstances (Brief, 1998) and strong identifiers tend to feel that they perform their jobs within the favorable job circumstance—the organization (van Dick et al., 2004a). In accordance with this logic, several previous studies have found that identification with the organization is positively related to the feeling of satisfaction with one’s job (e.g., van Dick et al., 2004a; van Dick, van Knip￾penberg, Kerschreiter, Hertel, & Wieseke, 2008; van Knippenberg This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 1050 LEE, PARK, AND KOO