This article was downloaded by: [Central Queensland University]On: 04 August 2015, At: 22:52Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG

Journal of Change ManagementPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjcm20

Other Organizations Are Doing It, WhyShouldn't We? A Look at Downsizingand Organizational Identity through anInstitutional Theory LensKristen Madison Day a , Achilles A. Armenakis b , Hubert S. Feild b

& Dwight R. Norris ba University of Tennessee , Knoxville , TN , USAb Auburn University , AL , USAPublished online: 23 Mar 2012.

To cite this article: Kristen Madison Day , Achilles A. Armenakis , Hubert S. Feild & Dwight R.Norris (2012) Other Organizations Are Doing It, Why Shouldn't We? A Look at Downsizing andOrganizational Identity through an Institutional Theory Lens, Journal of Change Management, 12:2,165-188, DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2012.662992

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2012.662992

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

Other Organizations Are Doing It, WhyShouldn’t We? A Look at Downsizingand Organizational Identity through anInstitutional Theory Lens

KRISTEN MADISON DAY∗, ACHILLES A. ARMENAKIS∗∗, HUBERT S.FEILD∗∗ & DWIGHT R. NORRIS∗∗

∗University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA, ∗∗Auburn University, AL, USA

ABSTRACT Downsizing is a current ‘hot-button’ issue confronting many organizations andenticing researchers alike. This case study explored the complex nature of these changeinitiatives, through both macro-environmental antecedents and non-financial organizationalconsequences. The adoption of downsizing was conceptualized through an institutional theorylens, and an organizational identity perspective to downsizing outcomes was applied, payingparticular attention to the alignment of post-downsizing activities with the organization’s mission.The case study examined the events leading up to the implementation of a downsizing initiative ata major university and then the post-implementation restructuring aftermath. It is demonstratedhow organizational change can result in less-than-expected outcomes if the planning andimplementation phases receive inadequate attention. Suffering from severe fiscal stress, decisionmakers mimicked a popular downsizing initiative without a thorough diagnosis, ultimatelycreating an environment for ineffectiveness. Specifically, a severe miscalculation in the number offaculty retirees resulted in academic chaos: a decrease in the classes offered; loss ofadministrative and student services; and loss of faculty achievements along with university namerecognition. Most notably, a majority of retiree research endeavours were eliminated; a shockingoutcome that conflicts with the mission of a major research university.

KEY WORDS: downsizing, task restructuring, institutional theory, organizational identity,organizational change effectiveness

Journal of Change Management

Vol. 12, No. 2, 165–188, June 2012

Correspondence Address: Kristen Madison Day, University of Tennessee, 406 Stokely Management Center, 916

Volunteer Boulevard, Knoxville, TN 37996-0530, USA. Email: kday6@utk.edu

1469-7017 Print/1479-1811 Online/12/020165–24 # 2012 Taylor & Francishttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2012.662992

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

It is axiomatic that change is hard, and this is especially true of change involving

reductions in jobs and people.

(Datta et al., 2010, p. 341)

Introduction

Because of environmental dynamics in the global economy (e.g. economic down-turns, fierce competition and the emergence of new technology), employee down-sizing is a popular trend in the workplace (Cascio, 1993; Marshak, 2002; Clair andDufresne, 2004; Gandolfi, 2009; Datta et al., 2010). For example, 85% of theFortune 500 companies downsized during the 1990s (Farrell and Mavondo,2004). Downsizing continues to be a prevalent practice, as witnessed by 4million US workers who were laid off in 2009 alone (Cascio, 2010). Simul-taneously, more change is occurring with the retirement of the baby-boomer gen-eration and the loss of knowledge workers in the labour pool (Dohm, 2000; Hilton,2008). Organizations are becoming leaner, but at what cost?

The focus of most downsizing research is on: (1) organizational antecedentssuch as firm performance, top management team attributes, governance character-istics, organizational structure, strategy or work practices (Iqbal and Shetty, 1994;Budros, 1997, 2000, 2002; Iverson and Pullman, 2000; Osterman, 2000; Ahmad-jian and Robinson, 2001; Conyon et al., 2002); (2) organizational-level financialoutcomes, like market share or accounting returns (Gandolfi, 2009; Datta, et al.,2010); or (3) employee-level consequences including job satisfaction, commit-ment, motivation and work performance (Brockner et al., 1993; Amabile andConti, 1995; Wagar, 1998; Luthans and Sommer, 1999). The literature revealsthat indicators such as financial decline (Ahmadjian and Robinson, 2001;Budros, 2002) or mergers and acquisitions (Budros, 2000; Conyon et al., 2002)are common drivers of implementing downsizing initiatives. The literature ismixed, but there is a slightly negative skew, regarding downsizing’s predictiverelationship with financial performance (Cascio et al., 1997; Cascio and Young,2003; Datta et al., 2010). A plethora of research on individual level behaviouraland attitudinal reactions has been conducted (Cascio, 2010), revealing that thechange process itself seems to be indicative of whether positive or detrimentalindividual level attitudes and behaviours surface (Datta et al., 2010).

Although a great deal is known about the prevalent practice of downsizing andits consequences, there is still much to be learned (Datta et al., 2010). There is adearth of research examining macro-environmental antecedents (i.e. economic orinstitutional factors) at play with downsizing. A scarcity of downsizing researchon non-financial organizational consequences also exists; the few studies explor-ing this stream commonly focus on such outcomes as firm reputation (Zyglidopou-los, 2005; Love and Kraatz, 2009) or innovation (Dougherty and Bowman, 1995).Digging deeper into either of these streams is beneficial, but simultaneously focus-ing on both macro-environmental antecedents and organizational-level non-finan-cial outcomes can provide valuable insight.

As such, the focus of this downsizing research is on macro-environmentalcauses and organizational-level non-financial consequences. The case studyexplores causes through an institutional theory lens, positing that downsizing

166 K.M. Day et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

strategies are often mimicked by organizations seeking legitimate change in timesof environmental uncertainty. The study also explores the process and conse-quences of organizational restructuring following downsizing, paying particularattention to how those activities align with the organization’s identity. Thisresearch addresses the questions of why organizations downsize and what organ-izational implications arise from that decision.

The contribution of this article to the downsizing literature is threefold. First, itfocuses on two areas where the scholarly literature is sparse. Macro-environmentalfactors are relevant to downsizing, especially during the global economic down-turn; non-financial outcomes are important in providing a holistic look at down-sizing. The second contribution answers a call by Datta et al. for research‘using multi-theoretic perspectives’ (2010, p. 337). The article integrates insti-tutional theory and an organizational identity perspective to dig deeper into theblack box of downsizing. The third contribution is in a field-based case studyresearch approach, in which the evolution of a downsizing change initiative is wit-nessed from its inception to post implementation. The case study documents theorganizational change that was witnessed and describes the events through atheoretical lens.

Given the complexity of the topic and research endeavour, an outline of thearticle is imperative. The article begins with a conceptual framework, describingand defining downsizing within the existing literature and through an institutionaltheory lens. Restructuring as a necessary phase of downsizing is then described,and the importance of organizational identity in this process is introduced. Anoverview of the organizational context is provided to unpack and contextualizethe constructs introduced in the conceptual framework. The case study is then pre-sented, detailing the research setting, data collection, analysis and results sections.The article concludes with discussion, implications and conclusion sections thathighlight the relevance of the findings.

Conceptual Framework

Downsizing

The term downsizing first appeared in an organizational context in the 1980sand was defined as ‘a strategy to streamline, tighten, and shrink the organiz-ational structure with respect to the number of personnel employed by thefirm’ (Gandolfi, 2009, p. 415). Furthermore, organizational decision makersemploy downsizing as a change management tactic to improve efficiency andperformance (Cascio, 2010). The last three decades have witnessed a dramaticincrease in the use of downsizing in organizations (Freeman and Cameron,1993; Morris et al., 1999; Datta et al., 2010). Along with this increasecomes heightened interest from the popular press, with headlines such as‘Layoffs Spread to More Sectors of the Economy’ (Rampell, 2009) and ‘LayOff the Layoffs’ (Pfeffer, 2010) becoming commonplace. Downsizing alsoentered the academic arena as an area ripe for scholarly research. Even withdozens of conceptual and empirical downsizing articles, there is still muchthat remains unknown regarding this complex topic. Cameron’s (1994)

Downsizing and Organizational Identity 167

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

assessment is still valid today, that is, downsizing is ‘probably the most perva-sive yet understudied phenomenon in the business world’ (p. 183).

A review of the downsizing literature reveals similarities in the areas of researchinterest regarding this topic. Datta et al. (2010) reviewed and integrated the down-sizing literature from 1984 to 2008 and categorized the main focal areas as eitherantecedents or consequences of the downsizing initiative. The extant literature isslightly unequal in the focus on antecedents or consequences, with consequencesslightly more prevalent.

Antecedents can be categorized as either organizational or environmental.Organizational factors, such as firm characteristics, upper echelon attributes,firm strategy and structure, are the most common focus of downsizing antecedents,explored in 32% of studies (Datta et al., 2010). Environmental factors, includingfacets of the economy, institution and industry accounted for only 11% of theexamined studies. Empirical examples reveal that downsizing adoption stemsfrom poor financial performance (Ofek, 1993; Iqbal and Shetty, 1994), decreasingmarket share and shareholder value (Budros, 1997), mergers and acquisitions(Budros, 2000; Conyon et al., 2002) and high-performance work practices (Oster-man, 2000).

Consequences of downsizing as the focus in the literature is split between indi-vidual outcomes, organizational-level financial outcomes and organizational-levelnon-financial outcomes, at 24, 23 and 10%, respectively. Individual outcomesinclude the attitudes and behaviours of victims and survivors. Empirical investi-gations in this category have found undesirable consequences such as decreasedmotivation (Brockner et al., 1993), lower employee satisfaction (Wagar, 1998),lower levels of trust between employees and the top management team (Mishraand Mishra, 1994), reduced co-worker support (Iverson and Pullman, 2000),lower productivity (Budros, 1997), decreased creativity (Amabile and Conti,1995) and reduced organizational commitment (Luthans and Sommer, 1999).Organizational outcomes predominantly focus on financial indicators, such asmarket share or accounting returns (Morris et al., 1999; Datta et al., 2010).Some research in this stream evidences a link with increased financial perform-ance; however, more studies demonstrate that ‘many downsizing efforts haveshown to produce financial results that are dismal and economic consequencesthat are devastating’ (Gandolfi, 2009, p. 418). Organizational reputation (Zyglido-poulos, 2005; Love and Kraatz, 2009) and innovation (Dougherty and Bowman,1995) have been the focus of the few studies examining organizational-levelnon-financial outcomes.

As stated, environmental factors represent the least studied antecedent in the down-sizing literature; the least examined consequence of downsizing studies is non-finan-cial outcomes at the organizational level. With little research attention paid to theseareas, many questions remain about both the reasons for and consequences of down-sizing. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to further explore these specific areasand open the black box by examining downsizing at the organizational level, with afocus on environmental antecedents and non-financial outcomes.

Institutional theory is used to address the environmental factors attributed todownsizing. DiMaggio and Powell’s (1983) seminal work on institutionaltheory describes isomorphism, or the idea that homogeneity among organizations

168 K.M. Day et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

results from attempts at organizational change. Institutional isomorphism occursthrough mimetic processes; mimicking behaviour is spurred by environmentaluncertainty and the desire to be perceived as legitimate (DiMaggio and Powell,1983; Kraatz, 1998; Sherer and Lee, 2002). In other words, organizations initiateinternal change in an effort to become more similar to the external organizationsthey perceive to be legitimate and successful, especially in times of environmentaluncertainty (i.e. economic downturns, declining demand). Downsizing, as seenthrough an institutional theory lens, often occurs because it is deemed to be a legit-imate strategy and therefore worthy of mimicking (Tsai et al., 2006).

Little research attention is paid to non-financial organizational-level outcomesof downsizing. As such, attention is paid here to organizational restructuring asan outcome of a downsizing change initiative for several reasons. Restructuringis tied to the downsizing literature and prescriptions are made to restructureresponsibly (Cascio, 2002). However, there are no empirical studies examiningthe nuances of restructuring activity. In this article restructuring is categorizedas a non-financial outcome of downsizing, thereby adding to the dearth of litera-ture in this stream. Furthermore, it is posited that exploring task-restructuring be-haviour can provide consequential insight into mimetic isomorphism. A basicpremise behind institutional theory is legitimacy (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983).Organizations strive for legitimacy, which in turn is linked to their image andinternal identity (Gioia et al., 2000; Sherer and Lee, 2002). Organizational identityis documented by the mission, but can be gleaned through the behaviour of theorganization (Whetten and Mackey, 2002). Task restructuring activities serve asa proxy for organizational behaviour. As such, organizational behaviour directlylinked to isomorphic change is examined here.

Restructuring

Downsizing leaves organizations with vacated positions; the vacated positionsleave responsibilities abandoned, duties unfilled and tasks undone. Consequently,organizations are forced to restructure. Restructuring is defined as organizing thecompany in a different way to make it more efficient (Cascio, 1995). Cascio (1995,p. 10) states, ‘Responsible restructuring asks, “how can we change the way we dobusiness, so that we can use the people we currently have most effectively?”.’Restructuring is often forced upon companies after downsizing efforts in orderto reorganize jobs, tasks and individuals in organizations (Andrews and Stalick,1994).

Restructuring can take several forms. One method is to eliminate jobs or respon-sibilities (Margulis, 1994). Eliminating activities requires careful and correct man-agement; organizations must know which activities are low priorities and whichare considered essential or top priorities (Kubeck, 1995). Only those activitiesdeemed low in priority should be eliminated. In this way, essential and importantelements are not eliminated (Mahoney, 1994).

A second way to restructure after a downsizing initiative is to combine or mergejobs and tasks (Margulis, 1994). This can be tricky because merging or combiningactivities means that someone may be gaining new responsibilities. The newlyappointed individuals must be capable and willing to accept a job enlargement.

Downsizing and Organizational Identity 169

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

Training may be needed to help employees take on new assignments (Henkoff,1994; Lester, 1994). If merging tasks or assigning new activities to employeesis necessary, it is important that each decision is thought out and planned. Affectedindividuals should be made aware ahead of time that their jobs may change (Carret al., 1996).

Restructuring can also take on the form of hiring, transferring or terminatingindividuals (Henkoff, 1994; Petrozzo and Stepper, 1994). Hiring individualswho are capable and willing to perform the job may be necessary. Terminatingor eliminating employees relates to eliminating jobs and tasks. Only employeesperforming low priority jobs should be terminated. If valued employees are per-forming unnecessary tasks, transferring, training or eliminating such activitiesmight be appropriate (DuBrin, 1996).

Restructuring is necessary after companies downsize. The above-mentionedmethods are only examples of the many ways restructuring can occur. Regardlessof the method, managing the restructuring process requires a focus on the organ-ization’s identity. Gioia et al. (2000, p. 63) succinctly define identity as ‘thatwhich is central, enduring, and distinctive about an organization’s character.’The organization’s mission or strategy reflects its identity (Whetten andMackey, 2002). Restructuring efforts should align with the mission to avoiddestroying the identity of the organization. If properly implemented, restructuringallows the organization to reap the advantages of downsizing (i.e. cost reductionand increased efficiency and profitability; Cascio, 2002). However, the negativeaspects of downsizing are highlighted when restructuring activities are notplanned or are mismanaged.

To recap, the extant downsizing literature reveals gaps in environmental ante-cedents and non-financial outcomes of adopting downsizing as an organizationalchange strategy. Here, institutional theory is presented as a relevant framework tothe downsizing stream by highlighting its applicability as an environmental factor,and restructuring is described as a non-financial outcome of downsizing, revealingits importance in the change process. Restructuring, although discussed in thedownsizing literature, has yet to receive empirical attention in this stream, andtherefore, becomes a focus of this case study. The remaining sections describethe case study by providing a general overview of the organizational contextand then a specific account of the restructuring activities following a downsizinginitiative implemented at a US university.

Organizational Context

Downsizing in Universities

A university was chosen as the organizational context of this study for severalreasons. First, it follows the lead of Gioia and Chittipeddi (1991) who acknowledgethat universities are worthy organizational research settings. Second, like their cor-porate counterparts, colleges and universities are not immune to the effects of econ-omic downturns (Cameron and Smart, 1998). Higher education institutions acrossthe US continue to downsize at unprecedented rates. However, with the currentuncertainty and instability facing numerous countries around the world (especially

170 K.M. Day et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

those in the Euro-zone), it can be questioned whether those universities will also befacing shortages in revenues. Third, given current societal trends, a focus specifi-cally on knowledge workers, a predominant personnel type in the universityenvironment (Lewis et al., 2003), is warranted. Fourth, Kraatz’s (1998) empiricalstudy of 230 colleges provides support for the mimetic behaviour within a collegiatesetting, thereby supporting the institutional theory lens adopted here.

Universities, large and small, public and private, have been negatively affectedby financial cutbacks and declining revenues (Farrell, 1993; Martin, 1994; AASCUPolicy Matters, 2010). One strategy these institutions have adopted to addressdecreasing revenues is to downsize in hopes of becoming more efficient and flex-ible. This is a ‘. . . new era – one in which higher education would have to focus onefficiency and increased productivity, with heavier teaching loads, reducedstudent services, larger classes, fewer tenured faculty members, and leaner admin-istrations’ (Breneman, 2002, p. 5). Unfortunately, downsizing has harsh connota-tions (Smollan, 2006), with people losing their jobs as the underlying negativeeffect (Gandolfi, 2009).

To counter the negative effects of downsizing, many educational institutionsdevelop strategies that are more humane. One approach is to offer early retirementincentives to encourage eligible personnel to leave (Feldman, 2003). Becausefaculty and staff voluntarily choose to accept a retirement offer, the method is amore benign means of reducing personnel (Jenny, 1974). In 1994, over 30% ofUS colleges and universities offered early retirement as a downsizing option(Lenckus, 1995). In more recent years, this option continues to be prevalent,with early retirement plan announcements in the popular press from universitiessuch as Princeton (Knapp, 2009), Purdue (Indianapolis Business Journal, 2010),Harvard (The Boston Globe, 2009) and Duke (Green, 2009), just to name a few.

Early retirement packages encourage employees to retire earlier than their targetretirement age (Feldman, 2003). Used as a downsizing activity, early retirementcan benefit the organization and the individual. Typical reductions in workforceare handled by laying off individuals who have no choice. Early retirement pro-grammes serve as an effective means of staff reduction, but employees makethe choice because the offer must be strictly voluntary to comply with the law(Schachner, 1993). As Flynn (1995, p. 20) stated, ‘these programs are beneficialnot just because they cut staff, but because they do so a little less painfully.’ Anorganization’s public and internal image is not as tarnished as in pure layoffsbecause the plans are voluntary (Kuzmits and Sussman, 1988). Employeesbenefit because they can leave their organizations on good terms with a bonusand perhaps pursue other endeavours (e.g. work for other educational institutionsthat are not experiencing financial stress; Feldman, 2003).

Although early retirement incentive programmes are more beneficial than puredownsizing activities, they still have drawbacks (Okba, 1993). The same problemswith downsizing can also occur by offering early retirement packages. Aside fromthose problems, there are unintended consequences that are specific to early retire-ment incentives (Schachner, 1993).

As mentioned, early retirement offers are voluntary. This is a benefit to anorganization’s image, but in some aspects, it is also a drawback. As Schachnerstated, ‘the downside of offering a voluntary program is that is it has to be

Downsizing and Organizational Identity 171

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

made available to everyone in a certain class’ (1993, p. 6). In other words, earlyretirement programmes run the risk of losing valuable employees. Lost expertiseoften costs companies more than anticipated. The future success of companies canbe jeopardized. Kuzmits and Sussman (1988, p. 30) stated, ‘the sword of downsiz-ing contains two edges – one that slashes labor overhead and one that has thepotential to carve a chunk of competent and skilled employees from the laborforce.’ Offers of early retirement must be made without discriminatory practices(i.e. open to everyone). Organizations always face a risk because they have nocontrol over who may accept the plan.

A second problem resulting from the plan being voluntary is that organizationsdo not know how many people will accept it. According to Koretz (1993), almosttwo-thirds of organizations lost more employees through early retirement thanthey had anticipated. This can be harmful for the organization because individualsmust be hired to fill the positions not intended to be open. This can be costly finan-cially and may negatively affect a university’s core competencies. Most likely,less experienced individuals will fill those open positions.

Another problem associated with early retirement plans is that they run the risk ofnot being voluntary. Employees might view them as ‘forced resignation’ that runthe risk of legal ramifications and ‘considerable economic and emotional traumato the affected employees’ (Kuzmits and Sussman, 1988, p. 29). US lawsuitshave increased in number over the past few years. The Age Discrimination inEmployment Act passed in 1967 makes it illegal to discriminate against individualsaged 40 and above. Early retirement plans often run the risk of violating this law.

Another potential negative is that offers of early retirement require largeamounts of cash outlays (Feldman, 2003). For the programme to be successfulin reducing the workforce, an economic benefit must be clear and enticing toemployees. Although universities may be saving money in the end, it can bequite expensive on a temporary basis (Kuzmits and Sussman, 1988).

Restructuring

Any attempt at downsizing, including early retirement options, leaves organiz-ations with vacated positions and lacking resources to cover key tasks. Conse-quently, the need to restructure emerges (Fisher and White, 2000). Mahoney(1994) sets a few guidelines for university redesign and states that if followed, uni-versities can emerge stronger and more efficient. The first guideline is to determinethe most important functions and departments of the university. In other words, canthe university eliminate unproductive programmes? Second, the university mustdetermine its main goal and mission. Is it research or teaching? The third guidelineconcerns making alliances with nearby universities, colleges or organizations; ‘anyactivity which is not absolutely at the heart of your competitive strength is a candi-date for outsourcing’ (Mahoney, 1994, p. 391). If these guidelines are followed aspart of restructuring efforts, a university has a better chance at success.

Case Study

The case study examines a university that downsized through the use of an earlyretirement incentive. The terms and concepts of downsizing, early retirement and

172 K.M. Day et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

restructuring are explained through actual events at the university. A case studyapproach allows researchers to explore the dynamics of the organization in areal life setting (Eisenhardt, 1989; Yin, 2011). It provides information anddetails that using a survey of numerous companies or archival data cannotprovide. The following statement highlights the appropriateness of this methodfor our research question: ‘the essence of a case study, the central tendencyamong all types of case study, is that it tries to illuminate a decision or a set ofdecisions: why they were taken, how they were implemented, and with whatresult’ (Schramm, 1971, p. 6).

All three essential aspects of case study research are addressed in this examin-ation of: (1) the university’s decision to implement an early retirement incentive;(2) how the university restructured activities, duties and responsibilities afterimplementation; and (3) the results of restructuring. Informants in this studywere the local change agents charged with the operational responsibility for imple-menting the programme. They provided their perceptions of the process andorganizational consequences through in-depth interviews. The interview datawas traingulated using newspaper articles, transcripts of the president’s State ofthe University Address, and direct communication with university officials inthe payroll and human resources offices. The use of multiple data sources provideda more complete picture of the change process.

Furthermore, each of the authors was affiliated with the university in the casestudy before, during and after the implementation of the downsizing initiative.The authors were bystanders of each phase, watching as the events unfolded,and therefore had the opportunity to apply a grounded theory approach to thecase study (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). Grounded theory’s ‘methodological empha-sis is to let interpretations emerge from the actors in the field with minimal inter-vention by the researcher and then compare them with academic concepts on thetopic. Theory is said to lay grounded in the data from the field and to emerge byconstantly comparing, fractioning, coding, and analysing observational and inter-view data until saturation is reached’ (Fendt and Sachs, 2008, p. 431). After theearly retirement programme decision was made, the authors reviewed theevents leading to the decision and compared the actions with the scholarly litera-ture, finding a strong fit with institutional theory. Following post-implementationinterviews, a misalignment between the organization’s mission and restructuringactivities emerged, allowing the authors to apply an organizational identity frame-work. Being able to assess the early retirement programme through both insti-tutional theory and organizational identity lenses allowed the authors to provideadditional insight into the change process.

Research Setting

This qualitative inductive case study was conducted at a large, public, research-oriented university located in the southeastern US in which all the authors wereaffiliated. Times were bleak, with the university facing annual declining staterevenue allocations. The president of the university announced the dire financialsituation in his State of the University Address. He said the university wasseverely underfunded and ‘the future looks considerably worse.’ He noted that

Downsizing and Organizational Identity 173

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

the governor refused to approve tax increases that would benefit higher education.The university faced a difficult decision about how to operate a quality universitywith insufficient funds. The president then remarked that the university is ‘up thecreek . . . but not without a paddle.’

The paddle he referred to was a plan to increase revenue and cut costs so that theuniversity can pursue continued excellence. The plan for increasing revenue tookthe form of increasing tuition incrementally until it reached the regional average.The president elaborated on cutting costs at the university. He said, ‘The problemthat we face is insufficient resources to support, at an acceptable level of quality,all those things we want to do. The solution is to apply our resources to those func-tions deemed to be most important.’ He requested that each department and unit atthe university identify and rank relevant criteria in order of importance. He wantedthe departments to organize functions as high, medium and low priority. If costshad to be cut drastically, it was important to eliminate those functions deemed tobe of low priority. It was important to make these distinctions, so that operations ofgreatest importance would not be accidentally eliminated. The university presi-dent further remarked, ‘My job would be a lot easier if we had plentiful resourcesand no need to evaluate effort or results, but the problem exists and decisions willhave to be made.’

Although the university followed the first guideline in the academic literature onrestructuring (i.e. determining the most important functions and departments), it wasall for naught. Less than two months following the president’s announcement, theuniversity’s board of trustees approved an early retirement incentive programmeaimed at reducing personnel costs, which made up 75% of the university budget.The plan was offered to all employees eligible to retire under the state retirementsystem. Criteria for participating employees were that they be at least 60 years ofage with at least 10 years of university service or have 25 years of service regardlessof age. The early retirement incentive was a lump sum payment determined by theindividual’s salary multiplied by years in the retirement system multiplied by 2%.

As with all early retirement incentives, the university had limited control overwho decided to participate. That is, all eligible employees, regardless of depart-mental association, could participate. The university newspaper reported thatapproximately 500 employees on two campuses of the university were eligiblefor the programme; 160 were expected to partake in the plan. However, 222 oralmost half (44.4%) of those eligible accepted the offer. The payout cost the uni-versity nearly $6 million.

Of those accepting the early retirement offer, 203 were from the university’smain campus, with 47 of those being university faculty with the rank of full pro-fessor, associate professor, assistant professor or instructor. These 47 persons wereengaged in a variety of teaching, administrative, public service and researchactivities. They represented 32 departments across the university’s campus.Those 32 departments were located within the colleges and schools of Agriculture,Architecture, Business, Education, Engineering, Human Sciences, Liberal Arts,Pharmacy, Sciences and Mathematics, and Veterinary Medicine.

The president acknowledged that the university’s reputation ‘could not havebeen developed and sustained without a dedicated and effective faculty.’However, the unexpected loss of faculty potentially threatened the positive

174 K.M. Day et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

reputation they were hired to build. The challenge now faced by the university wasto determine how to positively restructure activities after the faculty loss so that itcould continue to operate at a high level of quality.

Data Collection

In an attempt to discover how the university restructured tasks after the downsizingactivity, semi-structured interviews were conducted. Although the downsizing lit-erature identifies the necessity of task restructuring (Andrews and Stalick, 1994;Margulis, 1994), apparently no studies address the nature of this restructuring.Therefore, a set of preliminary questions was drafted for use in the semi-structuredinterviews. Subsequently, these questions were pilot tested in interviews with fourindividuals. Two of these individuals were university administrators who examinedthe content of interview questions. To test the interview procedure, the other twopilot interviews were conducted with department heads who had experiencedfaculty loss. Because of the piloting process, changes were made in the form andcontent of questions used in later semi-structured interviews. The intent of the ques-tions in the semi-structured interview was to capture information on: (1) what taskswere performed by the faculty member who retired, (2) what tasks are performedcurrently, and (3) by whom. A copy of the interview form used in the study isprovided as Appendix A.

Semi-structured interviews began following the pilot interview stage, withheads of academic departments serving as informants in the study. It wasassumed that they would be most knowledgeable and able to comment on thefaculty retirees’ duties and responsibilities as well as their disposition followingretirement. Approximately nine months after faculty members accepted theearly retirement offer, the first author conducted personal interviews. Each inter-viewee was contacted by phone to arrange an appointment for an interview. Inter-views were conducted face-to-face in the interviewer’s office, except for onetelephone interview. Department heads/chairs were given a set of questions toread at the beginning of the interview so that they could follow along as the ques-tions were asked. Interviewees were told that the information would be presentedin an anonymous manner. They were assured that information would be reportedin aggregate and individual responses would not be reported. Interviews lastedfrom 15 minutes to 1 hour, depending on the number of faculty members retiringfrom the department. Handwritten notes and audiotapes from each interview wereused in the analysis stage. A summary of the results was mailed to each intervie-wee in appreciation of their assistance.

A total of 27 department heads/chairs representing 29 of 32 departments thatexperienced faculty retirements provided data for the study. Two respondentsserved as department heads in each of two departments. Three departmentheads opted out of the study. Of the 47 faculty retirees, 42 (89.4%) were pre-viously affiliated with the 29 surveyed departments. All department heads inter-viewed had at least one faculty member retire from their departments becauseof the downsizing programme. The high response rate is attributed to theauthors affiliation with the university, the research-oriented nature of the intervie-wees, and the promise to provide aggregated feedback.

Downsizing and Organizational Identity 175

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

Data Analysis

When studying the disposition of duties, different aspects of the job were exam-ined, and not the position as a whole. The aspects of faculty members’ jobs encom-pass many responsibilities and were therefore examined separately. Each of the 42retirees’ jobs examined had a variety of teaching, administrative, outreach andresearch activities. As the interview questions show, department heads wereasked a series of questions from each of these categories. A single open-endedquestion was also asked to ascertain the department heads’ opinion of the earlyretirement incentive.

The lead author coded the interview data by quantifying or categorizing the datain aggregate; the coauthors validated the aggregated data for accuracy. Discrepan-cies were resolved by reviewing interview notes and audiotapes. As opposed tocomputing an inter-rater agreement index, the authors were more concernedabout eliminating errors. Thus, in the few instances in which rater disagreementoccurred, the discrepancies were discussed and 100% agreement was achieved(cf. Gregory et al., 2007; Ezzamel and Willmott, 2008). The data were analysedin a collaborative fashion by all authors in the following steps: (1) the numberof pre-retirement faculty job tasks was examined; (2) the proportion of jobtasks eliminated post retirement was determined; (3) the employee type assignedto the retained task was considered; and (4) the perceptions of the early retirementplan were summarized. Coding and analysis specifics are described in more detailin the step subsections.

Step 1. To understand the nature of work conducted by the retiree prior to retire-ment, the following were identified: the number of classes taught, the number ofadministrative and public service duties assigned, and whether or not research wasconducted. The number of classes taught varied by department and depended onthe nature of other activities assigned to the faculty member. Administrative dutiesincluded activities such as departmental committees, university committees, aca-demic advising, and coordinating and directing groups. Outreach involved exten-sion work and participation in continuing education programmes. Researchactivities included activities supported by the university as well as funded byoutside contractors and granting organizations. Outcomes of research rangedfrom publishing academic articles to aiding organizations in problem solving.

Each department head was asked to give the number of annual classes taught bythe faculty retiree prior to retirement. The actual number of classes was listed onthe coding sheet, then totalled and subtotalled by faculty rank. The number ofmajor administrative and outreach duties performed by the retiree prior to retire-ment were ascertained using the same process. Department heads were askedwhether the faculty retiree conducted research prior to retirement. Research activi-ties were standardized by coding a ‘no’ response as 0 (i.e. the retiree did notconduct research activities) and a ‘yes’ response as 1. Research numbers werethen aggregated in total and by faculty rank.

Step 2. Questions were asked to determine what happened to the retirees’ activitiesfollowing retirement. Each department head was asked to give the number of

176 K.M. Day et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

faculty retirees’ classes, administrative and outreach duties retained post retire-ment. The actual number of classes and duties retained was recorded. Responseto the research activities question provided a percentage of research activitiesstill conducted. For example, if half of a retiree’s research activities were retained,a score of .50 was entered. Responses were aggregated by task category andfaculty rank, and then divided the results to report the percentage retained.Table 1 provides descriptive statistics of the interview data in aggregate form(i.e. the results from Step 1 and Step 2).

Step 3. Reassignment of retained duties was analysed through responses to thequestion assessing to whom the retirees’ work was shifted. In other words, ifthe department head identified that three of a faculty retiree’s classes wereretained, they were then asked who was assigned to teach those classes. Theemployee category information was coded and aggregated, showing that the uni-versity employed various methods. Existing faculty members, new temporary orpermanent hires were made, graduate students were used, and in some cases retir-ees were re-employed. Table 2 shows how reassignments were made. As interpret-ative example, existing faculty were teaching 54% of the retained classes; 4% ofadministration and outreach duties were reassigned to new and permanent (i.e. noton temporary appointment) faculty hires.

Step 4. The final step in analysing the data involved categorizing the departmentheads’ perceptions of the early retirement programme. Interview notes and

Table 1. Examination of retiree teaching, administration and outreach, and research activities

Category

Teaching n Classes taught Retained Per cent retainedFull professor 25 141 133 94Associate professor 9 52 49 94Assistant professor 3 26 26 100Instructor 1 4 4 100

Total 38 223 212 95

Administration and outreach n Activities Retained Per cent retainedFull professor 28 74 56 76Associate professor 8 23 11 48Assistant professor 3 6 5 83Instructor 1 2 2 100

Total 40 105 74 70

Research n Activities Retained Percent RetainedFull professor 25 25 9.6 38Associate professor 7 7 3 43Assistant professor 1 1 0 0Instructor 0 n/a n/a n/aTotal 33 33 12.6 38

Note: n/a not applicable.

Downsizing and Organizational Identity 177

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

audiotapes were used to assist in grouping similar responses; Table 3 lists thereasons why respondents thought the downsizing programme was or was not det-rimental to their departments.

Results

According to direct communications with university officials, the downsizing planwas intended to eliminate two-thirds of all retirees’ positions. However, no instancewas found in which all activities performed by retiring faculty members were com-pletely eliminated. Instead, specific activities (e.g. teaching, administration andoutreach and research) associated with retirees’ positions were uniquely affected.Therefore, effects of the early retirement programme were examined separatelyfor each of these specific faculty activities.

Depicted in Figure 1 are the percentages of each activity that were either elimi-nated or retained, showing that the university retained teaching activities to the

Table 3. Frequency of reasons given by department heads concerning the early retirementprogramme and its effectiveness

Rankorder Reason

Number of timesmentioneda

Reasons why interviewees viewed programme as negative for their department1 Lost faculty experience or faculty name recognition 82 Received little or no money to replace retiree 7

3Negatively impacted current staff (e.g. overworked,

stressed) 3

4Students suffered (e.g. no research advisor; classes not

offered) 35 Not enough time to plan for the loss of a faculty member 3

Reasons why interviewees viewed programme as not negative for their department1 No reason given 52 Was able to refill the position 2

3Retiree planning to retire anyway (had already planned for

the loss) 14 New people were brought in (‘new blood’) 1

Note: aSome interviewees viewed the overall programme as negative for their departments for more than one

reason.

Table 2. Reassignment and allocation of retained teaching, administration and outreach, andresearch duties

Duties

Percentage of retained duties allocated to:

Existingfaculty

Temporaryhire

Permanenthire Student Retiree

Teaching 54 33 2 9 2Administration and outreach 87 9 4 0 0Research 48 12 0 8 32

178 K.M. Day et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

greatest extent and eliminated the majority of research activities, with administra-tive and outreach activities falling in the middle.

Teaching Activities

Of the 42 faculty retirees on whom information was obtained, 38 taught one ormore classes per year. The departure of these 38 faculty members left 223classes without professors, requiring a determination of which classes to retainor eliminate. Of the 223 classes taught by the retirees, only 11 (i.e. 5%) were elimi-nated (i.e. 212 were retained; see Table 1). Overall, the early retirement pro-gramme had little effect on class cancellations.

In general, a combination of existing faculty, temporary instructors, new perma-nent hires and graduate students were used in the reassignment of retirees’ retainedteaching activities. The most common method employed in the departmentsinvolved using existing faculty to teach retirees’ classes (115 of 212 classes or54%; see Table 2). However, when teaching activities were replaced, differenceswere found in the rank of the individuals used to perform these activities. Retireeswith the rank of full or associate professor taught the overwhelming majority(89%) of classes. In order to retain the classes, temporary instructors were hiredto teach 69 (33%) classes; new assistant professors were hired to teach 5 (2%);and graduate students were assigned to teach 18 (9%) of the classes.

Administration and Outreach Activities

Retirees were also involved in administration and outreach activities. Of the 42faculty retirees on whom information was collected, 40 performed administrationand/or outreach activities. Exactly 30% of the administration and outreach

Figure 1. Comparison of teaching, administration and outreach, and research duties eliminated andretained by the university.

Downsizing and Organizational Identity 179

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

activities were eliminated (i.e. 74 of 105 were retained; see Table 1). As shown inTable 2, of the remaining 70% of administration and outreach service activities,the overwhelming majority (87%) was shifted to existing faculty, followed bytemporary hires (9%) and new permanent hires (4%). Neither graduate studentsnor the retirees were assigned these retained activities.

Research Activities

A significant portion of faculty jobs involved conducting research. Of the 42 indi-viduals, 33 were engaged in research activities, which included securing fundingfrom sources outside the university, as well as from internal programmaticsources. Almost two-thirds of the research activities conducted by the retireeswere terminated completely; the remaining (38%) were retained (Table 1). Reten-tion of research activities was of particular interest because the activities werecontinued by the retiree and/or existing faculty. For 32% of the retained researchactivities, the retiree alone (through temporary employment contracts) continuedto perform the research activities. Existing faculty assumed 48% of the retainedresearch activities, and the remaining were reassigned to temporary hires andgraduate students (Table 2).

Assessment of Organizational Effectiveness

Interviewees were asked their opinions regarding the early retirement incentiveoffer. Many thought the incentive offer was beneficial to the individuals acceptingit. Even though the plan was often viewed as positive for the individual retiring, 18of the 27 (67%) department heads/chairs interviewed stated that the downsizingprogramme had a negative impact on their department.

Several interviewees thought offering this programme was a serious mistake onthe part on the university. Statements such as ‘it damaged our department, there isno question about it’ were made. Loss of name recognition from distinguished pro-fessors and loss of research money were mentioned as problems by different inter-viewees. Department heads thought the impact of the downsizing activity wasgreatest on the remaining employees (i.e. survivors). They were left to do theretained work, which led to stress from being overworked. Other intervieweesthought that students were the ones left suffering after downsizing and restructur-ing. Many academic advisors from departments and chairs of theses and disser-tations retired. A few classes were no longer offered. Respondents thought thiswould cause serious problems in the long run. This same sentiment was echoedby an associate dean who was quoted in the newspaper; this ‘is definitely detri-mental to the reputation of many programmes. The more experienced peopleare leaving the work in the hands of the less-experienced.’ Interviewees also men-tioned that this programme was sprung on them, and therefore the department hadlittle time to plan for the following year. One department head stated that the uni-versity ‘ought to offer incentives for our outstanding faculty to stay, not to go!’Importantly, department heads did not understand why they were asked to prior-itize relevant cost-cutting criteria if the ultimate decision was to eliminate depart-mental personnel through an early retirement buyout. In short, the implementation

180 K.M. Day et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

of the downsizing initiative left academic departments confused, frustrated andvulnerable.

Discussion

Having affiliation with the university during the events described in the case studyallowed the authors to witness factors leading to and resulting from the changeinitiative. They were able to see institutional theory unfolding in practice. Insti-tutional theory describes phenomena where an organization attempts change bymimicking the behaviour of other legitimate organizations, especially in timesof environmental uncertainty (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). The university inthe case study was facing a time of environmental uncertainty: the domesticeconomy was in a recession; resources historically depended upon were slashedby the state. This financial distress triggered the need to adopt change. Highlyreputable universities across the nation were adopting early retirement plans asdownsizing strategies. The case study university mimicked this strategy as itwas deemed to be a legitimate solution adopted by peer and superior institutions.While mimetic isomorphism provides the rationale for implementing this type ofchange behaviour, the theory does not address the outcomes of such action. Assuch, a deeper look into the consequences was necessary.

Through interviews and steps in the data analysis process, the authors are able tohighlight three important findings. First, from an individual-level perspective, thedownsized ‘survivors’ were left to do the work of the retirees. This finding wasapparent from the interviews, but also evident in the activity reallocation data.Second, from a group-level standpoint, interviewees thought the downsizinginitiative had a negative effect on the department, mainly through the loss offaculty name recognition. Both these findings are in line with the extant downsiz-ing literature. The third finding has not been addressed in the extant literature andhas the potential to make a significant impact. This finding addresses the conse-quences of the change initiative at the organizational level, with a specific focuson organizational identity.

Restructuring activities were analysed and findings reveal that the university didnot stay true to its identity of being a prominent research institution. This behav-iour violates a restructuring guideline set forth in the literature (Mahoney, 1994);namely, for the organization to determine and restructure according to its maingoal and mission. Results indicate the university eliminated retirees’ researchactivities more so than any other category of job function. The focus insteadwas on retaining teaching activities and, to a lesser extent, administrative and out-reach activities. This is a surprising finding given that in the mission statement, theuniversity defines research as being ‘essential to the mission’ and further statesthat the ‘university will continue development of its research programs.’ Researchactivities are an important means of bringing external funding to the universityand also can increase the reputation and legitimacy of the organization as awhole. It is ironic that the university’s behaviour of mimetic isomorphismpushed them further from the identity they were striving to protect.

Department heads commented that the early retirement programme resulted in aloss of reputation and research funds previously generated by the retirees. One

Downsizing and Organizational Identity 181

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

measure of research success is the monetary value of research funds acquired byuniversity faculty. Loss of research funds is a loss of status among research uni-versities, thereby negatively impacting the university’s reputation. Furthermore,funded research projects produce overhead money (which is used to pay forvarious types of insurance, utilities, equipment, other fledging research pro-grammes, etc.), student support and training. One department head, forexample, noted that a faculty member of his department took the university’searly retirement offer, took a job with another nearby, out-of-state university,and moved his multi-million dollar research programme to the new university.This is typically referred to as the ‘double whammy’ (Bedeian and Armenakis,1998). That is, from the standpoint of funded research, one university lost theresearch funds while another university gained the research funds. Furthermore,not only was the departmental reputation hurt by the loss, a competing university’sdepartmental reputation was significantly enhanced.

Developing and maintaining a viable research programme is a long-term endea-vour requiring the recruitment of unique faculty members having special skills,abilities and interests. Successful researchers also enhance the instructional pro-gramme by exposing students to their unique research findings. Furthermore,these researchers are instrumental in conducting outreach programmes (e.g.short courses) for practising professionals. Eliminating research activities notonly has a detrimental impact on the research activities themselves, but alsotrickles downward to negatively impact the value of the teaching and outreachactivities that are retained.

Implications

Universities across the US, as well as globally, are experiencing fiscal stress. Incoping with this stress, are university administrators are asking the right ques-tions? For example, are the basic questions asked: How can we reduce the fiscalstress being experienced? If we must reduce costs should we assess programmesand identify and eliminate those that cannot be justified? Should we consider redu-cing salaries? And, should we offer early retirement programmes; if so, who willelect to participate? Cost reduction is admittedly a complex process. Applyingmimetic isomorphism implies that decision makers might be trying to simplifythe cost-reduction process by implementing a downsizing strategy in the formof an early retirement programme. It became apparent through the course ofthis investigation that had the university conducted a thorough diagnosis andignored early retirement fads in higher education, a different strategy mighthave evolved or at least different restructuring guidelines developed.

The case study suggests a warning to systems of higher education, and othertypes of organizations, considering downsizing strategies. A thorough diagnosisof the financial situation is imperative. All potential solutions should be con-sidered instead of rushing into a kneejerk reaction and decision that may notcomport with the given situation. For example, Lederman (2011) details howthe University of Colorado System is now targeting specific faculty members tovoluntarily accept retirement packages, instead of offering the packages to all eli-gible faculty members. Although this practice is controversial, the university

182 K.M. Day et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

system is having success with the programme: they are not unexpectedly losingfaculty members they deem valuable; there is no need to quickly restructurevacated tasks and responsibilities; academic departments’ reputations are not atstake since retiring faculty members were targeted due to waning productivity.Furthermore, faculty members accepting the buy-out are doing so voluntarilyand can move on to other opportunities with a hefty financial payout. This is anexample of a unique solution created to lessen the university’s fiscal stress thatis delivering much more success than the generic and mimetic solutionimplemented by the university in our study.

Research shows that change initiatives fail more often than not (By, 2007;Burnes and Jackson, 2011). Along with proper diagnosis, planning is imperative(Armenakis and Harris, 2002; Cascio, 2002; By, 2007). Proper planning canensure that attention is paid to the organization’s identity, thereby aligning initiat-ives with the ideals of the organization. Burnes and Jackson (2011) demonstratethat a significant reason for the high failure rate of change initiatives is due tothis lack of alignment in values. Misalignments create an environment of ineffec-tiveness, as witnessed in Lofquist’s (2011) longitudinal study of the Norwegianaviation industry. His study shows that the implementation method was mis-matched with the culture of the organization, resulting in failure of the deliberatechange initiative. The results of this study indicate that restructuring decisionsresulting from the planned change event were not aligned with the university’smission statement. More in-depth planning was needed to determine how to effec-tively downsize and restructure without losing valuable research activities,thereby staying true to the core identity.

Having the proper administrators in the planning and implementation phases isalso a necessity (Clair and Dufresne, 2004; Woodward and Hendry, 2004; Niko-laou et al., 2007). Kezar (2004, p. 444) writes

downsizing and restructuring without input from faculty, staff, or students is now

commonplace; yet studies demonstrate that program reduction or restructuring is

best implemented with input from the academic community . . . research suggests

that many trustees do not have the educational expertise to make sound decisions

and that institutions are suffering from choices that negatively impact the teaching

and learning environment.

As such, consulting with external resources (e.g. administrators who have suc-cessfully implemented early retirement programmes, consultants who advise col-leges and universities on early retirement programmes) should be considered.Involving departmental administrators (i.e. local change agents) is beneficial tocapitalize on local knowledge. This should aid in planning and can increase thelikelihood that whatever organizational change decisions are made, they willstay true to the overall strategy of the organization.

A final word is needed to tie together the practical implications brought forth inthis study. Insights are provided by By’s (2007) findings from evaluating thechange readiness framework of Armenakis et al. (1993). He states, ‘What is ofutmost importance is that organizations are change-ready and that consciousdecisions are made. Based on this . . . organizational change management may

Downsizing and Organizational Identity 183

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

prove more successful if focused on facilitating continuous change readinessrather than on implementing and managing specific change efforts’ (By, 2007,p. 9). Although easier said than done, organizations need to prepare themselvesfor change, constantly seek ways to become more efficient, and adopt changethoughtfully, especially in light of the current economic conditions. This articlemight have investigated and reported different findings if the university hadheeded this advice.

Answering a call from By et al. (2011), noteworthy societal implications fromthis study are given, along with the above noted practical implications. The US isin a crisis: it is in the midst of an economic recession; is witnessing the retirementof the baby-boomer generation; and is facing an increased demand for knowledgeworkers in order to remain competitive in the global landscape. This study high-lights an organization that specifically targeted the baby-boomer generation in itsdownsizing initiative. By doing so, these highly educated knowledge workers lefttheir employ early, leaving tasks to be reassigned to less-skilled workers and othermore important tasks to be eliminated. This is a time at which organizations maywant to instead consider methods to keep this generation employed given theshortage of knowledge workers in the following generations. Hilton (2008)states that one of the US’s key strengths is that it is ‘home to many of theworld’s best research universities’ (p. 64). What are the domestic and global impli-cations if research universities continue to downsize and eliminate tasks in the pat-terns we witnessed in our study?

Conclusion

Downsizing is a current issue confronting many organizations. This studyexplored the complex nature of these change initiatives, through both macro-environmental antecedents and non-financial organizational consequences. Theadoption of downsizing strategies was conceptualized through an institutionaltheory lens and an organizational identity perspective was applied to downsizingoutcomes, paying particular attention to the alignment of post-downsizing activi-ties and the organization’s mission. These concepts were contextualized in a casestudy account of an organizational change event.

The case study examined the events leading up to the implementation of adownsizing initiative and then the post-implementation restructuring aftermath.The restructuring process is considered to be less effective because the universitypreserved teaching, administration and outreach activities to a much greater extentthan research activities. Thus, the university’s behaviour and its own identity weremisaligned. This study demonstrates how organizational change can result in less-than-expected outcomes if inadequate attention is given during the planning andimplementation phases. In an attempt for legitimacy, the university modelled itschange strategy after other institutions, ultimately creating an environment forineffectiveness.

Although mimicking the behaviour of legitimate organizations may on thesurface be appealing, it is important to understand the ramifications of thoseactions underneath. Attention must be paid to the entire change process. Forexample, how did the peer organizations restructure after downsizing? Did they

184 K.M. Day et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

stay true to their core identity, and what were the results? This study reveals thatmimetic isomorphism at the expense of organizational identity might be an inef-fective strategy. An organization’s identity is distinctive; it is what sets the organ-ization apart from other organizations. In this study, the university’s identity waswrapped up in its outstanding faculty and research reputation. Both were sacrificedwhen the university decided to copy the behaviour of others and then failed torestructure to its strength. Will other universities commit similar mistakes, thusultimately creating a societal void in research-oriented universities?

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge Rune By and three anonymous reviewerswho were instrumental in the development of this article. We would also like tothank Anne Smith and Blake Mathias for their insightful comments andsuggestions.

References

AASCU Policy Matters (2010) Top 10 higher education state policy issues for 2010. January, pp. 1–6

Ahmadjian, C.L. and Robinson, P. (2001) Safety in numbers: downsizing and the deinstitutionalization of perma-

nent employment in Japan, Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, pp. 622–654.

Amabile, T.M. and Conti, R. (1995) What downsizing does to creativity, Leadership in Action, 15(3), pp. 1–6.

Andrews, D. and Stalick, S. (1994) Business Reengineering: The Survival Guide for Radical Change (Englewood

Cliffs, NJ: Yourdon Press).

Armenakis, A.A. and Harris, S.G. (2002) Crafting a change message to create transformational readiness, Journal

of Organizational Change Management, 15(2), pp. 169–183.

Armenakis, A.A., Harris, S.G. and Mossholder, K.W. (1993) Creating readiness for organizational change,

Human Relations, 46(6), pp. 681–703.

Bedeian, A.G. and Armenakis, A.A. (1998) The cesspool syndrome: how dreck floats to the top of declining

organizations, Academy of Management Executive, 12(1), pp. 58–63.

The Boston Globe (2009) Harvard offers early retirement packages. February 11.

Breneman, D.W. (2002) For colleges, this is not just another recession, The Chronicle of Higher Education, June

14, pp. 1–6.

Brockner, J., Grover, S., O’Malley, M.N., Reed, T.F. and Glynn, M.A. (1993) Threat of future layoffs, self-esteem,

and survivors’ reactions: evidence from the laboratory and the field, Strategic Management Journal, 14,

pp. 153–166.

Budros, A. (1997) The new capitalism and organizational rationality: the adoption of downsizing programs,

1979–1994, Social Forces, 76, pp. 229–250.

Budros, A. (2000) Organizational types and organizational innovation: downsizing among industrial, financial

and utility firms, Sociological Forum, 15(2), pp. 273–306.

Budros, A. (2002) The mean and lean firm: causes of involuntary and voluntary downsizing strategies, Sociologi-

cal Forum, 17(2), pp. 307–342.

Burnes, B. and Jackson, P. (2011) Success and failure in organizational change: an exploration of the role of

values, Journal of Change Management, 11(2), pp. 133–162.

By, R.T., (2007) Ready or not . . ., Journal of Change Management, 7(1), pp. 3–11.

By, R.T., Burnes, B. and Oswick, C. (2011) Change management: the road ahead, Journal of Change Manage-

ment, 11(1), pp. 1–6.

Cameron, K.S. (1994) Investigating organizational downsizing: fundamental issues, Human Resource Manage-

ment, 33, pp. 183–188.

Cameron, K.S. and Smart, J. (1998) Maintaining effectiveness amid downsizing and decline in institutions of

higher education, Research in Higher Education, 39(1), pp. 65–86.

Downsizing and Organizational Identity 185

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

Carr, D., Hard, K. and Trahant, W. (1996) Managing the Change Process (New York: McGraw-Hill).

Cascio, W.F. (1993) Downsizing: what do we know? What have we learned?, Academy of Management Execu-

tive, 7(1), pp. 95–104.

Cascio, W.F. (2002) Strategies for responsible restructuring, Academy of Management Executive, 16(3),

pp. 80–91.

Cascio, W.F. (2010) Employment downsizing: causes, costs, and consequences, in: L. Stadtler, A. Schnitt, P.

Klarner and T. Straub (eds) More Than Bricks in the Wall: Organizational Perspectives for Sustainable

Success, pp. 87–96 (Berlin: Springer).

Cascio, W.F. and Young, C.E. (2003) Financial consequences of employment-change decisions in major US cor-

porations, 1982–2000, in: K.P. De Meuse and M.L. Marks (eds) Resizing the Organization: Managing

Layoffs, Divestitures, and Closings, pp. 131–156 (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass).

Cascio, W.F., Young, C.E. and Morris, J.R. (1997) Financial consequences of employment-change decisions in

major U.S. corporations, Academy of Management Journal, 40, pp. 1175–1189.

Clair, J.A. and Dufresne, R.L. (2004) Playing the grim reaper: how employees experience carrying out a down-

sizing, Human Relations, 57(12), pp. 1597–1625.

Conyon, M.J., Girma, S., Thompson, S. and Wright, P.W. (2002) The impact of mergers and acquisitions on

company employment in the United Kingdom, European Economic Review, 46, pp. 31–49.

Datta, D.K., Guthrie, J.P., Basuil, D. and Pandey, A. (2010) Causes and effects of employee downsizing: a review

and synthesis, Journal of Management, 36, pp. 281–348.

DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1983) The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective ration-

ality in organizational fields, American Sociological Review, 48, pp. 147–160.

Dohm, A. (2000) Gauging the labor force effects of retiring baby-boomers, Monthly Labor Review, July,

pp. 17–25.

Dougherty, D. and Bowman, E.H. (1995) The effects of organizational downsizing on product innovation,

California Management Review, 17, pp. 28–44.

DuBrin, A.J. (1996) Reengineering Survival Guide, Managing and Succeeding in the Changing Workplace

(Cincinnati, OH: Executive Press).

Eisenhardt, K. (1989) Building theories from case study research, The Academy of Management Review, 14(4),

pp. 532–550.

Ezzamel, M. and Willmott, H. (2008) Strategy as discourse in a global retailer: a supplement to rationalist and

interpretive accounts, Organization Studies, 29(2), pp. 191–217.

Farrell, C. (1993) Time to prune the ivy, Business Week, 320, pp. 112–118.

Farrell, M. and Mavondo, F.T. (2004) The effect of downsizing strategy and reorientation strategy on a learning

orientation, Personnel Review, 33(4), pp. 383–402.

Feldman, D.C. (2003) Endgame: the design and implementation of early retirement incentive programs, in: G.A.

Adams and T.A. Beehr (eds) Retirement Reasons, Processes, and Results, pp. 83–114 (New York: Springer).

Fendt, J. and Sachs, W. (2008) Grounded theory method in management research: users’ perspectives, Organiz-

ational Research Methods, 11, pp. 430–455.

Fisher, S.R. and White, M.A. (2000) Downsizing in a learning organization: are there hidden costs?, Academy of

Management Review, 25(1), pp. 244–251.

Flynn, G. (1995) Early retirement windows aid downsizing, Personnel Journal, 74(1), pp. 20.

Freeman, S.J. and Cameron, K.S. (1993) Organizational downsizing: a convergence and reorientation framework,

Organization Science, 4(1), pp. 10–29.

Gandolfi, F. (2009) Unravelling downsizing – what do we know about the phenomenon?, Review of International

Comparative Management, 19(3), pp. 414–426.

Gioia, D.A. and Chittipeddi, K. (1991) Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation, Strategic

Management Journal, 12(6), pp. 433–448.

Gioia, D.A., Schultz, M. and Corley, K.G. (2000) Organizational identity, image, and adaptive instability,

Academy of Management Review, 25(1), pp. 63–81.

Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research

(Chicago: Aldine).

Green, M. (2009) Nearly 300 staff accept retirement incentive, Duke Today, July 8.

Gregory, B.T., Armenakis, A.A., Moates, K.N., Albritton, M.D. and Harris, S.G. (2007) Achieving scientific rigor

in organizational diagnosis: An application of the diagnostic funnel, Consulting Psychology Journal: Prac-

tice and Research, 59(2), pp. 79–90.

Henkoff, R. (1994) Getting beyond downsizing, Fortune, 129, pp. 58–64.

186 K.M. Day et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

Hilton, M. (2008) Skills for work in the 21st century: what does the research tell us?, Academy of Management

Perspectives, November, pp. 63–78.

Indianapolis Business Journal (2010) More than 500 employees take Purdue early-retirement plan. November 2

Iqbal, Z. and Shetty, S. (1994) A multivariate analysis of employee layoffs, American Business Review, May,

pp. 15–21.

Iverson, R.D. and Pullman, J.A. (2000) Determinants of voluntary turnover and layoffs in an environment of

repeated downsizing following a merger: an event history analysis, Journal of Management, 26,

pp. 977–1003.

Jenny, H.H. (1974) A new issue in higher education: the financial consequences of early retirement, Early Retire-

ment, pp. 1–53. (New York: Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association).

Kezar, A.J. (2004) Obtaining integrity? reviewing and examining the charter between higher education and

society, The Review of Higher Education, 27(4), pp. 429–459.

Knapp, D. (2009) Princeton University to offer early retirement, Times of Trenton, June 17.

Koretz, G. (1993) Downsized companies feel the downside of early retirements, Business Week, 303, p. 20.

Kraatz, M.S. (1998) Learning by association? Interorganizational networks and adaptation to environmental

change, Academy of Management Journal, 41(6), pp. 621–643.

Kubeck, L.C. (1995) Techniques for Business Process Redesign (New York: Wiley).

Kuzmits, F.E. and Sussman, L. (1988) Early retirement or forced resignation: policy issues for downsizing human

resources, SAM Advanced Management Journal, Winter, pp. 28–32.

Lederman, D. (2011) Motivating the reluctant retiree (singular), Inside Higher Ed, June 22.

Lenckus, D. (1995) College retirement, Business Insurance, 29, , p. 6.

Lester, D. (1994) Reengineering Methodology and Case Study (Norcross, GA: Institute of Industrial Engineers).

Lewis, W., Agarwal, R. and Sambamurthy, V. (2003) Sources of influence on beliefs about information technol-

ogy use: an empirical study of knowledge workers, MIS Quarterly, 27(4), pp. 657–678.

Lofquist, E.A. (2011) Doomed to fail: a case study of change implementation collapse in the Norwegian civil

aviation industry, Journal of Change Management, 11(2), pp. 223–243.

Love, G.E. and Kraatz, M. (2009) Character, conformity, or the bottomline? How and why downsizing affected

corporate reputation, Academy of Management Journal, 52(2), pp. 314–335.

Luthans, B.C. and Sommer, S.M. (1999) The impact of downsizing on workplace attitudes: Differing reactions of

managers and staff in a health care organization, Group and Organization Management, 24, pp. 46–70.

Mahoney, R.J. (1994) Chair of the department of junkyard dog, Vital Speeches of the Day, 60(13), pp. 389–391.

Margulis, S.T. (1994) Bad news, good news about downsizing, Managing Office Technology, 39, pp. 23–24.

Marshak, R.J. (2002) Changing the language of change: how new contexts and concepts are challenging the ways

we think and talk about organizational change, Strategic Change, 11, pp. 279–286.

Martin, J. (1994) Rightsized U, Fortune, 130(4), p. 17.

Mishra, A.K. and Mishra, K.E. (1994) The role of mutual trust in effective downsizing strategies, Human

Resource Management, 33, pp. 261–279.

Morris, J.R., Cascio, W.F. and Young, C.E. (1999) Downsizing after all these years: questions and answers about

who did it, how many did it, and who benefited from it, Organizational Dynamics, 27(3), pp. 78–87.

Nikolaou, I., Gouras, A., Vakola, M. and Bourantas, D. (2007) Selecting change agents: exploring traits and skills

in a simulated environment, Journal of Change Management, 7(3–4), pp. 291–313.

Ofek, E. (1993) Capital structure and firms response to poor performance, Journal of Financial Economics, 34,

pp. 3–30.

Okba, M. (1993) The pros and cons of early retirement, OECD Observer, 185, pp. 34–36.

Osterman, P. (2000) Work reorganization in an era of restructuring: trends in diffusion and effects on employee

welfare, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 53, pp. 179–196.

Petrozzo, D. and Stepper, J. (1994) Successful Reengineering (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold).

Pfeffer, J. (2010) Lay off the layoffs, Newsweek, 155(7), p. 32.

Rampell, C. (2009) Layoffs spread to more sectors of the economy, The New York Times, January 27, A, p. 1.

Schachner, M. (1993) Early retirement study, Business Insurance, 27(8), p. 6.

Schramm, W. (1971) Notes on Case Studies of Instructional Media Projects, Stanford Univeristy, California

Institute for Communication Research, pp. 1–43.

Sherer, P.D. and Lee, K. (2002) Institutional change in large law firms: a resource dependency and institutional

perspective, Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), pp. 102–119.

Smollan, R.K. (2006) Minds, hearts and deeds: cognitive, affective and behavioural responses to change, Journal

of Change Management, 6(2), pp. 143–158.

Downsizing and Organizational Identity 187

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015

Tsai, C., Wu, S., Wang, H. and Huang, I. (2006) An empirical research on the institutional theory of downsizing:

evidence from MNC’s subsidiary companies in Taiwan, Total Quality Management and Business Excel-

lence, 17, pp. 633–654.

Wagar, T.H. (1998) Exploring the consequences of workforce reduction, Canadian Journal of Administrative

Sciences, 15, pp. 300–309.

Whetten, D.A. and Mackey, A. (2002) A social actor conception of organizational identity and its implications for

the study of organizational reputation, Business Society, 41(4), pp. 393–414.

Woodward, S. and Hendry, C. (2004) Leading and coping with change, Journal of Change Management, 4(2),

pp. 155–183.

Yin, Y.K. (2011) Case Study Research Design and Methods, 4th edn (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage).

Zyglidopoulos, S. (2005) The impact of downsizing on corporate reputation, British Journal of Management, 16,

pp. 253–259.

APPENDIX A

Interview Form

1. According to our research, you had x number of early retirees from yourdepartment. Their names and positions are person A and position, person Band position, etc. Is this correct?

2. What classes did person A teach and what quarter? How many sections of theclass? How many students on average?

3. Is the class(s) still being taught? If yes: What quarters? How many sections?How many students?

4. If answered ‘yes’ to number 3, who is teaching the class(s) now? Is it an exist-ing faculty member (if yes: one or many) or a new hire (if yes: is it an exactmatch)? What is the rank of the person teaching the class(s) (i.e. instructor,assistant, associate, or full professor)?

5. What general responsibilities did person A have outside the classroom? (i.e.committees, office hours for students, seminars, public service, etc.)

6. Are any of these responsibilities still being performed? Which ones?7. If answered ‘yes’ to number 6: Who is performing those responsibilities? Is it

an existing faculty member (if yes: one or many?) or new hire (if yes: is it anexact match?) What is the rank of the person performing those responsibilities(i.e. instructor, assistant, associate, or full professor)?

8. What, if any, research activities were conducted by person A?9. Has the research been continued, replaced by other research, or discontinued?

10. If answered ‘continued’ or ‘replaced’ to number 9: Who continued or replacedthe research activities? Is it an existing faculty member (if yes: one or many?)or a new hire (if yes: is it an exact match?) What is the rank of the person con-ducting the research (i.e. instructor, assistant, associate or full professor)?

11. Has person A been hired back on a part time basis? If yes, describe the natureof their appointment.

12. What is your reaction to the use of the early retirement incentive programme?Has it had a positive or negative effect on your department?

188 K.M. Day et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Que

ensl

and

Uni

vers

ity]

at 2

2:52

04

Aug

ust 2

015