The Social Identity Theory

1091 Words5 Pages
Different authors have a different view on the social identity theory. Cannella, Jones, and Withers (2014) attempt to explain the theory basing their facts on a family setting. They claim that family is the first social circle an individual has. Therefore, the way family members relate to one will influence the other social circles an individual is likely to have. People born in families that have good relations are likely to be more outgoing, thereby having several social identities. On the contrary, people brought up in families where people do not communicate properly are likely to have poor communication skills thereby have less social identities. This speculation seems accurate as most social people are from families that have excellent communication. Therefore it is easy for them to join several social circles thereby have several social identities. People from families that have poor communication find it difficult to join social circles. As such, these individuals have very few social identities due to their limited social life. Deephouse and Jaskiewicz (2013) support Cannella, Jones, and Withers’ (2014) statement. According to Deephouse and Jaskiewicz (2013), families are the key influence on an individual’s social life, consequently identity. They base their research on the performance of firms that are family based and those that are non-family. They further elaborate that family firms have a good reputation as they develop proper relations with one another,
Open Document