Why did a powerful department of hospital doctors support a merger with a rival hospital that they knew would ruin their beloved workplace?
This ethnographic study draws on 12 months of fieldwork consisting of 24 one-on-one interviews as well as 26 h of observations, informal conversations and archival records research to answer its research question. Grounded theory and the discourse analysis were employed to analyze all data.
Data reveal how participants' belief in a “merge or go bankrupt” narrative contributed to widespread support for a merger that seemed unthinkable on the surface. Although each doctor believes the merger will jeopardize or ruin their workplace culture, none resisted the merger nor did any ask hospital executives to provide evidence in support of their claims regarding the benefits of the merger (namely, that it would save their organization from inevitable bankruptcy).
The author relied on a family relative to introduce the author to and gain entry into this workplace. One potential consequence is biased interpretations of data. To address this, the author constantly revisited the data and compared the author’s interpretations with interviewees' words (i.e. “grounded” theory).
This study provides empirical and theoretical contributions to organizational storytelling scholarship.
