The polytechnics have been a part of the Finnish education for about 10 years. During these years they have tried to find an own profile as educational institutions. The community of teachers has also changed. It has become more pluralistic. The purpose of this research is to bring up the theme of collective identity: how the personnel in one polytechnic have succeeded in finding a feeling of belonging together. The research data is collected by a qualitative e-mail interview sent to a sample of 60 members of the personnel, a sample chosen by using the critical incident strategy. They represent all of the personnel. The data was analysed by argumentative and rhetoric analyses. After that the answers were combined to narrative stories. Then eight other persons were asked to member-check the stories by using the terms of rhetoric analysis. There are different ways to have a collective identity. Units play a big role. There are situations when one must or one wants to be the representative of the whole polytechnic. The use of the word ‘us’ is dependent on the situation. It is also dependent on the person with whom one is speaking. For most of the personnel to become `us` is something worth struggling for. The matters preventing one of becoming us are felt to be far from oneself and one cannot do anything to change them. In spite of the will of the polytechnic leaders to empower them, the personnel feel that they have no power and they have become alienated. There seems to be a need for a deeper discussion about the concepts “empowerment” and “alienation”. The possibilities and reasons for these two things are also worth careful consideration. The main sorurces used: Blumer, H. (1969) Symbolic Interactionism. Pespective and Method. Berkeley: University of California Press. Berkley and Los Angeles, California. Kalliola, S. (2001). Herbert Blumer. Symbolinen interaktionismi. Teoksessa V. Hänninen, J. Partanen & O-H. Ylijoki (toim.) Sosiaalipsykologian suunnannäyttäjiä. Tampere: Osuuskunta Vastapaino. Kaunismaa, P. (1997) Keitä me olemme? Kollektiivisen identiteetin käsitteellisistä lähtökohdista. Sosiologia 34, (3), 220-229. Kakkuri-Knuutila, M-L. ja Halonen, I. (2002). Argumentaatioanalyysi ja hyvän argumentin ehdot. Teoksessa M-L. Kakkuri-Knuutila (toim.) Argumentti ja kritiikki. Helsinki: Gaudeamus Kuusela P. (2001) George Herbert Mead. Pragmatismi ja sosiaalipsykologia. Teoksessa V. Hänninen, J. Partanen & O-H. Ylijoki (toim.) Sosiaalipsykologian suunnannäyttäjiä. Tampere: Osuuskunta Vastapaino. Mead, G. H. (1962) Mind, Self, & Society. From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Edited and with an Introduction by C. W. Morris. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Varto, J. (1996) Laadullisen tutkimuksen metodologia. Helsinki: Kirjayhtymä.