Organizational purpose is commonly presented as a source of meaning, strategic coherence, and stakeholder orientation, yet its normative force can also shape how organizational members interpret legitimate conduct and desirable identity. This Original Conceptual Theory Article develops a bounded theory of purpose-based control to explain when purpose may operate not only as inspiration but also as a mechanism of moral and organizational regulation. The article integrates scholarship on organizational purpose, identity work and identity regulation, work moralization, organizational identification, meaningful work, cultural control, resistance, and governance. It proposes that purpose becomes potentially controlling when value-laden aspirations are translated into moralized expectations, identity-regulatory demands, value-based pressure, and anticipatory self-monitoring. These mechanisms are treated as proposed relationships rather than a validated causal sequence. The theory further distinguishes purpose-based control from formal, economic, performance-management, and technological control, and it treats voice, alternative identities, institutional context, and stakeholder governance as conditions that can interrupt or redirect the proposed process. The central implication is that responsible purpose requires more than an appealing statement: it requires governance arrangements that preserve interpretive plurality, challenge rights, and separation between commitment to organizational purpose and willingness to absorb personal costs. The framework remains conceptually provisional. Its propositions require longitudinal, experimental, multilevel, and qualitative testing capable of separating purpose perception, moralization, identity regulation, self-monitoring, meaningful work, and rival forms of control.
