Download pdf - Organizational goals and values: A socialization model

ORGA~~~T~O~AL GOALS AND VALUES: A SOCIALIZATION MODEL

Maria L. Kraimer University of Illinois-Chicago

Research on the content of s~ia~ation has incorporated multiple content areas into one general framework. However, it has been suggested that the organizational content areas actually assess diierent constructs, thus, researchers should examine the content areas independently. The purpose of this article is to present a model of socialization that focuses on the antecedents and outcomes of socialization in one specific content area: organizational goals and values. The model suggests that an individual’s agreement with the organization’s values (work value congruence) and the importance of the individual’s own work values interact to determine the outcomes of socialization to the organizational goals and values. When there is low work value con~ence, the individu~ may engage in detrimental hehaviors if the individual has a strong belief in his/her own vahres.

Louis (1980) defined organizational socialization as “a process by which an individual comes to appreciate the values, abilities, expected behaviors, and social knowledge essential for assuming an organizational role and for partici- pating as an organization member” (pp. 229-230). Research on the content of s~ialization has suggested that there are several org~ization~ areas or domains that newcomer must master in order to become effective org~izational members including, organizational goals and values, task/role proficiency, organizational history, special languages, politics, and social integration (Chao, O’Leary-Kelly, Wolf, Klein, & Gardner 1994; Morrison 1993b). Thus far, research on the content of socialization has examined the socialization process by including multiple content areas as part of the same process (e.g. Chao et al. 1994; Morrison 1993a, 1993b; Ostroff & Kozlowski 1992). This research has consistently found that an individual who acquires more knowledge of the organizational domains through various socialization tactics and/or information-seeking during his or her first year on the new job, are more adjusted to the o~anization and display more positive attitudes. However, it has been

DIreot aII correspondence to: Maria L. Kraimer, Department of Managerial Studies (MC 2431, University of IIlinois-Chicago, 601 South Morgan St,, Chicago, IL 60607. E-mail: [email protected]

Human Resource Management Review, Copyright 0 1997 Volume 7, Number 4,1997, pages 425-447 by JAI Press Inc. AI1 rights of reproduction in any form reserved. ISSN:l053-4622

426 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOLUME 7, NUMBER 4,1997

suggested that scholars should take caution in treating the various organizational domains as a single construct in the socialization process (Bauer, Mor- rison, & Callister in press). Instead, researchers should recognize that the domains each have a different focus and actually reflect multiple concepts. Thus, it seems worthy to develop socialization models specific to a few, or even one of the domain areas in order to develop a better understanding of the socialization process.

The purpose of this article is to present a conceptual framework of socialization that focuses on the antecedents and outcomes of socialization in one specific domain: organizational goals and values. The goals and values domain is concerned with the rules and policies that uphold the integrity of an organization (Chao et al. 1994; Schein 1968). The focus is on goals and values for two main reasons. First, Chao et al. (1994) found that knowledge of the “organizational goals and values dimension had the strongest relationship with measures of career effectiveness” (p. 741). Specifically, individual’s knowledge of goals and values positively related to career involvement, adaptability, and job satisfaction. Second, organizational research has shown that the organization’s values have a significant impact on all aspects of a person’s job. Chatman (1989) states that U . . . the organizationl’sl . . . value systems provide an elabo- rate and generalized justification both for appropriate behaviors of members and for the activities and functions of the system” (p. 339). She further suggests that organizational norms and values are agreed upon and supported by a majority of organizational members. Because organizational values have a strong effect on the members’ activities and attitudes, it is especially critical to examine how newcomers come to learn and accept the organization’s values and goals.

This article will contribute to the socialization and work value congruence literature in three primary ways. First, the conceptual framework acknowl- edges that socialization does not take place in isolation by integrating both the proactive and reactive sides of socialization. The traditional view of socialization is that newcomers are fairly reactive in that they simply respond to information provided by the organization’s various socialization tactics (Allen & Meyer 1990; Jones 1986; Van Maanen & Schein 1979). However, several theoretical discussions of socialization have emphasized the importance of informal interactions between newcomers and organizational insiders (Ashford & Tay- lor 1990; Baker 1995; Louis 1980; Keichers 1987). Reichers (1987) argued that newcomers’ interactions with experienced organizational members largely contributes to the rate at which newcomers come to understand the meaning and reality of organizational life. Furthermore, newcomers can be proactive in this process. While research has since examined the newcomer as a proactive agent (e.g. Bauer & Green 1998; Morrison 1993a, 1993b; Ostroff 8z Kozlowski 1992), few theoretical discussions combined the proactive perspective with the reactive perspective of organizational socialization. This is an unfortunate oversight because it limits the conclusions that can be drawn about the nature of the socialization process (Bauer et al. in press).

Second, this article contributes to the research on work value congruence.

SOCIALIZATION AND VALUES 427

Work value congruence occurs when there is a match between the individual’s values and the organization’s values (Chatman 1989). The notion of work value congruence is based on the interactionist point of view that employees’ work attitudes and behaviors are a function of individual characteristics and situational characteristics (Chatman 1989; George 1992; Kristof 1996; Terborg 1981). Furthermore, it is consistent with theories of person-environment fit (Dawis & Lofquist 1984; Pervin 1968) which suggest that when the individual’s characteristics match the demands of the environment (i.e., there is “fit”), the individual will express higher levels of satisfaction and performance. While work value congruence is considered to be a measure of person-environment fit (Chatman 1991; George 1992; Kristof 1996) it has had only moderate effects on work attitudes and performance. By examining an individual’s value belief strength in combination with work value congruence, explanations for the moderate relationships between work value congruence and attitudes can be offered (Kristof 1996). At the same time, both positive and negative behavioral outcomes of work value congruence that have not been theoretically linked to work value congruence in the past can be offered.

Finally, this article contributes to our understanding of how newcomers learn the goals and values of an organization by integrating research on work value congruence and socialization. Despite the fact that socialization has been conceptualized as one of the primary ways in which organizational culture is transmitted and maintained (Louis 19801, few studies have examined how newcomers learn about organizational goals and values (see Chatman 1991 and Morrison 1993a for exceptions). Because organizational goals and values are important predictors of individuals’ attitudes and behaviors and to the overall functioning of the organization (Chatman 1991), it is important to examine how newcomers learn organizational goals and values and the process by which organizational goals and values affect behavioral and attitudinal outcomes.

After introducing a conceptual framework for socialization to organizational goals and values, the socialization and information-seeking literatures as it relates to the organizational goals and values content area will be briefly reviewed. Next, the work values and work value congruence literatures will be reviewed. Lastly, outcomes of the socialization process will be proposed based on an interactional framework between the individuals’ work values belief strength and work value congruence. Throughout the above literature reviews, propositions will be developed. The article concludes with suggestions for future research.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The conceptual framework is based on Fishbein and Azjen’s (1975) theory of reasoned action which develops a model for predicting attitudes and behaviors. They suggest that based on existing knowledge and experiences, a person will develop a belief about Object X, which leads to the person’s attitude and behav-

428 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REVIEW WLUME 7. NUMBER 4.1997

ioral intention toward Object X. Furthermore, the model developed here builds upon Chatman’s (1991) study in which she found that work value congruence mediated the relationship between two socialization tactics (social activities and mentors) and the newcomer’s job satisfaction and turnover intentions.

Specifically, the model (presented in Figure 1) suggests that newcomers seek-out information about the organizational goals and values through monitoring organizational insiders. At the same time, organizations provide various socialization tactics such as mentors, formal training programs, and social activities in order to teach newcomers the organizational goals and values. Together, newcomer’s information-seeking and organization’s socialization tactics positively relate to the newcomer’s knowledge about the organization’s goals and values. This knowledge relates to the newcomer’s assessment of beliefs concerning work value congruence. Work value congruence is related to various outcomes depending on the individual’s work values belief strength. When the individual has a weak belief strength in a value that is inconsistent with the organization’s values (low work value congruence), the individual is more likely to alter his or her values in order to increase work value congruence. When the individual has a weak value belief strength and high work value congruence, the individual is likely to display moderately positive attitudes and engage in compliant behaviors. Individuals with a strong value belief strength and high work value congruence will display the most positive outcomes. Finally, individuals with a strong value belief strength and low work value congruence will most likely display negative attitudes and behaviors. These relationships will be explained in more detail in subsequent sections.

Before fully explaining the model presented in Figure 1, a primary assumption needs to be mentioned. Specifically, an assumption is made that it is impossible for recruiters to select only employees that share the same values of the organizational insiders as suggested by the Attraction-Selection-Attrition (ASA) Hypothesis (Schneider 1987). Schneider’s ASA model is based on the theory that different people are attracted to different types of situations and

Organization’s

Socialization

Knowledge of P4 Organizational -

Goals and Values

ps_ ~13 Attitudinal and - Behavioral

Outcomes

Information-

- Monitoring Individual’s Belief Strength

in Work Values

Figure 1. Organizational Goals and Values: A Socialization Model


that it is people’s values that attract people to situations. The ASA model s~i~cally states that people are u~~r~~e~ to an organization that is similar to themselves. At the same time, the organization selects individuals who appear to fit in with the existing organizational members. Finally, there is attrition by those who do not fit (Schneider 1987). The research that followed Scheider’s ASA hypothesis has found that recruiters do attempt to select individuals that share similar values to themselves (Adkins, Russell, & Werbell994; Chatman 1991; Rynes & Gerhart 1990) and that organizations do tend toward homoge- neity with regard to the types of people in them over time (Schneider, Gold- stein, & Smith 1995). However, while these studies have found significant results in support of the ASA model, the overall effect sizes are moderate. Further, as the workforce demographic trends continue, it will become more difficult for organizations to select only employees with matching values (Ash- forth & Saks 1996). Demo~aphic characteristics, such as national origin (Hofstede 1980), gender (Lefkowitz 19941, and professional-level education (Raelin 1986) have been demonstrated to be related to different cultural and work values. Consequently, it will become even more likely that individuals will experience low work value congruence at their employing organizations.

ORGANIZATIONAL SOCIALIZATION

This section provides a review of socialization research from which research propositions will be offered. The section begins with a review of the organizational domains, followed by a detailed review of the socialization research. There are two distinct lines of research on socialization: organizational tactics and newcomer’s information-seeking. Both lines of research examine socialization to organizational domains.

Organizational domains refer to the various aspects of the organization that the individual needs to be familiar with, such as his or her job duties, his or her role in the orga~zation, and the organization’s policies and values, in order for the individual to be a full organizational member (Chao et al. 1994). Early frameworks of organizational domains were developed by Schein (19681, Feld- man (19811, and Fisher (1986). All three of these researchers suggested that an organization consists of three domains: (a) the individual’s work role; (b) the organization’s goals; and (c) the organization’s values. More recent researchers have suggested the domain areas to include a (a) task domain-task duties, assignments, and priorities; (b) role domain-boundaries of authority, respon- sibility, and appropriate behaviors; (c) group domain-coworker interactions and group norms and values; and (d) organizational domain-politics, power, values, and special languages (Morrison 199313; Ostroff & Kozlowski 1992). Chao et al. (1994) expanded the domains to six content areas: performance proficiency, people, politics, language, organizational goals and values, and history. An important point for this article is that all of these researchers suggested that organizational goals and values is a content area of socialization. Moreover, Chao et al. (1994) concluded from their correlational results

430 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REVIEW WXJME 7, NUMBER 4,1997

that the individual’s knowledge of one specific domain-Organizational Goals and Values-had the strongest relationship with job satisfaction and career involvement. This suggests that learning the organizational goals and values is an important aspect of the socialization process for the newcomer.

Organizational Tactics

Early research treated the newcomer as a reactive agent to the socialization process and examined the various tactics used by organizations to help assimi- late newcomers. Van Maanen and Schein (1979) developed a typology of six organizational tactics leading to either institutionalized socialization or individualized socialization (Jones 1986). Institutionalized socialization involves collective orientations, formal training, sequential job training progressions, fixed timetables for socialization, serial processes in which one is socialized by an experienced member, and investiture of individual identity. Individualized socialization involves individualized orientations, informal training, random sequences of training, variable timetables, disjunctive processes without the aid of experienced members, and divestiture of individual identity.

Empirical studies of Van Maanen and Schein’s (1979) tactics revealed that institutionalized tactics were positively related to organizational commitment (Allen & Meyer 1990; Ashforth & Saks 1996; Baker 1995; Jones 1986) and job satisfaction (Ashforth & Saks 1996; Jones 19861, but negatively related to intentions to quit (Ashforth & Saks 1996; Jones 1986) and role innovation (Allen & Meyer 1990; Ashforth & Saks 1996; Baker 1995; Jones 1986). Individ- ualized tactics were found to have the opposite effect on attitudes and behaviors. Other empirical research has examined one specific tactic that organizations can employ to help socialize newcomers, such as formal training programs (Chatman 1991; Louis, Posner, & Powell 1983; Saks 1996; Tannen- baum, Mathieu, Salas, & Cannon-Bowers 19911, mentors (Blau 1988; Chatman 1991; Dreher & Ash 1990; Green 1991; Louis et al. 1983; Ostroff & Kozlowski 19931, and social support from and interactions with coworkers and supervisors (Baker 1995; Bauer & Green 1994; Chatman 1991; Fisher 1985; Major, Kozlowski, Chao, & Gardner 1995). These studies consistently found that expo- sure to mentors, formal training programs, interactions with supervisors and coworkers, and social activities, had positive effects on newcomer’s commitment, satisfaction, role clarity, and performance.

Van Maanen and Schein (1979) also h~othesized, which research has supported, that institutionalized socialization emphasizes the status quo of the organization and encourages newcomers to passively accept preset roles (Allen & Meyer 1990; Ashforth & Saks 1996; Jones 1986). Since the status quo and current roles are based on existing culture, values, and norms, this suggests that organizational goals and values are relayed to newcomers through institutionalized socialization. Furthermore, Ostroff and Kozlowski (1993) found that having a mentor had the greatest impact on providing information about the organizational policies, values, and goals. Chatman (1991) found that newcomers who had mentors and who actively attended org~izationally spon-


sored social events were more likely to have high work value congruence one year later, than newcomers who did not have mentors or attend social events. Thus, we would expect both mentors and social activities to relate to knowledge of the organizational goals and values domain.

In relation to Van Maanen and Schein’s (1979) socialization tactics, mentors provide serial socialization which is an institutionalized tactic. Similarly, attending company-sponsored social activities would fall under the collective orientation of institutionalized socialization. Thus empirical research and theory suggests that newcomers will learn organizational goals and values more often through institutionalized tactics, than through individualized tactics.

Proposition 1. Institutionalized socialization tactics will provide newcomers with more information about the organization’s goals and values than will individualized socialization tactics.

Information-Seeking Tactics

In response to Miller and Jablin’s (1991) call for research on newcomer’s information-seeking tactics, there has been a shift in focus in the socialization literature from one where the newcomer is reactive to one where the newcomer is proactive. Much of this research has relied on the feedback-seeking literature which suggests that information-seeking is a means of reducing uncertainty and giving information more value (Ashford 1986). Ashford defines uncertainty as “a state in which individuals have no, little, or inconsistent information about the stimuli of interest” (p. 468). More recently, information- seeking researchers have examined how newcomers cope with this uncertainty in a new organization by examining the different tactics that newcomers use to seek-out information in order to learn the domain areas (Morrison 1993a, 1993b; Ostroff & Kozlowski 1992, 1993).

Information-seeking can be conducted using multiple tactics (Ashford & Cummings 1983) and be obtained from multiple sources in the organization (Miller & Jablin 1991; Ostroff & Kozlowski 1992). In their work on feedback- seeking, Ashford and Cummings (1983) identified two primary tactics: inquiry and monitoring.1 Inquiry entails directly asking another person for information, whereas monitoring entails attending to a situation, the behaviors of others, or both, to obtain informational cues. Which mode will be utilized largely depends on the social costs associated with them (Ashford & Cummings 1983; Morrison 1993b). In the case of monitoring, the individual must interpret what he or she observes. Thus, a potential cost of monitoring is misinterpreta- tion. In the case of inquiry, the individual risks damaging his/her ego and public image. Thus, individuals will choose an information-seeking tactic based on the perceived rewards and costs associated with each tactic.

Research has found that newcomers engage in both inquiry and monitoring in order to decrease uncertainty and reduce the social costs associated with using only one of the tactics (Louis et al. 1983; Morrison 1993a, 1993b; Ostroff & Kozlowski 1992, 1993). However, monitoring of co-workers was the most frequently used source for obtaining normative information (Morrison 199313).

432 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REVIEW MLUME 7. NUMBER 4.1997

Normative information was defined as “behaviors and attitudes that your firm values and expects” and is most similar to the organizational goals and values domain (Morrison 1993a, p. 183). Morrison also found that newcomers who used monitoring to gain normative information were more satisfied with their jobs (Morrison 1993b), less likely to leave their organizations (Morrison 1993b), and, although weakly related, better performers (Morrison 1993b). Similarly, Ostroff and Kozlowski (1992) found that, among newcomers, monitoring other organizational members during the first nine months contributed the most to newcomers’ knowledge of the organizational domain (politics, power, culture, and value system) compared to other information-seeking tactics. These findings suggest that newcomers perceive the social costs of inquiring about organizational goals and values to be greater than the costs of misinterpreting behaviors and actions of their co-workers. Newcomers may feel that it is not appropriate to inquire about the values of the organizations; thus, prefer to monitor their coworkers to see which behaviors are rewarded and expected.

Proposition 2. Newcomers will use information-seeking in the form of monitoring to obtain knowledge of the organizational goals and values domain more often than direct inquiry.

One limitation of this research is that no one has empirically examined information-seeking and organizational tactics in the same study (Bauer et al. in press). The interactionist perspective suggests that newcomers and situations can have additive effects on outcomes (George 1992; Ostroff 1993a; Ter- borg 1981). An additive interaction refers to two or more variables having additive or linear effects on the outcome variable. Proposing a main effect for both individual and situational factors is entirely consistent with an interactionist perspective (George 1992; Ostroff 1993a). Information-seeking is considered to be an individual difference variable in that individuals will vary in the extent to which they choose to engage in information-seeking based on personality factors such as need for personal control (Ashford & Black 1996). On the other hand, socialization tactics are a function of the organization; thus, create the situation to which the newcomer is exposed. An interactionist perspective suggests that information-seeking (whether through monitoring or inquiry) and organizational tactics will both contribute to the newcomer’s knowledge of the organizational goals and values.

Proposition 3. Organization socialization tactics and newcomer’s information-seeking will have additive effects on the newcomer’s knowledge of the organization’s goals and values.

OUTCOMES OF KNOWLEDGE OF ORGANIZATIONAL GOALS AND VALUES

Up to this point, the article has addressed the antecedents of the newcomer’s knowledge of organizational goals and values domain. Specifically, it was proposed that newcomers who are exposed to institutionalized socialization tactics


and who engage in monitoring efforts will obtain more knowledge of the organization’s goals and values. Based on Fishbein and Azjen’s (19751 theory of reasoned action, newcomers will use this knowledge to develop beliefs about the organizational goals and values, which will then influence attitudes and behaviors. Before developing theoretical relationships between knowledge of the organizational goals and values and work outcomes, several constructs and their relationship to socialization need to be more clearly defined. First, the definition of work values and individual’s belief strength in those values will be provided. Then, the concept of work value congruence and its related research will be reviewed. Based on these reviews, a direct outcome of knowledge of organizational goals and values will be proposed.

Work Values

Rokeach (1968) defined a value as “an enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally and socially preferable to alter- native modes of conduct or end-states of existence” (p. 160). Furthermore, once values are internalized, they become a standard for guiding action, developing and maintaining attitudes, and justifying one’s own actions and judging others. Thus, work values concern an individual’s belief toward work preferences and meaning and are more stabilized and deep-rooted than job attitudes (Dose 1997; George & Jones 1997; Hazer & Alvares 19811.

However, Fishbein and Azjen (1975) suggested that people vary in their belief strength and this belief strength is based on the individual’s information that he or she possesses about the object. A summary of studies on work values of high school and college-age teenagers indicated that work values, in terms of importance, stabilize sometime during adolescence, but that shifts in the intensity of work values can occur later in life through such powers as organizational socialization programs (Hazer & Alvares 1981). In contrast, a study by Luske and Oliver (1974) with 1072 American managers indicated that only 4 of 66 work values measured shifted in intensity during an eight-year period suggesting that socialization cannot really alter a person’s value system. These conflicting conclusions suggest that an important construct has been over- looked when examining the relationship between socialization and change in work values. This construct is the person’s belief strength in his/her own work values and will be examined in more detail in subsequent sections.

Work Value Congruence

Following Schneider’s (1987) ASA model, there has been a recent stream of research that investigates person-organization fit defined as “the congruence between the norms and values of organizations and the values of persons” (Chatman 1989, p. 339) or work value congruence (see Kristof 1996 for a detailed review). Much of this research has focused on how the employee and organization benefit when there is employee-organization work value congruence (Bretz & Judge 1994; Chatman 1989; Chatman 1991; Meglino, Ravlin, &

434 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOLUME 7, NUMBER 4.1997

Adkins 1989; OReilly, Chatman, & Caldwell 1991). These researchers have consistently found that work value congruence positively predicts important attitudinal and behavioral outcomes for the employee, such as organizational commitment (Chatman 1991; Meglino et al. 1989; O’Reilly et al. 19911, job satisfaction (Bretz & Judge 1994; Chatman 1991; Meglino et al. 1989; O’Reilly et al. 1991), tenure (Bretz & Judge 19941, retention rates (Chatman 1991; O’Reilly et al. lSSl), and career success (Bretz & Judge 1994).

Relatedly, other studies have assessed goal congruence and personal work orientation-organizational climate congruence as measures of person-organization fit. Vancouver and Schmitt (1991) found that individuals’ goal congruence with supervisors and coworkers positively related to their job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and negatively related to turnover intentions. Ostroff (1993b), in a study conducted in a public school system, found that the average score of person-organization climate congruence positively related to the school’s overall performance measures including academic achievement scores, administrative performance, and constituency satisfaction. In sum, work value congruence has been related primarily to individual-level attitudes and behaviors, but also to organizational effectiveness.

There are two primary shor~omings of this research. First, it has not considered the circumstances under which socialization tactics can change an individual’s work values. Chatman’s (1991) study, in which work value congruence mediated the relationship between socialization (mentoring and social activities) and job satisfaction and intent to leave the organization, suggests that socialization tactics can influence the individual’s values to be more congruent with the organization’s values. However, one limitation to having work value congruence as a direct outcome of socialization, is that it assumes that socialization tactics will be able to alter the newcomer’s value structure. As discussed above, this may not be true when the individual holds strong work values and there is a vast difference between the individual’s and organization’s values (Dose 1997; Luske & Oliver 1974). Socialization tactics are merely tools to help the individual learn the organization’s values and goals. The individual then cognitively decides whether he/she agrees or disagrees with the learned values, which can lead to either a high or low degree of work value congruence. The more knowledge the individual holds about the organizational goals and values, the easier it is for the individual to determine if work value congruence is high or low.

Proposition 4. The more knowledge the newcomer has about the organizational goals and values domain, the stronger the newcomer’s belief will be that work value congruence does or does not exist.

A second limitation to the work value congruence research is that it has not examined the outcomes associated with low work value congruence when low congruence cannot be changed through socialization mechanisms (Kristof 1996). It is likely that there are different outcomes associated with low work value congruence besides lowered organizational commitment, job satisfaction,


and retention rates. For example, decreased organizational identification and lowered job involvement may be consequences of low work value congruence. The interactional framework presented in the next section will address the above limitations of the work value congruence research, while at the same time contribute to our understanding of the socialization process in learning the organizational goals and values.

INDIVIDUAL BELIEF STRENGTH AND WORK VALUE CONGRUENCE

The interaction of individuals’ belief strengths in their own work values and work value congruence leads to different individual-level work outcomes. In this section, I consider situations in which there are either “high” or “low” degrees of work value congruence and “strong” or “weak” degrees of belief strength, and I propose how individuals will respond to different interactions of the two (see Figure 2). Although work value congruence and belief strength obviously are not dichotomous constructs, these extreme cases provide a framework for understanding different work attitudes and behaviors. Proposi- tions are developed from Kelman’s (1958) social influence theory and Fes- tinger’s (1957) cognitive dissonance theory and their related research.

Strong Belief Strength/High Work Value Congruence

It is expected that newcomers with a strong belief in work values that are consistent with the organization’s values will have positive attitudes and behaviors because they will have a strong internalized commitment towards their companies and strongly identify with their companies (Hall, Schneider, Nygren 1970; Kelman 1958; O’Reilly & Chatman 1986). According to Kelman

Work Value Congruence

LOW

Weak Effect on Attitudes; Compliance-Based Commitment

Individual’s values change to increase work value congruence

High Organkational Identification; High OCB-Organization

Negative External Corporate Image; Low Organizational Identification; Involvement in Non-work Activities; High Tumovw, Compliant Behaviors

Strong

Individual’s Belief Strength in bier Work Values

Figure 2. Individual Belief Strength x Work Value Congruence: Effect on Outcomes

436 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOWME 7. NUMBER 4.1997

(19581, internalization occurs when individuals accept influence and adopt attitudes and behaviors because their content is congruent with the individuals’ value systems. In the context of the employee-organization relationship, internalized-based organizational commitment will occur when newcomers feel that their values are congruent with the organizations’ goals and values (Becker, Billings, Eveleth, & Gilbert 1996). Internalized-based commitment is a result of intrinsic rewards associated with working for the organization (Sussmann & Vecchio 1987). On the other hand, Kelman (1958) suggested that identification occurs when individuals adopt attitudes and behaviors in order to be associated with an attractive figure. Thus, a newcomer will develop identification-based organizational commitment when he or she finds the organization an attractive place to work and wants outsiders to align him or her with the organization. The organization’s attractiveness can be a result of both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards associated with working for that organization (Dutton, Dukerich, & Harquail 1994).

Research has found that both internalized-based and identification-based organizational commitment have been positively related to prosocial behaviors (C)‘Reilly & Chatman 1986) and performance (Becker et al. 19961, and negatively related to turnover (C)‘Reilly & Chatman 1986). While identification and internalization are related concepts (Becker, Randall, & Riegel1995; Hall et al. 1970), there is theoretical evidence that the two constructs are distinct (Becker et al. 1996; Kelman 1958). In fact, internalization may actually lead to organizational identification. In their study with forest-preserve workers, Hall et al. (1970) found that individuals with strong work values that were congruent with their organizations’ values reported higher levels of organizational identification.

This is consistent with Dutton et al’s (1994) proposition concerning factors related to organizational identification. Specifically, they state that workers’ attraction to the organization and tenure in the organization should be related to the strength of the individuals’ organizational identification. Since newcomers, by definition, will have short tenure, their organizational identification will be largely determined by attractiveness. Attractiveness can be developed from both internal assessments of the organization’s policies, values, and standards and assessments of the external image of the organization (Dutton et al. 1994). For newcomers with strong work value beliefs, high work value congruence should make the organization more attractive to them (Hall et al. 1970). Thus, it is expected that high work value congruence will increase newcomer’s organizational identification when the individual has strong value beliefs.

Proposition 5. When the newcomer has a strong work value belief strength, high work value congruence will positively influence the newcomer’s organizational identification.

Findings from work value congruence research lend support to the above proposition. Specifically, work value congruence has been found to be positively


related to affective commitment, job satisfaction, and tenure (Bretz & Judge 1994; Chatman 1991; Meglino et al. 1989). These outcomes have also been positively associated with organizational identification (Dutton et al. 1994; Hall et al. 1970).

A behavioral outcome that has not been studied in socialization or work value congruence research, but should be a consequence of having high work value congruence is organizational citizenship behaviors or OCBs (Dutton et al. 1994; George & Jones 1997). OCBs are constructive, extra-role behaviors that an employee who is committed to and enthusiastic about his or her job will engage in for the benefit of not only the company, but his or her career ad- vancement (Smith, Organ, & Near 1983). Research has found that students who internalized their universities’ values displayed more prosocial behaviors (O’Reilly & Chatman 1986). It should follow that newcomer’s who share the same values as the organization will be more likely to engage in extra-role behaviors that benefit the organization.

Proposition 6. When the newcomer has a strong work value belief strength, high work value congruence will positively influence the newcomer’s organizational citizenship behaviors.

Strong Belief Strength/Low Work Value Congruence

A newcomer who has a strong belief in a value that is inconsistent with the organization’s values is most likely to display negative attitudes and behaviors because he/she will experience dissonance. In order to alleviate that dissonance, the newcomer will engage in behaviors that will have detrimental effects on his/her work attitudes and performance.

Festinger’s (1957) cognitive dissonance theory suggests that an individual’s perception of an inconsistency among cog&ions (a belief and a behavior) leads to a negative motivational state called dissonance. An important element of dissonance is that it is an aversive state (psychologically discomforting) and it has motivational properties, such that the individual will have a drive to reduce the dissonance (Elliot & Devine 1994). Furthermore, dissonance occurs when an individual freely engages in a behavior that is counter to his or her attitudes, which is referred to as counterattitudinal behavior (Festinger 1957).

Because work values are stabilized beliefs about a personally preferred mode of conduct (Rokeach 1968), an individual with low work value congruence is more likely to be put in a position to exhibit counterattitudinal behavior. Furthermore, if the newcomer has a strong belief strength, he or she will be more likely to experience cognitive dissonance as a result of engaging in counterattitudinal behaviors. Specifically, newcomers are encouraged to follow the company’s work values to help guide them in learning and accomplishing their job tasks and overall functioning in the organization (Sheridan 1992). When the newcomer is asked to carry out the job in a way that contradicts the individual’s own values, he or she will be engaging in counterattitudinal behavior if he or she adheres to company values. For example, a new engineer may come to realize that the company values minimizing costs over quality and

438 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOLUME 7, NUMBER 4.1997

be asked to develop a product with the least expensive materials. However, the engineer’s professional standards are to develop top quality products so as to ensure the safety of consumers. If the engineer follows company policies that are based on the company’s value of minimizing costs, the engineer will per- form his or her job in such a manner that contradicts his own professional and ethical values (ensuring safety and quality), in which he or she strongly be- lieves. Thus, the engineer is engaging in a counterattitudinal behavior and will experience cognitive dissonance.

Using the various reduction strategies suggested by cognitive dissonance theorists, we can examine the possible alternatives available to newcomers who strongly disagree with the organization’s values. Festinger (1957) suggested many possible reduction strategies, including: (a) changing the original attitude to conform to the source; (b) derogating the source of the aversive stimuli; (c) bolstering the original attitude; and (d) leaving the situation (Fiske & Taylor 1984; Kunda 1990; Sherman & Go&in 1980; Steele 1988). The latter three alternatives lead to plausible behavioral and attitudinal outcomes for a newcomer who is experiencing cognitive dissonance due to low work value congruence. However, the newcomer is less likely to change his/her attitude in response to socialization for the following reason.

First, Sherman and Gorkin (1980) suggested that attitude change will not occur when the individual’s original attitude is an especially strong and central one and involves a large degree of relevance and prior commitment. Hazer and Alvares (1981) noted that by adulthood work values are fairly stable traits that are developed throughout one’s lifetime. This is consistent with Kelman’s (1958) theory of social influence. Kelman proposed that attitude change will not occur if the individual does not perceive the influencer to be attractive (identification) or to have a similar value structure (internalization). Thus, it is unlikely that socialization tactics will change newcomers’ strongly held beliefs.

A second option a newcomer has for reducing cognitive dissonance is to derogate the source of the induced-dissonant state (Fiske & Taylor 1984). This strategy allows the individual to reduce the dissonant-state by disparaging someone or something that is causing the inconsistent cognitions. In the case of low work value congruence, the newcomer will consider the source of the dissonance to be his or her counterattitudinal behaviors, which in turn, can be attributed to the organization’s poor values. Thus, the employee could derogate the organization, instead of his or her behaviors, by spreading rumors or bad- mouthing the company to outsiders or other employees. These behaviors will serve to decrease the newcomer’s identification with the organization.

This is similar to Dutton et al.‘s (1994) proposition that construed external corporate image is an important indicator of organizational identification. When members construe the external image as attractive-meaning that they believe outsiders perceive value in the organization-then individuals will be more likely to identify with the organization because it also increases value of the individuals own self-identity. Conversely, when the external image is negative, individuals will not want to identify with the organization (Vardi, Weiner, & Poppa 1989). It is suggested here that individuals who strongly disagree

SO~IALI~TION AND VALUES 439

with the organization’s values are more likely to perceive the company’s external image as negative. This negative external image will cause the newcomer to engage in behaviors that will decrease his/her identity with the organization.

Proposition 7. When the newcomer has a strong belief strength, low work value congruence will cause the newcomer to construe the company’s external image to be negative.

F’roposition 8. When the newcomer has a strong belief strength, low work value congruence will cause the newcomer to engage in behaviors that will decrease his/her organizational identification.

Sherman and Gorkin (1980) examined the third reduction strategy: strengthening the initial attitude in order to reestablish the validity of the actor’s initial set of beliefs, which is formally called bolstering. Past researchers have found that one means of strengthening an initial attitude is to adopt more behaviors consistent with the original attitude (Dutton & Lake 19’73; Steele 1975). Furthe~o~, a person is likely to bolster when an important value has been questioned (Sherman & Gorkin 1980). They found that subjects who valued non-sexist attitudes and then failed a sex-role problem, were more likely to bolster their non-sexist attitudes by later displaying greater support for an Affirmative Action decision than subjects who did not consider non-sexist attitudes to be a central value. They interpreted the results to mean that the subjects who valued the non-sexist attitude experienced cognitive dissonance when they failed to correctly answer the sex-role problem; consequently, their values were threatened and they experienced dissonance. In an attempt to reestablish their values and reduce the dissonance, the subjects bolstered their attitudes by behaving in a way that re-affirmed their attitudes (Sherman & Go&in 1980).

These findings relate to this paper by suggesting that when work values are a central aspect to a newcomer’s self-concept, low work value congruence will cause the individual to use bolstering as a reduction strategy. No research has examined the ways in which newcomers can bolster their own work values. It is suggested here that one behavior that newcomers can engage in to bolster their attitudes toward their own work values is to become more involved in associations that reinforce those values such as professional and ethnic associations. This may be especially relevant for entry-level newcomers who recently graduated from college. College graduates may still have many ties to members from their college clubs and activities.

Proposition 9. When the newcomer has a strong belief strength, low work value congruence will be associated with the newcomer’s involvement in more non-work activities.

The final reduction strategy suggested by Festinger (1957) is to leave the situation that is creating the dissonance. This would be especially true in

440 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOLUME 7. NUMBER 4.1997

industries that have a plentiful job market and for highly skilled, expert professionals. Implementing this strategy would simply involve attrition from the organization, which is consistent with Schneider’s (1987) ASA framework. Chao et al. (1994) did find that newcomers who had low knowledge of the organizational goals and values domain were more likely to switch jobs and/or organizations compared to newcomers who had high knowledge of the organizational goals and values domain. However, their measure of knowledge of organizational goals and values was actually assessing organizational goals and values congruence. For example, two of the measurement items are “I believe that I fit in well with my organization” and “the goals of my organization are also my goals” (Chao et al. 1994, p. 735). Thus, their study suggests that a newcomer with low work value congruence is more likely to leave the organization.

Proposition 10. When the newcomer has strong work value belief strength, low work value congruence will lead to an increased likelihood of turnover.

In summary, of the four dissonance reduction strategies examined, an employee with strong internal work values that are inconsistent with the organization’s values is most likely to use the latter three strategies presented: derogating the source of the aversive stimuli; bolstering the original attitude; or leaving the situation. All three of these strategies are likely to cause the newcomer to display attitudes and behaviors that will decrease his/her organizational identification and involvement in work-related activities.

While low work value congruence under conditions of a strong belief strength may have a negative impact on the newcomer’s attitude towards the organization, it is not expected to influence job performance and other behaviors (such as attendance) that may lead to termination. Kelman’s (1958) compliance-based motivation suggests that the newcomer will comply with organizational goals and values in a desire to avoid punishment (i.e. disciplinary actions), despite the fact that the individual does not believe in those goals and values. Specifically, compliance occurs when an individual accepts influence in the hope of gaining some reward or avoiding some punishment to which the influence source has access. However, a compliant action is conducted for expe- diency, not because the individual has changed beliefs (Smith 1976). Thus, in order to avoid disciplinary action, a newcomer with low work value congruence may engage in compliant behaviors.

Proposition 11. When the newcomer has a strong belief strength, low work value congruence will be associated with more compliant behaviors.

Weak Belief Strength/Low Work Value Congruence

When the individual has a weak belief strength in his/her work values, low work value congruence will most likely change to high work value congruence in response to socialization. Research has shown that individual value change

SOCIALI~T~ON AND VALUES 441

has occurred in response to socialization; however, the effects are often weak and inconsistent (Ashforth & Saks 1996; Chao et al. 1994; Chatman 1991; Hazer & Alvares 1981). Hazer and Alvares found that extrinsic values (attitudes toward earnings and social status) changed in response to socialization, but intrinsic work values (pride-in-work and activity preference) did not change. Similarly, Chatman (1991) found that only two (mentoring and social activities) of the four socialization tactics studied related to work value congruence change over time. Ashforth and Saks (1996) found that collective socialization tactics positively related to person change; however, person change was negatively related to job satisfaction and intentions to quit and positively related to stress and role conflict. Finally, Chao et al. (1994) found that organizational value congruence did not change among job incumbents, but that it did increase among job changers and organizational changers. Additionally, job and organizational changers had the lowest scores on work value congruence prior to changing jobs/organizations. They suggested that these changers switched to jobs/organizations that were more congruent with their own beliefs. In summary, research has had inconsistent findings as to whether or not people’s values will change in response to socialization.

According to cognitive dissonance theory and research on values, individuals’ belief strength is an important consideration (Fishbein & Azjen 1975; Sherman & Gorkin 1980). If the person has a weak belief in values that are inconsistent with the organization, the inconsistency may heighten the individual’s awareness of the organization’s values and his/her own values, and the fact that there is low work value congruence. Because the person’s values are weak, it is possible that organizational socialization will alter the person’s values in order to be more in line with the organization’s values and reduce the individuals dissonance. It is likely that the positive results found between socialization and change in work value congruence is a result of the fact that newcomers with a weak belief strength are easily influenced by socialization.

Proposition l2. When the newcomer has a weak belief strength, socialization tactics are more likely to change the newcomer’s values to be more consistent with the organization’s values (increase work value congruence).

Weak Belief Strength/High Work Value Congruence

The fact that some newcomers will have a weak belief strength in their own work values may explain the moderate ~lations~ps between high work value congruence and work attitudes. For these individuals, it may be that work value congruence is not important. Instead, the newcomer with a weak belief strength may be more motivated by compliance-based commitment (Kelman 1958). In this case, newcomers will focus on meeting behavioral standards of the people who control valued resources (Kelman 1958). Thus, it is expected that newcomers with a weak belief strength in work values will engage in compliant behaviors in order to avoid punishments such as termination, and to gain rewards such as increases in salary and recognition. Research has found that individuals who have compliance-based commitment are less likely to

442 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOLUME 7. NUMBER 4. 1997

engage in prosocial behaviors (O’Reilly & Chatman 1986) or to change attitudes following a cultural sensitivity training class (Smith 1976). Instead, employees motivated by compliance are more likely to engage in strictly instru- mental activities toward meeting rewards (Cooper 1969).

Proposition 13. When newcomers have a weak belief strength, high work value congruence will have little effect on attitudes and behaviors. Instead, newcomers will be motivated by compliance-based commitment and achiev- ing desired rewards.

CONCLUSION

The goal of this article was to present a framework for understanding how newcomers learn organizational goals and values and the outcomes associated with knowledge of the organizational goals and values domain. It was suggested that newcomers will learn more about the organizational goals and values through institutionalized socialization tactics and monitoring organizational insiders. Once the goals and values of the organization are learned, this framework takes into account the fact that the person may not agree with those goals and values. According to the interactional framework, high work value congruence leads to increased organizational identification and OCBs toward the organization when the newcomer has a strong belief in those work values. In contrast, low work value congruence can lead to increases in turnover, involvement in non-work activities, and decreases in organizational identification behaviors. Clearly these behaviors are detrimental to the organization’s success, thus, organizations should be concerned with low work value congruence.

The model contributes to the socialization and work value congruence literature in several ways. First, it acknowledged that socialization does not take place in isolation by integrating both the proactive and reactive sides of socialization. The antecedents to knowledge of the organizational goals and values domain included both organizational tactics and the newcomer’s information- seeking tactics. Furthermore, the model recognized that there will be individual differences in responding to the acquired knowledge. Specifically, the model suggested that the individual’s work values must match the organization’s work values in order for knowledge acquisition to lead to positive attitudes and behaviors. Thirdly, this article attempts to explain the inconsistencies in work value congruence research and whether or not socialization can alter a person’s value structure. By incorporating belief strength and work value congruence as a key interaction in the socialization process, these inconsistencies may be explained. Finally, and most importantly, the model focuses on a specific content area of socialization in order to better understand how newcomers respond to socialization of organizational values and goals. Through more focused models of the socialization process, we can begin to better understand how newcomers learn and react to the various content areas of socialization (Bauer et al. in press).


Future research needs to empirically test the propositions using longitudinal studies in order to validate the model as a developmental process. Several of the constructs proposed to be outcomes of low work value congruence have not been examined in previous research. In order to test the propositions, researchers will need to examine variables to measure external corporate image, low organizational identification behaviors, and compliant behaviors. Measures for assessing external corporate image may include the newcomer’s perception of the organization’s reputation (Dutton et al. 1994). Behaviors related to low organizational identification may include bad-mouthing the company or non-attendance at company-sponsored social activities. Compliant behaviors may include in-role performance, working overtime only when abso- lutely necessary, showing up to work exactly on time (never earlier), and following company-policies even when the person doesn’t believe in them. These suggestions are intended to guide future research and are by no means exhaus- tive possibilities.

Additionally, research needs to use longitudinal field studies to compare individuals who left the organization with those who remained with the organization after the initial socialization phase, such as that used by Chao et al. (1994). Only through such a study could the role of work value congruence during the socialization process be fully captured. Future research should also examine whether or not newcomers obtain different types of information from organizational socialization tactics in comparison with their own proactive information-seeking. It might be that information-seeking is very limited in scope, whereas, socialization tactics provide a wide array of information. Final- ly, the socialization literature would be greatly advanced if controlled experi- ments were conducted in order to examine the cognitive processes behind the socialization experience. Is cognitive dissonance explaining why some people don’t always experience positive outcomes even though they have already learned about much of the organizational domains? These questions need to be answered in order to advance the socialization literature.

In conclusion, it seems that research is needed that begins to examine the specific content areas of socialization in order to fully understand the socialization process. I hope that the theoretical framework and the related set of research propositions suggested here will stimulate additional study about how the socialization process is most effective.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This article is a revised version of a paper originally presented at the Southern Management Association Meetings, November, 1996, New Orleans, LA. The author wishes to thank Talya Bauer, Allison Harrison, Robert Liden, and especially Sandy Wayne for helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article. The author also thanks three anonymous reviewers of this journal who provided valuable comments that greatly contributed to the final version of this article.

444 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOLUME 7. NUMBER 4.1997

NOTE

1. Miller and Jablin (1991) identified additional forms of information-seeking: indi- rect questions, use of third parties, testing limits, disguised conversations, and surveil- lance. I am using only the two modes described by Ashford and Cummings to be consistent with empirical research (e.g., Ashford 1986; Morrison 1993a, 1993b). This decision is also consistent with Miller and Jablin’s conclusion that inquiry and monitoring are used to a considerably greater extent than the other tactics identified by them.

REFERENCES

Adkins, C. L., C. J. Russell, and J. D. Werbel. 1994. “Judgments of Fit in the Selection Process: The Role of Work Value Congruence.” Personnel Psychology 47:605-623.

Allen, N. J. and J. P. Meyer. 1990. “Organizational Socialization Tactics: A Longitudinal Analysis of Links to Newcomers’ Commitment and Role Orientation.“Aca&my of Management Journal 33~847-858.

Ashford, S. J. 1986. “Feedback-Seeking in Individual Adaptation: A Resource Perspec- tive.” Academy of Management Journal 29:465-487.

Ashford, S. J. and J. S. Black. 1996. “Proactivity During Organizational Entry: The Role of Desire for Control.” Journal of Applied Psychology 81:199-214.

Ashford, S. J. and L. L. Cummings. 1983. “Feedback As an Individual Resource: Person- al Strategies of Creating Information.” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 32:370-398.

Ashford, S. J. and S. M. Taylor. 1990. “Adaptation to Work Transitions: An Integrative Approach.” Pp. l-39 in Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management (Vol. 8), edited by G. R. Ferris and K. M. Rowland. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Ashford, B. E. and A. M. Saks. 1996. “Socialization Tactics: Longitudinal Effects on Newcomer Adjustment.” Academy of Management Journal 39:149-178.

Baker, W. K. 1995. “Allen & Meyer’s 1990 Longitudinal Study: A Reanalysis and Rein- terpretation Using Structural Equation Modeling.” Human Relations 48:169- 186.

Bauer, T. N. and S. G. Green. 1994. “Effect of Newcomer Involvement in Work-Related Activities: A Longitudinal Study of Socialization.” Journal of Applied Psychology 79:211-233.

-. 1998. “Testing the Combined Effects of Newcomer Information Seeking and Managerial Behavior on Socialization.” Journal of Applied Psychology 83:72-83.

Bauer, T. N., E. W. Morrison, and R. R. Callister. (in press). “Organizational Socializa- tion: A Review and Directions for Future Research.” in Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management (Vol. 161, edited by G. R. Ferris. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Becker, T. E., D. M. Randall, and C. D. Riegel. 1995. “The Multidimensional View of Commitment and the Theory of Reasoned Action: A Comparative Evaluation.” Journal of Management 21:617-638.

Becker, T. E., R. S. Billings, D. M. Eveleth, and N. L. Gilbert. 1996. “Foci and Bases of Employee Commitment: Implications for Job Performance.” Academy of Munuge- ment Journal 39:464-482.

Blau, G. 1988. “An Investigation of the Apprenticeship Organizational Socialization Strategy.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 32:176-195.

Bretz, R. D. and T. A. Judge. 1994. “Person-Organization Fit and the Theory of Work


Adjustment: Implications for Satisfaction, Tenure, and Career Success.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 44~32-54.

Chao, G. T., A. M. O’Leary-Kelly, S. Wolf, H. J. Klein, and P. D. Gardner. 1994. “Organi- zational Socialization: Its Content and Consequences.” Journal of Applied Psy- chology 79:730-743.

Chatman, J. A. 1989. “Improving Interactional Organizational Research: A Model of Person-Organization Fit.” Academy of Management Review 14:333-349.

Chatman, J. A. 1991. “Matching People and Organizations: Selection and Socialization in Public Accounting Firms.” Administrative Science Quarterly 36:459-484.

Cooper, C. L. 1969. “The Influence of the Trainer on Participant Change in T-Groups.” Human Relations 22:515-530.

Dawis, S. and L. H. Lofquist. 1984. A Psychological Theory of Work Adjustment. Min- neapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Dose, J. J. 1997. “Work Values: An Integrative Framework and Illustrative Application to Organizational Socialization.” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 70:219-240.

Dreher, G. and R. Ash. 1990. “A Comparative Study of Mentoring Among Men and Women in Managerial, Professional, and Technical Positions.” Journul ofApplied Psychology 75:539-546.

Dutton, D. G. and R. A. Lake. 1973. meat of Own Prejudice and Reverse Discrimina- tion in Interracial Situations.” Journal of Personality and Social Aychology 28:98-107.

Dutton, J. E., J. M. Dukerich, and C. V. Harquail. 1994. “Organizational Images and Member Identification.” Administrative Science Quarterly 39:239-263.

Elliot, A. J. and P. G. Devine. 1994. “On the Motivational Nature of Cognitive Disso- nance: Dissonance as Psychological Discomfort.” Journal of Personality and So- cial Psychology 67:382-394.

Feldman, D. C. 1981. “The Multiple Socialization of Organization Members.“Aca&my of Management Review 6:309-318.

Festinger, L. A. 1957. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univer- sity Press.

Fishbein, M. and I. Azjen. 1975. Beliefs, Attitudes, Intentions, and Behavior: An Zntro- duction to Theory and Research. Philippines: Addison Wesley Publishing Com- pany.

Fisher, C. D. 1985. “Social Support and Adjustment to Work: A Longitudinal Study.” Journal of Management 11:39-53.

-. 1986. “Organizational Socialization: An Integrative Review.” Research in Per- sonnel and Human Resources Management 4:101-145.

Fiske, S. T and S. E. Taylor. 1984. “Social Cognitions.” New York Newberry Award Records, Incorporated.

George, J. M. 1992. “The Role of Personality in Organizational Life: Issues and Evi- dence.” Journal of Management 18:185-213.

George, J. M. and G. R. Jones. 1997. “Experiencing Work: Values, Attitudes, and Moods.” Human Relations 50:393-419.

Green, S. G. 1991. “Professional Entry and the Adviser Relationship.” Group & Organi- zation Studies 16:387-407.

Hall, D. T., B. Schneider, H. T. Nygren. 1970. “Personal Factors in Organizational Identification.” Administrative Science Quarterly 15:176-190.

Hazer, J. T and K. M. Alvares. 1981. “Police Work Values During Organizational Entry and Assimilation.” Journal of Applied Psychology 66:12-18.

446 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOLUME 7, NUMBER 4. 1997

Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Jones, G. R. 1986. “Socialization Tactics, Self-Efficacy, & Newcomers’ Adjustments to Organizations.” Academy of Management Journal 29:262-279.

Kelman, H. C. 1958. “Compliance, Identification and Internalisation.” Journal of Con- flict Resolution 2:51-60.

Kristof, A. L. 1996. “Person-Organization Fit: An Integrative Review Of Its Conceptual- izations, Measurement, and Implications.” Personnel Psychology 49:1-49.

Kunda, Z. 1990. “The Case for Motivated Reasoning.” Psychological Bulletin 108:480- 498.

Leikowitz, J. 1994. “Sex-Related Differences in Job Attitudes and Dispositional Vari- ables: Now You See Them, . . . n Academy of Management Journal 37:323-349.

Louis, M. R. 1980. “Surprise and Sense Making: What Newcomers Experience in Enter- ing Unfamiliar Organizational Settings.” Administrative .!%ien.ce Quarterly 25~226-248.

Louis, M. R., B. Z. Posner, and G. N. Powell. 1983. “The Availability and Helpfulness of Socialization Practices.” Personnel Psychology 36:857-865.

Luske, E. and B. Oliver. 1974. “American Managers’ Personal Value Systems Revisited.” Academy of Management Journal 17:549-554.

Major, D. A., S. W. Kozlowski, G. T. Chao, and P. D. Gardner. 1995. “A Longitudinal Investigation of Newcomer Expectations, Early Socialization Outcomes, and the Moderating Effects of Role Development Relationships.” Journal of Applied Psy- chology 80:418-431.

Meglino, B. M., E. C. Ravlin, and C. L. Adkins. 1989. “A Work Values Approach to Corporate Culture: A Field Test of the Value Congruence Process and Its Rela- tionship to Individual Outcomes.” Journal of Applied Psychology 74~424-432.

Miller, V. D. and F. M. Jablin. 1991. “Information-Seeking During Organizational En- try: Influences, Tactics, and a Model of the Process.” Academy of Management Review 16:92-120.

Morrison, E. W. 1993a. “Longitudinal Study of the Effects of Information-Seeking on Newcomer Socialization.” Journal of Applied Psychology 78:173-183.

-. 1993b. “Newcomer Information-Seeking: Exploring Types, Modes, Sources, and Outcomes.“Acadcmy of Management Journal 36:557-589.

O’Reilly, C. and J. A. Chatman. 1986. “Organizational Commitment and Psychological Attachment: The Effects of Compliance, Identification, and Internalization on Prosocial Behavior.” Journal of Applied Psychology 71:492-499.

O’Reilly, C. A., J. A. Chatman, and D. F. Caldwell. 1991. “People and Organizational Culture: A Profile Comparison Approach to Assessing Person-Organization Fit.” Academy of Management Journal 34:487-516.

Ostroff, C. 1993a. “The Effects of Climate and Personal Influences on Individual Behav- ior and Attitudes in Organizations.” Organizational Behavior and Human Deci- sion Processes 56:56-90.

-. 1993b. “Relationship Between Person-Environment Congruence and Organiza- tional Effectiveness.” GFOU~ and Organization Management 18:103-122.

Ostroff, C. and S. Kozlowski. 1992. “Organizational Socialization As a Learning Process: The Role of Information Acquisition.” Personnel Psychology 45:849-874.

-. 1993. “The Role of Mentoring in the Information Gathering Process of New- comers During Early Organizational Socialization.“Journal of Vocational Behav- i0F 42:170-183.


Pervin, L. A. 1968. uPerformance and Satisfaction As a Function of Individual-Environ- ment Fit.” Psychological Bulletin 6956-68.

Raelin, J. A. 1986. “The Clash of Cultures: Managers and Professionals.” Boston, MA; Harvard Business School Press.

Reichers, A. E. 1987. “An Interactionist Perspective on Newcomer Socialization Rates.” Academy of Management Review 12~278-287.

Rokeach, M. 1968. “Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values: A Theory of Organization and Change. Jossey-San Francisco, CA: Bass Incorporated.

Rynes, S. and B. Gerhart. 1990. “Interviewer Assessments of Applicant ‘fit’: An Explor- atory Investigation.” Personnel Psychology 43:13-35.

Saks, A. M. 1996. “The Relationship Between the Amount and Helpfulness of Entry Training and Work Outcomes.” Human Relations 49:429-451.

Schein, E. H. 1968. “Organizational Socialization and the Profession of Management.” Industrial Management Review 9:1-16.

Schneider, B. 1987. “The People Make the Place.” Personnel Psychology 40~437-453. Schneider, B., H. W. Goldstein, and D. B. Smith. 1995. “The ASA Framework: An

Update.” Personnel Psychology 48:747-773. Sheridan, J. E. 1992. “Organizational Culture and Employee Retention.” Academy of

Management Journal 35:1036-1056. Sherman, S. J. and L. Gorkin. 1980. “Attitude Bolstering When Behavior Is Inconsis-

tent With Central Attitudes.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 16:388- 403.

Smith, C. A., D. W. Organ, and J. P. Near. 1983. “Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its Nature and Antecedents.” Journal of Applied Psychology 68:653-663.

Smith, P. B. 1976. “Social Influence Processes, and the Outcome of Sensitivity Train- ing.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 34:1087-1094.

Steele, C. M. 1975. “Name-Calling and Compliance.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31:361-369.

-. 1988. “The Psychology of Self-Affirmation: Sustaining the Integrity of the Self.” Pp. 261-346 in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 211, edited by L. Berkowitz. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Sussman, M. and R. P. Vecchio. 1987. “Social Influence and Interpretation of Worker Motivation.” Pp. 279-292. in Motivation and Work Behavior (4th ed.), edited by R. M. Steers and L. M. Porter. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Tannenbaum, S. I., J. E. Mathieu, E. Salas, and J. A. Cannon-Bowers. 1991. “Meeting Trainees’ Expectations: The Influence of Training Fulfillment on the Develop- ment of Commitment, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation.” Journal ofApplied Psychol- ogy 76:759-769.

Terborg, J. R. 1981. “Interactional Psychology and Research on Human Behavior in Organizations.” Academy of Management Review 6:569-576.

Vancouver, J. B. and N. W. Schmitt. 1991. “An Exploratory Examination of Person- Organization Fit.” Personnel Psychology 44~333-352.

Van Maanen, J. and E. H. Schein. 1979. “Toward a Theory of Organizational Socializa- tion.” Research in Organizational Behavior 1:209-264.

Vardi, Y., Y. Weiner, and M. Poppa. 1989. ‘The Value Content of Organizational Mission As a Factor in the Commitment of Members.” Psychological Reports 65~27-34.