Citation
The effects of two organizational socialization strategies

Material Information

Title:
The effects of two organizational socialization strategies on job satisfaction, general satisfaction, participation, and workfamily conflict
Creator:
Zahrly, Janice Honea ( Dissertant )
Tose, Henry L. ( Thesis advisor )
James, John H. ( Reviewer )
Blair, Roger D. ( Reviewer )
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publisher:
University of Florida
Publication Date:
Copyright Date:
1984
Language:
English
Physical Description:
xi, 158 leaves : ill. ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Employees ( jstor )
Family conflict ( jstor )
Job satisfaction ( jstor )
Labor ( jstor )
Linear regression ( jstor )
Locus of control ( jstor )
Mathematical variables ( jstor )
Modeling ( jstor )
Social interaction ( jstor )
Socialization ( jstor )
Dissertations, Academic -- Management and Administrative Sciences -- UF
Management and Administrative Sciences thesis Ph. D
Socialization -- Case studies ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Abstract:
The relationship of specific organizational socialization strategies to job satisfaction, general satisfaction, participation, and work/family conflict was studied in a natural field experiment. Subjects were sixty-four new employees at a manufacturing plant which was beginning operations. Half of the new employees experienced formal group socialization into the organization; the other half experienced informal individual socialization. Formal group socialization lasted from five to nine weeks, encompassed technical information as well as company policies and procedures, and occurred before employees began work. Employees who experienced informal individual socialization began work on the production floor immediately upon entry into the organization and learned on the job. Personality and demographic measures were obtained when subjects were initially employed. These were measures of entry skill level, similar work experience, self-monitoring, and locus of control. During the first four months of work, the variety of job assignments was assessed by observation. Approximately four months after beginning work, job satisfaction, general satisfaction, participation, and work/ family conflict were measured. The mode of socialization appears to have some fairly strong effects. Those employees who were socialized by formal group methods had significantly higher job satisfaction and higher work/ family conflict than employees who experienced informal individual socialization. Socialization strategy did not contribute to general satisfaction or participation. The differential effect of socialization strategy was greatest for new employees with low job skills. Highly skilled employees were influenced slightly by the socialization strategy experienced. Self-monitoring, the sensitivity to social cues and subsequent adjustment of self-presentation by individuals, was found to be negatively related to work/ family conflict. Job variety, similar work experience, and locus of control, concomitant with socialization strategy, did not demonstrate significant relationships with job satisfaction, general satisfaction, participation, or work/family conflict.
Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1984.
Bibliography:
Bibliography: leaves 149-157.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Janice Honea Zahrly.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
030528955 ( AlephBibNum )
11802275 ( OCLC )
ACP5959 ( NOTIS )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text














THE EFFECTS OF TWO ORGANIZATIONAL SOCIALIZATION STRATEGIES
ON JOB SATISFACTION, GENERAL SATISFACTION,
PARTICIPATION, AND WORK/FAMILY CONFLICT













By

JANICE HONEA ZAHRLY


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL
FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY



UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


1984

















ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


This dissertation could not have been completed without

the significant contributions of many people. My committee

members have each made unique contributions. The theoret-

ical guidance, constant questioning, push for excellence,

and patient editing of Professor Henry Tosi were invaluable.

Professor Roger Blair's direction and support have been con-

stant through my Ph.D. program. Professor John James has

clarified the focus of this study and the implications of

the research findings. The guidance in statistical method-

ology and analysis of Professor Kim Sawyer was particularly

helpful.

The enthusiastic cooperation of the employees of Metal

Container Corporation, Gainesville Lid Plant, Gainesville,

Florida, made this research effort a positive experience.

Their willingness to give time and information is greatly

appreciated. The full cooperation of the plant manager,

Gary Reynolds, was essential to the completion of this pro-

ject.

Data collection and some analysis were supported by

a research grant from the National Science Foundation to

Professor Henry Tosi. I received financial support as a

research assistant from the grant.










Many friends encouraged me. In particular, Kelly

Vaverek, Larry Varela, and Eleanor Brown, were always a

source of encouragement and emotional support. Also,

Kelly's constant assistance with the computer analysis was

indispensable.

Finally, I acknowledge the contribution of my parents,

John Wiley Honea, Sr., and Lillian McKown Honea. They have

always believed that I could do anything and have supported

my dreams, even when surprised by my endeavors.



















TABLE OF CONTENTS


CHAPTER

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . .

LIST OF TABLES . . . . .

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . .

ABSTRACT . . . . . . .

CHAPTER

I THE MODEL AND HYPOTHESES

The Bases of Socialization
Socialization Strategies
The Proposed Research . .
Summary . . . . .

II RESEARCH DESIGN . . .

Research Setting . . .
Measures . . . . .
Methodology . . . .
Summary . . . . .

III RESULTS . . . . .


Socialization Strategies-Outcomes
Relationships . . . . . .
Factors Contributing to Desired Outcomes
Summary . . . . . . . . .

IV CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS . . .

The Influence of Socialization Strategy .
Implications . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . .


PAGE

. . . . . ii

. . . . . vi

. . . . . ix

. . . . . x











PAGE

APPENDICES

A INSTRUMENTS . . . . . . ... 139

B RANKING OF TASK VARIETY . . . . .. .146

C CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT . . . ... 148

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . 149

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH . . . . . . . ... 158


















LIST OF TABLES


Table Page

1. Base Wage Progression Steps . . . ... .50

2. Demographics . . . . . . . .. 52

3. Internal Consistency of Scales . . . .. .54

4. Schedule of Employment and Training . . .. .59

5. Schedule of Measurement of Variables ... .67

6. Regression Formulae . . . . . ... 72

7. Correlation Coefficients . . . . .. 77

8. Mean Scores on Dependent Variables . . .. .80

9. Job Satisfaction Regression Using Full Model .83

10. Job Satisfaction Stepwise Regression ... .84

11. General Satisfaction Regression Using Full
Model . . . . . . . . ... . 86

12. Participation Regression Using Full Model . 87

13. Work/Family Conflict Stepwise Regression
Using Full Model . . . . . ... 89

14. Mean Scores on Independent Variables ... .92

15. Job Satisfaction Regression Using Entry Skill
Level . . . . . . . . ... . 94

16. Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using
Entry Skill Level . . . . . . .. .94

17. Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Entry
Skill Level . . . . . . . ... 95

18. Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression
Using Entry Skill Level . . . . .. 95










LIST OF TABLES (continued)


Table Page

19. Job Satisfaction Regression Using Similar Work
Experience . . . . . . . ... 98

20. Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using
Similar Work Experience . . . . .. 98

21. Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Similar
Work Experience . . . . . . .. 99

22. Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression
Using Similar Work Experience . . ... 99

23. Job Satisfaction Regression Using Job
Variety . . . . . . . . . 101

24. Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using
Job Variety . . . . . . . . 101

25. Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Job
Variety . . . . . . . . ... 102

26. Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression
Using Job Variety . . . . . ... .102

27. Job Satisfaction Regression Using
Self-Monitoring . . . . . . .. .104

28. Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using
Self-Monitoring . . . . . . ... .104

29. Work/Family Conflict Regression Using
Self-Monitoring . . . . . ... .105

30. Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression
Using Self-Monitoring . . . . . .. .105

31. Job Satisfaction Regression Using Locus of
Control . . . . . . . . ... 107

32. Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using
Locus of Control . . . . . ... .107

33. Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Locus of
Control . . . . . . . . ... 108

34. Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression Using
Locus of Control . . . . . ... .108

35. Summary Results of Tests of Hypotheses . . 110










LIST OF TABLES (continued)


Table Page

36. Regression Results . . . . . ... 120

37. Mean Scores on Job Satisfaction by Social-
ization Strategy and Entry Skill Level . 122

38. Mean Scores on Work/Family Conflict by
Socialization Strategy and Self-Monitoring 126


viii


















LIST OF FIGURES


Figure Page

1. Models of Socialization . . . . .. 14

2. Organization Chart . . . . . .. 44

3. Plot of the Residuals of Socialization
Strategy and Entry Skill Level Against Job
Satisfaction Using a Moderated Regression 96

















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy


THE EFFECTS OF TWO ORGANIZATIONAL SOCIALIZATION STRATEGIES
ON JOB SATISFACTION, GENERAL SATISFACTION,
PARTICIPATION, AND WORK/FAMILY CONFLICT


By

Janice Honea Zahrly

August, 1984


Chairman: Henry L. Tosi
Major Department: Management and Administrative Sciences

The relationship of specific organizational socializa-

tion strategies to job satisfaction, general satisfaction,

participation, and work/family conflict was studied in a

natural field experiment. Subjects were sixty-four new

employees at a manufacturing plant which was beginning oper-

ations. Half of the new employees experienced formal group

socialization into the organization; the other half exper-

ienced informal individual socialization. Formal group

socialization lasted from five to nine weeks, encompassed

technical information as well as company policies and proce-

dures, and occurred before employees began work. Employees

who experienced informal individual socialization began work

on the production floor immediately upon entry into the

organization and learned on the job.









Personality and demographic measures were obtained when

subjects were initially employed. These were measures of

entry skill level, similar work experience, self-monitoring,

and locus of control. During the first four months of work,

the variety of job assignments was assessed by observation.

Approximately four months after beginning work, job satis-

faction, general satisfaction, participation, and work/

family conflict were measured.

The mode of socialization appears to have some fairly

strong effects. Those employees who were socialized by for-

mal group methods had significantly higher job satisfaction

and higher work/family conflict than employees who experi-

enced informal individual socialization. Socialization

strategy did not contribute to general satisfaction or

participation.

The differential effect of socialization strategy was

greatest for new employees with low job skills. Highly

skilled employees were influenced slightly by the socializa-

tion strategy experienced.

Self-monitoring, the sensitivity to social cues and

subsequent adjustment of self-presentation by individuals,

was found to be negatively related to work/family conflict.

Job variety, similar work experience, and locus of control,

concomitant with socialization strategy, did not demonstrate

significant relationships with job satisfaction, general

satisfaction, participation, or work/family conflict.

















CHAPTER I

THE MODEL AND HYPOTHESES



When I first went out on the floor to work, I knew
what I was supposed to be doing because we had
been taught about the equipment in class. We knew
what was expected. I also knew who I could depend
on and who I could trust because I had been in
class with them for weeks. I knew who would help
me. But I remember Sam's first day on the job.
He was bagging and it was awful. He was sweating,
making a lot of mistakes. He was just dropped in
on the floor with no training. He didn't even
know the people or who to go to for help. I know
it was a rough day for him. I guess I did have an
advantage after all. (Hourly Employee, 1984)

Socialization is the process by which individuals

acquire the values, beliefs, and behaviors that are neces-

sary for satisfactory membership in society. The socializa-

tion process occurs through many activities such as parental

guidance, formal training, informal observation and role

modeling, trial and error, apprenticeship, etc. (Caplow,

1964; Van Maanen, 1976; Wanous, 1980). The construct of

socialization has been developed and researched extensively

in sociology and developmental psychology but has only

recently become an area of interest to behavioral scien-

tists who study organizations. While there were some early

theoretical articles concerning socialization in organiza-

tions, the construct was given its current definition and









empirical validation primarily through the work of Schein

(1968, 1971, 1978, 1980).

Generic definitions of socialization are broad and

non-specific. For example, Mead (1972, p. ix) defines it as

"the process by which human children born potentially human

become human, able to function within the societies in which

they are born," and Williams (1972, p. 293) defines it as

"the process of transmission of human culture." Organiza-

tional socialization is more restricted. Organizational

socialization is focused on adults rather than children, who

are often the subjects of sociological and developmental

psychological socializational analyses. Work organization

socialization is the "process by which a person learns the

values, norms, and required behaviors which permit him to

participate as a member of the organization" (Van Maanen,

1976, p. 67). An even more elementary conceptualization of

socialization is that it is the process of "breaking in"

(Van Maanen, 1976). Organizational socialization directs

attention to the specific processes in an organization

setting.

Socialization is the influence of the organization on

the individual, as differentiated from the individual's

influence upon the organization. It is recognized that

individuals are not pawns, subject only to the organi-

zation's pressures. Organizations change because of

individual influence; individuals change because of organ-

izational influence. Bakke (1955) wrote of the newcomer









"personalizing" the organization; Porter, Lawler, and

Hackman (1975) refer to the "individualization" process when

a newcomer influences the organization; Schein (1971)

describes the "role innovator" who influences the organiza-

tion. Influence in both directions is important. However,

this study is limited to the effects of the organization, as

a total entity and as groups and/or individual members upon

the newcomer.

A final point of clarification regarding the socializa-

tion construct is in order. The construct is defined in

terms of both processes and outcomes. The word "process" is

a part of most definitions of socialization with the under-

standing that process can be a multitude of procedures or

behaviors used to bring about socialization. The particular

procedures used to influence the novice are contingent on

the situation, the individuals being socialized, and the

socializing agents (those who attempt to influence the

newcomers).

Socialization is also defined in terms of the desired

outcomes such as "participating and effective members"

(Feldman, 1981), or persons who "acquire the social know-

ledge and skills necessary to assume an organizational role"

(Van Maanen and Schein, 1979), or "society creates persons

suitable to carry out its functional requirements" (Brim,

1976).










The Bases of Socialization

The effects of socialization can be understood in terms

of role theory and socialization theory. Specific models of

socialization follow from socialization theory.



Role Theory

Not only is socialization theory founded in role

theory; it uses the language of role theory. Social rela-

tionships are defined as any relationship between people in

any situation, including work situations. Role theory

provides a model for understanding and defining the struc-

ture of social relationships (Shaw and Costanzo, 1982). In

their seminal book on role theory, Biddle and Thomas (1966)

argue that there is no "one grand" theory of role. Instead,

there are many hypotheses about roles which may or may not

be related. They point out that these hypotheses are often

difficult to test empirically. In general, researchers do

not attempt to test complete theories of role. Instead,

researchers study many role variables such as role conflict,

role ambiguity, role reversal, or expected behaviors in

roles.

Underlying constructs of role theory are best explained

as categories and in relation to each other. Biddle and

Thomas (1966) present exhaustive classification schemes

which are used to partion persons, behaviors, sets of

persons and behaviors, and to relate sets of persons and

behaviors.










Persons are differentiated as to the actor (e.g. focal

person, self, ego) and the "other" person (e.g. target

person, alter-ego). Shaw and Costanzo (1982) explain that

the "other" is a "generalized entity which the person

utilizes as a reference point for his own behavior"

(p. 297).

Behaviors may relate to performance, prescription,

evaluation, description, and sanction. Behavior may be

overt or covert; it may be individual or aggregate. Perfor-

mance is classified in terms of ends or goals, not means to

an end. Outcomes are the results of role performance.

Role prescription defines the expected behaviors.

Norms are covert prescriptions and role demands are overt

prescriptions, although some writers use norms and prescrip-

tions interchangeably. Role prescriptions are often couched

in phrases such as "ought to" or "should" or "expected."

Prescriptions are generalized expected behaviors. Behaviors

may be evaluated or judged against particular standards or

values. Behaviors may also be described or sanctioned.

Concepts which involve sets of persons and behaviors

are positions and roles. Position is a recognized category

of persons with a common attribute, common behavior, or

common reactions of others toward the individual or group.

A general definition of role is that "role is the set of

prescriptions defining what the behavior of a position

member should be" (Biddle and Thomas, 1966, p. 29). Katz

and Kahn (1966) call roles "standardized patterns of










behavior required of all persons playing a part in a given

functional relationship" (p. 37). Bakke (1955) points out

that roles are never in isolation. Persons always perform

roles in relation to others or perceived expectations of

others.

Actors have many sets of expectations imposed upon them

simultaneously. For example, a particular actor may have a

position of college professor, i.e. a category of people

with many common attributes and behaviors who elicit common

reactions from others in society. There are certain

expected behaviors (norms or role demands) for the person

occupying the position of college professor. Students

expect the professor to lecture, assign grades, advise, etc.

and perform the role of a teacher. Other professors expect

the professor to act as a colleague, to discuss theories and

research, to collaborate, and to act in accordance with

their similar professional values. The department chair-

person and dean expect the professor to teach and get good

student evaluations, research and publish, get outside

financial support in the form of grants and contracts, and

be supportive of administrative practices. All "others" who

interact with the professor expect specific behaviors from

the professor. These behaviors define the roles which the

professor enacts. It should be noted that this relationship

is reciprocal. The professor also has a set of prescriptive

behaviors for all of the "others" whom he or she encounters.

In addition, the professor will have other roles in the









position of parent, lover, consultant, community leader,

etc. Each of these roles carries sets of prescribed behav-

iors or norms.

The final role concept is one of relationships between

sets of persons and behaviors. This covers such areas as

similarity of behaviors, interdependence of behaviors and

various combinations of similarity and interdependence such

as conformity and adjustment. With the basic constructs of

role theory delineated, it is possible to understand social-

ization theory.



Socialization Theory

The culture of a group can be expressed in terms of its

values, attitudes, knowledge, and norms. In broad terms,

individuals acquire the culture of their social groups

through socialization (Brim, 1976). Learning the culture

allows the individual to be a functioning member of the

group or society.

Those people who do not learn the necessary norms,

behaviors, values, and motives are deviants. They are

punished physically or emotionally by society, and in

extreme cases are removed from the general social group and

isolated in facilities such as prisons or mental institu-

tions (Brim and Wheeler, 1976).

Role prescriptions define the allowed deviance. Some

expected behaviors allow no deviance. For example, college

students must pay tuition if they wish to remain in the









role of students. The expected behavior must occur with no

deviation. On the other hand, there is a great range of

behavior and deviance from that behavior when evaluating the

acceptable behavior of students at a school athletic event.

The expected behaviors range from polite cheering to rowdy

chants to obscene chants, gestures, and signs.

The norms and demands of roles define the behaviors as

well as the range of behaviors and the amount of deviance

allowed before punishment. Of course, the legal system of a

society also defines expected behaviors and limits the range

of those behaviors. When deviance occurs, society almost

always continues resocialization efforts in an attempt to

bring the deviant behaviors into generally accepted (i.e.

conforming) behaviors. Most people choose to comply with

society's values rather than become total deviates.

Deliberate socialization efforts are one method of

effecting control. The more effective the socialization,

the less the need for overt organizational controls (Simon,

1957). As individuals become socialized, that is they learn

and perform the expected behaviors, less organizational

control, less managerial effort and fewer organizational

resources are needed to direct their behaviors within the

organization. Socialization brings about the expected

behaviors because many role demands (overt prescriptions)

are internalized by the individual over time and become

norms. For example, an organization might consistently tell

employees that the primary production goal is a quality









product. After hearing this enough and after receiving

positive reinforcements for quality production, employees

may internalize this goal of a quality product, i.e. accept

the goal as a personal one, and would then work to produce a

quality product regardless of the organization's goals or

reinforcements. Norms, in turn, can influence values which

are used in evaluation procedures. In the language of role

theory, socialization is concerned with having the newcomer

learn the role prescriptions and with evaluations of the

behaviors enacted.

Schein (1968) argues that the stability and the effec-

tiveness of an organization is a function of the sociali-

zation of new members. The speed and effectiveness of the

socialization process will determine the members' levels of

commitment, loyalty, productivity, and turnover. All of

these elements contribute to the quality and quantity of the

organization's final output.

Etzioni (1964) points out that organizational control

and socialization are related. Three types of organiza-

tional control exist. Coercive control is physical force,

as in prisons. There is no selection of members. Utili-

tarian control is by the giving or withholding of material

rewards. Most business organizations are in this category.

They are quite selective, especially at the higher ranks.

Normative control is control by symbols such as moral

values. Organizations which use normative control vary as

to the degree of selectivity of members. Churches are









examples of organizations which use normative control.

There is a trade-off between selection and socialization

(Etzioni, 1964). Organizations which are highly selective

take in individuals who come close to meeting the organiza-

tion's standard of the ideal member who will achieve the

goals and objectives valued by the organization. Therefore,

there is little need for intense socialization efforts and

control is easier. On the other hand, less selective

organizations take in a variety of people and have to invest

organizational resources in socialization or teaching new

members the necessary and expected behaviors. The military

is an example of a less selective organization, particularly

at the lower ranks. The military takes in enlisted person-

nel who do not conform to military standards. This means

that the military must spend time and resources in basic

training of recruits in order to inculcate the desired

values and objectives.

Socialization is always defined in terms of the desired

outcomes. The desired outcomes are usually not isolated

behaviors. Instead, organizations want members to acquire

and display particular values, motives, repeated behaviors

or bodies of knowledge over the individual's tenure in the

organization. For example, a utilitarian organization, such

as a law firm, might desire that members exhibit certain

standards of quality in courtroom performance or that mem-

bers become committed to doing pro bono work. These are

examples of values and motives that the law firm desires









each member to have. The organization expects these values

and motives, establishes role prescriptions and then eval-

uates members against the prescriptions. Overall, the goal

of socialization of any organization remains the transfor-

mation of a new member into a functioning, contributing

member who can perform the desired activities.

Socialization theory describes outcomes and processes

but places little emphasis on the content of socialization.

The values and norms which the organization seeks to trans-

mit are varied. It is specific to the individuals, groups

and situations where socialization is occurring. The

important aspect of socialization is that a process occurs.

The process of socialization takes many forms such as

training, apprenticeship, trial and error, etc., and is

discussed extensively in the literature. (See Caplow, 1964;

Wanous, 1980; Van Maanen, 1976; Maier, 1973 and others for

exhaustive listings.) The process of socialization can

occur by a formal organizationally planned procedure, by

informal unplanned interaction with others in the organ-

ization, or by any combination of efforts between these

two extremes. Socialization can take place by individual

efforts, multiple efforts, interactive procedures or activ-

ities in isolation.

Socialization is a continuous process, occurring

throughout a lifetime. In organizations, socialization is

continuous throughout the individual's membership. However,

many believe that early socialization experiences are a









major factor in the individual's acceptance of significant

organization norms, values, behaviors, and motives (Van

Maanen, 1976; Schein, 1980; Berlew and Hall, 1966; Irwin,

1970). Berlew and Hall (1966), in one of the few research

efforts on initial socialization, found a strong relation-

ship between early job challenge and later job performance

for managers. They conclude that the first year of employ-

ment is "a critical period of learning." Van Maanen (1976)

reviews research which shows that first offenders' long term

orientations toward imprisonment were usually dependent upon

early jailing experiences. The obvious conclusion is that

the potential for organizational influence is greatest

during transition periods, when the individual is moving

from one role or set of expectations to another. The

ambiguity and demands of a new role produce anxiety and

individuals are usually motivated to reduce the anxiety by

learning the requirements for the new role (Van Maanen and

Schein, 1979).

Finally, organizational socialization does not occur in

a social vacuum. Many organizations, groups, and individ-

uals influence the newcomer at the same time. For example,

a person may be employed by an organization and experience

the influence of the formal work organization as well as the

influence of the informal work group that is encountered

daily. Simultaneously, he or she is a part of, and influ-

enced by, a family group, various social and civic groups,

such as churches and clubs, and is also a member of the









community where he or she lives. The socialization efforts

of all of these entities are interactive and are difficult

to separate.



A Socialization Model

Socialization can be described as a multiple stage

process model. A multiple stage process model is one which

has sequential stages or phases with specific processes in

each stage. All members must pass through each stage, in

the proper sequence, in order to become fully socialized

into the organization. There are several socialization

models which are very similar (Porter, Lawler and Hackman,

1975; Van Maanen, 1976; Feldman, 1976; Feldman, 1981;

Schein, 1978; Wanous, 1980). They all describe sequential

periods through which a novice must pass on his or her way

to full membership.

The socialization model used in this study, derived

from several recent models, contains the following sequen-

tial stages:

Stage 1--Pre-Entry/Anticipatory

Stage 2--Initial Entry

Stage 3--Maturation

Stage 4--Outcomes

Figure 1 compares the stages in this model with the stages

in several of the more prominent socialization models.

Anticipatory/Pre-entry. This stage of the socializa-

tion process occurs before the recruit actually becomes a











Pre-Entry/
Anticipatory


Initial Entry


Maturation


Porter, Lawler,
Hackman (1975)


Van Maanen
(1976)


Feldman (1976)


Feldman (1981)



Schein (1978)



Wanous (1980)


PreArrival


Choice:
Anticipatory


Anticipatory


Anticipatory


Entry


Encounter


Entry: The
Encounter


Accommodation


Encounter


Socialization



Confronting
and Accepting
Organizational
Reality;
Achieving Role
Clarity


Change and
Acquisition


Continuance:
Metamorphosis


Role Management


Change and
Acquisition


Locating Oneself
in the organ-
izational
Context


Outcomes


Outcomes


Mutual
Acceptance


Detecting
Signposts of
Successful
Socialization


Figure 1. Models of Socialization


Outcomes









member of the organization. Individuals come to the organ-

ization with "a set of cultural baggage that they have

acquired previously" (Porter et al., 1975). People have

existing values, motives, knowledge and expectations that

may color their views of the organization. Cultural values,

education, and prior experiences are part of the anticipa-

tory socialization phase. In addition, information about

the organization influences the newcomers' perceptions.

This may range from vague misinformation to specific details

presented in realistic job previews. This is the period

when applicants need to learn as much as possible about the

organization. Feldman (1976) indicates two processes that

should occur during this stage. They are acquisition of a

full and accurate picture of life in the organization

(realism) and the matching of the organization's resources

and needs with the individual's skills and needs (congru-

ence). Anticipatory socialization is viewed as "an imper-

fect and unfinished process" (Van Maanen, 1976). For this

preliminary socialization to be meaningful, it must be

supported and expanded by the organization.

Initial entry. This phase, termed encounter, accom-

modation, or socialization in some models, is a period in

which new members must begin to learn the required tasks,

learn the work group and organizational norms, learn to

interact with others on the job, and define their roles

within the group. Hughes (1958) calls this a period of

"reality shock." The level of reality shock is a function









of how realistic the recruit's evaluation of the organiza-

tion was prior to employment, and the level of congruence

between the organizational demands and the individual's

ability to meet the demands.

This initial entry stage is most critical to the

socialization process for it is during this period that the

new member is most susceptible to the organization's influ-

ence (Van Maanen and Schein, 1979; Brim, 1976; Irwin, 1970;

Berlew and Hall, 1966). Initial placement and the associ-

ated challenge of that placement correlate strongly with

performance and later success (Berlew and Hall, 1966). This

phase is of a short duration, probably a few weeks or a few

months. It is truly the initiation period. It is charac-

terized by ambiguity and disconfirmation of expectations

(Van Maanen and Schein, 1979).

Maturation. The third socialization stage can last

from a few months to several years. This is a time for

members to settle into roles, resolve conflicting role

demands, and acquire necessary organizational goals and

values. Wanous (1980) indicates that the recruit must

"locate oneself in the organizational context."

The maturation stage is when the new member establishes

to self and others what role or roles he or she will enact

with respect to the organization. Compliance with or rebel-

lion to the norms, values, and standards of the organization

will occur. This will establish a pattern that will be

recognized by the organization. This pattern will be









generally accepted and will be difficult to change, once

established.

In his classic Principles of Organization, Capiow

(1964) lists four requirements for the new member to become

a "successful incumbent." Recruits must acquire a new self

image, new involvements, new values, and new accomplish-

ments. The new image will reflect the new member's organi-

zational role and will include the values, status rankings

and activities of the organization.

New involvements are required when the recruit inter-

acts with an aggregate of individuals who compose the work

group. This phase of the socialization requires more than

the development of new relationships; old relationships are

often changed and even abandoned. The acquisition of appro-

priate new values is a multifaceted process. Values of the

new role are first communicated in such a way that the

recruit understands them. They must then be accepted by the

novice and, eventually, internalized if the newcomer is to

be successfully socialized.

Finally, new accomplishments must occur that are unique

to the particular role of the recruit. He or she must learn

the necessary skills and then actually complete the speci-

fied tasks. By completing a task that is new, the recruit

experiences the sense of accomplishment that is identified

with the new role. The new accomplishments more firmly

establish that the recruit is becoming a fully functioning

member of the organization. The maturation stage is best









understood as the time when newcomers establish themselves

as functioning and contributing members of the organization.

Outcomes. Even though some socialization models do not

delineate the specific outcomes desired, the overall goal of

all models is to explain the process which transforms the

recruit into a satisfactory member. Most of the models

discuss outcomes in a very general way. As Feldman (1976)

notes, there is a difference between successful socializa-

tion and complete socialization. Successful socialization

occurs at any time the individual becomes more proficient at

any socialization task. Completed socialization indicates

that the individual is contributing to the organization and

has accomplished the tasks of the maturation stage. He or

she has moved from "newcomer to insider" (Schein, 1978).

Outcomes may be organizationally or individually

desired. The effects of socialization are assessed by such

factors as general and job satisfaction, salary increases,

positive performance appraisals, new job assignments,

promotions, influence and participation in organization

decisions, internal work motivation, job involvement, and

work/family conflict. Instead of discussing outcomes,

Wanous (1980) calls these factors "signposts of successful

socialization." While theorists acknowledge that organiza-

tional socialization is a continuous process, there are

definite milestones which signify that an individual is a

member. The outcomes stage of a socialization model marks









the point where members are evaluated as to their contribu-

tion and their acceptability to the organization.

In general, organizations want their members to be

satisfied, particularly with the job. Not only is this a

humane attitude for management to take, but it is also a

practical one. Overall satisfaction and job satisfaction

lead to more pleasant working conditions, less absenteeism

and tardiness, less turnover, and lowered production costs.

Some organizations want members to actively participate

in decisions which influence the organization and its mem-

bers. Higher levels of participation usually lead to higher

commitment on the part of employees. Those employees with

high organizational commitment are easier to control because

they have internalized or adopted the organization's goals

as their own. The organization does not have to expend a

lot of time and effort trying to influence the member's

goals.

Another desired outcome for organizations is minimal

conflict between work roles and other roles, especially the

family role. Many jobs can force the employee to take time

and resources away from the family to devote to the job.

This can lead to great conflict, and, in turn, to high dis-

satisfaction.



Socialization Strategies

Socialization can take many forms. The organization

can shape and structure the socialization experiences in









varied ways. Socialization strategies are the "people

processing" modes that the organization uses to bring new

members into conformity (Van Maanen, 1978). The strategies

used by the organization may be selected consciously or

unconsciously; they may be planned innovations or rely on

habit (Van Maanen and Schein, 1979).

The effects of socialization are cumulative and inter-

active. Each new socialization effort adds to the total

lifetime socialization. Organizations usually use more than

one strategy in the total socialization process. Van Maanen

(1978) and Van Maanen and Schein (1979) suggest the most

comprehensive list of strategies. Strategies of organiza-

tional socialization are

collective versus individual processes

formal versus informal processes

sequential versus random processes

fixed versus variable processes

serial versus disjunctive processes

investiture versus divestiture processes

Van Maanen and Schein (1979) list many propositions

about each of these strategies but also point out that the

strategies are interactive. Organizations will probably use

several strategies simultaneously so it is difficult to test

hypotheses about single strategies.









Collective Versus Individual Processes

Collective socialization occurs when a group of

recruits go through a common set of experiences designed to

aid them in becoming full members. Examples are basic

training in the military or pledgeship in a fraternity.

This collective process tends to strengthen group cohesive-

ness and camaraderie which, in turn, leads members to share

problems and solutions to those problems. Through this

process, newcomers "arrive at a definition of the situation,

its problems and possibilities, and develop consensus as to

the most appropriate and efficient ways of behaving"

(Becker, 1964, p. 47). This group consensus then constrains

the behaviors of individual members with respect to group

acceptance or requirements.

The other end of the continuum is individual socializa-

tion. Recruits enter the organization singly and go through

a unique set of experiences. An individual apprenticeship

program where the novice learns alone with an expert and

"on-the-job" training are examples of individual socializa-

tion. Results of this mode of socialization are quite

variable and are largely a function of the specific social-

ization agent who trains and guides the novice. That is,

one person experiencing individual socialization might

become a fully functioning member very quickly through the

guidance of a concerned mentor and friend. Another person

in the same organization might be assigned to learn from a

disinterested or negative employee who could hinder the









socialization process. The second newcomer may be poorly

socialized and may never become a functioning member. This

socialization tends to be an intense, value-oriented process

and is most likely to be associated with complex roles (Van

Maanen and Schein, 1979).



Formal Versus Informal Processes

Formal socialization occurs when newcomers are segre-

gated from regular organization members while undergoing

specific experiences designed to orient and train them. All

members understand that the recruits have a "special" role

(Wheeler, 1976) and that the special role entails the

participation in a series of scheduled activities. "Spe-

cial" roles for recruits entail such concepts as a lighter

work load, permission to violate some of the group norms,

or permission to make mistakes without the usual contingent

reprimands and punishments. Scheduled activities are spe-

cific classes, orientation sessions, introductions to par-

ticular employees or suppliers, etc. Professional schools

and company training courses are examples of formal social-

ization. This mode of socialization is often used when it

is important for the novice to learn the "correct" values,

attitudes, and behaviors required for the new role. By

isolating the newcomer and making his or her role explicit

and different from the existing members' roles, it is easier

for the newcomer to know what the organization wants.










In contrast, informal socialization processes do not

segregate the newcomer from more experienced members and the

newcomer role is not emphasized. On-the-job training is the

most obvious example of informal socialization. The recruit

must negotiate his or her own way through the new situations

although there are usually certain socialization agents to

guide the newcomer. Sponsors or guides may be assigned by

the organization or the newcomer may gravitate to those

experienced members who give advice and aid entry into the

organization.



Sequential Versus Random Processes

This socialization strategy refers to the specificity

of the sequence of events which lead to the target or

desired role for the newcomer. Sequential socialization

reflects a "given sequence of discrete and identifiable

steps" (Van Maanen and Schein, 1979) which the recruit must

pass through. These steps are defined as to the content of

the step and the particular order in which the experiences

must occur. A medical education is an example of a sequen-

tial process where third year students experience certain

activities that first and second year students do not.

Similarly, interns and residents have experiences that

students do not go through.

Random socialization occurs when there is no sequence

to the steps in the socialization process. The route to

being accepted as a functional member is ambiguous, unknown,









or constantly changing. The newcomer must discover the

various methods available for becoming socialized and then

try those methods to see which ones work best for him or

her. The socialization of a highly skilled employee is

often random. There is no sequential process since the

employee already has many skills and can begin work

immediately. He or she will learn about the culture of the

organization in a random fashion and will probably "learn

the ropes" as it becomes important.



Fixed Versus Variable Processes

Fixed and variable socialization are concerned with the

established timetable for the socialization process. A

fixed process has a definite timetable for the newcomer's

passage from a recruit to an experienced member. Formal

educational situations, such as public schooling or police

training, have established periods of time for each step in

the phases of socialization. Variable socialization pro-

cesses have no set timetable for the newcomer to experience

certain activities. Recruits can often move at their own

paces. Apprenticeships, which may only require minimum

training periods, are examples of variable processes.



Serial Versus Disjunctive Processes

This mode of socialization deals with the degree of

intergenerational activity that occurs during the socializa-

tion. Intergenerational activity is activity that occurs










between employees of different work generations. For

example, one group is hired, socialized, and the individuals

become mature and experienced workers; then another group is

hired and begins the same process. The two groups are two

work generations and the learning about work by the second

group from the first group is intergenerational. A serial

socialization process is one in which an experienced member

prepares the newcomer to occupy the same or a similar role.

The role is established and recognized within the organiza-

tion before the newcomer attempts to enact the role. Role

occupants serve as role models for the recruits. An excel-

lent example of this strategy is the seasoned politician who

trains, protects, and guides a protege.

When newcomers are to enact a role that is new in the

organization or when there are no role models, the process

is a disjunctive one. Newcomers must create the role and

often the socialization is by trial and error. The first

astronauts and the first woman on the U.S. Supreme Court

were socialized by disjunctive processes.



Investiture Versus Divestiture Processes

This socialization strategy deals with the degree to

which the organization attempts to confirm or disconfirm the

existing values and behaviors of the newcomer. Investiture

processes seek to strengthen and ratify the newcomers'

existing identities and assure them that they bring valu-

able characteristics to the organization. This type of










socialization often occurs when the newcomer has been pre-

viously socialized into the profession. Recruits to upper-

level management positions in an established firm go through

an investiture process. Long time employees will reinforce

the newcomer's self-image because he or she is bringing

desired characteristics and capabilities to the organiza-

tion.

Divestiture processes have a goal of removing certain

personal characteristics of the newcomers. The intent is to

destroy or remove certain aspects of the personalities and

replace them with characteristics which are valued and

desired by the organization. The priesthood and the Marine

Corps are examples of organizations which attempt to destroy

old values and behaviors and replace them with others.



The Proposed Research

The overall goal of socialization efforts is to convert

newcomers into functioning organization members. One way to

evaluate these socialization efforts is to assess how well

the members achieve the organization's desired outcomes such

as high job satisfaction, high worker participation in

company decisions, minimal conflict between family and work,

and high productivity.



Research Questions

The basic research question addressed in this thesis is

whether the particular socialization strategies employed by









the organization do, in fact, influence the desired out-

comes. Certainly the content and intensity of socialization

efforts have an influence on outcomes. But do the different

modes of socialization affect outcomes? Will the results of

socialization be the same within an organization regardless

of the methods of orientation and training imposed on the

newcomers?

Another issue revolves around the specific situational

and individual factors that contribute to outcomes, given

different socialization strategies. Do situational and

individual factors influence outcomes such as job satis-

faction and participation differently when individuals are

socialized by different means?

If significant differences in outcomes occur when new-

comers are socialized by different strategies, one could

argue that certain of the organization's strategies had

different effects. If there are no significant differences

in outcomes between individuals socialized in different

ways, the implication would be that the mode of socializa-

tion does not influence desired outcomes. Regardless of

whether differences in outcomes occur with different strat-

egies, factors which influence outcomes are of interest to

the organization. If certain factors significantly influ-

ence desired outcomes under one socialization strategy but

not under another, predictions of adjustment may become more

accurate and organizationally desired outcomes are more

attainable.










Organization socialization strategies are often a

complex case of several strategies. The interaction of

strategies may render exact measurement of a single strategy

impossible. For example, one person may experience infor-

mal, individual, serial, variable, and divestiture sociali-

zation processes while another person is socialized in a

formal, group, fixed, sequential, investiture process. It

is not reasonable to compare individual strategies for these

two people. However, if groups of newcomers are socialized

differently on one or two strategies only, it is possible to

compare the groups to evaluate the effects of the one or two

strategies.

This thesis examines whether formal group socialization

and informal individual socialization have differential

effects. All subjects experienced random, variable, dis-

junctive, and investiture socialization. There were only

two strategies, group versus individual and formal versus

informal, which were different for the new employees.



Relationship of Socialization Strategies and Outcomes

Van Maanen and Schein (1979) predict responses to

socialization strategies either in terms of the way individ-

uals will enact organizational roles or in terms ot certain

situations where different strategies will be used. How-

ever, not much is known about the effects of the various

strategies. In only one situation do Van Maanen and Schein

predict outcomes. They argue that individual socialization









is more likely to produce the specific outcomes desired by

the organization than is group socialization. They believe

that an individual strategy presents a greater opportunity

for socialization without the moderating effect of the group

processes which will occur during group socialization.

Satisfaction. While there is a paucity of evidence

supporting a direct relationship between performance and

satisfaction (Cherrington, Reitz, and Scott, 1971; Greene,

1972), business organizations usually desire employees to be

generally satisfied, particularly with the job. High

satisfaction is correlated with less absenteeism and

tardiness, lower turnover and fewer grievances. These, in

turn, lead to lower costs for the organization as well as a

more pleasant environment.

If the Van Maanen and Schein argument is correct,

newcomers who experience individual socialization will be

more likely to achieve the organization's desired outcome of

satisfaction. This leads to the following hypotheses about

general and job satisfaction:

H1: Newcomers who experience informal individual

socialization into an organization will report

higher job satisfaction than will newcomers who

undergo formal group socialization.

H2: Newcomers who experience informal individual

socialization into an organization will report

higher general satisfaction than will newcomers

who undergo formal group socialization.










Participation. Employees who are involved in important

decisions tend, in general, to feel more commitment to the

organization and are more satisfied. Greater participation

may bring enhanced motivation for certain employees (Locke

and Schewiger, 1979; Steers, 1975). Employee participation

is a desired outcome for many organizations.

Van Maanen and Schein's proposition would support

higher participation among recruits who experienced individ-

ual socialization. However, research shows that members of

groups learn the behaviors and attitudes of other group

members, develop norms, and establish a cohesiveness which

can lead to greater understanding of team members and to

greater trust (Jewell and Reitz, 1981). Holding other

variables constant, group members might feel a greater

ability to participate than if they entered the organization

as a single individual. Employees who experience group

socialization are more likely to know the norms and could

feel more comfortable with participation than individuals

who are just learning the expected roles.

H3: Newcomers who experience formal group sociali-

zation into an organization will report higher

participation in organizational decisions than

will newcomers who undergo informal individual

socialization.

Work/Family Conflict. Most organizations prefer not to

have dysfunctional conflicts, such as a conflict between the

work role and the role as a family member. Results of










research efforts indicate that role conflict on the job is

related to lower job satisfaction and lower levels of

performance (Rizzo, House and Lirtzman, 1970; House and

Rizzo, 1972; Schuler, 1977). If the demands of the job

interfere with the family structure or activities, overall

satisfaction, as well as job satisfaction, will probably be

reduced.

The newcomers who are socialized as a group have an

opportunity to develop social support systems quickly at

work. Individual entrants will take a longer time to meet

co-workers, learn the norms and values of the work group,

and establish a social support system within the work

setting. Supportive co-workers can help relieve the stress

of conflict related to a new job or can comfort and advise

about problems at home or on the job. In addition, formal

socialization specifies the role expectations more defini-

tively than does informal socialization, thereby reducing

role ambiguity and stress. The cohesiveness of a training

group can also contribute to stronger support systems. This

leads to the following hypothesis:

H4: Newcomers who experience formal group sociali-

zation into an organization will report lower

work/family conflict than will newcomers who

undergo informal individual socialization.










Contributing Factors to Outcomes

Both situational and psychological factors contribute

to the achievement of desired organizational outcomes.

While the particular organizational strategy of sociali-

zation is one situational variable, there are other sit-

uational variables which are unique to the individual

recruits. Most recruits will experience some anxiety upon

entering the organization and most have some level of

ambiguity initially about the roles they are expected to

perform. There are other variables which might influence

desired outcomes, and which are the independent variables in

this study. In this study, the following factors are

considered: entry skill level, similarity of past work

experience, job variety, self-monitoring, and locus or

control.

Situational variables. The individual's level of

knowledge which is required to complete the assigned tasks

is likely to influence the socialization effort, as well as

the desired outcomes. The recruit who has the required job

knowledge at the time he or she enters the organization will

have to spend less time learning and performing the task and

can spend more time discovering the expected role and

working toward desired outcomes. Conversely, the newcomer

who has little or no knowledge of the task will have to

invest personal resources in learning the task and will have

less time to devote to the role and desired outcomes.









H5: The influence of entry skill levels on desired

organizational outcomes will be greater for new-

comers who experience informal individual social-

ization into an organization than for newcomers

who undergo formal group socialization.

A variable which is analogous to knowledge of the task

is similarity of past work experiences. Again, employees

with experiences which are similar or familiar should have

higher performance than those with less similar work exper-

iences. The novice who is accustomed to the situation can

invest more effort in learning the desired role. A newcomer

who has no or few similar experiences must expend more

effort in analyzing the situation and becoming accustomed to

the task instead of learning the expected role.

H6: The influence of similar work experiences on

desired organizational outcomes will be greater

for newcomers who experience informal individual

socialization into an organization than for new-

comers who undergo formal group socialization.

A wide range of operations and the necessity of using a

great variety of equipment and procedures to complete the

task constitute high job variety. The variability of the

task has been shown to significantly influence outcomes such

as job satisfaction (Hackman and Oldham, 1980). However,

the newcomer who is individually learning on-the-job might

be distracted and/or disturbed by high job variety. Low job

variety would give the novice an opportunity to learn the









task as well as devote some effort to the enactment of the

expected role and discovery of desired organizational

outcomes.

H7: The influence of high job variety on desired

organizational outcomes will be greater for new-

comers who experience formal group socialization

into the organization than for newcomers who

undergo informal individual socialization.

Psychological variables. There are some psychological

characteristics which may influence the socialization of

individuals and the subsequent outcomes of socialization.

There are many possible factors. Some which are of special

interest here are self-monitoring and locus of control.

Self-monitoring is the degree to which an individual is

sensitive to others in social situations and the subsequent

use of social cues to direct self-presentation (Snyder,

1974; 1979b). As Briggs, Cheek, and Buss (1980) point out,

the three characteristics of a high self-monitoring person

are concern for the appropriateness of social behavior,

sensitivity to important cues, and self-regulation of

behavior. Research has demonstrated that self-monitoring

was "most important during the period of early tenure" for

persons in boundary-spanning positions (Caldwell and

O'Reilly, 1982a). Newcomers who enter individually and have

an informal introduction to the job must rely heavily on

their personal characteristics and capabilities. The novice

who is trained formally in a group of newcomers can rely not









only on his or her individual capabilities, but also on the

group capabilities, and on the formal socializing agent.

Hg: The influence of self-monitoring on desired

organizational outcomes will be greater for

newcomers who experience informal individual

socialization into the organization than for

newcomers who undergo formal group socialization.

Locus of control is a personality dimension which

reflects the level of perceived control by the individual

over pertinent events. People can attribute control over

events to themselves (internal orientation) or to outside

forces or luck (external orientation). Research supports

the thesis that internals, in general, have higher job

satisfaction and performance, seek more relevant information

in complex tasks, and prefer participative management styles

(Spector, 1982). However, locus of control is often a

moderating or interactive variable in conjunction with many

other personality and situational variables (Phares, 1976).

Because internals perceive more personal control over their

environments than do externals, individual socialization

might strengthen the perception of control whereas sociali-

zation in a group might weaken the individually perceived

control.

H : The influence of locus of control on desired

organizational outcomes will be greater for

newcomers who experience informal individual









socialization into the organization than for

newcomers who undergo formal group socialization.



Summary

A multiple stage model of organizational socialization

was presented in this chapter. The various socialization

strategies available to organizations were discussed.

This study will assess the differential effects of

socialization strategy on the organizationally desired

outcomes of job satisfaction, general satisfaction,

participation and work/family conflict. Some effects of the

socialization strategies of formal group entry and informal

individual entry are evaluated. In addition, the influence

of entry skill level, similar work experience, job variety,

self-monitoring and locus of control, concomitant with

socialization strategy, will be assessed.

















CHAPTER II

RESEARCH DESIGN



Socialization effects are most likely to be obvious

when persons take on new roles. The research focus of this

thesis is the socialization of new manufacturing employees.

The socialization process was studied during the start-up of

a new manufacturing facility. This chapter will describe

the site, the subjects, the data collection, and the data

analysis which was undertaken to test the hypotheses pre-

sented in Chapter I.



Research Setting

A new manufacturing facility was available as the

research site; all of the employees were new and there were

no existing organizational roles. After preliminary discus-

sions with management, a study was designed to assess the

effects of socialization on all employees. This site lent

itself well to the study because all employees were hired

within a few months while the plant was still becoming

operational. Because of this, it was possible to study the

establishment of roles and norms, the taking of roles, role

outcomes, and relate this to socialization strategies.










The employees were oriented and trained in different

ways. Half of the employees were oriented and trained in a

formal group situation. The other half of the employees

entered the organization individually and did not undergo

formal orientation or training. They were initially trained

and socialized on-the-job informally. Thus, there is an

important difference in the way the two groups were social-

ized.



Research Site

The manufacturing plant uses a continuous process

automated operation and produces a single product, an

aluminum lid. This lid is used exclusively on one-piece

aluminum beverage cans. This is one of four manufacturing

facilities in the company. The company is wholly owned by a

major corporation in the beer industry.

The nature of the production work is complex. The

product requires narrow production tolerances. While there

are some simple, routine jobs, employees at the lowest skill

level have enriched jobs with several tasks assigned to each

position. Some work assignments require that the employee

perform equipment retooling, design and develop prototypic

additions or changes to equipment, and train others to

maintain, operate, or repair equipment. Team members also

rotate the jobs of cleaning the break room and locker rooms,

as well as clean up on the production floor. A janitorial

service cleans the staff offices.









The work is dirty, noisy, and can be dangerous if

safety precautions are not observed. The noise and speed of

the equipment require that anyone on the production floor

must wear safety glasses, ear protectors, and safety shoes

with steel toe-protectors.

Workers are skilled at various functions. For example,

some are trained electricians and mechanics; another is a

welder with twelve years experience; others are hydraulics

experts and master tool and die makers. All are expected to

rotate jobs and become skilled in all tasks. No job is

assigned permanently to a single person. All employees

participate in cleaning their area and all are expected to

be rotated into the quality assurance lab. This is par-

ticularly unusual in that quality assurance is usually a

specialized task and separate from production.

There is a great amount of pressure to meet target

production budgets. In some respects this was due to many

unexpected problems in the start-up of the plant. The

prototypic equipment presented more rework and redesign

problems than had been anticipated. Production targets were

rarely met during the first year of production. The plant

began operating with one-third of the equipment and received

other machinery over time. Workers had a two-fold task.

They had to get the equipment operational, which often

entailed down time for the machines, and they also had to

produce a quality, marketable product. With the start-up

problems, these goals sometimes produced a stressful









situation for the operatives on the floor as well as the

managerial staff.

Innovation. The plant differs both technically and in

management philosophy from other facilities in the company

and the industry. From a technical viewpoint, the machinery

is prototypic and was designed specifically for this plant.

Similar equipment has been used in the industry but all of

the equipment for this plant was specially designed. The

equipment is high speed, highly automated and integrated,

and has a production capacity which substantially exceeds

existing levels in the industry.

Secondly, the management philosophy at this plant is

very different from most facilities in the container indus-

try. The industry is characterized by high-pressure man-

agement, low employee involvement, high levels of unionism,

and specialized jobs. In contrast, at the research site,

the work force is non-unionized and the prevailing manager-

ial culture is participative. Almost all of the employees

are new to the industry. Quality of work-life is emphasized

and supported by the parent company. The managerial concept

for this plant was conceived and implemented by a corporate

officer, the plant manager, and the plant employee relations

manager. All management personnel at this plant had worked

at traditional facilities in the container industry before




1This characterization comes from in-depth interviews
with staff members, other workers in the industry, and
equipment suppliers.









coming to this plant. Because of this dramatic difference

in management philosophy, and because all of the managers

had practiced a more directive style of management that was

generally typical in the industry, it would seem that there

would have been a great amount of training and development

undertaken to implement the particular philosophy at this

plant. However, no specific management training occurred to

facilitate implementation of this participative style

although the philosophy was emphasized repeatedly during

pre-employment interviews with staff and hourly workers and

during the plant start-up.

Based upon the in-depth interviews with staff members,

the management began the operation of this plant with the

following approaches:

1. There will be a climate of trust, honesty, and

openness at all times.

2. The work force will have much discretion in the

performance of work. They will have a "license to

fail." If there is a failure, it will be studied

in order to learn how to prevent it later.

3. There will be semi-autonomous work teams. Each

team is headed by a superintendent (managerial)

who is supported by a team leader (hourly). The

team leader assignment is to be rotated among

several team members. The team leader may have

managerial responsibility and authority in the

absence of the superintendent. Each team is









encouraged to work as a unit and to make team

decisions, where relevant.

4. A person's potential to work in a highly partici-

pative environment and to work with the semi-

autonomous work team concept is very important in

selection. Communication skill is an important

selection criterion.

5. There will be an opportunity for workers to have a

vehicle for discussing work and personal problems

in strict confidence. (This was to have been

accomplished through the creation of an "ombuds-

man" position, a liaison between management and

hourly employees.)

6. There will be, to the greatest extent possible,

worker participation in the operation of the

plant. The range of participation may be from

total autonomy in some situations to simple input

for consideration in other cases. The level of

participation in various areas is emerging and is

still being defined.

7. Workers are to be cross-trained, up to each

person's potential, in all skills required to

operate the plant. The purpose of cross-training

is to facilitate rotation of the workers through

the different jobs in the plant.

8. Compensation is skill-based; that is, pay level is

determined by the number of skills a person has









rather than the specific job assignment. One

purpose of this system is to support the concept

of cross-training and job rotation. Pay levels

are high for this geographical area.

There is an informal atmosphere around the plant.

Formal lines of communication and authority exist but the

overwhelming modes of communication and relationships are

informal. Employees are encouraged to suggest improvements,

look for solutions to problems, and interact freely with all

staff members. Hourly employees, managers, and staff

members use a single cafeteria/break room that looks out on

the plant floor; staff and managers occasionally do produc-

tion work on the plant floor.

From interviews, it appears that the management struc-

ture is "flat", relative to other firms in the industry.

That means that many people report to one supervisor. (See

Figure 2 for the organization chart by job titles.) There

are fifteen managerial, staff, and supervisory personnel.

First line supervisors report directly to the plant manager

and have a great amount of responsibility. In other plants

of this size, there is a level of supervision between the

plant manager and the first line supervisors, usually a

position such as "production manager." The eighty hourly

employees report to one of the four superintendents. There

are few staff specialists compared to other firms in the

industry. There is a plant engineer, an employee relations

manager, an accountant, and a quality assurance director.














Plant Manager


Employee Controller
Relations
Manager




Clerical
Accountant




Assistant
Controller


Plant
Engineer






-Maintenance
Coordinator


Quality
Assurance
Engineer


Secretary


Quality
Representative


-Buyer


--Superintendent
Team A




- Superintendent
Team B




-Superintendent
Team C




- Superintendent
Team D


Figure 2. Organization Chart









Most plants have other specialists on staff such as a

machine shop foreperson, shift quality control managers,

shipping and delivery managers, etc.

Selection. The selection process at this plant was

different from common practice. In most manufacturing

facilities, selection procedures are usually limited to

skill tests, interviews, and reference checks. In this

situation there was an effort to select people both for

their technical competence or potential for technical

competence and for their perceived willingness and ability

to work within the framework of a participative management

philosophy.

Each job applicant was screened through staff inter-

views to assess technical ability or potential. Those who

passed the initial screening were invited to attend a

42 hour course at the local community college. This course

was designed by the company and covered areas such as

blueprint reading, mathematics, safety, and mechanical

design and repair. Applicants attended the class on their

own time at night and received no pay. There was some

competence testing during the course and individual scores

were used in selection.

Job applicants who made it to the community college

course were interviewed by at least seven of the managerial

staff, including the four superintendents. Interviews were

at least one hour long and, often, were longer. Staff

interviews were intended to assess technical skills,









interpersonal skills, and the potential for working within

the stated managerial framework. There was no interview

protocol and staff members were free to ask questions and

form opinions any way they chose. For example, one staff

member asked everyone if he or she had ever been a member of

a volunteer fire department in order to make a judgment

about whether the applicant could work as a member of a team

and make voluntary contributions. The ability to work in

teams and in a participative environment was an important

criterion. Staff members looked for initiative, good

communication skills, the ability to work without direct

supervision, high achieving work orientation, and a sense of

personal responsibility for desired organizational outcomes.

These selection criteria were never formally dissemin-

ated in policies or in writing. Employment criteria emerged

from discussions among key staff members. Selection of

personnel was done by a consensus process. Periodic staff

meetings were held and each applicant was discussed before

hiring decisions were made. The employment offer was always

made by the plant manager and was made both to the applicant

and the applicant's spouse. This was an attempt to involve

the spouse and to present the job in a realistic framework.

Both applicant and spouse were told about the demanding

schedule, the parent company's philosophy, the plans for a

participative work environment with high quality of work

life, and about the required training after employment.









Work team. The team concept was intended to be very

important in the operation of this plant. There are four

teams made up of twenty hourly employees and a superinten-

dent. Assignments to teams are permanent. Teams are

encouraged to work semi-autonomously; they are urged to work

together as a unit, look for problems and solutions, help

and train each other while producing high quality lids.

Specifically, each team member is encouraged to accept

personal responsibility for the operation and maintenance of

equipment on his or her shift, and to accept responsibility

for the quality of lids produced by his or her team. While

there are certain people assigned to a quality control task,

all team members share an aggregate responsibility for good

production.

No one has a permanent job assignment. Workers are

trained to do several tasks and rotate among job assign-

ments. The ultimate goal is to have each team member

capable of doing every job. Hourly workers rotate jobs

according to their capabilities which are constrained by the

skills they brought with them to the job and the skills they

have acquired since beginning employment. Team members

learn additional skills in formal classes and informally

from managers and from their co-workers on the job.

Each team superintendent is assisted by a team leader,

who is an hourly employee and who is selected by the mana-

gerial staff. Team leaders are highly skilled, have a

working knowledge of all of the equipment, have additional










responsibilities such as record keeping, and often serve as

superintendent in the absence of the superintendent. They

are paid a small wage differential as team leaders.

Team members work at a particular task from a few days

to many months. Job assignment and rotation is a function

of the individual's skills, the time others on the team have

to train co-workers, the smoothness of the operation of the

equipment, and the specific team's needs at any one point in

time. Assignments are primarily the responsibility of the

superintendent, with varying degrees of input from the team

leader, team members, and staff.

Schedule. The plant operates 24 hours a day,

seven days a week. The normal shift is twelve hours long

and operatives work three days or nights, then have

three days or nights off. Every four months, the day shift

changes to night shift and vice versa. This schedule is

different from the traditional manufacturing schedule with

three eight-hour shifts a day and 21 shifts per week.

However, a twelve-hour shift appears to be typical in the

container industry. Three days on and then three days off

is not typical. Neither is the day/night rotation every

four months typical in the industry.

There are no time clocks and employees record the time

worked once a week on a time card and turn it in to the

superintendent. Since the production process is continuous,

certain tasks must be performed constantly. Team members

relieve each other for breaks informally. In general,









employees receive four ten-minute breaks and a twenty-minute

lunch break during a twelve hour work period. However,

one team has modified this schedule and has two twenty-

minute breaks and the lunch break. In addition, each team

has an informal, non-required, non-paid meeting just before

the work day starts. These meetings last about fifteen min-

utes and most employees attend voluntarily. The informality

of the breaks and decisions on the structure of breaks, the

lack of a time clock, and the voluntary attendance at daily

team meetings represent ways to transfer responsibility to

the work force.

Compensation. The plant uses a skill based compensa-

tion system. Employees are paid for their skill levels or

what they know, not for the tasks they complete. For

example, a highly skilled electrician might work at elec-

trical jobs but he might be assigned to quality assurance or

to the operation of a specific machine if there are no

pressing electrical problems. Regardless of the assignment,

the electrician is paid for the skill he or she possesses,

not for the task he or she completes.

There are three basic skill levels, trainee, production

technician, and plant technician. There are several pay

grades within each level. The trainee level has five skill

levels and five corresponding pay grades; the production

technician level has five skill grades; the plant technical

level has three skill grades. (See Table 1 for the skill

levels.) The lowest trainee wage is $11.43 an hour.











Table 1

Base Wage Progression Steps



PLANT JOB ENTRY 1ST
CLASSIFICATION RATE PROG.


MAINTAINER/PLANT
TECHNICIAN 13.13 13.49


MAINTAINER/PRODUCTION
TECHNICIAN 12.60 12.84


MAINTAINER/PRODUCTION
TECHNICIAN TRAINEE 11.43 11.61



A shift premium of $.20 per hour will be added to the base
night shift.


The base wage rates will be reviewed quarterly and will be J
increases have occurred in the industry wage rates, and if
warrant the increase.


2ND 3RD 4TH
PROG. PROG. PROG.



13.85



13.08 13.32 13.56



11.79 11.97 12.15



rate for employees working the



increased if significant
)lant economic conditions










Workers are paid only for the hours that they work.

There is no paid sick leave. All employees are eligible for

one paid holiday on a day of their choice if they complete a

year of work with no absences or tardies. Hourly workers

receive pay premiums after eight hours on the job, for the

night shift, for overtime, and for holidays. The plant is

occasionally shut down for major holidays.

Employees' skills are assessed for pay purposes by

management at the time of employment. Informal training

on-the-job and formal training on off-days lead to addi-

tional skills for promotion. Employees may request skill

assessment for skill level upgrading at any time. Team

superintendents also have regular schedules for skill

evaluations.



Subjects

The eighty hourly employees are the subjects of this

research. Only four of them had experience in the lid

industry before coming to this plant. Hourly workers are

divided equally between the four teams and there are no

significant demographic differences between teams. (See

Table 2 for demographic information.) Eight of the subjects

are female and seven of them are racial minorities. The

average age is 33 and 76 percent are married. Sixty-eight

of the subjects have completed some education beyond high

school. Three of the subjects have college degrees. Almost











Table 2

Demographics



Dimension Organizational Organizational
Entry by Group Entry as Individual Total




Average Age 32.28 33.10 32.68



Percentage Married 80 72 76



Percentage Women 7.5 12.5 10.0



Percentage Racial
Minority 7.5 10.0 8.75



Percent with Education
Beyond High School 61 77 68










one-third of them moved to this area specifically for this

job.

Participation in this study was voluntary. The initial

questionnaire, measuring personality and demographic varia-

bles, was completed during training classes at the community

college or at the site. Later questionnaires, measuring

attitudes toward work, were completed on the employees' own

time, away from work.



Measures

The various instruments used to test the hypotheses

are described in this section. The complete scales which

are not copyrighted are presented in Appendix A, along with

scoring procedures. Table 3 lists the scales, the number of

items in each scale and the internal reliability scores,

calculated by the coefficient alpha formula (Cronbach,

1951).



Dependent Variables

The dependent variables were chosen because they are

all outcomes that are desired by the organization for its

employees. These outcomes were measured approximately four

months after the subjects began to work on the production

floor.

Job satisfaction. A twenty item scale, a shortened and

modified version of one developed by Weiss, Davis, England,

and Lofquist (1967) as the Minnesota Satisfaction










Table 3

Internal Consistency of Scales


Number of Coefficient
Scale Items Alpha



Job Satisfaction 20 .94


General Satisfaction 8 .90


Participation 9 .89


Work/Family Conflict 8 .93


Self-Monitoring 25 .71


Locus of Control 20 .74









Questionnaire, was used to assess satisfaction with the job.

Subjects were asked to react to items which described

aspects of the job. Responses were on a five point contin-

uum, ranging from "very dissatisfied" to "very satisfied."

Responses to items were averaged to obtain a job satisfac-

tion score. Examples of the items are as follows:

The chance to do something that makes use of my abili-

ties.

The working conditions.

My pay and the amount of work I do.

The chances for advancement on this job.

General satisfaction. Feldman and Brett (1983) devel-

oped an eight-item scale that measures satisfaction with

many areas of life, including the job. An overall satis-

faction measure is obtained by averaging items on this

scale. Subjects are asked to respond on a five point

continuum to various areas of their lives. Responses range

from "very satisfied" to "very dissatisfied" and are in

answer to questions such as

How satisfied are you

with your health?

with your friendships?

with your standard of living?

Participation. High employee participation was one of

the major goals of management at the research site. It is a

measure of the employee's influence on the job. An a priori

scale was used to assess the participation in particular









areas where managers said they wanted employees to be

involved in decisions. This scale was designed specifically

for this plant and this study, and used some items from a

participation scale developed by Vroom (1960). The scale

has nine items and responses were on a five point Likert-

type continuum from "none" (i.e. no participation) to "a

very great degree." Sample items follow:

How much influence do you have over your daily job

assignment?

How often does your boss ask your opinion?

How much influence do you have over the training of

employees, including yourself?

Work/Family conflict. Because of the unusual work

schedule, it was believed there was a great potential for

conflict between the work and the family roles. An eight-

item scale, developed by Kopelman, Greenhaus, and Connolly

(1982), was used to assess this conflict. Subjects

responded to statements on a five point continuum ranging

from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." Sample items

are as follows:

My work schedule often conflicts with my family life.

My job makes it difficult to be the kind of spouse or

parent I'd like to be.

Because my work is demanding, at times I am irritable

at home.









Independent Variables

All of the independent variables except job variety

were measured before employees began work. Job variety was

assessed during the first four months of employment.

Group or individual entry. This is the ma3or indepen-

dent variable of the study. All of the hypotheses consider

the effect of the socialization strategy imposed by the

organization. Half of the subjects entered the organization

in a group and received formal training; the other half

entered the organization individually and did not undergo

formal training.

The original plan for selection and training was to

bring all employees into the organization in a group situa-

tion for formal training. After the first forty employees

were trained in groups, and as pressure for production grew,

management decided to hire forty people and bring them into

the organization individually, let them learn on-the-job,

and formally train them later. The first employees were in

the groups; the later employees were in the individual

situation. In general, the earliest applicants and those

immediately available for employment were hired first.

Later applicants and those with later availabilities were

hired last.

The first twenty employees went through a nine-week

training and orientation session together. They were

trained in special classes at the local community college

and in the plants where the equipment was being









manufactured. This plant was being completed and equipment

was not in place, necessitating travel and a longer training

period. During this training period, employees got to know

each other fairly well, experienced some unique and bonding

situations, and developed some close social relationships.

The other twenty employees who entered as a group began

training about one month after the first group finished

training. (See Table 4 for an employment and training

schedule.) They were trained at the plant site for five

weeks. Most of the training occurred in large conference

rooms, although some of the equipment was on the production

floor and the second group could view its operation. This

was not so for the first training group. The second group

of twenty had examinations and established study groups away

from work.

Both of the training groups had occasions when they

interacted socially. The first group went on training trips

together. The second group had unofficial study groups

after class. Members of both groups related experiences of

having meals together and other social events.

While the second group of twenty employees was in

training, management made the decision to drop the initial

group training and orientation. Individuals were hired and

began working on the production floor within an hour or so

of first coming to work. Their only orientation was exper-

ienced during the pre-employment interviews. Most of the

employees were hired within the first four months of the










Table 4

Schedule of Employment and Training


First Group
Hired, Began
Training


First Group
Began Work


Second Group
Hired, Began
Training



Second Group
Began Work


Individuals
Began Work



Individuals
Began Work



Individuals
Began Work


October


November



December


January


February


March


April









plant's opening. There was no early systematic training or

orientation for those employees who entered the organization

individually and learned on-the-job. At best, newcomers

were assigned to another employee to learn the task. There

were no assigned sponsors or guides to help the new employee

"learn the ropes."

During the year and a half after the plant opened,

there were various training sessions in many different skill

areas for all employees. These formal training sessions

were systematic, covered most of the technical operations

required to produce lids, were required for all employees

who needed the skills or reviews of the skills, and occurred

on paid overtime.

Employees who entered in groups and individually were

assigned to teams equally. The only concern with who was

assigned to which team was when management tried to balance

the teams as to the skills of the team members. Each of the

four teams has ten members who were socialized by a group

strategy and ten members who experienced individual social-

ization.

Entry skill level. The skill level of each employee

was determined when he or she was hired. This variable was

assessed by the managerial staff, prior to employment, but

after interviews and past job experiences were reviewed.

Employees could enter at any one of thirteen skill positions

since there were five divisions in the first two skill

levels and three divisions at the highest skill position.









In actuality, new employees were initially categorized from

the first trainee level to the first plant technician level,

giving an entry skill level range of eleven positions.

Similar work experience. Similar work experience

reduces the stress of a new job and allows the new employee

to devote more time to learning the actual job. Employees

were interviewed by the researcher to determine previous

work experiences. The interview followed a strict protocol

(See Appendix A). Subjects were asked how many years

experience they had in making lids, in doing shift work, in

doing shift work where the shifts were rotated (such as day

and night), and in factory work.

To derive a composite similar work experience score,

equal weight was given to experience in lid making, shift

work, and work in a factory environment. This was done

because those who had previous lid experience were familiar

with the product and the production processes. Those with

experience in lid making were usually the team leaders.

Rotating shift experience was given less weight because this

experience was already included in the shift experience.

The derived score for this variable was estimated by the

following formula:

Similar Work Experience = Lid Making Experience + Shift

Work + .5 (Rotating Shift Work) + Factory Work

This formulation assumes that lid making experience is

valuable in acclimating oneself to this particular facility.

So is shift work experience or the experience of working in









some other factory. While these experiences may or may not

have occurred at the same time, they are all facets of the

new job that employees had to accept and become accustomed

to. Thus, experience with shift work in a factory or a lid

factory more closely resembles the operation of this plant

than does other work experiences singly. Therefore, a

decision was made to weight such experiences more heavily.

Job variety. Two dimensions were considered when

determining this variable, average job variety and job rota-

tion. Job variety is similar to the concept of task variety

defined by Hackman and Oldham (1975). They define it as the

number of tasks, while keeping in mind the number of pieces

of equipment and the number of procedures required to do the

necessary tasks. During interviews, superintendents and

team leaders were asked to evaluate and rank the job variety

of tasks that composed each of the job assignments.

The job that had the most variety was ranked the

highest while the job with the least variety was ranked the

lowest. The rankings of the superintendents and team

leaders were averaged to obtain a single ranking of task

variety for each of the assigned jobs. (See Appendix B for

the rankings.)

The second dimension of this variable was the rotation

of the actual job assignments of the employees. The

researcher observed each team once during every other

three-day shift. That is, employees were observed on the

job one day or night out of every six days or nights they









worked. The job that each employee was doing was recorded.

Later, the jobs were numerically coded according to the task

variety rankings of the superintendents and team leaders.

The ranked scores were averaged over the first ten observa-

tions, which was approximately four months of employment.

The number of different jobs that the employee had been

assigned and the number of changes in job assignments were

also summed over the first ten job assignments. Thus, a

person who was a team leader or assigned to quality assur-

ance for the first ten observations had one job assignment

and zero job changes. The team leader would have a high

average job variety score while the employee assigned to

quality assurance would have a low average job variety

score. Someone else, with many different jobs would have

many job changes and a high number of jobs score. His or

her average job variety score would be a function of the

variety of the particular jobs assigned.

Correlation coefficients were calculated to determine

the particular formula or score which would best represent

job variety. As expected, the number of different jobs

and the number of job changes were highly correlated (.76,

p < .0001). However, neither the number of different jobs

nor the number of job changes was significantly correlated

with the mean job variety. A composite job variety score

was devised which seemed to represent both job changes and

average job variety. This was done because variety on

a single job as well as the variety of moving to another job









should influence total job variety. A composite score of

average job variety multiplied by the number of different

jobs was calculated and defined as job variety.

Self-monitoring. This psychological construct measures

the degree to which individuals exercise control over their

expressive behavior, self-presentation, and non-verbal

displays of emotion (Snyder, 1974). The twenty-five item

scale evaluates the individual's concern for the appropri-

ateness for social behavior, the sensitivity to social cues,

and the subsequent regulation of behavior based on the

social cues. Snyder reports internal reliabilities from .63

to .83 (1974). Subjects respond "true" or "false" in a

forced choice format to statements about themselves.

Examples are as follows:

I would probably make a good actor.

I'm not always the person I appear to be.

I can only argue for ideas which I already have.

A factor analysis on the self-monitoring scale was

performed since other researchers have found significant

sub-factors within the scale. Briggs, Cheek, and Buss

(1980) found three replicated factors which they named

acting, extraversion, and other-directedness. They had two

groups of subjects with over 500 people in each group.

However, Briggs et al. changed the response format to a

five point Likert scale rather than the original true-false

format.









The self-monitoring scale was factor analyzed using an

orthogonal rotation. The Statistical Analysis System (SAS)

factor analysis package was used with a Varimax rotation. A

Varimax rotation is used when the objective is to interpret

the underlying factors or to understand the factor composi-

tion rather than to understand the variance composition

(Weiss, 1976).

No clear factors emerged. This may be because of the

small number of subjects relative to the number of items in

the scale, because the rotation was orthogonal rather than

oblique, because there is only one factor, or any combina-

tion of the above. Given the failure to replicate the

factor structure found by Briggs et al. (1980), the total

scale score is used as a single measure of social cueing and

the desire to act upon the social cues.

Locus of control. Rotter (1966) conceptualized this

construct as a measure of the individual's perception of the

control over rewards. A person with an internal locus of

control perceives rewards or outcomes as contingent on his

or her own behavior; a person with an external locus of

control believes rewards and outcomes are independent of his

or her own behavior. Rotter (1966) reports many tests of

internal consistency above .7 on this scale.

This twenty item scale consists of paired statements

from which subjects must choose one. One statement reflects

control of outcomes by self (internal), and the other

statement indicates luck or the control of others brings









about outcomes (external). Subjects are asked to choose the

statement which they more strongly believe. Examples of the

items follow:

a. What happens to me is my own doing.

b. Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control

over the direction my life is taking.

a. Unfortunately, an individual's worth often passes

unrecognized no matter how hard he tries.

b. In the long run, people get the respect they

deserve in the world.

a. Becoming a success is a matter of hard work, luck

has little or nothing to do with it.

b. Getting a good job depends mainly on being in the

right place at the right time.



Schedule of Measurement.

The schedule of measurement of the variables is shown

in Table 5. Entry skill level, similar work experience,

self-monitoring, and locus of control were baseline mea-

sures, assessed upon entry. Job variety was measured during

the first four months of employment. After four months on

the job, employees rated their job satisfaction, general

satisfaction, participation, and level of work/family

conflict.

Subjects were asked to identify themselves on all

measures so their scores could be matched later but were

guaranteed confidentiality by the researcher. Subjects and











Table 5

Schedule of Measurement of Variables


Entry


Group/Individual Entry


Entry Skill Level


Similar Work Experience


Self-Monitoring


Locus of Control


During First Four
Months of Work


Job Variety


After Four Months
of Work


Job Satisfaction


General Satisfaction


Participation


Work/Family Conflict









researcher signed an agreement of participation and confi-

dentiality. (See Appendix C for a copy of this agreement.)



Methodology

This study is a natural field experiment which the

researcher was able to evaluate since she had previously

gained access to the site. Data collection had begun before

the plant opened as part of a large two-year research

project which looked at a plant start-up, stress in the

factory, strategies for coping with stress, and productivity

with "non-traditional" management approaches. Subjects were

observed systematically during training and on the plant

floor. The researcher attended team social functions,

interviewed staff and hourly employees, and even occasion-

ally did unskilled tasks on the production floor to aid the

employees.

The abrupt change in the mode of organizational entry

for new employees presented an opportunity to study the

differential effects of socialization strategy.

Natural Field Experiment

Field experiments have a major concern with the situa-

tion or context of the situation, rather than with the

particular participants and their behaviors. As Katz (1953)

notes, the field study is "unique in enabling us to observe

and measure social processes in their natural occurrence"

(p. 81). The reality and richness of the data in the

natural situation have long been recognized as valuable









assets in predicting actual behaviors. And Kerlinger (1973)

argues, "The more realistic the research situation, the

stronger the variables" (p. 402).

In an experiment, one or more independent variables are

manipulated. This is often difficult to achieve in actual

organization settings since those who control organizations

are often unwilling to allow an experimenter to intervene in

the operations of the organization for the sake of research.

In the natural field experiment the researcher can "oppor-

tunistically capitalize upon some on-going changes and

study their effects in the experimental design" (French,

1953, p. 99). However, the manipulation of variables is a

decision of the management or officers of the organization,

not the researcher. Barnes (1967) argues that this is an

advantage since research roles are divided. Management

decides upon and implements the natural experiment, while

the outside researcher collects and analyzes data. The

outside researcher is not influenced by the desires of

management and can independently develop hypotheses that may

or may not be favorable to management. Barnes (1967,

p. 104) believes that the "loss of experimenter control" in

natural field experiments is greatly exaggerated. Most of

the "relatively few controls available to an outside

researcher" are also available under natural experiment

conditions to an outside researcher.

One of the most positive views of natural field exper-

iments is that of Daniel Katz (1953, p. 78). He writes:









The best opportunity for the use of hypothesis
testing is on the occasion of the "natural exper-
iment." The difficulty with the use of hypotheses
in field studies is the inability to determine
causal relationships with any definiteness, since
most of our measures are not taken with respect to
systematic changes in some ascertained independent
variable. Now, a natural experiment is a change
of major importance engineered by policy-makers
and practitioners and not by social scientists.
It is experimental from the point of view of the
scientist rather than of the social engineer.

Experimental Design

The design of an experiment is concerned with the

scheduling of observations, the choice of treatments and

comparisons, the selection and measurement of control

variables, and the assignment of subjects (Cook and

Campbell, 1979). In this study, management took on the task

of assigning the employees to different treatments, that of

group or individual organizational entry. There is no

reason to believe that management systematically differen-

tiated between employees in either situation. In fact, the

groups are fairly equivalent on demographic dimensions as

shown in Table 2.

The design of this study is called the "Compromise

Experimental Group-Control Group" design by Kerlinger

(1973). The threat to internal validity is selection. This

means that systematic differences between groups may occur

because of the selection process. This might have direct

effects on the outcomes which are assessed here. This

design can only attempt to control for selection bias by

evaluating the equivalence of the two groups on the indepen-

dent variables.









The two groups are fairly similar on demographic dimen-

sions. Still subjects were not randomly assigned to the

formal group entry on the informal individual entry. Sub-

jects were treated in the same manner by the organization

up to the point of employment. The experimental treatment

is the assignment to a formal group orientation and training

or to informal individual entry. There were no differences

in working conditions, task assignments, or team assignments

based on the method of organization entry. As Kerlinger

(1973, p. 331) points out, "Comparisons are essential in all

scientific investigation." This research allows the compar-

ison of desired organizational outcomes with only one major

difference between the groups; the differentiation is the

organizational mode of socialization.



Statistical Analyses

The major statistical technique used in this study was

multiple linear regression. The regression formulae used

are listed in Table 6.

Regression procedures are concerned with three main

questions (Hays, 1981).

1. Does a statistical relation affording some

description or predictability appear between the

random variables X and Y?

2. How strong is the apparent degree of the statis-

tical relation, in the sense of possible descrip-

tive or predictive ability the relation affords?










Table 6

Regression Formulae


(1) Job Satisfaction


= f (socialization strategy, entry skill level, similar work

experience, job variety, self-monitoring, locus of control)


(2) General Satisfaction = f (socialization strategy, entry skill level, similar work

experience, job variety, self-monitoring, locus of control)


(3) Participation


f (socialization strategy, entry skill level, similar work

experience, job variety, self-monitoring, locus of control)


(4) Work/Family Conflict = f (socialization strategy, entry skill level, similar work

experience, job variety, self-monitoring, locus of control)









3. Can a simple rule be formulated fcr predicting or

describing Y from X, and if so, how good is this

rule?

By using multiple regression equations, it is possible to

determine whether there is a statistical relationship

between the predictor (independent) variables and the

outcome (dependent) variables. This is done by determining

those variables which contribute significantly to the total

variance. Then, by determining the regression formulation

which accounts for the greatest proportion of variance in

the dependent variables, the descriptive or predictive

ability of this combination of independent variables can be

assessed. The regression equation which has the highest R2

would thus represent the combination of variables with the

best descriptive or predictive ability. Stepwise regres-

sions were performed to assess the predictive cr descriptive

ability of independent variables.

Hierarchical moderated regression techniques were also

used to assess the extent to which various independent

variables might interact as moderator variables, but not

have a main effect on the dependent variable. In effect,

this evaluates the extent to which dependent variables are

influenced jointly by a predictor (or independent) variable

and another moderating variable (Peters, O'Connor and Wise,

1984).

Finally, the coefficients of the independent variables

were examined to evaluate the relative weights of each of









them. The strength of the relationship between the indepen-

dent and dependent variables is demonstrated by the varia-

bility and significance levels of the coefficients. The

signs of the coefficients indicate the direction of the

relationships.

SAS programs GLM, STEPWISE, and RSQUARE were used to

determine the models that explained the most variance and to

calculate the coefficients for the independent variables.

The calculated coefficients for the independent variables in

the full models are partial regression coefficients. They

measure the change in the dependent variable per unit change

in the specific independent variable when all the other

independent variables are held constant. Another way to

express this is that the partial regression coefficients

measure the change in the dependent variable per unit change

in the specific independent variable when the linear associ-

ation with all other independent variables has been removed

(Green, 1978). Only in the case where the predictor or

independent variables are totally uncorrelated will the

partial regression coefficients equal the simple regression

coefficients.



Summary

A natural field experiment was conducted at an innova-

tive manufacturing facility. Subjects were new employees

who experienced formal group entry or informal individual

entry into the organization.





75



Multiple linear regression was used to assess the

influence of socialization strategy, concomitant with other

variables, on organizationally desired outcomes of job

satisfaction, general satisfaction, participation and

work/family conflict.

















CHAPTER III

RESULTS



This chapter contains the results of the data analyses

performed to test the hypotheses presented in Chapter I.

Statistical test results are presented with the relevant

hypotheses. Tests which produced significant results will

be briefly discussed.

The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients

between all variables are listed in Table 7, with signifi-

cance probabilities in parenthesis. Since socialization

strategy is a dummy variable, coded zero and one, the

correlations between strategy and other variables are

analogous to tests for significant differences between means

of those who had group socialization and those who were

socialized individually. Significant correlations, or

significant differences between strategies, occurred with

the dependent variables of work/family conflict and job

satisfaction. Independent variables which had significant

correlations with socialization strategy were locus of

control and previous work experience indicating a difference

in mean scores on those variables between those who were

socialized individually and those who were socialized as a

group.










Table 7

Correlation Coefficients


Work/ General Job
Partici- Family Satis- Satis-
Strategy pation Conflict faction faction


Strategy ----


.212
Participation---
(.063)

Work/ .388** .175
Family --
Conflict (.002) (.142)

.213 .134 .531****
General ----
Satisfaction (.091) (.262) (.0001)

.409*** .434**** .536**** .548****
Job --
Satisfaction (.0008) (.0001) (.0001) (.0001)

.131 .108 -.041 -.045 .043
Job
Variety (.251) (.349) (.747) (.726) (.736)

-.262* .032 -.047 -.153 -.089
Locus of
Control (.020) (.778) (.711) (.229) (.483)

-.072 -.030 -.223 -.093 .024
Self-
Monitoring (.528) (.791) (.076) (.466) (.853)

.223* .156 .240 .145 .196
Experience
(.050) (.176) (.058) (.256) (.124)

Entry .207 -.033 .107 .164 .185
Skill
Level (.067) (.776) (.398) (.196) (.144)

p < .05
** p < .01
*** p < .001
**** p < .0001










Table 7

Continued


Entry
Job Locus Self- Experi- Skill
Variety Control Monitoring ence Level


Strategy


Participation


Work/
Family
Conflict

General
Satisfaction

Job
Satisfaction

Job
Variety ----

-.035
Locus of ----
Control (.757)

-.061 -.096
Self- ----
Monitoring (.593) (.398)

.118 -.078 -.008
Experience ----
(.299) (.495) (.942)

Entry .373*** .013 -.246* .325**
Skill ----
Level (.0007) (.907) (.029) (.004)


**
***


.05
.01
.001
.0001









The dependent variable of job satisfaction was posi-

tively correlated with the other dependent variables of

general satisfaction, participation, and work/family con-

flict. Work/family conflict and general satisfaction also

have a positive correlation.

The only independent variable which correlates with any

dependent variable is socialization strategy. Other than

the strategy correlations, there are only three significant

correlations within independent variables. Entry skill

level is positively correlated with job variety and similar

work experience and negatively correlated with self-

monitoring.



Socialization Strategies-Outcomes Relationships

Multiple regressions were calculated to determine

whether there were significant statistical relationships

between dependent and independent variables, and, if so, the

degree and direction of the relationship. The influence of

socialization strategy and the other independent variables

on each of the dependent variables was assessed. The mean

scores on the dependent variables for group entry and

individual entry are reported in Table 8, along with the

possible range of scores.

A basic assumption of multiple regression is that the

dependent and independent variables have a linear additive

relationship. The assumption that independent variables are

not correlated is violated in the full model regressions










Table 8

Mean Scores on Dependent Variables


Mean Score Mean Score
Variable Group Entry Individual Entry Range


Job Satisfaction





General Satisfaction





Participation





Work/Family Conflict


4.344

(n=37)



4.298

(n=37)



3.016

(n=40)



3.935

(n=37)


3.917

(n=27)



4.032

(n=27)



2.697

(n=38)



3.323

(n=27)


1-5









because of the significant correlations between entry skill

level and other variables. Also, the assumption that the

disturbances in the regression have a normal distribution is

violated in that the range of the dependent variables is

limited from one to five. The variables are continuous over

a limited range. However, estimated coefficients are likely

to be fairly robust, given this departure from the standard

assumption.

All usable data were included in the statistical cal-

culations. Sample attrition occurred for various reasons,

such as lack of interest in the research project, lack of

time, or personal problems. Non-responses are random and

are not related to other variables in this study. The

censoring problem does not systematically confound the

results.

While the alternative hypotheses to those tested are

not stated, they are implicitly recognized in the analyses.

The alternative hypotheses are that there is no significant

influence of socialization strategy on desired organiza-

tional outcomes and that socialization strategy does not

interact with the other independent variables to signfi-

cantly influence outcomes.



Hypothesis 1: Job Satisfaction

The following hypothesis is concerned with the rela-

tionship between socialization strategy and job satisfac-

tion.









HI: Newcomers who experience informal individual

socialization into an organization will report

higher job satisfaction than will newcomers who

undergo formal group socialization.

The results of multiple regressions, displayed in

Tables 9 and 10, do not support this hypothesis. In fact,

the opposite hypothesis seems true. Newcomers who experi-

ence group socialization have higher job satisfaction than

those who undergo individual socialization.

Because the initial regression on the full model, shown

in Table 9, approached a significance level (p = .0712), a
9
stepwise regression, using a maximum R~ improvement tech-

nique, was performed to determine the model which best

explained the relationship between the independent variables

and job satisfaction (Table 10). Variables are listed in

the order they entered the model. This procedure demon-

strates that a five variable model, with locus of control
2
removed, reached a significant level (R = .1810, p h .05).

However, the only independent variable which was significant

was socialization strategy, which contributed most of the

explanation of variance (.1589 of the R ). No other vari-

able approached significance. The positive coefficient on

the strategy variable and the mean scores in Table 8 indi-

cate that those employees who entered as a group had higher

job satisfaction than those who entered individually.










Table 9

Job Satisfaction
Regression Using Full Model


Significance
Variable Coefficient Level



Socialization Strategy .3808* .0059


Similar Work Experience .0132 .4353


Entry Skill Level .0121 .5437


Self-Monitoring .2606 .5662


Job Variety -.0025 .8284


Locus of Control .0724 .8457




2
Full Model R2 = .1816

(p = .0712)


N = 63
*p < .01










Table 10

Job Satisfaction
Stepwise Regression


Significance Contribution
Variable Coefficient Level to R




Socialization
Strategy .3761** .0053 .1589


Similar Work
Experience .0130 .4362 .0136


Entry Skill Level .0124 .5302 .0032


Self-Monitoring .2441 .5811 .0047


Job Variety -.0024 .8333 .0006



2
Full Model R = .1810*

(p = .0392)


N = 63
*p < .05
**p < .01









Hypothesis 2: General Satisfaction

The hypothesis detailing the relationship of social-

ization strategy and general satisfaction follows.

H2: Newcomers who experience informal individual

socialization into an organization will report

higher general satisfaction than will newcomers

who undergo formal group socialization.

The statistical data analysis produced no support for

this hypothesis. Table 11 presents the regression results.

The regression explanation of variance (the R2) was not

significant and neither were any of the predictor variables.

The modes of organizational socialization tested here do not

appear to influence general satisfaction.



Hypothesis 3: Participation

The hypothesized relationship of socialization strategy

and participation is discussed below.

H3: Newcomers who experience formal group socializa-

tion into an organization will report higher

participation in organizational decisions than

will newcomers who undergo informal individual

socialization.

Table 12 reports the results of the full model regres-

sion for participation. The data do not support the hypoth-

esis. The regression correlation coefficient is not sig-

nificant and neither are the independent variables. Only

socialization strategy approaches significance (p = .0691).










Table 11

General Satisfaction
Regression Using Full Model


Significance
Variable Coefficient Level



Socialization Strategy .1815 .2869 (ns)


Entry Skill Level .0188 .4539 (ns)


Similar Work Experience .0132 .5402 (ns)


Self-Monitoring -.3901 .4975 (ns)


Locus of Control -.3821 .4165 (ns)


Job Variety -.0103 .4910 (ns)




Full Model R2 = .0831

(p = .5398)


N = 63










Table 12

Participation
Regression Using Full Model


Variable


Socialization Strategy


Entry Skill Level


Similar Work Experience


Self-Monitoring


Locus of Control


Job Variety


Coefficient


.3401


-.0401


.0325


-.2461


.3564


.0163


Significance
Level


.0691 (ns)


.1548 (ns)


.1986 (ns)


.6897 (ns)


.4634 (ns)


.2942 (ns)


Full Model R2 = .0995

(p = .3798)


N = 63


---










From these data and analysis, we can not predict that

organizational participation will be influenced by group or

individual entry into the organization. However, since

employees with formal group socialization did have a higher

mean score on participation (Table 8) and because socializa-

tion strategy approached a significant level when correlated

with participation (Table 7), a relationship between social-

ization strategy and participation may exist and should be

investigated in future research.



Hypothesis 4: Work/Family Conflict

The influence of socialization strategy on work/family

conflict is hypothesized and discussed below.

H4: Newcomers who experience formal group socializa-

tion into an organization will report lower

work/family conflict than will newcomers who

undergo informal individual socialization.

This hypothesis is not supported as shown in the

stepwise regression results in Table 13. However, the

converse seems to be the case. New employees who experience

formal group socialization will have higher work/family

conflict than those who enter individually.

The full model produced a significant regression

(p = .0179) and a stepwise regression, using a maximum

R2 improvement technique, shows each individual variable's

contribution to the variance. Socialization strategy is the

only significant predictor variable with a contribution to










Table 13

Work/Family Conflict
Stepwise Regression Using Full Model


Significance Contribution
Variable Coefficient Level to R




Socialization
Strategy .5810** .0044 .1428


Self-Monitoring -1.2394 .0668 .0428


Similar Work
Experience .0382 .1287 .0287


Job Variety -.0152 .3804 .0138


Entry Skill Level -.0155 .5941 .0038


Locus of Control .1041 .8483 .0005




2
Full Model R = .2323*

(p = .0179)


N = 64
*p < .05
**p < .01




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EANCLRO5V_7LQV72 INGEST_TIME 2017-07-14T22:06:20Z PACKAGE UF00099599_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES



PAGE 1

THE EFFECTS OF TWO ORGANIZATIONAL SOCIALIZATION STRATEGIES ON JOB SATISFACTION, GENERAL SATISFACTION, PARTICIPATION, AND WORK/FAMILY CONFLICT By JANICE HONEA ZAHRLY A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1984

PAGE 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation could not have been completed without the significant contributions of many people. My committee members have each made unique contributions. The theoretical guidance, constant questioning, push for excellence, and patient editing of Professor Henry Tosi were invaluable. Professor Roger Blair's direction and support have been constant through my Ph.D. program. Professor John James has clarified the focus of this study and the implications of the research findings. The guidance in statistical methodology and analysis of Professor Kim Sawyer was particularly helpful. The enthusiastic cooperation of the employees of Metal Container Corporation, Gainesville Lid Plant, Gainesville, Florida, made this research effort a positive experience. Their willingness to give time and information is greatly appreciated. The full cooperation of the plant manager, Gary Reynolds, was essential to the completion of this project. Data collection and some analysis were supported by a research grant from the National Science Foundation to Professor Henry Tosi. I received financial support as a research assistant from the grant.

PAGE 3

Many friends encouraged me. In particular, Kelly Vaverek, Larry Varela, and Eleanor Brown, were always a source of encouragement and emotional support. Also, Kelly's constant assistance with the computer analysis was indispensable. Finally, I acknowledge the contribution of my parents, John Wiley Honea, Sr., and Lillian McKown Honea. They have always believed that I could do anything and have supported my dreams, even when surprised by my endeavors.

PAGE 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER pAGE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii LIST OF TABLES v i LIST OF FIGURES i x ABSTRACT x CHAPTER I THE MODEL AND HYPOTHESES 1 The Bases cf Socialization 4 Socialization Strategies 19 The Proposed Research 2 6 Summary _ 36 II RESEARCH DESIGN 37 Research Setting 37 Measures 53 Methodology 68 Summary 74 III RESULTS 7 6 Socialization Strategies-Outcomes Relationships 79 Factors Contributing to Desired Outcomes ... 90 Summary 109 IV CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS Ill The Influence of Socialization Strategy .... Ill Implications 12& Summary 136

PAGE 5

PAGE APPENDICES A INSTRUMENTS 139 B RANKING OF TASK VARIETY 146 C CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT 148 BIBLIOGRAPHY 149 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 1 58

PAGE 6

LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Base Wage Progression Steps 50 2. Demographics 52 3. Internal Consistency of Scales 54 4. Schedule of Employment and Training 59 5. Schedule of Measurement of Variables 67 6. Regression Formulae 72 7. Correlation Coefficients 77 8. Mean Scores on Dependent Variables 80 9. Job Satisfaction Regression Using Full Model . 83 10. Job Satisfaction Stepwise Regression 84 11. General Satisfaction Regression Using Full Model 86 12. Participation Regression Using Full Model ... 87 13. Work/Family Conflict Stepwise Regression Using Full Model 89 14. Mean Scores on Independent Variables 92 15. Job Satisfaction Regression Using Entry Skill Level 94 16. Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using Entry Skill Level 94 17. Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Entry Skill Level 95 18. Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression Using Entry Skill Level 95 VI

PAGE 7

LIST OF TABLES (continued) Table Page 19. Job Satisfaction Regression Using Similar Work Experience 9 8 20. Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using Similar Work Experience 9 8 21. Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Similar Work Experience 99 22. Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression Using Similar Work Experience 99 23. Job Satisfaction Regression Using Job Variety 101 24. Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using Job Variety 101 25. Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Job Variety 102 26. Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression Using Job Variety 102 27. Job Satisfaction Regression Using Self-Monitoring 104 28. Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using Self-Monitoring 104 29. Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Self-Monitoring 105 30. Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression Using Self-Monitoring 105 31. Job Satisfaction Regression Using Locus of Control 107 32. Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using Locus of Control 107 33. Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Locus of Control 108 34. Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression Using Locus of Control 108 35. Summary Results of Tests of Hypotheses .... 110

PAGE 8

LIST OF TABLES (continued) Table Page 36. Regression Results 120 37. Mean Scores on Job Satisfaction by Socialization Strategy and Entry Skill Level . . . 122 38. Mean Scores on Work/Family Conflict by Socialization Strategy and Self-Monitoring . 126 Vill

PAGE 9

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Models of Socialization 14 2. Organization Chart 44 3. Plot of the Residuals of Socialization Strategy and Entry Skill Level Against Job Satisfaction Using a Moderated Regression . . 96

PAGE 10

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy THE EFFECTS OF TWO ORGANIZATIONAL SOCIALIZATION STRATEGIES ON JOB SATISFACTION, GENERAL SATISFACTION, PARTICIPATION, AND WORK/FAMILY CONFLICT By Janice Honea Zahrly August, 1984 Chairman: Henry L. Tosi Major Department: Management and Administrative Sciences The relationship of specific organizational socialization strategies to job satisfaction, general satisfaction, participation, and work/family conflict was studied in a natural field experiment. Subjects were sixty-four new employees at a manufacturing plant which was beginning operations. Half of the new employees experienced formal group socialization into the organization; the other half experienced informal individual socialization. Formal group socialization lasted from five to nine weeks, encompassed technical information as well as company policies and procedures, and occurred before employees began work. Employees who experienced informal individual socialization began work on the production floor immediately upon entry into the organization and learned on the job.

PAGE 11

Personality and demographic measures were obtained when subjects were initially employed. These were measures of entry skill level, similar work experience, self-monitoring, and locus of control. During the first four months of work, the variety of job assignments was assessed by observation. Approximately four months after beginning work, job satisfaction, general satisfaction, participation, and work/ family conflict were measured. The mode of socialization appears to have some fairly strong effects. Those employees who were socialized by formal group methods had significantly higher job satisfaction and higher work/ family conflict than employees who experienced informal individual socialization. Socialization strategy did not contribute to general satisfaction or participation. The differential effect of socialization strategy was greatest for new employees with low job skills. Highly skilled employees were influenced slightly by the socialization strategy experienced. Self-monitoring, the sensitivity to social cues and subsequent adjustment of self-presentation by individuals, was found to be negatively related to work/ family conflict. Job variety, similar work experience, and locus of control, concomitant with socialization strategy, did not demonstrate significant relationships with job satisfaction, general satisfaction, participation, or work/family conflict.

PAGE 12

CHAPTER I THE MODEL AND HYPOTHESES When I first went out on the floor to work, I knew what I was supposed to be doing because we had been taught about the equipment in class. We knew what was expected. I also knew who I could depend on and who I could trust because I had been in class with them for weeks. I knew who would help me. But I remember Sam's first day on the job. He was bagging and it was awful. He was sweating, making a lot of mistakes. He was just dropped in on the floor with no training. He didn't even know the people or who to go to for help. I know it was a rough day for him. I guess I did have an advantage after all. (Hourly Employee, 1984) Socialization is the process by which individuals acquire the values, beliefs, and behaviors that are necessary for satisfactory membership in society. The socialization process occurs through many activities such as parental guidance, formal training, informal observation and role modeling, trial and error, apprenticeship, etc. (Caplow, 1964; Van Maanen, 1976; Wanous , 1980). The construct of socialization has been developed and researched extensively in sociology and developmental psychology but has only recently become an area of interest to behavioral scientists who study organizations. While there were some early theoretical articles concerning socialization in organizations, the construct was given its current definition and

PAGE 13

empirical validation primarily through the work of Schein (1968, 1971, 1978, 1980) . Generic definitions of socialization are broad and non-specific. For example, Mead (1972, p. ix) defines it as "the process by which human children born potentially human become human, able to function within the societies in which they are born," and Williams (1972, p. 293) defines it as "the process of transmission of human culture." Organizational socialization is more restricted. Organizational socialization is focused on adults rather than children, who are often the subjects of sociological and developmental psychological socializational analyses. Work organization socialization is the "process by which a person learns the values, norms, and required behaviors which permit him to participate as a member of the organization" (Van Maanen, 1976, p. 67). An even more elementary conceptualization of socialization is that it is the process of "breaking in" (Van Maanen, 1976) . Organizational socialization directs attention to the specific processes in an organization setting. Socialization is the influence of the organization on the individual, as differentiated from the individual's influence upon the organization. It is recognized that individuals are not pawns, subject only to the organization's pressures. Organizations change because of individual influence; individuals change because of organizational influence. Bakke (1955) wrote of the newcomer

PAGE 14

"personalizing" the organization; Porter, Lawler, and Hackman (1975) refer to the "individualization" process when a newcomer influences the organization; Schein (1971) describes the "role innovator" who influences the organization. Influence in both directions is important. However, this study is limited to the effects of the organization, as a total entity and as groups and/or individual members upon the newcomer. A final point of clarification regarding the socialization construct is in order. The construct is defined in terms of both processes and outcomes. The word "process" is a part of most definitions of socialization with the understanding that process can be a multitude of procedures or behaviors used to bring about socialization. The particular procedures used to influence the novice are contingent on the situation, the individuals being socialized, and the socializing agents (those who attempt to influence the newcomers) . Socialization is also defined in terms of the desired outcomes such as "participating and effective members" (Feldman, 1981), or persons who "acquire the social knowledge and skills necessary to assume an organizational role" (Van Maanen and Schein, 1979), or "society creates persons suitable to carry out its functional requirements" (Brim, 1976) .

PAGE 15

The Bases of Socialization The effects of socialization can be understood in terms of role theory and socialization theory. Specific models of socialization follow from socialization theory. Role Theory Not only is socialization theory founded in role theory; it uses the language of role theory. Social relationships are defined as any relationship between people in any situation, including work situations. Role theory provides a model for understanding and defining the structure of social relationships (Shaw and Costanzo, 1982) . In their seminal book on role theory, Biddle and Thomas (1966) argue that there is no "one grand" theory of role. Instead, there are many hypotheses about roles which may or may not be related. They point out that these hypotheses are often difficult to test empirically. In general, researchers do not attempt to test complete theories of role. Instead, researchers study many role variables such as role conflict, role ambiguity, role reversal, or expected behaviors in roles. Underlying constructs of role theory are best explained as categories and in relation to each other. Biddle and Thomas (1966) present exhaustive classification schemes which are used to partion persons, behaviors, sets of persons and behaviors, and to relate sets of persons and behaviors.

PAGE 16

Persons are differentiated as to the actor (e.g. focal person, self, ego) and the "other" person (e.g. target person, alter-ego) . Shaw and Costanzo (1982) explain that the "other" is a "generalized entity which the person utilizes as a reference point for his own behavior" (p. 297) . Behaviors may relate to performance, prescription, evaluation, description, and sanction. Behavior may be overt or covert; it may be individual or aggregate. Performance is classified in terms of ends or goals, not means to an end. Outcomes are the results of role performance. Role prescription defines the expected behaviors. Norms are covert prescriptions and role demands are overt prescriptions, although some writers use norms and prescriptions interchangeably. Role prescriptions are often couched in phrases such as "ought to" or "should" or "expected." Prescriptions are generalized expected behaviors. Behaviors may be evaluated or judged against particular standards or values. Behaviors may also be described or sanctioned. Concepts which involve sets of persons and behaviors are positions and roles. Position is a recognized category of persons with a common attribute, common behavior, or common reactions of others toward the individual or group. A general definition of role is that "role is the set of prescriptions defining what the behavior of a position member should be" (Biddle and Thomas, 1966, p. 29). Katz and Kahn (1966) call roles "standardized patterns of

PAGE 17

behavior required of all persons playing a part in a given functional relationship" (p. 37). Bakke (1955) points out that roles are never in isolation. Persons always perform roles in relation to others or perceived expectations of others . Actors have many sets of expectations imposed upon them simultaneously. For example, a particular actor may have a position of college professor, i.e. a category of people with many common attributes and behaviors who elicit common reactions from others in society. There are certain expected behaviors (norms or role demands) for the person occupying the position of college professor. Students expect the professor to lecture, assign grades, advise, etc. and perform the role of a teacher. Other professors expect the professor to act as a colleague, to discuss theories and research, to collaborate, and to act in accordance with their similar professional values. The department chairperson and dean expect the professor to teach and get good student evaluations, research and publish, get outside financial support in the form of grants and contracts, and be supportive of administrative practices. All "others" who interact with the professor expect specific behaviors from the professor. These behaviors define the roles which the professor enacts. It should be noted that this relationship is reciprocal. The professor also has a set of prescriptive behaviors for all of the "others" whom he or she encounters. In addition, the professor will have other roles in the

PAGE 18

position of parent, lover, consultant, community leader, etc. Each of these roles carries sets of prescribed behaviors or norms. The final role concept is one of relationships between sets of persons and behaviors. This covers such areas as similarity of behaviors, interdependence of behaviors and various combinations of similarity and interdependence such as conformity and adjustment. With the basic constructs of role theory delineated, it is possible to understand socialization theory. Socialization Theory The culture of a group can be expressed in terms of its values, attitudes, knowledge, and norms. In broad terms, individuals acquire the culture of their social groups through socialization (Brim, 1976) . Learning the culture allows the individual to be a functioning member of the group or society. Those people who do not learn the necessary norms, behaviors, values, and motives are deviants. They are punished physically or emotionally by society, and in extreme cases are removed from the general social group and isolated in facilities such as prisons or mental institutions (Brim and Wheeler, 1976) . Role prescriptions define the allowed deviance. Some expected behaviors allow no deviance. For example, college students must pay tuition if they wish to remain in the

PAGE 19

role of students. The expected behavior must occur with no deviation. On the other hand, there is a great range of behavior and deviance from that behavior when evaluating the acceptable behavior of students at a school athletic event. The expected behaviors range from polite cheering to rowdy chants to obscene chants, gestures, and signs. The norms and demands of roles define the behaviors as well as the range of behaviors and the amount of deviance allowed before punishment. Of course, the legal system of a society also defines expected behaviors and limits the range of those behaviors. When deviance occurs, society almost always continues resocialization efforts in an attempt to bring the deviant behaviors into generally accepted (i.e. conforming) behaviors. Most people choose to comply with society's values rather than become total deviates. Deliberate socialization efforts are one method of effecting control. The more effective the socialization, the less the need for overt organizational controls (Simon, 1957) . As individuals become socialized, that is they learn and perform the expected behaviors, less organizational control, less managerial effort and fewer organizational resources are needed to direct their behaviors within the organization. Socialization brings about the expected behaviors because many role demands (overt prescriptions) are internalized by the individual over time and become norms. For example, an organization might consistently tell employees that the primary production goal is a quality

PAGE 20

product. After hearing this enough and after receiving positive reinforcements for quality production, employees may internalize this goal of a quality product, i.e. accept the goal as a personal one, and would then work to produce a quality product regardless of the organization's goals or reinforcements. Norms, in turn, can influence values which are used in evaluation procedures. In the language of role theory, socialization is concerned with having the newcomer learn the role prescriptions and with evaluations of the behaviors enacted. Schein (1968) argues that the stability and the effectiveness of an organization is a function of the socialization of new members. The speed and effectiveness of the socialization process will determine the members' levels of commitment, loyalty, productivity, and turnover. All of these elements contribute to the quality and quantity of the organization's final output. Etzioni (1964) points out that organizational control and socialization are related. Three types of organizational control exist. Coercive control is physical force, as in prisons. There is no selection of members. Utilitarian control is by the giving or withholding of material rewards. Most business organizations are in this category. They are quite selective, especially at the higher ranks. Normative control is control by symbols such as moral values. Organizations which use normative control vary as to the degree of selectivity of members. Churches are

PAGE 21

10 examples of organizations which use normative control. There is a trade-off between selection and socialization (Etzioni, 1964) Organizations which are highly selective take in individuals who come close to meeting the organization's standard of the ideal member who will achieve the goals and objectives valued by the organization. Therefore, there is little need for intense socialization efforts and control is easier. On the other hand, less selective organizations take in a variety of people and have to invest organizational resources in socialization or teaching new members the necessary and expected behaviors. The military is an example of a less selective organization, particularly at the lower ranks. The military takes in enlisted personnel who do not conform to military standards. This means that the military must spend time and resources in basic training of recruits in order to inculcate the desired values and objectives. Socialization is always defined in terms of the desired outcomes. The desired outcomes are usually not isolated behaviors. Instead, organizations want members to acquire and display particular values, motives, repeated behaviors or bodies of knowledge over the individual's tenure in the organization. For example, a utilitarian organization, such as a law firm, might desire that members exhibit certain standards of quality in courtroom performance or that members become committed to doing pro bono work. These are examples of values and motives that the law firm desires

PAGE 22

11 each member to have. The organization expects these values and motives, establishes role prescriptions and then evaluates members against the prescriptions. Overall, the goal of socialization of any organization remains the transformation of a new member into a functioning, contributing member who can perform the desired activities. Socialization theory describes outcomes and processes but places little emphasis on the content of socialization. The values and norms which the organization seeks to transmit are varied. It is specific to the individuals, groups and situations where socialization is occurring. The important aspect of socialization is that a process occurs. The process of socialization takes many forms such as training, apprenticeship, trial and error, etc., and is discussed extensively in the literature. (See Caplow, 1964; Wanous, 1980; Van Maanen, 1976; Maier, 1973 and others for exhaustive listings.) The process of socialization can occur by a formal organizationally planned procedure, by informal unplanned interaction with others in the organization, or by any combination of efforts between these two extremes. Socialization can take place by individual efforts, multiple efforts, interactive procedures or activities in isolation. Socialization is a continuous process, occurring throughout a lifetime. In organizations, socialization is continuous throughout the individual's membership. However, many believe that early socialization experiences are a

PAGE 23

12 major factor in the individual's acceptance of significant organization norms, values, behaviors, and motives (Van Maanen, 1976; Schein, 1980; Berlew and Hall, 1966; Irwin, 1970). Berlew and Hall (1966), in one of the few research efforts on initial socialization, found a strong relationship between early job challenge and later job performance for managers. They conclude that the first year of employment is "a critical period of learning." Van Maanen (1976) reviews research which shows that first offenders' long term orientations toward imprisonment were usually dependent upon early jailing experiences. The obvious conclusion is that the potential for organizational influence is greatest during transition periods, when the individual is moving from one role or set of expectations to another. The ambiguity and demands of a new role produce anxiety and individuals are usually motivated to reduce the anxiety by learning the requirements for the new role (Van Maanen and Schein, 1979). Finally, organizational socialization does not occur in a social vacuum. Many organizations, groups, and individuals influence the newcomer at the same time. For example, a person may be employed by an organization and experience the influence of the formal work organization as well as the influence of the informal work group that is encountered daily. Simultaneously, he or she is a part of, and influenced by, a family group, various social and civic groups, such as churches and clubs, and is also a member of the

PAGE 24

13 community where he or she lives. The socialization efforts of all of these entities are interactive and are difficult to separate. A Socialization Model Socialization can be described as a multiple stage process model. A multiple stage process model is one which has sequential stages or phases with specific processes in each stage. All members must pass through each stage, in the proper sequence, in order to become fully socialized into the organization. There are several socialization models which are very similar (Porter, Lawler and Hackman, 1975; Van Maanen, 1976; Feldman, 1976; Feldman, 1981; Schein, 1978; Wanous, 1980). They all describe sequential periods through which a novice must pass on his or her way to full membership. The socialization model used in this study, derived from several recent models, contains the following sequential stages: Stage 1 — Pre-Entry/Anticipatory Stage 2 — Initial Entry Stage 3--Maturation Stage 4--Outcomes Figure 1 compares the stages in this model with the stages in several of the more prominent socialization models. Anticipatory/Pre-entry . This stage of the socialization process occurs before the recruit actually becomes a

PAGE 25

14

PAGE 26

15 member of the organization. Individuals come to the organization with "a set of cultural baggage that they have acquired previously" (Porter et al., 1975). People have existing values, motives, knowledge and expectations that may color their views of the organization. Cultural values, education, and prior experiences are part of the anticipatory socialization phase. In addition, information about the organization influences the newcomers' perceptions. This may range from vague misinformation to specific details presented in realistic job previews. This is the period when applicants need to learn as much as possible about the organization. Feldman (1976) indicates two processes that should occur during this stage. They are acquisition of a full and accurate picture of life in the organization (realism) and the matching of the organization's resources and needs with the individual's skills and needs (congruence) . Anticipatory socialization is viewed as "an imperfect and unfinished process" (Van Maanen, 1976) . For this preliminary socialization to be meaningful, it must be supported and expanded by the organization. Initial entry . This phase, termed encounter, accommodation, or socialization in some models, is a period in which new members must begin to learn the required tasks, learn the work group and organizational norms, learn to interact with others on the job, and define their roles within the group. Hughes (1958) calls this a period of "reality shock." The level of reality shock is a function

PAGE 27

16 of how realistic the recruit's evaluation of the organization was prior to employment, and the level of congruence between the organizational demands and the individual's ability to meet the demands. This initial entry stage is most critical to the socialization process for it is during this period that the new member is most susceptible to the organization's influence (Van Maanen and Schein, 1979; Brim, 1976; Irwin, 1970; Berlew and Hall, 1966) . Initial placement and the associated challenge of that placement correlate strongly with performance and later success (Berlew and Hall, 1966) . This phase is of a short duration, probably a few weeks or a few months. It is truly the initiation period. It is characterized by ambiguity and disconf irmation of expectations (Van Maanen and Schein, 1979) . Maturation . The third socialization stage can last from a few months to several years. This is a time for members to settle into roles, resolve conflicting role demands, and acquire necessary organizational goals and values. Wanous (1980) indicates that the recruit must "locate oneself in the organizational context." The maturation stage is when the new member establishes to self and others what role or roles he or she will enact with respect to the organization. Compliance with or rebellion to the norms, values, and standards of the organization will occur. This will establish a pattern that will be recognized by the organization. This pattern will be

PAGE 28

17 generally accepted and will be difficult to change, once established. In his classic Principles of Organization , Caplow (1964) lists four requirements for the new member to become a "successful incumbent." Recruits must acquire a new self image, new involvements, new values, and new accomplishments. The new image will reflect the new member's organizational role and will include the values, status rankings and activities of the organization. New involvements are required when the recruit interacts with an aggregate of individuals who compose the work group. This phase of the socialization requires more than the development of new relationships; old relationships are often changed and even abandoned. The acquisition of appropriate new values is a multifaceted process. Values of the new role are first communicated in such a way that the recruit understands them. They must then be accepted by the novice and, eventually, internalized if the newcomer is to be successfully socialized. Finally, new accomplishments must occur that are unique to the particular role of the recruit. He or she must learn the necessary skills and then actually complete the specified tasks. By completing a task that is new, the recruit experiences the sense of accomplishment that is identified with the new role. The new accomplishments more firmly establish that the recruit is becoming a fully functioning member of the organization. The maturation stage is best

PAGE 29

understood as the time when newcomers establish themselves as functioning and contributing members of the organization. Outcomes . Even though some socialization models do not delineate the specific outcomes desired, the overall goal of all models is to explain the process which transforms the recruit into a satisfactory member. Most of the models discuss outcomes in a very general way. As Feldman (1976) notes, there is a difference between successful socialization and complete socialization. Successful socialization occurs at any time the individual becomes more proficient at any socialization task. Completed socialization indicates that the individual is contributing to the organization and has accomplished the tasks of the maturation stage. He or she has moved from "newcomer to insider" (Schein, 1978) . Outcomes may be organizationally or individually desired. The effects of socialization are assessed by such factors as general and job satisfaction, salary increases, positive performance appraisals, new job assignments, promotions, influence and participation in organization decisions, internal work motivation, job involvement, and work/ family conflict. Instead of discussing outcomes, Wanous (1980) calls these factors "signposts of successful socialization." While theorists acknowledge that organizational socialization is a continuous process, there are definite milestones which signify that an individual is a member. The outcomes stage of a socialization model marks

PAGE 30

19 the point where members are evaluated as to their contribution and their acceptability to the organization. In general, organizations want their members to be satisfied, particularly with the job. Not only is this a humane attitude for management to take, but it is also a practical one. Overall satisfaction and job satisfaction lead to more pleasant working conditions, less absenteeism and tardiness, less turnover, and lowered production costs. Some organizations want members to actively participate in decisions which influence the organization and its members. Higher levels of participation usually lead to higher commitment on the part of employees. Those employees with high organizational commitment are easier to control because they have internalized or adopted the organization's goals as their own. The organization does not have to expend a lot of time and effort trying to influence the member's goals . Another desired outcome for organizations is minimal conflict between work roles and other roles, especially the family role. Many jobs can force the employee to take time and resources away from the family to devote to the job. This can lead to great conflict, and, in turn, to high dissatisfaction. Socialization Strategies Socialization can take many forms. The organization can shape and structure the socialization experiences in

PAGE 31

20 varied ways. Socialization strategies are the "people processing" modes that the organization uses to bring new members into conformity (Van Maanen, 1978) . The strategies used by the organization may be selected consciously or unconsciously; they may be planned innovations or rely on habit (Van Maanen and Schein, 1979) . The effects of socialization are cumulative and interactive. Each new socialization effort adds to the total lifetime socialization. Organizations usually use more than one strategy in the total socialization process. Van Maanen (1978) and Van Maanen and Schein (1979) suggest the most comprehensive list of strategies. Strategies of organizational socialization are collective versus individual processes formal versus informal processes sequential versus random processes fixed versus variable processes serial versus disjunctive processes investiture versus divestiture processes Van Maanen and Schein (1979) list many propositions about each of these strategies but also point out that the strategies are interactive. Organizations will probably use several strategies simultaneously so it is difficult to test hypotheses about single strategies.

PAGE 32

21 Collective Versus Individual Processes Collective socialization occurs when a group of recruits go through a common set of experiences designed to aid them in becoming full members. Examples are basic training in the military or pledgeship in a fraternity. This collective process tends to strengthen group cohesiveness and camaraderie which, in turn, leads members to share problems and solutions to those problems. Through this process, newcomers "arrive at a definition of the situation, its problems and possibilities, and develop consensus as to the most appropriate and efficient ways of behaving" (Becker, 1964, p. 47) . This group consensus then constrains the behaviors of individual members with respect to group acceptance or requirements. The other end of the continuum is individual socialization. Recruits enter the organization singly and go through a unique set of experiences. An individual apprenticeship program where the novice learns alone with an expert and "on-the-job" training are examples of individual socialization. Results of this mode of socialization are quite variable and are largely a function of the specific socialization agent who trains and guides the novice. That is, one person experiencing individual socialization might become a fully functioning member very quickly through the guidance of a concerned mentor and friend. Another person in the same organization might be assigned to learn from a disinterested or negative employee who could hinder the

PAGE 33

socialization process. The second newcomer may be poorly socialized and may never become a functioning member. This socialization tends to be an intense, value-oriented process and is most likely to be associated with complex roles (Van Maanen and Schein, 1979) . Formal Versus Informal Processes Formal socialization occurs when newcomers are segregated from regular organization members while undergoing specific experiences designed to orient and train them. All members understand that the recruits have a "special" role (Wheeler, 1976) and that the special role entails the participation in a series of scheduled activities. "Special" roles for recruits entail such concepts as a lighter work load, permission to violate some of the group norms, or permission to make mistakes without the usual contingent reprimands and punishments. Scheduled activities are specific classes, orientation sessions, introductions to particular employees or suppliers, etc. Professional schools and company training courses are examples of formal socialization. This mode of socialization is often used when it is important for the novice to learn the "correct" values, attitudes, and behaviors required for the new role. By isolating the newcomer and making his or her role explicit and different from the existing members' roles, it is easier for the newcomer to know what the organization wants.

PAGE 34

23 In contrast, informal socialization processes do not segregate the newcomer from more experienced members and the newcomer role is not emphasized. On-the-job training is the most obvious example of informal socialization. The recruit must negotiate his or her own way through the new situations although there are usually certain socialization agents to guide the newcomer. Sponsors or guides may be assigned by the organization or the newcomer may gravitate to those experienced members who give advice and aid entry into the organization. Sequential Versus Random Processes This socialization strategy refers to the specificity of the sequence of events which lead to the target or desired role for the newcomer. Sequential socialization reflects a "given sequence of discrete and identifiable steps" (Van Maanen and Schein, 1979) which the recruit must pass through. These steps are defined as to the content of the step and the particular order in which the experiences must occur. A medical education is an example of a sequential process where third year students experience certain activities that first and second year students do not. Similarly, interns and residents have experiences that students do not go through. Random socialization occurs when there is no sequence to the steps in the socialization process. The route to being accepted as a functional member is ambiguous, unknown,

PAGE 35

or constantly changing. The newcomer must discover the various methods available for becoming socialized and then try those methods to see which ones work best for him or her. The socialization of a highly skilled employee is often random. There is no sequential process since the employee already has many skills and can begin work immediately. He or she will learn about the culture of the organization in a random fashion and will probably "learn the ropes" as it becomes important. Fixed Versus Variable Processes Fixed and variable socialization are concerned with the established timetable for the socialization process. A fixed process has a definite timetable for the newcomer's passage from a recruit to an experienced member. Formal educational situations, such as public schooling or police training, have established periods of time for each step in the phases of socialization. Variable socialization processes have no set timetable for the newcomer to experience certain activities. Recruits can often move at their own paces. Apprenticeships, which may only require minimum training periods, are examples of variable processes. Serial Versus Disjunctive Processes This mode of socialization deals with the degree of intergenerational activity that occurs during the socialization. Intergenerational activity is activity that occurs

PAGE 36

25 between employees of different work generations. For example, one group is hired, socialized, and the individuals become mature and experienced workers; then another group is hired and begins the same process. The two groups are two work generations and the learning about work by the second group from the first group is intergenerational. A serial socialization process is one in which an experienced member prepares the newcomer to occupy the same or a similar role. The role is established and recognized within the organization before the newcomer attempts to enact the role. Role occupants serve as role models for the recruits. An excellent example of this strategy is the seasoned politician who trains, protects, and guides a protege\ When newcomers are to enact a role that is new in the organization or when there are no role models, the process is a disjunctive one. Newcomers must create the role and often the socialization is by trial and error. The first astronauts and the first woman on the U.S. Supreme Court were socialized by disjunctive processes. Investiture Versus Divestiture Processes This socialization strategy deals with the degree to which the organization attempts to confirm or disconfirm the existing values and behaviors of the newcomer. Investiture processes seek to strengthen and ratify the newcomers' existing identities and assure them that they bring valuable characteristics to the organization. This type of

PAGE 37

26 socialization often occurs when the newcomer has been previously socialized into the profession. Recruits to upperlevel management positions in an established firm go through an investiture process. Long time employees will reinforce the newcomer's self-image because he or she is bringing desired characteristics and capabilities to the organization. Divestiture processes have a goal of removing certain personal characteristics of the newcomers. The intent is to destroy or remove certain aspects of the personalities and replace them with characteristics which are valued and desired by the organization. The priesthood and the Marine Corps are examples of organizations which attempt to destroy old values and behaviors and replace them with others. The Proposed Research The overall goal of socialization efforts is to convert newcomers into functioning organization members. One way to evaluate these socialization efforts is to assess how well the members achieve the organization's desired outcomes such as high job satisfaction, high worker participation in company decisions, minimal conflict between family and work, and high productivity. Research Questions The basic research question addressed in this thesis is whether the particular socialization strategies employed by

PAGE 38

27 the organization do, in fact, influence the desired outcomes. Certainly the content and intensity of socialization efforts have an influence on outcomes. But do the different modes of socialization affect outcomes? Will the results of socialization be the same within an organization regardless of the methods of orientation and training imposed on the newcomers? Another issue revolves around the specific situational and individual factors that contribute to outcomes, given different socialization strategies. Do situational and individual factors influence outcomes such as job satisfaction and participation differently when individuals are socialized by different means? If significant differences in outcomes occur when newcomers are socialized by different strategies, one could argue that certain of the organization's strategies had different effects. If there are no significant differences in outcomes between individuals socialized in different ways, the implication would be that the mode of socialization does not influence desired outcomes. Regardless of whether differences in outcomes occur with different strategies, factors which influence outcomes are of interest to the organization. If certain factors significantly influence desired outcomes under one socialization strategy but not under another, predictions of adjustment may become more accurate and organizationally desired outcomes are more attainable.

PAGE 39

28 Organization socialization strategies are often a complex case of several strategies. The interaction of strategies may render exact measurement of a single strategy impossible. For example, one person may experience informal, individual, serial, variable, and divestiture socialization processes while another person is socialized in a formal, group, fixed, sequential, investiture process. It is not reasonable to compare individual strategies for these two people. However, if groups of newcomers are socialized differently on one or two strategies only, it is possible to compare the groups to evaluate the effects of the one or two strategies . This thesis examines whether formal group socialization and informal individual socialization have differential effects. All subjects experienced random, variable, disjunctive, and investiture socialization. There were only two strategies, group versus individual and formal versus informal, which were different for the new employees. Relationship of Socialization Strategies and Outcomes Van Maanen and Schein (1979) predict responses to socialization strategies either in terms of the way individuals will enact organizational roles or in terms of certain situations where different strategies will be used. However, not much is known about the effects of the various strategies. In only one situation do Van Maanen and Schein predict outcomes. They argue that individual socialization

PAGE 40

29 is more likely to produce the specific outcomes desired by the organization than is group socialization. They believe that an individual strategy presents a greater opportunity for socialization without the moderating effect of the group processes which will occur during group socialization. Satisfaction . While there is a paucity of evidence supporting a direct relationship between performance and satisfaction (Cherrington, Reitz, and Scott, 1971; Greene, 1972) , business organizations usually desire employees to be generally satisfied, particularly with the job. High satisfaction is correlated with less absenteeism and tardiness, lower turnover and fewer grievances. These, in turn, lead to lower costs for the organization as well as a more pleasant environment. If the Van Maanen and Schein argument is correct, newcomers who experience individual socialization will be more likely to achieve the organization's desired outcome of satisfaction. This leads to the following hypotheses about general and job satisfaction: H,: Newcomers who experience informal individual socialization into an organization will report higher job satisfaction than will newcomers who undergo formal group socialization. H~ : Newcomers who experience informal individual socialization into an organization will report higher general satisfaction than will newcomers who undergo formal group socialization.

PAGE 41

30 Participation . Employees who are involved in important decisions tend, in general, to feel more commitment to the organization and are more satisfied. Greater participation may bring enhanced motivation for certain employees (Locke and Schewiger, 1979; Steers, 1975). Employee participation is a desired outcome for many organizations. Van Maanen and Schein's proposition would support higher participation among recruits who experienced individual socialization. However, research shows that members of groups learn the behaviors and attitudes of other group members, develop norms, and establish a cohesiveness which can lead to greater understanding of team members and to greater trust (Jewell and Reitz, 1981). Holding other variables constant, group members might feel a greater ability to participate than if they entered the organization as a single individual. Employees who experience group socialization are more likely to know the norms and could feel more comfortable with participation than individuals who are just learning the expected roles. H : Newcomers who experience formal group socialization into an organization will report higher participation in organizational decisions than will newcomers who undergo informal individual socialization. Work/Family Conflict . Most organizations prefer not to have dysfunctional conflicts, such as a conflict between the work role and the role as a family member. Results of

PAGE 42

31 research efforts indicate that role conflict on the job is related to lower job satisfaction and lower levels of performance (Rizzo, House and Lirtzman, 1970; House and Rizzo, 1972; Schuler, 1977). If the demands of the job interfere with the family structure or activities, overall satisfaction, as well as job satisfaction, will probably be reduced. The newcomers who are socialized as a group have an opportunity to develop social support systems quickly at work. Individual entrants will take a longer time to meet co-workers, learn the norms and values of the work group, and establish a social support system within the work setting. Supportive co-workers can help relieve the stress of conflict related to a new job or can comfort and advise about problems at home or on the job. In addition, formal socialization specifies the role expectations more definitively than does informal socialization, thereby reducing role ambiguity and stress. The cohesiveness of a training group can also contribute to stronger support systems. This leads to the following hypothesis: H.: Newcomers who experience formal group socialization into an organization will report lower work/ family conflict than will newcomers who undergo informal individual socialization.

PAGE 43

32 Contributing Factors to Outcomes Both situational and psychological factors contribute to the achievement of desired organizational outcomes. While the particular organizational strategy of socialization is one situational variable, there are other situational variables which are unique to the individual recruits. Most recruits will experience some anxiety upon entering the organization and most have some level of ambiguity initially about the roles they are expected to perform. There are other variables which might influence desired outcomes, and which are the independent variables in this study. In this study, the following factors are considered: entry skill level, similarity of past work experience, job variety, self-monitoring, and locus of control. Situational variables . The individual's level of knowledge which is required to complete the assigned tasks is likely to influence the socialization effort, as well as the desired outcomes. The recruit who has the required job knowledge at the time he or she enters the organization will have to spend less time learning and performing the task and can spend more time discovering the expected role and working toward desired outcomes. Conversely, the newcomer who has little or no knowledge of the task will have to invest personal resources in learning the task and will have less time to devote to the role and desired outcomes.

PAGE 44

33 H 5 : The influence of entry skill levels on desired organizational outcomes will be greater for newcomers who experience informal individual socialization into an organization than for newcomers who undergo formal group socialization. A variable which is analogous to knowledge of the task is similarity of past work experiences. Again, employees with experiences which are similar or familiar should have higher performance than those with less similar work experiences. The novice who is accustomed to the situation can invest more effort in learning the desired role. A newcomer who has no or few similar experiences must expend more effort in analyzing the situation and becoming accustomed to the task instead of learning the expected role. H,: The influence of similar work experiences on desired organizational outcomes will be greater for newcomers who experience informal individual socialization into an organization than for newcomers who undergo formal group socialization. A wide range of operations and the necessity of using a great variety of equipment and procedures to complete the task constitute high job variety. The variability of the task has been shown to significantly influence outcomes such as job satisfaction (Hackman and Oldham, 19 80) . However, the newcomer who is individually learning on-the-job might be distracted and/or disturbed by high job variety. Low 30b variety would give the novice an opportunity to learn the

PAGE 45

34 task as well as devote some effort to the enactment of the expected role and discovery of desired organizational outcomes . H_,: The influence of high job variety on desired organizational outcomes will be greater for newcomers who experience formal group socialization into the organization than for newcomers who undergo informal individual socialization. Psychological variables . There are some psychological characteristics which may influence the socialization of individuals and the subsequent outcomes of socialization. There are many possible factors. Some which are of special interest here are self-monitoring and locus of control. Self-monitoring is the degree to which an individual is sensitive to others in social situations and the subsequent use of social cues to direct self-presentation (Snyder, 1974; 1979b). As Briggs, Cheek, and Buss (1980) point out, the three characteristics of a high self-monitoring person are concern for the appropriateness of social behavior, sensitivity to important cues, and self-regulation of behavior. Research has demonstrated that self-monitoring was "most important during the period of early tenure" for persons in boundary-spanning positions (Caldwell and O'Reilly, 1982a). Newcomers who enter individually and have an informal introduction to the job must rely heavily on their personal characteristics and capabilities. The novice who is trained formally in a group of newcomers can rely not

PAGE 46

35 only on his or her individual capabilities, but also on the group capabilities, and on the formal socializing agent. Hgi The influence of self-monitoring on desired organizational outcomes will be greater for newcomers who experience informal individual socialization into the organization than for newcomers who undergo formal group socialization. Locus of control is a personality dimension which reflects the level of perceived control by the individual over pertinent events. People can attribute control over events to themselves (internal orientation) or to outside forces or luck (external orientation) . Research supports the thesis that internals, in general, have higher job satisfaction and performance, seek more relevant information in complex tasks, and prefer participative management styles (Spector, 1982) . However, locus of control is often a moderating or interactive variable in conjunction with many other personality and situational variables (Phares, 1976) . Because internals perceive more personal control over their environments than do externals, individual socialization might strengthen the perception of control whereas socialization in a group might weaken the individually perceived control. H_: The influence of locus of control on desired organizational outcomes will be greater for newcomers who experience informal individual

PAGE 47

36 socialization into the organization than for newcomers who undergo formal group socialization. Summary A multiple stage model of organizational socialization was presented in this chapter. The various socialization strategies available to organizations were discussed. This study will assess the differential effects of socialization strategy on the organizationally desired outcomes of job satisfaction, general satisfaction, participation and work/ family conflict. Some effects of the socialization strategies of formal group entry and informal individual entry are evaluated. In addition, the influence of entry skill level, similar work experience, job variety, self-monitoring and locus of control, concomitant with socialization strategy, will be assessed.

PAGE 48

CHAPTER II RESEARCH DESIGN Socialization effects are most likely to be obvious when persons take on new roles. The research focus of this thesis is the socialization of new manufacturing employees. The socialization process was studied during the start-up of a new manufacturing facility. This chapter will describe the site, the subjects, the data collection, and the data analysis which was undertaken to test the hypotheses presented in Chapter I. Research Setting A new manufacturing facility was available as the research site; all of the employees were new and there were no existing organizational roles. After preliminary discussions with management, a study was designed to assess the effects of socialization on all employees. This site lent itself well to the study because all employees were hired within a few months while the plant was still becoming operational. Because of this, it was possible to study the establishment of roles and norms, the taking of roles, role outcomes, and relate this to socialization strategies. 37

PAGE 49

38 The employees were oriented and trained in different ways. Half of the employees were oriented and trained in a formal group situation. The other half of the employees entered the organization individually and did not undergo formal orientation or training. They were initially trained and socialized on-the-job informally. Thus, there is an important difference in the way the two groups were socialized. Research Site The manufacturing plant uses a continuous process automated operation and produces a single product, an aluminum lid. This lid is used exclusively on one-piece aluminum beverage cans. This is one of four manufacturing facilities in the company. The company is wholly owned by a major corporation in the beer industry. The nature of the production work is complex. The product requires narrow production tolerances. While there are some simple, routine jobs, employees at the lov/est skill level have enriched jobs with several tasks assigned to each position. Some work assignments require that the employee perform equipment retooling, design and develop prototypic additions or changes to equipment, and train others to maintain, operate, or repair equipment. Team members also rotate the jobs of cleaning the break room and locker rooms, as well as clean up on the production floor. A janitorial service cleans the staff offices.

PAGE 50

39 The work is dirty, noisy, and can be dangerous if safety precautions are not observed. The noise and speed of the equipment require that anyone on the production floor must wear safety glasses, ear protectors, and safety shoes with steel toe-protectors. Workers are skilled at various functions. For example, some are trained electricians and mechanics; another is a welder with twelve years experience; others are hydraulics experts and master tool and die makers. All are expected to rotate jobs and become skilled in all tasks. No job is assigned permanently to a single person. All employees participate in cleaning their area and all are expected to be rotated into the quality assurance lab. This is particularly unusual in that quality assurance is usually a specialized task and separate from production. There is a great amount of pressure to meet target production budgets. In some respects this was due to many unexpected problems in the start-up of the plant. The prototypic equipment presented more rework and redesign problems than had been anticipated. Production targets were rarely met during the first year of production. The plant began operating with one-third of the equipment and received other machinery over time. Workers had a two-fold task. They had to get the equipment operational, which often entailed down time for the machines, and they also had to produce a quality, marketable product. With the start-up problems, these goals sometimes produced a stressful

PAGE 51

40 situation for the operatives on the floor as well as the managerial staff. Innovation . The plant differs both technically and in management philosophy from other facilities in the company and the industry. From a technical viewpoint, the machinery is prototypic and was designed specifically for this plant. Similar equipment has been used in the industry but all of the equipment for this plant was specially designed. The equipment is high speed, highly automated and integrated, and has a production capacity which substantially exceeds existing levels in the industry. Secondly, the management philosophy at this plant is very different from most facilities in the container industry. The industry is characterized by high-pressure management, low employee involvement, high levels of unionism, and specialized jobs. In contrast, at the research site, the work force is non-unionized and the prevailing managerial culture is participative. Almost all of the employees are new to the industry. Quality of work-life is emphasized and supported by the parent company. The managerial concept for this plant was conceived and implemented by a corporate officer, the plant manager, and the plant employee relations manager. All management personnel at this plant had worked at traditional facilities in the container industrv before This characterization comes from in-depth interviews with staff members, other workers in the industry, and equipment suppliers.

PAGE 52

41 coming to this plant. Because of this dramatic difference in management philosophy, and because all of the managers had practiced a more directive style of management that was generally typical in the industry, it v/ould seem that there would have been a great amount of training and development undertaken to implement the particular philosophy at this plant. However, no specific management training occurred to facilitate implementation of this participative style although the philosophy was emphasized repeatedly during pre-employment interviews with staff and hourly workers and during the plant start-up. Based upon the in-depth interviews with staff members, the management began the operation of this plant with the following approaches: 1. There will be a climate of trust, honesty, and openness at all times. 2. The work force will have much discretion in the performance of work. They will have a "license to fail." If there is a failure, it will be studied in order to learn how to prevent it later. 3. There will be semi-autonomous work teams. Each team is headed by a superintendent (managerial) who is supported by a team leader (hourly) . The team leader assignment is to be rotated among several team members. The team leader may have managerial responsibility and authority in the absence of the superintendent. Each team is

PAGE 53

42 encouraged to work as a unit and to make team decisions, where relevant. 4. A person's potential to work in a highly participative environment and to work with the semiautonomous work team concept is very important in selection. Communication skill is an important selection criterion. 5. There will be an opportunity for workers to have a vehicle for discussing work and personal problems in strict confidence. (This was to have been accomplished through the creation of an "ombudsman" position, a liaison between management and hourly employees.) 6. There will be, to the greatest extent possible, worker participation in the operation of the plant. The range of participation may be from total autonomy in some situations to simple input for consideration in other cases. The level of participation in various areas is emerging and is still being defined. 7. Workers are to be cross-trained, up to each person's potential, in all skills required to operate the plant. The purpose of cross-training is to facilitate rotation of the workers through the different jobs in the plant. 3. Compensation is skill-based; that is, pay level xs determined by the number of skills a person has

PAGE 54

43 rather than the specific job assignment. One purpose of this system is to support the concept of cross-training and job rotation. Pay levels are high for this geographical area. There is an informal atmosphere around the plant. Formal lines of communication and authority exist but the overwhelming modes of communication and relationships are informal. Employees are encouraged to suggest improvements, look for solutions to problems, and interact freely with all staff members. Hourly employees, managers, and staff members use a single cafeteria/break room that looks out on the plant floor; staff and managers occasionally do production work on the plant floor. From interviews, it appears that the management structure is "flat", relative to other firms in the industry. That means that many people report to one supervisor. (See Figure 2 for the organization chart by job titles.) There are fifteen managerial, staff, and supervisory personnel. First line supervisors report directly to the plant manager and have a great amount of responsibility. In other plants of this size, there is a level of supervision between the plant manager and the first line supervisors, usually a position such as "production manager." The eighty hourly employees report to one of the four superintendents. There are few staff specialists compared to other firms in the industry. There is a plant engineer, an employee relations manager, an accountant, and a quality assurance director.

PAGE 55

44 +J

PAGE 56

45 iMost plants have other specialists on staff such as a machine shop foreperson, shift quality control managers, shipping and delivery managers, etc. Selection . The selection process at this plant was different from common practice. In most manufacturing facilities, selection procedures are usually limited to skill tests, interviews, and reference checks. In this situation there was an effort to select people both for their technical competence or potential for technical competence and for their perceived willingness and ability to work within the framework of a participative management philosophy. Each job applicant was screened through staff interviews to assess technical ability or potential. Those who passed the initial screening were invited to attend a 42 hour course at the local community college. This course was designed by the company and covered areas such as blueprint reading, mathematics, safety, and mechanical design and repair. Applicants attended the class on their own time at night and received no pay. There was some competence testing during the course and individual scores were used in selection. Job applicants who made it to the community college course were interviewed by at least seven of the managerial staff, including the four superintendents. Interviews were at least one hour long and, often, were longer. Staff interviews were intended to assess technical skills,

PAGE 57

46 interpersonal skills, and the potential for working within the stated managerial framework. There was no interview protocol and staff members were free to ask questions and form opinions any way they chose. For example, one staff member asked everyone if he or she had ever been a member of a volunteer fire department in order to make a judgment about whether the applicant could work as a member of a team and make voluntary contributions. The ability to work in teams and in a participative environment was an important criterion. Staff members looked for initiative, good communication skills, the ability to work without direct supervision, high achieving work orientation, and a sense of personal responsibility for desired organizational outcomes. These selection criteria were never formally disseminated in policies or in writing. Employment criteria emerged from discussions among key staff members. Selection of personnel was done by a consensus process. Periodic staff meetings were held and each applicant was discussed before hiring decisions were made. The employment offer was always made by the plant manager and was made both to the applicant and the applicant's spouse. This was an attempt to involve the spouse and to present the job in a realistic framework. Both applicant and spouse were told about the demanding schedule, the parent company's philosophy, the plans for a participative work environment with high quality of work life, and about the required training after employment.

PAGE 58

47 Work team . The team concept was intended to be very important in the operation of this plant. There are four teams made up of twenty hourly employees and a superintendent. Assignments to teams are permanent. Teams are encouraged to work semi-autonomously; they are urged to work together as a unit, look for problems and solutions, help and train each other while producing high quality lids. Specifically, each team member is encouraged to accept personal responsibility for the operation and maintenance of equipment on his or her shift, and to accept responsibility for the quality of lids produced by his or her team. While there are certain people assigned to a quality control task, all team members share an aggregate responsibility for good production. No one has a permanent job assignment. Workers are trained to do several tasks and rotate among job assignments. The ultimate goal is to have each team member capable of doing every job. Hourly workers rotate jobs according to their capabilities which are constrained by the skills they brought with them to the job and the skills they have acquired since beginning employment. Team members learn additional skills in formal classes and informally from managers and from their co-workers on the job. Each team superintendent is assisted by a team leader, who is an hourly employee and who is selected by the managerial staff. Team leaders are highly skilled, have a working knowledge of all of the equipment, have additional

PAGE 59

48 responsibilities such as record keeping, and often serve as superintendent in the absence of the superintendent. They are paid a small wage differential as team leaders. Team members work at a particular task from a few days to many months. Job assignment and rotation is a function of the individual's skills, the time others on the team have to train co-workers, the smoothness of the operation of the equipment, and the specific team's needs at any one point in time. Assignments are primarily the responsibility of the superintendent, with varying degrees of input from the team leader, team members, and staff. Schedule . The plant operates 2 4 hours a day, seven days a week. The normal shift is twelve hours long and operatives work three days or nights, then have three days or nights off. Every four months, the day shift changes to night shift and vice versa. This schedule is different from the traditional manufacturing schedule with three eight-hour shifts a day and 21 shifts per week. However, a twelve-hour shift appears to be typical in the container industry. Three days on and then three days off is not typical. Neither is the day /night rotation every four months typical in the industry. There are no time clocks and employees record the time worked once a week on a time card and turn it in to the superintendent. Since the production process is continuous, certain tasks must be performed constantly. Team members relieve each other for breaks informally. In general,

PAGE 60

49 employees receive four ten-minute breaks and a twenty-minute lunch break during a twelve hour work period. However, one team has modified this schedule and has two twentyminute breaks and the lunch break. In addition, each team has an informal, non-required, non-paid meeting just before the work day starts. These meetings last about fifteen minutes and most employees attend voluntarily. The informality of the breaks and decisions on the structure of breaks, the lack of a time clock, and the voluntary attendance at daily team meetings represent ways to transfer responsibility to the work force. Compensation . The plant uses a skill based compensation system. Employees are paid for their skill levels or what they know, not for the tasks they complete. For example, a highly skilled electrician might work at electrical jobs but he might be assigned to quality assurance or to the operation of a specific machine if there are no pressing electrical problems. Regardless of the assignment, the electrician is paid for the skill he or she possesses, not for the task he or she completes. There are three basic skill levels, trainee, production technician, and plant technician. There are several pay grades within each level. The trainee level has five skill levels and five corresponding pay grades; the production technician level has five skill grades; the plant technical level has three skill grades. (See Table 1 for the skill levels.) The lowest trainee wage is $11.43 an hour.

PAGE 61

50 CD G o 0) P tr> H CP H « w Eh Eh W 3 Eh m Z t. < H X c/) PU C/3 < u Fh

PAGE 62

51 Workers are paid only for the hours that they work. There is no paid sick leave. All employees are eligible for one paid holiday on a day of their choice if they complete a year of work with no absences or tardies. Hourly workers receive pay premiums after eight hours on the job, for the night shift, for overtime, and for holidays. The plant is occasionally shut down for major holidays. Employees' skills are assessed for pay purposes by management at the time of employment. Informal training on-the-job and formal training on off-days lead to additional skills for promotion. Employees may request skill assessment for skill level upgrading at any time. Team superintendents also have regular schedules for skill evaluations . Subjects The eighty hourly employees are the subjects of this research. Only four of them had experience in the lid industry before coming to this plant. Hourly workers are divided equally between the four teams and there are no significant demographic differences between teams. (See Table 2 for demographic information.) Eight of the subjects are female and seven of them are racial minorities. The average age is 33 and 76 percent are married. Sixty-eight of the subjects have completed some education beyond high school. Three of the subjects have college degrees. Almost

PAGE 63

52

PAGE 64

53 one-third of them moved to this area specifically for this job. Participation in this study was voluntary. The initial questionnaire, measuring personality and demographic variables, was completed during training classes at the community college or at the site. Later questionnaires, measuring attitudes toward work, were completed on the employees' own time, away from work. Measures The various instruments used to test the hypotheses are described in this section. The complete scales which are not copyrighted are presented in Appendix A, along with scoring procedures. Table 3 lists the scales, the number of items in each scale and the internal reliability scores, calculated by the coefficient alpha formula (Cronbach, 1951) . Dependent Variables The dependent variables were chosen because they are all outcomes that are desired by the organization for its employees. These outcomes were measured approximately four months after the subjects began to work on the production floor. Job satisfaction . A twenty item scale, a shortened and modified version of one developed by Weiss, Davis, England, and Lofquist (1967) as the Minnesota Satisfaction

PAGE 65

Table 3 Internal Consistency of Scales 54 Scale Number of Items Coefficient Alpha Job Satisfaction 20 94 General Satisfaction .90 Participation 89 Work/Family Conflict 93 Self -Monitoring 25 71 Locus of Control 20 74

PAGE 66

55 Questionnaire, was used to assess satisfaction with the job. Subjects were asked to react to items which described aspects of the job. Responses were on a five point continuum, ranging from "very dissatisfied" to "very satisfied." Responses to items were averaged to obtain a job satisfaction score. Examples of the items are as follows: The chance to do something that makes use of my abilities. The working conditions. My pay and the amount of work I do. The chances for advancement on this job. General satisfaction . Feldman and Brett (1983) developed an eight-item scale that measures satisfaction with many areas of life, including the job. An overall satisfaction measure is obtained by averaging items on this scale. Subjects are asked to respond on a five point continuum to various areas of their lives. Responses range from "very satisfied" to "very dissatisfied" and are in answer to questions such as How satisfied are you with your health? with your friendships? with your standard of living? Participation . High employee participation was one of the major goals of management at the research site. It is a measure of the employee's influence on the job. An a priori scale was used to assess the participation in particular

PAGE 67

56 areas where managers said they wanted employees to be involved in decisions. This scale was designed specifically for this plant and this study, and used some items from a participation scale developed by Vroom (1960) . The scale has nine items and responses were on a five point Likerttype continuum from "none" (i.e. no participation) to "a very great degree." Sample items follow: How much influence do you have over your daily job assignment? How often does your boss ask your opinion? How much influence do you have over the training of employees, including yourself? Work/Family conflict . Because of the unusual work schedule, it was believed there was a great potential for conflict between the work and the family roles. An eightitem scale, developed by Kopelman, Greenhaus , and Connolly (1982) , was used to assess thxs conflict. Subjects responded to statements on a five point continuum ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." Sample items are as follows: My work schedule often conflicts with my family life. My job makes it difficult to be the kind of spouse or parent I'd like to be. Because my work is demanding, at times I am irritable at home .

PAGE 68

57 Independent Variables All of the independent variables except job varietywere measured before employees began work. Job variety was assessed during the first four months of employment. Group or individual entry . This is the major independent variable of the study. All of the hypotheses consider the effect of the socialization strategy imposed by the organization. Half of the subjects entered the organization in a group and received formal training; the other half entered the organization individually and did not undergo formal training. The original plan for selection and training was to bring all employees into the organization in a group situation for formal training. After the first forty employees were trained in groups, and as pressure for production grew, management decided to hire forty people and bring them into the organization individually, let them learn on-the-job, and formally train them later. The first employees were in the groups; the later employees were in the individual situation. In general, the earliest applicants and those immediately available for employment were hired first. Later applicants and those with later availabilities were hired last. The first twenty employees went through a nine-week training and orientation session together. They were trained in special classes at the local community college and in the plants where the equipment was being

PAGE 69

manufactured. This plant was being completed and equipment was not in place, necessitating travel and a longer training period. During this training period, employees got to know each other fairly well, experienced some unique and bonding situations, and developed some close social relationships. The other twenty employees who entered as a group began training about one month after the first group finished training. (See Table 4 for an employment and training schedule.) They were trained at the plant site for five weeks. Most of the training occurred in large conference rooms, although some of the equipment was on the production floor and the second group could view its operation. This was not so for the first training group. The second group of twenty had examinations and established study groups away from work. Both of the training groups had occasions when they interacted socially. The first group went on training trips together. The second group had unofficial study groups after class. Members of both groups related experiences of having meals together and other social events. While the second group of twenty employees was in training, management made the decision to drop the initial group training and orientation. Individuals were hired and began working on the production floor within an hour or so of first coming to work. Their only orientation was experienced during the pre-employment interviews. Most of the employees were hired within the first four months of the

PAGE 70

November Table 4 Schedule of Employment and Training 59 October First Group Hired, Began Training December First Group Began Work January Second Group Hired, Began Training February Second Group Began Work Individuals Began Work March Individuals Began Work April Individuals Began Work

PAGE 71

60 plant's opening. There was no early systematic training or orientation for those employees who entered the organization individually and learned on-the-job. At best, newcomers were assigned to another employee to learn the task. There were no assigned sponsors or guides to help the new employee "learn the ropes." During the year and a half after the plant opened, there were various training sessions in many different skill areas for all employees. These formal training sessions were systematic, covered most of the technical operations required to produce lids, were required for all employees who needed the skills or reviews of the skills, and occurred on paid overtime. Employees who entered in groups and individually were assigned to teams equally. The only concern with who was assigned to which team was when management tried to balance the teams as to the skills of the team members. Each of the four teams has ten members who were socialized by a group strategy and ten members who experienced individual socialization. Entry skill level . The skill level of each employee was determined when he or she was hired. This variable was assessed by the managerial staff, prior to employment, but after interviews and past job experiences were reviewed. Employees could enter at any one of thirteen skill positions since there were five divisions in the first two skill levels and three divisions at the highest skill position.

PAGE 72

61 In actuality, new employees were initially categorized from the first trainee level to the first plant technician level, giving an entry skill level range of eleven positions. Similar work experience . Similar work experience reduces the stress of a new job and allows the new employee to devote more time to learning the actual job. Employees were interviewed by the researcher to determine previous work experiences. The interview followed a strict protocol (See Appendix A) . Subjects were asked how many years experience they had in making lids, in doing shift work, in doing shift work where the shifts were rotated (such as day and night) , and in factory work. To derive a composite similar work experience score, equal weight was given to experience in lid making, shift work, and work in a factory environment. This was done because those who had previous lid experience were familiar with the product and the production processes. Those with experience in lid making were usually the team leaders. Rotating shift experience was given less weight because this experience was already included in the shift experience. The derived score for this variable was estimated by the following formula: Similar Work Experience = Lid Making Experience + Shift Work + .5 (Rotating Shift Work) + Factory Work This formulation assumes that lid making experience is valuable in acclimating oneself to this particular facility. So is shift work experience or the experience of working in

PAGE 73

62 some other factory. While these experiences may or may not have occurred at the same time, they are all facets of the new job that employees had to accept and become accustomed to. Thus, experience with shift work in a factory or a lid factory more closely resembles the operation of this plant than does other work experiences singly. Therefore, a decision was made to weight such experiences more heavily. Job variety . Two dimensions were considered when determining this variable, average job variety and job rotation. Job variety is similar to the concept of task varietydefined by Hackman and Oldham (1975) . They define it as the number of tasks, while keeping in mind the number of pieces of equipment and the number of procedures required to do the necessary tasks. During interviews, superintendents and team leaders were asked to evaluate and rank the job variety of tasks that composed each of the job assignments. The job that had the most variety was ranked the highest while the job with the least variety was ranked the lowest. The rankings of the superintendents and team leaders were averaged to obtain a single ranking of task variety for each of the assigned jobs. (See Appendix B for the rankings.) The second dimension of this variable was the rotation of the actual job assignments of the employees. The researcher observed each team once during every other three-day shift. That is, employees were observed on the job one day or night out of every six days or nights they

PAGE 74

63 worked. The job that each employee was doing was recorded. Later, the jobs were numerically coded according to the task variety rankings of the superintendents and team leaders. The ranked scores were averaged over the first ten observations, which was approximately four months of employment. The number of different jobs that the employee had been assigned and the number of changes in job assignments were also summed over the first ten job assignments. Thus, a person who was a team leader or assigned to quality assurance for the first ten observations had one job assignment and zero job changes. The team leader would have a high average job variety score while the employee assigned to quality assurance would have a low average job variety score. Someone else, with many different jobs would have many job changes and a high number of jobs score. His or her average job variety score would be a function of the variety of the particular jobs assigned. Correlation coefficients were calculated to determine the particular formula or score which would best represent job variety. As expected, the number of different jobs and the number of job changes were highly correlated (.76, p < .0001). However, neither the number of different jobs nor the number of job changes was significantly correlated with the mean job variety. A composite job variety score was devised which seemed to represent both job changes and average job variety. This was done because variety on a single job as well as the variety of moving to another job

PAGE 75

64 should influence total job variety. A composite score of average job variety multiplied by the number of different jobs was calculated and defined as job variety. Self-monitoring . This psychological construct measures the degree to which individuals exercise control over their expressive behavior, self-presentation, and non-verbal displays of emotion (Snyder, 1974) . The twenty-five item scale evaluates the individual's concern for the appropriateness for social behavior, the sensitivity to social cues, and the subsequent regulation of behavior based on the social cues. Snyder reports internal reliabilities from .63 to .83 (1974). Subjects respond "true" or "false" in a forced choice format to statements about themselves. Examples are as follows: I would probably make a good actor. I'm not always the person I appear to be. I can only argue for ideas which I already have. A factor analysis on the self-monitoring scale was performed since other researchers have found significant sub-factors within the scale. Briggs, Cheek, and Buss (1980) found three replicated factors which they named acting, extraversion , and other-directedness . They had two groups of subjects with over 500 people in each group. However, Briggs et al. changed the response format to a five point Likert scale rather than the original true-false format.

PAGE 76

65 The self-monitoring scale was factor analyzed using an orthogonal rotation. The Statistical Analysis System (SAS) factor analysis package was used with a Varimax rotation. A Varimax rotation is used when the objective is to interpret the underlying factors or to understand the factor composition rather than to understand the variance composition (Weiss, 1976) . No clear factors emerged. This may be because of the small number of subjects relative to the number of items in the scale, because the rotation was orthogonal rather than oblique, because there is only one factor, or any combination of the above. Given the failure to replicate the factor structure found by Briggs et al. (1980) , the total scale score is used as a single measure of social cueing and the desire to act upon the social cues. Locus of control . Rotter (1966) conceptualized this construct as a measure of the individual's perception of the control over rewards. A person with an internal locus of control perceives rewards or outcomes as contingent on his or her own behavior; a person with an external locus of control believes rewards and outcomes are independent of his or her own behavior. Rotter (1966) reports many tests of internal consistency above .7 on this scale. This twenty item scale consists of paired statements from which subjects must choose one. One statement reflects control of outcomes by self (internal) , and the other statement indicates luck or the control of others brings

PAGE 77

66 about outcomes (external) . Subjects are asked to choose the statement which they more strongly believe. Examples of the items follow: a. What happens to me is my own doing. b. Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control over the direction my life is taking. a. Unfortunately, an individual's worth often passes unrecognized no matter how hard he tries. b. In the long run, people get the respect they deserve in the world. a. Becoming a success is a matter of hard work, luck has little or nothing to do with it. b. Getting a good job depends mainly on being in the right place at the right time. Schedule of Measurement . The schedule of measurement of the variables is shown in Table 5. Entry skill level, similar work experience, self-monitoring, and locus of control were baseline measures, assessed upon entry. Job variety was measured during the first four months of employment. After four months on the job, employees rated their job satisfaction, general satisfaction, participation, and level of work/family conflict. Subjects were asked to identify themselves on all measures so their scores could be matched later but were guaranteed confidentiality by the researcher. Subjects and

PAGE 78

67

PAGE 79

68 researcher signed an agreement of participation and confidentiality. (See Appendix C for a copy of this agreement.) Methodology This study is a natural field experiment which the researcher was able to evaluate since she had previously gained access to the site. Data collection had begun before the plant opened as part of a large two-year research project which looked at a plant start-up, stress in the factory, strategies for coping with stress, and productivity with "non-traditional" management approaches. Subjects were observed systematically during training and on the plant floor. The researcher attended team social functions, interviewed staff and hourly employees, and even occasionally did unskilled tasks on the production floor to aid the employees . The abrupt change in the mode of organizational entry for new employees presented an opportunity to study the differential effects of socialization strategy. Natural Field Experiment Field experiments have a major concern with the situation or context of the situation, rather than with the particular participants and their behaviors. As Katz (1953) notes, the field study is "unique in enabling us to observe and measure social processes in their natural occurrence" (p. 81) . The reality and richness of the data in the natural situation have long been recognized as valuable

PAGE 80

69 assets in predicting actual behaviors. And Kerlinger (1973) argues, "The more realistic the research situation, the stronger the variables" (p. 402) . In an experiment, one or more independent variables are manipulated. This is often difficult to achieve in actual organization settings since those who control organizations are often unwilling to allow an experimenter to intervene in the operations of the organization for the sake of research. In the natural field experiment the researcher can "opportunistically capitalize upon some on-going changes and study their effects in the experimental design" (French, 1953, p. 99). However, the manipulation of variables is a decision of the management or officers of the organization, not the researcher. Barnes (1967) argues that this is an advantage since research roles are divided. Management decides upon and implements the natural experiment, while the outside researcher collects and analyzes data. The outside researcher is not influenced by the desires of management and can independently develop hypotheses that may or may not be favorable to management. Barnes (1967, p. 104) believes that the "loss of experimenter control" in natural field experiments is greatly exaggerated. Most of the "relatively few controls available to an outside researcher" are also available under natural experiment conditions to an outside researcher. One of the most positive views of natural field experiments is that of Daniel Katz (1953, p. 78). He writes:

PAGE 81

70 The best opportunity for the use of hypothesis testing is on the occasion of the "natural experiment." The difficulty with the use of hypotheses in field studies is the inability to determine causal relationships with any def initeness , since most of our measures are not taken with respect to systematic changes in some ascertained independent variable. Now, a natural experiment is a change of major importance engineered by policy-makers and practitioners and not by social scientists. It is experimental from the point of view of the scientist rather than of the social engineer. Experimental Design The design of an experiment is concerned with the scheduling of observations, the choice of treatments and comparisons, the selection and measurement of control variables, and the assignment of subjects (Cook and Campbell, 1979) . In this study, management took on the task of assigning the employees to different treatments, that of group or individual organizational entry. There is no reason to believe that management systematically differentiated between employees in either situation. In fact, the groups are fairly equivalent on demographic dimensions as shown in Table 2. The design of this study is called the "Compromise Experimental Group-Control Group" design by Kerlinger (1973). The threat to internal validity is selection. This means that systematic differences between groups may occur because of the selection process. This might have direct effects on the outcomes which are assessed here. This design can only attempt to control for selection bias by evaluating the equivalence of the two groups on the independent variables.

PAGE 82

71 The two groups are fairly similar on demographic dimensions. Still subjects were not randomly assigned to the formal group entry on the informal individual entry. Subjects were treated in the same manner by the organization up to the point of employment. The experimental treatment is the assignment to a formal group orientation and training or to informal individual entry. There were no differences in working conditions, task assignments, or team assignments based on the method of organization entry. As Kerlinger (1973, p. 331) points out, "Comparisons are essential in all scientific investigation." This research allows the comparison of desired organizational outcomes with only one major difference between the groups; the differentiation is the organizational mode of socialization. Statistical Analyses The major statistical technique used in this study was multiple linear regression. The regression formulae used are listed in Table 6. Regression procedures are concerned with three main questions (Hays, 1981) . 1. Does a statistical relation affording some description or predictability appear between the random variables X and Y? 2. How strong is the apparent degree of the statistical relation, in the sense of possible descriptive or predictive ability the relation affords?

PAGE 83

12 0) u CD w

PAGE 84

73 3. Can a simple rule be formulated for predicting or describing Y from X, and if so, how good is this rule? By using multiple regression equations, it is possible to determine whether there is a statistical relationship between the predictor (independent) variables and the outcome (dependent) variables. This is done by determining those variables which contribute significantly to the total variance. Then, by determining the regression formulation which accounts for the greatest proportion of variance in the dependent variables, the descriptive or predictive ability of this combination of independent variables can be assessed. The regression equation which has the highest R 2 would thus represent the combination of variables with the best descriptive or predictive ability. Stepwise regressions were performed to assess the predictive or descriptive ability of independent variables. Hierarchical moderated regression techniques were also used to assess the extent to which various independent variables might interact as moderator variables, but not have a main effect on the dependent variable. In effect, this evaluates the extent to which dependent variables are influenced jointly by a predictor (or independent) variable and another moderating variable (Peters, O'Connor and Wise, 1984) . Finally, the coefficients of the independent variables were examined to evaluate the relative weights of each of

PAGE 85

74 them. The strength of the relationship between the independent and dependent variables is demonstrated by the variability and significance levels of the coefficients. The signs of the coefficients indicate the direction of the relationships . SAS programs GLM, STEPWISE, and RSQUARE were used to determine the models that explained the most variance and to calculate the coefficients for the independent variables. The calculated coefficients for the independent variables in the full models are partial regression coefficients. They measure the change in the dependent variable per unit change in the specific independent variable when all the other independent variables are held constant. Another way to express this is that the partial regression coefficients measure the change in the dependent variable per unit change in the specific independent variable when the linear association with all other independent variables has been removed (Green, 1978) . Only in the case where the predictor or independent variables are totally uncorrelated will the partial regression coefficients equal the simple regression coefficients . Summary A natural field experiment was conducted at an innovative manufacturing facility. Subjects were new employees who experienced formal group entry or informal individual entry into the organization.

PAGE 86

75 Multiple linear regression was used to assess the influence of socialization strategy, concomitant with other variables, on organizationally desired outcomes of job satisfaction, general satisfaction, participation and work/ family conflict.

PAGE 87

CHAPTER III RESULTS This chapter contains the results of the data analyses performed to test the hypotheses presented in Chapter I. Statistical test results are presented with the relevant hypotheses. Tests which produced significant results will be briefly discussed. The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients between all variables are listed in Table 7, with significance probabilities in parenthesis. Since socialization strategy is a dummy variable, coded zero and one, the correlations between strategy and other variables are analogous to tests for significant differences between means of those who had group socialization and those who were socialized individually. Significant correlations, or significant differences between strategies, occurred with the dependent variables of work/ family conflict and job satisfaction. Independent variables which had significant correlations with socialization strategy were locus of control and previous work experience indicating a difference in mean scores on those variables between those who were socialized individually and those who were socialized as a group. 76

PAGE 88

77 Table 7 Correlation Coefficients Work/ General Job ParticiFamily SatisSatisStrategy pation Conflict faction faction Strategy .212 Participation (.063) Work/ .388** .175 Family Conflict (.002) (.142) .213 .134 .531**** General Satisfaction (.091) (.262) (.0001) .409*** .434**** .536**** .548**** Job Satisfaction (.0008) (.0001) (.0001) (.0001) Job Variety

PAGE 89

78 Table 7 Continued Entry Job Locus SelfExperiSkill Variety Control Monitoring ence Level Strategy

PAGE 90

79 The dependent variable of job satisfaction was positively correlated with the other dependent variables of general satisfaction, participation, and work/ family conflict. Work/family conflict and general satisfaction also have a positive correlation. The only independent variable which correlates with any dependent variable is socialization strategy. Other than the strategy correlations, there are only three significant correlations within independent variables. Entry skill level is positively correlated with job variety and similar work experience and negatively correlated with selfmonitoring. Socialization Strategies-Outcomes Relationships Multiple regressions were calculated to determine whether there were significant statistical relationships between dependent and independent variables, and, if so, the degree and direction of the relationship. The influence of socialization strategy and the other independent variables on each of the dependent variables was assessed. The mean scores on the dependent variables for group entry and individual entry are reported in Table 8, along with the possible range of scores. A basic assumption of multiple regression is that the dependent and independent variables have a linear additive relationship. The assumption that independent variables are not correlated is violated in the full model regressions

PAGE 91

80 Table 8 Mean Scores on Dependent Variables Mean Score Mean Score Variable Group Entry Individual Entry Range Job Satisfaction 4.344 3.917 1-5 (n=37) (n=27) General Satisfaction 4.298 4.032 1-5 (n=37) (n=27) Participation 3.016 2.697 1-5 (n=40) (n=38) Work/Family Conflict 3.935 3.323 1-5 (n=37) (n=27)

PAGE 92

81 because of the significant correlations between entry skill level and other variables. Also, the assumption that the disturbances in the regression have a normal distribution is violated in that the range of the dependent variables is limited from one to five. The variables are continuous over a limited range. However, estimated coefficients are likely to be fairly robust, given this departure from the standard assumption. All usable data were included in the statistical calculations. Sample attrition occurred for various reasons, such as lack of interest in the research project, lack of time, or personal problems. Non-responses are random and are not related to other variables in this study. The censoring problem dees not systematically confound the results. While the alternative hypotheses to those tested are not stated, they are implicitly recognized in the analyses. The alternative hypotheses are that there is no significant influence of socialization strategy on desired organizational outcomes and that socialization strategy does not interact with the other independent variables to signficantly influence outcomes. Hypothesis 1: Job Satisfaction The following hypothesis is concerned with the relationship between socialization strategy and job satisfaction.

PAGE 93

82 H 1 : Newcomers who experience informal individual socialization into an organization will report higher job satisfaction than will newcomers who undergo formal group socialization. The results of multiple regressions, displayed in Tables 9 and 10, do not support this hypothesis. In fact, the opposite hypothesis seems true. Newcomers who experience group socialization have higher job satisfaction than those who undergo individual socialization. Because the initial regression on the full model, shown in Table 9, approached a significance level (p = .0712), a 9 stepwise regression, using a maximum R~ improvement technique, was performed to determine the model which best explained the relationship between the independent variables and job satisfaction (Table 10). Variables are listed in the order they entered the model. This procedure demonstrates that a five variable model, with locus of control removed, reached a significant level (R = .1810, p h .05). However, the only independent variable which was significant was socialization strategy, which contributed most of the explanation of variance (.1589 of the R ). No ether variable approached significance. The positive coefficient on the strategy variable and the mean scores in Table 8 indicate that these employees who entered as a group had higher job satisfaction than those who entered individually.

PAGE 94

83 Table 9 Job Satisfaction Regression Using Full Model Full Model R 2 .1816 (p = .0712) N = 63 *p < .01 Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .3808* .0059 Similar Work Experience .0132 .4353 Entry Skill Level .0121 .5437 Self-Monitoring .2606 .5662 Job Variety -.0025 .8284 Locus of Control .0724 .8457

PAGE 95

84 Table 10 Job Satisfaction Stepwise Regression Significance Contribution Variable Coefficient Level to R 2 Socialization Strategy .3761** .0053 .1589 Similar Work Experience .0130 .4362 .0136 Entry Skill Level .0124 .5302 .0032 Self-Monitoring .2441 .5811 .0047 Job Variety -.0024 .8333 .0006 Full Model R 2 = .1810* (p .0392) N = 63 *p < .05 **p < .01

PAGE 96

85 Hypothesis 2: General Satisfaction The hypothesis detailing the relationship of socialization strategy and general satisfaction follows. H 2 : Newcomers who experience informal individual socialization into an organization will report higher general satisfaction than v/ill newcomers who undergo formal group socialization. The statistical data analysis produced no support for this hypothesis. Table 11 presents the regression results. The regression explanation of variance (the R^) was not significant and neither were any of the predictor variables. The modes of organizational socialization tested here do not appear to influence general satisfaction. Hypothesis 3; Participation The hypothesized relationship of socialization strategy and participation is discussed below. H., : Newcomers who experience formal group socialization into an organization will report higher participation in organizational decisions than will newcomers who undergo informal individual socialization. Table 12 reports the results of the full model regression for participation. The data do not support the hypothesis. The regression correlation coefficient is not significant and neither are the independent variables. Only socialization strategy approaches significance (p = .0691).

PAGE 97

Table 11 General Satisfaction Regression Using Full Model 86 Variable Socialization Strategy Entry Skill Level Similar Work Experience Self -Monitoring Locus of Control Job Variety Significance Coefficient Level 1815 0188 0132 -.3901 -.3821 -.0103 .2869 (ns) .4539 (ns) .5402 (ns) .4975 (ns) .4165 (ns) .4910 (ns) Full Model R = .0831 (p = .5398) N = 63

PAGE 98

87 Table 12 Participation Regression Using Full Model (p = .3798) Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .3401 .0691 (ns) Entry Skill Level -.0401 .1548 (ns) Similar Work Experience .0325 .1986 (ns) Self-Monitoring -.2461 .6897 (ns) Locus of Control .3564 .4634 (ns) Job Variety .0163 .2942 (ns) Full Model R 2 = .0995 N = 63

PAGE 99

From these data and analysis, we can not predict that organizational participation will be influenced by group or individual entry into the organization. However, since employees with formal group socialization did have a higher mean score on participation (Table 8) and because socialization strategy approached a significant level when correlated with participation (Table 7) , a relationship between socialization strategy and participation may exist and should be investigated in future research. Hypothesis 4: Work/Family Conflict The influence of socialization strategy on work/family conflict is hypothesized and discussed below. H.: Newcomers who experience formal group socialization into an organization will report lower work/ family conflict than will newcomers who undergo informal individual socialization. This hypothesis is not supported as shown in the stepwise regression results in Table 13. However, the converse seems to be the case. New employees who experience formal group socialization will have higher work/ family conflict than those who enter individually. The full model produced a significant regression (p = .0179) and a stepwise regression, using a maximum 2 . R improvement technique, shows each individual variable's contribution to the variance. Socialization strategy is the only significant predictor variable with a contribution to

PAGE 100

89 Table 13 Work/Family Conflict Stepwise Regression Using Full Model Significance Contribution Variable Coefficient Level to R 2 Socialization Strategy .5810** .0044 .1428 Self-Monitoring -1.2394 .0668 .0428 Similar Work Experience .0382 .1287 .0287 Job Variety -.0152 .3804 .0138 Entry Skill Level -.0155 .5941 .0038 Locus of Control .1041 .8483 .0005 Full Model R 2 = .2323* (p = .0179) N = 64 *p < .05 **p < .01

PAGE 101

90 variance of .1428. However, self-monitoring approaches significance (p = .0668) and has a moderate contribution of .0428 to the full model. The contributions of entry skill level and locus of control to the explanatory power of the model are negligible. The possible interactions of these variables with socialization strategy is discussed in the next section. By examining the direction of the signs on the coefficients and the mean scores for work/ family conflict in Table 8, we can predict that group entry is positively related to higher work/ family conflict. These data tend to support a negative relationship between work/ family conflict and self-monitoring, within the parameters of this model. Factors Contributing to Desired Outcomes In order to test the interaction of independent variables and socialization strategy, hierarchical moderated regression was used. A regression was first calculated using socialization strategy and another independent variable. Then the interaction or cross-product term was entered into the equation after the entry of the variables which make up the interaction term. The significance level 2 of the interaction term and the difference in R between the two regressions were evaluated. The significance test on 2 the interaction term is analagous to comparing the R for 2 the model with no interaction term to the R of the model with the interaction term (Peters et al., 1984). If the

PAGE 102

91 2 increment in R due to the addition of the cross-product term is significant, then the two variables interact and the first variable is assumed to be a moderator variable. The magnitude and direction of the regression coefficients in the two regressions were evaluated to assess the combination of variables. Also, residuals were plotted against the dependent variables in order to determine if there was a systematic bias in the combination of variables. Interaction of socialization strategy and the concomitant variables was tested for job satisfaction and work/ family conflict since they were the only outcomes significantly influenced by the independent variables. While it is possible that interaction terms might significantly influence general satisfaction and participation, the moderated regressions were not performed since socialization strategy had not attained significance in the simple regressions. Table 14 displays the mean scores on independent variables by group and individual entry, and the possible range of scores. The correlation matrix (Table 7) indicates that those subjects who entered as a group were significantly higher on similar work experience than those who entered the organization individually. Group entry subjects were also significantly lower on locus of control (more internally oriented) than those who experienced individual entry.

PAGE 103

92 Table 14 Mean Scores on Independent Variables Mean Score Mean Score Variable Group Entry Individual Entry Range Entry Skill Level 5.750 4.231 1-11 Similar Work Experience 4.370 2.622 0-20 Self-Monitoring .327 .348 0-1 Locus of Control .326 .426 0-1 Job Variety 11.635 10.067 1-29

PAGE 104

93 Hypothesis 5: Entry Skill Level The influence of entry skill level, coupled with socialization strategy, on organizational outcomes is discussed below. H^ : The influence of entry skill levels on desired organizational outcomes will be greater for newcomers who experience informal individual socialization into an organization than for newcomers who undergo formal group socialization. This hypothesis was supported somewhat and the results of the statistical analyses are presented in Tables 15 through 18. The model and the socialization strategy variable reach significant levels in all regressions (Figure 3) . Entry skill level and the interaction of socialization strategy and entry skill level approach significance on job satisfaction only in the moderated regression (Table 16) . Since the coefficients of socialization strategy and entry skill level both increased in the same direction in the moderated regressions from the simple regressions, the combination of the two variables is probably nonlinear. Plots of the residuals of the simple and moderated regressions are similar and suggest a meaningful combination of strategy and entry skill levels. Residuals are clustered in the upper right quadrant and have a positive linear slope (Figure 3) . Entry skill level and the interaction term do not approach significance on the work/ family conflict regressions, suggesting that the interaction may have more

PAGE 105

94 Table 15 Job Satisfaction Regression Using Entry Skill Level Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .4038* .0020 Entry Skill Level .0129 .4711 Model R 2 = .1745* (p = .0029) N = 63 *p < .01 Table 16 Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using Entry Skill Level Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .6567* .0021 Entry Skill Level .0445 .1020 .6567*

PAGE 106

95 Table 17 Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Entry Skill Level Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .6079* .0025 Entry Skill Level .0023 .9319 Model R 2 = .1504* (p = .0069) N = 64 *p < .01 Table 18 Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression Using Entry Skill Level Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .8686** .0080 Entry Skill Level .0350 .4041 Socialization Strategy X Entry Skill Level -.0570 .3045 Model R 2 = .1653* (p = .0121) N = 64 *p < .05 **p < .01

PAGE 107

96 |o

PAGE 108

97 influence on job satisfaction. The explained variance (R 2 ) for job satisfaction increases substantially from the simple regression to the moderated regression, thereby explaining more variance in the model. The positive signs on the strategy and entry skill level coefficients suggest that the influence of entry skill level is greater for those who entered the organization as a group. However, this can not be supported b^ the statistical test results. Hypothesis 6: Similar Work Experience The following hypothesis and discussion is concerned with the relationship of similar work experience and socialization strategy on organizational outcomes. h • The influence of similar work experiences on desired organizational outcomes will be greater for newcomers who experience informal individual socialization into an organization than for newcomers who undergo formal group socialization. Moderated regressions produced no support for this hypothesis. The regressions are presented in Tables 19 through 22. While the model regression and socialization strategy variable are at significant levels for all regressions, similar work experience and the strategy /experience interaction never approach significance. Furthermore, the increase in explained variance from the simple regression to the moderated regression is slight and insignificant. Those

PAGE 109

98 Table 19 Job Satisfaction Regression Using Similar Work Experience Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .3860* .0028 Similar Work Experience .0157 .3243 R 2 = .1725 (p = .0034) Model R 2 = .1725* N = 63 *p < .01 Table 20 Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using Similar Work Experience Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .4615* .0077 Similar Work Experience .0350 .2893 Socialization Strategy X Similar Work Experience -.0252 .5022 Model R 2 .1788* (p = .0085) N = 63 *p < .01

PAGE 110

99 Table 21 Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Similar Work Experience Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .5402* .0056 Similar Work Experience .0349 .1518 Model R 2 = .1718* (p = .0035) N = 64 *p < .01 Table 22 Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression Using Similar Work Experience Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .6632* .0127 Similar Work Experience .0660 .1975 Socialization Strategy X Similar Work Experience -.0402 .4877 Model R 2 = .1786** (p = .0085) N = 64 *p < .05 **p < .01

PAGE 111

100 subjects who experience formal group socialization had significantly higher experience levels than did those who had informal individual socialization. This difference may have influenced the results. Hypothesis 7; Job Variety The influence of job variety, concurrent with socialization strategy, on organizational outcomes is hypothesized and discussed below. H 7 : The influence of high job variety on desired organizational outcomes will be greater for newcomers who experience formal group socialization into the organization than for newcomers who undergo informal individual socialization. The results of moderated regressions on job variety are given in Tables 23 through 26. This hypothesis is not supported. The insignificance of socialization strategy in the moderated regressions is evidence of a linear combination of strategy and job variety, since strategy was a significant variable in the simple regressions. The change 2 in explained variance (R ) from the simple model to the moderated regression is slight, arguing that the interaction does not meaningfully contribute to the model.

PAGE 112

101 Table 23 Job Satisfaction Regression Using Job Variety Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .4303** .0009 Job Variety -.0020 .8551 R 2 = .1679 (p = .0037) Model R 2 = .1679* N = 63 *p < .01 **p < .001 Table 2 4 Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using Job Variety Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .3533 .1820 Job Variety -.0058 .7154 Socialization Strategy X Job Variety -.0074 .7393 Model R 2 = .1694* (p = .0106) N = 63 *p < .05

PAGE 113

102 Table 25 Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Job Variety Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .6314* .0013 Job Variety -.0133 .4330 R 2 = .1589 (p = .0051) Model R 2 = .1589* N = 64 *p < .01 Table 26 Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression Using Job Variety Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .5800 .1573 Job Variety -.0159 .5204 Socialization Strategy X Job Variety .0049 .8864 Model R 2 = .1592* (p = .0148) N = 64 *p < .05

PAGE 114

103 Hypothesis 8: Self-Monitoring The hypothesized relationship between self-monitoring, concomitant with socialization strategy, and organizational outcomes is discussed below. H g : The influence of self-monitoring on desired organizational outcomes will be greater for newcomers who experience informal individual socialization into the organization than for newcomers who undergo formal group socialization. This hypothesis receives some support for the work/ family conflict outcome but not for job satisfaction. Results of regressions are displayed in Tables 27 through 30. The regressions on job satisfaction show little increase in explained variance, the strategy variable becomes insignificant, and the sign on the self-monitoring coefficient becomes negative when the interaction term is added. These results would argue for high colinearity of the two variables. Significant effects occur with the work/ family conflict regression. When the interaction term enters the equation, the socialization strategy coefficient decreases and becomes insignificant. However, the self-monitoring coefficient increases substantially and becomes significant. If strategy and self-monitoring have high colinearity, the interaction term may draw enough variance away from the self-monitoring variable so that self-monitoring becomes significant. The decrease in the strategy coefficient is a

PAGE 115

104 Table 27 Job Satisfaction Regression Using Self-Monitoring Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .4291** .000! Self-Monitoring .1610 .702! Model R 2 = .1694* (p = .0035) N = 6 3 *p < .01 **p < .001 Table 28 Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using Self-Monitoring Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .2116 .4971 Self-Monitoring -.1807 .7697 Socialization Strategy X Self-Monitoring .6453 .4477 Model R^ = .1774* (p = .0081) N = 63 *p < .01

PAGE 116

105 Table 29 Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Self-Monitoring Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .6001* .0016 Self-Monitoring -1.1357 .0737 Model R 2 = .1941* (p = .0014) N = 64 *p < .01 Table 30 Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression Using Self-Monitoring Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .1327 .7716 Self-Monitoring -1.8698* .0429 Socialization Strategy X Self-Monitoring 1.3969 .2671 Model R 2 = .2106** (p = .0026) N = 64 *p < .05 **p < .01

PAGE 117

106 movement toward individual socialization. The pattern of change, plus the negative coefficient on self-monitoring, support the hypothesis that self-monitoring significantly influences work/ family conflict. Persons with lower self-monitoring scores (i.e. lower awareness of or action on social cues) have higher work/family conflict. Hypothesis 9: Locus of Control The hypothesis and discussion concerning the influence of locus of control and socialization strategy on organizational outcomes follows. H g : The influence of locus of control on desired organizational outcomes will be greater for newcomers who experience informal individual socialization into the organization than for newcomers who undergo formal group socialization. The hypothesized interaction did not receive support from the statistical analyses. Tables 31 through 3 4 show the regression results. The insignificant coefficient for strategy in the job satisfaction regression is evidence of a linear combination of strategy and locus of control. However, since locus of control and the interaction term never approach significance, the hypothesis receives no support. Those employees who were socialized as a group were significantly lower on locus of control than those who were socialized individually. This may have contributed to the results.

PAGE 118

107 Table 31 Job Satisfaction Regression Using Locus of Control Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .4237* .0011 Locus of Control -.0464 .8939 R 2 = .1677 (p = .0037) Model R 2 = .1677* N = 63 *p < .01 Table 32 Job Satisfaction Moderated Regression Using Locus of Control Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .4994 .0858 Locus of Control .0611 .9041 Socialization Strategy X Locus of Control -.2056 .7695 Model R 2 = .1689* (p = .0108) N = 63 x p < .05

PAGE 119

108 Table 33 Work/Family Conflict Regression Using Locus of Control Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy .6210* .0018 Locus of Control .1268 .8097 Model R 2 = .1511* (p = .0068) N = 64 *p < .01 Table 34 Work/Family Conflict Moderated Regression Using Locus of Control Significance Variable Coefficient Level Socialization Strategy 1.1246* .0113 Locus of Control .8241 .2744 Socialization Strategy X Locus of Control -1.3589 .1976 Model R 2 = .1745** (p = .0090) N = 6 4 *p < .05 **p < .01

PAGE 120

109 Summary The results of the statistical analysis are presented in this chapter. Socialization strategy significantly influences both job satisfaction and work/family conflict. The interaction of entry skill level and socialization strategy have a significant effect on job satisfaction. Work/ family conflict is significantly influenced by selfmonitoring and socialization strategy. Table 35 is a summary of the results of the tests of the hypotheses.

PAGE 121

110 Table 35 Summary Results of Tests of Hypotheses Hypotheses Results 1. Employees with informal individual socialization will report higher job satisfaction 2. Employees with informal individual socialization will report higher general satisfaction 3. Employees with formal group socialization will report higher participation 4. Employees with formal group socialization will report lower work/ family conflict 5. Influence of entry skill level will be greater for informal individual entrants 6. Influence of similar work experience will be greater for informal individual entrants 7. Influence of job variety will be greater for formal group entrants Not supported Higher job satisfaction for formal group entry Not supported Not supported Not supported Lower work/ family conflict for informal individual entry Supported for job satisfaction Not supported Not supported 8. Influence of self-monitoring will be greater for informal individual entrants 9. Influence of locus of control will be greater for informal individual entrants Supported for work/ family conflict Not supported

PAGE 122

CHAPTER IV CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS These results suggest a number of implications about how socialization strategies, personality variables, and some situational factors are related to a set of preferred organizational outcomes. The basic research questions, presented in Chapter I, focused on whether socialization strategy, personality, and some situational factors influenced job satisfaction, general satisfaction, participation and work/ family conflict. The Influence of Socialization Strategy Socialization strategy is related to some organizationally desired outcomes which occurred during the first four months of membership. These results show, generally, that newcomers who experience formal group socialization have higher job satisfaction than those who are socialized informally and individually. However, formal group socialization is also related to higher work/ family conflict. Those employees who experienced informal individual socialization had lower work/ family conflict during the period studied. Ill

PAGE 123

112 Influence on Job Satisfaction The significance of the socialization strategy variable alone, in the full model and in the moderated regressions with other variables, is indicative of the strength of socialization strategy in influencing job satisfaction. Socialization strategy was significant in the moderated regressions with entry skill level and similar job experience. It was marginally significant (p = .0858) with the locus of control moderated regression. Socialization strategy accounted for sixteen percent of the variance in job satisfaction, but, when coupled with entry skill level, explained twenty-one percent of the variance. Job satisfaction was significantly affected by socialization strategy during the early tenure of the employees in this study. Berlew and Hall (1966) and Van Maanen and Schein (1979) have argued that early socialization experiences in an organization have major consequences for later outcomes. These findings support that thesis and clarify the direction on the relationship between strategy and outcomes of socialization efforts. The particular outcome of higher job satisfaction for newcomers who experienced formal group socialization may have occurred because of the content of the group sessions. Roles were more clearly defined, newcomers were taught specific skills that they would later use on the plant floor, and expectations of employees were presented to employees who received formal training. Newcomers who were

PAGE 124

113 socialized individually did not receive clear role specifications, skill training, or knowledge of expectations. In addition, the intrinsic aspects of group socialization such as friendship, the feeling of belonging, and camaraderie may have contributed to the higher job satisfactions scores for those employees who were socialized by a group process. These data and analyses indicate a strong socialization strategy effect on job satisfaction. This is important to researchers and practitioners. The implication is that researchers should include this variable in models and research on socialization. Practitioners can use these findings to design and implement better socialization experiences for newcomers. Whether the relationship between job satisfaction and socialization strategy changes over time is another question. This research was concerned only with the first four months of employment. It may be that the influence of socialization strategy lessens over time as the newcomer learns the task, learns the expected roles, and becomes acclimated to the organization. An extension of this or a similar study could test the nature of the relationship over time . The relationship between socialization strategy and job satisfaction reported in this study may be specific to manufacturing operatives or other blue collar employees. Furthermore, the reported relationship may be specific to white males, since a great majority of the subjects in this

PAGE 125

114 study were white males. It is possible that women and racial minorities may experience different levels of job satisfaction in relation to formal group socialization or informal individual socialization than do white men. This possibility exists for two reasons. The feelings of cohesion and belonging to a group could be very important to a woman or black person who felt different from the majority of the work force. A group strategy of socialization may be more valued by an "outsider" than by someone who was like a majority of the employees. Similarly, previous occupational socialization could influence the relationship between socialization strategy and job satisfaction (Nicholson, 1984) . Women, particularly, have not been socialized in such a way as to encourage them to enter mechanical or technical blue collar occupations. Therefore many women and racial minorities may enter the organization with prior occupational socialization that may not be relevant to the job. This prior socialization may interact with the organization socialization strategy differently than this research indicates. It was not possible to test the differential effects of socialization strategy on women or black persons because there were too few of them in the subject pool. Similarly, the same relationship may not exist for managers or professionals. The pervasive and lengthy socialization efforts of professional schools, management training courses, and management experiences may be so strong as to weaken or

PAGE 126

115 neutralize the formal socialization efforts of the work organization. Influence on Work/Family Conflict A strong socialization strategy effect on work/ family conflict during the first four months of employment exists. Researchers and practitioners can use this relationship in future research and in implementation of socialization processes for newcomers. Socialization strategy is related to the conflict between the work and family roles. Socialization strategy is a significant variable in the full model regression and in the moderated regressions for entry skill level, similar work experience, and locus of control. Furthermore, the direction and magnitude of the coefficients in the moderated regressions for job variety and for self-monitoring suggest linear relationships for socialization strategy and these variables. Because of the colinearity of socialization strategy and self-monitoring and the colinearity of socialization strategy and job variety, variance is transferred from the single variable to the interaction term in the moderated regressions, leaving the socialization strategy variable, itself, insignificant. However, the contribution of socialization strategy to work/ family conflict remains significant in terms of future research on socialization. High work/ family conflict could lead to dysfunctional behavior on the job, such as tardiness, absenteeism,

PAGE 127

116 careless work procedures, or reduced effort. If managers are aware that specific socialization processes such as formal group entry contribute to higher work/ family conflict, management can implement other procedures to alleviate some of the conflict. Higher work/ family conflict for those newcomers who were socialized formally in a group situation may occur because of greater levels of organizational commitment due to the special orientation and training. The training group norms may impose additional work-related pressures or demands on group members which lead, in turn, to higher work/ family conflict. Since individual entrants were socialized informally while they performed production tasks, commitment to the organization and awareness of group norms may take a longer period of time to develop. This would allow newcomers who experience informal individual socialization more time to resolve conflicts between the work and family roles. Furthermore, the individual entrant may experience less pressure for compliance because the organization, and not the group, is applying pressure. The relationship between socialization strategy and work/ family conflict may change over time. Family situations change, work roles change, and relationships with others change. Any of these changes could contribute to the level of work/ family conflict over a period of time. The influence of socialization strategy on work/ family conflict reported in this study may be unique to this group

PAGE 128

117 of subjects. It is conceivable that a relationship between these variables may not exist, or may be of a different magnitude or direction, for mothers of young children, managers, professionals, young people, or any other group. These results suggest that organizations need to understand the differential effects of the various organizational socialization strategies. To the extent that these results can be generalized, organizations may have to choose between high job satisfaction and low work/ family conflict. If formal group socialization is the chosen mode of bringing newcomers into the organization, management should be aware that an attendant effect may be higher conflict between the work and family roles. At the same time, informal individual socialization will not lead to the higher levels of job satisfaction that formal group socialization is likely to produce. If managers are aware of these effects, they can attempt to counteract the undesirable outcomes by modifying the initial socialization process or by other approaches such as providing employees with specific feedback about job-related matters, opportunities for social interaction with new employees and their spouse/partners, and Employee Assistance Programs. Influence on General Satisfaction Socialization strategies are related to job satisfaction, but not to general satisfaction. This is somewhat surprising since job satisfaction and general satisfaction

PAGE 129

lib are positively correlated (r = .55, p < .0001) and this relationship has been reported elsewhere (Feldman, 1981) . Socialization strategy contributed .16 to the explanation of variance on job satisfaction but had no significant influence on general satisfaction. The factors hypothesized and variables tested in the model are not those which explain or predict general satisfaction. Variables such as entry skill level, similar work experience, and job variety are specific to the job and, logically, might not contribute to an explanation of general satisfaction. However, even the personality factors of self-monitoring and locus of control, which seem logically related to general satisfaction, did not add to understanding this relationship. A different set of variables, drawn from a broader spectrum of demographic and personality measures, may be more useful to explain general satisfaction. Influence on Participation The failure to predict participation from the regression model may be particularly useful to organization scientists. The influence of the work group, knowledge of the task, social cueing (such as self-monitoring measures) and locus of control are often used as predictors of participation in decision making. However, these variables did not contribute to an explanation of participation with these data and this regression model.

PAGE 130

119 It is worth noting that socialization strategy alone approached significance (p = .0691) in the regression on participation, even though the full model did not approach significance. Newcomers who experienced formal group entry reported higher levels of participation than did those who experienced informal individual entry. However, the difference in mean scores between the two socialization processes was not significant. Because of the importance of participation as a theoretical and a practical variable these results suggest that the relationship between socialization strategy and participation should be the subject of further investigation. Interaction Effects With Independent Variables The independent variables had varying levels of influence on different outcomes. Table 3 6 reports the variance accounted for in the dependent variables of job satisfaction and work/ family conflict by the full model, by socialization strategy alone, and by socialization strategy with each of the five other independent variables. All values in this table were significant. Socialization strategy alone contributes .16 to the variance on job satisfaction and .14 to the variance on work/ family conflict. Furthermore, the explained variance for the moderated regression with socialization strategy and entry skill level exceeds the full model explanation of variance for job satisfaction. The moderated regression explained variance

PAGE 131

Table 3 6 Regression Results 120 2 R for R for Work /Family Job Satisfaction Conflict Full Model 23 Socialization Strategy 16 14 Moderated Models: Socialization Strategy X Entry Skill Level 21 17 Socialization Strategy X Similar Work Experience Socialization Strategy X Job Variety 17 .16 Socialization Strategy X Self -Monitoring .21 Socialization Strategy X Locus of Control 17 .17

PAGE 132

121 for socialization strategy and self-monitoring approaches the explained variance for the full model on work/ family conflict. The pervasive influence of socialization strategy argues that this variable should be considered in future studies of and in the development of future theory in socialization. Socialization strategy, entry skill level and job satisfaction . Entry skill is the only situational variable which was studied which is meaningful when assessed with socialization strategies for job satisfaction. The variance 2 accounted for in the moderated regression (R = .21, p = .003), which is greater than that of the full model (R = .18, p = .0392), suggests that one or more of the other variables of experience, job variety, self-monitoring, or locus of control counteract the effect of entry skill level. The variable which counteracts the influence of entry skill level is a suppressor variable which negates or weakens the influence of entry skill level. This is a plausible explanation, especially since entry skill level has significant positive correlations with similar work experience and job variety and a negative correlation with self-monitoring (Table 7). In order to determine how job satisfaction is related to socialization strategy and entry skill level, the mean scores on job satisfaction for high and low entry skill levels by socialization strategy were calculated (Table 37) . High entry skill level is defined as those employees who

PAGE 133

Table 37 Mean Scores on Job Satisfaction by Socialization Strategy and Entry Skill Level 122 Formal, Informal, Group Individual Socialization Socialization Entry as Production Technician or Above Entry as Trainee 4.33 (n=27) 4.37 (n=10) 4

PAGE 134

123 were classified as a production technician or higher (grades above 6 on Table 1) . Low entry skill levels are assigned to subjects who entered the organization as trainees. It appears that socialization strategy has a greater effect on employees who entered the organization as trainees. There is little difference in mean scores on job satisfaction for those employees who have higher skill levels, regardless of socialization strategy experienced. Trainees who are socialized in a formal group situation are more satisfied than trainees who experience informal individual socialization. This finding has significant implications for the socialization of unskilled employees. The organization can structure the initial socialization in such a way as to significantly affect the job satisfaction of unskilled workers much more than it can influence skilled workers. Prior occupational socialization of the skilled employees may minimize the influence of the particular organization's socialization efforts (Nicholson, 1984). Socialization strategy, job variety, and job satisfaction . The finding that job variety has a negligible effect on job satisfaction is surprising. Researchers such as Hackman and Oldham (1980) and Turner and Lawrence (1965) have found positive significant relationships between job variety and job satisfaction. Since socialization strategy was not significant in the moderated reyressions (Tables 24 and 26) and was significant in the simple regressions, a

PAGE 135

124 linear combination may exist between socialization strategy and job variety. The possible linearity of the two variables in combination reduces the explanation of variance. However, these data would lead one to conclude that job variety should be dropped from the descriptive model. Perhaps the reason that job variety might not be significant in this study is that most employees at this plant have fairly high job variety. Even the job with the lowest variety rating is composed of several tasks and almost all employees are rotated, to varying degrees, among the jobs. Another aspect of job variety that may be significant here is the specific group of subjects. These employees may not care as much about job variety as employees in other studies. In addition, the novelty of the new job at a new factory may have been more important than the effect of job variety. Socialization strategy, self-monitoring and work/ family conflict . Self-monitoring measures the sensitivity of individuals to social cues and the ability to react to those cues. The effect of this personality variable is as predicted. Thus, individuals who have low awareness of or few reactions to social cues will experience more conflict between roles. The negative coefficients for selfmonitoring in Tables 29 and 30 support this interpretation. Table 35 clearly shows that work/ family conflict is described better by socialization strategy and selfmonitoring than by socialization strategy alone or by the

PAGE 136

125 combination of socialization strategy and other independent variables. Furthermore, the moderated regression with socialization strategy and self-monitoring accounts for almost the same amount of variance as the full model (R = .21 and .23) . Table 38 displays the mean scores on work/family conflict for each socialization strategy and for high and low self-monitoring individuals. The self-monitoring scores were divided at the mean for each strategy. The colinearity between socialization strategy and self-monitoring is evident since those employees who experienced formal group socialization have higher work/ family conflict scores than do those who were socialized informally and individually. It should be noted here that the subjects in this study tend to have low self-monitoring scores relative to subjects in other studies. Snyder (1974), Snyder and Monson (1975), and Ickes et al. (1978) report mean scores around 11 or 12 for undergraduates on the self-monitoring inventory. Snyder (1974) also reports a mean score of 18.41 for professional actors and actresses and a mean score of 10.19 for hospitalized psychiatric patients. The mean score for selfmonitoring for subjects in this study was 8.44. The lowest score reported in the literature up to this point is that for the psychiatric patients. Perhaps the self-monitoring inventory is a measure of social sophistication or cosmopolitan orientation. Many studies using the self-monitoring inventory were with college undergraduates, although

PAGE 137

126 Table 38 Mean Scores on Work/Family Conflict By Socialization Strategy and Self -Monitoring Formal, Informal, Group Individual Socialization Socialization High Self-Monitoring 3.92 (n«15) 3.31 (n=13) Low Self-Monitoring 3.95 (n=22) 3.34 (n=14)

PAGE 138

127 Caldwell and O'Reilly (1982a) tested field representatives in boundary-spanning positions. The self-monitoring scale should be tested and further validated with a broader range of subjects, including blue-collar operatives if it is to be used in further organizational research. Overview There is a strong relationship between socialization strategies and job satisfaction and work/ family conflict. The explained variance in the regressions (listed in Table 36) range from .16 to .23, indicating that the regression models explain about one-fifth of the variance associated with both job satisfaction and work/ family conflict. Plots of the residuals from the moderated regressions of entry skill level and self-monitoring follow a similar pattern and suggest that all of the significant variables have not been accounted for. These plots also show that the functions are nonlinear (Figure 3). The residual plots were skewed to the upper right quadrant. That is, a disproportionate number of residuals appear in the upper right quadrant. This suggests a curvilinear, or concave, function to describe the relationship between job satisfaction, entry skill level and socialization strategy. Similarly, a curvilinear relationship is suggested for work/ family conflict, self-monitoring, and socialization strategy. Speculating about a curvilinear relationship is not unreasonable since individuals enter the organization with

PAGE 139

128 varying levels of prior socialization and experience. Those individuals who already know the required task (i.e. have high entry skill levels) or who are aware of social cues (i.e. are high self-monitoring individuals) need less socialization in order to become functioning members. Prior socialization has prepared them for their organizational roles. Implications Socialization has a strong effect on desired organizational outcomes. The results of this study demonstrate that the different strategies are related to different outcomes. For example, formal group socialization is related to higher job satisfaction, particularly when combined with entry skill level. However, formal group socialization is also related to higher work/ family conflict. This has some important implications for both theory and practice. Theoretical Perspective From a theoretical perspective, these results show that socialization strategy might interact with personality variables to affect some outcomes, but not others. For example, socialization strategy and self-monitoring have an obvious colinear effect on work/ family conflict but only socialization strategy has a significant influence on job satisfaction. Even though personality characteristics are long-term orientations, those that were studied influenced

PAGE 140

129 attitudes in different ways, especially when combined with socialization strategy. The theoretical implications from the findings concerning socialization strategy and situational variables are that socialization strategy tends to dominate other situational variables except when combined with entry skill level. While it is not surprising that low skill workers have lower job satisfaction levels if they were socialized in an informal individual situation, this has some theoretical implications. Those theorists who study groups, socialization, training and development, etc. should be aware of the differential effects of socialization strategy and entry skill level in combination with each other. For example, existing models of socialization do not consider the differential effects of situational variables. The acknowledgement that socialization occurs before an individual becomes a member (e.g. anticipatory socialization) is not an adequate representation of individual differences. Nicholson (1984) argues that individual differences and prior occupational socialization may significantly influence outcomes. Yet he dees not delineate the variables which may be relevant. This study has shown that the differential effects of entry skill level or selfmonitoring, particularly when combined with differing modes of organizational entry, can significantly influence the socialization process and subsequent outcomes. Van Maanen and Schein (1979) touch on this aspect of socialization but

PAGE 141

130 Porter et al. (1975), Feldman (1976, 1981), and Wancus (1980) assume that the socialization process follows the same pattern for all subjects, regardless of the differences which new members bring with them to the organization. Existing models of socialization should be modified to include situational variables which might influence the process and outcomes of socialization. For example, Nicholson (1984) suggests that previous opportunities for discretionary behaviors and the novelty of previous jobs be compared to the discretion and novelty of the new job. Jones (1983) points out that the interaction of the organizational socialization methods with the individual differences of the newcomer must be evaluated in order to predict the reactions of the new member. This research evaluated the interactions of different socialization modes with other variables to explain outcomes of socialization. Existing socialization theories and models do not suggest that differential effects occur based on different socialization strategies. Only recently has Nicholson (1984) included the organizational-induction socialization processes in a theory of work role transitions. The theory is currently being tested by Nicholson. Van Maanen and Schein (1979) discuss the. various socialization strategies but only once suggest a relationship to outcomes. Their theoretical argument is that persons who experience individual socialization into the organization will be more likely to achieve organizationally desired outcomes than

PAGE 142

131 V7ill those persons who experience group socialization. These data argue that their proposition is true for one situation, that of lower family work conflict associated with individual entry, but not for others. Socialization theory should specify which strategies interact with which personality and situational variables to influence different outcomes. Otherwise, the approaches which are current "Theories of Socialization" are purely descriptive of either the mode of socialization (Van Maanen and Schein, 1979) or the process (Feldman, 1976 and 1981) . These descriptive theories might be considered otiose unless the different outcomes are considered. Socialization theory may not be as simple as theorists have presented it. Perhaps certain models exist for particular groups of people. For example, one socialization model may be appropriate for professionals, while another is useful for blue collar employees. Socialization models may differ for minorities or for volunteer organizations. This research suggests that entry skill level is an important determinant of the effects of the socialization process for blue collar workers. However, entry skill level may not influence the job satisfaction of professionals, regardless of the socialization strategy experienced. Mere research is needed en socialization with groups other than managers and professionals to determine whether different socialization models operate for different occupational, professional, or demographic groups.

PAGE 143

132 Theories of socialization should include socialization strategies. While this research only tested formal group and informal individual socialization strategies, other strategies should be studied. For example, Feidman (1976, 1981) lists process variables of initiation to the task, initiation to the group and role definition but does not consider the particular socialization strategy imposed. These processes of initiation to the task, initiation to the group, and role definition would occur regardless of the socialization strategy but they might occur in different ways as a result of the socialization strategy imposed. These data suggest that existing models of socialization tend to be too generic. In order to contribute to the body of knowledge about socialization, it is necessary to become, perhaps, more group specific in the mcdels and in the research. Placing different occupational groups together in the same study on socialization processes assumes that all people are socialized in a similar manner. It is not adequate to assume that one socialization strategy is used more frequently than others. Certain organizations may use one strategy, or a particular combination of strategies, more than others. However, as Van Maanen and Schein (1979) point out, most organizations use a variety of socialization strategies and often combine strategies, depending on the needs of the organization. For example, a firm may use formal training groups in management trainee programs for several employees in one functional

PAGE 144

133 area but may turn to formal individual training for newcomers in another functional area. Research on the frequency of the various socialization strategies as well as the situations where certain strategies are used may contribute valuable information. Practical Perspective The most practical application of these findings is for the socialization of organizational members. There are differential effects of socialization strategies, particularly for employees who enter the organization with low skill levels and with particular personality attributes, such as low self -monitoring . If managers know that certain socialization strategies frequently lead to less desired outcomes, such as formal group entry leading to higher work/ family conflict, they can compensate for this in other ways. For example, spcuse/partners can be included in the organization in additional ways, such as newsletters or family and social gatherings. Additionally, management may decide to use particular socialization strategies more often than others in order to achieve desired organizational outcomes. Modification and/or combination of existing socialization methods is possible. The organization has many opportunities to design socialization strategies. The opening of a new facility or branch office and training of new employees are obvious

PAGE 145

134 opportunities to design and test particular configurations of socialization strategies. Employee transfers within the firm and organizational development are other occasions when socialization strategies can be designed more carefully. Qualifications There are some qualifications to this study which should be discussed. First, the subjects, as a whole are fairly homogeneous on several relevant dimensions. Subjects have fairly high skill levels, have a substantial amount of job variety, have low sensitivity to social cues and/or few reactions to social cues, and believe that their behaviors contribute to outcomes and rewards (i.e. are internally oriented) . Because the subjects are more homogeneous than many subject pools, a difference in one variable such as socialization strategy, may have substantial effects which are discernible. The similarity of subjects acts as a control of sorts. Research on a more heterogeneous group or on managerial personnel might have produced different results. Secondly, the small sample size is a problem that cannot be avoided, yet must be considered. Statistical procedures are limited with this sample. The initial sample size was eighty and most subjects participated in the baseline survey on personality measures. However, after four months, some subjects dropped out of the study. Some were not as interested in the research effort, others lost and/or forgot questionnaires at home, and other subjects

PAGE 146

135 returned questionnaires with unusable data. These subjects are not accustomed to completing questionnaires about attitudes and behaviors. Some subjects, in an attempt to be helpful, gave long written descriptions to questions rather than responses to the true/ false or multiple choice format. As a result, 63 subjects provided data about job satisfaction and data from 64 subjects were obtained for work/ family conflict. There is always a concern for generalizability in a field study at one site. These results may be unique to this manufacturing facility. However, the intent cf this research was to evaluate particular socialization strategies at a small manufacturing facility. Additional research with similar subjects will evaluate the generalizability of these findings. Finally, it is not possible to knew whether the significant outcomes are due to the socialization strategy or the effect of selection since the employees selected first were also these employees who experienced formal group socialization. However, in an earlier study on the first sixtyeight subjects hired (Tosi and Zahrly, in press 1984), there were few significant differences between persons hired and persons rejected for employment. Furthermore, Tosi and Zahrly did net discover any significant differences between the first forty people hirea and the next twentyeight people hired when compared to those who were not hired. In other words, there seemed to be no selection bias

PAGE 147

136 within those people who were hired. This lends support to the conclusion that socialization strategy influenced the differential results rather than a selection bias. The depth and realism of the data collected in a field study contribute to its validity as a research strategy (Luthans and Davis, 1982). The research was conducted in an on-going organization by a researcher/observer/participant who was familiar to the subjects. The full support of top management and complete access to the site contributed to the validity of the data. Knowledge of the specific site contributed to the design of the research, specifically the relevant variables. Research hypotheses were derived from theory, previous research, and site-specific observations and interviews. A major strength of this research effort is that it tests different socialization strategies in the same organization with major organizational variables, such as company policy, management, and production process, unchanged. These strategies have not been compared previously in this manner. Summary This research tested the relationships of socialization strategies, personality and situational variables and desired organizational outcomes. Of the four outcomes tested, only job satisfaction and work/ family conflict were

PAGE 148

137 significantly related to socialization strategy and other variables. Socialization strategy had a strong but differential effect on job satisfaction and work/ family conflict. This situational or contingent effect was significant for the entry skill level-job satisfaction relationship and the self-monitoring-work/ family conflict relationship. These results suggest that socialization strategy should be considered in models of socialization and in future research on socialization. The variables of similar work experience, job variety and locus of control may net be significant when combined with socialization strategy.

PAGE 149

APPENDIX A INSTRUMENTS

PAGE 150

JOB SATISFACTION (Modified from Weiss, Davis, England and Lofquist, 1967) NOW WE WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO TELL KOW YOU FEEL ABOUT YOUR PRESENT JOB, WHAT THINGS YOU ARE SATISFIED WITH AND WHAT THINGS YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH. PLEASE CIRCLE THE NUMBER THAT ACCURATELY REFLECTS YOUR ATTITUDES. ON MY PRESENT JOB, THIS IS HOW I FEEL ABOUT: Very DissatVery isfied -----Satisfied Being able to keep busy all the time 12 3 4 5 The chance to work alone on the job 12 3 4 5 The chance to do different things from time to time 12 3 4 5 4. The chance to be "somebody" in the community 5. The way my boss handles subordinates 6 . The competence of my supervisor in making decisions 7. Being able to do things that don't go against my conscience 8. The way my job provides for steady employment 9 . The chance to do things for other people 10. The chance to tell people what to do 139

PAGE 151

140 JOB SATISFACTION (cont.) Very DissatVery isfied -----Satisfied 11. The chance to do something that makes use of my abilities 12 3 4 5 12. The way company policies are put into practice 12 3 4 5 13. My pay and the amount of work I do 12 3 4 5 14. The chances for advancement on this job 12 3 4 5 15. The freedom to use my own judgement 12 3 4 5 16. The chance to try my own methods of doing the job 12 3 4 5 17. The working conditions 12 3 4 5 lb. The way my co-workers get along with each other 12 3 4 5 19. The praise I get for doing a good job 12 3 4 5 20. The feeling of accomplishment from the job 12 3 4 5

PAGE 152

141 GENERAL SATISFACTION (Feldraan and Brett, 1983) Very IN GENERAL, HOW SATISFIED DissatVery OR DISSATISFIED ARE YOU . . . isfied -----Satisfied a. with your nonworking activities — hobbies and so on? 12 3 4 5 b. with your marriage? 12 3 4 5 c. with your health? 12 3 4 5 d. with the type of work. you are doing? 12 3 4 5 e. with your family life? 12 3 4 5 f. with your friendships? 12 3 4 5 g. with your standard of living? 12 3 4 5 h. with your company as a place to work? 12 3 4 5

PAGE 153

142 PARTICIPATION As part of our MCC study, we would like to know how much influence ycu have over different aspects of your work, Please circle, on the scale below, the response which reflects your current situation. Moderate None Amount A Very Great Amount How much influence do you have over your daily job assignment? 12 3 4 5 2. How much influence do you have over the job assignment of others? 12 3 4 5 How much influence do you have concerning company policy areas such as safety , vacation, shift changes, etc.? 12 3 4 5 How much influence do you have over how you do vour job? 12 3 4 5 5. How much influence do you have over your long term job assignments? 12 3 4 5 How much can you influence the decisions of your boss regarding things about which you are concerned? 12 3 4 5 7. How often does your bos; your opinion? ask How satisfied are you with the present amount of influence you have on the decisions of your boss that relate to your work? 12 3 4 5 12 3 4 5 9. How much influence do you have over the training of employees, including yourself? 12 3 4 5

PAGE 154

143 WORK/FAMILY CONFLICT (Kopelman, Greenhaus , and Connolly, 1982) BELOW IS A GROUP OF STATEMENTS WHICH DESCRIBE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT COULD OCCUR AT WORK AND/OR AT HOME. INDICATE YOUR EXTENT OF AGREEMENT WITH EACH OF THE STATEMENTS. REMEMBER, WE ARE INTERESTED IN THE ACTUAL SITUATION, NOT HOW YOU WOULD LIKE THE SITUATION TO BE. Neither Strongly Agree Nor Strongly Agree Disagree Disagree My work schedule often conflicts with my family life. After work, I come home too tired to do some of the things I'd like to do. On the 30b I have so much work to do that it takes away from my personal interests. My family dislikes how often I am preoccupied with my work while I am heme . Because my work is demanding, at times I am irritable at home. The demands of my job make it difficult to be relaxed all the time at home. My work takes up time that I'd like to spend with my family. My job makes it difficult to be the kind of spouse or parent I'd like to be.

PAGE 155

144 SIMILAR WORK EXPERIENCES INTERVIEW PROTOCOL 1. How many years experience did you have making lids before you came to work at Metal Container? 2. How many years experience did you have doing shift work before you came to work at Metal Container? 3. How many years experience did you have doing shift work where you were on a rotating shift or shifts before you came to work at Metal Container? That is, where you were required to rotate shifts, such as a day and night shift? 4 . How many years experience did you have working in a factory atmosphere before you came to work at Metal Container?

PAGE 156

APPENDIX B RANKING OF TASK VARIETY

PAGE 157

Ranking of Task Variety for Specific Assignments Team Leader 9 Floater 8 Machine Shop 7 Utility Person 6 Conversion Press Operator . . 5 Quality Assurance 4 Shell Press Operator 5 Storeroom 2 Bagger 1 This is an average ranking from 10 superintendents, team leaders, and acting team leaders. 146

PAGE 158

APPENDIX C CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT

PAGE 159

Metal Container Corporation University of Florida Study The purpose of this research is to study work groups. This study involves completion of questionnaires and interviews. There are no anticipated risks associated with this study. Benefits may include improved work conditions. There will be no monetary compensation for participation in this study. Participation is voluntary and participants may withdraw at any time. ALL INFORMATION WILL BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL. No individual data will be available to managerial personnel. Only aggregate data will be provided to managers and participants upon request. Due to the need to match individuals' scores at different time periods, participants are requested to identify themselves. A special identification number can be arranged with the researchers if you do not wish to use your social security number. Individuals will never be identified to any other person either verbally or in writing. In order to protect each individual, Metal Container Corporation, the University of Florida and the researchers, you are asked to sign the consent form below. I understand that I am free to withdraw my consent and to discontinue participation at any time without prejudice. I will authorize Metal Container Corporation to provide personnel information to the University of Florida researchers. I have read and I understand the procedures described above. I agree to participate in the Metal Container Corporation/University of Florida study and I have received a copy of this description. SIGNATURES: Subject Date Witness Date Dr. Henry L. Tosi Professor Department of Management University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 392-0163 392-6147 Ms. Jan Zahrly Doctoral Candidate Department of Management University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 392-0163 392-5266 148

PAGE 160

BIBLIOGRAPHY Adorno, T., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D.J. , & Sanford, N. (1950) . The authoritarian personality . New York: Harper. Anderson, C.R. (1977) . Locus of control, coping behaviors, and performance in a stress setting: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology , 62 , 446-451. Appley, M.H., & Trumbull, R. (1977). On the concept of psychological stress. In A. Mcnet & R.S. Lazarus (Eds.), Stress and coping . New York: Columbia University Press. Bakke, E.W. (1955) The fusion process . New Haven: Yale University, Labor and Management Center. Barnes, L.B. (1967). Organizational change and field experiment methods. In V.H. Vrocm (Ed.), Methods of organizational research . Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Bateman, T.S., & Ferris, G.R. (1984). Method and analysis in organizational research . Restcn, VA: keston Publishing Company, Inc. Becker, H.S. (1964). Personal change in adult life. Sociometry , 27 , 40-53. Beehr, T.A., & Newman, J.E. (1978). Job stress, employee health, and organizational effectiveness: A facet analysis, model and literature review. Personnel Psychology , 31 , 665-699. Berlew, D.E., & Hall, D.T. (1966). The socialization of managers: Effects of expectations on performance. Administrative Science Quarterly , 11 , 207-223. Biddle, B.J., & Thomas, E.J. (Eds.). (1966). Role theory: Concepts and research . New York: Wiley. Brief, A. P., Schuler, R.S., & Van Sell, M. (1981). Managing stress . Boston: Little, Brown, and Company. 149

PAGE 161

150 Eriggs, S.R., Cheek, J.M., & Buss, A.H. (1980). An analysis of the self-monitoring scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 38 , 679-686. Brim, O.G. (1976) . Socialization through the life cycle. In O.G. Brim & S. Wheeler. Socialization after childhood; Two essays . Huntington, MY: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company. Brim, O.G. , & Wheeler, S. (1976). Socialization after childhood: Two essays . Huntington, NY: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company. Buchanan, B. (1974) . Building organizational commitment: The socialization of managers in work organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly , 19 , 533-546. Caldwell, D.F., & O'Reilly, C.A. U982a) . Boundary spanning and individual performance: The impact of selfmonitoring. Journal of Applied Psychology , 67, 124-127. ~ "" ' ""' "" Caldwell, D.F., & O'Reilly, C.A. (1982b). Responses to failure: The effects of choice and responsibility on impression management. Academy of Management Journal , 25, 121-136. Caplow, T. (1964) . Principles of organization . New York: Harcourt, Brace and World. Cherrington, D.L. Reitz, H.J., & Scott, W.E. (1971). Effects of contingent and noncontingent reward on the relationship between satisfaction and task performance, Journal of Applied Psychology , 55 , 531-537. Cohen, S. (1980). Aftereffects of stress on human performance and social behavior: A review of research and theory. Psychological Bulletin , 88 , 82-108. Cook, T.D., & Campbell, D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings . Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Coopersmith, S. (1967) . The antecedents of self esteem . San Francisco: W.H. Freeman. Cronbach, L.J. (1951) . Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika , 16 , 297-334. Dubin , R. (1956). Industrial worker's worlds: A study of the "Central Life Interests" of industrial workers. Social Problems, 3, 131-142.

PAGE 162

151 Dubin, R. , & Goldman, D.R. (1972). Central life interests of American middle managers and specialists. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 2, 133-141. Etzioni, A. (1964). Modern organizations . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Feldman, D.C. (1976). A contingency theory of socialization. Administrative Science Quarterly , 21 , 433-452. Feldman, D.C. (1977) . The role of initiation activities in socialization. Human Relations , 30 , 977-990. Feldman, D.C. (1980) . A socialization process that helps new recruits succeed. Personnel , 57 , 11-23. Feldman, D.C. (1981) . The multiple socialization of organization members. Academy cf Management Review , 6, 309-318. Feldman, D.C, & Brett, J.M. (1983). Coping with new jobs: A comparative study of new hires and job changers. Academy of Management Journal , 26 , 258-272. Festinger, L., & Katz , D. (1953). Research methods in the behavioral sciences . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Foikman, S., & Lazarus, R.S. (1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community sample. Journal cf Health and Social Behavior , 21 , 219-239. French, J.R.P. (1953) . Experiments in field settings. In L. Festinger & D. Katz (Eds.), Research methods in the behavioral sciences . New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. Glass, D.C, & Singer, J.E. (1972). Urban stress: Experiments on noise and social stressors . New York: Academic Press. Green, P.E. (1978) . Analyzing multivariate data . Hinsdale, IL: The Dryden Press. Greene, C.N. (1972). The satisfaction-performance controversy. Business Horizons , 15 , 31-41. Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology , 60, 159-170. hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1980). Work redesign . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley .

PAGE 163

152 Hays, W.L. (1981). Statistics (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Hemphill, J.K. (1956). Manual for group dimensions descriptions . Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Research. Hermans, H.J.M. (1970). A questionnaire measure of achievement motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology , 54_, 353-363. House, R.J., & Rizzo, J.R. (1972). Role conflict and ambiguity as critical variables in a model of organizational behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance , 1_, 467-505. Hughes, E.C. (1958). The study of occupations. In R.K. Merton, L. Broomand, & L. Cotrell (Eds.), Sociology today . New York: Basic Books. Ickes, W. , & Barnes, R.D. (1977). The role of sex and self-monitoring in unstructured dyadic interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 3 5 , 315-330. Ickes, W., Layden, M.A. , & Barnes, R.D. (1978). Objective self-awareness and individuation: An empirical link. Journal of Personality , 46 , 146-161. Irwin, J. (1970) . The felon . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Jewell, L.N., & Reitz, H.J. (1981). Group effectiveness in organizations . Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. Jones, G.R. (1983) . Psychological orientation and the process of organizational socialization: An interactionist perspective. Academy of Management Review , 8_, 464-474. Kahn, R.L. , Wolfe, D.M., Quinn, R.P., Snoek, J.D., & Rosenthal, R.A. (1964) . Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity . New York: Wiley. Katz, D. (1953). Field studies. In L. Festinger & D. Katz (Eds.), Research methods in the behavioral sciences . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Katz, D. & Kahn, R.L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations . New York: Wiley. Kerlinger, F.N. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

PAGE 164

153 Kobasa, S.C. (1979). Stressful life events, personality, and health: An inquiry into hardiness. Journal o f Personality and Social Psychology , 37 , 1-11. Kopelman, R.E. , Greenhaus , J.H., & Connolly, T.F. (1982, August) . A model of work, family, and inter-role conflicts: A construct validation study . Paper presented at the annual meeting, Academy of Management , New York. Lazarus, R.S. (1978, November). The stress and coping paradigm . Paper presented at the conference "The Critical Evaluation of Behavioral Paradigms for Psychiatric Science," Gleneden Beach, Oregon: Organized by the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at the University of Washington. Locke, E.A., & Schweiger, D.M. (1979). Participation in decision making: One more look. In B.M. Staw (Ed.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 1). Greenwich, CN: JAI Press. Luthans, F., & Davis, T.R.V. (1982). An idiographic approach to organizational behavior research: The use of single case experimental designs and direct measures. Academy of Management Review , 1_, 380-391. Maddi, S.R. (1976). Personality theories: A comparative analysis (3rd ed.). Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press. Maier, N.R.F. (1973) . Psychology in industrial organizations (4th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. McGee, M.G., & Snyder, M. (1975). Attribution and behavior: Two field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 32 , 185-190. McGrath, J.E. (1976) . Stress and behavior in organizations. In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology . Chicago: Rand McNally. Mead, M. (1972). "Forward" in T.R. Williams. Introduction to socialization: Human culture transmitted . St. Louis: C.V. Mosby. Monet, A., & Lazarus, R.S. (1977). Stress and coping . New York: Columbia University Press. Moore, W.E. (1969) . Occupational Socialization. In D.A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research . Chicago: Rand McNally.

PAGE 165

154 Newman, J.E., & Beehr, T.A. (1979). Personal and organizational strategies for handling job stress: A review of research and opinion. Personnel Psychology , 32 , 1-43. Nicholson, N. (1984) . A theory of work role transitions. Administrative Science Quarterly , 29 , 172-191. Pennebaker, J.W. , Burnam, M.A. , Schaeffer, M.A. , & Harper, D.C. (1977) . Lack of control as a determinant of perceived physical symptoms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 35 , 167-174. Peters, L.H. , O'Conner, E.J., & Wise, S.L. (1984). The specification and testing of useful moderator variable hypotheses. In T.S. Bateman and G.R. Ferris (Eds.), Method and analysis in organizational research . Reston, VA: Reston Publishing. Phares, E.J. (1976) . Locus of control in personality . Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press. Porter, L.W., Lawler, E.E., & Hackman, J.R. (1975). Behavior in organizations . New York: McGraw-Hill. Presthus, R. (1978). The organizational society (revised ed.). New York: St. Martin's Press. Rizzo, J.R., House, R.J., & Lirtzman, S.I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly , 15 , 150-163. Rotter, J.B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied , 80 , 1-28. SAS user's guide: Basic and statistics, 1982 Edition . Cary, NC : SAS Institute, Inc. Schein, E.H. (1968) . Organizational socialization and the profession of management. Industrial Management Review , 9_, 1-15. Schein, E.H. (1971). Occupational socialization in the professions. Journal of Psychiatric Research , 8, 521-530. Schein, E.H. (1978). Career dynamics: Matching individual and organizational needs . Reading, MA: AddisonWesley . Schein, E.H. (1980). Organizational psychology (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

PAGE 166

155 Schuler, R.S. (1977) . Role conflict and ambiguity as a function of the task-structure-technclogy interaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance , 20 , 66-74. Shaw, M.E. (1971) . Group dynamics; The psychology of small group behavior . New York: McGraw-Hill. Shaw, M.E., & Costanzo, P.R. (1982). Theories of social psychology (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Simon, h.A. (1957). Administrative behavior (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan. Snyder, M. (1974). Seif-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 30 , 526-537. Snyder, h. (1979a) . Cognitive, behavioral and interpersonal consequences of self-monitoring. In P. Pliner, K.R. Blankstein, & I.M. Spigel (Eds.), Advances in the study of communication and affect (Vol. 5) . New York: Plenum Press. Snyder, M. (1979b). Self-monitoring processes. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 12). New York: Academic Press. Snyder, M. , & Monson, T.C. (1975). Persons, situations, and the control of social behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 32 , 637-644. Snyder, M. , & Swann , W.B. (1976). When actions reflect attitudes: The politics of impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 34 , 1034-1042. Spector, P.E. (1982). Behavior in organizations as a function of employee's locus of control. Psychological Bulletin , 91 , 482-497. Steers, R.M. (1975). Task-goal attributes, n achievement, and supervisory performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance , 13 , 392-403. Tosi, H. & Zahrly, J. (In Press, 1984) . The analysis of an implicit selection model. Proceedings of the Southern Management Association . Turner, A.N. , & Lawrence, P.R. (1S65). Industrial jobs and the worker: An investigation of response to task attributes . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

PAGE 167

156 Van Maanen, J. (1976) . Breaking in: Socialization to work. In R. Dubin (Ed.), Handbook of work, organization, and society . Chicago: Rand McNally. Van Maanen, J. (1978) . People processing: Strategies of organizational socialization. Organizational Dynamics , 7, 18-36. Van Maanen, J., & Schein, E.H. (1977). Career development. In J.R. Hackman, & J.L. Suttle (Eds.), Improving life at work . Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear Publishing Company . Van Maanen, J., & Schein, E.H. (1979). Toward a theory of organizational socialization. In B. Staw (Ed.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 1) . Greenwich, CN: JAI Press . Vroom, V.H. (1960). Some personality determinants of the effects of participation . Englewocd Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Wanous, J. P. (1980). Organizational entry: Recruitment, selection, and socialization of newcomers . Reading, MA: Addi son-Wesley. Weiss, D.J. (1976). Multivariate procedures. In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology . Chicago: Rand McNally. Weiss, D.J., Davis, R.V. , England, G.W., & Lofquist, L.H. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire (Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation 22). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Industrial Relations Center. Weiss, H.M. (1978). Social learning of work values in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology , 6_, 711-718. Weiss, H.M., & Knight, P. A. (1980). The utility of humility: Self-esteem, information search, and problemsolving efficiency. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance , 25 , 216-223. Wentworth, W.M. (1980) . Context and understanding: An inquiry into socialization theory . New York: Elsevier North Holland. Wheeler, S. (1976). The structure of formally organized socialization settings. In O.G. Brim, & S. Wheeler. Socialization after childhood: Two essays . Huntington, New York: Robert E. Krieger.

PAGE 168

157 Williams, T.R. (1972) . Introduction to socialization: Human culture transmitted . St. Louis: C.V. Mosby. Winer, B.j . (1971) . Statistical principles in experimental design . New York: McGravtf Hill. Zajonc, R.B. (1965) . Social facilitation. Science , 149 , 269-274.

PAGE 169

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Janice Honea Zahrly has been a public school teacher, a real estate broker, a market researcher, a manager of a real estate development firm, a political campaign staffer, and a Peace Corps Volunteer in Korea. Her long-term volunteer commitment has been to crisis intervention centers. She was listed in Outstanding Young Women of America (1974) and has received awards for excellence in teaching and volunteerism. Ms. Zahrly is a member of Beta Gamma Sigma and Sigma Iota Epsiion honorary societies. 158

PAGE 170

I certify that I have read this study and that in ny opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the decree of Doctor of Philosoohn Henry L. Tosi/, Chairman Professor of /Management and AdministrativeSciences I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. -rPlo /j: .Jonn H. James/ -'Associate Professor of Hanagerr and Administrative Sciences I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ^W^^73l O-ju^ Roger D. Blair Professor o: Economics

PAGE 171

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in sccpe and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Kim R. Sawyer Assistant Professor of Economics This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Department of Management and Administrative Sciences c: the College of Business Administration and to the Graduate School, and was accepted for partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. August 19 84 Dean for^Graduate Studies ai Research

PAGE 172

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 3 1262 08285 238 4