Review Organizational Socialization Process: and

newcomers adjustment during organizational

socialization

I selectively review the literature on newcomer socialization in organizational locations and

organizational socialization process by tested a model of antecedents and outcomes of
newcomer adjustment using 70 unique samples of newcomers with a model in which adjustment
(role clarity, self-efficacy, and social acceptance) mediated the effects of organizational
socialization tactics and information looking for on socialization results (job satisfaction,
organizational commitment, job performance, intentions to remain, and turnover).

Introduction
Organization socialization is the process of learning where we develop over attitudes, thoughts
and personality through adapting another’s culture.

New employees obtain the attitudes, performances, and information that is required to contribute
as a organizational members so this is a process known as organizational socialization (Van
Maanen & Schein, 1979). Organizational researchers are mainly involved in understanding
socialization processes, in part because operative socialization grips large applied organizational
implications. Unsuccessful socialization is a main cause that organizational newcomers left
(Fisher, 1986), which interrupts work, loses output (Shaw, Gupta, & Delery, 2005), and costs
organizations their investments in staffing, selection, and training (Kammeyer-Muller &
Wanberg, 2003). Overcome the monetary losses, organizations need for newcomers to be
 socialized well because, as workforces are becoming more moveable and organizational
devotions are decreasing, effective socialization may be a primary source only their drawing
perceptions and behaviors but also their concerns about fitting in and performing well (Carr,
Pearson, Vest, & Boyar, 2006). Studies of the
socialization process has typically followed one of three approaches
(1) organizational, ( 2)individualistic, (3)or interaction based
so now we develop a model of newcomer modifications. We first define three socialization
pointers and define our choice of these variables as shows of newcomer adjustment for the
present review. Next, we discuss antecedents and outcomes of newcomer adjustment. Finally, we
present three possible moderators of newcomer adjustment.

Model of Newcomer Adjustment During Socialization

New commers New comers Adjustment Outcomes

Information seeking Role clarification + Job satisfaction +

Independent Self Efficiency + Organizational

variables commitment +

Organizational Social Acceptance + Intention to remain +

Social tactics Turnover _

Viewpoint, the socialization process is one of ambiguity decrease (e.g., Berger, 1979).
Uncertainty decrease theory posits that newcomers desire to increase the probability of
communications between themselves and others within the new organization (Berger &
Calabrese, 1975). Second, the individual level of adjustment was an clear main focus of our
study, including the effects of both information seeking and organizational socialization tactics
on outcomes. Finally, from a practical perspective, this model signifies the most commonly
studied concepts in newcomer socialization (Bauer et al., 1998). Unlike a theoretical review
article, which can include any possible constructs, a meta-analytic review is limited to relations
that have been steadily studied.
 Newcomer Adjustment
A first issue concerns the dynamic nature of the socialization process. Although most research focuses
on newcomers, this adjustment process is to be monitored in its evolution from the early entry stage to
subsequent phases, when newcomers may more or less successfully adapt to the organizational context,
new tasks, and work relations (Ashforth, 2012; Levine & Moreland, 1991). Thus, it is important to base
research on measure instruments which are stable in time

Socialization researchers have tended to study newcomers adjustment contain in a variety of

ways. According to Fisher’s (1986) review of the literature, newcomer adjustment following
basic need to reduce uncertainty about task, roles and social norms. Similarly, Feldman (1981)
noted that modification consists of three facets (see Table 1). Resolution of role loads refers to
understanding job responsibilities to perform and understanding task priorities and time
distribution (role clarity). Task mastery refers to learning the tasks of the new job and build
confidence in the role (self-efficacy). Adjustment to one’s group mentions to coming to feel
liked and recognized by peers (social acceptance). Subsequently, researchers have repeatedly
used role clarity, selfefficacy, and social approval as signs of newcomer adjustment (e.g., Bauer
et al., 1998). However, researchers have chosen different methods to the measurement of
adjustment. It should be noted that learning is only a underlying feature of the adjustment facets
focused on in this study. Whereas some detectives have taken the method noted above to tap the
latent construct of learning (e.g., Bauer & Green, 1998; Feldman, 1976), others have measured
adjustment more closely as real learning and knowledge gaining. For example, Ostroff and
Kozlowski (1992) measured adjustment as a single universal measure, and, more newly,
researchers have developed more particular measures of adjustment that tap learning regarding
specific features of the job and organization directly (e.g., Chao, O’Leary-Kelly, Wolf, Klein, &
Gardner, 1994; Haueter, Macan, & Winter, 2003; Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1992; Taormina, 1994,
2004).

Antecedents of Newcomer Adjustment

A decade after Fisher’s (1986) review, Saks and Ashforth (1997a) presented a summary model
of socialization that proposed information seeking and socialization tactics as antecedents of
adjustment. We focused on these same influences on adjustment.

Briefly, under institutionalized socialization, newcomers have access to structured forms of modeling
and social support; they undergo common learning experiences as part of a cohort, with clearly defined,
sequenced, and timed training and orientation activities. Under individualized socialization, newcomers
are exposed to learning experiences individually, informally, and sporadically; they define situations on
their own without help and feedback from experienced insiders (see Ashforth & Saks, 1996; Bauer et al.,
2007; Bauer et al., 1998; Jones, 1986; Saks et al., 2007, for reviews). Most researchers have
conceptualized organizational tactics along a single continuum ranging from individualized tactics to
institutionalized tactics because the tactics are highly and positively intercorrelated (e.g., Ashforth, Saks,
& Lee, 1998; Bauer et al., 2007; Kim et al., 2005; Lueke & Svyantek, 2000). Following these studies,

Information seeking.

Van Maanen and Schein’s (1979) first assumption for their theory of socialization was that
newcomers will try to reduce uncertainty. Uncertainty reduction theory (Berger, 1979) argues
that individuals do this to create predictable environments (Falcione & Wilson, 1988). As Saks
and Ashforth (1997a) noted, “Uncertainty is reduced through information provided via various
communication channels, notably social interactions with superiors and peers” (p. 236). Louis
(1980) also noted that a key input to the sense-making process is information from organizational
insiders. Because reality testing is an important aspect of sense making, having insiders serve as
“sounding boards” and provide background information is critical for newcomers to diagnose
and interpret the many surprises they encounter.

Information seeking and newcomer adjustment.

At its core, information seeking maps onto three adjustment types. In their theoretical article on
information seeking, Miller and Jablin (1991) developed a typology of information sought during
organizational entry. These include referent information, which includes understanding what is
needed to function on the job (role clarity); appraisal information, which includes information on
how well the newcomer is able to function in relation to role requirements (self-efficacy); and
relational information, which relates to the quality of relationships with organizational insiders
(social acceptance). Table 1 summarizes how the types of information sought and indicators of
adjustment overlap.

Measuring information seeking.

E. W. Morrison (2002) noted in her review of the newcomer information-seeking literature that
some researchers have used global versus different types of measures, which makes comparisons
across studies challenging. Some of the ways that information-seeking measures vary include the
degree to which they address information acquisition (e.g., amount of information gathered),
information types (e.g., referent, appraisal, and relational), and measurement approaches (e.g.,
composite or facet measurement). To examine these different measurement approaches, we
studied the relationship between information seeking and outcomes and explored, using
moderation analysis, whether results differed when analyses were conducted on facets and on
aggregate measures.

Organizational socialization tactics.

Socialization tactics are organizational approaches to information dissemination to facilitate

adjustment in new roles. Van Maanen and Schein (1979) suggested that organizations could be
differentiated on the basis of how they approach newcomer socialization on at least six
dimensions. 979; Jones, 1986; Ashforth and Saks, 1996). One of the most prominent theoretical models
of socialization is Van Maanen and Schein’s (1979) typology of socialization tactics. The model identifies
six dimensions along which socialization tactics vary, each consisting of a bipolar continuum; the six
polarities are: (1) collective vs. individual; (2) formal vs. informal; (3) fixed vs. variable; (4) sequential vs.
random; (5) serial vs. disjunctive; and (6) investiture vs. divestiture

Even though they did not propose that the six dimensions represented all of the ways in which
organizations differ in their approaches to socialization, the framework has motivated several
subsequent studies.

The first aspect on which organizations differ is whether socialization practices are collective versus
individual. Under the collective approach, newcomers go through common experiences as part of a
group, whereas under the individual approach, newcomers accumulate unique experiences separate
from other newcomers. Second, socialization tactics can be formal or informal. Formal tactics involve
newcomers who are segregated from others and trained off the job, whereas informal tactics involve
little separation between newcomers and existing employees. Third, socialization experiences can be
sequential or random. Under sequential, newcomers know what phases they need to go through,
whereas under random, the progression is more ambiguous. Fourth, fixed or variable socialization
tactics involve having a timetable of when the socialization process is complete as opposed to having no
specific timetable. Fifth, serial or disjunctive tactics refer to whether the person is socialized with the
help of insiders or without the help of a role model. Finally, investiture versus divestiture tactics refer to
whether newcomers receive feedback from insiders that affirms or disaffirms their identity. A review of
the literature indicates that researchers tend to draw from uncertainty reduction theory to explain the
link between socialization tactics, adjustment, and outcomes. Saks and Ashforth (1997a) suggested that
the purpose of tactics is to reduce the degree of uncertainty experienced during early socialization.
Tactics shape the type of information newcomers receive, the source of this information, and the ease
of getting information. As Jones (1986) and Allen (2006) proposed, socialization tactics should reduce
uncertainty, which should reduce ambiguity for newcomers, leading to more positive attitudes and
facilitating adjustment. Organizational socialization tactics and newcomer adjustment. Jones (1986)
proposed that the six tactics could be classified as content (collective, formal), context (sequential,
fixed), and social (serial, investiture) aspects of socialization. This higher order classification has received
scant attention. In one study that examined the relationship of content, context, and tactics with
person– organization fit, Cable and Parsons (2001) found that these three dimensions were differentially
related to outcomes. Their findings suggest the value of examining the differential relations between
socialization dimensions and outcomes. Despite the theoretical rationale for expecting different tactics
to relate differentially to outcomes, researchers have tended not to make differential predictions. The
three aspects of socialization tactics map onto the three aspects of newcomer adjustment (see Table 1).
Specifically, content tactics address whether newcomers are trained off the job, where performance
consequences are minimized, and prepared for their new roles in a way that is nonthreatening. When
dangers of the new role are removed and newcomers can practice their roles without fear of failure,
their confidence should increase. Thus, content tactics should be positively related to self-efficacy.
Context tactics reflect whether newcomers have a fixed timetable and whether they know the stages
they need to progress through and, therefore, should contribute to role clarity. Finally, social tactics
encourage organizations to provide mentoring and positive feedback to newcomers, leading to greater
social acceptance.

Measuring organizational socialization tactics.

It is important to examine whether future research should study the six socialization tactics separately
or as one dimension. An argument against aggregation is whether there is agreement on the
classification of different tactics as institutionalized as opposed to individualized. Specifically, some
evidence suggests that not all of the dimensions fit well with this aggregated conceptualization. For
example, it is not clear whether the investiture dimension behaves as the other institutionalized tactics.
Jones (1986) classified investiture as an institutionalized tactic. Others followed suit and found positive
relations between investiture and other institutionalized tactics (e.g., Allen & Meyer, 1990; Ashforth &
Saks, 1996). However, Saks and Ashforth (1997b) found negative correlations between investiture and
some other institutionalized tactics, and Laker and Steffy (1995) classified investiture as an
individualized tactic. We agree with Saks and Ashforth (1997a) that, given the conflicting treatment of
investiture in the field, it is important to continue to examine whether aggregation of the different
tactics is warranted. To examine the validity of the single continuum, we studied the relationship
between each tactic and the different outcomes and conducted moderation tests to determine whether
results differed when analyses were conducted on facets or on aggregate measures.

Outcomes of Newcomer Adjustment Newcomer adjustment has been associated with outcomes such as
performance, job attitudes, and retention (Bauer et al., 1998). The relationships among newcomer
adjustment and the outcomes in Figure 1 have been studied to varying degrees, and adjustment is often
related to socialization outcomes. However, the nature of these relationships is unclear because of
conflicting findings across studies and a lack of individual studies that included the full set of outcomes.

Performance.

We expected newcomer adjustment to relate to performance. Employees who are clear about role
expectations are more likely to perform well, and those who believe they can accomplish their tasks
tend to have greater goal accomplishment. Employees who are socially accepted by peers may perform
at higher levels, given that the relationships they form with their peers may serve as social capital that
facilitates their job performance (Bauer & Green, 1994). Thus, we expected positive relations between
adjustment and job performance.

Job attitudes.

Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and intentions to remain are three of the most studied
outcomes of socialization. We predicted that newcomer adjustment was related to all three attitudes.
Role ambiguity is a source of dissatisfaction because it is associated with high levels of stress and
burnout. Employees who are not clear about their roles may be less satisfied and committed to the
organization and more likely to leave. In addition, research has linked uncertainty to lower job
satisfaction (e.g., Louis, 1980). Similarly, employees who have high selfefficacy will feel confident that
they can achieve key aspects of their jobs and be more satisfied, committed to the organization, and less
likely to want to leave. Finally, receiving social support on the job is important for job attitudes (Fisher,
1985; Louis, Posner, & Powell, 1983).

Turnover.

Employees who adjust to their new roles by understanding role demands, feeling capable of performing
tasks, and establishing effective relationships with peers will have a strong attachment to the
organization that will prevent them from leaving their jobs. When newcomers successfully adjust to
their roles and work environment, they should be less likely to quit. Wanous (1980) found a link
between uncertainty and premature turnover.

Potential Methodological Moderators of Newcomer Adjustment Data collection design (longitudinal vs.
cross-sectional). We explicitly considered data collection design (longitudinal vs. crosssectional) as a
moderator of observed relationships. Key variables in the socialization process can be measured at the
same time or on different occasions. Given the tendency for correlations over longer time periods to
decline in magnitude, it is important to explore which correlations among socialization variables are
most influenced by the length of time between measurements. Although many studies in the field of
organizational socialization are now longitudinal, cross-sectional studies still exist. In addition, even
when studies gather data across time, many of the individual relationships reported are, in fact, cross-
sectional. Transition from school versus work. As socialization is a process of uncertainty reduction, we
determined that it is important to account for the effects of sampling issues in the analyses. Not all
newcomers deal with the same degree of uncertainty as they enter organizations. We proposed that
newcomers transitioning from school to work face more drastic transitions and greater challenges than
those transitioning from one job to another job (Ashforth, 2001). On the other hand, newcomers who
are transitioning from one organization to another may have established ways of accomplishing their
roles and may thus experience more difficulty in accepting “new” ways. Therefore, we examined the
moderating effects of the type of work transition on the relationships. Measurement of information
seeking and organizational socialization tactics. Some studies report information seeking and tactics at
the facet level (e.g., Allen & Meyer, 1990; Ashforth & Saks, 1996), whereas others report only composite
measures (e.g., Bravo, Peiro, Rodriguez, & Whitely, 2003; Mignerey, Rubin, & Gorden, 1995). It is unclear
how these different measurement approaches affect the conclusions drawn from these studies. For
example, researchers have measured tactics in three ways. First has been to conduct analyses and
report findings for all six dimensions (e.g., Allen & Meyer, 1990; Ashforth & Saks, 1996). Second has
been to use the three-dimensional approach, which aggregates tactics into content, context, and social
dimensions (e.g., Allen, 2006; Cable & Parsons, 2001). Third, Jones (1986) referred to tactics on the
formal side of the continuum as “institutional tactics” and tactics on the less formal side as
“individualized tactics.” Following this classification, several researchers combined all six tactics as
institutionalized and individualized tactics (e.g., Bravo et al., 2003; Mignerey et al., 1995). It is unclear
whether measurement affects findings.

Method

Criteria for Inclusion In choosing studies for this meta-analysis, we had three inclusion criteria. First, we
focused on studies of organizational newcomers, which we defined as those who had been on a new job
in a new company for 13 months or less. Therefore, we excluded studies examining transferees.
Similarly, we did not include studies of expatriates because they are adjusting to new cultures as well as
to new organizations (Bauer & Taylor, 2001) and because a recent meta-analysis has been conducted on
expatriate adjustment 710 BAUER, BODNER, ERDOGAN, TRUXILLO, AND TUCKER (Bhuasskar-Shrinivas,
Harrison, Shaffer, & Luk, 2005). Second, we chose to focus on organizational socialization, not
occupational socialization. Organizational and occupational socialization are different types of
adjustment. For example, learning to be a nurse is different from learning to work at a new hospital as a
nurse. Third, we included studies that measured at least two of the variables presented in Figure 1 and
also reported correlation coefficients. Literature Search We obtained both published and unpublished
empirical study

Literature Search

We obtained both published and unpublished empirical studies through a variety of means. First, to
locate relevant journal articles, we conducted a computerized search using PsycINFO from 1872 until
January 1, 2006, using the following keywords: “newcomer,” “organizational socialization,” “employee
socialization,” “feedback seeking” “socialization,” and “information seeking” “socialization.” Next, we
searched the conference programs from 2000 through 2005 for the annual meetings of the Society of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology and the national meetings of the Academy of Management for
articles including the keywords “socialization” or “newcomer.” We searched the digital dissertation Web
site (http://wwwlib.umi.com) using the key word “socialization” from 2000 through 2005. Talya N. Bauer
read the abstracts to determine inclusion. Finally, we contacted 10 experts who have published articles
on organizational socialization. We sent them the list of articles we had considered and asked them to
note or share any additional articles (published, in press, or working papers). Coding for Meta-Analysis
Four subject matter experts (SMEs) coded the variables included in Figure 1. A team of two SMEs
examined all of the studies for all variables except information seeking and organizational socialization
tactics. A third SME created composite variables for these remaining two constructs and coded
correlations. Following this, a fourth SME recoded a random sample of 20% of all of the studies. The
initial average interrater agreement for the SMEs was 95%. Differences in coding were discussed to
consensus. Articles were then recoded as needed. In a number of studies, socialization tactics and
information and feedback seeking were measured with several items on multiple dimensions. In these
cases, more than one effect size was available for inclusion in the meta-analysis. When the correlations
were available, we combined these variables into composite variables and then based the included
effect size on the correlations on the basis of the composite variables (Hunter & Schmidt, 1990). When
all the necessary correlations were unavailable for creating the composite, we randomly selected one of
the possible effect sizes for inclusion (Lipsey & Wilson, 2001; Rosenthal & Rubin, 1986).

Discussion

Overall, we found general support for the summary model presented in Figure 1. Consistent with
Feldman (1981), role clarity, self-efficacy, and social acceptance emerged as three important indicators
of newcomer adjustment. For the antecedents of adjustment, we found, using composite measures,
that information seeking was significantly related to role clarity and social acceptance, whereas
socialization tactics were related to all three adjustment types. This is consistent with the important role
that information seeking plays in uncertainty reduction (Saks & Ashforth, 1997a). Examining the facets
of information seeking, referent and appraisal information were related to most of the adjustment
indicators, but the relational facet was unrelated. We found that a majority of the tactics was related to
all three types of adjustment, consistent with the proposed role of socialization tactics for newcomer
uncertainty reduction (Allen, 2006; Jones, 1986). For the outcomes of adjustment, we found that social
acceptance was related to all outcomes, self-efficacy was related to all of the outcomes except job
satisfaction and organizational commitment, and role clarity was related to all of the outcomes except
turnover.
Dimension

In specific, the performance proficiency dimension refers to learning the tasks involved on the job; it
entails features such as understanding task duties, assignments and priorities as well as ways of handling
routine problems. According to stage models of the socialization process (e.g. Feldman, 1981; Louis,
1980), in the course of the first few months on a new job, incumbents focus on learning the tasks
necessary to perform their job and clarifying their role in the organization. Ostroff and Kozlowski’s
(1992) study indicated that task and role-related information were found to be the most salient to
newcomers, especially during the first few months after entering the organization. Nevertheless,
inconsistent findings have been reported regarding the relationship between task mastery and
organizational commitment, while most studies have suggested the existence of weak or no relationship
between the two constructs, which