ORGANlZATlONAL SOCIALIZATION 133

The Organizational Socialization

Inventorv J

Robert J. Taorrnina

Organizational socialization is regarded as an interactive process between employees and their

0 g a n i U t i 0 such
~ that employee perceptions of socialization may impact on the process. Four
social-psychological factors were theorized to influence employee perceptions of their social-
ization at work, namely: training understanding; co-worker support; and prospects for the
future.Based on these four factors, an Organizational socialization Inventory (OSI) was created
as a quantitative measure of socialization in organizations. The OSI is intended for general
use in a variety of organizational settings. This paper describes the construction of the OSI
and its subsdes, reports their reliabilities, relates the results of their initial validity tests,
and suggests some potential uses of the OSI.

H ow people adjust when they are brought

into a group, organization, or society
has been the concern of psychologists and
sociologistsfor many years. The term ’social-
ization’ was coined to refer to this process, but
has been defined differently depending on the
psychological or sociologicalorientation of the
person marking the definition. Thus, some
definitions center on the individual, such as
an infant, who must actively adapt to his or
her society or culture, while other definitions
center on the social context, such as the
organization, emphasizing that the context
provides the rules and restrictionsto which the
individual must conform. Most organizational
theorists seem to prefer the latter, such that
organizational socialization is regarded as ‘the
process by which an individual acquires the
social knowledge and skills necessary to
assume an organizational role’ (Van Manaan
and Schein 1979, p. 211).
The preferred definition recognizes the
importance of the psychological and socio-
l@ foundations of this prucess, and balances
both the individual and contextual compo-
nents of the concept. Such a definition, which
is used in this paper, was provided by Kam-
meyer, Ritzer, and Yetman (1990), namely:
‘Socializationis the process by which a person
learns and generally accepts the established
ways of a particular social group, [organiza-
tion], or society‘ (p. 129).
While it may be easy to find a satisfactory
definition of socialization, it has been much
more difficult to measure it. The problem of
creating a standard instrument to assess how
employees are socialized into an organization
is due not only to the differences in the
researchers’ perspectives (i.e. whether the
focus is on the individual or the socialcontext),
but also to differences in the personalities of
the employees, the numerous differences in
job types, the great variety in the sizes and
types of modem organizations, and the
cultural differences between organizations as
well as between the societies in which they
exist.
For example, researchers with a manager’s
organizationalperspective might focus on the
larger picture and prefer to use ‘macro‘
measures, such as group productivity or tum-
over rates, in attempting to measure social-
ization in organizations (e.g. Ross and Zander,
1%7; van Manaan 1975). On the other hand,
organizationalpsychologists (especially those
with a clinical orientation)might focus on the
individual and prefer to use ’micrro’ measures,
as assessed by psychometric tests, in examin-
ing employee adjustment to work (e.g.
Nicholson 1984). Such difference in orientation
is undoubtedly one reason that attempts to
assess the socialization of employees into
organizational settings have used multiple
instruments rather than a single measure. This
is confirmed by two recent reviews of the
literature on this topic, which made no
mention of a standard measure of organiza-
tional socialization (Fisher 1986;Wanous and
Colella 1989).
In this paper, an attempt is made to con-
struct a standard and reliable measure of
organizational socialization which reflects the
dfnamic interaction between the employee Robert J. Taormina,
and the organization (see Jones 1983;Reichers for Inter-
1987)because it asks employees to assess both national ~ i ~ -7 i ~ ~ ,
their own perceptions OC and their Company’s Chickering RO;~ 1324,
efforts in, the socialization process. To achieve Fort Worth, TX 76116,
this, four aspects of socialization will be USA.

0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 IJF, UK and
238 Main Street, Cambridge, MA 02142. USA. Volume 2 Number 3 luly 1994
134 1NTERNATlONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION A N D ASSESSMENT
examined. They were included because all are
considered to be prominent facets of the
socializationprocess (whether it takes place in
a group, Organization, or society), because of
their important psychological bases, and
because of their relevance to the organizational
setting. The four aspects are assessments of:
(1)the training one received from the organiza-
tion; (2) one‘s understanding (or perceptions)
of the organizational context; (3) the role
played by sigruficant others, i.e. co-workers,
who are organizational insiders; and (4) one’s
prospects for the future (e.g. for advancement)
regarding the organization into which one is
being socialized.
Training
Training is included as a facet of socialization
into any group or organization by definition
(Kammeyer et al. 1990), and because some sort
of skill or knowledge is required for any job,
whether it be a manual, technical, or admini-
strative job (wanous 1980). In organizations,
training usually refers to the transfer of some
type of skill, knowledge, or ability from an
insider to a newcomer who must learn that
skill or ability in order to perform a particular
job. This transfer can occur in a variety of
ways, whether it is formal or informal, verbal
or nonverbal. While certain organizations may
have no formal training program, it would be
difficult indeed for a newcomer to perform his
or her work successfully if no verbal or non-
verbal cues of any type were ever given. More
frequently, however, training or instruction is
given by means of some type of apprentice-
ship, on-the-job training, seminar, classroom,
or written instruction, or combination of these
methods. The psychosocial basis for this factor
can be found in the long process of learning
of accepted behaviors (e.g. toilet training, table
manners, etc.) which begins in infancy and
takes place within one‘s family, social group,
community, or society (see Erikson 1 W ) .
The training of personnel has been long
recognized as influential to the development
of both the organization and the employees
(e.g. Craig and Bittel1%7; Prestan 1993). This
view is supported by studies which show that
training has such organizational benefits as
helping professionals adapt to their work
(Vogt and Herzog 1989), increasing pro-
ductivity, reducing anxiety and turnover
(Gomersall and Myer 1996), and reducing
absenteeism (Frayne 1991). In a discussion of
the role training plays in the socialization of
employees, Feldman (1989) suggested that
training has evolved into an extremely impor-
tant part of the socialization process. More
Volume 2 Number 3 July 1994
interesting is his suggestion that employees’
perceptions of training are a sigrhcant aspect
of their socialization. In this vein, Nordhaug
(1989) found empirical evidence for the idea
that training can be viewed positively by
employees, who reported that training
enhanced their self-confidence, and had
reward functions in terms of their career
development. Thus, whether it occurs in one’s
family or organization, training seems to be
both necessary and important in helping the
individual adjust to a new social context.
Therefore, in attempting to measure social-
ization in organizations, it would seem logical
to assess the employees’ views of the training
they received.
Understanding/perceptions
Training, like teaching, is not merely a one-
way affair in which information is transmitted
‘top-down’ only, without concern for the
receiver. Rather, and in accordance with the
preferred definition, it is interactive because
the trainee or student must learn, understand,
or apply what has been taught. Hence,
another factor which is deemed relevant to
successful socialization into an organization
would be the understanding (or perceptions)
which the employee has of his or her role in
the organization, how things operate in the
organization, and the goals of the organiza-
tion. The psychosocial bases for this factor,
which stresses the importance of understand-
ing on the part of the individual being
socialized, can be found in the works of
psychologists such as Carl Jung, Jean Piaget,
and Lawrence Kohlberg. For example, in his
writings on psychology and education, Jung
(1969) listed several psychic disturbances in
children and suggested that ‘backward child-
ren [are] characterized chiefly by low intel-
ligence and a general incapaaty to understand’
(p. 59). Piaget (1965)theorized, documented,
and emphasized the ‘cognitive’ stages of
mental development, and Kohlberg (1%9)
extended Piaget’s ideas into a cognitive-
developmental approach to socialization.
Thus, all emphasize how essential a new-
comer‘s understanding is to the socialization
process.
Though organization theorists have used
different names for ‘understanding’, the topic
warrants a closer look. For example, in a
discussion of managerial attitudes, Porter and
Lawler ( 1 W )suggested that employee per-
ceptions (‘clarity’) about and ‘acceptance’ of
their work role can influence the employees’
performance. In another discussion of
employee perceptions, Louis (1980) stressed
0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994
ORGANIZATlONAL SOClAUZA TlON
that newcomers have a need to understand
their organizational surroundings, and labeled
this ‘sense making’. More recently, Rousseau
(1988)was more specific, stating that ‘per-
ceptions are undeniably necessary to under-
standing both the behavior of individuals and
the processes characteristic of their organiza-
tions’ (p. 139).Feldman (1981),in describing
a stage model of socialization, stated that the
second (encounter) stage involves both the
clarification of one’s role, duties, etc. (‘role
definition’) and the learning of new work tasks
(‘initiationto the task‘). These tasks all involve
employee learning and understanding. To
achieve this clarification and understanding of
roles, the employees must interact with their
work environment (Jones 1983; Reichers 1983,
and must be active information seekers (Miller
and Jablin 1991; Morrison 1993).
Hence, beyond merely offering training
courses, the organization should ensure that
the employees have a fullunderstanding of the
operations and goals of their company and of
their roles in that company. This may explain
why the major Japanese corporations put all
new hirees through comprehensive training
programs (which last as long as one year), and
may help to explain why Japanese companies
have been so successful (Ballon 1992).There-
fore, the employee‘s understanding of his or
her role in a company and how the company
works is included here as an influential aspect
of the socialization process.
Co-worker support
A third force considered to play a sigruficant
role in the process of socializationis the actions
and behaviors of ‘signrficant others’ who are
already ’insiders‘ as regards the context into
which one is being socialized. The psycho-
social bases for this factor are well established,
and the existence of socializing agents is
essential to normal development (see Curtiss
1977; or Singh and Zingg 1942). While the
most obvious socializing agents are parents
and teachers, other powerful and influential
agents may include siblings (Polit and Falbo
1983, and peers (Fine 1987).
Similarly, in organizations, there may be
many agents of socialization. This view was
stressed by Reichers (1987) in a discussion of
newcomer socialization from an interactionist
perspective. Here, it is assumed that most of
the interactionsbetween workers occur among
those employees who are working at the same
echelon in the organization, i.e. among co-
workers. As with individuals who are being
socialized into a family or social group, if a
worker perceives that his or her co-workers are
0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994
135
being accepting, and that their efforts are
helpful, then that individual should be social-
ized into the organization more successfully.
For example, in organizations where workers
frequently face stressful situations, it has been
argued that social support plays an influential
role in alleviating stress caused by work
(Cohen and Wills 1985; Eisenberger,
Huntington, Hutchison and Sowa 1986;
House, Landis and Umberson 1988), and the
empirical evidence supports this view (e.g.,
Eisenberger, Fasolo and Davis-LaMastro 1990;
George, Reed, Ballard, Colin, and Fielding
1993). Also, co-worker support has been found
to contribute to more positive outcomes, such
as job satisfaction (LaRocco and Jones 1978;
Seers, McGee, Serey and Graen 1983).There-
fore, the influence of co-worker support is
included as another essential aspect of
socialization into organizations.
Prospects for the future
The fourth agent which is expected to have an
influence on the socialization process is the
individual’s perceptions of his or her prospects
for a rewarding future within the new social
context. The psychological bases for this factor
are profound, extensive, and vaned. For
example, the definition stating that individuals
must ’accept the established ways’ of the
organization for socialization to be complete
has a basis in Henri Tajfel’s (1981)work on
social identity theory, which has been applied
to organizational socialization (Ashforth and
Mae1 1989). In theory, socialization involves
some degree of acceptance of the social group
by the individual such that the greater the
identification, the greater the acceptance of the
ways of the group, and the more complete the
socialization. In other words, if the established
ways (e.g. reward structure) of a company are
acceptable, the employee will stay, and if they
are not, he or she will leave.
The above example is a manifestation of a
psychological principle which states that
satisfymg relationships will be continued,
while unsatisfymg relationships will be ended
(unless other extraneous or intervening factors
preclude one from ending an unsatisfying
relationship). The psychological bases for this
are grounded in reinforcement theory (Skinner
1953), social comparison theory (Festinger
1954), social exchange theory (Homans 1958,
1974), and comparison level theory (Thibaut
and Kelley 1959). Stated simply, reinforcement
theory posits that we continue behaviors for
which we are rewarded, and discontinue those
for which we are not rewarded. Social com-
parison theory states that we look to others for
Volume 2 Number 3 July 1994
136 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT
a standard of comparison to evaluate our own
social situation. Social exchange theory
contends that we engage in social behaviors
that maximize our rewards and minimize our
costs. Comparison level theory reveals how we
establish a standard of evaluation when we are
considering leaving a relationship in order to
determine whether we will continue the rela-
tionship. Thus, comparison level theory is
relevant to the perceptions employees have of
their future prospects with a company, and
could help explain why some workers leave
their organizations. Empirical support for this
idea has been provided in a study which uses
relative deprivation theory (a part of com-
parison level theory) to predict employee
satisfaction with income and pay level
(Sweeney, McFarlan and Indemeden 1990).
Another basis for the pmspeds factor, which
has already been used extensively in organiza-
tional settings, is Maslow’s (1970)hierarchy of
needs. According to Maslow, people are
motivated to fulfill whichever need is most
potent at any given time. Basic needs are more
powerful (which explains why some workers
may show no interest in career advancement
over long time periods), but once these are
met, higher order needs (such as the desire for
advancement, status, and recognition) are
more likely to manifest themselves. There is
also research evidence to support the notion
that Maslow‘s theory of need fulfilment is
applicable to the workplace (e.g. Betz 1984),
suggesting that employee perceptions of their
future prospects in the workplace are related
to organizational socialization, and should be
measured.
MKlelland’s (1%1) research on the need for
achievement is an extension of Maslow‘s
theory. All employees have a need for achieve-
ment, albeit to different degrees. If the desired
job situation is not achieved, some employees
may feel they are in a ‘dead-end job‘, which
implies a need for advancement, while others
may sense that they are being ‘passed over’
as they watch colleagues receive promotions.
Either situation can produce dissatisfaction,
andlor lead to resignation, but both are
characteristic of inauspicious socialization.
In the latter case, the unfulfilled need for
achievement occurs with social comparison.
The outcome reveals why it is necessary to
assess an employee’s perceptions of his or her
prospects for future success (recognition,
promotion, etc.) in an organization. Since
‘success’ has economic connotations in busi-
ness, perceptions of equity (as assessed by
received pay, benefits, etc.) could be a com-
ponent of the prospects factor. If payment
predicts one’s perceptions of equity, which in
turn predict one‘s job satisfaction, then such
Volume 2 Number 3 July 1994
perceptions would predict one’s intent to stay
with a company. This is precisely what was
found in a recent study of these relationships
(Berg 1991). Hence, if employees use their
perceptions of equity to evaluate their current
and future prospects for recognition or success
in an organization, then the employees‘view
of their future prospects (whether for mere
continued employment, or for more ambitious
corporate advancement) should play a major
part in their socialization.
In other words, when a worker realizes that
his or her goals may not be forthcoming, or
even attainable, it could lead to behaviors that
are unproductive, counterproductive,or could
lead to resignation. Research evidence for this
has shown that when workers perceive they
have little chance of success in an organization,
the result is poor socialization; e.g. failure to
get a promotion can lead to feelings of inequity
and a decrease in commitment, or to an
increase in absenteeism (Schwarzwald,
Koslowsky and Shalit 1992). On the other
hand, the perception that one has favorable
prospects for success in an organization can
result in more positive socialization; e.g.
strong reward systems in a company can lead
to increased commitment (Caldwell, Chatman
and O’Reilly 1990), just as being promoted can
result in higher levels of commitment
(Schwanwald et al. 1992).
In summary, organizational socialization
was defined as an interactive process involving
both the individual employee and the organi-
zation. It was stated that the many differences
that exist among individuals and organizations
most likely contributed to the difficulty in
devising a standard measure of this phen-
omenon. While it is recognized that there
could be numerous possible factors which may
affect one’s socialization in an organization,
the current approach stresses four factors
which have very profound psychosociological
foundations, and which are theorized to
influence the process of organizational
socialization from the employee’s point of
view.
This paper thus describes the construction
of a standard, generalized instrument (for use
in any organization) to assess employee per-
ceptions about the inputs of both the indivi-
dual and the organization in the socialization
process. The factors addressed by the inven-
tory are the employee’s perceptions of: (1)the
training received from the organization; (2) his
or her understanding of organization opera-
tions; (3)the support (or lack thereof) received
from co-workers; and (4) his or her prospects
for the future in the organization. This instru-
ment is called the Organizational Socialization
Inventory, or OSI.
0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994
ORGANlZATlONAL SOClAUZATlON
Method
Subjects
For the initial phase of this study, 369 working
people (149 males, 220 females) in the
Singapore business community partiapated as
subjects. To obtain a broad, representative
cross-section of work settings and workers,
people from many diverse types of large and
small organizations were surveyed. Repre-
sented were more than 30 organizations from
both the public and private sectors, as well as
the military services. No more than 35 par-
ticipants came from any one organization.
The participants also came from various
echelons in their companies’ organizational
heirarchies, and included both blue-collar and
white-collar workers. They also performed a
variety of tasks in their organizations, such as
clerical, educational, manufacturing, retailing,
service, technical, and trading functions.
For the second phase of this study, which
assessed the validity of the Organizational
Socialization Inventory (OSI), the subjects
were 18 middle-echelon managers from an
aircraft maintenance company in China.
Materials
All the items of the OSI were constructed to
assess the influence of the four components
which were theorized to play a role in the
socialization of workers into an organization.
Namely, the items were constructed to assess
the extent to which a worker perceives that:
(1)his or her company trains its employees;
(2) he or she understands the company poliaes
and operations; (3)his or her coworkers played
a role in his or her adjustment to the organiza-
tion; and (4) he or she has good prospects for
developing a career in the organization.
Through brainstorming, discussions with
colleagues for suggestions, and gathering and
revising items from my previous attempts to
assess organizational climate, orientation, and
socialization, roughly fdty potential items were
obtained. The main criteria for keeping items
were that they had to be: (a) classifiable into
one of the four categories, listed above; (b)
concise enough to preclude confusion regard-
ing the intent of the question; and (c) easily
understandable. The resulting inventory had
a total of 20 items, with five items composing
each of the four subscales (see Appendix). The
various items from the different subscales were
interspersed throughout the OSI to preclude
response bias.
For each item, a 7-point, Likert-type
response continuum was added. The end-
points of the scale ranged from 1 (Strongly
Disagree) to 7 (Strongly Agree). Respondents
0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994
137
were asked to indicate the extent of their
agreement or disagreement with each state-
ment by circling the appropriate number on
the corresponding scale. An individual
respondent’s score could be computed for
each OSI subscale by adding together the
scores for that respondent on the five items for
each subscale. The scores for any of the 5item
subscales could range from 5 to 35. Similarly,
a total OSI score could be computed for each
respondent by summing his or her responses
for all 20 items. The total OSI scores could
range from 20 to 140. On any scale, lower
scores mean less favorable, and higher scores
mean more favorable employee perceptions of
an organization’s endeavors to socialize its
workers.
In the second part of the study, a version of
M i s d s (1984) ’Performance-Maintenance’
(PM) questionnaire was used along with the
OSI. Since the subjects in this phase of the
study were Chinese, both the PM and the OSI
were translated from Japanese and English
(respectively) into Chinese by bilingual
Chinese nationals (reverse translations were
also performed and these were deemed ade-
quate by an independent bilingual Chinese
national). The Chinese version of the PM
questionnaire contains ten 5item subscales.
These examine: motivaton; satisfaction with
financial rewards; satisfaction with physical
work conditions; psychological well-being;
group spirit; quality of work meetings;
communication patterns; involvement with
work; quality of the leader’s performanceplan;
and management-employee relations. Each
item on the PM questionnaire has a Spoint,
Likert-type response scale. Some items are
negatively worded, but reverse scored, so that
the scales are scored in a manner similar to that
of the OSI. A respondent‘s score on each PM
subscale can range from a minimum of 5 (low
motivation, low satisfaction, etc.) to a maxi-
mum of 25 (high motivation, high satisfaction,
etc.).
Procedure
In the first phase of this study, a survey team
of 30 individuals was recruited from a local
university to execute the survey. The survey
team members split up into groups to canvass
different geographic sections of the city. The
groups then split into individuals and each
team member located from one to three
businesses, and obtained permission from the
senior management to survey their employees.
Once permission was obtained, workers were
individually asked to complete the question-
naires. Only those employees who agreed
were provided with the inventory. The
Volume 2 Number 3 July 1994
138 INTERNATlONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTlON AND ASSESSMENT

subjects were assured that they would remain
anonymous, and their answers would never
be revealed to their employers. The subjects
were then requested to read the instructions
carefully, and answer each question as
candidly as possible before returning the
inventories.
In the second phase of this study, the
Chinese subjects were met at a company-
owned learning center in Beijing, China. The
company which employs these workers regu-
larly puts members of its management through
courses at its learning center. The group had
been previously selected by upper manage-
ment for testing. On the scheduled day, the
subjects were asked to complete voluntarily
and anonymously both the PM questionnaire
and the OSI. All subjects present completed
both inventories, and were subsequently
debriefed.
Results
Factor analyses
The data were subjected to a pMapal com-
ponents factor analysis (with iterations) and
varimax rotation. Initially, four factors
emerged with most items from the same con-
ceptual groupings (training, understanding,
co-workers, and prospects) loading heavily on
Table 1: Item factor loadings for the organizational socialization inventory (OSI)"
the same factors. However, there were two
notable anomalies. The first was that most of
the training and understanding items loaded
together on the same factor. The second was
that one item from each of the conceptual
groupings loaded in a way which suggested
they could be eliminated from the present
analysis. Items were retained for further
analysis only if they had a loading which was
greater than 0.46 on any factor. This reduced
the OSI to 16 items, with four items from each
conceptual grouping.
The reduced list of items was resubmitted
to a pMapal componentsfactor analysis (with
iterations) and varimax rotation. After six
iterations, the new analysis yielded three
factors with eigenvalues greater than unity.
The results of this factor analysis are shown
in Table 1.
Eight items (loading 0.47 or above) con-
verged on Factor 1.Half of these were the four
training items, and the other half were the four
understanding items. Though these constructs
were originally conceived as independent
facets of socialization, their convergence onto
a single factor indicates that they may be
different perspectives of the same concept.
Namely, they may be the two (teaching and
learning) portions of the same orientation
polarity. Thus,Factor 1may be conceptualized
as the Orientation Subscale of the OSI, with

Factor
Subscnlelltem 1 2 3
~ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~

Orientation Subscale
Training Component
Item 1 0.72 0.01 0.19
Item 2 0.66 -0.01 0.19
Item 3 0.68 0.14 0.28
Item 4 0.57 0.24 0.41
Understanding Component
Item 5 0.77 0.27 0.07
Item 6 0.59 0.35 0.20
Item 7 0.62 0.21 0.30
Item 8 0.47 0.28 0.41
Co-worker Support Subscale
Item 1 0.32 0.69 0.05
Item 2 0.29 0.71 0.18
Item 3 0.00 0.80 0.19
Item 4 0.04 0.81 0.24
Prospects Subscale
Item 1 0.29 0.08 0.76
Item 2 0.28 0.29 0.64
Item 3 0.18 0.15 0.84
Item 4 0.23 0.34 0.45

"N - 369.

Volume 2 Number 3 Iuly 1994 0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994

ORGANIZATIONAL SOCIALIZATION
two sukomponents. (Suggestions for how
this subscale and its subcomponents may be
used in practice are described in the discussion
section of this paper.)
The Training component of this first factor
asks the respondents to assess whether they
were put through a formal training program,
if all newcomers are provided with the same
learning experiences, if company training gave
them a thorough knowledge of their job skills,
and whether they are satisfied with the job
training the company provided.
The Understanding (Perceptions) compo-
nent of this factor asks each respondent
whether the way to do things was made clear,
if he or she has a clear understanding of his
or her role in the company, whether company
policies had been made explicit, and to what
extent the company’s goals are known to
company members.
Factor 2 consisted of four items (loading 0.69
or above). All of the items came from the
originally theorized co-worker construct,
giving a clear indication of their conceptual
convergence. This factor may be called the Co-
worker Support Subscale. The items on this
subscale ask the respondent to assess the
degree to which his or her colleagues have
provided moral, professional, and emotional
support and guidance in helping the respon-
dent adjust to the company.
On Factor 3, all four items (loading 0.45 or
above) came from the originally theorized
prospects construct, which was designed to
assess the employee’s perceptions for the
future within his or her company. Together,
these items compose the Prospects Subscale.
The items ask each respondent to evaluate
aspects of his or her future employment within
that company. These include whether his or
her career path in that company is known, if
the steps in the company’s career ladder are
clearly stated, if prospects for promotion can
be anticipated, and if he or she desires to
continue working in that company.
Whereas the results of the factor analyses
suggested reducing the number of items in the
scale, all further tests of the OSI described in
this paper (unless otherwise noted) will use
only the retained 16 items. Also, since the first
factor combines two concepts which were
theorized to represent different constructs, the
analyses of Factor 1will be given for both the
combined 8-item Orientation Subscale and for
the two Citem (Training and Understanding)
subsubsales of which it is composed.
Tests of normality
Since the OSI is intended for research and
practice, and most statistical tests (e.g.
0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994
139
ANOVAs, regressions, etc.) used with scale
data assume that the data are normally
distributed, some mention should be made of
the normality of the OSI data. Theoretically,
for any given scale, if the data are normally
distributed, the scores for any population (or
representative sample thereof) should cover
the entire range of the scale, and, ideally, the
mean should fall on the midpoint of that scale.
Thus, two rough gauges of normality for a
sample would be: (1)a broad range of scores;
and (2) a mean score that is close to the scale
midpoint. (However, whereas sigruficant
differences between the scale midpoint and an
obtained mean could occur for reasons other
than non-normality of the data, even if the
scores are normally distributed, the latter
gauge of normality should be used with care.)
For the Sitem Orientation Subscale, the
scores could range from 8 to 56, and the
obtained range was from 9 to 56. The midpoint
of the scale was 32, and the obtained mean of
this sample on the Orientation Subscale was
31.80 (s.d. = 8.98). A two-tailed t-test of the
obtained mean against the scale midpoint
yielded no significant difference between the
values, y368) = -0.4231, NS. Other measures
of centrality were also near the scale midpoint,
with the median at 32, and the mode at 33.
Thus, the data obtained for the Orientation
Subscale have range and midpoint values
which conform to a normal distribution. In
addition, the computed skewness value was
found to be near zero (+0.038), and the
kurtosis value was found to be relatively small
and negative (-0.252), both of which are
further indications that the distribution of
scores on the Orientation Subscale did not
deviate from normality (see Nunnally 1978).
The scores on the Training portion of the
Orientation Subscale could range from 4 to 28,
and the obtained scores covered the entire
range (4 to 28).The scale midpoint was 16,and
the obtained mean was 15.09 (s.d. = 5.15). A
two-tailed t-test of the obtained mean against
the scale midpoint yielded a sigruficant differ-
ence between the values, t(368) = -3.3994,
p c 0.001.The median and mode were both
at 15. The skewness value for the distribution
of the Training scores was near zero (+0.037),
and the kurtosis value was relatively small and
negative (- 0.349). Though all three centrality
measures were one point below the scale
midpoint, the skewness and kurtosis values
indicated no noticeable deviation from
normality.
Scores on the Understanding (Perceptions)
portion of the Orientation Subscale could
range from 4 to 28, and the obtained range was
from 4 to 28. The scale midpoint was 16, and
the obtained mean was 16.71 (s.d. = 4.64).A
Volume 2 Number 3 luly 1994
140 INTERNATlONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT
two-tailed t-test of the obtained mean against
the scale midpoint also yielded a s i e c a n t
difference between the values, $368) = 2.9508,
p < 0.005.Thus, the sample mean was sig-
nificantly higher than the scale midpoint, as
were the other centrality measures, with the
median at 17, and the mode at 18.All of these
scores were, however, well within one
standard deviation of the scale midpoint. The
skewness value for the distribution of
Understanding scores was near zero ( -0.037),
and the value of the kurtosis was relatively
small and negative (-0.282), showing little
deviation from normality.
The scores on the Citem Co-worker Support
Subscale could range from 4 to 28, and the
obtained values ranged from 4 to 28. The scale
midpoint was 16, and the obtained mean was
17.71 (s.d. = 4.60). A two-tailed t-test of the
obtained mean versus the scale midpoint
yielded a highly sigruficant difference between
the values, t(368) = 7.1281, p < O.OOO1. The
median value was 18, and the mode was 19.
All these values of central tendency, though
higher than the scale's theoretical center,
remained within one standard deviation of the
scale midpoint. Further, the skewness value
for the distribution of Co-worker Support
scores was near zero (-0.175), and the
kurtosis value was relatively small and
negative ( - 0.347), indicating little deviation
from normality.
Scores on the 4-item Prospects Subscale
could range from 4 to 28, and the obtained
values ranged from 4 to 28. The scale midpoint
was 16, and the obtained mean was 15.69 (s.d.
= 4.93). A two-tailed t-test of the obtained
mean against the scale midpoint yielded no
sigxuficant difference between the values,
t(368) = - 1.1931, NS.The median and mode
values were both 16, exactly equal to the
theoretical scale mean. The very small skew-
Normal Curve - - 0.0228
Orientation 31.80 8.98 0.0163
Training 15.09 5.15 0.0163
Understanding 16.71 4.64 0.0190
Co-workers 17.71 4.60 0.0163
Prospects 15.69 4.93 0.0136
Total OSI 65.20 15.73 0.0163
Volume 2 Number 3 July 1994
ness value for the distribution of Prospects
scores (-0.016), and the relatively small and
negative kurtosis value ( - 0.427), indicated
very little deviation from normality.
The scores for the entire OSI inventory could
range from 16 to 112, and the obtained range
was from 26 to 105, covering 83% of the entire
scale. the scale midpoint was 64, and the
obtained mean was 65.20 (s.d. = 15.73). A
two-tailed t-test of the obtained mean against
the scale midpoint yielded no signhcant
difference between the values, t(368) = 1.4691,
NS. The median value was 66, fairly close to
the theoretical mean. The mode was 69, a bit
higher than the scale midpoint. However, the
second mode was considerably lower than the
scale midpoint, and the third and fourth
modes were multimodal. The average of all
these modes was 64.70,which was very close
to the theoretical mean.
A more strict test of the normality of a dis-
tribution of obtained scores involves the z-test
for the sigruficance of a proportion. To deter-
mine whether the scores on the OSI and its
subscales were normally distributed, propor-
tions of the scores under different sections of
each of the curves were computed and com-
pared to those of a normal curve. The z-test
was used to evaluate whether the obtained
proportions of different sections of the curves
for the OSI and its subscales were signrficantly
different from the expected proportions (i.e.
proportions under the relevant sections of a
normal curve). As can be seen in Table 2,
which lists these proportions, only one in 36
(i.e. 2.78%) of the computed differences
reached the 0.05 level of significance,
suggesting that this difference could have
occurred by change. This result, when com-
bined with the other indices, convincingly
affirms that the scores on the total OSI and its
subscales were normally distributed.
0.1587 0.5oOo 0.50oO 0.1587 0.0228
0.1978* 0.4715 0.5285 0.1518 0.0271
0.1382 0.5257 0.4743 0.1518 0.0244
0.1843 0.4688 0.5312 0.1518 0.0352
0.1816 0.4661 0.5339 0.1491 0.0217
0.1653 0.4715 0.5285 0.1680 0.0217
0.1707 0.4878 0.5122 0.1653 0.0271
0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994
ORGANIZATIONAL SOClALlZATION 141

Correlations inventory. The &item Orientation Subscale

Correlations were computed to assess the
relationships between the items, the different
subscales, and the total OSI inventory. These
are shown in Table 3.The item-subscale cor-
relations demonstrate a consistent pattern,
with all items being s w c a n t l y related to all
of the subscales, and evincing their highest
correlations with their own subscales.
The item-total correlations were also highly
s i e c a n t , as were the subscale-subscale
correlations. Also, extremely high values were
obtained for the subscale-total correlations.
The entire pattern demonstrates that all of the
items hang together quite well, not only on
their own subscales, but also with the total
OSI,and that each of the subscales, although
independent, is well-integrated with the total
OSI .
Reliabil ities
Reliability tests were performed on all of the
subscales as well as on the total (16-item) OSI
Table 3: 1ntercorrelationP between items,b subscales,c and total OSI i n v e n t o g
yielded a reliability value of 0.8580. The
Training portion of this subscale had a relia-
bility value of 0.7643,and the Understanding
portion yielded a reliability of 0.7882. (For all
scales p c 0.001.)
The Citem Co-workers Support subscale
had a reliability of 0.8113.The Citem Prospects
Subscale yielded a reliability of 0.7600.The
reliability for the entire 16-item OSI inventory
reached 0.8993. (For all scales, p c 0.001.)
Validity
The convergent validity of the OSI was tested
by using a separate sample of subjects from
Beijing, China. Subjects were asked to com-
plete Chinese versions of both Misumi's (1984)
PM questionnaire and the OSI.(Since the data
came from a new sample of subjects which
came from a different culture, all of the original
20 items of the OSI were used in their testing,
and in the validity tests, so as to preclude
eliminating items that are potentially useful in
other cultures.)

Item Orientation Co-workers Prospects Total OSI

Training 1 0.71 0.25 0.40 0.61
Training 2 0.66 0.21 0.37 0.55
Training 3 0.73 0.34 0.48 0.67
Training 4 0.74 0.41 0.57 0.72
Understanding 1 0.76 0.39 0.43 0.68
Understanding 2 0.69 0.43 0.47 0.67
Understanding 3 0.72 0.36 0.51 0.68
Understanding 4 0.68 0.42 0.52 0.67
Co-workers 1 0.44 0.76 0.36 0.59
Co-workers 2 0.48 0.81 0.45 0.65
Co-workers 3 0.29 0.79 0.39 0.52
Co-workers 4 0.34 0.83 0.42 0.57
Prospects 1 0.52 0.33 0.81 0.65
Prospects 2 0.54 0.46 0.76 0.68
Prospects 3 0.50 0.37 0.82 0.65
Prospects 4 0.45 0.39 0.67 0.58

Orientation 0.86 0.49 0.66 0.92

Co-workers - 0.81 0.51 0.73
Prospects - - 0.76 0.84
Total OSI - - - 0.90
I

'All correlations shown are significant at p < 0.01 or beyond.

bItem-to-itemcorrelations are deleted to simplify the table.
-
%ternal consistencylscale reliabilities are on the diagonal.
dN 369.

0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994 Volume 2 Number 3 July 1994

142 lNTERNA77ONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT
The Chinese version of the PM questionnaire
is composed of ten subscales (see the method
section of this paper for details). Of the ten PM
subscales, three (‘involvement with work’,
‘communication patterns’, and ’satisfaction
with financial rewards’) assess constructs that
were deemed to be related to socialization.
Therefore, these three PM subscales were
selected for further comparison.
The PM ’Involvementwith Work’ Subscale
asks employees to report on some of their
thoughts and feelings about their work en-
vironment. These questions relate to the desire
to compete with other work units, feelings of
being at ease or tense when at work, exchang-
ing ideas about the work, and the willingness
to do more to complete the work. This subscale
may be thought of as a measure of the
employee’s general orientation toward his or
her work. Therefore, it should have a high,
positive correlation to the (Witem) Orientation
Subscale of the OSI. The correlation between
these two subscales was a sigruficant one and
in the predicted direction (I = 0.6183, p <
0.01).
As the PM ‘Involvement with Work’ Sub-
scale asked for the employees‘ thoughts and
feelings about work, it was expected that the
items also should have a high, positive correla-
tion to the (5item) worker Understanding (or
Perceptions) portion of the OSI Orientation
Subscale. This correlation also proved to be
significant (r = 0.6391, p < 0.01). The PM
questionnaire did not measure training of
employees, so no direct assessment could be
made regarding the validity of the Training
portion of the Orientation Subscale of the OSI.
However, whereas the Training and Under-
standing portions are related theoretically (and
statistically, by factor analysis), the PM
’Involvement with Work‘ Subscale should
bear some positive correlation to the (Sitem)
Training portion of the OSI. The correlation
was found to be marginally sigruficant (I =
0.4683, p < 0.10).
The PM ‘CommunicationPatterns’ Subscale
asks the worker to evaluate interpersonal
communications in the company. The ques-
tions address the sharing of information
between, and the quality of the relationships
among, members of the company. Whereas
good communication patterns are essential to
favorable interpersonal relations, this PM
subscale should have a high, positive correla-
tion to the (Sitem) Co-worker Support Sub-
scale of the PSI. The obtained correlation was
signtficant, and in the predicted direction (I =
0.6037,p < 0.01).
The PM ‘Satisfactionwith Financial Rewards’
Subscale asks the respondents to indicate how
satisfied they are with the salary, raises,
Volume 2 Number 3 July 1994
bonuses, and other compensations and
benefits provided by the company. Since
financial rewards and benefits are one way of
measuring professional advancement, this
subscale should have a high, positive
correlation with the (sitem) Prospects (for the
Future) Subscale of the OSI. The correlation
between these subscales was high and positive
(I = 0.6385, p < 0.01).
In sum, the convergent validity of the OSI
was assessed by using subscales of the OSI in
coordination with subscales of a different
instrument to measure concepts theoretically
related to organizational socialization. The
results revealed statistically significant
correlations between the different measures of
the socialization construct. Though additional
studies should be performed, these initial
assessments of the convergent validity of the
OSI subscales tend to corroborate the validity
of the OSI.
Discussion
The OSI was created in response to the
evolving need for a standard, generalized
instrument to assess the socialization of
employees into their work environments
across a wide range of organization settings.
M g development, the OSI and its sub-
scales demonstrated normal distributions, a
well-integrated pattern of correlations, high
reliabilities, and satisfactory convergent
validities, thus yielding acceptable results in
all the requirements for a practical measure of
the socialization of employees into their
organizations. Of course, additional studies
should be performed to (a) confirm these
outcomes, and (b) augment its (convergent,
discriminant, etc.) validities.
The OSI should prove to be a useful tool in
both research and practice. For example, in
discussing the directions which future social-
ization research should take, Wanous and
Colella (1989)pointed out that studies should
be conducted across a variety of organizations
to enable making generalizations about the
socialization process. According to this
suggestion, a large number of workers were
tested at dozens of public and private
organizations during the development of the
OSI in order to obtain the broadest possible
sample of organizations (within the resource
limits of this study). Thus, having an
instrument which was developed in this way
makes the inventory applicable to many types
or organizations.
Additional research can and should be
performed using the OSI to clanfy various
relationships which have been suspected to
0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994
ORGANlZATlONAL SOClAUZATlON
exist between socialization and certain other
variables. As examples: What is the relation-
ship between a company’s culture (or climate) reveal the overall health of an organization’s
and a worker‘s understanding (or perceptions)
of the company, including his or her role in
the company (Pascale and Athos 1981)? What
is the relationship between socialization and
work involvement (Etzioni 1961), or between
socialization and commitment (Kanter lW)? organization.
How is job satisfaction related to socialization
(Seers et al., 1983)? Which types of company
training lead to more complete socialization
(Feldman 1989; Nordhaug 1989)? How is
socialization (particularly workers’ views of
their own prospects for the future) related to
such important measures as performance,
absenteeism, and turnover (Berg 1991)? For
each of these questions, the OSI can provide
direct, quantitative measures of socialization.
Some other interesting areas of research in
which the OSI can be beneficially applied
include studies that would measure the extent
of socialization at various stages of the process unsatisfied employees, thus enabling the
(e.g. Feldman 1981), or measure the degree of
socializationwhich results when organizations
use different socialization tactics (e.g. van
Manaan and Schein 1979). Also, the OSI could
be employed in cross-cultural studies of
socialization, since organizations in different
societies tend to utilize different socialization practice as a serviceable instrument for
techniques.
Addition to its usefulness in basic research
and the testing of organizational theory, the
OSI should have very practical applications in
organizational settings, especially when
Human Resource Management (HRM) con-
cerns are at issue. That is, corporations could
benefit by employing the OSI to uncover
needed modifications in training, job design,
or even corporate communications. The
changes could alleviate problems thought to
be associated with poor sociahation, including
absenteeism, cheerless corporate climates, and
resignations.
For example, a corporation wishing an
overall assessment of how its employees are
being socialized could administer the OSI and
utilize the total (summed) scores. If the cor-
poration would like to evaluate how well its
orientation program is working, scores on the
Orientation Subscale would provide such an
assessment. More specifically, the Training
scores would reveal whether the employees
felt their training program was adequate; while
the Understanding scores would reveal
whether the corporate philosophy and goals
were being transmitted, and whether the
workers comprehended their roles in the
company.
The OSI also could give corporations an
assessment of how well its workers are inter-
0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994
’143
acting. If used as a general index, aggregate
scores on the Co-worker Support Subscale can
social climate. At the same time, personnel
managers may wish to examine individuals‘
scores on this subscale to idenbfy employees
who haven‘t been receiving the social support
required for smooth socialization into an
Another HRM concern which the OSI can
help address is the extent to which workers
accept their anticipated future within their
company. This can be assessed by the
Prospects Subscale of the OSI. Aggregate
scores from employees on this subscale can
provide corporate executives with a general
assessment of how satisfied workers are with
the compensations, benefits, and advance-
ment opportunities provided by the company,
and whether the corporate policy may need
revision. Additionally, personnel managers
may use individuals’ scores to identify
managers to counsel discontented individuals
and thereby prevent their loss as a human
resource.
In conclusion, the OSI satisfactorily passed
its initial tests of useability, and possesses
considerable potential in future research and
assessing several social and organizational
variables that can facilitate or impede
organizational socialization.
Appendix: The Organizational
Socialization Inventory (OSI)
Training items
T1. I was put through a formal training pro-
gram by my company.
T2. This company puts all newcomers
through the same learning experiences.
T3. Company training gave me a thorough
knowledge of my job skills.
T4. I’m satisfied with the type of job training
this company gave to me.
T5. My superiors have given me excellent
guidance and instruction. *
Understanding/perepfion items
U1. The way to do things in this company
was always made clear to me.
U2. I have a clear understanding of my role
in this company.
U3. This company’s policies have been made
very explicit.
U4. This company‘s goals are known to
almost everyone in the company. *These items were in-
U5. I think I know very well the way this cluded for the Chinese
company operates. * sample.
Volume 2 Number 3 Iuly 1994
144 ZNTERNATlONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT
Co-worker support items
C1. Other workers have helped me to
understand my job requirements.
C2. I received a lot of guidance from experi-
enced company members.
C3. Almost all my colleagues have given me
personal or moral support.
C4. My colleages did a great deal to help me
adjust to this company.
C5. The interpersonal relations in this com-
pany are very good.'
Prospects for the fiture items
PI. I can predict my future career path in this
organization.
P2. The steps in the career ladder are clearly
stated in this company.
P3. I can readily anticipate my prospects for
promotion in this company.
P4. I'd like to continue working for this
company for many more years.
P5. I usually know in advance when I'll
receive a new job assignment.*
References
Ashforth, B.E. and Mael, F. (1989)Social identity
theory and the organization. Academy of
Management Reoiau, 14, 20-39.
Ballon, R.J. (1992) Foreign Competition in Japan:
Human Resource Shntegies. New York: Routledge.
Berg, T.R. (1991) The importance of equity
perception and job satisfaction in predicting
employee intent to stay at television stations.
Group and Organization Studies, 16, 268-284.
Betz, E.L. (1984)Two tests of Maslow's theory of
need fulfilment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 24,
204-220.
Caldwell, D.F., Chatman, J. A. and O'Reilly, C.A.
(1990) Building organizational commitment: A
multifirm study. Journal of Occupational
Psychology, 63, 3, 245-261.
Cohen, S. and Wills, T.A. (1985) Stress, social
support and the buffering hypothesis.
Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310-357.
Craig, R.L. and Bittel, L.R. (eds.). (1%7) Training
and Development Handbook. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Curtiss, S. (1977).Genie: A Psycholinguistic Study of
a Modernday 'Wild Child'. New York: Academic
Press.
Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P. and Davis-LaMastro, V.
(1990) Perceived organizational support, and
employee diligence, commitment, and innova-
tion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 51-59.
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S.and
Sowa, D. (1986) Perceived organizational
support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 7l,
*These items were in- 500-507.
cluded for the Chinese Erikson, E.H. (1963) Childhood and society. New
sample. York: Norton.
Volume 2 Number 3 July 1994
Etzioni, A. (1%1) A Comparative Analysis of Complex
Organizations. New York Free Press.
Feldman, D.C. (1981)The multiple socialization of
organization members. Academy of Management
R w ~ w ,6, 309-318.
Feldman, D.C. (1989)Socialization, resocialization,
and training: Reframing the research agenda. In
I.L. Goldstein (ed.), Training and Development in
Organizations (pp. 376-416). San Francisco:
Josey-Bass.
Festinger, L. (1954)A theory of social comparison
processes. Human Relations, 7 , 117-140.
Fine, G.A. (1987)With the Boys: Little League Baseball
and Pre-dolescent Culture. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Fisher, C.D. (1986)Organizational socialization:An
integrative review. In K.R. Rowland and G.R.
Ferris (eds.), Research in Personnel and Human
Resource Management: Vol. 4 (pp. 101-145).
Greenwich, CT:JAI Press.
Frayne, C.A. (1991)Reducing Employee Absenteeism
through Self-management Tmhing: A Research-based
Analysis and Guide. New York: Quorum.
George, J.M., Reed, T.F., Ballard, K.A., Colin, J.
and Fielding, 1. (1993) Contact with AIDS
patients as a source of work-related distress:
effects of organizational and social support.
Academy of Management Joumal, 36, 157-171.
Gomersall, E.R. and Myer, M.S. (1966) Break-
through in on-the-job training. H a m r d Business
Review, 44, 62-72.
Homans, G.C. (1958)Social behavior as exchange.
American Journal of Sociology, 63, 597-606.
Homans, G.C. (1974)Social Behavior: Its Elementary
Forms (Rev. edn.). New York: Harcourt, Brace,
Jovanovich.
House, J.S., Landis, K.R. and Umberson, D.(1988).
Social relationships and health. Science, 241,
540-545.
Jones, G.R. (1983)Psychological orientation and the
process of organizational socialization: an
interactionist perspective. Academy ofManagement
Reoiew, 8, 464-474.
Jung, C.G. (1%9) Psychology and Education (R.F.
Hull,Trans.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univer-
sity Press. (Original work published as
Anulytische Psychologie und Erriehung, 1926)
Kammeyer, K.C.W., Ritzer, G., and Yetman, N.R.
(1990)Sociology: Experiencing Changing societies.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Kanter, R.M. (1968)Commitment and sccial organ-
ization: a study of commitment mechanisms in
Utopian communities. American Sociological
Review, 33, 499-517.
Kohlberg, L. (1%9) Stage and sequence: The
cognitive-developmental approach to
socialization. In D.A. G o s h (ed.), Handbook of
Socialization Theory and Research (pp. 347-480).
Chicago: Rand McNally.
LaRocco, J.M. and Jones, A.P. (1978)Co-worker and
leader support as moderators of stress-strain
relationships in work situations. J o u d of Applied
Psychology, 63, 629-634.
Louis, M.R. (1980)Surprise and sense making:
What newcomers experience in entering
unfamiliar organizational settings. Administmtive
Science Quarterly, 25, 226-251.
0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994
ORGANIZATIONAL SOCLAUZATION
Maslow, A.H. (1970)Motivation and Personality (2nd
edn.). New York: Harper and Row.
McClelland, D.C. (1%1) The Achieving Society.
Princeton, N J : Van Nostrand.
Miller, V.D., and Jablin, F.M. (1991)Information
seeking during organizational entry: influences,
tactics, and a model of the process. Academy of
Management Rm'ew, 16, 92-120.
Misumi, J. (1984)The Behavioral Science of Lendership
(2nd edn.). [in Japanese.] Tokyo: Yuhikaku.
Morrison, E.W. (1993) Newcomer information
seeking: exploring types, modes, sources, and
outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 36,
557-589.
Nicholson, N. (1984) A theory of work role
transitions. Administmtive Sciece Quarterly, 29,
172-191.
Nordhaug, 0. (1989)Reward functions of personnel
training. Human Relations, 42, 373-388.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978)Psychometric Theory (2nd edn.). Tajfel, H. (1981)Human Groups and Social Categories:
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pascale, R.T., and Athos, A.G. (1981)The Art of
Japnese Management. New York: Simon and
Schuster.
Piaget, J. ( 1 W )The Moml Judgment ofthe Child. New van Manaan, J. (1975) Police socialization: a
York: Free Press.
Polit, D.F. and Fdbo, T. (1987)Only children and
personality development: A quantitative review.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 49, 309-325.
Porter, L.W., and Lawler, E.E. (1968)Managerial
Attitudes and Performance. Homewood, IL:Irwin.
Prestan, D. (1993) Management development
structures as symbols of organizational culture.
Personnel Review, 22, 18-30.
Reichers, A.E. (1987)An interactionist perspective
on newcomer socialization rates. Academy of
Management Review, 12, 278-287.
Ross, I.C., and Zander, A.F. (1967) Need
satisfaction and employee turnover. In E.A.
Fleishman (ed.),Studies in Persanel and Zndustrial
Psychdogy (w.edn.)@p.297-304). H O X I W W ~ ,
IL: Dorsey Press.
Rousseau, D.M. (1988)The construction of climate
in organizational research. In C.L. Cooper and
I. Robertson (eds.), International Reivew of
0 B a d Blackwell Ltd. 1994
145
Industrial and Organizational Psychology
(pp. 139-158). New York: J. Wiley and Sons.
Schwarzwald, J., Koslowsky, M. and Shalit, 8.
(1992)A field study of employees' attitudes and
behaviors after promotion decisions. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 77,511- 514.
Seers, A., McGee, G.W., Serey, T.T., and Graen,
G.B.(1983)The interaction of job stress and
social support: a strong inference investigation.
Academy Of Management Journal, 26, 273-284.
Singh, J.A.L. and Zingg, R.M. (1942)WolfChildren
and Fml Man. New York: Harper and Row.
Skinner, B.F. (1953)Science and Human Behavior.
New York: MacMillan.
Sweeney, P.D., McFarlan, D.B. and Inderrieden,
E.J. (1990)Using relative deprivation theory to
explain satisfaction with income and pay level:
a multi-study examination. Academy of
Management Journal, 33, 423-436.
Studies in socinl Psychology. Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University.
Thibaut, J.W. and Kelley, H.H. (1959)The Social
Psychology of Groups. New York: John Wiley.
longitudinal examination of job attitudes in an
urban police department. Administmtizw Science
Q m r t d y , 20, 207-228.
van Manaan, J. and Schein, E.H. (1979)Towards
a theory of socialization. In B.M. Staw (ed.)
Research in Organizational Behavior: Vol. 2
(pp. 209-264) Greenwich, CT:JAI Press.
Vogt, J.F. and Herzog, E.L. (1989)Facilitating the
new professional's transition to business.
Organizntion Development Journal, 7 , 59-68.
Wanous, J.P. (1980)Organizutionnl Entry: Recruit-
ment, Selection and Socializution of Newcomers.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Wanous, J.P. and Colella, A. (1989)Organizational
entry research: Current status and future direc-
tions. In G.R. Ferris and K.R. Rowland (eds.),
Research in Personnel and Human Resource
Management: Vd.7(pp. 59-UO). Greenwich, CT:
JAI Press.
Volume 2 Number 3 Iuly 1994