Popular stereotypes suggest that generational differences among workers present challenges for workplace managers. However, existing empirical research provides mixed evidence for generational differences in important values and attitudes. The current study extends generational effects research by examining differences in actual workplace behaviors. Drawing from commonly held generational stereotypes, the authors hypothesized that Baby Boomers would exhibit (Hypothesis 1) fewer job mobility behaviors and (Hypothesis 2) more instances of compliance‐related behaviors in comparison with both GenXers and Millennials, while (Hypothesis 3) GenXers would be less likely to work overtime in comparison with Baby Boomers and Millennials. A sample of 8,040 applicants at two organizations was used to test these predictions. Results provided support for Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 3 and partial support for Hypothesis 2, but the effect sizes for these relationships were small. It appears the effects of generational membership on workplace behavior are not as strong as suggested by commonly held stereotypes. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.

Although job seekers' motivation to process the information encountered during recruitment partially influences recruitment success, little is known about what motivates more thorough information processing. To address this issue, we integrated recruitment and social information processing theories to examine the possibility that diversity cues on recruitment websites influence website viewers' processing of presented information. Utilizing a controlled experiment and a hypothetical organization, Study 1 revealed that both Blacks and Whites spent more time viewing recruitment websites and better recalled website information when the sites included racial diversity cues. These relationships were stronger for Blacks, and organizational attractiveness perceptions mediated these effects for Blacks but not for Whites. Study 2 found similar relationships for Black and White participants viewing real organizational recruitment websites after taking into account perceived organizational attributes and website design effects. Implications of these findings for recruiting organizations are discussed.

No abstract

Abstract:For human resource (HR) departments, screening job applicants is an integral role in acquiring talent. Many HR departments have begun to turn to social networks to better understand job candidates' character. Using social networks as a screening tool might provide insights not readily available from resumes or initial interviews. However, requiring access to an applicants' social networks and the private activities occurring therein-a practice currently legal in 29 U.S. states (Deschenaux, 2015)-could induce strong moral reactions from the job candidates because of a perceived loss of information privacy. Subsequently, such disclosure requests could induce job candidates to respond in a multitude of ways to protect their privacy. Given that an estimated 2.55 billion individuals will use social media worldwide by 2017 (eMarketer, 2013), the repercussions from requests for access social media environments have potentially far-reaching effects. In this research, we examine how one such disclosure request impacted six information privacy protective responses (IPPRs) (Son & Kim, 2008) based on the job candidates' perceived moral judgment and the perceived moral intensity of the HR disclosure request. These responses occurred when we asked respondents to provide personal login information during a hypothetical interview. By modeling data derived from a sample of 250 participants in PLS-SEM, we found that the five IPPRs (i.e., refusal, negative word of mouth, complaining to friends, complaining to the company, and complaining to third parties) were all significant responses when one judged the request to be immoral and perceived the moral intensity concept of immediate harm. The amount of variance explained by these five IPPRs ranged from 17.7 percent to 38.7 percent, which indicates a solid initial foundation from which future research can expand on this HR issue. Implications for academia and practice are discussed.

No abstract