Measurement of newcomer socialization: Construct validation of a multidimensional scale

Haueter, Jill A.; Macan, Therese Hoff; Winter, Joel P.

doi:10.1016/s0001-8791(02)00017-9

Cited by 177 publications

(205 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

164

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Turkish adaptation of Newcomer Socialization Questionnaire (NSQ) developed by Haueter, Macan, and Winter (2003) was used to measure organizational socialization in this study. The original version of the NSQ has three dimensions: organization socialization, department socialization and task socialization.…”

Section: Newcomer Socialization Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of Organizational Socialization of Instructors in Higher Education

Ataman

Kondakçı

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

KeywordsThis study aims to investigate the relationship between organizational socialization and various organizational (type of university, training, work conditions, knowledge sharing) and individual (academic degree, teaching experience, length of employment at current work place, job satisfaction, commitment, self-efficacy) level factors, both factors taken together focusing on the content, context and process dimensions of socialization. For this aim, data from 737 public and private university English language instructors were collected with an inventory consisting of three parts made up of self-developed and pre-developed scales. Taking each dimension of organizational socialization as a criterion variable, three sets of predictors were defined for three separate hierarchical regression analyses. The results revealed that socialization of instructors to the organization, department, and task are significantly predicted by several organizational and individual variables. Knowledge sharing and training are the strongest organizational level predictors while job satisfaction, selfefficacy for instructional strategies, and affective commitment are the strongest individual level predictors. The results suggest higher education administrators adapt organizational and individual level managerial strategies to facilitate organizational, department and task socialization in higher education organizations. Organizational socialization Faculty inductionHigher education Organizational commitment Self-efficacyArticle Info

show abstract

Section: Newcomer Socialization Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of Organizational Socialization of Instructors in Higher Education

Ataman

Kondakçı

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Morrison (1995) identifie par exemple des informations techniques, référentielles, sociales, normatives, organisationnelles, politiques et évaluatives, toutes ces catégories rentrant dans la typologie plus générale évoquée précé-demment (travail, groupe de travail, organisation). Notons enfin que la typologie de Morrison (1995) (Anakwe et Greenhaus, 1999;Chao et al, 1994), "tâche" (Haueter et al, 2003;Ostroff et Kozlowski, 1992), et "formation" (Taormina, 2004). Thomas et Anderson (1998, p. 754) (Chao et al, 1994), « soutien des collègues » (Taormina, 2004), « groupe de travail » (Haueter et al, 2003;Ostroff et Kozlowski, 1992), « fonctionnement avec le groupe de travail », « sociale », et « soutien interpersonnel » (Anakwe et Greenhaus, 1999).…”

Section: Identification Des Contenus Clésunclassified

“…Concernant le domaine organisation, Taormina (2004) souligne que quatre des six dimensions utilisées par Chao et al (1994) peuvent être considérées comme rattachées au même domaine : l'organisation (« politique », « langage », « objectifs et valeurs », et « histoire »). D'autres échelles retiennent directement le domaine organisationnel comme l'une des dimensions de l'échelle (Haueter et al, 2003;Ostroff et Kozlowski, 1992;Taormina, 2004;Thomas et Anderson, 1998), et Anakwe et Greenhaus (1999) distinguent une facette liée à la connaissance de la culture organisationnelle, et une autre liée à son niveau d'acceptation.…”

Section: Identification Des Contenus Clésunclassified

“…Seules deux échelles (Haueter et al, 2003;Ostroff et Kozlowski, 1992) (Bourhis, 2004;Fabre, 2005). Plusieurs critiques ont été émises sur l'échelle de Chao et al (1994), notamment la multi dimensionnalité de certaines facettes (Bauer et al, 1998) et l'instabilité de sa structure factorielle (Bourhis, 2004).…”

Section: Processus De Socialisation Et éChelles De Mesure Existantesunclassified

“…à travers cette perspective intégrative, nous souhaitons également évaluer l'intérêt ou non de poursuivre le développement des échelles, et de proposer des pistes en ce sens. (Anakwe et Greenhaus, 1999;Haueter et al, 2003;Ostroff et Kozlowski, 1992) considèrent l'ensemble des trois grands domaines de socialisation. Troisièmement, si l'on considère le processus d'intériorisation, le tableau 1 révèle essentiellement des cases vides.…”

Section: Vers Une Perspective Intégrativeunclassified

See 2 more Smart Citations

Échelles de mesure de la socialisation organisationnelle : état de l’art et perspectives

Perrot

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Résumé Cet article suggère que le développement récent des échelles de mesure de la socialisation organisationnelle (SO) s’est confondu avec les recherches sur le contenu, en négligeant la prise en compte des processus sous-jacents. Les échelles sont donc insuffisantes, car elles ne proposent pas une mesure complète du construit et/ou se fondent sur des opérationnalisations éloignées. Cet article propose une analyse critique des échelles de SO existantes, en croisant une lecture par les contenus et par les processus. Puis, il définit six dimensions de la SO, et offre ainsi une base conceptuelle pour le développement futur des échelles de mesure.

show abstract

Socialization in Organizational Contexts

Ashforth¹,

Sluss²,

Harrison³

2008

International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2007, Volume 22

205

349

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The survival of an organization depends partly on its ongoing ability to integrate new members into the fold while simultaneously allowing if not encouraging organizational change. Organizational socialization is the process by which individuals become part of an organization's pattern of activities (Anderson, Riddle & Martin, 1999). This broad definition accommodates the impact of both the organization on the individual and the individual on the organization (the latter is often referred to as individualization or personalization), and-given that socialization is continuous-recognizes that individuals may be organizational newcomers or veterans.Why does socialization matter? First, because work contexts are complex, dynamic, designed for multiple purposes, and, for the newcomer, more or less novel, their meaning is inherently equivocal. As various perspectives (e.g., social learning theory, Bandura, 1977; social information processing theory, Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978; social comparison theory;Festinger, 1954) maintain, individuals socially construct meaning, giving particular weight to the views of credible people-in this case, veteran insiders. For example, Salzinger (1991) studied two cooperatives that specialized in domestic worker placement. In one, management regarded domestic work as stopgap work and provided no training. In the other, management regarded domestic work as a profession, provided training, and held supportive meetings where workers discussed their

show abstract

Measurement of newcomer socialization: Construct validation of a multidimensional scale

Cited by 177 publications

References 22 publications

Predictors of Organizational Socialization of Instructors in Higher Education

Predictors of Organizational Socialization of Instructors in Higher Education

Échelles de mesure de la socialisation organisationnelle : état de l’art et perspectives

Socialization in Organizational Contexts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About