This article aims to better understand the concept of organizational socialization of employees, a concept that has been largely integrated in the majority of work in recent years relating to the attitudes and behaviors of individuals in the employment relationship. Emerging from the different debates between several fields of investigation including sociology, psychology and, in a related perspective, social psychology, organizational socialization is a fundamental concept that attempts to reconcile the company (its values, its structure) and the employee with its own characteristics, its personal identity. Indeed, organizational socialization theories seek more precisely to understand the behaviors by which individuals manage to link individual variables (the personal identity that distinguishes them from their organizational environment) and situational variables (the organizational identity to which they must conform to belong to a professional family). In this research, we identify four major trends in the literature on organizational socialization. A first approach includes organizational socialization as a sequential process within a role transition process. A second cognitive approach studies organizational socialization through a process of attribution of meaning. The third, so-called proactive approach, considers man as his own actor in his socialization with the organization. The last approach, called interactionist, studies the success of the individual’s adjustment to the organization through a balance between the way that the individual responds to the reality of his or her organizational life and the context in which the company evolves. A contextual approach to alluding to the latter is also discussed. Finally, we propose a multi-criteria model for the study of organizational socialization to facilitate understanding of this concept and discuss future research perspectives.
| Published in | Social Sciences (Volume 11, Issue 4) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ss.20221104.13 |
| Page(s) | 208-219 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Socialization, Proactivity, Identity, Cognition, Learning, Meaning Assignment
| [1] | Van Maanen J. (1976), “Breaking-in: Socialization to Work”, in Dubin R. (Ed.), Handbook of Work, Organization, and Society, Chicago: Rand-McNally, 67-130. |
| [2] | Ashforth B. E., Sluss D. M. et Saks A. M. (2007), “Socialization Tactics, Proactive behavior, and Newcomer Leaming: Integrating Socialization Models”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 70, pp. 447-462. |
| [3] | Lacaze D. (2005a), «Vers une meilleure compréhension des processus d’intégration: validation d’un modèle d’intégration proactive des nouveaux salarié » [Towards a better understanding of integration processes: validation of a model for proactive integration of new employees], Revue de Gestion des Ressources Humaines, Avril/Mai/Juin 2005. |
| [4] | Porter L., Lawler E. et Hackman J. (1975), “Behavior in organizations”, New-York, McGraw-Hill. |
| [5] | Van Maanen J. et Schein E. H. (1979), “Toward a Theory of Organizational Socialization”, Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 1, pp. 209-264. |
| [6] | Fabre C. (2005), «La mesure de la socialisation organisationnelle» [Measuring organizational socialization], in Delobbe N., Herrbach O., Lacaze D. et Mignonac K. (Eds.), Comportement organisationnel, contrat psychologique, émotions au travail, socialisation organisationnelle [Organizational behavior, psychological contract, work emotions, organizational socialization], Vol. 1, Edition De Boeck, Paris, pp. 292-302. |
| [7] | Isaksen J. (2000), “Constructing meaning despite the drudgery of repetitive work”, Journal of Humanistic Psychology, Vol. 40, pp. 84-107. |
| [8] | Denis J. F. (2002), «Le sens du travail: validation d’une mesure des caractéristiques valorisées du travail et vérification empirique d’un modèle sur le sens du travail en fonction de la cohérence du travail» [The meaning of work: validation of a measure of the valued characteristics of work and empirical verification of a model on the meaning of work according to the coherence of work], Thèse de doctorat en Sciences de Gestion, Université de Montréal. |
| [9] | Morin E. M. (2003), «Sens du travail. Définition, mesure et validation», In Vandenberghe C., Delobbe N. et Karnas G. (Eds), Dimensions individuelles et sociales de l’investissement professionnel [Individual and social dimensions of professional investment], Vol. 2, Actes du 12ème Congrès de psychologie du travail et des organisations, Louvain la Neuve, pp. 11-20. |
| [10] | Boudrias J. S. et Savoie A. (2006), «Les manifestations comportementales de l’habilitation au travail: développement d’un cadre conceptuel et d’un instrument de mesure» [Behavioral manifestations of work empowerment: development of a conceptual framework and a measuring instrument], Psychologie du travail et des organisations, Vol. 12, pp. 119-138. |
| [11] | Schein E. H. (1978), “Career dynamics: Matching individual and organizational needs”, Addison-Wesley. |
| [12] | Louis M. R., Posner B. Z. et Powell G. N. (1983), "The Availability and Helpfulness of Socialization Practices", Personnel Psychology, Vol. 36, pp. 857-866. |
| [13] | Chao G. T., O'Leary-Kelly A. M., Wolf S., Klein, H. J. et Gardner P. D. (1994), “Organizational socialization: Its content and consequences”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79, n° 5, pp. 730-743. |
| [14] | Anakwe U. P. et Greenhaus J. H. (1999), «Effective socialization of employees: Socialization content perspective», Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 11, n° 3, pp. 315-329. |
| [15] | Lacaze D. (2005), «Évaluer l’intégration des nouveaux salariés: un instrument validé auprès de personnes travaillant en contact avec la clientèle» [Evaluate the integration of new employees: a device validated with people working in contact with customers], Revue Sciences de Gestion, Vol. 48, pp. 91-118. |
| [16] | Fisher (1986), “Organizational Socialization: an integrative review”, Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, vol. 4, pp. 101-145. |
| [17] | Wanous J. P. (1980), “Organizational entry: Recruitment, selection, and socialization of newcomers, Reading, M A: Addison Wesley (2ème ed. 1992). |
| [18] | Fournier V. et Payne R. (1994), “Change in self-construction during the transition from university to employment: A personal construct psychology approach”, Journal of Ocupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 67, pp. 297-314. |
| [19] | Kane A. A., Argote L., Levine J. M. (2005), “Knowledge transfer between groups via personnel rotation: Effects of social identity and knowledge quality”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, n° 96, p. 56-71. |
| [20] | Koenig G. (1994), "L'apprentissage Organisationnel: Repérage des Lieux" [Organizational Learning: Locating the Places], Revue Française de Gestion, Janvier-Février. |
| [21] | Boukar H. et Guidkaya Z. (2017), « Communication interne et apprentissage organisationnel des salariés dans les petites et moyennes entreprises » [Internal communication and organizational learning of employees in small and medium-sized enterprises], Revue Africaine de Management, Vol. 2, n° 2, pp. 126-153. |
| [22] | Schein E. H. (1968), “Organizational Socialization and the Profession of Management”, Industrial Management Review, Vol. 9, n° 2, pp. 1-16. |
| [23] | Feldman D. C. (1976), “A Contingency Theory of Socialization”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 21, n° 3, pp. 433-452. |
| [24] | Louis M. R. (1980), “Surprise and Sense Making: What Newcomers Experience in Entering Unfamiliar Settings”, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 25, pp. 226-251. |
| [25] | Bandura A. (1969), “Social-Learning Theory of Identification Processes”, in Goslin, Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research, Russell Sage Publication, Rand McNally et Co, pp. 213-262. |
| [26] | Sainsaulieu R. (1977), “L’identité au travail” [Identity at work], Presses de la Fondation Nationales des sciences Politiques. |
| [27] | Sainsaulieu R. et Segrestin D. (1986), «Vers une théorie sociologique de l’entreprise» [Towards a sociological theory of enterprise], Sociologie du travail, Vol. 13. |
| [28] | Jones G. R. (1986), «Socialization tactics, self-efficacy, and newcomers' adjustments to organizations», Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 29, n° 2, pp. 262-279. |
| [29] | Dufour L. et Lacaze D. (2007), « L’intégration dans l’entreprise des jeunes à faible capital scolaire: un processus d’ajustement mutuel » [Integration into the enterprise of young people with little educational capital: a mutual adjustment process], Communication au XVIIIème Congrès de l’AGRH, Fribourg, Suisse. |
| [30] | Perrot S. (2001), «L’entrée dans l’entreprise des jeunes diplômés» [Entry into the business of young graduates], Recherche en Gestion, Edition Economica. |
| [31] | Feldman D. C. (1981), “The Multiple Socialization of Organization Members”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 6, n° 2, pp. 309-318. |
| [32] | Graen G. (1976), “Role making processes within complex organizations”, in Dunette M. D., Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, Chicago, Rand McNally. |
| [33] | Lacaze D. (2001), «Le rôle de l’individu dans la socialisation organisationnelle: le cas des employés dans les services de restauration rapide et de grande distribution» [The role of the individual in organizational socialization: the case of employees in fast food and mass distribution services], Thèse de doctorat en Sciences de Gestion, Université de droit, d’économie et des sciences d’Aix-Marseille III, Institut d’Administration des Entreprises, France. |
| [34] | Ostroff C. et Kozlowski S. W. J. (1992), «Organizational socialization as a learning process: The role of information acquisition», Personnel Psychology, Vol. 45, pp. 849-874. |
| [35] | Waung M. (1995), “The effects of self-regulatory coping orientation on newcomer adjustment and job survival”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 48, pp. 633-650. |
| [36] | Morrison E. W. (1993), “Longitudinal study of the effects of information seeking on newcomer socialization”, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 78, n° 2, pp. 173-183. |
| [37] | Major D. A., Kozlowski S. W. J., Chao G. T. et Gardner P. D. (1995), “A longitudinal investigation of newcomers expectations, early socialization outcomes, and the moderating effects of role development factors”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 80, n° 3. |
| [38] | Garreau L. et Perrot S. (2011), «Le rôle des émotions dans la socialisation organisationnelle: une approche par le sensemaking» [The role of emotions in organizational socialization: a sensemaking approach], AGRH, 2011, Marrakech, Morocco. |
| [39] | Maitlis S., Sonenshein S. (2010), “Sensemaking in Crisis and Change: Inspiration and Insights”, From Weick (1988), Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 47, n° 3, pp. 551- 580. |
| [40] | Tracy S. J., Myers K. K. et Scott C. W. (2006), “Cracking jokes and crafting selves: Sensemaking and identity”, Communication Monographs, Vol. 73, n° 3, pp. 283-308. |
| [41] | Kumar K., Bakhski A. et Rani E. (2007), «Organizational Justice Perceptions as Predictor of Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment», The IUP Journal of Management Research, Vol. 8, n° 10, pp. 24-37. |
| [42] | Yi X. et Uen J. F. (2006), « Relationship between organizational socialization and organizational identification of professionals: Moderating effects of personal work experience and growth need strength », The journal of American Academy of Business, Vol. 10, n° 1, pp. 362-371. |
| [43] | Riordan, C. M.; Weatherly, E. W.; Vandenberg, R. J.; Self, R. M. (2001). The effects of preentry experiences and socialization tactics on newcomer attitudes and turnover, Journal of Managerial Issues, vol. 13, n° 2, p. 159-176. |
| [44] | Chartrand V. (2017), «Socialisation des nouveaux employés, l’effet d’une formation en autogestion sur les comportements de recherche d’information» [Socialization of new employees, the effect of self-management training on information-seeking behaviors], Thèse de Doctorat en Sciences d’Administration des entreprises, Université du Québec à Montréal. |
| [45] | Saks A. M. et Ashforth B. E. (1997), “A longitudinal investigation of the relationships between job information sources, applicant perceptions of fit, and work outcomes”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 50, pp. 395-426. |
| [46] | Cyert R. et J. March (1963), “A behavioural theory of the firm”, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice. |
| [47] | Bourhis A. (2004), «Des difficultés de la mesure du niveau de socialisation dans les organisations» [Difficulties in measuring the level of socialization in organizations], Actes du 15ème congrès de l’AGRH, Montréal, Tome 2, pp. 683-698. |
| [48] | Levitt B. et March J. (1988), "Organizational learning", Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 14, p. 319-40. |
| [49] | March J. et Olsen P. (1975), "The uncertainty of the past: organizational learning under ambiguity", European Journal of Political Research, vol. 3, p. 141-71. |
| [50] | Nelson R. R. et Winter S. G. (1982), “An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change”, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. |
| [51] | Quinlan P. (1991), “Connectionism and Psychology”, University of Chicago Press. |
| [52] | Sandelands L. E. et Stablein R. E. (1987), "The concept of organizational mind", Research in the Sociology ofOrganizations, vol. 5, p. 135-161. |
| [53] | Fiol C. M. (1994), "Consensus, diversity and learning in organizations", Organization Science, vol. 5, n° 3, August, pp. 403-20. |
APA Style
Aboubakar Roukatou, Zamba Guidkaya. (2022). Trends in the Study of the Organizational Socialization of Employees in the Employment Relationship: Theoretical Framework and Research Perspectives. Social Sciences, 11(4), 208-219. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ss.20221104.13
ACS Style
Aboubakar Roukatou; Zamba Guidkaya. Trends in the Study of the Organizational Socialization of Employees in the Employment Relationship: Theoretical Framework and Research Perspectives. Soc. Sci. 2022, 11(4), 208-219. doi: 10.11648/j.ss.20221104.13
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ss.20221104.13,
author = {Aboubakar Roukatou and Zamba Guidkaya},
title = {Trends in the Study of the Organizational Socialization of Employees in the Employment Relationship: Theoretical Framework and Research Perspectives},
journal = {Social Sciences},
volume = {11},
number = {4},
pages = {208-219},
doi = {10.11648/j.ss.20221104.13},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ss.20221104.13},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ss.20221104.13},
abstract = {This article aims to better understand the concept of organizational socialization of employees, a concept that has been largely integrated in the majority of work in recent years relating to the attitudes and behaviors of individuals in the employment relationship. Emerging from the different debates between several fields of investigation including sociology, psychology and, in a related perspective, social psychology, organizational socialization is a fundamental concept that attempts to reconcile the company (its values, its structure) and the employee with its own characteristics, its personal identity. Indeed, organizational socialization theories seek more precisely to understand the behaviors by which individuals manage to link individual variables (the personal identity that distinguishes them from their organizational environment) and situational variables (the organizational identity to which they must conform to belong to a professional family). In this research, we identify four major trends in the literature on organizational socialization. A first approach includes organizational socialization as a sequential process within a role transition process. A second cognitive approach studies organizational socialization through a process of attribution of meaning. The third, so-called proactive approach, considers man as his own actor in his socialization with the organization. The last approach, called interactionist, studies the success of the individual’s adjustment to the organization through a balance between the way that the individual responds to the reality of his or her organizational life and the context in which the company evolves. A contextual approach to alluding to the latter is also discussed. Finally, we propose a multi-criteria model for the study of organizational socialization to facilitate understanding of this concept and discuss future research perspectives.},
year = {2022}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Trends in the Study of the Organizational Socialization of Employees in the Employment Relationship: Theoretical Framework and Research Perspectives AU - Aboubakar Roukatou AU - Zamba Guidkaya Y1 - 2022/08/24 PY - 2022 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ss.20221104.13 DO - 10.11648/j.ss.20221104.13 T2 - Social Sciences JF - Social Sciences JO - Social Sciences SP - 208 EP - 219 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2326-988X UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ss.20221104.13 AB - This article aims to better understand the concept of organizational socialization of employees, a concept that has been largely integrated in the majority of work in recent years relating to the attitudes and behaviors of individuals in the employment relationship. Emerging from the different debates between several fields of investigation including sociology, psychology and, in a related perspective, social psychology, organizational socialization is a fundamental concept that attempts to reconcile the company (its values, its structure) and the employee with its own characteristics, its personal identity. Indeed, organizational socialization theories seek more precisely to understand the behaviors by which individuals manage to link individual variables (the personal identity that distinguishes them from their organizational environment) and situational variables (the organizational identity to which they must conform to belong to a professional family). In this research, we identify four major trends in the literature on organizational socialization. A first approach includes organizational socialization as a sequential process within a role transition process. A second cognitive approach studies organizational socialization through a process of attribution of meaning. The third, so-called proactive approach, considers man as his own actor in his socialization with the organization. The last approach, called interactionist, studies the success of the individual’s adjustment to the organization through a balance between the way that the individual responds to the reality of his or her organizational life and the context in which the company evolves. A contextual approach to alluding to the latter is also discussed. Finally, we propose a multi-criteria model for the study of organizational socialization to facilitate understanding of this concept and discuss future research perspectives. VL - 11 IS - 4 ER -
Email: