New Employee Orientation / Socialization 300 words

jquotes

week4readingarticle2.pdf

Home >Human Resource Management homework help >New Employee Orientation / Socialization 300 words

The effects of career plateaued workers on in-group members’

perceptions of P-O fit Deondra Conner

Department of Management and Marketing, Alabama A&M University, Normal, Alabama, USA

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects on in-group members of an influential worker’s response to being in a state of career plateau. Design/methodology/approach – Using the concepts of the career plateau, person-organization fit, and organizational climate, a set of propositions is presented and discussed relative to the influential worker’s response. A model is presented to illustrate the effects and the components involved. Findings – An influential career plateaued worker can affect the in-group he or she is associated with. An ineffectively plateaued worker is not only low in productivity, but also resorts to such negative behavior as absenteeism, withdrawal, and frequent job changes. When noticed by other in-group members, such behavior can affect their attitudes and behaviors. Practical implications – The organizational socialization process can counter the effects of the otherwise influential ineffectively career plateaued person’s response. This is possible if the socialization process is strong enough to overcome (or complement) certain personal characteristics of the in-group members and their association with the career plateaued person by creating an environment where career progress, performance expectations, and role expectations are clear. Originality/value – The paper develops an original model based on a set of theory-based propositions that is of value to both academicians and practitioners.

Keywords Influence, Socialization, Person-organization fit, Career plateau, Organizational climate

Paper type Conceptual paper

In today’s volatile work environment, downsizing and layoffs have become as common place as the hostile acquisitions and corporate mergers which symbolized the late 1980s - 1990s. With such corporate behavior come certain consequences and many career casualties. Unfortunately, diminishing opportunities for upward mobility in organizations is a very prominent consequence. A recent study by one of the world’s largest staffing organizations indicated that at least 40 percent of those sampled were planning to look for a new job in the coming months, with dissatisfaction with the availability of promotions and bonuses in the current economy being a major factor (Adams, 2012). Though generally speaking, there are a number of ways to define a career plateau, many authors agree that the career plateau can be defined as a stage in a person’s organizational career where future promotions are no longer likely (Ference et al., 1977; Slocum et al., 1985; Chao, 1990; Rantze and Feller, 1985; Bardwick, 1986; Duffy, 2000; Lapalme et al., 2009). For managers and the organizations they serve, an overlooked and equally important issue is the effect that a career plateaued individual can have on fellow employees (i.e. peers and subordinates). This relationship is important because not only must organizations devise remedies to deal with the possible responses of their career plateaued workers, but they should be aware of the effects that a negative response of a career plateaued worker can have on co-workers.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm

Received 1 January 2013 Revised 31 May 2013 Accepted 31 May 2013

Employee Relations Vol. 36 No. 2, 2014 pp. 198-212 r Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0142-5455 DOI 10.1108/ER-01-2013-0001

198

ER 36,2

This paper proposes that a variety of issues of which a career plateaued worker can potentially raise (e.g. low morale, low productivity, turnover, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, etc.; Chay et al., 1995; Heilmann et al., 2008; Lapalme et al., 2009) can also affect the co-workers associated with the plateaued worker. Thus, much as one would not treat a serious wound with a bandage, an organization must thoroughly address the severity of the situation. An organization would be well served to address these issues from an all-encompassing, human resource perspective and not simply target the career plateaued individual.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of a negative response from a career plateaued individual on the perceived organization fit of fellow employees. Based on a review of the related literature, a structural model is proposed. The model is based on work in the fields of career plateaus (Carnazza et al., 1981; Chao, 1990; Hall, 1987; Tremblay and Roger, 2004), person-organization fit (Chatman, 1989; Kristof, 1996; Kristof-Brown et al., 2005; Edwards and Billsberry, 2010; Şenyuva and Gönül, 2011), and organizational climate research ( Joyce and Slocum, 1982; Ekvall, 1996; Altman, 2000; Mahal, 2009).

The career plateau Over the years, researchers have attempted to thoroughly delineate the career plateau. For example, Ference et al. (1977) define the career plateau as a point where upward career mobility is unlikely. They distinguish between two types of career plateaued workers based on the worker’s level of performance and likelihood of promotion and discuss career plateaued workers in terms of effectively plateaued or “solid citizens” and ineffectively plateaued or “deadwood” (Ference et al., 1977). Solid citizens are high in performance but low in promotion likelihood. Deadwood employees are low in performance and low in promotion likelihood. Later researchers continued the theme of discussing the career plateau from a content, structural, and/or personal perspective (Bardwick, 1986; Duffy, 2000; McCleese and Eby, 2006; Smith-Ruig, 2009). From a content perspective, one is plateaued due to having essentially mastered all of the context (e.g. tasks) of their job. From a structural perspective, movement to higher positions within the organizational hierarchy is greatly limited due to few positions or great difficulty and complexity attaining those positions. From a personal perspective, the employee lacks the motivation, direction, and enthusiasm for further advancement. Therefore, whether the career plateau is viewed from an organizational perspective resulting from a lack of upper-level job openings, or a content perspective resulting from a lack of context, or a personal perspective resulting from a lack of ability or desire; the central theme is a point where upward career mobility seems unlikely.

A number of empirical studies have been performed in the career plateau area. For example, in a study of salespeople, Slocum et al. (1985) found that ineffectively plateaued workers (deadwood) were more likely to change jobs more frequently. Further, they found that effectively plateaued workers (solid citizens) were more likely to stay in their jobs for long periods of time. The authors attributed this tenure of effectively plateaued workers to an acceptance of getting off of the mobility track. In a study of 1,722 managers from the organizational vice-president level downward, Veiga (1981) found that ineffectively plateaued workers were more likely to move from job to job and to plateau earlier. Further, plateaued workers were more likely to feel they were less marketable than other workers.

Other studies have found mostly negative aspects to being career plateaued. Elsass and Ralston (1989) developed a model of the stress cycle caused by the career plateau.

199

Perceptions of P-O fit

These authors determined that career plateau workers develop coping responses to deal with their career state. These coping strategies include absenteeism, denial, and withdrawal. Also, the workers’ valuing of rewards is a basis for this negative response. In a study involving surveys of managers, Near (1980) also found that absenteeism, working less hours, and lessened organizational commitment are also the results of plateauing. Thus, an influential career plateaued employee (e.g. formal or informal leader, likeable peer, etc.) might initiate a negative (i.e. absenteeism, withdrawal) or relatively passive (i.e. solid citizen) response as a result of their perception of being in a state of career plateau.

Carnazza et al. (1981) talk of the inevitability of becoming plateaued. They believe a more important issue is how managers choose to respond to their career status and the consequences of their responses. Their study of middle and upper-level managers determined that ineffectively plateaued managers were more likely to attribute promotions to organizational politics and impression management (Carnazza et al., 1981). In a study on career plateaus and stress, Fernandez (1995) found that negative affectivity interacted with negative discrepancies to produce career development stress. Chao (1990) chose to define the career plateau in terms of the employee’s perception. It is this perception of existence and the level of importance that the employee places on the career plateau that is important and affects subsequent behavior. Career plateaus have been shown to be positively associated with turnover intentions (Heilmann et al., 2008). Lapalme et al. (2009) added to the findings of previous research that structural and content plateauing is negatively related to employee perceptions of supervisor support, concluding that employees who feel plateaued may blame their immediate supervisor for a lack of perceived support. Based on semi-structured interviews, Smith-Ruig (2009) determined both positive and negative views of a plateau amongst study participants influenced strongly by how an individual defines career and success. Salami (2010) showed that career plateauing was negatively correlated with job satisfaction and organizational commitment and positively correlated with turnover intentions. Consequently, we see that a career plateau can raise issues that might make one question the perceived or actual appropriateness of fit between the employee and the organization.

Organization fit Person-organization fit can be defined as “the congruence between the norms and values of organizations and the values of persons” (Chatman, 1989, p. 339). Thus, ensuring employees maintain a sense of person-organization fit is important. In a study of first-level supervisors and their direct supervisors, Weiss (1978) concluded that individuals will have value congruence with their leaders if they have a positive perception of their leaders. Additionally, in the attraction-selection-attrition (ASA) model, Schneider (1987) argues that both people and organizations operate through a process of selection and attrition in an attempt to develop an environment where employees and the organization achieve the best fit based on similar characteristics and values. George (1992) also contends that since organizations tend to follow a pattern of hiring similar people, the behavior within organizational settings is a reflection of the similarity of the personalities within the setting. Likewise, the more classical work of Lewin (1951) argues that behavior is a function of the person and the environment and further supports the concept of person-organization fit and the idea that there are “reciprocal effects of persons on situations and situations on persons” (Chatman, 1989, p. 335).

200

ER 36,2

In a study of teachers and principals, Vancouver and Schmitt (1991) evaluated person-organization fit and goal congruence. The authors found goal congruence between supervisors and subordinates as well as goal congruency between peers, with member-constituency congruence having a greater impact on employee attitudes and turnover intentions. Value and goal congruency are important aspects of person- organization fit; thus, the results of Vancouver and Schmitt’s (1991) study relate the ASA model’s principles to collective assessments of person-organization fit. Westerman and Cyr (2004) examined P-O fit from a values, personality, and work environment perspective, concluding that values and work environment fit were both related to job satisfaction and organizational commitment and all three fit measures were related to turnover intentions. Resick et al. (2007) linked P-O fit to job choice decisions, organizational attraction, and work-related attitudes. Bangcheng et al. (2010) concluded that person-organization fit affects turnover intention through job satisfaction as a mediator. Prottas (2011) extended the theory of person-environment fit to choice of work arrangement (employee vs self-employed), concluding that individuals who worked as employees reported greater opportunities for affiliation and higher needs for affiliation. Amos and Weathington (2008) analyzed the relation between employee- organization value congruence and employee attitudes and found that the perceived congruence of employee-organizational values is positively associated with satisfaction with the job and organization as a whole and negatively related to turnover intentions. Thus, when a worker becomes career plateaued, that worker may question whether his or her goals are still in agreement with the organization’s and whether he or she still enjoys a state of good person-organization fit. The mechanics of this “fit” assessment process in the current context will be further explained by briefly examining the concepts of socialization, influence and identification, organization climate perception, and personal characteristics of in-group members. In the context of the present study, in-group members are understood to be co-workers of the career plateaued worker who potentially identify with the plateaued worker for reasons such as proximity, similarity, or perceived potential of shared fate.

Organization fit: the role of socialization Chatman (1989) proposed a model of person-organization fit based on the process of organizational socialization as a moderator of the individual’s characteristics and the organization’s characteristics. Further, Chatman (1989) defined socialization as a “process through which an individual comes to understand the values, abilities, expected behaviors, and social knowledge that are essential for assuming an organizational role and for participating as an organizational member” (p. 345). In a review of the person-organization fit literature, Kristof (1996) discusses the purpose of socialization as a process that facilitates learning of various organizational aspects such as politics, performance expectations, people, and other organizational culture perspectives.

Other authors have defined the socialization concept similarly, but additionally emphasizing socialization as a concept of continued learning and adjustment to the work environment (Feldman and Weitz, 1988; Goldman, 1987; Hart et al., 2003; O’Brien and Drost, 1985; Singer, 2004). This notion, described as continuous socialization or sometimes referred to as resocialization, matches well with a definition by Hall (1987, p. 301) of socialization as a social learning process and of a career as “a long-term ‘bundle’ of socialization experiences.” Moreover, an individual’s understanding of the phases and timing of their career stages is affected by this ongoing socialization

201

Perceptions of P-O fit

(Cable and Parsons, 2001). Similarly, Chao et al. (1994, p. 731) described organizational socialization as “learning on the part of the individual who is adjusting to a new or changed role within the organization.” Thus, the amount of “resocialization” required is governed by the extent to which the work environment or aspects of the job change (Chao et al., 1994). Also, the socialization process involves role clarification, sense making, and worker identity confirmation and is directed toward developing organizational commitment and task performance (Hart et al., 2003; Wanous et al., 1984). Moreover, when employees are “well socialized” they are more adaptable to change (Chao et al., 1994; Hart et al., 2003).

In a longitudinal study of newly employed masters of business administration students, Jones (1986) observed that effective socialization can remove ambiguity for workers. Additionally, in terms of information dissemination concerning workers’ future organizational progress, organizational socialization can serve to reduce employee uncertainty ( Jones, 1986). Further, Stumpf and Hartman (1984) concluded that workers will still generally view discrepancies between reality and socialization information “as exceptions due to immediate local conditions” (p. 326). The socialization process can help employees internalize organizational goals (Ashforth and Mael, 1989). Further, socialization can cause the worker to define his identity through the organization based on self-depersonalization, perceived similarity, and value congruency (Ashforth and Mael, 1989). A study by Hart et al. (2003) indicate that perceptions of socialization tactics’ use and communication relationships contribute to decreased role ambiguity and role conflict and increased commitment. Cooper-Thomas and Anderson (2005) investigated newcomer learning and suggested a need for further development of socialization models. Korte’s (2010) qualitative case study examined the socialization process from a relational perspective and concluded that relationship building is a primary driver of the socialization process in organizations. Korte (2010) argues that typically, the socialization literature underestimates the social influences of co-workers and managers. Hence, an organization’s socialization program is a way of fostering person-organization fit and as such, may affect workers’ perception of what is and is not acceptable. Thus, it is proposed that:

P1. The impact of an influential career plateaued individual’s response on in-group members will be moderated by the strength of the organization’s socialization process.

P2. The stronger the organization’s socialization process, the less effect either a passive or negative response of an influential career plateaued worker will have on fellow in-group employees.

As mentioned, the socialization process involves worker identity confirmation (Hart et al., 2003; Wanous et al., 1984) and can cause the worker to define his identity through the organization based on self-depersonalization and value congruency (Ashforth and Mael, 1989). Thus, we look at the role of influence and identification next.

Organization fit: the role of influence and identification Ashforth and Mael (1989) describe identification as a “perceptual cognitive construct” and the “perception of oneness with or belongingness to a group, involving direct or vicarious experience of its successes and failures” (p. 34). Becker and Billings (1993) propose commitment profiles built on employee identification. These profiles include

202

ER 36,2

the locally committed employees (workers with an attachment to their supervisor and work group) and the globally committed employees (workers with an attachment to upper management and the organization) (Becker and Billings, 1993). Further, “identification with a group is similar to identification with a person (e.g. one’s father, a sports hero) or a reciprocal role relationship (e.g. husband-wife, doctor-patient) in as much as one partly defines oneself in terms of a social referent” (Ashforth and Mael, 1989, p. 22).

“Identification also may engender internalization of, and adherence to, group values and norms and homogeneity in attitudes and behavior” (Ashforth and Mael, 1989, p. 26). Conner (2003) argued that even as the nature of the work environment changes in the new millennium, workers will still need and seek influential information from referent other workers. Research by Jehn and Shah (1997) demonstrated that friendships that permeate groups encourage trust and information sharing that affects decision making, morale, commitment, and cooperation. Adams and Anantatmula (2010) continued this line of research by exploring the social and behavioral influences that an individual can have on the team and how those behaviors can impact the team’s social behaviors. As mentioned earlier, Lewin’s (1951) theory denoting that behavior is a function of both the environment and the person supports the concept of person- organization fit but it also embodies interactional concepts in that there are “reciprocal effects of persons on situations and situations on persons” (Chatman, 1989, p. 335). Thus, it is also proposed that:

P3. Employees who interact with an ineffectively influential plateaued worker on a regular basis will notice a negative response of that career plateaued worker.

Ashforth and Mael (1989) also describe the concept of “self stereotyping” as “depersonalization of the self” wherein an individual has an increased perception of “similarity with other group members” (Ashforth and Mael, 1989, p. 26). Identification results from employees deriving situational meanings through “symbolic interactionism” or verbal interactions with other individuals (Ashforth and Mael, 1989, p. 26). Based on Ashforth and Mael’s (1989) perspective on organizational identification, van Knippenberg and van Schie (2000) demonstrated that work-group identification can at times be stronger than organizational identification as well as more predictive of organizational attitudes and behavior in terms of job satisfaction, turnover intentions, job involvement, and job motivation. In an explanation of action theory, Rentsch (1990) describes how members who interact in a group may “attach similar meanings to organizational events” (p. 670). Further, these “groups” do not have to be formally identified as groups, because individuals tend to informally categorize themselves into “groups” based on similarities (actual or perceived) with others (Rentsch, 1990; Ashforth and Mael, 1989). Moreover, not only do co-workers and managers exert social influences upon each other (Korte, 2010), but justice research argues that similarity to the target of perceived injustice influences observer identification with the target (Goldberg et al., 2011). Thus, it is also proposed that:

P4. The way a worker responds to being plateaued will affect workers who identify with the career plateaued worker.

A final and important aspect of fit relevant to understanding the possible psychological influence of a career plateaued individual on their co-workers is climate perception.

203

Perceptions of P-O fit

Organization fit: the role of climate perception According to James et al. (2008, p. 27), climate “is the only domain of organizational research that simultaneously examines perceptions of jobs, groups, leaders, and organizational attributes, and thus has the unique capacity of being able to decipher common denominators and latent relationships.” Joyce and Slocum (1982) describe a psychological climate as, “individual descriptions of organizational practices and procedures (p. 951).” Moreover, Joyce and Slocum (1984) explain the concept of collective climates as representing “learned environments” that provide a common frame of reference for the participants. Likewise, an organizational climate is described as, “a collective description of [the psychological] environment, most often assessed through the average perceptions of organization members” (Joyce and Slocum, 1982, p. 951). The authors talk of how the “‘fit’ between a person’s psychological climate and the prevailing organization climate represents a potentially important source of influence on both job performance and satisfaction as it represents the extent to which the individual’s perceptions of organizational practices and procedures differ from, or are consistent with, the common perception of those practices held by others in the organization” ( Joyce and Slocum, 1982, p. 952). Schulte et al. (2006) examined individual and unit-level climate-satisfaction relationships and concluded that the individual’s perceptions of the climate accounted for a large percentage of variance in the individual’s satisfaction. In a study of human resource practices, organizational climate and employee outcomes, Gould-Williams (2007) demonstrated the basic tenets of social exchange theory in that positive exchanges between employees lead to positive work behavior and attitudes and negative exchanges lead to negative outcomes like stress and turnover. Also, Gould-Williams (2007) found that organizational factors also significantly affected worker attitudes and behaviors.

Joyce and Slocum (1982) describe climate discrepancy as the difference between psychological and average organizational climate. Goodman (1977) advises that the perception of climate discrepancy evolves from social comparison. The employee evaluates climate aspects through comparison with a referent. Hence, it is further proposed that:

P5. If the in-group member identifies with the organization, the in-group member’s psychological and organizational climate perceptions will remain congruent.

P6. If an in-group member identifies with the negative response of a career plateaued worker, the in-group member’s psychological and organizational climate perceptions will not be congruent and instead of the original level of perceived person-organization fit, there will be climate discrepancy.

The remaining propositions consider the role of individual differences in terms of the personal characteristics of a career plateaued worker’s co-workers. Given the theoretical nature of the present work, though not an exhaustive list, the suggested attributes discussed are offered as an example of how individual differences can affect the process.

In-group members’ personal characteristics In general, the personal characteristics of an in-group member will moderate the way he or she interprets the career plateaued in-group member’s behavior. For example, some suggested attributes might include negative affectivity, locus of control, self- esteem, and value congruency.

204

ER 36,2

Negative affectivity has been shown to directly relate to variables such as job and life satisfaction (Barsky et al., 2004). George (1992) discusses the relationship between negative affectivity and person-organization fit. A person high in negative affectivity will be more susceptible to negative stimuli. Hence, in-group members high in negative affectivity may be more likely to be affected by a negative reaction of an influential career plateaued worker. In a study of mentoring relationships, Turban and Dougherty (1994) describe locus of control as a measure of “the extent to which individuals believe that rewards and outcomes are controlled by their own actions or by external forces in their environments” (p. 689). According to Bulus (2011), locus of control predicts goal orientations. Žitný and Halama (2011) demonstrated that internal locus of control and self-esteem can interact to buffer against sensitivity to injustice. Thus, in-group members with an external locus of control may be more likely to feel they cannot prevent what happened to the influential career plateaued worker from happening to them.

Further, Turban and Dougherty (1994) define self-esteem as a measure of how favorably individuals see themselves. An in-group member with low self-esteem may not have much confidence in his or her own work ability and will probably become very unsure of their future with the company after exposure to a negative response of an influential career plateaued employee. Meglino et al. (1989) discuss value congruency as being able to reduce role ambiguity and conflict and increase organizational commitment. This assertion is based on value consistency with the organization. The same effects hold for value consistency with an individual (Meglino et al., 1989). Ashkanasy and O’Connor (1997) examined value congruence in leader-member exchanges and concluded that leader-member exchange quality is associated with compatibility of authority, affiliation, and similarity of values between leaders and members. In a study of personal and organizational values congruency, Posner (2010) concluded that both types of values congruency were significantly related to satisfaction, motivation, anxiety, ethics, work stress, and commitment.

Thus, continuing with our propositions:

P7. An in-group member’s interpretation of an influential career plateaued worker’s response to being career plateaued will be moderated by the in-group member’s personal characteristics.

P8. An in-group member who is subjected to a strong organizational socialization process and whose personal characteristics make him/her less susceptible to co- worker influence (e.g. high self-esteem, and internal locus of control) will identify more with the organization than with the influential, career plateaued individual.

P9. An in-group member who is subjected to a weak organizational socialization process and whose personal characteristics make him/her more susceptible to co-worker influence (e.g. low self-esteem, negative affectivity, and external locus of control) will identify more with the influential career plateaued worker than with the organization.

Structural model of the effects of an influential career plateaued worker’s response on the person-organization fit of in-group members The model in Figure 1 takes into account the fact that an influential worker could be a formal organizational leader, an informal leader, or even a peer that some other worker

205

Perceptions of P-O fit

Influential Worker

In e ff e ct

iv e ly

P la

te a u e d

E ff e ct

iv e ly

P la

te a u e d

P a ss

iv e

R e sp

o n se

(I n te

rp re

te d

b y

In -g

ro u p

M e m

b e r)

In -g

ro u p

M e m

b e r

In -g

ro u p M

e m

b e r

Id e n tif

ie s

w ith

O rg

a n iz

a tio

n a n d /o

r In

d iv

id u a l

In -g

ro u p M

e m

b e r

Id e n tif

ie s

w ith

O rg

a n iz

a tio

In -g

ro u p M

e m

b e r

Id e n tif

ie s

w ith

In d iv

id u a l

O rg

a n iz

a tio

n a l

S o ci

a liz

a tio

n P

ro ce

N e g a tiv

e R

e sp

o n se

(I n te

rp re

te d

b y

In -g

ro u p

M e m

b e r)

In -g

ro u p

M e m

b e r

In -g

ro u p M

e m

b e r’ s

P e rs

o n a l C

h a ra

ct e ri st

ic s

O rg

a n iz

a tio

n a l

S o ci

a liz

a tio

n P

ro ce

In -g

ro u p M

e m

b e r’ s

P sy

ch o lo

g ic

a l

C lim

a te

= O

rg a n iz

a tio

n a l

C lim

a te

In -g

ro u p M

e m

b e r’ s

P sy

ch o lo

g ic

a l

C lim

a te

= O

rg a n iz

a tio

n a l

C lim

a te

In -g

ro u p M

e m

b e r’ s

P sy

ch o lo

g ic

a l

C lim

a te

= O

rg a n iz

a tio

n a l

C lim

a te

In -g

ro u p M

e m

b e r

E xp

e ri e n ce

s C

lim a te

D is

cr e p a n cy

N o S

ig n ifi

ca n t C

h a n g e

in I n -g

ro u p M

e m

b e r’ s

P e rc

e p tio

n o

f P

e rs

o n -

O rg

a n iz

a tio

n F

Figure 1. Structural model of the effects of an influential career plateaued worker’s response on the perception of person-organization fit of in-group members

206

ER 36,2

or workers relate to and are influenced by. As indicated by the model and reinforced by the literature, an ineffectively plateaued individual’s response may be categorized as negative while an effectively plateaued individual’s response may be categorized as passive. A negative response is manifested in the form of negative behavior or attitudes (i.e. absenteeism, unproductive, quit the job, poor organizational commitment). A passive response would be representative of an effectively plateaued worker (i.e. still productive). An in-group member’s interpretation of the career plateaued worker’s response is moderated by both the organizational socialization process as well as the in- group member’s personal characteristics. If the in-group member identifies with the organization, there will not be a significant change between the in-group member’s perception of psychological climate and the organizational climate. Hence, the in-group member’s perception of person-organization fit will not change. If the in-group member identifies with the influential career plateaued worker, the in-group member’s perceptions of psychological and organizational climate will differ. Hence, the in-group member will experience climate discrepancy. As illustrated by the model, if an influential career plateaued worker’s response is not interpreted as negative by the in-group member, then there will be little or no significant effect upon the in-group member. Thus, the final proposition:

P10. If the career plateaued worker’s response is passive, it will not cause in-group members to experience significant climate discrepancy.

Discussion This paper has shown that a career plateaued worker who is influential, through either a leadership role (formal or informal), affiliation, or some element of associated similarity can affect the in-group he or she is associated with. While not all workers plateau ineffectively, there are those who do. By definition, an ineffectively plateaued worker is not only low in productivity, but may also resort to such negative behavior as absenteeism, withdrawal, and frequent job changes. These negative behaviors, when noticed by other in-group members, can affect the attitudes and behaviors of other workers.

Consequently, issues stemming from the career plateaued worker’s attitude and behaviors might make not only the career plateaued worker, but the associated in-group members question their perceived or actual appropriateness of fit with the organization. As outlined, the organization’s ongoing process of organizational socialization/resocialization can counter the effects of the influential career plateaued person’s response. However, this countering of negative effects will occur only if the organizational socialization process is strong enough to overcome (or complement) certain personal characteristics of the in-group members and their association with the career plateaued person. But, the socialization process can be used to create an environment where career progress, performance expectations, and role expectations are clear. It can also help in creating organization identification and ultimately lead to the perception of-and maintenance of person-organization fit.

Ever present are the in-group member’s personal characteristics. These personal characteristics can affect the way an in-group member interprets an influential career plateaued worker’s response. These personal characteristics can also affect whether the in-group member identifies with the career plateaued worker or the organization. As long as the in-group member identifies with the organization, his psychological climate will remain consistent with the organizational climate. If however, the in-group

207

Perceptions of P-O fit

member identifies more with the influential career plateaued worker, then climate discrepancy will result. Once an in-group member perceives climate discrepancy, negative behavior similar to that of an ineffectively plateaued worker may follow. Since the process and effect is like a progressive disease, it must be detected early and stopped decisively. Organizations should strive to create an environment in which career plateaus become career pinnacles or the highest point an employee strives for (Chao, 1990). Keeping in mind an argument made by McCue (2008), that is to say that too often workers tend to be promoted to the limit and level of their competence and because they are performing well, some get promoted again to their level of incompetence. Therefore, in conjunction with creating the right environment for workers who are necessarily hierarchically structurally plateaued, organizations should consider changing the characteristics of the job such as job scope to counter the content perspective of workers plateaued from a context perspective (Tremblay and Roger, 2004). But as Smith- Ruig (2009) explains, the career plateau is a multi-faceted phenomenon that is strongly influenced by how an individual defines career and success. Therefore, it is important that the organization take the lead in helping the employee shape that definition.

A number of strategies are available to organizations for effectively managing career plateaued workers. For example, use of job rotation and skills cross-training to reduce boredom and make workers feel useful and needed. Education programs, training, mentoring, and career counseling for management and employees can be used to realistically manage career expectations and to maximize the potential for promotion opportunities. Organizations can also utilize alternative reward programs in lieu of promotions to keep workers motivated. And finally, outplacement services and incentives for early retirement can be used to assist workers who might otherwise be ineffectively plateaued with the current organization.

Implications for future research Future research should consider the propositions raised here. Perhaps a longitudinal study following individuals entering occupations in which the availability of senior positions dramatically narrows as one progresses upwards is warranted. Likewise, a qualitative study of work environments in which a number of career plateaued individuals or positions have been identified could prove equally valuable. Nevertheless, the literature on career plateauing should take the additional consequences this paper has shown into consideration. The influences on the rest of the in-group members exposed to a negative effect must be considered and explored. The stability of organizations, the effectiveness of human resource programs, and the firms’ competitive edge are all at stake.

Future research should also consider the influential career plateaued person’s response from the standpoint of cultural implications. How does a collective culture change the equation? Also, future research might consider the influential plateaued response from a gender and race or ethnic standpoint.

References

Adams, S. (2012), “Why most employees wish they had a different job”, available at: Forbes.Com (accessed November 6, 2012).

Adams, S.L. and Anantatmula, V. (2010), “Social and behavioral influences on team process”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 89-98.

Altman, R. (2000), “Forecasting your organizational climate”, Journal of Property Management, Vol. 65 No. 1, pp. 62-65.

208

ER 36,2

Amos, E. and Weathington, B. (2008), “An analysis of the relation between employee- organization value congruence and employee attitudes”, Journal of Psychology, Vol. 142 No. 6, pp. 615-632.

Ashforth, B.E. and Mael, F. (1989), “Social identity theory and the organization”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 20-39.

Ashkanasy, N.M. and O’Connor, C. (1997), “Value congruence in leader-member exchange”, Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 137 No. 5, pp. 647-662.

Bangcheng, L., Jianxin, L. and Jin, H. (2010), “Person-organization fit, job satisfaction, and turnover intention: an empirical study in the Chinese public sector”, Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 615-625.

Bardwick, J.M. (1986), The Plateauing Trap: How to Avoid it in Your Career and in Your life, American Management Association, New York, NY.

Barsky, A., Thoresen, C.J., Warren, C.R. and Kaplan, S.A. (2004), “Modeling negative affectivity and job stress: a contingency-based approach”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 915-936.

Becker, T.E. and Billings, R.S. (1993), “Profiles of commitment: an empirical test”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 177-190.

Bulus, M. (2011), “Goal orientations, locus of control and academic achievement in prospective teachers: an individual differences perspective”, Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 540-546.

Cable, D.M. and Parsons, C.K. (2001), “Socialization tactics and person-organization fit”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 1-23.

Carnazza, J.P., Korman, A.K., Ference, T.P. and Stoner, J.A. (1981), “Plateaued and nonplateaued managers: factors in job performance”, Journal of Management, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 7-25.

Chao, G.T. (1990), “Exploration of the conceptualization and measurement of career plateau: a comparative analysis”, Journal of Management, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 181-193.

Chao, G.T., O’Leary-Kelley, A.M., Wolf, S., Klein, H.J. and Gardner, P.D. (1994), “Organizational socialization: its contents and consequences”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79 No. 5, pp. 730-743.

Chatman, J.A. (1989), “Improving interactional organizational research: a model of person- organization fit”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 333-349.

Chay, Y.W., Aryee, S. and Chew, I. (1995), “Career plateauing: reactions and moderators among managerial and professional employees”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 61-78.

Conner, D. (2003), “Social comparison in virtual work environments: an examination of contemporary referent selection”, Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, Vol. 76 No. 1, pp. 133-147.

Cooper-Thomas, H.D. and Anderson, N. (2005), “Organizational socialization: a field study into socialization success and rate”, International Journal of Selection & Assessment, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 116-128.

Duffy, J. (2000), “The application of Chaos theory to the career-plateaued worker”, Journal of Employment Counseling, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 229-236.

Edwards, J.A. and Billsberry, J. (2010), “Testing a multidimensional theory of person- environment fit”, Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 476-493.

Ekvall, G. (1996), “Organizational climate for creativity and innovation”, European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 105-123.

Elsass, P.M. and Ralston, D.A. (1989), “Individual responses to the stress of career plateauing”, Journal of Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 35-47.

209

Perceptions of P-O fit

Feldman, D.C. and Weitz, B.A. (1988), “Career plateaus reconsidered”, Journal of Management, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 69-80.

Ference, T.P., Stoner, J.A.F. and Warren, E.K. (1977), “Managing the career plateau”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 602-612.

Fernandez, D.R. (1995), Career Plateau Response as a Function of Person Coping Strategies, doctoral dissertation, The Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.

George, J. (1992), “The role of personality in organizational life: issues and evidence”, Journal of Management, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 185-213.

Goldberg, C.B., Clark, M.A. and Henley, A.B. (2011), “Speaking up: a conceptual model of voice responses following the unfair treatment of others in non-union settings”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 75-94.

Goldman, P. (1987), “Occupational versus organizational socialization of high school teachers”, Theoretical & Policy Issues American Sociological Association, Chicago, p. 21 ERIC, EBSCO host (accessed March 24, 2012).

Goodman, P.S. (1977), “Social comparison process in organizations”, in Staw, B.M. and Salancik, C.R. (Eds), New Directions in Organizational Behavior, St. Clair Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 97-132.

Gould-Williams, J. (2007), “HR practices, organizational climate and employee outcomes: evaluating social exchange relationships in local government”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 18 No. 9, pp. 1627-1647.

Hall, D.T. (1987), “Careers and socialization”, Journal of Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 301-321.

Hart, Z.P., Miller, V.D. and Johnson, J.R. (2003), “Socialization, resocialization, and communication relationships in the context of an organizational change”, Communication Studies, Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 483-495.

Heilmann, S.G., Holt, D.T. and Rilovick, C.Y. (2008), “Effects of career plateauing on turnover”, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 59-68.

James, L.R., Choi, C.C., Ko, C., McNeil, P.K., Minton, M.K., Wright, M. and Kwang-il, K. (2008), “Organizational and psychological climate: a review of theory and research”, European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 5-32.

Jehn, K.A. and Shah, P.P. (1997), “Interpersonal relationships and task performance: an examination of mediating processes in friendship and acquaintance groups”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 72 No. 4, pp. 775-790.

Jones, G.R. (1986), “Socialization tactics, self-efficacy, and newcomers’ adjustments to organization”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 262-279.

Joyce, W.F. and Slocum, J. (1982), “Climate discrepancy: refining the concepts of psychological and organizational climate”, Human Relations, Vol. 35 No. 11, pp. 951-972.

Joyce, W.F. and Slocum, J. (1984), “Collective climate: agreement as a basis for defining aggregate climates in organizations”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 721-742.

Korte, R. (2010), “First, get to know them: a relational view of organizational socialization”, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 27-43.

Kristof, A. (1996), “Person-organization fit: an integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 1-49.

Kristof-Brown, A.L., Zimmerman, R.D. and Johnson, E.C. (2005), “Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: a meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person- supervisor fit”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 58 No. 2, pp. 281-342.

Lapalme, M., Tremblay, M. and Simard, G. (2009), “The relationship between career plateauing, employee commitment and psychological distress: the role of organizational and supervisor support”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 1132-1145.

210

ER 36,2

Lewin, K. (1951), Field Theory in Social Science, Harper & Row, New York, NY.

McCleese, C.S. and Eby, L.T. (2006), “Reactions to job content plateaus: examining role ambiguity and hierarchical plateaus as moderators”, Career Development Quarterly, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 64-76.

McCue, M. (2008), “Let workers decide what’s best for them”, Sales & Marketing Management, Vol. 160 No. 5, p. 6.

Mahal, P. (2009), “Organizational culture and organizational climate as a determinant of motivation”, IUP Journal of Management Research, Vol. 8 No. 10, pp. 38-51.

Meglino, B.M., Ravlin, E.C. and Adkins, C.L. (1989), “A work values approach to corporate culture: a field test of the value congruence process and its relationship to individual outcomes”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 74 No. 3, pp. 424-432.

Near, J.P. (1980), “The career plateau: causes and effects”, Business Horizons, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 53-57.

O’Brien, F.P. and Drost, D.A. (1985), “The lead man concept: a comprehensive program for effective employee socialization”, Journal of Applied Business Research, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 57-63.

Posner, B. (2010), “Another look at the impact of personal and organizational values congruency”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 97 No. 4, pp. 535-541.

Prottas, D. (2011), “Person-environment fit and self-employment: opportunities and needs for achievement, affiliation, autonomy, and dominance”, North American Journal of Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 403-426.

Rantze, K.R. and Feller, R.W. (1985), “Counseling career-plateaued workers during times of social change”, Journal of Employment Counseling, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 23-28.

Rentsch, J.R. (1990), “Climate and culture: interaction and qualitative differences in organizational meanings”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 75 No. 6, pp. 668-681.

Resick, C.J., Baltes, B.B. and Shantz, C.W. (2007), “Person-organization fit and work-related attitudes and decisions: examining interactive effects with job fit and conscientiousness”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92 No. 5, pp. 1446-1455.

Salami, S.O. (2010), “Career plateauing and work attitudes: moderating effects of mentoring others with Nigerian employees”, Europe’s Journal of Psychology, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 71-92.

Schneider, B. (1987), “The people make the place”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 437-453.

Schulte, M., Ostroff, C. and Kinicki, A. (2006), “Organizational climate systems and psychological climate perceptions: a cross-level study of climate-satisfaction relationships”, Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, Vol. 79 No. 4, pp. 645-671.

Şenyuva, Z. and Gönül, Ö. (2011), “The impact of social learning on constructing person- organization fit”, International Journal of Business & Social Science, Vol. 2 No. 11, pp. 154-158.

Singer, J.B. (2004), “More than ink-stained wretches: the resocialization of print journalists in converged newsrooms”, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, Vol. 81 No. 4, pp. 838-856.

Slocum, J.W., Cron, W.L., Hansen, R.W. and Rawlings, S. (1985), “Business strategy and the management of plateaued employees”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 133-154.

Smith-Ruig, T. (2009), “Exploring career plateau as a multi-faceted phenomenon: understanding the types of career plateaux experienced by accounting professionals”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 610-622.

Stumpf, S.A. and Hartman, K. (1984), “Individual exploration to organizational commitment or withdrawal”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 308-329.

Tremblay, M. and Roger, A. (2004), “Career plateauing reactions: the moderating role of job scope, role ambiguity and participation among Canadian managers”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 996-1017.

Turban, D.B. and Dougherty, T.W. (1994), “Role of protégé personality in receipt of mentoring and career success”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 688-702.

211

Perceptions of P-O fit

van Knippenberg, D. and van Schie, E (2000), “Foci and correlates of organizational identification”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 73 No. 2, pp. 137-147.

Vancouver, J.B. and Schmitt, N.W. (1991), “An exploratory examination of person-organization fit: organizational goal congruence”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 333-352.

Veiga, J.F. (1981), “Plateaued versus nonplateaued managers: career patterns, attitudes, and path potential”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 566-578.

Wanous, J.P., Reichers, A.E. and Malik, S.D. (1984), “Organizational socialization and group development: toward an integrative perspective”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 670-683.

Weiss, H. (1978), “Social learning of work values in organizations”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 63 No. 6, pp. 711-718.

Westerman, J.W. and Cyr, L.A. (2004), “An integrative analysis of person-organization fit theories”, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 252-261.

Žitný, P. and Halama, P. (2011), “Self-esteem, locus of control and personality traits as predictors of sensitivity to injustice”, Studia Psychologica, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 27-40.