Zonas verdes identificadas

One of the most widely used approaches to understanding OS is Van Maanen and Schein’s (1979)

theoretical model of organisational factors that influence newcomer socialisation. Van Maanen and

Schein’s model provides a typology of socialisation tactics that organisations use to structure the early work experiences of newcomers (Ashforth & Saks, 1996). These socialisation tactics are defined by Van Maanen and Schein (1979) as “ways in which the experiences of individuals in transition from one role to another are structured for them by others in the organisation” (p. 230). Since Van Maanen and Schein’s ground-breaking theory was developed over 30 studies on socialisation tactics have been conducted. This research suggests that the use of socialisation tactics by organisations is a key socialisation factor influencing newcomer learning and adjustment (Kim et al., 2005; Saks et al., 2007).

According to Van Maanen and Schein’s (1979) model, organisations use a variety of tactics to

socialise newcomers that are classified into six dimensions that exist on a bipolar continuum. These tactics are: (1) Formal versus Informal tactics that refer to newcomers going through a structured process of socialisation activities with the express purpose of being exposed to socialisation experiences, as opposed to a more unstructured, flexible approach to socialisation; (2) Collective

versus Individual tactics where approaches to newcomers being socialised are as part of a group

who are exposed to and share common learning experiences or being individually exposed to unique experiences separate from other newcomers; (3) Fixed versus Variable practices referring to newcomers proceeding through the socialisation process according to a fixed schedule or plan, which is clearly communicated, as opposed to having no specific schedule or plan; (4) Sequential

versus Random approaches that entails newcomers being aware of a systematic process or being

uncertain as to how the process will progress or unfold; (5) Investiture versus Divestiture, which

affirms a newcomer’s identity and individual attributes, as opposed to attempting to nullify or change a newcomer’s identity and personal characteristics; and (6) a Serial versus Disjunctive

process that refers to newcomers being socialised with the assistance of experienced organisational

members who serve as role models or being left to largely experience ‘learning the ropes’ on their

own, with the lack of/absence of role models. These socialisation tactics are viewed as general characteristics of actual actions or approaches taken by organisations to facilitate newcomer adjustment (Ardts et al., 2001; Barge & Schlueter, 2004; Bauer et al., 2007).

Building on Van Maanen and Schein’s (1979) conceptual model of OS, Jones (1986) designed scales for each of the six tactics and then conducted the first empirical study on the relationship between socialisation tactics and newcomer adjustment. Based on the results the six socialisation tactics can be classified into two main categories, namely institutionalised (formal, collective, fixed, sequential, investiture and serial) or individualised (informal, individual, variable, random, divestiture and disjunctive). The socialisation tactics are categorised into an additional three factor framework, namely context (collective-individual and formal-informal), content (sequential-random and fixed-variable) and social aspects (serial-disjunctive and investiture-divestiture) that affect newcomer adjustment in different ways (Jones, 1986). According to Jones, institutionalised tactics reduce uncertainty experienced during early entry into the organisation and through this approach the organisation attempts to reinforce the organisational status quo. This approach regards

newcomers’ primarily as passive participants in the OS process. On the other hand, an

individualised approach represents reduced organisational involvement and as providing less

structure during socialisation. This requires newcomers to become more active participants in their own socialisation. It is expected that institutionalised socialisation are likely to be found in larger bureaucratic organisations, while individualised socialisation will occur in smaller, more organic organisations (Ashforth & Saks, 1996).

Empirical studies (e.g. Allen & Meyer, 1990; Ashforth & Saks, 1996; Saks & Ashforth, 1997) support the basic propositions and the classification of the socialisation tactics into the categories

proposed by Jones (1986). However, research examining the relationship between Jones’

classification of tactics and resultant outcomes found that different approaches to using socialisation tactics affect newcomer learning and adjustment in different ways (Bauer et al., 2007; Saks et al.,

2007). For example, Saks et al.’s (2007) meta-analysis of socialisation tactics and newcomer adjustment found that the social tactics of serial and investiture were the most strongly related to adjustment outcomes. These findings are consistent with the importance attached to social tactics in the first empirical study on socialisation tactics conducted by Jones (1986).

The majority of OS research continues to focus on socialisation tactics, with more than 30 studies on the role of socialisation tactics in newcomer adjustment being undertaken up to the mid-2000s (Saks et al., 2007). Research findings tend to provide support for the relationship that exists between socialisation tactics and newcomer learning and adjustment outcomes (e.g. role clarity, task mastery, social integration and organisational knowledge) (e.g. Bauer et al., 1998; Bauer et al., 2007; Kim et al., 2005; Saks & Ashforth, 1997; Saks et al., 2007). It would appear that a point has been reached in the socialisation tactics literature where it is possible to identify the effects of

certain tactics on newcomer adjustment (Saks et al., 2007). Institutionalised tactics are probably better suited to large organisations that reflect a more formal, structured approach towards socialisation, where newcomers are likely to be formally allocated a more experienced colleague who serves as a mentor or role model and follows a specific plan (Ashforth et al., 2007). On the other hand, small firms represent an environment characterised by a more individualised, informal approach to socialisation (i.e. disjunctive tactics) (Cardon & Stevens, 2004) that is likely to require newcomers to show a bit more initiative in interacting and forming relationships with fellow workers.

Notwithstanding the fairly extensive research covering socialisation tactics (Bauer & Erdogan, 2012; Saks & Gruman, 2012), the different tactics used by organisations remain to a certain extent a

“black box”, insofar as determining the actual activities associated with specific tactics (Ashforth et

al., 2007). This is mainly because socialisation tactics research focusses on examining the effects of

the “structural side” of socialisation tactics (Van Maanen & Schein, 1979) and not the specific

activities or how the actual content of organisational approaches used to socialise newcomers is being implemented (Ashforth et al., 2007; Saks & Gruman, 2012). For example, with the

socialisation tactic of ‘collective’ it is not known whatnewcomers are actually ‘doing’ and how it is being ‘done’ together; it is only known that what they are ‘doing’, is being done together. According to Klein and Polin (2012) and Saks and Gruman (2012) this is the most problematic aspect of research on socialisation tactics and further research on organisational approaches to socialisation is required to provide a detailed understanding of what organisations actually do, as well as the specific activities or events that occur within each particular tactic. In addition, Saks et

al.’s (2007) meta analytic review of the relationship between socialisation tactics and newcomer

adjustment found that it remains unclear as to the relative importance and strength of different socialisation tactics and the effects on outcomes. Future research on the influence of socialisation tactics during the socialisation process should benefit by focusing more on examining the specific activities related to the different socialisation tactics, as well as the relative significance of different socialisation tactics.