Applicant attraction outcomes

8/13/2019 Applicant attraction outcomes

1/17

Signaling theory and applicantattraction outcomes

Anthony CelaniDeGroote School of Business, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada, and

Parbudyal SinghSchool of Human Resource Management, York University, Toronto, Canada

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, to discuss the application of a multi-levelperspective to signaling theory in a recruitment context. Then to discuss how the integration ofsignaling theory and the social identity approach may provide an improved understanding of the

associations between an organizations recruitment activities and applicant attraction outcomes. Thepaper, first, summarizes the existing research and theoretical developments pertaining to signalingtheory, multi-level theory, and the social identity approach. From this literature a theoretical modelfrom which research propositions are developed is suggested.

Design/methodology/approach This is a literature review, within recruitment contexts, onsignaling theory, the association between market signals and applicant attraction outcomes, and theintegration of signaling, social identity, and self-categorization theories as a theoretical foundation forresearch propositions.

Findings Despite widespread acceptance of signaling theory in recruitment research, surprisinglylittle is known about the boundary conditions in the association between an organizations recruitmentactivities and applicant attraction outcomes.

Practical implications A greater understanding of the application of signaling theory will enablemanagers to design and administer recruitment activities and processes in order to improve applicant

attraction to recruiting organizations.Originality/value This paper fills a void in the recruitment literature by integrating signalingtheory, social identity theory, and self-categorization theory and providing avenues for future work.

KeywordsRecruitment, Social theories, Employee turnover, Product endorsement, Job applications

Paper type Conceptual paper

1. IntroductionThe world of work is undergoing dramatic change due to factors such as globalization,technological innovation, and increasing demographic and cultural diversity in theworkplace (Cascio, 2003). As a result, there are greater demands on the knowledge,skills, abilities, and other personal attributes that organizations require of current andfuture employees. These changes also underscore the importance of an organizationsability to attract and retain the most qualified applicants in order to remain viable inthe current business environment. Given the competitive nature of this environment,organizations would undoubtedly benefit from a greater understanding of howapplicants react to the use and administration of their recruitment activities.

Over the last two decades, theorists have commented on the hierarchical, multi-levelnature of organizational activities (Kozlowski and Klein, 2000), with an increase in theapplication of multi-level theory to recruitment and selection phenomena (e.g. Ployhart,2004; Ployhart and Schneider, 2002, 2005). While progress has been made toward

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm

PR40,2

222

Received 1 February 2009Revised February 2009Accepted 4 January 2010

Personnel Review

Vol. 40 No. 2, 2011

pp. 222-238

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0048-3486

DOI 10.1108/00483481111106093


2/17

understanding multi-level issues in recruitment and selection research, manyunanswered questions remain. Signaling theory offers considerable promise in thisregard.

Signaling theory (Rynes, 1991; Spence, 1973) is commonly used to explain how

applicant attraction to a recruiting organization may, in part, can be influenced byinformation, or signals, about an organizations characteristics revealed duringrecruitment activities. It is recognized that applicants construe manyrecruitment-related activities and information as signals of unknown organizationalcharacteristics (Collins and Stevens, 2002; Turban and Cable, 2003), and recruitercharacteristics and/or behavior (Rynes, 1991; Turban et al., 1998). In this paper, wesuggest that signals from recruiting organizations may be conceptualized fromindividual-level and organizational-level perspectives.

While signaling theory demonstrates the potential to explain the influence of manypredictors on applicant attraction outcomes (Ehrhart and Ziegert, 2005), social identitytheory (Tajfel and Turner, 1979) and self-categorization theory (Turner et al., 1987)have the potential to help researchers understand the conditions under whichapplicants look upon certain signals more favorably than others.

The purpose of this paper is two-fold. First, we discuss the application of amulti-level perspective to signaling theory in a recruitment context. Second, we discusshow the integration of signaling theory and the social identity approach may providean improved understanding of the associations between an organizations recruitmentactivities and applicant attraction outcomes. In addition to this theoreticalcontribution, the investigation of these research issues is of practical importance toorganizational recruiting activities. Providing organizations with a greaterunderstanding of the psychological processes that applicants engage in whenassessing the attractiveness of a recruiting organization will enable them to improveapplicant attraction to their respective organizations. In the following sections, we also

present a theoretical model of applicant attraction outcomes and develop propositionsdrawn from signaling theory, multi-level theory, and the social identity approach.

2. Multi-level theoryMulti-level theory argues that organizational phenomena are structured as nestedhierarchical units. Failure to acknowledge this hierarchical structure can lead toinaccurate research findings (Kozlowski and Klein, 2000). Accordingly, multi-leveltheory suggests theoretical processes connecting organizational levels, known astop-down processes, or contextual effects, and bottom-up processes, or emergenteffects. Contextual effects occur when higher-level variables either directly affectlower-level variables, or moderate lower-level relationships, while emergent effectsinvolve the transformation of individual-level characteristics into higher-level

collective phenomena (Kozlowski and Klein, 2000).Composition and compilation models capture two types of bottom-up processes.

Compilation models describe the transformation of related, yet distinct,individual-level constructs into group-level constructs while composition modelsdescribe the amalgamation of lower-level characteristics to form higher-levelproperties that are conceptually similar (Kozlowski and Klein, 2000; Rousseau,1985). Examples include additive, dispersion, and direct consensus composition modelsthat relate individual and group-level constructs using summation or averaging

Signaling theory

223


3/17

techniques, within group variance, and within group agreement indices respectively(Chan, 1998).

Consistent with multi-level theory, we suggest that during initial recruitmentepisodes, applicants are likely to receive signals from recruitment sources from at least

two levels of activity, the individual-level and the organizational-level. Examples ofindividual-level recruitment sources from which applicants likely receive signalsinclude recruitment interviews and word-of-mouth endorsements while examples oforganizational-level recruitment sources are corporate advertising and recruitmentadvertising.

We contend that both individual and organizational-level signals influenceindividual-level outcomes, such as applicant job pursuit intentions, applicant attractionto the organization, and applicant acceptance intentions. Additionally, these signalswill influence organizational-level outcomes such as applicant pool quantity andquality that can be operationalized as an aggregation of the aforementionedindividual-level recruitment outcomes through the use of composition methods. In thenext section, we further discuss multi-level theory in the context of the model outlinedin Figure 1. We will also discuss the proposed role of organizational identification andorganizational identity salience in the associations between recruitment signals andapplicant attraction outcomes.

3. The modelThe theoretical model shown in Figure 1 posits associations between individual-leveland organizational-level market signals from recruitment activities, applicantsorganizational identity salience, applicant inferences, applicants organizationalidentification, and applicant attraction outcomes. The extent to which applicantsbelieve that membership in the organization is relevant to their social identity (i.e.organizational identity salience) will moderate the extent to which they infer positive

Figure 1.A multi-level model of the

association betweenmarket signals,instrumental and symbolicinferences, applicantorganizationalidentification, andapplicant attractionoutcomes in a recruitmentcontext

PR40,2

224


4/17

information from the organizations instrumental and symbolic attributescommunicated through its recruiting activities. Specifically, the greater the extent towhich applicants believe that being a member of the recruiting organization is relevantto their social identity, the more likely they are to infer a greater number of positive

inferences about the organization from its recruiting activities and thus have a morepositive view of that organization.

It is also expected that applicants with a greater number of positive inferences aboutthe recruiting organization will more likely identify with the recruiting organization. Inturn, stronger organizational identification by applicants will provide more of apositive impact on applicant attraction to the recruiting organization via outcomessuch as job pursuit intentions, job-organization attraction, and job acceptanceintentions. Increased applicant attraction to the recruiting organization will alsopositively impact the quantity and quality of the organizations applicant pool.

Although much recruitment research has examined associations at the individualand organizational levels of analysis, relatively little empirical or theoretical researchhas examined constructs, processes, and associations across levels of analysis(Ployhart, 2004). For example, Ployhart (Ployhart, 2004) and Ployhart and Schneider(2002, 2005) use multi-level theory to examine the contextual, or top-down, influence ofstaffing practices on the selection of individuals. Specifically, they argue thatappropriate knowledge, skills, abilities, and other attributes contribute to theemergence of human capital, which creates a human capital advantage that is believedto positively influence organizational performance.

The proposed model goes beyond existing multi-level models in the following ways.First, our model focuses on the influence of specific recruitment practices, such asrecruiting interviews, word-of-mouth endorsements, recruitment advertising, andrecruitment outcomes that include applicant pool quantity and quality. Second, inaddition to discussing the contextual, or top-down, influence of recruitment practices at

the organizational-level of analysis, we discuss the influence of recruitment practices atthe individual-level of analysis. Third, our model incorporates an applicantsperspective by discussing how applicants become attracted to an organization throughits organizational-level and individual-level recruitment practices. Finally, we alsodiscuss how our theoretical framework may be applied to develop existing recruitmenttheory, such as signaling theory, and provide specific recommendations to furtherinform recruitment practice. In the following sections, we further discuss the proposedtheoretical linkages of our model.

4. Organizational-level and individual-level market signals, and applicantinferencesRecruitment refers to the activities undertaken by organizations in an effort to identify

and attract potential applicants (Ployhart, 2006). Many reviews of the recruitmentliterature have advanced our understanding of the influence of recruitment activitieson applicant attraction outcomes (e.g. Barber, 1998; Breaugh, 1992; Breaugh andStarke, 2000; Highhouse and Hoffman, 2001; Ployhart, 2006; Rynes, 1991; Rynes andCable, 2003; Saks, 2005; Taylor and Collins, 2000). Signaling theory has been used inthe recruitment literature to explain how applicant attraction occurs; however, as somescholars comment, this theory has neither been fully developed nor sufficiently testedin the field (Breaugh, 2008; Hausknecht et al., 2004).

Signaling theory

225


5/17

Spences (1973, 1974) work on signaling in the economics literature dealt extensivelywith the employers perspective. As he contended, in most job markets, employers arenot sure about the productive capabilities of an individual when he/she is hired. Therecruitment literature discusses signaling theory from an applicants perspective. This

body of literature suggests that, in the absence of information about the characteristicsof an organization, applicants form impressions of an organization based oninformation, or signals, conveyed to them through recruitment activities or episodes(Rynes, 1991; Ryneset al., 1991). Research has demonstrated that applicants interpretmany recruitment-related activities and information (Collins and Stevens, 2002;Turban and Cable, 2003) and recruiter characteristics and/or behavior (Rynes, 1991;Turban et al., 1998), as signals of organizational characteristics.

Employer or workplace branding is a related concept that is beginning to attractsome attention. The approach is similar to that used in the marketing of anorganizations products and services. In marketing terms, the word brand is, like anyreputation, linked to what customers believe about a specific product or service of acompany (Keller, 2003; Hoeffler and Keller, 2003). Workplace branding has beendefined as a targeted, long-term strategy to manage awareness and perceptions ofemployees, potential employees and related stakeholders with regards to a particularorganization (Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004, p. 2). Essentially, workplace brandingallows the organization an opportunity to distinguish itself from the competition anddevelop a recognizable identity, through practices that are perceived as desirable toemployees and the public. Effective employer branding generates images of theorganization as a distinct and desirable employer (Lievens et al., 2007, p. 48).

Empirical evidence suggests that a good image or brand has several advantages inrecruitment. A meta-analysis conducted by Chapman et al. (2005) found that anorganizations image is a strong predictor of the applicant attraction outcomes of jobpursuit intentions (r 0:51; job-organization attraction (r 0:48; and acceptance

intentions (r 0:

41:

Furthermore, recruiter behaviors (i.e. personableness,competence, informativeness, and trustworthiness) moderately correlated with jobpursuit intentions (r 0:37; job-organization attraction (r 0:29; and acceptanceintentions (r 0:29: Consistent with signaling theory, the authors suggest thatapplicants may perceive recruiter behavior as signals of organizational characteristics.

Other research suggests that applicants also make use of organizationalreputations, operationalized as a ranking in a business publication, as signalsduring the recruitment process (Turban and Cable, 2003). Specifically, the authorsfound that organizations with more positive reputations had a greater number ofapplicants in comparison to organizations with less positive reputations. Research alsodemonstrates that organizational reputation and the conceptually similar construct oforganizational image positively influence the size and quality of an organizations

applicant pool (Belt and Paolillo, 1982; Saks, 2005), and applicant job pursuit intentions(Collins and Stevens, 2002; Gatewood et al., 1993).

Collins and Stevens (2002) suggest that organizations can employ the marketingconcept of brand equity (i.e. consumer beliefs held about a product name and/or logothat influence the decision to purchase that product) in their recruiting activities.Specifically, the authors argue that the creation of a positive brand image can influencepositive reactions from applicants, thus creating a competitive advantage fororganizations that enables them to attract a larger and more qualified applicant pool.

PR40,2

226


6/17

Lievens and Highhouse (2003) have also drawn upon the marketing literature byapplying the instrumental-symbolic framework to argue that initial applicantattraction to an organization is, in part, a function of two types of information that isderived from an organizational brand. This information includes instrumental

attributes and symbolic meanings.Instrumental attributes refer to factual information about the job or organization

such as pay, benefits, working hours, advancement opportunities, and trainingprograms (Cable and Graham, 2000; Highhouseet al., 1999; Honeycutt and Rosen, 1997;Lievens et al ., 2001; Turban and Keon, 1993). Symbolic meanings refer toorganizational attributes, such as personality traits, that applicants inferfrom organizational information. Examples of other traits that applicants mayattribute to organizations include trendy, prestigious, and innovative. In support oftheir argument, Lievens and Highhouse (2003) found that instrumental attributessignificantly predicted organizational attractiveness and that symbolic meaningsincrementally predicted organizational attractiveness.

While research has established that organizational brands influence applicantattraction outcomes, it is also important to note the factors influencing organizationalbrand development. Collins and Stevens (2002) found that activities such as publicity,word-of-mouth, and recruitment advertising influenced applicant decisions byinfluencing an organizations brand image. Furthermore, the authors found that theuse of these activities in combination had a stronger influence on an organizationsbrand image. Related research by Collins and Han (2004) also found that lowinvolvement recruitment practices, such as the use of general recruitment ads,increased applicant pool quantity and quality for organizations that engage in lesscorporate advertising or have lesser known reputations. Alternatively, fororganizations that engage in more corporate advertising or have better knownreputations, the use of high involvement recruitment practices, such as detailed

recruitment ads and employee endorsements, increased applicant pool quantity andquality. According to Cable and Turban (2001), applicants will likely have lessmotivation to process information provided through high-involvement recruitmentpractices without prior brand awareness of the organization. Thus, high-involvementrecruitment practices will likely have less impact on applicant attraction outcomes fororganizations that have not created brand awareness amongst applicants than fororganizations that have created brand awareness amongst applicants.

The above research by Collins and Han (2004) and Collins and Stevens (2002)suggests a distinction between individual-level recruitment activities, such asword-of-mouth endorsements, and organizational-level activities such as corporate andrecruitment advertising. In an extension of signaling theory we contend that, duringthe initial stages of the recruiting process, applicants form impressions of

organizations based on signals transmitted to them from multiple levels ofrecruitment activities, as demonstrated in Figure 1. We will now discuss howorganizational identity salience influences what applicants infer from an organizationsrecruitment activities.

5. Organizational identity salience and applicant inferencesTajfel and Turner (1979) developed Social Identity Theory (SIT) to explain intergroupconflict and discrimination. SIT suggests that behavior within groups is, in part, a

Signaling theory

227


7/17

function of the extent to which group membership becomes part of an individualsmembers self concept (Tajfel and Turner, 1979). Self-Categorization Theory (SCT)(Turner et al., 1987) expanded upon SIT by proposing that social identity can beactivated through depersonalization, a psychological process that enables an

individual to stereotype themselves into certain groups, or categories.SCT and SIT, also known as the social identity approach, suggest that behavior

within groups is not only a function of the extent to which individuals see themselvesbelonging to a group (i.e. identification) but is also a function of the extent to whichindividuals believe that group membership to be relevant to their social identity (i.e.identity salience). The application of SCT and SIT in organizational settings predictsthat organizations with highly identified employees are expected to benefit from betterperformance, lower absenteeism, less turnover, and the performance of more extra-rolebehavior. Highly identified employees are also expected to benefit from higher jobsatisfaction.

Research has demonstrated associations between organizational identification andoutcome variables such as positive organizational evaluations (Cheney, 1983a, b),defense of the organization (Edwards, 2005; Tyler, 1999), organizational citizenshipbehavior (Van Dicket al., 2006), employee job satisfaction and turnover intentions (VanDicket al., 2004; Van Dick et al., 2006).

Meta-analytic results from Riketta (2005) show that organizational identification ispositively correlated with demographic variables such as organizational tenure (r0:13and work-related attitudes including occupational attachment (r0:47; job satisfaction(r0:13; and job involvement (r0:61: Furthermore, Rikettas (2005) meta-analysisdemonstrates that organizational identification is positively correlated withwork-related behaviors that include in-role performance (r0:17; and extra-roleperformance (r0:35 and negatively correlated with work-related intentions such asintent to leave the organization (r2 0:48:

This research provides insight into the cognitive and/or affective processes thatmay not only influence the type of information that applicants perceive fromrecruitment activities as signals of the organizations characteristics, but may alsoinfluence how applicants come to perceive those signals to reflect positively and/ornegatively upon the organization.

Scholars have suggested that an organizations identity underlies its organizationalimage. For example, Dutton et al. (1994) distinguish between two types oforganizational images. The first of these images is an organizational identity,consisting of enduring characteristics, as perceived by employees. The second of theseimages is an external image comprised of employee perceptions of external evaluationsof the organization. This perceived external image differs from actual externalevaluations of the organization, known as corporate reputation. These scholars

contend that both perceived organizational identity and perceived external imageinfluence the extent to which an employee identifies with an organization.

Research by Highhouseet al.(2005) suggests that the signaling process is not onlydependent upon the signals sent via the recruitment activity, but is also dependentupon the inferences drawn by the applicants receiving those signals, prospective jobseekers draw inferences about instrumental and symbolic features from signals in themarketplace (i.e. via advertising, word-of-mouth, corporate rankings, experience asconsumers, etc.) (Highhouse et al., 2005, p. 136).

PR40,2

228


8/17

According to SCT (Turner et al., 1987), applicants assess the appropriateness ofincorporating the organizations identity into their own identity through processes ofcomparative and normative fit. Translated into a recruitment context, comparative fitinvolves applicant comparisons of perceived differences between themselves and

individuals that are believed to be typical applicants of the recruiting organization aswell as applicant comparisons between themselves and typical applicants ofcompeting organizations. Applicants will likely believe membership in the recruitingorganization to be relevant if they perceive differences between themselves and typicalapplicants to that organization to be smaller than differences between themselves andapplicants of competing organizations.

Normative fit involves applicant assessments of the nature of the differencesobserved. Applicants will likely believe membership in the recruiting organization tobe relevant if perceived differences between applicants to the recruiting organizationand applicants to competing organizations are consistent with their expectations. Forexample, a software designer who is a potential applicant to Company X, anorganization that is perceived to be innovative, will likely consider its organizationalidentity relevant if he/she perceives greater similarity amongst applicants to CompanyX than amongst applicants of Company Y, an organization perceived to be lessinnovative.

In addition to comparative and normative fit, SCT (Turner et al., 1987) alsopostulates that perceiver readiness, or an applicants expectations, formed in part byprevious recruitment experiences, also influences the extent to which applicantsdetermine an organizations identity to be salient. This means that people are morelikely to define themselves in terms of a particular identity to the extent that it hasprior meaning for them(Haslamet al., 2003, p. 363). For example, a software designerwho is a potential applicant to Company X will be more likely define him/herselfaccording to that organizations identity if he/she has had previous positive

experiences with that organization.Accordingly, applicants that perceive membership in a recruiting organization to be

relevant will likely pay closer attention to individual-level and organizational-levelrecruiting signals about the organizations instrumental and symbolic attributes.Furthermore, applicants with heightened perceptions of organizational identitysalience will also be more likely to interpret recruiting signals in the manner in whichthey were intended, and will thus be more likely to make positive instrumental andsymbolic inferences about the recruiting organization. Based on the above, thefollowing is proposed:

P1. An applicants organizational identity salience will moderate the positiveassociation between organizational-level signals received and the extent to

which applicants make positive instrumental and symbolic inferences aboutthe organizations characteristics. Applicants with higher levels oforganizational identity salience will more likely find more positiveorganizational-level signals from which more positive and distinct symbolicinferences will be made about the recruiting organizations characteristics.

P2. An applicants organizational identity salience will moderate the positiveassociation between individual-level signals received and the extent to whichapplicants make positive instrumental and symbolic inferences about the

Signaling theory

229


9/17

organizations characteristics. Applicants with higher levels of organizationalidentity salience will more likely find more positive individual-level signalsfrom which more positive instrumental and symbolic inferences will be madeabout the recruiting organizations characteristics.

6. Applicant inferences and organizational identificationThe extent to which applicants make positive inferences about the recruitingorganizations instrumental and symbolic attributes positively influences applicantsorganizational identity. We contend that applicants realize their organizationalidentities, or develop the perception that they share an identity, or similarcharacteristics, with the organization (Ashforth et al., 2008; Ashforth and Mael,1989; Dutton et al., 1994), through the interpretation of organizational-level andindividual-level recruitment signals. Applicants engaged in these identificationprocesses attempt to determine the extent to which they share similar characteristicswith the organization. For example, at the individual-level, signaling theory suggeststhat recruiter behavior is reflective of the organizations characteristics and thusapplicants who perceive many similarities between themselves and the organizationalrepresentative, such as a recruiter, during a face-to-face interview may also perceivemany similarities between themselves and the recruiting organization. At theorganizational-level, applicants exposed to recruitment advertising featuring anemployer brand communicating personality traits, such as honesty, trustworthiness,and innovativeness, will likely become attracted to that organization if they believethat they share those traits with that organization.

We believe that the greater the extent to which applicants perceive similarcharacteristics between themselves and the recruiting organization the greater theextent to which applicants will identify with the recruiting organization. Relatedresearch focusing on employee, rather than applicant, identification suggests such anassociation. For example, Lievens et al. (2007) found that employee perceptions ofinstrumental and symbolic employer attributes are positively associated withemployer attractiveness. It was also found that, amongst employees, outsiderperceptions of the organizations instrumental and symbolic attributes are positivelyassociated with the extent to which employees identified with the organization.

Carmeli et al. (2007) found that employee perceptions of their organizationsperceived social responsibility and development is positively associated withorganizational identification. Additionally, organizational identification was found tobe positively associated with the extent to which employees fit in with theirorganizations which, in turn, was positively associated with job performance. Based onthe above, the following is proposed:

P3. An applicants instrumental and symbolic inferences about the organizations

characteristics will be positively associated with an applicants organizationalidentification.

7. Applicants organizational identification and applicant attractionoutcomesThe extent to which applicants identify with the recruiting organization positivelyinfluences applicant attraction outcomes such as job pursuit intentions,

job-organization attraction, and job acceptance intentions. In a recruitment context,

PR40,2

230


10/17

SIT and SCT predict that applicants will be more attracted to recruiting organizationswith which they identify, than to recruiting organizations with which they do notidentify. Highly identified applicants that have defined themselves according to therecruiting organizations identity will likely seek to maintain positive self-esteem by

pursuing a job with the recruiting organization. Conversely, less identified applicantswill less likely seek a job with a recruiting organization with which they identify lessbecause their self-esteem is less dependent upon getting a job with that recruitingorganization. Based on the above, the following is proposed:

P4. Applicants organizational identification is positively associated withapplicant attraction outcomes such as job pursuit intentions,

job-organization attraction, and applicant acceptance intentions.

8. Implications and conclusionThis paper has theoretical, research-oriented, and practical implications. Theoretically,

the above model begins to address long outstanding research questions pertaining tosignaling theory and applicant attraction outcomes (Breaugh, 2008). In this paper, wesuggest that a better understanding of the signaling process can be achieved byintegrating signaling theory with other theoretical perspectives such as social identitytheory and multi-level theory.

An analysis of signaling theory from a multi-level perspective provides a moreunified approach to understanding the various types of signals that may betransmitted during the recruitment process. As recruitment research continues toaccumulate on the influence of various organizational and individual-level signals onapplicant attraction outcomes, we suggest that the incorporation of a multi-levelperspective will provide greater clarity and organization of types of recruitmentsignals that are of use and in need of further examination in the recruitment literature.

In turn, this will help create consensus through the establishment of a nomologicalnetwork of variables that will further our understanding of recruitment signals and thesignaling process.

While the incorporation of a multi-level perspective into signaling theory gives usgreater insight into what recruitment signals influence applicant attraction outcomes,we also posit that the integration of signaling theory and social identity theory willfurther our understanding of how and why those recruitment signals influenceapplicant attraction outcomes. For example, signaling theory helps to describe thesignaling process by providing explanations of the types of recruitment informationthat will likely influence applicant perceptions of recruiting organizations. We arguethat the social identity approach can complement explanations of the signaling processby describing how applicants process recruitment information and form perceptions

about the recruiting organization. Amidst calls to develop theory in recruitmentresearch (e.g. Ployhart, 2006), we encourage researchers to investigate and build uponthe above propositions by considering alternative theoretical perspectives.

From a research perspective, an improved understanding of how applicants areinfluenced by recruitment signals will help to address outstanding research needs andassumptions in the recruitment literature. For example, research suggests that themost likely way in which an organization can improve its image is by increasing theamount of information available to applicants (Rynes and Cable, 2003). We also argue

Signaling theory

231


11/17

that an organization may also improve its image by giving careful consideration to thecontent of the information provided to applicants during the recruitment process.

Consideration should also be given to the idea that the transmission of recruitmentsignals likely occurs simultaneously and not in isolation. This consideration provokes

many interesting research questions that have yet to be addressed. For example, doorganizational-level recruitment signals such as an organizations brand image interactwith individual-level recruitment signals transmitted by recruiters to enhance ordiminish applicant perceptions of the organization? If so, what are the underlyingpsychological processes used to interpret the transmission of multiple signals duringthe recruitment process?

Additional consideration should be given to the influence of multi-level recruitmentsignals on applicant attraction outcomes over the entire recruitment and selectionprocess. For example, do recruitment signals promote lasting applicant perceptions ofthe recruiting organization? If so, are certain recruitment signals more likely toinfluence applicant perceptions of an organizations selection process and/or post-hireapplicant behaviors? Answers to these research questions have the potential to providemeaningful conceptual contributions to recruitment theory and offer usefulrecommendations to recruitment practitioners.

Furthermore, signaling theory and the related research evidence show that allsignals are not equally effective, in terms of generating perceptions of organizationalattractiveness (Lievens and Highhouse, 2003). This raises questions about thereliability and validity of instrumental attributes versus symbolic meanings. However,it is possible that each set of signals may be equally effective but their usefulness maybe more pronounced in different stages of the recruitment process. For instance,instrumental attributes highlighted in factual advertising (e.g. compensation andbenefits packages) may serve to get applicants interested in the organization butsymbolic meanings, such as recruiter characteristics and behaviors, may actually help

to close the deal. There is a need for research on these possibilities.Also, signaling theory in the recruitment context has largely been applied from the

applicants perspective. That is, how applicants react to signals from the organization.And in this paper, we extend this theorizing. There is need, however, for research fromthe organizations perspective. That is, how does the organization read signals fromapplicants? This goes back to the early work of Spence (1973, 1974) and others whofocused on applicant attributes, such as their educational attainments, as signals.There is a need for new theoretical and empirical insights on this issue.

While our model can be empirically tested in many ways, we offer somesuggestions. For example, at the individual-level of analysis, researchers can collectdata from job applicants using existing, adapted, or newly created measures ofapplicants organizational identity salience, applicants organizational identification,

applicant inferences, and applicant attraction outcomes. Individual-level analysis ofthese data can be conducted using, for instance, either multiple regression, or acombination of multiple regression and structural equation modeling. At theorganizational-level of analysis, the construct of organizational market signals may beoperationalized by creating a measure using a referent-shift composition model (Chan,1998).

For example, rather than being asked to answer questions about signals theyperceive at the individual-level based on phenomena such as recruiter behavior,

PR40,2

232


12/17

applicants would be asked to answer questions about signals they perceive at theorganizational-level based on activities such as recruitment advertising. By shiftingthe referent of the question content the two similar, yet distinct, constructs ofindividual-level market signals and organizational-level market signals could be

appropriately measured and analyzed. Finally, all the aforementioned constructs canbe analyzed using statistical techniques such as hierarchical linear modeling todetermine the presence of statistically significant cross-level direct and/or cross-levelmoderating effects.

There are also several practical implications of the paper. The proposed researchmodel has the potential to offer prescriptive information that positively influences thepractical application of recruitment sources that include newspaper advertisements,employee referrals, recruiters, employer websites, and job candidate site visits. Whileresearch has demonstrated the influence of the above recruitment sources onrecruitment outcomes, continued research is needed to further improve the extent towhich these recruitment sources can influence applicant attraction outcomes (Breaugh,2008).

The application of the social identity perspective, as shown in our model, suggeststhat these recruitment sources can be designed to positively change applicantperceptions of recruiting organizations. For example, newspaper advertisements maybenefit from the inclusion of more organization-specific information that illustratesspecific characteristics with which certain applicants identify. Furthermore,newspaper advertisements targeting applicants from specific professions may alsobenefit from the inclusion of information that helps applicants identify with theorganization on the basis of their professional identity. Similar logic can be applied tonon face-to-face recruitment sources such as employer websites.

For face-to-face recruitment sources such as employee referrals, recruiters, and jobcandidate site visits, an application of the social identity approach suggests, for

example, that appropriate representatives of the organization should be chosen toengage in recruiting activities with applicants. Specifically, recruiting organizationsshould not only use representatives with the specific knowledge of the job vacancy, butshould also use representatives that they believe embody the characteristics of theorganization. Employing such a strategy would likely encourage desired candidates toidentify with, and increase their attraction to, the recruiting organization. Conversely,undesirable candidates are less likely to identify with, and become attracted to, therecruiting organization.

Furthermore, given the multi-level context of our proposed model, it is also ofpractical concern to give further consideration to the combined use of recruitmentsources and activities to attract applicants. For example, an organization may wishcommunicate the companys general characteristics (i.e. brand image) using a

newspaper advertisement that directs applicants to a website offering more specificinformation about the company and the vacancy in question. This strategy wouldfacilitate an applicants identification with the organization, which would also likelyincrease an applicants attraction to the recruiting organization. As demonstrated inthis section, the implications of the proposed model are of theoretical, empirical, andpractical importance.

Signaling theory has advanced the understanding of recruitment research andinformed organizational recruitment practices. This paper attempts to further advance

Signaling theory

233


13/17

recruitment research by proposing how signaling theory in conjunction withmulti-level theory and the social identity approach can serve as explanatorymechanisms through which applicants process organizational signals amongst variousrecruiting activities. It is hoped that this integration of theory may provide researchers

with a more systematic and unified approach in future investigations into theassociation between organizational recruitment and applicant attraction outcomes.

References

Ashforth, B.E. and Mael, F. (1989), Social identity theory and the organization, Academy ofManagement Review, Vol. 14, pp. 20-39.

Ashforth, B.E., Harrison, S.H. and Corley, K.G. (2008), Identification in organizations:an examination of four fundamental questions, Journal of Management, Vol. 34,pp. 325-74.

Backhaus, K. and Tikoo, S. (2004), Conceptualizing and researching employer branding,Career

Development International, Vol. 9, pp. 1-5.Barber, A.E. (1998), Recruiting Employees: Individual and Organizational Perspectives, Sage,

Thousand Oaks, CA.

Belt, J.A. and Paolillo, J.G.P. (1982), The influence of corporate image and specificity ofcandidate qualifications on response to recruitment advertisements, Journal of

Management, Vol. 8, pp. 105-12.

Breaugh, J.A. (1992), Recruitment: Science and Practice, PWS Kent, Boston, MA.

Breaugh, J.A. (2008), Employee recruitment: current knowledge and important areas for futureresearch, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 18, pp. 103-18.

Breaugh, J. and Starke, M. (2000), Research on employee recruiting: so many studies, so manyremaining questions, Journal of Management, Vol. 26, pp. 405-34.

Cable, D.M. and Graham, M.E. (2000), The determinants of job seekers reputation perceptions,Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 21, pp. 929-47.

Cable, D.M. and Turban, D.B. (2001), Establishing the dimensions, sources and value of jobseekers employer knowledge during recruitment, in Ferris, G.R. (Ed.), Research in

Personnel and Human Resources Management, Elsevier, New York, NY, pp. 115-63.

Carmeli, A., Gilat, G. and Waldman, D.A. (2007), The role of perceived organizationalperformance in organizational identification, adjustment, and job performance,Journal of

Management Studies, Vol. 44, pp. 972-92.

Cascio, W.F. (2003), Changes in workers, work and organizations, in Weiner, I.B. (Ed.),Handbook of Psychology, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, pp. 401-22.

Chan, D. (1998), Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at differentlevels of analysis: a typology of composition models, Journal of Applied Psychology,

Vol. 83, pp. 234-46.Chapman, D.S., Uggerslev, K.L., Carroll, S.A., Piasentin, K.A. and Jones, D.A. (2005), Applicant

attraction to organizations and job choice: a meta-analytic review of the correlates ofrecruiting outcomes, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 90, pp. 928-44.

Cheney, G. (1983a), On the various and changing meanings of organizational membership: a fieldstudy of organizational identification,Communication Monographs, Vol. 50, pp. 342-62.

Cheney, G. (1983b), The rhetoric of identification and the study of organizationalcommunication, Quarterly Journal of Speech, Vol. 69, pp. 143-58.

PR40,2

234


14/17

Collins, C.J. and Han, J. (2004), Exploring applicant pool quantity and quality: the effects of earlyrecruitment practices, corporate advertising, and firm reputation, Personnel Psychology,Vol. 57, pp. 685-717.

Collins, C.J. and Stevens, C.K. (2002), The relationship between early recruitment-related

activities and the application decisions of new labor-market entrants: a brand equityapproach to recruitment, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, pp. 1121-33.

Dutton, J.E., Dukerich, J.M. and Harquail, C.V. (1994), Organizational images and memberidentification, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 39, pp. 239-63.

Edwards, M.R. (2005), Organizational identification: a conceptual and operational review,International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 7, pp. 207-30.

Ehrhart, K.H. and Ziegert, J.C. (2005), Why are individuals attracted to organizations?,Journalof Management, Vol. 31, pp. 901-19.

Gatewood, R.D., Gowan, M.A. and Lautenschlager, G.J. (1993), Corporate image, recruitmentimage, and initial job choice decisions, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36,pp. 414-27.

Haslam, S.A., Postmes, T. and Ellemers, N. (2003), More than a metaphor: organizationalidentity makes organizational life possible, British Journal of Management, Vol. 14,pp. 357-69.

Hausknecht, J., Day, D. and Thomas, S. (2004), Applicant reactions to selection procedures:an updated model and meta-analysis, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 57, pp. 639-83.

Highhouse, S. and Hoffman, J.R. (2001), Organizational attraction and job choice, in Cooper, C.L.and Robertson, I.T. (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organizational

Psychology, Wiley, Manchester, pp. 37-64.

Highhouse, S., Thornbury, E.E. and Little, I.S. (2005), Social-identity functions of attraction toorganizations, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 103,pp. 134-46.

Highhouse, S., Zickar, M.J., Thorsteinson, T.J., Stierwalt, S.L. and Slaughter, J.E. (1999),

Assessing company employment image: an example in the fast food industry, PersonnelPsychology, Vol. 52, pp. 151-72.

Hoeffler, S. and Keller, K.L. (2003), The marketing advantages of strong brands, Journal ofBrand Management, Vol. 10, pp. 422-4.

Honeycutt, T.L. and Rosen, B. (1997), Family-friendly human resource policies, salary levels andsalient identity as predictors of organizational attraction, Journal of Vocational

Behaviour, Vol. 50, pp. 271-90.

Keller, K.L. (2003), Brand synthesis: the multidimensionality of brand knowledge, Journal ofConsumer Research, Vol. 29, pp. 596-7.

Kozlowski, S.W.J. and Klein, K.J. (2000), A multilevel approach to theory and research inorganizations: contextual, temporal, and emergent processes, in Klein, K.J. andKozlowski, S.J.W. (Eds), Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations:

Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 3-90.

Lievens, F. and Highhouse, S. (2003), The relation of instrumental and symbolic attributes to acompanys attractiveness as an employer, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 56, pp. 75-102.

Lievens, F., Van Hoye, G. and Anseel, F. (2007), Organizational identity and employer image:towards a unifying framework,British Journal of Management, Vol. 18, pp. S45-S59.

Lievens, F., Decaesteker, C., Coetsier, P. and Geirnaert, J. (2001), Organizational attractivenessfor prospective applicants: a person-organization fit perspective, Applied Psychology:

An International Review, Vol. 50, pp. 30-51.

Signaling theory

235


15/17

Ployhart, R.E. (2004), Organizational staffing: a multilevel review, synthesis, and model,in Martocchio, J. (Ed.),Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, Elsevier,Oxford, pp. 121-76.

Ployhart, R.E. (2006), Staffing in the 21st century: new challenges and strategic opportunities,

Journal of Management, Vol. 32, pp. 868-97.Ployhart, R.E. and Schneider, B. (2002), A multi-level perspective on personnel selection

research and practice: implications for selection system design, assessment, and constructvalidation, in Yammarino, F.J. and Dansereau, F. (Eds), The Many Faces of Multi-Level

Issues: Research in Multi-Level Issues, Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 95-140.

Ployhart, R.E. and Schneider, B. (2005), Multilevel selection and prediction: theories, methods,and models, in Evers, A., Smit-Voskuyl, O. and Anderson, N. (Eds), Handbook of

Personnel Selection, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 495-516.

Riketta, M. (2005), Organizational identification; a meta-analysis, Journal of VocationalBehavior, Vol. 66, pp. 358-84.

Rousseau, D.M. (1985), Issues of level in organizational research: multi-level and cross-levelperspectives, in Staw, B.M. and Cummings, L.L. (Eds), Research in Organizational

Behavior, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 1-37.

Rynes, S.L. (1991), Recruitment, job choice, and post-hire consequences, in Dunnette, M.D. (Ed.),Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., Consulting PsychologistsPress, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 399-444.

Rynes, S.L. and Cable, D.M. (2003), Recruitment, in Borman, W., Ilgen, D. and Klimoski, R. (Eds),Handbook of Psychology, Wiley, New York, NY, p. 12.

Rynes, S.L., Bretz, R.D. Jr and Gerhart, B. (1991), The importance of recruitment in job choice:a different way of looking, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 44, pp. 487-521.

Saks, A.M. (2005), The impracticality of recruitment research, in Evers, A., Smit-Voskuyl, O.and Anderson, N. (Eds), Handbook of Personnel Selection, Basil Blackwell, Oxford,pp. 47-72.

Spence, M. (1973), Job market signaling, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 87, pp. 355-74.Spence, M. (1974), Market Signaling: Informational Transfer in Hiring and Related Screening

Processes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1979), An integrative theory of intergroup conflict, in Austin, W.G.and Worchel, S. (Eds), The Social Psychology of Group Relations, Brooks-Cole, Monterey,CA, pp. 33-47.

Taylor, M.S. and Collins, C.J. (2000), Organizational recruitment: enhancing the intersection oftheory and practice, in Cooper, C.L. and Locke, E.A. (Eds),Industrial and Organizational

Psychology: Linking Theory and Practice, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 304-34.

Turban, D.B. and Cable, D.M. (2003), Firm reputation and applicant pool characteristics,Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 24, pp. 733-51.

Turban, D.B. and Keon, T.L. (1993), Organizational attractiveness: an interactionist

perspective, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 78, pp. 184-93.

Turban, D.B., Forret, M.L. and Hendrickson, C.L. (1998), Applicant attraction to firms:influences of organization reputation, job and organizational attributes, and recruiterbehaviors, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 52, pp. 24-44.

Turner, J.C., Hoog, M.A., Oakes, P.J., Reicher, S.D. and Wetherell, M.S. (1987), Rediscovering theSocial Group: A Self-Categorization Theory, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

Tyler, T.R. (1999), Why people cooperate with organizations: an identity-based perspective,Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 21, pp. 201-46.

PR40,2

236


16/17

Van Dick, R., Ullrich, J. and Tissington, P.A. (2006), Working under a black cloud: how tosustain organizational identification after a merger, British Journal of Management,Vol. 17, pp. S69-S79.

Van Dick, R., Christ, O., Stellmacher, J., Wagner, U., Ahlswede, O., Grubba, C., Haupmeier, M.,

Hohfeld, C., Moltzen, K. and Tissington, P.A. (2004), Should I stay or should I go?Explaining turnover intentions with organizational identification and job satisfaction,

British Journal of Management, Vol. 15, pp. 351-60.

Bibliography

Dick, R., Wagner, U., Stellmacher, J. and Christ, O. (2004), The utility of a broaderconceptualization of organizational identification: which aspects really matter?,Journal ofOccupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 77, pp. 171-91.

Haslam, S.A. (2004), Psychology in Organizations: The Social Identity Approach, 2nd ed., Sage,London.

Haslam, S.A. and Ellemers, N. (2005), Social identity in industrial and organizational psychology:concepts, controversies, and contributions, in Hodgkinson, G.P. and Ford, J.K. (Eds),

International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Wiley, Chichester,pp. 39-118.

Jackson, J.W. (2002), Intergroup attitudes as a function of different dimensions of groupidentification and perceived intergroup conflict,Self and Identity, Vol. 1, pp. 11-34.

Lievens, F. (2007), Employer branding in the Belgian army: the importance of instrumental andsymbolic beliefs for potential applicants, actual applicants, and military employees,

Human Resource Management, Vol. 46, pp. 51-69.

Mauer, S.D., Howe, V. and Lee, T.W. (1992), Organizational recruiting as marketingmanagement: an interdisciplinary study of engineering graduates, Personnel Psychology,Vol. 45, pp. 807-33.

Postmes, T., Haslam, A. and Swaab, R.I. (2005), Social influence in small groups: an interactivemodel of social identity formation,European Review of Social Psychology, Vol. 16, pp. 1-42.

Slaughter, J.E., Zickar, M., Highhouse, S., Mohr, D.C., Steinbrenner, D. and OConnor, J. (2001),Personality trait inferences about organizations: development of a measure and tests ofthe congruence hypothesis, paper presented at the 16th Annual Conference of the Societyfor Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego, CA.

Tajfel, H. (1978), Differentiation between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology ofInter-Group Relations, Academic Press, London.

Turner, J.C. (1982), Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group, in Tajfel, H. (Ed.),Social Identity and Intergroup Relations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,pp. 15-40.

Van Dick, R. (2004), My job is my castle: identification in organizational contexts, in Cooper, C.L.

and Robertson, I.T. (Eds), International Review of Industrial and OrganizationalPsychology, Wiley, Chichester, pp. 171-203.

Van Dick, R., Grojean, M.W., Christ, O. and Wieseke, J. (2006a), Identity and the extra mile:relationships between organizational identification and organizational citizenshipbehaviour, British Journal of Management, Vol. 17, pp. 283-301.

Wieseke, J., Lee, N., Broderick, A.J., Dawson, J.F. and Van Dick, R. (2008), Multilevel analyses inmarketing research: differentiating analytical outcomes,Journal of Marketing Theory and

Practice, Vol. 16, pp. 321-39.

Signaling theory

237


17/17

About the authorsAnthony Celani is a Visiting Assistant Professor of Human Resources Management andOrganizational Behaviour at McMaster University. His research interests within the area ofHuman Resources Management include understanding the antecedents and consequences of

applicant reactions in recruitment and selection contexts. He has also gained experience as aHuman Resources practitioner in various roles in both the Canadian public and private sectors.Anthony Celani is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected]

Parbudyal Singh is an Associate Professor of Human Resources Management at YorkUniversity, Toronto. He has published more than 60 refereed articles, many in top journals suchas Industrial Relations, Human Resource Management Review, International Journal of Human

Resource Management, Journal of Vocational Behavior, and Management International Review.His research focuses on compensation and other human resource management issues.

PR40,2

238

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Documents

Applicant attraction outcomes