Organizational socialization Essay

Organizational socialization is a very important aspect in all organizations. It has been a lot of definitions, one is â€Å"the process by which organizational members become a part of, or absorbed into, the culture of an organization† (Jablin, 1982, p. 256). Another meaning that we have for organizational socialization is â€Å"the process of ‘learning the ropes,’ being indoctrinated and trained, and being taught what is important in the organization† (Schein, 1968, p. 2). Last but not the least, we have â€Å"the process by which a person learns the values, norms, and required behaviors which permit him or her to participate as a member of the organization† (Van Maanen, 1978, p. 67). Organizational socialization is evidently very important for growth and satisfaction not only in an individual’s job output, but more importantly it is essential to an organization’s growth towards innovation, job satisfaction, cooperation, organizational commitment, and ultimately organizational performance (Fisher, 1986). Even though organizations vary in their different natures, we must keep in mind that the nature of man and the dynamics of working as a group towards a common goal is what keeps all organizations united in the process of keeping its dynamics at its utmost best to come with the best results as they can with the given field of work they choose to follow. This is why so many people have come up with so many different theories with having the most ideal organizational socialization in their company. More importantly, this is why these different theories matter in the day to day encounters of people with in the company or any organization for that matter. Although the theories hold well in some practices in organizational development, practice of each theory in different settings will still vary and depend a lot on how each person will practice what theories present specially in organizational socialization (Tosi. et al, 2000 p3). Up to date, there have been a lot of studies pertaining to organizational socialization. A problem with these studies though is that so far, little research has been done to measure the specific settings and circumstances in which such socialization occurs (Ashforth & Saks, 1996; Jones, 1986). There was this one study, conducted by Ashforth, Saks and Lee (1998) that the examined the effects of three organizational context variables such as structure, size and job design. These variables were tested on the use of socialization tactics and the impact of these tactics on newcomer adjustment. This was particularly pretty helpful in t he field of organizational socialization to measure and compare the data gathered not only in the newcomer’s experience, but also to contrast each experience in varying fields. The study and application of organizational socialization is very important in the dynamics of the organizational processes also for many different reasons. One is that organizational socialization opens doors to behavioral changes that may occur from an employee’s entry point to being a key player in an organization or in a managerial or administrative role. Another is that the transitional view point of a worker in this process shapes an individuals’ growth, behaviors, decisions and even some key points that help shape the entrepreneurial process of an organization (Gartner, 1989; Stevenson & Jarillo, 1990). Another would be that specific role relationships within the person and key outsiders can be shown by viewing the influential outside constituents as socializing agents that can assist a newcomer in the formation of the firm he entered. Another would be that socialization literature such as orientations and the likes can identify the response of a new comer to the pressures of the environment of a new comer depending on the adaptability of each individual, henceforth showing the diversity of entrepreneurial experiences and new ventures (Gartner, 1985). Finally, the socialization perspective complements the environment of the newcomer by specifying the mechanisms that singles out those who cant fit with in the new environment. In the socialization process, the newcomers learn how to adapt and value the beliefs through social knowledge their new roles and function that they have to play in effectively in and organization (Aldrich & Zimmer, 1986). Van Maanen and Schein (1979) even developed a theoretical model of socialization which shows that socialization tactics used by an organization can influence the role orientation of a newcomer. Jones (1986) argues that a combination of six tactics form a socialization process namely formal, collective, sequential, serial, fixed, investiture or individualized. Jones concluded that institutionalized tactics encouraged newcomers to passively accept these established roles, while individualized tactics tend to encourage newcomers to develop their own approaches to playing their roles. According to some studies, there are specific socialization tactics in organizational socialization, Jones summarized Van Maanen & Schein’s 6 socialization tactics into a single polarity called institutionalized vs individualized dimension. He defined the institutionalized to be characterized by the common starting learning experiences. Due to the nature of this specified learning, it is sequential, fixed, collective, formal, and investiture. On the other hand individualized socialization is by its name, individual, random, informal, variable, and disjunctive and divestiture. This may be due to the nature of how it is learned by the new comer as it was defined by its characteristics. There are a lot of bases for adaptation of organizational socialization. In the motivational bases for adaptation, sociability of a newcomer is directly in line with the newcomer’s motivation to adapt to the expectations, norms and values that are already eminent not only in the organization members, but also in the structure of the organization. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivational factors also let new recruits attend to socializing with the older members and adjusting accordingly through their actions. Furthermore, man’s psychological make-up makes him have real qualities that will help him have the right motivation to learn to adapt to the new setting that he is in behavior wise. This is probably why individuals respond in organizational efforts differently which causes a personalized response to each new setting. In organizational socialization, the main goal of adapting as a newcomer is to reach the entrepreneurial stage. In the entrepreneurial process, this can be viewed as a way where in you determine where in you will to start out a career in the path you chose as a newcomer in the field that you entered. This process of adapting to the field that you entered can also be viewed as your initiation or stepping stone towards your will to start a business. Some literature has tried to link a relationship between the motivational factors driving entrepreneurial activity and firm performance, with limited success (Cooper & Gascon, 1992) Even though some studies show the motivation to adapt in the environment of entrepreneurial endeavors, the literature in the entrepreneurship world shows the typical entrepreneur as the innovator who has to be different from the people around him. In most studies present, there has been a small consideration of the motivational mechanisms, activities, circumstances, or encounters where imitation, accommodation, or compliance might be the critical survival response. Four motivational bases for adaptation to socialization pressures can be applied to the entrepreneurial context–Personality, Anxiety or stress reduction, Choice, and Rewards/Power. A big aspect you have to factor in an organizational socialization also is personality. The variable of the uniqueness of each personality is bound to affect the motivation to become socialized. An individual’s unique tendencies to respond to authority, his need for control, and feedback can affect the newcomer’s adjustment and accommodation process to the expectations of members around him. One example would be a newcomer with moderate self-esteem and self-efficacy beliefs will cause him not be afraid to explore the new role and seek feedback as the basis for learning how to behave appropriately, otherwise, his coping mechanisms will be different. In other cases when an individual with a strong self-efficacy concept may have the tendency to attempt to change the organization rather than adapt to the situation presented to him. In the entrepreneurial context, his need for achievement motivation has been manifested to be his driving force in his start-up process in the organization (Brockhaus & Hurwitz, 1986). The goal orientation, self-confidence, and independence that compel individuals to start new businesses may also be factors in the entrepreneurial socialization process. Another thing to factor in organizational socialization is the anxiety and stress levels of the new comer. The new comer’s capacity for anxiety or stress reduction is important given that it is only inevitable for a newcomer to face a lot of stress while dealing with the unfamiliar pressures of a given field he entered. Some people are even motivated but this kinf of tension created by a new setting that tend to let them seek out new information for a new learning experience. Through developing and adaptation to the new environment, they will be able to create a predictability and certainty. This will enable then to adapt to their new setting. In the entrepreneurial context, one’s ability to manage risk, and associated personal characteristics such as tolerance for ambiguity, are generally linked to new firm performance. Another important thing to factor in is the concept of choice. This is because a person’s motivation to adjust to a new setting will always be influenced by the newcomer’s choice and commitment he has to his new role. This choice is essential considering that this choice defines to what extent a new comer will be willing to adjust to. Also, if the new role is a role the newcomer preferred compared to his previous role, his inclination and motivation to succeed in the new role should be higher. Rewards and power also is another factor in organizational socialization. Tangible benefits and possible power holding roles can be a big motivation for a new comer to excel and be more adaptive to changes in his new environment. This aspect of motivation is an essential component of organizational socialization. This is because newcomers respond to organizational communications that specify role behaviors that can promise or lead to organizational rewards or career growth. Also, traditional sources of social influence and reciprocity, such as proximity, status, and affective interactions, may also motivate compliance. In one study, Dornblaser, Lin, and Van de Ven observed differences in the concerns and performance expectations of innovation managers and resource controllers in 16 innovation settings (Dornblaser et al. , 1990). In human resource procedures, most of the instructions regarding norms, values, standard operating procedures, skills related to the job and the likes are provided by veteran organization members. Organizational insiders act as socializing agents which serve as critical resources who may both be the reason for impediment or better adaptability of new comers in an organization. The person in charge of giving the orientation is in charge of providing the background history, informal practices, local culture and any other information that a newcomer will be needing to cope with the new environment. Due to this, the newcomer’s perception of the organizational experiences will rely a lot on the person in charge of introducing him to the organization. Through this orientation to the organizational structure, a newcomer will be able to adapt to the organization, despite this other current members may or may not also be cognizant that they serve as role models and information sources for newcomers. In the modern scenario of emerging organizations, given that there are a number of organizations setting a competitive scene, an entrepreneur must learn to respond or adapt to several incumbents representing multiple organizational contexts. Due to this, customers, suppliers, bankers, employees, and other members of the business community function as comrades who guide, and influence the new entrepreneurial recruit (Aldrich & Zimmer, 1986; Larson & Starr, in press). Mentioned here are some features of entrepreneurial networks which describe ways in which network members serve as socializing agents in the entrepreneurial setting. Typically, in organizational settings, there is normally more than one agent who influences the newcomer. The power of agents’ influence depends on several factors earlier discussed such as tangible reward power, frequency of contact, perceived legitimacy and expertise, explicitness of expectations, and the compatability between the expectations of the agent and the newcomer. Other agents such as colleagues, bosses, and subordinates surrounding the newcomer in his environment are very important in the process of organizational socialization. Although this area has not yet been explored, future research should be dedicated regarding the facilitation of better dynamics of all these agents in relation to maximizing the results of organizational socialization. In the entrepreneurial context, the powers in the dynamics of hierarchy are more subtle. Despite this it is still implicit in the negotiations and informal and legal contracts with critical stakeholders that they exist. (Gabarro, 1987). Ofcourse organizational socialization exists and is studied for a very good reason, this is done to achieve a better outcome not only of the newcomer in an organization but also for good output of the organization as a whole. Outcomes related to organizational socialization should ideally be measured to improve tactics on how to deal with newcomers for optimum results. Role orientation is ideally done in this process where in a newcomer will be briefed and equip to face the new challenges for his job. Given that a newcomer ideally fits in a fixed role in an existing organization, it is through this process that our new comer can accept the conformity of a position while practicing innovation that he needs to display in wanting the best for his growth and that he wants to impart in the organization that he is taking part in. Organizational Politics is also an intricate issue that managers should deal with in orienting a newcomer for his proper adjustment to the organization. This is where managers orient acquired employees by specifying clearly the job hierarchies and the reporting relationships associated with different jobs in the firm and its component groups. In doing this, the newcomer can easily distinguish his superior from his subordinates and more importantly, to whom he should regularly report to. It is through this formal communication that organizations can avoid confusion within operations and its structure. This can also be where a new comer can view the organization structure so that he can be motivated and set his work and goal towards climbing up the organizational ladder. Another important aspect of organizational socialization is the technological advances that now innovate the way we deal with organizations. Technology has now paved the way in the way run organizations especially in the way we store and communicate information. As compared to older and traditional means of running organizations, new age technology through electronic communication and information technologies, information is now disseminated faster at an even much lower cost that what used to cost organizations before. While more people offer increased data communications and more powerful technological capabilities, the advancement of the communication process has extended the number an variety of people involved in organizational decisions (Huber, 1990; Sproull & Kiesler, 1991), this happens because technological communications make it possible to diminish temporal and physical interaction constraints through online conferencing and the likes (Eveland & Bikson, 1988; Kaye & Byrne, 1986), it will also increase horizontal and vertical communication as everyone in the organization is easily accessible via the world wide web(Hinds & Kiesler, 1995).