It would seem RJP's are not only important in finding the right people for the right job, but also for making sure the wrong people don't pursue a job that they would not fit with. Related to our discussions of utility of HR practices, it would seem RJP's could save the organization a lot of money by deterring candidates that might otherwise drop out of the position. Would RJP's be helpful in all levels of jobs from entry level all the way to CEO's? I would expect it would be more helpful with higher level positions or more specialized jobs.
•A critique… it seems in appropriate to have only Caucasian women in the study. •Can RJPs be legally required within a selection process or specifically during hiring to limit the conceiving nature of some companies? I agree with Shane in that this seems necessary to assure that the right people select the position so that there is a right fit for both the company and individual to assure for long term employment.
What other factors might mediate the relationship between RJPs and organizational outcomes? Would RJPs help to reduce turnover in jobs that have a high likelihood of turnover? And what might the relationship look like between exposure to an RJP and early job performance?
This full mediation model provides some light on the theoretical mechanisms responsible for the success of RJP in lowering turnover. I am not sure I understand the difference between interdependent and independent mediating process, e.g. met expectations have direct and indirect effects through other mediators (Roni Q?) I would like to better understand how the RJP works through post-decisional dissonance arousal (Wanous & Colella, 1989) (e.g. people want to believe that they have made a good decision even in the face of difficulty?) The authors refer to this theory, but I am not clear about the relationship with expectations. I also find theoretically interesting the way employer concern is found to mediate met expectations and org commitment.
In Hom et al.’s revised integrative model of interdependent mediators (Figure 10), they do not show a direct connection between employer concern and honesty and job satisfaction. Does this seem odd to anyone else?
I would imagine that the influence that RJPs have on turnover varies by job. Nurses tend to have an idea of the type of work that they are getting themselves into due to the specialized training they must go through. I wonder if the influence of RJPs is higher or lower in jobs that require little or no specialization.
It would seem RJP's are not only important in finding the right people for the right job, but also for making sure the wrong people don't pursue a job that they would not fit with. Related to our discussions of utility of HR practices, it would seem RJP's could save the organization a lot of money by deterring candidates that might otherwise drop out of the position. Would RJP's be helpful in all levels of jobs from entry level all the way to CEO's? I would expect it would be more helpful with higher level positions or more specialized jobs.
ReplyDelete•A critique… it seems in appropriate to have only Caucasian women in the study.
ReplyDelete•Can RJPs be legally required within a selection process or specifically during hiring to limit the conceiving nature of some companies? I agree with Shane in that this seems necessary to assure that the right people select the position so that there is a right fit for both the company and individual to assure for long term employment.
What other factors might mediate the relationship between RJPs and organizational outcomes? Would RJPs help to reduce turnover in jobs that have a high likelihood of turnover? And what might the relationship look like between exposure to an RJP and early job performance?
ReplyDeleteWhat individual, organizational, and world level factors might moderate the effectiveness of RJPs?
ReplyDeleteThis full mediation model provides some light on the theoretical mechanisms responsible for the success of RJP in lowering turnover. I am not sure I understand the difference between interdependent and independent mediating process, e.g. met expectations have direct and indirect effects through other mediators (Roni Q?) I would like to better understand how the RJP works through post-decisional dissonance
ReplyDeletearousal (Wanous & Colella, 1989) (e.g. people want to believe that they have made a good decision even in the face of difficulty?) The authors refer to this theory, but I am not clear about the relationship with expectations.
I also find theoretically interesting the way employer concern is found to mediate met expectations and org commitment.
In Hom et al.’s revised integrative model of interdependent mediators (Figure 10), they do not show a direct connection between employer concern and honesty and job satisfaction. Does this seem odd to anyone else?
ReplyDeleteI would imagine that the influence that RJPs have on turnover varies by job. Nurses tend to have an idea of the type of work that they are getting themselves into due to the specialized training they must go through. I wonder if the influence of RJPs is higher or lower in jobs that require little or no specialization.
ReplyDelete