Developing Strong Socialization Processes in the Workplace

New employees are often confused about the expectations and requirements of their new positions and the organization where they work. These uncertainties result in feelings of stress, confusion, anxiety, awkwardness and uneasiness (Louis, 1980). Such feelings create insecure inaction that begins to clear up the longer the employee is employed. Yet managers can speed up the socialization process by developing stronger communication networks and transference of information through a proper socialization process.

One of the first things new employees look for to clear up this confusion is a point of reference. This typically is the person they are first introduced. Such points of reference are based upon interpersonal communication and the information they can secure through the work network. This point of reference is fostered from another employee, organizational information, or their managers (Barge & Schlueter, 2004).

It is important for managers to understand precisely what points of reference employees are being offered or most likely to attach themselves. For example, if an employee receives one day of training and then left to their work group to understand their environment they will use available positive and negative information to make their conclusions. It is the constant communication between managers and employees that helps foster alternative points of reference that further more appropriate impressions and final conclusions.

The totality of positive and negative impressions can impact the success of the employee and cause low productivity and higher turnover rates into the future. During the initial organizational entry period both formal and informal messages combine to either reinforce engagement or encourage disengagement from the organization (Altman, Visel & Brown, 1981). Strong orientations and constant communication can develop higher levels of engagement that allow the integration of the self with the organizational expectations.

The very first months will create attitudes, behavior, and knowledge that determine employee level engagement with company expectations (Allen, 2006). After these first impressions are created it becomes extremely difficult to change the course of thinking without higher levels of intervention. Such impressions make their way throughout the employees’ method of thinking creating additional justifications why their assumptions are true. Competing information is often ignored due to high levels of selection attention that don’t fit with initial assumptions.

The initial signs of uncertainty most employees feel when entering the workplace is the ideal time to open up communication lines and socialize employees to positive workplace expectations. This is the time when information seeking behavior increases (Berger and Calabrese, 1975). In such a situation it is beneficial to offer the needed information in order to both reduce this information seeking behavior as well as limit the cost of initial lackluster performance throughout the socialization process. 

Managers who engage their employees through positive communication and expectation building have the capacity to create higher levels of performance with less wasted time and disciplinary distractions that impact the department long into the future. Proactive management should consider the benefits of spending additional time at the beginning of the socialization process to ensure that initial impressions are strong so that future information is filtered and categorized appropriately by the employee. A little extra effort in the beginning can create stronger group development in the future once a general culture has been developed.

Allen, D. (2006). Do organizational socialization tactics influence newcomer embeddedness

and turnover? Journal of Management, doi: 10.1177/0149206305280103.

Altman, I., Vinsel, A. & Brown, B. (1981). Dialectic conceptions in social psychology: An

application to social penetration and privacy regulation. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances

in experimental social psychology (Vol. 14, pp. 107-160). New York: Academic Press.

Barge, J. & Schlueter, D. (2004). Memorable messages and newcomer socialization.

Western Journal of Communication, 68(3), 233-256.

Berger, C. & Calabrese, R. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond:

Toward a theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research,

1(2), 99-112.

Louis, M. (1980). Surprise and sense making: What newcomers experience in entering

unfamiliar organizational settings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(2), 226-251.

Human Instincts, Workmanship and Economic Development

The innate nature of man is to contribute to the development of the organization and society. Through the purposeful enhancement of individual workers, society can reap the rewards of higher levels of performance. Such performance is a natural instinct of man when given appropriate guidance and opportunities for development. Managers can contribute to the economic development of their society by fostering the instinctual self-interest of individuals to contribute to survival of the entire organization. 

"Chief among those instinctive dispositions that conduce directly to the material well-being of the race {I'm pretty sure this means the human species/mankind}, and therefore to its biological success, is perhaps the instinctive bias here spoken of as the sense of workmanship." -Thorstein Veblen

Instincts have a large impact on why man engages in meaningful work. As a biological creature he seeks to develop the well-being of his race and in essence his own overall success. Within the context of the organization, instincts are tied to behavior and eventually to the methods by which people find needs attainment. Instincts seek concrete objects while habits are the methodology of achieving these concrete objects (Brette 2003).

In the work Instinct of Workmanship, Thorstein Veblen discusses man and his instincts as the elemental parts of an economic system. To him man, through his natural development, is instinctively pushing himself to learn, innovate and create more efficient methods of ensuring survival (Veblen, 1914). The development of tools and machines is a natural part of this process (Ayres 1958).

Understanding human behavior is important for understanding both organizational development and economics. All socio-economic development theories rely on human behavior as their foundational understanding (Jensen 1987). Therefore, psychology and economic development within an organization, or a nation, are inherently tied to behavior that can be adjusted through development of new habits based in instinctual expression.  These concepts are spawned by Darwinian explanations of biological development and adaptation.

As innovations improve they naturally create structural changes in the environment. The structural changes further adjust people's thoughts and habits that eventually lead to alignment with organizational and societal adjustments. The process of adjustment and adaptation continues because it is within man's best interest to survive, develop, and overcome. The creation of institutions and their development fits within this instinctual pattern of survival.

"The typical human endowment of instincts, as well as the typical make-up of the race {mankind} in the physical respect, has according to this current view been transmitted intact from the beginning of humanity. . . . On the other hand the habitual elements of human life change unremittingly and cumulatively, resulting in a continued proliferous growth of institutions. Changes in the institutional structure are continually taking place in response to the altered discipline of life under changing cultural conditions, but human nature remains specifically the same. (1914, 18)"

 Society develops by creating ever higher levels of efficiency with its use of tools and effort. Therefore, as society develops and becomes more complex man creates the need for division of labor and institutional development in order to create higher levels of utility (Edgell 1975). With such an understanding it is possible to see how successful organizations are more able to capitalize off of the instincts inherent in every persons self-interest.

Let us put this within an example. People are naturally driven by their survival instincts to develop and innovate. Employees use the the tools available to them, through the job specialization they have learned, in order to create the most efficient use of their time. The more skill they have, the less time they spend to fulfill their financial needs. Managers not only control this function within an organization but also have a responsibility to encourage workplace adaptations that benefit the organizations. Empowering employees to use the drive of their instincts to create habits that find solutions to organizational problems contribute to their, the organizations, and society's survival. 

Key Points:
-Man is driven by instincts that create habits.
-Man's habits help him obtain resources from the environment.
-Tools, machines, and organizations help man use his time efficiently.
-Organizational management should encourage the natural instincts of employees to develop.
-Individual development contributes to organizational and societal development.
- The economic system is fostered through individual instinctual development.

Ayres, C. (1958). Veblen's Theory of Instincts Reconsidered. In Thorstein Veblen: A Critical Reappraisal, edited by D. F. Dowd, 25-37. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1958. 


Brette, O. (2003) Thorstein Veblen's Theory of Institutional Change: Beyond Technological Determinism. European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 10, (3), 455-477. 

Edgell, S. (1975). Thorstein Veblen's Theory of Evolutionary Change. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 34, (3), 267-280. 


Jensen, H.(1987). The Theory of Human Nature. Journal of Economic Issues 21, (3), 1039-1073. 


Veblen, T (1898). The Instinct of Workmanship and the Irksomeness of Labor. American Journal of Sociology 4, (2), 187-201.  

Expectancy-Value Theory: Connecting Expectations to Rewards

As employees scramble over each other in an attempt to achieve the next promotion, or trinket of acknowledgement, it is important to understand precisely how their expectations lead to motivation. Expectancy-Value Theory is one way of looking at how employees value the behavioral options available to them.  In this theory, management should tie behavior and reward closely together if there is an expectation that employees will be motivated and productive.  Management has an ethical opportunity to ensure proper returns on investments and progressive use of human capital in order to fulfill their function.

The concepts of valence and expectancy make up the bulk of the Expectancy-Value Theory.  In general, employees believe that when they put forth a specific amount of effort there should be an appropriate reward that is offered. If the expected energy and the value of the reward are not in alignment it will be difficult for management to solicit certain types of motivated behavior.

Valence and expectancies make up the bulk of Vroom's Value-Expectancy Theory and are further defined as the following: 

1.) Valence: The desired outcome of working at a particular level.

2.) Expectancies: The subjective expectation that such action will lead to a particular reward.

Vroom defines valence as, "the affective orientation toward particular outcomes" (1964, pp. 15). Those positive outcomes an employee desires to achieve are called positively valent while those things which an employee desires to avoid are negatively valent. It does not matter much what the true worth of these positive or negative factors are but only that they have a subjective perceptual value to employees.

It is not enough for a person to think in terms of the value of objectives but also the likelihood of achieving those objectives. For example, if an employee believes there is a high likelihood of achieve a particular objective after a defined amount of effort is put forth motivation is more likely. If this association of effort and reward is lower, motivation is less likely. Such expectancies are often denoted in numbers and range from .00 (low) to 1.0 (high).

In general, employees continually scan their environment in an effort to judge the value combinations of potential valences and expectancies. Alternatives come and go and employees do not always maintain orderings throughout their time of employment (Behling & Starke, 1973). The ordering of valences and expectancies can be seen as Sum (EijVj).  Someone who prefers a specific expectancy and valence combination is said to prefer Sum(EijVj)1 over Sum(EijVj)2  This would mean they prefer a particular course of action based upon the value of expectancy and the likelihood of its valence. 

We might be able to break this into an appropriate example. An employee has an option to put effort towards 1.) obtain a raise; or 2.) obtain a promotion without a raise. Option 1 could be denoted as Sum(EijVj)1 and option 2 can be denoted as Sum(EijVj)2. The employee makes the decision that the particular value combination of option 1 is worth more than option 2. The employee is most likely to put his effort toward the higher income.

Researchers can often use these short denotations to help them categorize and keep track of certain options over others. It is such understandings and choices, from the perspective of the employee, that often leads to an approach in workplace behavior based upon the value ordering of these particular choices.  As employees move through these choices they will often ignore or forget older orderings as they become less available.

. . . most decisions are made in sequential fashion. Thus, having chosen y over X and then, z over y, one is typically committed to z and may not even compare it with x, which has already been eliminated. Furthermore, in many choice situations the eliminated alternative is no longer available, so there is no way of finding out whether our preferences are transitive or not. These considerations suggest that in actual decisions, as well as in laboratory experiments, people are likely to overlook their own intransitivities. Transitivity, however, is one of the basic and the most compelling principles of rational behavior (Tversky, 47, p. 45).

Unfortunately, many employees cannot formalize these values in their minds and this can cause confusion. At times it is beneficial for managers to ensure that the actions that lead to rewards are clearly defined for employees in order to help them make these values more solidified. This is one of the reasons why workplace expectations and the rewards should be transparent and clear for employees in order to build develop appropriate behavioral options.

Furthermore, understanding what employees value in terms of potential outcomes within the workplace will lead to a greater understanding of the motivational potentials of employee behavior. It should be kept in mind that management should ensure that the performance expectations are solidified through formal corporate literature, management behavior, and compensation structures. When there is confusion between the expectancies and their potential outcomes this lowers the total likelihood that certain behaviors will be exhibited. Poor performance is a direct result of poor management communication.

Behling, O. & Starke, F. (1973). The postulates of expectancy theory. Academy of Management Journal, 16 (3).

Tversky. A. (1969) Intransitivity of Preferences. Psychological Review, 76, pp.31-48.

Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and Motivation. New York: Wiiey.

The Components of Employee Motivation and Organizational Success

At the center of any successful organization rests the employees that take the orders, assemble the products, and sell the goods. Before companies can achieve success they should ensure employees are committed and engaged with the organization and its objectives. Where well managed and committed employees are an asset, a poorly managed company with a lack of employee commitment will ultimately lead to decline. Through the development and encouragement of employee effort does the unique synergy exist in   organizations that allow for higher levels of operational savings and environmental capitalization. The components of this motivation are discussed through this article.

Motivation is derived from the word "motivate" which means to push, move, or influence the environment to achieve some objective (Kalimullah et al, 2010). Motivation can also be seen as the process by which behavior obtains a results, attempts to complete an objective and continues to push forward. It still may further be seen as an internal drive that pushes to fulfill some need (Bedeian, 1993).

Employee motivation is one of the main functions of management that is derived through the policies and procedures of an organization (Shadare et al, 2009). Through the need to accomplish some goal or find a path to personal development an employee will scan their work environment to put their skills, knowledge and abilities to the most appropriate use. Such excited employees are seeking ways to make their work more interesting and efficient and therefore organizations should foster the effort in order to make the company more successful (Kalimullah et al, 2010).

Through the capitalization on employee motivation an organization can meet customer demands, lower costs, and change to meet environmental challenges. Organizational effectiveness is the efficient process of turning inputs to outputs (Matthew et al, 2005). The more efficiently the organization is run through motivating processes the more effective is the process of converting the organizational factors into viable products or services. This is accomplished through the minds and bodies of workers that engage in and make micro and macro decisions throughout the process.

The Legitimacy Model views organizational effectiveness as “component preferences for performance and natural limitations on performance from an external environmental perspective” (Zammuto.R.F,
1982). In other words, while reviewing an organization it is possible to determine its effectiveness by understanding employees' preferences for performance and the limitations these employees have in utilizing these pathways. If road blocks are removed employees will put their effort toward those designed pathways that have the most chances of success.

Leadership is an essential component of motivation. Through employee trust of management they will believe that the leadership function of the organization will fulfill their explicit and implicit promises (Baldoni.J, 2005). Thus leadership and trust in management is necessary if employees are to make that decision to put forward effort into the organizational pathways. The leadership function and the labor function raise each other to higher levels of motivation and morality in a synergistic manner that furthers market interests (Rukhmani.K, 2010).

The essential components of employee motivation rely in trust, rewards, decision making, empowerment, information and group expectations (Baldoni.J, 2005; Yazdani,B.O. et al, 2011; Hassan et al, 2011; Adeyinka et al, 2007; Brewer et al, 2000). When these components work in tandem an environment can be more aligned to the needs of the employees and thus produce more meaningful results for the organization. Investors should ensure their management team are working to continually align their organizations to foster these motivational components to meet environmental needs.

Through a review of a number of studies it has been found that a various components contribute to the development of motivation within the organization:

 ...the factors that enhance employee motivation are fair pay, incentives, special allowances, fringe benefits, leadership, encouragement, trust, respect, joint decision making, quality of supervision, adequate working relationships, appreciation, chances for growth, loyalty of organization, identification and fulfillment of their needs, recognition, empowerment, inspiration, importance attached to their job, safe working conditions, training and information availability and communication to perform actions (Manzoor, 2011).

Baldoni, J., (2005). Motivation Secrets. Great Motivation Secrets of Great Leaders. [Online]
Available: http://govleaders.org/motivation_secrets.htm

Kamalian, A., Yaghoubi, N., & Moloudi, J., (2010). Survey of Relationship between Organizational Justice and Empowerment (A Case Study). European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, 24, 165-171.

Matthew, J., Grawhich, & Barber, L., (2009). Are you Focusing both Employees and Organizational Outcomes. Organizational Health Initiative at Saint Louis University (ohi.slu@edu), 1-5.

Manzoor, Q. (2011). Impact of employees motivation on organizational effectiveness. Business and Management Strategy, 3 (1).

Rukhmani, K., Ramesh, M., & Jayakrishnan, J., (2010). Effect of Leadership Styles on Organizational Effectiveness. European Journal of Social Sciences, 15 (3), 365-369.

Yazdani, B., Yaghoubi, N., & Giri, E., (2011). Factors affecting the Empowerment of Employees. European Journal of Social Sciences, 20 (2), 267-274.

Zammuto, R. (1982). Assessing Organizational Effectiveness. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY.