Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Impact of Organizational Culture on Attraction and Recruitment of Job Applicants

  • Published:
Journal of Business and Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

This research examined how job pursuit and application decisions of male and female job applicants are impacted by beliefs about the organization’s culture.

Design/Methodology/Approach

Participants responded to questions regarding job pursuit intentions, organizational preference, and organizational choice for two hypothetical organizations, depicted in recruitment brochures as having either a competitive (“masculine”) or supportive (“feminine”) organizational culture in a 2 × 2 repeated measures design. Choosing the supportive culture required the trade-off of lower salary.

Findings

The results indicate that organizational culture interacts with gender to influence applicant attraction. Men were more likely than women to intend to pursue a job with the competitive organization; however, the majority of both men and women reported stronger interest in working for the supportive organization, even though salary would be lower.

Implications

This provides an empirical basis for organizational decision makers to integrate more supportive “feminine” values into the organizational culture and to highlight these values in recruitment literature. Perceived organizational culture plays a significant role in applicant decision making and both male and female applicants indicated a willingness to accept a lower salary in return for a supportive organizational culture. This has significance for organizations that seek to attract high quality applicants but whose direct compensation is lower than that offered by competitors.

Originality/Value

This is the first study to use an experimental design to manipulate organizational culture and salary trade-offs depicted in recruitment literature to examine the impact on applicant attraction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aiman-Smith, L., Bauer, T. N., & Cable, D. M. (2001). Are you attracted? Do you intend to pursue? A recruiting policy-capturing study. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16, 219–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. The Academy of Management Review, 14, 20–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braddy, P. W., Meade, A. W., & Kroustalis, C. M. (2006). Organizational recruitment website effects on viewers’ perceptions of organizational culture. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 525–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, R. J. (1997). Culture’s consequences: Organizational values, family-friendliness and a level playing field. Women in Management Review, 12, 222–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, R. J. (2001). Organizational values, work experiences and satisfactions among managerial and professional women. The Journal of Management Development, 20, 346–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cable, D. M., Aiman-Smith, L., & Edwards, J. (2000). The sources and accuracy of job applicants’ beliefs about organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 1076–1085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carli, L. L., & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender effects on social influence and emergent leadership. In G. N. Powell (Ed.), Handbook of gender & work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, D. E. (1990). Work and family: The new strategic plan. Human Resource Planning, 13, 79–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonyea, J. G., & Googins, B. (1996). A new challenge for American corporations. In S. Lewis & J. Lewis (Eds.), The work-family challenge. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grover, S. L., & Crooker, K. J. (1995). Who appreciates family-responsive human resource policies: The impact of family-friendly policies on the organizational attachment of the organizational attachment of parents and non-parents. Personnel Psychology, 48, 271–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckert, T. M., Droste, H. E., Adams, P. J., Griffin, C. M., Roberts, L. L., Muellere, M. A., et al. (2002). Gender differences in anticipated salary: Role of salary estimates for others, job characteristics, career paths, and job inputs. Sex Roles, 47, 139–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1998). Attitudes, values and organizational culture: Disentangling the concepts. Organization Studies, 19, 477–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. A. (1999). The sex segregation of occupations: Prospects for the 21st century. In G. N. Powell (Ed.), Handbook of gender & work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judge, T. A., & Cable, D. M. (1997). Applicant personality, organizational culture, and organization attraction. Personnel Psychology, 50, 359–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49, 1–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, S. (2001). Restructuring workplace cultures: The ultimate work-family challenge? Women in Management Review, 16, 21–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loden, M. (1985). Feminine leadership on how to succeed in business without being one of the boys. New York: Times Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Looker, E. D., & Magee, P. A. (2000). Gender and work: The occupational expectations of young women and men in the 1990s. Gender Issues, 18, 74–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyness, K. S., & Kropf, M. B. (2005). The relationships of national gender equality and organizational support with work-family balance: A study of European managers. Human Relations, 58, 33–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maier, M. (1999). On the gendered substructure of organization: Dimensions and dilemmas of corporate masculinity. In G. N. Powell (Ed.), Handbook of gender & work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGinty, R., & Reitsch, A. (1992). Using student perceptions and job characteristics to recruit recent graduates. Review of Business, 14, 38–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C. (1989). Corporations, culture, and commitment: Motivation and social control in organizations. California Management Review, 31, 9–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C. A., III, Chatman, J. A., & Caldwell, D. F. (1991). People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 487–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, L. A., Thomas, K. M., & Taylor, G. A. (2000). Advertising and recruitment: Marketing to minorities. Psychology & Marketing, 17, 235–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, G. N. (1999). The sex difference in employee inclinations regarding work-family programs: Why does it exist, should we care, and what should we do about it (if anything)? In S. Parasuraman & J. H. Greenhaus (Eds.), Integrating work and family: Challenges and choices for a changing world. Connecticut: Westport.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rau, B. L., & Hyland, M. M. (2002). Role conflict and flexible work arrangements: The effects of applicant attraction. Personnel Psychology, 55, 111–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosener, J. B. (1995). America’s competitive secret: Utilizing women as a management strategy. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B., Goldstein, H. W., & Smith, D. B. (1995). The ASA framework: An update. Personnel Psychology, 48, 747–773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, F. N. (1989). Management women and the new facts of life. Harvard Business Review, 67, 65–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. M., & Wise, P. G. (1999). Organizational attractiveness and individual differences: Are diverse applicants attracted by different factors? Journal of Business and Psychology, 13, 375–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Vianen, A. E. M., & Fischer, A. (2002). Illuminating the glass ceiling: The role of organizational culture preferences. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 315–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wicks, D., & Bradshaw, P. (1999). Gendered organizational cultures in Canadian work organizations: Implications for creating an equitable workforce. Management Decision, 37, 372–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, C. (1992). Recruiting strategies for changing times. International Journal of Manpower, 13, 13–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, E. M. (1998). Gendered career paths. Personnel Review, 27, 396–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA, 23606, USA

    Diane Catanzaro, Heather Moore & Timothy R. Marshall

Authors
  1. Diane Catanzaro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Heather Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Timothy R. Marshall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diane Catanzaro.

Additional information

Received and reviewed by former editor, George Neuman.

Appendix

Appendix

Job Pursuit Intentions Scale (Adapted from Aiman-Smith et al. 2001)

Directions: Based on the company brochure you just read, please respond to these following statements. Please indicate your agreement with each item by circling one answer for each question.

  1. 1.

    I would accept a job offer from this company after graduating.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  2. 2.

    I would request more information about this company after graduating.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  3. 3.

    If this company visited campus I would want to speak with a representative.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  4. 4.

    I would attempt to gain an interview with this company after graduating.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  5. 5.

    I would actively pursue obtaining a position with this company after graduating.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  6. 6.

    If this company was at a job fair I would seek out their booth.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

Organizational Preference Measure

Directions: Please read each of the following statements. Think about the preferences you have towards the values in an organization. Please indicate your agreement with each item by circling one answer for each statement.

  1. 1.

    I would prefer to work in an organization that values collaboration with other employees in my department.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  2. 2.

    I would prefer to work in an organization that would allow me to balance my work and family life, even if it meant earning a lower salary.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  3. 3.

    I would prefer to work in an organization that values my working independently from other employees.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  4. 4.

    I would prefer to work in an organization that values my being supportive and helpful to others in my department.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  5. 5.

    I would prefer to work in an organization that provides me the opportunity to have high salary earnings, even if it meant sacrifices regarding my personal and family life.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  6. 6.

    I would prefer to work in an organization that allows me to be competitive with my colleagues for rewards.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  7. 7.

    I would prefer to work in an organization that views high salary and career advancement as the main focus of my life, even if the job was very demanding and required 60 h work weeks.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  8. 8.

    I would prefer to work in an organization where rewards are distributed equally in my workgroup.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  9. 9.

    I would prefer to work in an organization that values being a winner and outperforming my peers.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

  10. 10.

    I would prefer to work in an organization that realizes I have a life outside of my career, even if the salary is less than I could earn in a more demanding job.

    Strongly disagree

    Somewhat disagree

    Slightly disagree

    Neutral

    Slightly agree

    Somewhat agree

    Strongly agree

Organizational Choice Measure

Directions: Based on the two company brochures you just read, please respond to the following questions.

  1. 1.

    What is the probability that you would choose to work at one organization over the other? (Please indicate your response by placing a check by one of the probability statement options).

    • Example: If you would strongly prefer to work at Hampton Roads Bank & Trust over Tidewater Savings & Loan, you could choose option (f) below: 100% HRB&T and 0% TS&L

    • Example: If you would strongly prefer to work at Tidewater Savings & Loan, you could choose option (a) below: 0% HRB&T and 100% TS&L.

     

    Hampton Roads Bank & Trust (HRB&T)

    Tidewater Savings & Loan (TS&L)

    _____ a.

    0% HRB&T

    100% TS&L

    _____ b.

    20% HRB&T

    80% TS&L

    _____ c.

    40% HRB&T

    60% TS&L

    _____ d.

    60% HRB&T

    40% TS&L

    _____ e.

    80% HRB&T

    20% TS&L

    _____ f.

    100% HRB&T

    0% TS&L

  2. 2.

    Based on the two brochures you have read, which organization would you prefer to work?

    a. ____ Hampton Roads Bank & Trust

    b._____ Tidewater Savings & Loan

    Please explain your choice:

    ________________________________________________________________________________________

    ________________________________________________________________________________________

    ________________________________________________________________________________________

    ________________________________________________________________________________________

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Catanzaro, D., Moore, H. & Marshall, T.R. The Impact of Organizational Culture on Attraction and Recruitment of Job Applicants. J Bus Psychol 25, 649–662 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9179-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9179-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation