Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Organizational socialization of employees with disabilities: Critical issues and implications for workplace interventions

  • Published:
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Organizational socialization is the process whereby newcomers to work organizations become insiders. The socialization process has been linked to various outcomes including newcomer job satisfaction, organizational commitment, job knowledge and performance, promotion and advancement rate, salary, and turnover. The purpose of the present paper is threefold: (1) to examine issues facing persons with disabilities during organizational socialization in order to help guide future research on this topic; (2) to provide an awareness of potential aditional barriers (unrealistic newcomer expectations, interaction avoidance, “norm to be kind,” low work group expectations) that face newcomers with disabilities as they begin jobs; and (3) to suggest some possible policies, programs, and interventions that might help persons with disabilities to overcome those barriers.

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

  1. Wanous JP, Colella A. Organizational entry research: Current status and future directions. In: Rowland K, Ferris G, eds.Research in personnel and human resources management. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1989, pp. 59–120.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wanous JP.Organizational entry. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Greenwood R, Johnson V. Employer perspectives on workers with disabilities.J. Rehab. 1987; 53: 37–45.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bressler R, Lacy A. Analysis of the relative job progression of the perceptibly physically handicapped.Acad Management J 1980; 23: 132–143.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Goodyear D, Stude E. Work performance: A comparison of severely disabled and non-disabled employees.J Appl Rehab Consel 1975; 6: 210–216.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Greenwood R, Johnson V. Employer perspectives on workers with disabilities.J. Rehab 1987; 53: 37–45.

    Google Scholar 

  7. McNeil J.Labor force status and other characteristics of persons with a work disability: 1982. U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Stone EF, Stone DL, Dipboye RL. Stigmas in organizations: Race, handicaps, and physical unattractiveness. In: Kelly K, ed.Issues, theory, and research in industrial and organizational psychology. New York: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., 1992, pp. 385–457.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jackson SE, Stone VK, Alvarez EB. Socialization amidst diversity: The impact of demographics on work team oldtimers and newcomers. In: Cummings LL, Staw BM, ed.Research in organizational behavior. Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1993, pp. 45–109.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Wanous JP.Organizational entry. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Van Maanen J. Breaking in: Socialization to work. In: Dubin R, ed.Handbook of work, organization, and society. Chicago, IL: Rand-McNally, 1976, pp. 67–130.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fisher C. Organizational socialization: An integrative review. In: Rowland KM, Gerris GR, ed.Research in personnel and human resources management. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1986, pp. 101–146.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wanous JP.Organizational entry. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wanous JP, Colella A. Organizational entry research: Current status and future directions. In: Rowland K, Ferris G., ed.Research in personnel and human resources management. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1989, pp. 59–120.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wanous JP.Organizational entry. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Van Maanen J, Schein E. Toward a theory of organizational socialization. In: Staw BM, ed.Research in organizational behavior. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1979, pp. 209–266.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Allen N, Meyer J. Organizational socialization tactics: A longitudinal analysis of links to newcomers' commitment and role orientation.Acad Management J 1990; 33: 847–858.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jones G. Socialization tactics, self efficacy, and newcomers' adjustments to organizations.Acad Management J 1986; 29: 262–279.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Reichers A. An interactionist perspective on newcomer socialization rates.Acad Management Rev 1987; 12: 278–287.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Weiss H. Social learning of work values in organizations.J Appl Psychol 1978; 63: 711–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Berlew D, Hall DT. The socialization of managers: Effects of expectations on performance.Admin Sci Quart 1966; 11: 207–223.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Eden D.Pygmalion in management: Productivity as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Wanous JP.Organizational entry. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Berlew D, Hall DT. The socialization of managers: Effects of expectations on performance.Admin Sci Quart 1966; 11: 207–223.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Davis F. Deviance disavowal: The management of strained interaction by the visibly handicapped.Soc Problems 1961; 9: 120–132.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Goffman E.Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Strenta A.Physical Disability and the Attribution Dilemma: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior in Social Interaction. Doctoral dissertation, Dartmoth College, New Hamshpire, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Colella A.A New Role for Newcomer Pre-entry Expectations During Organizational Entry: Expectation Effects on Job Perceptions. Doctoral dissertation, the Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Colella A, DeNisi AS, Lund M.The Orientation and Work Socialization of Workers with Disabilities: Research and Development of Interventions to Increase Satisfaction, Performance, and Retention. Report to the New Jersey Council for Developmental Disabilities, November 1992.

  31. Wanous JP, Poland, T, Premack S, Davis S. The effects of met expectations on newcomer attitudes and behaviors: A review and meta-analysis.J Appl Psychol 1992; 77: 288–297.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Stone EF, Stone DL, Dipboye RL. Stigmas in organizations: Race, handicaps, and physical unattractiveness. In: Kelly K, ed.Issues, theory, and research in industrial and organizational psychology. New York: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., 1992, pp. 385–457.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Reichers A. An interactionist perspective on newcomer socialization rates.Acad Management Rev 1987; 12: 278–287.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Gates LB. The role of the supervisor in successful adjustment to work with a disabling condition: Issues for disability policy and practice.J. Occup Rehab 1993; 3: 179–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Goffman E.Stigman: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Stone EF, Stone DL, Dipboye RL. Stigmas in organizations: Race, handicaps, and physical unattractiveness. In: Kelly K, ed.Issues, theory, and research in industrial and organizational psychology. New York: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., 1992, pp. 385–457.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Lerner M.The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York, NY: Plenum Press, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Katz I. Some thoughts about the stigma notion.Pers Soc Psychol Bull 1979; 5: 447–460.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Kleck R, Ono H, Hastorf A. The effects of physical deviance upon face to face interaction.Human Rel 1966; 19: 425–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Langer EJ, Fiske S, Taylor AE, Chanowitz B. Stigman, staring and discomfort: A novel stimulus hypothesis.J Exp Soc. Psychol 1976; 12: 451–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Strohmer DC, Grand SA, Purcell MJ. Attitudes towards persons with a disability: An examination of demographic factors, social context, and specific disability.Rehab Psychol 1984; 29: 131–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Bowman JT. Attitudes towards disabled persons: Social distance and work competence.J. Rehab 1987; 53: 41–44.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Stone DL, Michaels C.Factors Affecting the Acceptance of Disabled Individuals in Organizations. Paper presented at the Meeting of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, Georgia, August 1993.

  44. Wanous JP.Organizational entry. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Hastorf A, Northcraft G, Piciotto S. Helping the handicapped: How realistic is the performance feedback received by the physically handicapped.Pers Soc Psychol Bull 1979; 5: 373–376.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Carver C, Glass D, Katz I. Favorable evaluations of blacks and the handicapped: Positive prejudice, unconscious denial, or social desirability.J Appl Soc Psychol 1978; 8: 97–106.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Snyder M, Kleck R, Strenta A, Mentzer S. Avoidance of the handicapped: An attributional ambiguity analysis.J. Pers Soc Psychol 1979; 37: 2297–2306.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Gates LB. The role of the supervisor in successful adjustment to work with a disabling condition: Issues for disability policy and practice.J. Occup. Rehab 1993; 3: 179–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Bordieri J, Drehmer D. Hiring decisions for disabled workers: Looking at the cause.J Appl Soc Psychol 1986; 16: 199–208.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Bowman JT. Attitudes towards disabled persons: Social distance and work competence.J Rehab 1987; 53: 41–44.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Colella A, DeNisi AS, Lund M.The Job Socialization of Employees with Disabilities: The Role of Expectations. Paper presented at the Academy of Management National Meetings, Atlanta, Georgia, 1993.

  52. Gouvier WD, Steiner DD, Jackson WT, Schlater D, Rain JS. Employment discrimination against handicapped job candidates: An analog study of the effects of neurological causation, visibility of handicap, and public contact.Rehab Psychol 1991; 36: 121–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Krefting LA, Brif AP. The impact of applicant disability on evaluative judgment in the selection process.Acad Management J 1976; 19: 675–680.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Christman LA, Slaten BL. Attitudes towards people with disabilities and judgments of employment potential.Percept Motor Skills 1991; 72: 467–475.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Hastorf A, Northcraft G, Piciotto S. Helping the handicapped: How realistic is the performance feedback received by the physically handicapped.Pers Soc Psychol Bull 1979; 5: 373–376.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Krefting LA, Brief AP. The impact of applicant disability on evaluative judgment in the selection process.Acad Management J 1976; 19: 675–680.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Rose G, Brief AP. Effects of handicap and job characteristics on selection evaluations.Personnel Psychol 1979; 32: 385–392.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Carver C, Glass D, Katz I. Favorable evaluations of blacks and the handicapped: Positive prejudice, unconscious denial, or social desirability.J Appl Soc Psychol 1978; 8: 97–106.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Christman LA, Slaten BL. Attitudes towards people with disabilities and judgments of employment potential.Percept Motor Skills 1991; 72: 467–475.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Krefting LA, Brief AP. The impact of applicant disability on evaluative judgment in the selection process.Acad Management J 1976; 19: 675–680.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Farina A, Feiner RD, Boudreau, LA. Reactions of workers to male and female mental patient job applicants.J. Consult Clin Psychol 1976; 41: 363–372.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Rose G, Brief AP. Effects of handicap and job characteristics on selection evaluations.Personnel Psychol 1979; 32: 385–392.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Czajka J, DeNisi AS. Effects of emotional disability and clear performance standards on performance ratings.Acad Management J 1988; 31: 394–404.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Parent W, Everson J. Competencies of disabled workers in industry: A review of business literature.J. Rehab 1986; 52: 16–23.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Greenwood R, Johnson V. Employer perspectives on workers with disabilities.J. Rehab 1987; 53: 37–45.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Hastorf A, Northcraft G, Piciotto S. Helping the handicapped: How realistic is the performance feedback received by the physically handicapped.Pers Soc Psychol Bull 1979; 5: 373–376.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Leventhal G, Michaels J. Locus of causes and equity motivations as determinants of reward allocation.J. Pers Soc Psychol 1971; 17: 229–235.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Bordieri JE, Drehmer DE. Hiring decisions for disabled workers: Looking at the cause.J Appl Soc Psychol 1986; 16: 199–208.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Bordieri JE, Drehmer DE. Causal attribution and hiring recommendations for disabled job applicants.Rehab Psychol 1988; 33: 239–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Bordieri JE, Drehmer DE, Comninel ME. Attribution of responsibility and hiring recommendations for job applicants with lower back pain.Rehab Counsel Bull 1988; 32: 140–148.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Bordieri JE, Drehmer DE, Taricone PF. Personnel selection bias for job applicants with cancer.J Appl Soc Psychol 1990; 20: 244–253.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Colella A, DeNisi AS, Lund M.The Job Socialization of Employees with Disabilities: The Role of Expectations. Paper presented at the Academy of Management National Meetings, Atlanta, GA, 1993.

  74. Heilman M, Block C, Lucas J. Presumed incompetent? Stigmatization and affirmative action efforts.J Appl Psychol 1992; 77: 536–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Makas E. Positive attitudes toward disabled people: Disabled and nondisabled persons' perspectives.J Soc Issues 1988; 44: 49–61.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Reichers A. An interactionist perspective on newcomer socialization rates.Acad Management Rev 1987; 12: 278–287.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Ashford SJ, Black JS.Self-Socialization: Individual Tactics to Facilitate Entry. Paper presented at the National Academy of Management Meetings, Las Vegas, Nevada, 1993.

  78. Ibid.

  79. Wanous JP.Organizational entry. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Eden D.Pygmalion in management: Productivity as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, School of Business, Rutgers University, USA

    Adrienne Colella

Authors
  1. Adrienne Colella
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Colella, A. Organizational socialization of employees with disabilities: Critical issues and implications for workplace interventions. J Occup Rehab 4, 87–106 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02110048

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02110048

Key words

Search

Navigation