Select Page
  

There is a minimum requirement of 500 words for the article critique. Format your critique in APA style. Begin with an introduction that defines the subject of your critique and your point of view. You will first need to identify and explain the author’s ideas. Include specific passages that support your description of the author’s point of view. Take into consideration how you would approach a recruiting program for your company based on the author’s ideas on the subject matter. What challenges would you face if your company were a global conglomerate? Defend your point of view by raising specific issues or aspects of the argument. Offer your own opinion. Explain what you think about the argument. Describe several points with which you agree or disagree. Explain how the passages support your opinion. Conclude your critique by summarizing your argument and re-emphasizing your opinion. For each of the points you mention, include specific passages from the text (you may summarize, quote, or paraphrase, being sure to include proper in-text citations) that provide evidence for your point of view.
who_will_we_recruit.pdf

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
BHR3352 CSU Targeted Human Resources Recruting And Labor Relations
Just from $10/Page
Order Essay

WHO WILL WE RECRUIT?
TARGETING DEEP- AND SURFACELEVEL DIVERSITY WITH HUMAN
RESOURCE POLICY ADVERTISING
W E N D Y J . C A S P E R , J U L I E H O L L I D AY W AY N E , A N D
JENNIFER GRACE MANEGOLD
Research on targeted recruitment has focused on targeting applicants with
surface-level attributes such as underrepresented demographic groups. The
present study extends targeted recruitment research by examining how
advertising human resource policies might be useful for targeting both surface- and deep-level attributes. Specifically, the current study uses an experimental design to examine the impact of work-family, diversity, and employee
development policies on the job-pursuit intentions of working adults in the
United States. We examined surface- (demographic characteristics; e.g., race)
and deep-level differences (attitudes or values; e.g., diversity values) as predictors of whether participants intend to pursue jobs with firms advertising
these human resource (HR) policies. Deep-level differences consistently predicted job-pursuit intentions for all three HR policies, but only marginal support was obtained for surface-level variables as predictors. Findings suggest
that targeted recruitment based on deep-level attributes may be more successful than targeted recruitment based on surface-level factors.
Keywords: human resource policy; organizational attraction; recruitment;
values; diversity
D
istinctive human resource policies
may aid targeted recruitment
(Breaugh, 2008) by helping an
employer develop a brand that is
distinct and desirable (Celani &
Singh, 2009), as such positive brand images attract applicants (Love & Singh, 2011). A variety
of human resource (HR) policies can enhance
a firm’s attractiveness as an employer (Allen &
O’Brien, 2006; Avery, 2003; Barbeite &
Maurer, 2002; Brown, Cober, Keeping, & Levy,
2006; Casper & Buffardi, 2004; Rau & Hyland,
2002), but the breadth of applicant attributes
that can be targeted with HR policies is
not well understood (Breaugh, Macan, &
Grambow, 2008). The current study contributes to targeted recruitment research by examining the viability of targeting deep- and
Correspondence to: Wendy J. Casper, 701 S. West Street, Suite 233, Box 19467, College of Business, University of
Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX 76019-0467, Phone: 817.272.1133, Fax: 817.272.3122, E-mail: [email protected]
Human Resource Management, May–June 2013, Vol. 52, No. 3. Pp. 311–332
© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com).
DOI:10.1002/hrm.21530
312
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MAY–JUNE 2013
surface-level differences with work-family,
diversity, and employee development policies using a sample of US workers.
Targeted Recruitment
Targeted recruitment can be an effective strategic HR management tool. Firms may want
to attract certain types of applicants who can
support their strategy (Huselid & Becker,
2011), because matching a firm’s human capital to its strategy is positively related to firm
performance (Wright, Smart, & McMahan,
1995). For example, although many
firms seek to hire workers with
more education and experience—
Because better
typical indicators of human
recruitment
capital—this might not fit firms
with a cost leadership strategy,
outcomes occur
given the higher wages required to
pay these workers. Instead, firms
when an applicant
that offer lower wages to support
their cost leadership strategy may
pool is replete
want to recruit applicants with
with the kind of
lower levels of traditional indicators of human capital (i.e., educacandidates that fit
tion, experience) but who possess
other attributes that will make
the firm’s strategy
them successful employees.
or culture, firms that Likewise, firms using a differentiation strategy might want to attract
are able to draw
diverse applicants to foster cresuch candidates into ativity and respond to a diverse
market (Cox & Blake, 1991). Thus,
their applicant pool
targeted recruitment might be
used to attract applicants possessshould recruit more
ing any attribute, such as those
that support a firm’s strategy or
effectively.
attributes that are prevalent in
a firm’s labor pool (Breaugh
et al., 2008).
Despite the importance of targeted recruitment, researchers lament the sparse research
on this topic (Barber, 1998; Breaugh et al.,
2008; Ployhart, Schneider, & Schmitt, 2006),
which has typically examined only demographic groups such as women and minorities
(Avery & McKay, 2006). Given the relevance
of targeted recruitment to strategic HR management, understanding who distinctive HR
practices can effectively target is important.
Theoretically, targeted recruitment is based
in interactional psychology, which posits
that people differ in what they find attractive
(Chatman, 1989; Schneider, 1987; Turban &
Keon, 1993). This suggests firms should have
greater success recruiting targeted applicants
with policies that are attractive to them.
Individual differences that a firm may target can be classified as surface-level factors,
such as demographics (i.e., race, education),
or deep-level factors, such as attitudes and values. Because research has focused on targeting
demographics, it is not clear whether surfaceor deep-level attributes might be more effectively targeted. In fact, recent reviews of the
recruitment literature note the need for more
research to identify which applicant attributes are more important to organizational
attraction (Ehrhart & Ziegert, 2005).
Targeted recruitment occurs during the
“matching” phase of the staffing cycle when
the applicant and firm evaluate each other
to determine fit (Carlson & Connerly, 2003).
Applicants use signals from firms to evaluate fit with their needs (i.e., supplies–needs
fit; Kristof, 1996), and these fit perceptions
are a strong predictor of attraction to a firm
(Chapman, Uggerslev, Carroll, Piasentin,
& Jones, 2005). Thus, targeted recruitment
should be successful if it is based on accurate
knowledge of applicant needs and HR policies that are designed to meet those needs.
Because better recruitment outcomes occur
when an applicant pool is replete with the
kind of candidates that fit the firm’s strategy or culture (Carlson & Connerly, 2003),
firms that are able to draw such candidates
into their applicant pool should recruit more
effectively.
Because candidates are commonly sourced
through advertising, it is pertinent to consider what information can be advertised to
signal firm attributes that will appeal to targeted applicants (Breaugh & Starke, 2000;
Highhouse, Beadle, Gallo, & Miller, 1998).
Recruitment experts have long argued that
HR practices influence applicant decisions to
apply (Rynes, 1991), and research supports
this (Bretz & Judge, 1994; Cable & Judge,
1994). Thus, firms might target applicants
with job advertisements containing details
Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm
DEEP-
AND
SURFACE-LEVEL DIVERSITY
IN
RECRUITMENT
about HR practices that appeal to them. For
example, some firms advertise diversity policies to target women and minorities (Avery &
McKay, 2006; Williams & Bauer, 1994) and
family-friendly policies to target women
and parents (Albrecht, 2003). However, firms
may also wish to target applicants whose values fit the firm or other deep-level attributes
that support their strategy. To date, little
research has examined advertising HR policies
for targeted recruitment of deep-level diversity.
This study examines the importance
of surface- and deep-level attributes to jobpursuit intentions for firms advertising workfamily, diversity, or employee development
policies. Theoretically, applicants’ interest in
a firm might be driven by self-interest, when
they directly benefit from an HR policy due
to membership in a demographic group that
is the targeted beneficiary of a policy (e.g., De
Dreu & Nauta, 2009). Or, applicants’ interest
might be driven by their perception that their
values or attitudes (deep-level differences) fit
with those of the organization (e.g., Edwards &
Cable, 2009). Practically, knowing who prefers firms that advertise particular HR policies
will aid in targeted recruitment.
That is, although many people may think an
organization’s on-site child care center is a
good thing, the center can benefit their selfinterest only if they have children who they
can enroll in the center.
Because women comprise 47 percent of
the workforce (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2011),
they represent many of firms’ targeted recruits.
Moreover, because 64 percent of mothers with
children under 18 are employed (Bureau
of Labor Statistics, 2010a), parents are also
potential recruitment targets. Self-interest
theory suggests that advertising work-family
policies should aid recruitment of women
and parents because they are likely to benefit
more than men and non-parents. Women
struggle more with work-family issues (Eby,
Casper, Lockwood, Bordeaux, & Brinley,
2005) and have greater caregiving demands
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010b) than men.
Similarly, parents of dependent children face
greater caregiving demands than non-parents. Consistent with self-interest, Rothausen,
Gonzalez, Clarke, and O’Dell (1998) found
that only employees who thought they might
use on-site childcare found it appealing. Thus,
we predict:
Surface-Level Diversity
Hypothesis 1: Women (1a) and parents (1b) will
report higher job-pursuit intentions for organizations advertising work-family policies than will
men (1a) and non-parents (1b).
People differ in surface-level attributes such
as race, gender, parental status, and education
(Harrison, Price, & Bell, 1998; Harrison, Price,
Gavin, & Florey, 2002). For targeted recruitment based on surface-level attributes to be
effective, it must appeal to the needs and desires of targeted applicants (Mannix & Neale,
2005; Thomas & Wise, 1999). A self-interest
model proposes that people act out of selfconcern, suggesting people prefer HR policies
that benefit them (De Dreu & Nauta, 2009;
Lind & Tyler, 1988; Miller, 1999; Sears &
Funk, 1991). Self-interest is the basis of economic behavior and social-exchange theories
(Sik & Allen, 2005), and research has found
self-interest can explain human preferences
(Diekmann, Samuels, Ross, & Bazerman,
1997). In this study, we define self-interest
as a phenomenon that occurs when a
surface-level attribute makes an HR policy
personally beneficial in an instrumental way.
Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm
As firms become aware of the benefits of
diversity, many are targeting recruitment
of minorities and women (Avery & McKay,
2006; Cox & Blake, 1991). Self-interest theory
suggests advertising diversity policies should
help recruit women and minorities because
they are typically the intended beneficiaries
of such policies (Williams & Bauer, 1994).
Supporting this, research has found that people respond more positively to affirmative
action when they benefit personally (Breaugh
et al., 2008). Further, minorities place more
emphasis on race and diversity policies in
recruitment brochures (Avery, 2003; Avery,
Hernandez, & Hebl, 2004; Williamson,
Slay, Shapiro, & Shivers-Blackwell, 2008)
and on a firm’s diversity climate in recruitment (McKay & Avery, 2006) than do whites.
313
314
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MAY–JUNE 2013
Females and minorities also show more interest in firms with diversity policies (Goldberg
& Allen, 2008; Perkins, Thomas, & Taylor,
2000; Thomas & Wise, 1999) than males and
whites. Thus, we predict:
Hypothesis 2: Racial minorities (2a) and women
(2b) will report higher job-pursuit intentions for
organizations advertising diversity policies than
will whites (2a) and men (2b).
Human capital is defined as employee
attributes that facilitate firm success, and the
most common indicators of human capital
are education and work experience (Becker,
1965). Many firms target applicants with high
levels of education and experience because
they believe they can contribute to firm success. However, firms may also target those
with lower levels of these traditional indices of human capital such as education and
experience but who have other attributes that
should facilitate success in their environment.
For example, Southwest Airlines prefers workers without much business education and
airline experience because they believe applicants who have had less exposure to “typical”
ways of business will be more likely to embrace
the novel and creative approaches that support Southwest’s unique culture (O’Reilly &
Pfeffer, 1995).
Targeted recruitment based on human
capital might focus on employee development policies because they are a typical way
to develop human capital. Several theoretical
views inform how typical human capital indicators might relate to the efficacy of advertising
employee development policies in recruitment.
On the one hand, employee development policies may appeal more to workers with more
education and experience because they may
be more aware of how skill development can
benefit them. Supporting this, Mihail (2008)
found employees with more of this traditional
human capital were more likely to plan career
development activities than those with less
of it. Alternatively, those with less education
and experience may have more to gain from
skill development, and, thus, may be more
drawn to firms with employee development
programs. Supporting this, employees who
believe they have more to gain are more likely
to participate in employee development activities (Maurer, Weiss, & Barbeite, 2003). Because
theory and research are equivocal with respect
to the relationship between traditional human
capital variables and interest in firms with
employee development policies, we pose an
exploratory research question.
Research Question 1: How does participant education (1a) and work experience (1b) relate to jobpursuit intentions for firms advertising employee
development policies?
Deep-Level Diversity
Targeted recruitment may also be effective for
targeting deep-level attributes such as values
and attitudes that fit at a firm. Values are relatively stable beliefs about what is right or
wrong (Chatman, 1989; Meglino & Ravlin,
1998), whereas an attitude involves an evaluation of how good or bad an entity is (Eagly &
Chaiken, 1993). This value congruence view,
which draws from signaling theory (Spence,
1973) and the person-organization (P-O) fit
literature (Ehrhart & Ziegert, 2005), suggests
applicants prefer firms that share their values
(Edwards, 2008; Edwards & Cable, 2009).
Signaling theory asserts that in the absence of
information about factors such as firm values,
which typically cannot be known before employment, people draw inferences from observable characteristics, such as advertised HR
policies, about unknown factors such as firm
values (Spence, 1973). Then, applicants evaluate the match between their own values or
attitudes and what they infer as those of the
firm (Lievens, Decaesteker, Coetsier, &
Geirnaert, 2001; Rynes, 1991). An applicant’s
perception of the congruence between his/
her own values and attitudes and those of the
firm has been found to relate to job-pursuit
intentions (Chapman et al., 2005).
The value congruence perspective is consistent with research that finds that deeplevel differences influence reactions to HR
policies and to organizations (Allen & O’Brien,
2006; Bretz, Ash, & Dreher, 1989; Harrison,
Kravitz, Mayer, Leslie, & Lev-Arey, 2006; Judge &
Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm
DEEP-
Bretz, 1992; Kim & Gelfand, 2003; Martins &
Parsons, 2007). This research, combined with
the value congruence perspective, suggests
firms might effectively target deep-level attributes in recruitment. Because job advertisements contain information (i.e., HR policies)
that signal firm values (Breaugh & Starke,
2000; Rynes, 1991; Spence, 1973), applicants
can form impressions of the organization that
drive their interest in working there.
Attracting applicants with strong family
values may be important for firms recruiting
in regions in the United States where people
live to provide a good family environment or
for those recruiting internationally in familycentric cultures like Latin America (Sabogal,
Marin, Otero-Sabogal, Marin, & Perez-Stable,
1987; Schwartz, 2007). People with strong family values have salient family identities—they
believe family is one of their most important
life roles and are willing to commit resources
to ensure success in this role. In contrast,
those with weaker family values see family as
less important to their personal satisfaction
and, thus, are willing to make fewer sacrifices for family relative to those with stronger family values (Amatea, Cross, Clark, &
Bobby, 1986). Because work-family policies
signal that a firm values employees’ families
(Casper & Buffardi, 2004; Grover & Crooker,
1995; Wayne & Casper, 2012), people with
strong family values should find firms that
offer these policies appealing. Supporting
this, Honeycutt and Rosen (1997) found that
people with family-salient identities saw flexible careers as more attractive, and those with
career-salient identities found traditional
careers more appealing. Thus, we propose:
Hypothesis 3: Participants with higher family values will report greater job-pursuit intentions for
firms advertising work-family policies than those
with lower family values.
Firms whose clients are diverse would
benefit from hiring people who enjoy working with diverse others, and firms with diverse
and collegial climates likely want to maintain
a positive climate for diversity. Thus, firms
often benefit from hiring people with positive
diversity attitudes, and advertising diversity
Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm
AND
SURFACE-LEVEL DIVERSITY
IN
RECRUITMENT
policies should aid recruitment of such individuals. Studies of diversity policies and
recruitment have often examined diversity
policies that target a single form of applicant
diversity, such as race (e.g., Kim & Gelfand,
2003) or sex (e.g., Martins & Parsons, 2007).
To extend past research, we examine diversity
policies that go beyond the basic legal protections of race and gender (i.e., many affirmative action programs) and that are broader
and more inclusive (i.e., most managing
diversity programs). Theoretically, applicants
who value diversity along a variety of dimensions are likely to be attracted to firms that
advertise broad managing diversity efforts.
We define diversity values as a belief that
diversity is favorable for firms and a desire
to affiliate with diverse others. In defining
diversity values, we draw from the idea of
other-group orientation, or a desire to participate and be involved with people from
other ethnic groups (Phinney, 1992), but we
extend this idea beyond race/ethnicity. That
is, diversity values involve a preference for
involvement with diverse others with respect
to any diversity dimension, including gender,
race, ethnicity, religion, culture, age, sexual
orientation, and functional background.
Several studies suggest that advertising
diversity policies may increase attraction of
applicants with attitudes and values supporting diversity. Kim and Gelfand (2003) found
that individuals with strong ethnic identities
were more attracted to firms that highlighted
race-based diversity initiatives than those that
did not. Martins and Parsons (2007) found
that people with more central gender identities and more positive attitudes toward affirmative action for women, and who believed
that women were discriminated against at
work, were more attracted to firms with gender diversity initiatives. We posit that:
Hypothesis 4: Participants with higher diversity
values will exhibit higher job-pursuit intentions
for firms advertising diversity policies than those
with lower diversity values.
Diversity policies that go beyond race
or sex reflect the more inclusive nature of
many managing diversity programs …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Order your essay today and save 10% with the discount code ESSAYHSELP