Newcomer Identification: Trends, Antecedents and Consequences

r Academy of Management Journal 2017, Vol. 60, No. 3, 855–879. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.0466 NEWCOMER IDENTIFICATION: TRENDS, ANTECEDENTS, MODERATORS, AND CONSEQUENCES JING ZHU Hong Kong University of Science and Technology SRINIVASAN TATACHARI Indian Institute of Management Udaipur PRITHVIRAJ CHATTOPADHYAY University of Auckland We examine changes in organizational identification among 1,346 newcomers at critical milestones during their first year. Integrating the social identity approach with the literature on psychological contracts, we argue that changes in newcomer perceptions of organizational prestige influence changes in their organizational identification over time, mediated by changes in their perceptions of the extent to which their psychological contract has been fulfilled. Our five-wave results reveal that perceived prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and organizational identification rise during institutionalized socialization, then fall immediately after this period, and finally recover and stabilize as employees settle into their first assignment. Newcomers’ personal prestige markers, including academic qualifications, the proportion of in-group members in the incoming cohort, and organizational preferential treatment moderate these change patterns, which subsequently predict the speed and occurrence of newcomers’ voluntary turnover over three years of employment. because it undermines our prescriptions for enhancing newcomer identification and related attitudes and behaviors that are critical to newcomer success. We examine how organizational identification unfolds during the initial months of employment across critical milestones encountered by newcomers, including entry, institutional socialization, informal socialization, and initial assignment; how changes in perceived organizational prestige (i.e., the degree to which an organization is perceived as being highly regarded in the broader community on account of its success and visibility; Mael & Ashforth, 1992; March & Simon, 1958) give rise to changes in organizational identification over time; and how individual and contextual factors modify the trajectories of these variables. Our theoretical model integrates the social identity approach—Haslam’s (2004) synthesis of social identity (Tajfel & Turner, 1986) and self-categorization theories (Turner, 1987)—with the literature on psychological contracts (i.e., employees’ understanding of their social exchange relationship with their organization; Rousseau, 1989). We draw on the psychological contracts literature to explain how changes in perceived firm prestige affect changes in organizational identification via changes of psychological contract fulfillment, and on the social identity approach to “Organizational identification,” the extent to which individuals define themselves in terms of their organization and its representative attributes (Mael & Ashforth, 1992), has been shown to predict an array of employee attitudes and behaviors, including job satisfaction and intention to leave (for a review, see Riketta, 2005). Many scholars have also examined the antecedents of identification within the diversity literature (for a review, see van Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007), relational demography literature (for a review, see Chattopadhyay, George, & Ng, 2011), and elsewhere (e.g., George & Chattopadhyay, 2005). Recognizing that the early socialization period tends to significantly impact identification (Ashforth & Saks, 1996), we concur with Haslam and Ellemers’ (2005) contention that it is a significant omission that the field has yet to systematically examine how and why this important variable waxes and wanes for newly hired employees. This omission is particularly problematic All authors share the first authorship. We thank Associate Editor Daan van Knippenberg and the three anonymous reviers for their helpful comments and suggetsions. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 75th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management held in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, in 2015. 855 Copyright of the Academy of Management, all rights reserved. Contents may not be copied, emailed, posted to a listserv, or otherwise transmitted without the copyright holder’s express written permission. Users may print, download, or email articles for individual use only. 856 Academy of Management Journal formulate our expectations regarding how perceived prestige and, in turn, psychological contract fulfillment and organizational identification unfold over time, and how individual attributes and experiences may moderate these trends. Social identity theory posits that individuals identify with social units to satisfy the two fundamental needs of self-enhancement and uncertainty reduction (Haslam, 2004). We model the impact of selfenhancement by examining the effect of organizational prestige on identification over time, since considerable research shows that prestige facilitates the construction of a more positive social identity, resulting in higher organizational identification (e.g., George & Chattopadhyay, 2005). We model the impact of uncertainty reduction on identification in terms of how variations in the level of uncertainty faced by newcomers over significant milestones shape changes in their perceptions of prestige and, in turn, identification across these milestones. Organizational prestige is a particularly relevant antecedent for newcomer identification as many employees are drawn to joining firms that are highly regarded in the broader community (Cable & Graham, 2000); other antecedents (see Riketta, 2005) are not as relevant at entry. In our conceptualization, newcomers’ initial perceptions of firm prestige shape employee psychological contracts; variations in perceived prestige thus influence the contracts’ fulfillment over time. In turn, the extent of psychological contract fulfillment influences the extent to which employees are able to construct clear and positive social identities based on organizational membership (Restubog, Hornsey, Bordia, & Esposo, 2008). We therefore expect psychological contract fulfillment to mediate the relationship between prestige and identification over time. Mael and Ashforth (1992) incorporated March and Simon’s (1958) arguments on organizational prestige and identification into their seminal work on social identity and organizational identification. We extend March and Simon’s (1958) argument that personal prestige is used as a benchmark in forming views of firm prestige, such that employees with higher personal prestige perceive the firm as having lower prestige. Specifically, we argue that employees with higher rather than lower academic qualifications, with a larger rather than smaller proportion of in-group members within the incoming cohort, and who are given preferential treatment by the firm, in that they are allocated rather than being denied their preferred assignment locations, may perceive themselves to have higher individual prestige and therefore discount the firm’s prestige. June These moderators represent different aspects of individual prestige; namely, newcomer abilities, their social standing, and how they are treated by the firm, respectively. Finally, we go beyond previous work linking organizational identification at a single point of time with employee turnover (see Riketta, 2005) to examine whether changes in identification and its antecedents influence turnover. We make several important contributions. This paper presents a much-needed model predicting changes in newcomer identification (Haslam & Ellemers, 2005). As George and Jones (2000: 658) stated, “time can totally change the way theoretical constructs and the relationships between them are conceptualized and therefore change the propositions that derive from a theory.” Incorporating time into theorizing about identification allows us to provide “an ontologically accurate description” (George & Jones, 2000: 658) of the nature, the antecedents, the moderators, and the consequences of changes in organizational identification. Research on the dynamics of socialization processes has focused on (changes in) newcomer information seeking (Morrison, 1993), satisfaction (Boswell, Shipp, Payne, & Culbertson, 2009; Kammeyer-Mueller, Wanberg, Glomb, & Ahlburg, 2005), and, more recently, hedonic tone and proactive socialization behaviors (Kammeyer-Mueller, Wanberg, Rubenstein, & Song, 2013), but little is known about how newcomers’ identification unfolds over time and what drives these patterns. We provide an initial theoretical account of how self-enhancement and uncertainty reduction motives jointly influence identification over time. Although Hogg and colleagues continue to examine uncertainty reduction as an important motive driving social categorization (see Hogg, 2012, for a review), management researchers have mostly focused on selfenhancement rather than on uncertainty reduction (Chattopadhyay et al., 2011; see Chattopadhyay, George, & Lawrence, 2004, Elstak, Bhatt, Van Riel, Pratt, & Berens, 2015, and Goldberg, Riordan, & Schaffer, 2010, for exceptions). Furthermore, our field lacks an understanding of patterns of identification for newcomers over milestones such as entry, socialization, and initial assignment. Although socialization researchers have long noted the significant role of these milestones in shaping newcomer attitudes and behaviors (Louis, 1980), and longitudinal researchers have advocated the incorporation of milestones into study designs (Ployhart & Ward, 2011), extant longitudinal studies of newcomer attitudes and behaviors have not done so (e.g., Kammeyer-Mueller et al., 2013). We contribute to theory by enhancing our understanding of how 2017 Zhu, Tatachari, and Chattopadhyay identification waxes and wanes over these milestones, and, in turn, impacts employee turnover, as well as of how the change pattern differs across newcomers depending on various aspects of personal prestige, including their qualifications, the proportion of ingroup members in the incoming cohort, and assignment to their preferred locations. We contribute to practice by helping managers to understand how and when to intervene with organizational identification development. Finally, we introduce and test the idea that a diffuse organizational attribute such as prestige can be associated with employee psychological contracts such that fluctuations in prestige can be interpreted in terms of psychological contract fulfillment changes and subsequently related to changes in organizational identification. Although considerable research links prestige and identification (Fuller, Hester, Barnett, Frey, Relyea, & Beu, 2006; Mael & Ashforth, 1992), and a growing number of studies link psychological contract (non)fulfillment and identification (Epitropaki, 2013; Restubog et al., 2008), we do not have a thorough understanding of the process through which changes in perceived organizational prestige result in changes in organizational identification over time. This focus also responds to calls to examine whether specific aspects of organizational context influence psychological contracts (e.g., Rosen, Chang, Johnson, & Levy, 2009). We build on the work of Rousseau (1998) and Restubog et al. (2008) to further clarify the role of psychological contracts within an organizational identification rather than a social exchange paradigm. THEORY AND HYPOTHESES Influence of Prestige on Organizational Identification The social identity approach (Haslam, 2004) explains the link between prestige and identification over time. Identification involves a process of depersonalization through which the positive features of social units are incorporated into the social self in order to construct and maintain a positive self-image and thereby fulfill the need for self-enhancement. These features include socially valued attributes such as prestige (Mael & Ashforth, 1992). Membership in a prestigious organization facilitates the construction of a positive social identity, as employees are able to bask in its reflected glory by incorporating relevant positive organizational qualities into their social identities, resulting in higher levels of organizational identification (Mael & Ashforth, 1992). 857 Changes in prestige are, therefore, likely to be linked to changes in identification. Hypothesis 1. There is a positive relationship between changes in perceived organizational prestige and changes in organizational identification over time. Mediating Role of Psychological Contract Fulfillment We expect that changes in newcomers’ perceived prestige relate to changes in identification through changes in psychological contract fulfillment. Perceptions of organizational prestige may be associated with organizational attributes that are markers of organizational success and underpin a positively valenced image for the firm’s employees and across the community (March & Simon, 1958). Organizational attributes conveying prestige include positive visibility in terms of size, growth, a publicly recognized profile, a history of goal achievement, and a high average employee-status level; organizations employing high-status individuals are, by implication, high-status organizations (Fuller et al., 2006). These markers give rise to an overall impression (March & Simon, 1958) akin to an employee schema regarding organizational prestige (Rousseau, 2001). Employees who are yet to join the organization are likely to develop their perceptions of organizational prestige relying on the visibility of the organization more so than on other markers of prestige (Cable & Graham, 2000). These impressions may be further reinforced through the recruitment process (Rousseau, 1989). In an effort to reduce uncertainty regarding the major transition of joining a new firm, newcomers tend to fill in the blanks related to missing information in a schema (Rousseau, 2001) and are likely to develop ideas about average employee status and the extent to which various organizational goals and subgoals are met even without objective information on those topics. A prestigious reputation may thus lead individuals to believe that the organization has positive practices and procedures that enable it to meet its various goals (Collins & Han, 2004) as well as employees of high status who achieve these outcomes. On the basis of their organizational prestige schema, employees may therefore form expectations regarding the extent to which the organization has promised to help them to successfully fulfill organizational goals and become high-status employees. As noted by Coyle-Shapiro and Shore (2007), variables we usually conceptualize as representing the employment context 858 Academy of Management Journal (e.g., employees work in a prestigious firm) may influence perceptions of what the organization promises and delivers in much the same way as perceptions of features more central to the job (e.g., the number of hours worked). Thus, these impressions and expectations linked to joining a prestigious organization may frame the initial psychological contracts of newcomers. After joining the firm, employees are likely to update their impressions of these internal prestige markers. Their experiences of work procedures and interactions with existing employees provide information regarding how well the organization fulfills its organizational goals and subgoals related to smaller units, and whether expectations about average employee status in terms of capabilities, achievements, and how well they are treated are met (Rousseau, 2001). Upon encountering this new information, newcomers engage in a sensemaking process in which they compare their initial ideas about the organization to their actual experiences and make an overall judgment on the extent to which their initial expectations are met (Louis, 1980) and their psychological contracts are fulfilled (Robinson & Morrison, 2000). Perceptions of psychological contract fulfillment are likely to be higher if the updated information conforms to initial perceptions of organizational prestige. To the extent that perceptions of organizational prestige are adjusted downward (upward) across the milestones encountered by newcomers (as will be explained further in the next section), we expect a similar downward (upward) adjustment in perceptions of psychological contract fulfillment. How does employee identification change in reaction to changes in psychological contract fulfillment? The social identity approach suggests that the valence and clarity of social categories become salient when any change in the category vis-à-vis its content or its social context has a bearing on the usefulness of the category in creating a positive and clear self-image (Haslam, 2004). Identification with a social unit occurs when individuals internalize the key defining features of that unit, which are referred to as the unit “prototype.” Since a prototype is a categorical representation of the abstracted defining features of a social unit (Hogg, 2012) and psychological contracts are employee schemas regarding mutual promises between employees and organizations that are key to defining the relationship between them (Rousseau, 1998), we suggest that an employee’s psychological contract schema is a core aspect of his or her organizational prototype. If so, a psychological contract may function in a similar manner to the prototype in guiding individual expectations and enacted behaviors (see Hogg, 2012). June Employees are more likely to construct positive and clear social identities based on membership in an organization that fulfills their psychological contracts (Restubog et al., 2008; Rousseau, 1998). Identification involves the internalization of positive and clear prototypical features of social units to build positive and clear self-images, thereby satisfying needs for selfenhancement and uncertainty reduction (Turner, 1987). Organizations perceived as fulfilling psychological contracts to a greater extent are likely to have more positively valenced prototypical features than organizations that are perceived as breaching their psychological contracts. Moreover, the fulfillment of psychological contracts is likely to provide clarity as to what the firm stands for, whereas psychological contract breach may create confusion in newcomers as to the key defining features of the firm. Thus, employees are likely to have higher identification with organizations that have fulfilled the psychological contracts to a greater extent.1 Taken together, changes in contract fulfillment are likely to reflect changes in prestige and relate to changes in identification over time. Hypothesis 2. Changes in psychological contract fulfillment mediate the relationship between changes in perceived organizational prestige and changes in organizational identification over time. Prestige, Psychological Contracts, and Identification over Time Based on the socialization literature (Louis, 1980; van Maanen, 1978), we theorize, below, that uncertainty wanes during formal socialization, waxes immediately afterward as informal socialization commences, and then stabilizes and drops somewhat at the start of a newcomer’s initial assignment. Since a key motive underlying categorization is uncertainty reduction (Hogg, 2012), a social unit is less likely to be used for 1 In addition to the reevaluation of organizational identification, it is also possible that employees engage in activities to improve firm prestige (a form of social competition) or build a positive identity based on other firm qualities not related to prestige (a form of social creativity—see Tajfel & Turner, 1986). However, individuals are likely to take the path of least resistance by reducing their identification with a less positive social category rather than to engage in the more effortful social competition (requiring organized collective action) or social creativity (requiring collective agreement on these qualities; Chattopadhyay, Tluchowska, & George, 2004; Haslam, 2004). We would expect this to be truer of newcomers, as they may find it difficult to coordinate collective actions or agreements. 2017 Zhu, Tatachari, and Chattopadhyay categorization purposes when it is associated with greater uncertainty. As uncertainty rises, employees are less likely to engage in the top-down processing associated with self-categorization where they accept and enact the values and norms of the organization (Chattopadhyay et al., 2011). Instead, they are likely to engage in more bottom-up processing and pay attention to further details about the firm as they try to make sense of their uncertain situation. Thus, newcomers may notice more negative rather than positive information about their firm as negative details tend to be more salient than positive details in general, and this tendency is further enhanced in uncertain situations that trigger the tendency to be vigilant against potential threats (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Finkenauer, & Vohs, 2001). They would therefore perceive their firm to be less prestigious, in turn lowering their perceptions of psychological contract fulfillment. An unfulfilled psychological contract is likely to be central to a negative valenced and unclear firm prototype, thereby resulting in lower firm identification. Newcomers may undergo two waves of socialization—formal or institutionalized socialization followed by informal socialization (van Maanen, 1978).2 Employees undergoing formal socialization are segregated from the rest of the organization and provided with positive information about the organization as part of the socialization process while being shielded from the potentially negative views of incumbents (Jablin, 1987; van Maanen, 1978). For example, an important part of formal socialization is to present the positive values that organizations stand for and to describe actions that exemplify these values (van Maanen, 1978). Under these segregated circumstances, newcomers are likely to further bolster one another’s positive impressions as they exchange the positive organizational information. Since formal socialization aims to make a newcomer’s role more explicit and to influence their values and attitudes to achieve a better fit with those espoused in the organization (van Maanen, 1978), we can also conclude that it reduces uncertainty about what the firm stands for and how the newcomer fits in. The process of uncertainty reduction may be further abetted because incumbents are more open to answering newcomers’ queries regarding the organization at this point of time (Miller & Jablin, 1991). Furthermore, the formal socialization practice of offering explicit 2 Although institutionalized socialization prior to their initial assignments is very common (e.g., Klein & Weaver, 2000), it is not universal; our theorizing is limited to firms engaging in formal socialization. 859 information about organizational plans for meeting current and future career and task-related needs may convey the message that employees are valued in this organization (Riordan, Weatherly, Vandenberg, & Self, 2001), reinforcing the idea that employees have high status in the firm. Formal socialization is therefore likely to reinforce and clarify newcomers’ perceptions that they are high-prestige employees who have been hired by a prestigious firm. Institutionalized socialization is also time bound, so that, after a period of time, employees leave behind this collective orientation and start to individually find their way around the organization through what van Maanen (1978) refers to as “informal socialization.” As they leave the segregated environs of institutional socialization and embark on learning through a trialand-error method the idiosyncrasies of performing particular roles, employees may experience a “reality shock” and realize that there is a lot to learn about the organization, creating a great deal of uncertainty about the firm (Chao, O’Leary-Kelly, Wolf, Klein, & Gardner, 1994; Louis, 1980). For example, employees given sales training may think, after completing their formal training, that they have learned a considerable amount about their product and customer, leading to reduced uncertainty. However, upon exposure to customers in the field, they may experience how the actual sales process is much more uncertain than the process depicted and practiced in the formal training. Thus, the sense of certainty created within the segregated environs of formal training may give way to the much greater uncertainty associated with the trial-and-error methods of informally learning on the job as newcomers come to realize how much they actually do not know about their job (van Maanen, 1978). In addition, incumbents may no longer be as motivated as they are during formal socialization, where the purpose is to impart information to newcomers and to take time from their busy schedules to answer queries from newcomers (Miller & Jablin, 1991). At this point, since newcomers are no longer segregated, they may come into contact with incumbents who provide a different and more negative view of the organization than that that was provided during formal socialization (Jablin, 1987); this information will impinge on their views about how well the organization meets its various goals and subgoals as well as the average status of existing employees. Moreover, individuals are more likely to pay attention to negative information than positive information in times of uncertainty (Baumeister et al., 2001). Since the period following the institutionalized socialization process is always likely to be more uncertain than during the 860 Academy of Management Journal formal socialization process (van Maanen, 1978), newcomers will pay more attention to the negative rather than the positive information they come across. Overall, newcomers’ perceptions of prestige are likely to drop at this time. As employees gradually transform from outsiders to insiders, they resolve uncertainties about the tasks and relationships aspect of their job (Feldman, 1981). Their insider perspective allows them to better interpret information regarding the organizational context (Louis, 1980). During this time, employees start to understand and appreciate the positive features of the organization more as they try to make sense of why they remain in the organization and work hard at achieving its goals (Weller, Holtom, Matiaske, & Mellewigt, 2009). The longer they remain in the organization, the more this process of cognitive dissonance reduction is likely to facilitate a focus on the firm’s positive features. As they become socialized into their first assignment, they are particularly likely to learn about and appreciate their colleagues’ success and the extent to which their goals are being met (Feldman, 1981). Employees may also gain an appreciation of how the organization functions in order to produce the external image that attracted them to the organization in the first place. Thus, their perceptions of organizational prestige are likely to stabilize from the downward trend of the previous stage, and trend upward to some extent. In sum, employees’ perceptions of prestige are likely to rise initially after entry, as they go through institutionalized socialization, fall as they encounter organizational realities following the socialization period, and then stabilize following their first assignment and rise a little over time. Moreover, since we have argued that changes in perceived prestige influence psychological contract fulfillment, which, in turn, influences organizational identification, we expect all three variables to follow a similar pattern over time. Hypothesis 3. (a) Perceived organizational prestige, (b) psychological contract fulfillment, and (c) organizational identification follow curvilinear trends over time such that they initially rise during institutionalized socialization, then fall immediately after this period, and finally stabilize and recover to some extent as employees settle into their first assignment. Moderating Effect of Personal Prestige: Initial Qualification We argue, in the following three sections, how three aspects of personal prestige—(1) academic June qualifications, (2) proportion of in-group members in the incoming cohort, and (3) preferential treatment by the firm in allocating assignment locations—moderate trends in perceived firm prestige, and consequently trends in psychological contract fulfillment and organizational identification. Regarding the first aspect, March and Simon (1958) specified that individuals’ own prestige levels reflected in their accomplishments should relate negatively to their perceptions of organizational prestige, because individuals use their own status as a benchmark for ascertaining organizational status. Employees’ individual accomplishments relate to their human capital and reflect their status (Certo, 2003); in the case of newcomers, this is particularly related to their accomplishments prior to joining. Thus, newcomers with higher qualifications may perceive lower firm prestige. Individuals’ own prestige is particularly likely to be salient at entry if an organization has hired employees with differing levels of qualifications, since educational qualifications signal individual status (Côté, 2011). We focus particularly on the differential status accorded to qualifications in various disciplines (e.g., an engineering degree is perceived as higher status than a humanities degree) (Becher & Trowler, 2001). Since prestigious employees are a marker of firm prestige (March & Simon, 1958), newcomers joining what they perceive to be a prestigious firm may feel that they themselves have prestige through association with the firm and may expect other employees to evidence equal levels of prestige in terms of educational qualifications. Newcomers with higher levels of qualifications at entry who observe that many incoming colleagues possess lower levels of qualifications will therefore perceive lower levels of organizational prestige, as compared with newcomers with lower levels of qualifications who observe that other colleagues have higher qualifications. Moreover, since qualifications signal expertise and performance potential, newcomers with higher qualifications may harbor uncertainty regarding the abilities of their less-qualified colleagues to perform well (e.g., Bunderson, 2003). This would erode their perceptions of firm prestige, since, as argued earlier, firm prestige stands on perceptions of firm performance. Therefore, newcomers expecting to work with colleagues who possess similar qualifications may report lower psychological contract fulfillment when they realize otherwise. Psychological contract fulfillment for employees with lesser qualifications should be at higher levels as they do not face that issue. Finally, since perceptions of prestige and psychological contract fulfillment drive organizational identification, it should be higher at 2017 Zhu, Tatachari, and Chattopadhyay entry for newcomers who have lower rather than higher qualifications. During the institutional socialization period, individuals with higher levels of qualifications are less likely to be impressed by the positive organizational information provided, and the use of their own status as a benchmark implies a lower increase in perceived organizational prestige for them than for employees with lower levels of qualifications (Fuller et al., 2006; March & Simon, 1958). Moreover, less prestigious sources of communication are less persuasive than sources that are more prestigious (Berlo, Lemert, & Mertz, 1969) and lower persuasiveness leads to higher uncertainty for the message recipient. Due to the uncertainty caused initially by the presence of their less-qualified colleagues, more-qualified newcomers are less likely to unquestioningly accept the positive information provided, and thus less likely to upwardly revise their perceptions of firm prestige on the basis of this information. Next, they are likely to experience a lower drop in perceived prestige when they experience reality shock. First, due to their lower initial levels of perceived prestige, their expectations of the organization are likely to be lower, and, thus, the organizational reality is less likely to disappoint them. Second, because of their higher qualifications, they are presumably better able to handle organizational tasks and thus experience less uncertainty. Uncertainty heightens awareness of negative information across a wide range of contexts (Baumeister et al., 2001), and negative information about an organization lowers evaluations of the organization’s prestige. Consequently, lower uncertainty for newcomers with higher qualifications will mean a lower drop in perceived prestige. Finally, consistent with research showing that initial social judgments tend to be perpetuated over time (Kleinke, 1975), we expect prestige to stabilize at a lower level for employees with higher levels of qualifications than for those with lower levels of qualifications. Since fluctuations in psychological contract fulfillment and organizational identification follow from the fluctuations in perceived organizational prestige, as established earlier, we expect employees with higher qualifications to report a lower increase in both variables during the initial socialization period, lower subsequent decrease, and lower upturn at first assignment. In sum, newcomers with higher levels of qualifications will perceive lower levels of prestige at entry than will newcomers with lower levels of qualifications, and experience less fluctuations over time because they are less influenced by positive prestige-related information during socialization (i.e., lower increase), less susceptible to 861 negative prestige-related information following socialization (i.e., lower decrease), and show less recovery at their first assignment. Following this pattern, we expect newcomers with higher qualifications to also report fewer fluctuations in psychological contract fulfillment and organizational identification over time. Hypothesis 4. Newcomer qualifications moderate the trends of (a) perceived organizational prestige, (b) psychological contract fulfillment, and (c) organizational identification over time such that newcomers with higher levels of qualifications report lower levels of all three variables at organization entry (intercept) and experience fewer fluctuations over time (lower increase during the initial socialization, lower subsequent decrease, and lower recovery at first assignment) than newcomers with lower levels of qualifications. Moderating Effect of Personal Prestige: Cohort InGroup Proportion New recruits in a cohort are likely to categorize one another into in-groups and out-groups based on salient dimensions. One such salient dimension is their geographical region of origin. Just as, within the USA, there is a clear divide between individuals from north and south of the Mason Dixon line, in India (from where our data originate), there is a clear distinction between individuals from the North, South, East, and West regions (Cheema, 2011). These regions include distinct clusters of languages, cuisine, and other aspects of culture (Ministry of Tourism, 2015). Social identity theory suggests that individuals tend to accord in-groups higher status in order to build more positive social identities from membership in those in-groups (Haslam & Ellemers, 2005).3 Moreover, the greater the proportion of the out-group in comparison to the in-group, the more the in-group 3 We considered whether individuals from any particular region might disidentify with their own region and think of another region as the in-group—that is, engage in social mobility (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). For this to occur, it is necessary that members of the chosen category accept the aspiring individual as one of them (Chattopadhyay, Tluchowska, & George, 2004). Differences in language, dietary habits, and religious practices would make this difficult for these four regions. Moreover, it is necessary that there is a clear gain in status through social mobility (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). As this is not the case, we consider the geographical region of the newcomer to define their in-group. 862 Academy of Management Journal attributes are highlighted and contrasted with that of the out-group (Chattopadhyay, Tluchowska, & George, 2004). Thus, the greater the proportion of out-group members (and, hence, the smaller the ingroup proportion), the more newcomers may perceive the average status of employees to be lower at entry in comparison to their own status, and in turn, perceive lower firm prestige at entry, as employees deduce firm prestige from comparing their own status to the status accorded to the average employee (March & Simon, 1958). Finally, out-group members may be less trusted to carry out tasks effectively (Chattopadhyay, 1999), and (as argued earlier) lower employee performance may lower perceptions of firm prestige. Moreover, a primary feature of newcomer experience is uncertainty regarding their overall experience (Chao et al., 1994). A smaller proportion of in-group members means greater uncertainty, since there is lower trust that out-group members will achieve the required levels of performance and will help rather than hinder in-group members in their work (Chattopadhyay, 1999). As greater uncertainty is associated with attention to more negative information (Baumeister et al., 2001), and negative information about organizational systems and performance may lower perceptions of prestige, as argued, we also expect that newcomers working with smaller proportions of cohort in-group members may perceive lower levels of prestige when they join an organization, as compared with newcomers who work with greater proportions of cohort in-group members. Furthermore, when newcomers are more focused on in-group versus out-group dynamics, they may focus more on making sense of the differences between them and less on positive information regarding the firm provided during recruitment and training. They may thus perceive lower firm prestige at entry and experience a lower rise during initial socialization. Since social judgments tend to be perpetuated over time (Kleinke, 1975), employees working with lower proportions of in-group members are likely to have lower expectations following their initial socialization. Lower expectations may, in turn, dampen the “reality shock” following training, leading to a lower downturn in perceived prestige. For similar reasons (i.e., lower appreciation of colleagues and greater uncertainty), we expect a less positive trend during the initial assignment for newcomers working with lower proportions of cohort in-group members. Overall, we expect newcomers with lower proportions of ingroup members in the cohort to show a more negative and flatter curve for perceived prestige because June of the lower upswings during training and initial assignment and lower downswing immediately after training. As before, we argue that the trends for psychological contract fulfillment and organizational identification follow the trend of prestige, so that initial contract fulfillment and identification are lower for newcomers working with lower proportions of in-group members and both show more negative and flatter trends over time. Hypothesis 5. Newcomers’ cohort in-group proportion moderates the trends of (a) perceived organizational prestige, (b) psychological contract fulfillment, and (c) organizational identification over time such that newcomers working with lower proportions of in-group members (or higher proportions of out-group members) in the incoming cohort will report lower levels of all three variables at organization entry (intercept), and experience fewer fluctuations over time (lower increase during the initial socialization, lower subsequent decrease, and lower recovery at first assignment) than those working with higher proportions of in-group members. Moderating Effect of Personal Prestige: Preferential Treatment Although we have, so far, considered how circumstances that prevail at organizational entry may influence individuals’ perceptions of organizational prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and organizational identification over time, managers can also make a difference through their actions at any significant milestone for employees after they join. We focus on circumstances in which some employees receive preferential treatment over others in terms of being allocated to a location of their choice for the first project. During this significant period of moving from outsider to insider roles, new employees may interpret such differential treatment more negatively than would an experienced employee (Weller et al., 2009). Employees may prefer certain locations over others for both work- and non-work-related reasons. Newcomers may prefer to work at a certain location because its requirements match with their existing skill set or it has a reputation for cutting-edge projects. Mitchell and Lee (2001) also noted several non-work reasons why employees might prefer certain locations. Employees may be embedded in particular locations through links to community members; they may have personal interests and 2017 Zhu, Tatachari, and Chattopadhyay lifestyles common to certain locations; and they may have to make sacrifices if they must move from their favored locations, such as forgoing views they enjoy there. Although Mitchell and Lee (2001) made these arguments to explain longstanding employee preferences, the same arguments apply for individuals who choose particular locations as their favored place of work. For example, newcomers may anticipate views or lifestyles associated with a place where they hope to live or where they have worked in a previous job. Newcomers who are granted their preferred location may be seen to have been given preferential treatment, compared with those whose preference is not respected. Prestige may be deduced from how incumbent employees are treated, with higher prestige being associated with those who are seen to be treated with greater respect (March & Simon, 1958). Newcomers who join a prestigious firm perceive themselves to have high status based on their membership and expect to be treated accordingly. Initial assignment location may be an important point of comparison for newcomers trying to discern whether, in fact, the organization is according them status by respecting their wishes in this important decision. Those who receive preferential treatment in being assigned to their preferred locations are likely to feel that they are treated in a manner befitting their status, and thus maintain their perceptions of organizational prestige. We argued earlier that the period of informal socialization following institutional socialization is one of great uncertainty when negative information concerning the firm and its treatment of employees is highlighted and has a disproportionate impact on perceptions of prestige. Newcomers not allocated their preferred locations may therefore be significantly negatively influenced in their perceptions of prestige at this time. In summary, newcomers assigned to their preferred locations are likely to show a shallower dip in their perceived prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and organizational identification following the initial socialization as they anticipate their first assignment. Although all employees may register a slight recovery in their perceived prestige after settling into the initial assignment, social judgments tend to be perpetuated over time (Kleinke, 1975), so that employees who fail to get their preferred locations are likely to register a smaller recovery in perceived prestige compared with employees who are given their preferred locations. In turn, they are also likely to register a smaller recovery on their psychological contract fulfillment and organizational identification. 863 Hypothesis 6. Newcomer treatment moderates the trends of (a) perceived organizational prestige, (b) psychological contract fulfillment, and (c) organizational identification over time such that newcomers who receive preferential treatment (i.e., are assigned to preferred locations in their first project) will experience a reduced fall in all three constructs following initial socialization and a higher recovery during the first assignment than those who do not receive preferential treatment. Impact of Prestige, Psychological Contract Fulfillment, and Identification on Turnover Employees who are more identified with their organizations are more likely to stay, for several reasons. Individuals who identify with a social unit have a more positive and clearer sense of self (i.e., a positive and clear social identity based on organizational membership) and a greater sense of belonging (Haslam, 2004). Moreover, self-enhancement and uncertainty reduction are fundamental human motives that drive individuals to categorize themselves as members of a particular social unit (Haslam & Ellemers, 2005). Employees therefore identify more with organizations where they can construct and maintain positive and clear social identities; they stay on in those organizations since their membership allows them to fulfill their needs for self-enhancement and uncertainty reduction. Equally, they are more likely to quit when their organizational identification is at a lower level, because membership in that organization does not facilitate the fulfillment of these needs (Riketta, 2005). As such, newcomers who experience low levels of organizational identification over time are more likely to leave. In combination with our earlier arguments that prestige and contract fulfillment influence identification over time, we expect that newcomers who experience low levels of prestige and psychological contract fulfillment over time are more likely to leave their organizations, and these effects are mediated by their low levels of identification over time. Hypothesis 7a. Perceived organizational prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and organizational identification over time relate negatively to newcomers’ voluntary turnover. Hypothesis 7b. Organizational identification over time mediates the relationship between perceived organizational prestige and psychological 864 Academy of Management Journal contract fulfillment over time and newcomers’ voluntary turnover. METHOD Sample and Procedure We collected multiwave data from an Indian IT services organization that recruits final-year students from undergraduate or postgraduate programs in universities. The company assigns newcomers to one of various training streams, such as Java, UNIX, and Oracle, based on business requirements and the newcomers’ educational background. This intensive training starts on the second day (“Time 1,” abbreviated hereafter to “T1”), lasts an average of two months, and includes sessions on corporate induction, communication, and organizational values, in addition to sessions on the core technology. At the end of the training program (labeled “Time 2,” or “T2”), newcomers must pass training assessment examinations failing which may lead to termination of employment. A month after successfully completing the training program, they report to their assigned business units, located in various Indian cities, and are allocated a project. We collected the third wave of data within the first month of this new project (“Time 3,” or “T3”), and the fourth wave four months into the assignment, after they had gathered adequate knowledge about the client and the project and settled into working on the project (“Time 4,” or “T4”) (Ashforth & Saks, 1996). We determined these four measurement points according to the milestones of newcomer experience rather than arbitrary equal spacing, a strategy recommended by Ployhart and Ward (2011). Finally, we collected data on voluntary turnover from the human resources department about three years after T1 (labeled “Time 5,” or “T5”). We asked 1,399 newcomers to provide data in the first four waves. One author obtained data at T1 and T2 by meeting with the newcomers and administering a paper-and-pencil questionnaire. Online instruments were used at T3 and T4, due to the geographical spread of various business units. Response rates were 99% for T1, 85% for T2, 52% for T3, and 48% for T4. A final sample of 1,346 newcomers completed at least one survey, among whom 40% were women and 51% possessed a bachelor’s degree or higher in engineering. Their average age was 21.47 years; 23% were from northern, 9% from eastern, 3% from western, and 65% from southern June India. On average, the sample completed three out of four surveys, with 31% completing all four surveys.4 Measures Organizational identification, perceived organizational prestige, and psychological contract fulfillment were measured in the first four waves of survey with 5-point Likert-type responses (1 5 strongly disagree, 5 5 strongly agree). Organizational identification. We used Bartels, Pruyn, de Jong, and Joustra’s (2007) 11-item measure. A sample item was “When someone praises [the organization], it feels like a personal compliment.” Coefficient a ranged from .80 to .91. Perceived organizational prestige. We used four items from Mael and Ashforth’s (1992) 8-item scale that were most appropriate in the study context and adapted them to the organization context: “people in the community think highly of [the organization],” “[the organization] is considered prestigious in the community,” “[the organization] is considered one of the best,” and “[the organization] has a good reputation.” In addition, we included one item (family and friends’ opinion) from Bartels et al.’s (2007) scale, as it was appropriate for the study context.5 Coefficient a ranged from .73 to .86. Psychological contract fulfillment. We used Robinson and Morrison’s (2000) five-item scale. A sample item was “So far, [the organization] has done an excellent job of fulfilling its promises to me.” Coefficient a ranged from .77 to .90. Turnover. Hire and turnover dates were obtained from the firm’s human resources department. We focused on voluntary turnover; individuals who left involuntarily were treated as right-censored observations. A total of 387 individuals in the sample (29%) had turned over voluntarily by the end of the study period. Among the turnovers, employment 4 Tests of attrition effects showed that individuals who completed all surveys (restricted sample) were more likely to be males than those who missed at least one survey (65% vs. 55%, t 5 26.62, p , .01), but the restricted sample and the full sample did not differ on the mean, the variance, or the relationships of any of the study variables, providing confidence on performing longitudinal analyses on the data with sample attrition (Goodman & Blum, 1996). 5 Validation test on a separate sample of 126 employed individuals in India showed that the correlation between the scale score of the 5-item measure we used and the full 8item measure of Mael and Ashforth (1992) was .83, indicating a strong overlap between our measure and the original Mael and Ashforth (1992) measure. 2017 Zhu, Tatachari, and Chattopadhyay ranged from 44 days to 1,237 days, with a mean of 790 days. Individuals who were still with the organization at the end of the study period were also treated as right-censored. Qualification. We followed Becher and Trowler’s (2001) arguments in operationalizing high versus low qualifications on the basis of status accorded to completed degrees in a particular discipline. We specified whether the newcomer had completed an engineering degree or was educated in another discipline. Indian society has held engineers in the highest regard over the years, and a degree in this field is widely accepted as a key to social success (Banerjee & Muley, 2007). Non-engineers, in contrast, are hired to cut costs, suggesting a cost versus quality trade-off (Mishra, 2010). Newcomers with engineering degrees (coded as “1”) were therefore considered to have higher qualifications than those from other disciplines (coded as “0”). Cohort in-group proportion. As individuals underwent initial socialization through training in cohorts, we used the proportion of the cohort from the same region as the focal individual to indicate the proportion of the individual’s cohort in-group (i.e., number of individuals who were from the same region in the cohort / total number of individuals in the cohort). Higher proportions corresponded to higher proportions of in-group members. Preferential treatment. We operationalized this variable as whether individuals were assigned to their preferred locations for the first project. Location match was coded “0” for those who were not assigned to their preferred locations and “1” for those who were so assigned. Control variables. We controlled for gender (“0” 5 men, “1” 5 women) and age. Analyses The data have a two-level structure with repeated measures (Level 1) nested within individuals (Level 2). We used random coefficient modeling (also known as hierarchical linear modeling) to test Hypotheses 1–6. The within-individual repeated measures were analyzed at Level 1, and the between-individual moderators and control variables were analyzed at Level 2. We centered the Level 1 repeated-measures scores around the corresponding individual means, and the Level 2 scores, except dummy variables, around the sample mean (Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002; Wanberg, Zhu, & van Hooft, 2010). As individuals underwent initial training in cohorts at seven locations, we also included six location dummy variables 865 at Level 2 to control for the nesting effect of common location in all hypotheses testing. We used SAS software’s PROC MIXED procedures to perform the analyses. Hypotheses 1 and 2 involve dynamic mediation among prestige, contract fulfillment, and identification. We used the random coefficient modeling approach with time-varying predictors to test these Level 1 within-individual relationships with Level 2 random effects, following Pitariu and Ployhart’s (2010) suggestion (described in more detail below). For Hypotheses 7a and 7b, we used proportional hazard modeling (Morita, Lee, & Mowday, 1993) with repeated measures of independent variables (i.e., timevarying covariates). In these analyses, employment duration, measured in number of days, was the dependent variable, and each observation point of the independent variables was used in the dynamic predictors (Kammeyer-Mueller et al., 2013). We used SAS PROC PHREG procedures to perform this analysis. RESULTS Table 1 presents descriptive statistics and the between-individual correlations among the study variables. Confirmatory factor analysis on the three repeated-measures variables supported the discriminant validity of the measures. Because we had four waves of measurements for these variables, we randomly chose the T1 measures for the analysis. Specifically, we entered items of perceived prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and organizational identification into three correlated factors. The data fit the three-factor model well (x2 5 851.59, df 5 186, p , .001, comparative fit index 5 .92, root mean square error of approximation 5 .05) and significantly better than any of the alternative models when two of the three factors were correlated at 1.0.6 We first tested measurement invariance across time to ensure that the changes we found in the variables were not due to changes in the meaning or the measurement of the constructs (Chan, 1998). We followed Chan’s (1998) procedure and compared unconstrained measurement models in which factor loadings of the items administered over time and item-specific errors were freely estimated and constrained models in which factor loadings of the same items were fixed to be equal across time. Comparing comparative fit index and root mean square error of approximation values between the 6 Full confirmatory factor analysis results including alternative model specifications are available from the authors upon request. 866 TABLE 1 Descriptive Statistics and Correlations of Study Variables Gender Age Qualificationb Location matchc Cohort in-group proportion Perceived organizational prestige (T1) Perceived organizational prestige (T2) Perceived organizational prestige (T3) Perceived organizational prestige (T4) Psychological contract fulfillment (T1) Psychological contract fulfillment (T2) Psychological contract fulfillment (T3) Psychological contract fulfillment (T4) Organizational identification (T1) Organizational identification (T2) Organizational identification (T3) Organizational identification (T4) Turnover (T5)d n Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1,346 1,346 1,279 736 1,298 1,328 1,138 706 647 1,328 1,138 707 648 1,328 1,138 708 659 1,346 0.41 21.47 0.54 0.63 0.49 4.29 4.28 4.09 4.01 3.87 3.83 3.66 3.55 4.15 4.17 4.01 3.90 0.29 0.50 1.34 0.50 0.48 0.24 0.50 0.54 0.57 0.62 0.61 0.67 0.71 0.80 0.47 0.54 0.55 0.61 0.45 2.20** 2.24** .00 .09** .10** .13** .07 .05 .08** .05 2.02 .07 .12** .09** .06 .08 2.10** .54** .02 2.14** 2.14** 2.16** 2.16** 2.11** .05 2.07* 2.01 2.08* 2.09** 2.14** 2.08* 2.10* .15** .00 2.01 2.22** 2.29** 2.27** 2.26** 2.04 2.19** 2.06 2.19** 2.19** 2.28** 2.22** 2.26** .37** .09* 2.07 2.07 .02 .02 2.02 2.02 .19** .13** 2.04 2.07 .07 .04 2.04 .04 .13** .08* .14** 2.04 .03 .04 .02 .07* .09** .07 .07 2.01 .73 .51** .44** .43** .33** .20** .16** .17** .52** .40** .35** .34** 2.16** .81 .60** .53** .22** .37** .19** .20** .45** .63** .47** .47** 2.24** .84 .64** .21** .29** .36** .30** .38** .49** .66** .54** 2.23** .86 .20** .28** .30** .40** .36** .43** .51** .63** 2.27** .77 .44** .37** .37** .36** .25** .27** .24** 2.08** .81 .51** .48** .27** .41** .36** .35** 2.14** .87 .63** .19** .19** .41** .33** 2.15** .90 .18** .24** .33** .48** 2.23** .80 .59** .54** .54** 2.19** .88 .63** .59** 2.21** .89 .71** 2.22** .91 2.30** Academy of Management Journal 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. a Notes: T1 5 Time 1, T2 5 Time 2, T3 5 Time 3, T4 5 Time 4, T5 5 Time 5. Coefficient alphas are on the diagonal. a 0 5 male, 1 5 female. b 0 5 not in engineering discipline, 1 5 in engineering discipline. c 0 5 did not match preference, 1 5 matched preference. d 0 5 involuntary turnover/did not turnover, 1 5 voluntary turnover. *p , .05 **p , .01 June 2017 Zhu, Tatachari, and Chattopadhyay free-loading and equal-loading models at two decimal places provided no difference, suggesting that there is evidence of measurement invariance (Kammeyer-Mueller et al., 2013). We then examined whether systematic within- and between-individual variances occurred in the repeated-measure variables via intercept-only models. The results supported both the use of repeated measures and hierarchical linear modeling, in that 51% of the total variance in perceived prestige was within individuals (49% between), 58% was within individuals for psychological contract fulfillment (42% between), and 45% was within individuals for organizational identification (55% between). Hypotheses Tests In order to test the dynamic direct and mediation relationships predicted in Hypotheses 1 and 2, we had to first establish that there was change over time in each of the variables (Pitariu & Ployhart, 2010). Since Hypotheses 3a–3c predicted the changes (trends) of the three variables, we present the results related to those hypotheses first. Hypotheses 3a–3c predicted that perceived organizational prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and organizational identification follow curvilinear trends over time, where they initially rise during institutionalized socialization, then fall immediately after this period, and finally stabilize and recover to some extent as employees settle into their first assignment. To test the trends, we included the intercept and a linear term (i.e., time, coded “0” for T1, “1” for T2, “2” for T3, and “3” for T4), a quadratic term, a cubic term, and a quartic term of time in polynomial models (Zhu, Wanberg, Harrison, & Diehn, 2016). The quartic term was never significant and was dropped from further analyses. Table 2 shows significant cubic (g 5 0.04, 0.03, 0.05 p , .01 or .001) and quadratic (g 5 20.20, 20.16, 20.25, p , .01 or .001) terms for perceived organizational prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and organizational identification, respectively; the linear terms were significant for perceived organizational prestige and organizational identification (g 5 0.13, 0.22, p , .01 or .001), but not significant for psychological contract fulfillment. Figures 1a–1c confirm these curvilinear effects, showing that all three variables rose during the initial institutional socialization after entry, then dropped right after that period, and finally recovered to some extent as newcomers settled into their first project. Thus, Hypotheses 3a, 3b, and 3c were supported. 867 Hypotheses 1 and 2 predicted the withinindividual relationships between the three variables over time (see Table 3). According to Pitariu and Ployhart (2010), because the predictor, mediator, and dependent variables are at Level 1, we can follow the classic multilevel mediation testing sequence (Kenny, Korchmaros, & Bolger, 2003) to test these relationships.7 The trend in organizational prestige was positively related to the trend in organizational identification over time (g 5 0.35, p , .001, Model 2), supporting Hypothesis 1. The trend in perceived prestige was positively associated with the trend in psychological contract fulfillment (g 5 0.32, p , .001, Model 1), and the trend in psychological contract fulfillment was positively related to the trend in organizational identification when perceived prestige was also in the model (g 5 0.14, p , .001, Model 4). The effect of prestige on identification also decreased to 0.30 (p , .001, Model 4). We then followed Bauer, Preacher, and Gil’s (2006) procedure and used Preacher and Selig (2010)’s Monte Carlo method for 1-1-1 multilevel mediation to estimate the indirect effect of prestige on identification via psychological contract fulfillment over time. The 99% confidence interval of the indirect effect [0.03, 0.11] did not include zero. Thus, Hypothesis 2 was supported. Table 4 reports the hierarchical linear modeling results for the cross-level moderating effects of Hypotheses 4–6. We tested the moderating effects of qualification, cohort in-group proportion, and preferential treatment on the trends by introducing these variables in the model at level 2 and interacting them with the level 1 linear, quadratic, and cubic terms of time (full model) (Aiken & West, 1991). In cases where higher-order interactions were not significant, we then tested an alternative model where only an interaction with the linear term was included (Aiken & West, 1991: 69; Zhu et al., 2016). For simplicity, we present the 7 This approach is equivalent of the latent growth modeling approach with parallel growth curves (Pitariu and Ployhart, 2010). We also tested Hypotheses 1 and 2 using latent growth modeling in Mplus 7.0. Results showed that each of the four growth factors of perceived prestige (i.e., intercept, linear, quadratic, and cubic term) positively predicted each growth factor of organizational identification (p , .001), supporting Hypothesis 1. Also, there were significant indirect effects from all four growth factors of perceived prestige to the corresponding growth factors of organizational identification via the growth factors of psychological contract fulfillment (p , .001, 99% confidence interval), supporting Hypothesis 2. 868 TABLE 2 Hierarchical Linear Modeling Results for Intercept and Slope of Repeated Measuresa Intercept g00 4.29*** 3.93*** 4.18*** Coefficient BetweenIndividual Variances 0.13*** 0.18*** 0.13** 0.08 0.13*** 0.22*** Quadratic Term of Time g20 Cubic Term of Time g30 ∼R2 Coefficient BetweenIndividual Variances Coefficient BetweenIndividual Variances 0.01*** 0.03*** 20.20*** 20.16** — — 0.04*** 0.03** — — .23 .22 0.01*** 20.25*** — 0.05*** — .22 Notes: n 5 3,819 observations for perceived prestige, n 5 3,821 observations for psychological contract fulfillment, and n 5 3,833 observations for organizational identification. Entries corresponding to the predictors in the first column are estimates of fixed effects, gs. Six location dummy variables were controlled for common locations during the formal socialization. ;R2 5 pseudo R-square. a Because we only have four measurement points to fit a cubic model, we do not have sufficient degrees of freedom to estimate random effects on all of the intercept, linear, quadratic and cubic terms (i.e., the model is unidentified when variances of all four growth terms are estimated). As the linear term represents the general trend and usually captures the most variance (Ployhart & Ward, 2011), we examined the variances of the intercept and the linear term for each repeated-measures variable (see Boswell et al., 2009, for a similar approach). Results in Table 2 show significant variances in the intercept and the linear term (p , .001) of all variables, suggesting that individuals varied significantly in their initial levels and the trends in these variables. This supports our use of random coefficient models to model the variability in individual intercepts and trends and our test of moderators on them later. **p , .01 ***p , .001 Academy of Management Journal Perceived prestige Psychological contract fulfillment Organizational identification Coefficient BetweenIndividual Variances Linear Term of Time g10 June 2017 Zhu, Tatachari, and Chattopadhyay 869 FIGURE 1 Trends of Perceived Organizational Prestige, Psychological Contract Fulfillment, and Organizational Identification B Psychological Contract Fulfillment Perceived Prestige 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 1 2 3 4 C 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 1 Time results of the full model in Table 4 but discuss the results of the alternative model in the text. Hypotheses 4a–4c proposed that newcomers with higher qualifications would report lower levels of organizational prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and organizational identification at entry, and experience lower rise, lower fall subsequently, and lower recovery in the end (i.e., fewer fluctuations). Table 4 shows that qualification was negatively related to the intercept of perceived prestige (g 5 20.21, p , .001, Model 1) and identification (g 5 20.18, p , .001, Model 3), and marginally negatively related to the intercept of psychological contract fulfillment (g 5 20.07, p , .10, Model 2), explaining 4.2%, 2.0%, and 1.6% of the variance of the intercept of the three variables, respectively. These results suggest that individuals from engineering disciplines (i.e., holding a higher qualification) started with lower levels of perceived prestige, contract fulfillment (albeit to a lesser extent), and identification at entry. Furthermore, the interactions between qualification and the linear, quadratic, and cubic terms of time were significant for contract fulfillment (g 5 20.57, 0.45, 20.10, respectively, p , .001, Model 2) and identification (g 5 20.30, 0.22, 20.05, respectively, p , .001 or .01, Model 3), explaining 26% and 44% of the variance of the slope of the two variables. The interaction with the cubic and quadratic terms of perceived prestige were not significant (although there was a significant interaction with the linear term, g 5 20.17, p , .05, Model 1), so we further tested the alternative model where only the interaction with the linear term of perceived prestige was included. Results indicated that qualification did interact with the linear term of perceived prestige significantly 2 3 Time 4 Organizational Identification A 4.5 4.3 4.1 3.9 3.7 3.5 1 2 3 4 Time (g 5 20.05, p , .01) when the higher-order interactions were not included in the model, explaining 6.8% of the slope variance. Thus, qualification moderated the trends of all three variables. Figures 2a–2c depict the trends of the variables for highand low-qualification individuals. As shown, individuals with higher qualifications started with lower initial perceived prestige, contract fulfillment, and identification, and dropped gradually after entry with almost no fluctuations. In contrast, individuals with low qualifications experienced a rise during the institutional socialization between T1 and T2 in all three variables, and then experienced a fall before recovering to some extent as they settled into the first assignment. These patterns confirm our predictions, and Hypotheses 4a–4c were supported. Hypotheses 5a–5c proposed that newcomers working with a smaller proportion of in-group members (i.e., from the same geographic region) in the cohort would report lower levels of perceived organizational prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and organizational identification at entry, and experience a lower increase, lower subsequent decrease, and lower final recovery over time (i.e., fewer fluctuations). Model 1 of Table 4 shows that the proportion of in-group members in the cohort was unrelated to the intercept, but positively related to the linear, quadratic, and cubic term of the perceived organizational prestige (g 5 0.49, 20.38, 0.08, respectively, p , .01, .05, .05). The interaction terms together explained 6.4% of the variance on the slope. Figure 3a depicts the trend of perceived prestige at high (1 SD above) and low (1 SD below) levels of proportion of cohorts from the same region (Aiken & West, 1991). Figure 3a shows that individuals with 870 Academy of Management Journal June TABLE 3 Hierarchical Linear Modeling Results for Mediation Test Psychological Contract Fulfillment Variables Intercept Gendera Age Model 1 Organizational Identification Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 3.95 *** 0.08 * 0.00 4.94 *** 0.08 *** 20.04 *** 4.97 *** 0.08 *** 20.04 *** 4.97 *** 0.08 ** 20.04 *** 0.04 20.11 * 0.02 † 0.32 *** 0.18 *** 20.19 *** 0.04 *** 0.35 *** 0.20 *** 20.22 *** 0.04 *** 0.17 *** 20.17 *** 0.03 *** 0.30 *** 0.14 *** .45 4147.1 Dynamic predictors Linear Quadratic Cubic Perceived prestige Psychological contract fulfillment ∼R2 Model fitb .45 6980.6 .43 4264.2 0.20 *** .45 4445.3 Notes: n 5 3,819 observations for Model 1, Model 2, and Model 4, and n 5 3,821 observations for Model 3. Entries are estimates of fixed effects, gs. Six location dummy variables were controlled for common locations during the formal socialization. ∼R2 5 pseudo R-square. a 0 5 male, 1 5 female. b Model fit index is AIC. The smaller the value is, the better the fit. † p , .10 *p , .05 **p , .01 ***p , .001 a bigger proportion of in-group members (i.e., a high proportion of their cohorts from the same region) experienced a rise in perceived prestige during the socialization stage, which then fell at the beginning of the first assignment, and went back to some extent as they settled into the first assignment, whereas newcomers with a smaller proportion of in-group members (i.e., a low proportion of the cohort were from the same region) went through a decline right away with almost no fluctuations, confirming our prediction. Hence, Hypothesis 5a was partially supported. Models 2 and 3 of Table 4 show that the proportion of newcomers in the cohort from the same region did not predict either the intercept or the change terms of psychological contract fulfillment, but was positively related to the intercept of organizational identification (g 5 0.11, p , .05), explaining additional 19% of the variance. Further examination of the alternative model with only the interaction with the linear term of trend indicated that proportion of in-group members in the cohort interacted with the linear term of contract fulfillment (g 5 0.09, p , .05), explaining 8.6% of the variance on the slope, but not with the linear term of organizational identification. Plotting the interaction in Figure 3b shows that individuals with a smaller proportion of in-group members experienced a decline in their psychological contract fulfillment without fluctuations, whereas those who had a higher proportion of in-group members had a rise in their psychological contract fulfillment before experiencing a fall. Therefore, Hypotheses 5b and 5c were both partially supported. Hypotheses 6a–6c proposed that individuals who received preferential treatment experience less decrease in perceived organizational prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and organizational identification after their socialization and a higher upward adjustment after settling into their initial assignment. Because the newcomers in our sample did not know the locations of their first project until the end of the initial training (T2), we removed T1 data and examined the moderating effects of location match on the trends based on T2–T4 data. With three data points, only linear and quadratic (not cubic) trends can be estimated. Table 4 shows that the interactions between location match and the linear and quadratic terms of time were significant for contract fulfillment (g 5 0.47, 20.17, respectively, p , .001, Model 2) and identification (g 5 0.22, 20.07, respectively, p , .01 and .05, Model 3), explaining 3.2% and 15% of the variance of the slope, respectively, but were not significant for perceived prestige. Further examination of the alternative model with only the interaction with the linear term indicated that location match interacted significantly with the linear term of prestige (g 5 0.06, p , .05), explaining 8.0% of the slope variance. Thus, location match moderated the trends of all three variables. 2017 Zhu, Tatachari, and Chattopadhyay 871 TABLE 4 Hierarchical Linear Modeling Results for Moderation Test Model 1 Perceived Prestige Model 2 Model 3 Psychological Contract Fulfillment Organizational Identification Parameter SE Parameter SE Parameter SE 4.47 *** 0.04 0.00 0.22 *** 20.24 *** 0.05 *** 20.21 *** 20.17 * 0.09 20.02 0.24 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.09 0.08 0.02 3.25 *** 0.06 0.03 * 0.38 *** 20.40 *** 0.09 *** 20.07 † 20.57 *** 0.45 *** 20.10 *** 0.29 0.03 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.02 0.04 0.11 0.11 0.02 3.97 *** 0.07 ** 0.01 0.37 *** 20.37 *** 0.08 *** 20.18 *** 20.30 *** 0.22 ** 20.05 ** 0.24 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.08 0.07 0.02 5.33 *** 0.08 ** 20.05 *** 0.11 ** 20.18 *** 0.04 *** 0.04 0.49 ** 20.38 * 0.08 * 0.21 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.06 0.17 0.17 0.04 3.81 *** 0.10 ** 0.00 0.07 20.15 ** 0.03 * 20.09 0.32 20.12 0.01 0.25 0.03 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.01 0.07 0.23 0.22 0.05 4.90 *** 0.10 *** 20.03 *** 0.21 *** 20.24 *** 0.05 *** 0.11 * 0.13 20.07 0.01 0.20 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.06 0.16 0.15 0.03 5.37 *** 0.09 * 20.05 *** 20.28 *** 0.07 * 20.06 0.10 20.02 0.31 0.04 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.04 4.14 *** 0.01 20.01 20.54 *** 0.16 *** 20.02 0.47 *** 20.17 *** 0.37 0.04 0.02 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.10 0.05 4.84 *** 0.06 20.03 * 20.38 *** 0.11 *** 20.07 0.22 ** 20.07 * 0.31 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.03 Variables Qualification Intercept Gendera Age Linear Quadratic Cubic Qualification Linear 3 Qualification Quadratic 3 Qualification Cubic 3 Qualification Cohort In-Group Proportion Intercept Gendera Age Linear Quadratic Cubic Cohort in-group proportion Linear 3 Cohort in-group proportion Quadratic 3 Cohort in-group proportion Cubic 3 Cohort in-group proportion Location Matchb Intercept Gendera Age Linear Quadratic Location match Linear 3 Location match Quadratic 3 Location match Notes: n 5 3,819 observations for perceived prestige, n 5 3,821 observations for psychological contract fulfillment, and n 5 3,833 observations for organizational identification. Entries corresponding to the predictors in the first column are estimates of fixed effects, gs. Six location dummy variables were controlled for common locations during the formal socialization. a 0 5 male, 1 5 female. b Only T2–T4 data were used for the analysis given that individuals were informed about their location after T1, and hence, only a quadratic curve can be fitted. † p , .10 *p , .05 **p , .01 ***p , .001 Figures 4a–4c show that, from the point when individuals learned about their location (T2), those who were assigned to their preferred locations experienced lesser declines after the initial socialization and mostly maintained the trends at a higher level thereafter in perceived prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and organizational identification; those who were not assigned to their preferred locations experienced a steeper decline in these variables during the project, which leveled off to some extent at a lower level at the end. Therefore, the first parts of Hypotheses 6a–6c were supported, but the second parts were not. 872 Academy of Management Journal June FIGURE 2 Moderating Effects of Qualifications on Trends B Psychological Contract Fulfillment Perceived Prestige 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 1 2 3 4 Time Engineering Engineering discipline 0 1 discipline 0 1 C 4.2 4.5 4 4.3 Organizational Identification A 3.8 3.6 3.4 1 2 3 Time Engineering Engineering discipline 0 1 discipline 0 1 1 Not in engineering discipline, lower qualification 0 4 4.1 3.9 3.7 3.5 1 2 3 4 Time Engineering Engineering discipline 0 1 discipline 0 1 In engineering discipline, higher qualification other two variables over time on turnover. Models 2, 3, and 4 in Table 5 together show that the effect of prestige became nonsignificant and that the effect size of contract fulfillment became smaller (parameter changed from 20.31 to 20.20) after including identification in the model. Therefore, Hypothesis 7b was supported. Hypothesis 7a proposed that perceived organizational prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and organizational identification over time negatively relate to voluntary turnover. Results from the repeated-measures turnover analyses described earlier in Table 5 show that higher perceived levels of prestige, contract fulfillment, and identification over time were all related to slower turnover (Model 2, Model 3, and Model 4, respectively). Specifically, one unit increase in the variables over time was associated with a 51% (hazard ratio 5 0.49), 27% (hazard ratio 5 0.73), and 44% (hazard ratio 5 0.56) decrease in the hazard rate in the three constructs, respectively. Accordingly, Hypothesis 7a was supported. Hypothesis 7b proposed that organizational identification over time mediates the effects of the Supplementary Analysis Given our focus on the trends, it is interesting to compare the trends of the three variables between “leavers” and “stayers.” Following KammeyerMueller and colleagues (2005), we coded a leaver– stayer dummy variable (“1” for those turned over voluntarily during the study and “0” for those who FIGURE 3 Moderating Effects of Cohort In-Group Proportion on Trends of Perceived Organizational Prestige and Psychological Contract Fulfillment B Perceived Prestige 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 1 2 3 4 Psychological Contract Fulfillment A 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 4 3 Time low proportion of the cohort from the same region as the respondent (– 1 SD, low proportion of in-group) high proportion of the cohort from the same region as the respondent ( 1 SD, high proportion of in-group) Time 1 2 2017 Zhu, Tatachari, and Chattopadhyay 873 FIGURE 4 Moderating Effects of Preferential Treatment on Trends B Psychological Contract Fulfillment Perceived Prestige 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 2 0 1 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 4 3 Time Preferred Preferred 1 1 location 0 location 0 2 4 3 Time Preferred location C Preferred location Organizational Identification A 0 1 0 = Assigned location did not match preference 4.5 4.3 4.1 3.9 3.7 3.5 4 3 Time Preferred Preferred location 0 1 location 0 1 2 1 = Assigned location matched preference lower perceived prestige, contract fulfillment, and identification at entry, and experienced a smooth decline without fluctuations over time; stayers had a slight increase during institutional training, which then fell and, finally, recovered to some extent. did not) and used the random coefficient modeling described above to examine the differences in the intercepts and the trends of the variables between leavers and stayers. Results show that the leaver–stayer dummy variable had a significant effect on both the intercepts (g 5 20.16, 20.09, 20.17, p , .001, .05, .001 for prestige, contract fulfillment, and identification, respectively) and the trends (interaction with the linear term g 5 20.06, 20.10, 20.05, p , .001) of all three variables. Figures 5a–5c show that leavers started with DISCUSSION Although organizational identification has been linked to important employee outcomes, including TABLE 5 Proportional Hazard Regression with Repeated-Measures Covariates Predicting Speed of Voluntary Turnover Model 1 Variables Model 2 Model 3 Hazard Ratio Parameter Hazard Ratio 1.43 1.21 0.36 ** 0.19 *** 1.41 1.17 0.35 * 0.15 *** 1.39 1.17 0.33 * 0.16 *** 1.37 1.18 0.49 20.71 *** 0.57 20.56 *** 0.77 20.26 0.73 20.31 *** 0.82 20.20 * 0.56 20.59 *** Parameter Hazard Ratio Model 4 Parameter Hazard Ratio Parameter Time-invariant controls Gendera Age 0.32 * 0.16 *** Time-varying predictors Perceived organizational prestige Psychological contract fulfillment Organizational identification Wald x2 (df) 91.91 (8) 104.65 (9) 115.91 (10) 136.90 (11) Notes: n 5 5,184 observations for Model 1, n 5 3,818 observations for Models 2, 3, and 4. Six location dummy variables were controlled for common locations during the formal socialization. a 0 5 male, 1 5 female. *p , .05 **p , .01 ***p , .001 874 Academy of Management Journal June FIGURE 5 Trends of Stayers and Leavers B C 4 Psychological 4.3 4.1 3.9 Contract Fulfillment Perceived Prestige 4.5 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 3.7 1 2 4 3 Time Leaver 0 1 Leaver 0 1 1 Time Leaver 0 1 Leaver 0 = stayers turnover (for a review, see Riketta, 2005), we know little about how identification changes during the initial months of employment and how these changes influence turnover. Recent research has highlighted the need to understand such patterns with respect to other variables such as job satisfaction in understanding employee turnover (e.g., Boswell et al., 2009; Kammeyer-Mueller et al., 2005, 2013). As we show, changes in identification impact the speed of occurrence of turnover. We also show that perceptions of organizational prestige over time give rise to these changes, mediated by changes in perceptions of psychological contract fulfillment, and that all three variables follow curvilinear trends. Finally, we link these trends to various significant milestones in the life of newcomers—their entry, formal socialization, and initial assignment—and show that the trends vary by employee personal prestige markers such as qualification, cohort in-group proportion, and preferential treatment in terms of assignment to a preferred location. To enhance newcomer identification and to reduce turnover, it is important for managers to understand these trends, their link to milestones, and their variation across employees. Since new recruits are often drawn to an organization due to its prestige in the wider community, it is particularly important to understand how perceived prestige influences decisions on whether to stay or leave over time. Our data show support for our model of how selfenhancement and uncertainty reduction motives, modeled as organizational prestige and (theorized) levels of uncertainty at various milestones, combine to influence organizational identification over time. The extent to which employees find their organization to be prestigious increases due to the positive experiences and information provided that reduces 4 3 2 0 1 Organizational Identification A 4.5 4.3 4.1 3.9 3.7 3.5 1 4 3 Time Leaver 0 1 Leaver 0 1 2 1 = leavers uncertainty during the institutionalized socialization that occurs immediately after joining, falls during the period of uncertainty that follows as employees leave the structured training environment and try to adjust to everyday life in the organization, and then recovers a little as employees settle into their first assignment and become familiar with some of the more positive features of their work. Since newcomers may be drawn to an organization because of its prestige, the maintenance and increase in perceptions of prestige relates positively to the fulfillment of newcomers’ psychological contracts. Moreover, since employees are more likely to identify with an organization when they perceive greater fulfillment in their psychological contracts, their change patterns of identification over time parallel the change patterns of perceived prestige and psychological contract fulfillment. In turn, identification over time predicts turnover and mediates the impact of prestige and contract fulfillment over time on turnover; those with greater rises in perceived prestige during socialization and greater recoveries during their first assignment are more likely to be those who stay. It is noteworthy in this context that individuals’ perception of organizational prestige can and did change vividly during the first few months of organizational entry, with more than 50% of the variable’s variance originating from within-person changes. Our data shows support for our argument that newcomers benchmark firm prestige on different aspects of their own prestige, such as initial qualifications, size of in-group in the newcomer cohort, and preferential treatment, so that firm prestige is lower when personal prestige is higher. We found that newcomers with higher levels of qualifications begin with lower initial perceived prestige and recover less 2017 Zhu, Tatachari, and Chattopadhyay in their first assignment, leading also to more negative patterns with fewer fluctuations for contract fulfillment and identification. These patterns support our arguments that newcomers with higher levels of qualifications have lower expectations from the organization during training and the first assignment, and are better able to manage the uncertainties experienced between training and the initial assignment. We similarly found more negative patterns for employees who joined with smaller proportions of in-group members in their cohort. Greater proportions of newcomers who are from other geographic regions in the cohort appear to make it more difficult for employees to appreciate the positive features of the organization during socialization and the initial assignment, as reflected in their perceptions of organizational prestige. Smaller in-group proportion in the cohort also negatively affects employees’ psychological contract fulfillment during the formal socialization, but, as employees settle into the first assignment, the effects go away, probably because they fit in better with their first assignment location. These moderating effects of in-group proportion, however, did not carry over to identification beyond the initial level. Newcomers with larger proportions of their cohort from the same region showed stronger identification with the organization at entry, but this effect did not carry on to make any difference in the change patterns of identification over time. We speculate that this effect may follow from those with a smaller proportion of in-group members finding an alternate focus of identification after entry. Since a larger out-group accentuates the salience of the in-group, newcomers from a numerically less well-represented geographical region may identify with their in-group members with spillover effects for the entire organization over time. Employees have been shown to identify with local foci such as a subunit or team and their organization simultaneously (van Knippenberg & van Schie, 2000), and identification with one target may influence identification with another as long as the targets are perceived as consistent in goals and values (George & Chattopadhyay, 2005). Thus, over time, identification with in-group members may spill over to the whole organization as similarities in values and goals are identified, nullifying the negative effect of psychological contract nonfulfillment. We found some support for the moderating effects of receiving preferential treatment in terms of being assigned to a preferred location during the first assignment. Those not assigned to their preferred locations showed a larger drop in prestige, psychological 875 contract fulfillment, and identification between training and their initial assignment, compared with those who were assigned to preferred locations. Following the initial assignment, newcomers assigned to preferred locations stayed at higher levels without much change in all three curves, while those who were denied their favored location showed some recovery at lower levels. Overall, these results suggest that newcomers are negatively influenced over time when they are not assigned to their preferred locations, but are not overly positively influenced when they are so assigned, supporting the idea that negative events have a stronger influence than positive events on individual attitudes (Baumeister et al., 2001). Limitations and Future Directions Our results support most of our theorizing, although our conclusions are limited by the study’s sampling from one IT services firm. Most firms may subject newcomers to some form of institutional socialization, but this may not be applicable to all firms. Firms may also vary in the duration and intensity of such programs and the timing of the first assignment. These factors may impact the trends of prestige, psychological contract fulfillment, and identification. However, our results are generalizable to the extent that we know the role milestones play in shaping the trends. Future research should examine how differences in the temporal distributions of these milestones impact trends in identification and turnover. Although we theorized that changes in perceived prestige influence psychological contract fulfillment and subsequently identification, it is possible—and indeed likely—that these variables reciprocally influence each other over time. However, it makes sense to theorize perceived prestige as an independent variable since it has extensive theoretical and empirical support as an antecedent to identification. It is particularly appropriate for us to do so as newcomers may form an impression of this variable prior to joining and identifying with the firm, which then influences their employment decisions. Future research may consider other information about the firm that is available to job seekers that may, in a manner similar to prestige in our model, play a part in their identification with and eventual decision to leave the firm. Furthermore, although we theorize that changes in psychological contract fulfillment mediate the relationship between changes in prestige and changes in identification, it is possible that the effects of contract fulfillment on identification are further mediated by individuals’ emotional 876 Academy of Management Journal reaction to the breach of their psychological contract, such as anger and frustration—that is, psychological contract violation (e.g., Morrison & Robinson, 1997). Higher contract fulfillment may relate to lower contract violation, which, in turn, relates to higher identification. The complexity of our study constrains us from including this intermediary mediator, but future research may test the more fine-grained mediation relationship. Finally, even though we used a shortened version of Mael and Ashforth’s (1992) measure of perceived prestige to maintain response rate over time, analysis using a separate sample supported the validity of our measure. Contributions and Implications We contribute to the understanding of the dynamic relationship between perceived organizational prestige and organizational identification over time. Although the direct relationship has been tested earlier at a single point in time (e.g., George & Chattopadhyay, 2005; Mael & Ashforth, 1992), we theorize about how newcomers may come to expect a certain level of perceived prestige in their organization such that psychological contract fulfillment is negatively related to deviations from expected prestige levels, and, in turn, affects the level of identification. These findings extend social identity theory arguments that relative changes to social categories may render them salient (Haslam, 2004) by explicitly modeling the interpretation of such changes in one instance in the form of psychological contract fulfillment. Our findings also help to clarify how perceptions of a diffuse organizational characteristic may inform an employee’s psychological contract along with other, more direct inputs such as promises made by recruiters. Overall, we heed the call of researchers such as Rosen et al. (2009) who have argued for greater understanding of the impact of diffuse organizational characteristics on psychological contract perceptions; we go further in examining the mediating role of contract fulfillment in the dynamic relationship between firm prestige and organizational identification. Our study is the first to examine how organizational identification fluctuates in the initial period of employment. Moreover, we provide an understanding of how these fluctuations originate and why it is important to understand them by demonstrating a link between dynamic identification, its dynamic antecedents, and employee turnover. Finally, although a few recent studies have examined trends in newcomer adjustment and turnover (e.g., Kammeyer- June Mueller et al., 2005, 2013), we are the first to tie these trends to specific milestones in the lives of newcomers, encompassing entry, institutional socialization and the period leading up to and following the initial assignment. Understanding the role of these important milestones in shaping trends of identification and its antecedents (and, ultimately, employee turnover) helps to draw a clearer picture of why fluctuations in these important constructs occur during this critical period of newcomer socialization and how they impact employee turnover years later. Our findings are important for managers, too, in that they need to understand how critical variables such as psychological contract fulfillment and organizational identification unfold over time in the first few months of employment, particularly because they have longterm implications for employee turnover. We identify specific milestones during which these patterns develop and provide clarity as to when, during newcomers’ first few months of employment, managers may seek to intervene in order to improve perceptions of contract fulfillment and to raise levels of identification. Specifically, managers should intervene and reinforce the positive aspects of the organization and reduce uncertainty thereof, or enhance coworker support to newcomers from veteran employees during the period between formal socialization and the initial assignment when newcomers tend to experience significant declines in their contract fulfillment and identification. Furthermore, our findings that these patterns are moderated by employee qualification levels, the proportion of in-group members in the cohort, and whether they are assigned to their preferred locations provide managers with an understanding regarding which employees are more likely to perceive lower levels of contract fulfillment, to identify less, and to turnover. Managers may minimize these problems by grouping newcomers from the same region and with similar qualifications into the same cohort for initial socialization purposes as well as respecting newcomers’ preferences regarding their initial assignment. REFERENCES Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. 1991. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Ashforth, B. E., & Saks, A. M. 1996. Socialization tactics: Longitudinal effects on newcomer adjustment. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 149–178. Banerjee, R., & Muley, V. P. 2007. Engineering education in India. Powai, Mumbai, India: IIT Bombay. http://www. 2017 Zhu, Tatachari, and Chattopadhyay ese.iitb.ac.in/;rb/Research/EnEdu.pdf (accessed April 1, 2015). Bartels, J., Pruyn, A., de Jong, M., & Joustra, I. 2007. Multiple organizational identification levels and the impact of perceived external prestige and communication climate. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28: 173–190. Bauer, D. J., Preacher, K. J., & Gil, K. M. 2006. Conceptualizing and testing random indirect effects and moderated mediation in multilevel models: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 11: 142–163. Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. 2001. Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5: 323–370. Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. 2001. Academic tribes and territories. Buckingham, England: Open University Press. Berlo, D. K., Lemert, J. B., & Mertz, R. J. 1969. Dimensions for evaluating the acceptability of message sources. Public Opinion Quarterly, 33: 563–576. Boswell, W. R., Shipp, A. J., Payne, S. C., & Culbertson, S. S. 2009. Changes in newcomer job satisfaction over time: Examining the pattern of honeymoons and hangovers. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 844–858. Bunderson, J. S. 2003. Recognizing and utilizing expertise in work groups: A status characteristics perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 557–591. Cable, D. M., & Graham, M. 2000. The determinants of organizational reputation: A job search perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21: 929–947. Certo, S. T. 2003. Influencing initial public offering investors with prestige: Signaling with board structures. Academy of Management Review, 28: 432–446. Chan, D. 1998. The conceptualization and analysis of change over time: An interactive approach incorporating longitudinal mean and covariance structure analysis (LMACS) and multiple indicator latent growth modeling (MLGM). Organizational Research Methods, 1: 421–483. Chao, G. T., O’Leary-Kelly, A. M., Wolf, S., Klein, H. J., & Gardner, P. D. 1994. Organizational socialization: Its content and consequences. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 79: 730–743. Chattopadhyay, P. 1999. Beyond direct and symmetrical effects: The influence of demographic dissimilarity on organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 273–287. Chattopadhyay, P., George, E., & Lawrence, S. A. 2004. Why does dissimilarity matter? Exploring self-categorization, self-enhancement, and uncertainty reduction. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 89: 892–900. Chattopadhyay, P., George, E., & Ng, C. K. 2011. An uncertainty reduction model of relational demography. 877 In A. Joshi, H. Liao, & J. J. Martocchio (Eds.) Research in personnel and human resource management, 30: 219–251. Bingley, England: Emerald. Chattopadhyay, P., Tluchowska, M., & George, E. 2004. Identifying the ingroup: A closer look at the influence of demographic dissimilarity on employee social identity. Academy of Management Review, 29: 180–202. Cheema, I. K. 2011. Sociocultural stratification of India. Policy Perspectives, 8: 49–63. Collins, C. J., & Han, J. 2004. Exploring applicant pool quantity and quality: The effects of early recruitment practice strategies, corporate advertising, and firm reputation. Personnel Psychology, 57: 685–717. Côté, S. 2011. How social class shapes thoughts and actions in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31: 43–71. Coyle-Shapiro, J. A.-M., & Shore, L. M. 2007. The employee–organization relationship: Where do we go from here? Human Resource Management Review, 17: 166–179. Elstak, M. N., Bhatt, M., Van Riel, C., Pratt, M. G., & Berens, G. A. 2015. Organizational identification during a merger: The role of self-enhancement and uncertainty reduction motives during a major organizational change. Journal of Management Studies, 52: 32–62. Epitropaki, O. 2013. A multi-level investigation of psychological contract breach and organizational identification through the lens of perceived organizational membership: Testing a moderated–mediated model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34: 65–86. Feldman, D. C. 1981. The multiple socialization of organizational members. Academy of Management Review, 6: 309–319. Fuller, J. B., Hester, K., Barnett, T., Frey, L., Relyea, C., & Beu, D. 2006. Perceived external prestige and internal respect: New insights into the organizational identification process. Human Relations, 59: 815–846. George, E., & Chattopadhyay, P. 2005. One foot in each camp: The dual identification of contract workers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50: 68–99. George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. 2000. The role of time in theory and theory building. Journal of Management, 26: 657–684. Goldberg, C. B., Riordan, C., & Schaffer, B. S. 2010. Does social identity theory underlie relational demography? A test of the moderating effects of uncertainty reduction and status enhancement on similarity effects. Human Relations, 63: 903–926. Goodman, J. S., & Blum, T. C. 1996. Assessing the nonrandom sampling effects of subject attrition in longitudinal research. Journal of Management, 27: 627–652. 878 Academy of Management Journal Haslam, S. A. 2004. Psychology in organizations: A social identity approach (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage. Haslam, S. A., & Ellemers, N. 2005. Social identity in industrial and organizational psychology: Concepts, controversies and contributions. In G. P. Hodgkinson (Ed.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology, 20: 39–118. Chichester, England: Wiley. Hogg, M. A. 2012. Uncertainty-identity theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology: 62–80. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Jablin, F. M. 1987. Organizational entry, assimilation and exit. In F. M. Jablin, L. L. Putnam, K. H. Roberts, & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication: An interdisciplinary perspective: 679–740. London, England: Sage. Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D., Wanberg, C. R., Glomb, T. M., & Ahlburg, D. 2005. The role of temporal shifts in turnover processes: It’s about time. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 644–658. Kammeyer-Mueller, J., Wanberg, C., Rubenstein, A., & Song, Z. 2013. Support, undermining, and newcomer socialization: Fitting in during the first 90 days. Academy of Management Journal, 56: 1104–1124. Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger, N. 2003. Lower level mediation in multilevel models. Psychological Methods, 8: 115–128. June Mishra, P. 2010, March 19. IT companies hire non-techies, cut costs. The Economic Times. http://articles. economictimes.indiatimes.com/2010-03-19/news/ 27597867_1_software-engineer-wipro-technologiesgraduates (accessed April 1, 2015). Mitchell, T. R., & Lee, T. W. 2001. The unfolding model of voluntary turnover and job embeddedness: Foundations for a comprehensive theory of attachment. Research in Organizational Behavior, 23: 189–246. Morita, J. G., Lee, T. W., & Mowday, R. T. 1993. The regression-analog to survival analysis: A selected application to turnover research. Academy of Management Journal, 36: 1430–1464. Morrison, E. W. 1993. Longitudinal study of the effects of information seeking on newcomer socialization. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 173–183. Morrison, E. W., & Robinson, S. L. 1997. When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review, 22: 226–256. Pitariu, A. H., & Ployhart, R. E. 2010. Explaining change: Theorizing and testing dynamic mediated longitudinal relationships. Journal of Management, 36: 405–429. Ployhart, R. E., & Ward, A.-K. 2011. The “quick start guide” for conducting and publishing longitudinal research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26: 413–422. Klein, H. J., & Weaver, N. A. 2000. The effectiveness of an organizational-level orientation training program in the socialization of new hires. Personnel Psychology, 53: 47–66. Preacher, K. J., & Selig, J. P. 2010, July. Monte Carlo method for assessing multilevel mediation: An interactive tool for creating confidence intervals for indirect effects in 1-1-1 multilevel models [Computer software]. Retrieved April 1, 2015 from http:// quantpsy.org/.web Kleinke, C. L. 1975. First impressions: The psychology of encountering others. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Louis, M. R. 1980. Surprise and sensemaking: What newcomers experience in entering unfamiliar organizational settings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24: 226–251. Restubog, S. L., Hornsey, M. J., Bordia, P., & Esposo, S. R. 2008. Effects of psychological contract breach on organizational citizenship behavior: Insights from the group value model. Journal of Management Studies, 45: 1377–1400. Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. 1992. Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13: 103–123. March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. 1958. Organizations. New York, NY: Wiley. Miller, V. D., & Jablin, F. M. 1991. Information seeking during organizational entry: Influences, tactics, and a model of the process. Academy of Management Review, 16: 92–120. Ministry of Tourism. 2015. Ministry of Tourism, Government of India [Website]. Retrieved September 4, 2015 from http://www.tourism.gov.in/AboutUs/ TourismOfficeIndia.aspx. Riketta, M. 2005. Organizational identification: A metaanalysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66: 358–384. Riordan, C. M., Weatherly, E. W., Vandenberg, R. J., & Self, R. M. 2001. The effects of pre-entry experiences and socialization tactics on newcomer attitudes and turnover. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13: 159–176. Robinson, S. L., & Morrison, E. W. 2000. The development of psychological contract breach violation: A longitudinal study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21: 525–546. Rosen, C. C., Chang, C.-H., Johnson, R. E., & Levy, P. E. 2009. Perceptions of the organizational context and 2017 Zhu, Tatachari, and Chattopadhyay psychological contract breach: Assessing competing perspectives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108: 202–217. Rousseau, D. M. 1989. New hire perceptions of their own and their employer’s obligations: Study of psychological contracts. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11: 389–400. 879 early voluntary turnover. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 1146–1162. Zhu, J., Wanberg, C. R., Harrison, D. A., & Diehn, E. W. 2016. Ups and downs of the expatriate experience? Understanding work adjustment trajectories and career outcomes. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 101: 549–568. Rousseau, D. M. 1998. Why workers still identify with organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19: 217–233. Rousseau, D. M. 2001. Schema, promise and mutuality: The building blocks of the psychological contract. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74: 511–541. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. 1986. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations: 7–24. Chicago, IL: Nelson–Hall. Turner, J. C. 1987. A self-categorization theory. In M. Hogg, P. Oakes, S. Reicher, & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory: 42–67. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell. van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. 2007. Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 515–541. van Knippenberg, D., & van Schie, E. 2000. Foci and correlates of organizational identification. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73: 137–147. van Maanen, J. 1978. People processing: Strategies of organizational socialization. Organizational Dynamics, 7: 18–36. Wanberg, C. R., Zhu, J., & van Hooft, E. 2010. The jobsearch grind: Perceived progress, self-reactions, and selfregulation of search effort. Academy of Management Journal, 53: 788–807. Weller, I., Holtom, B. C., Matiaske, W., & Mellewigt, T. 2009. Level and time effects of recruitment sources on Jing Zhu (jingzhu@ust.hk) is an assistant professor of management in the School of Business and Management at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. She received her PhD from the Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota. Her research interests include individual behavior changes and development during work-related transitions (including dynamics of expatriate adjustment, newcomer identification, and job search of the unemployed) and team processes and effectiveness. Srinivasan Tatachari (srinivasan.tatachari@iimu.ac.in) is an associate professor in the Organizational Behavior and Human Resources Management department at the Indian Institute of Management Udaipur in India. He received his PhD (Fellow Programme) from the Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore, in India. He worked in the Indian information technology industry for 13 years before moving into the academic field. His current research focuses on social identity in organizations, specifically during socialization, employees’ idle time, and in leadership and employee well-being. Prithviraj Chattopadhyay (p.chattopadhyay@auckland. ac.nz) is a professor of management at the University of Auckland. He holds a PhD in management from the University of Texas at Austin. His research interests include relational demography and diversity, identification, managerial cognition, and employment externalization.